Diagnose the failure before replacing the interface
An old visual style is not enough evidence for a full redesign. Start with user tasks: can a visitor understand the offer, find relevant work, navigate with a keyboard and send a request? Can the team update important information without breaking a page?
Record the failure, evidence and business consequence separately. “The contact form returns success but no record is saved” is a specific defect. “The site feels dated” is a preference that still needs a design discussion.
Separate repair from structural change
| Finding | Likely first action |
|---|---|
| Broken form or inaccessible navigation | Repair and verify the critical journey |
| Useful content hidden by poor hierarchy | Restructure navigation and page sections |
| Slow image-heavy first screen | Optimise delivery and measure again |
| New services do not fit the current architecture | Revisit sitemap and content model |
| Brand direction has changed | Agree a visual brief and approval references |
A targeted correction may solve a serious problem with less disruption than replacing the whole site. A structural redesign becomes reasonable when repeated local patches cannot express the business or when the content and technology prevent essential workflows.
Preserve what already works
Inventory URLs, search landing pages, content, conversion paths, assets and integrations before migration. Define redirects for changed URLs. Keep a record of which facts and visuals are approved; a redesign must not silently turn a prototype into a delivered-client claim.
M48’s UD Plast and SCG Mechanical entries are labelled redesign prototypes. A prototype demonstrates a direction; it does not prove that a client adopted it or that live business metrics improved.
Acceptance should include real tasks
Review mobile and desktop screens, then complete the journey from landing page to recorded enquiry. Include error states, translation, keyboard use and the handover process. Define a rollback path for launch. Discuss a design review using the observed problems rather than an assumed need to replace every screen.
A practical question
Does every visual defect require a full redesign?
No. Reproduce the defect and identify its cause. A broken enquiry, cramped typography or clipped border can often be repaired while retaining the approved identity. Change the architecture when the information or workflow requires it.