In one way or another, I'm always part of some team (often Scrum), where my role is usually labeled "UX Architect," or "UX Designer," meaning I'm responsible for shaping the façade, i.e. what someone sees and interacts with. The ultimate aim is always a smooth, satisfying interaction (aka user experience, or "UX"), no matter the specific context or task at hand.
‍
In some cases, the additional role of proxy Product Owner (certified CSPO) also makes sense, as my intimate involvement in the research, design, and feedback stages can result in becoming the de facto domain expert within the dev team.

My main contribution is typically the creation of interactive prototypes (mostly Figma now) detailing a future state, centered around specific user workflows. Ideally, those proposals are founded on the learnings captured through conversations with true domain experts and actual end users (UX Research), followed by an exercise in creative problem-solving—a process I highly enjoy.
‍
The scope of proposals can range from microcopy tweaks, to feature changes, new products, a rethink of the whole information architecture or navigation system, to even shifts in platform-level strategy or legacy software rebuilds.

Nowadays, a lot of software might not seem like classic software anymore, because most software tools now run in a browser tab, just like simple websites. Even in hospitals or air traffic control centers, for extremely complex tasks. Many mobile phone or tablet apps too, are in fact, just web pages in disguise.
‍
The experience gained over 15+ years in digital agencies, building all sorts of websites, web applications, and other types of tools has certainly proved valuable. Some recent assignments like EBMT (medical research) or Eurocontrol (aviation) certainly are grand efforts to bring aging, but highly specialized software into the browser era.

No matter if the focus is on designing for coffee table-sized touch displays, apps on phones, or good old-fashioned laptops with trackpads and mouse clicks, in the end, it's always about designing for people; each individual with its own particular expectations, mental models, physical surroundings, levels of expertise, learning curves, time pressures, distractions, potential disabilities, etc.
‍
Understanding those users and how they (might) react to what they see is a big deal in user-centric design. Arguably, the ideal design process would always look the same, no matter the subject matter. Nevertheless, flexibility to adapt the process is essential in order to be as impactful as can be, given the available time, budget, and access (not just to end users, but other stakeholders too).

The better our understanding of the precise task(s) users need to get done, the higher the chances are the proposed solution will fit that need nicely. So a lot of effort goes into examining those needs, which are essentially always a combination of trigger, motivation, and expected outcome.

The deeper you dig, the longer this list of user needs grows, which is why it's equally important to try to keep one's eye on the ball through constant prioritization of those user stories (or job stories, a format I like better because of its emphasis on the trigger aspect). Prioritization can be a delicate exercise, as the needs of different user (or their opinions of what is high priority) can conflict.

17 years ago, I graduated, having studied Economics (at KULeuven) and something extra in French (at UCLouvain). Straight after, I started as Information Architect —"UX" was not a thing yet— at Emakina, Belgium's primary digital agency (now active in 20+ territories). 7 years later, I joined another agency, which also did serious web development, including two digital banks. I stayed for 8 years, after which I joined Cronos, Belgium's largest IT conglomerate, in 2022.