The Manu Times
Shipped · 2022

Youth in Politics · Shipped 2022

Youth in Politics

A 3-week sprint, 400+ research voices, and India's first trusted political-training platform for young people. 50,000+ onboarded.

Youth in Politics cover

At a glance

RoleUX Designer · I-PAC
Timeline2022 · 3-week design sprint
StatusShipped to production
DomainEdTech · Civic technology · B2C · Mobile + Desktop
PlatformMobile + Desktop · Multi-language
TeamManushri Dave (UX Designer) · Animesh Dwivedi (UX Designer) · Alok (Project Manager) · Murali (Full Stack Developer) · Mintu (Full Stack Developer)

The problem

Motivated young Indians curious about governance had no trusted way to learn, informal training was unaffordable, formal pathways didn’t exist, and the loudest voices online were the least reliable.

What I shipped

In a 3-week sprint, I shipped a mentor-first civic-learning platform with a relevance-driven IA and a credible-but-approachable visual system, built around real human mentors, not curriculum.

What I ownedUX research · UI design · Prototyping · User testing · IA · Visual identity

The opportunity

Ask a 22-year-old in a tier-2 Indian city how to enter politics, and the answer is usually: "Be born into it." Or: "Know someone." Or: a silence.

India's political ecosystem had, and still has, a structural gap for youth. Motivated young people curious about governance had no good way to learn. Informal training cost money most didn't have. Formal pathways didn't exist for first-generation aspirants. And the loudest voices online were the least reliable.

I-PAC set out to build the missing rung: a trusted, structured, accessible platform where young Indians could learn politics, find mentors, and build a real path into governance. A 3-week sprint. Mobile and desktop. Multiple Indian languages down the road.

That was the brief. The research made it personal.

The problem

Three weeks doesn't buy you exploratory research. It buys you fast research with a sharp funnel. I ran two tracks in parallel.

  • Secondary: Youth participation studies, UN civic-engagement reports, Indian policy framework reviews
  • Primary: 100+ offline interviews · 300+ online survey responses · field observations in rural, semi-urban, and urban settings · heuristic evaluation of existing civic tools · competitive analysis

400+ voices in three weeks. The pattern that emerged across all of it:

  • Limited access to any meaningful political training or mentorship
  • Lack of clarity about political processes, even basic ones, like how a candidate actually files for an election
  • Low trust in institutions, and in any platform that claimed to teach about them
  • Region-specific complexity, what works in Tamil Nadu is not what works in Uttar Pradesh
  • Cognitive overload, the internet is drowning in political information, none of it structured for learning

Young Indians weren't disengaged. They were under-served. The design problem wasn't "make politics interesting." It was "make politics navigable."

Stakeholder map, I-PAC leadership, mentors, prospective learners, and the policy ecosystem the product had to fit into
Persona, the motivated 22-year-old aspirant from a tier-2 city, the user the whole product was designed around

How I worked

1. Double Diamond, compressed

The Double Diamond (Discover → Define → Develop → Deliver) was the structural frame, compressed into three weeks. Week 1: research and synthesis. Week 2: IA, flows, wireframes. Week 3: final UI plus prototype plus user testing.

What the framework bought us wasn't the method, it was forcing honesty about what we were doing at any given moment. In a 3-week sprint, the temptation to bleed research into design (or vice versa) is enormous. The Double Diamond made it obvious when we'd slipped.

Design process, the 3-week Double Diamond, with explicit week-by-week deliverables and decision gates
User journey map, first-time learner from app open through mentor match, with friction and trust moments flagged
Journey map, second pass with the mentor-first reframing applied, showing where engagement actually compounded

2. Information architecture, relevance-first

The defining insight from the research: young Indians weren't intimidated by politics. They were intimidated by how politics was explained. Existing civic tools simplified by removing context, "how to vote in 5 easy steps," which read to users as condescension. They dropped out.

Our thesis flipped the default: simplification isn't about removing information. It's about structuring it for confidence. A 22-year-old entering politics for the first time doesn't need shorter sentences, they need a map.

That translated into concrete design moves:

  • Relevance over volume. The IA surfaced what was relevant to you (your state, your interests, your stage) before anything else
  • Hierarchy, not dumbing-down. Complex topics got fuller treatment with context, not shorter versions
  • Progressive disclosure on trust. The platform earned reader trust incrementally: who vouches for this content, who's the mentor, where does the information come from

The trade-off: slower onboarding, more scaffolding, more engineering. The alternative, a "simple" tutorial flow, would have felt condescending and churned the motivated users we most needed.

Prioritizing, the IA decisions that ranked relevance above volume, with the trust ladder built in

3. Mentorship as the product, not the feature

The single biggest engagement driver, from user testing and post-launch data: mentors.

Not the curriculum. Not the gamification. Not the community. Real human mentors, with verifiable political experience, matched to learners by region and interest. The curriculum was the entry ramp. The mentor relationship was what made users come back.

I redesigned the IA mid-sprint around that insight. The mentor wasn't a feature buried three taps deep, they were present from the home screen, accessible, named, and visible. Every learning unit was anchored by "here's who'll guide you through this."

That call was the highest-leverage decision in the whole sprint. It's why the platform worked.

4. Wireframes, locking the structure

Wireframes locked the relevance-first home, the mentor card pattern, and the progressive-disclosure trust ladder.

Low-fi wireframes, relevance-first home and the mentor card pattern that anchors every learning unit
Low-fi wireframes, onboarding, content modules, and the progressive-disclosure trust ladder

5. Visual identity, credible and approachable

Civic products usually look like government websites: institutional, gray, cautious. Or they look like gamified tutorials: cartoonish, condescending. YIP needed to sit between, serious enough that a 28-year-old considering running for office trusts it, approachable enough that an 18-year-old curious about politics doesn't bounce.

The visual system: generous typography, muted institutional palette with one confident accent, illustration used sparingly for narrative moments (not decoration). Credible without being stiff.

Style guide, typography, palette, and component principles tuned for civic credibility without stiffness

The outcome

Three weeks of design, launched within I-PAC's 2022 cycle.

0K+

users onboarded

in the launch phase, driven disproportionately by the mentor-match feature

4.1/5

Google Play Store rating

civic-product category, where trust is hard to earn

0+

research voices in 3 weeks

100+ offline interviews + 300+ online surveys, rural to urban

Final UI, relevance-first home, mentor anchored across every learning unit
Final UI, mentor profile + match flow, the highest-engagement surface in the product
Final UI, learning unit with progressive disclosure on trust and source
Final UI, multi-language support, South Indian + Hindi-belt scripts both treated as first-class

And from Abhijit, a YIP user:

"YIP makes learning about politics feel far less intimidating. It breaks complex ideas into clear steps with real mentors."

Less intimidating. That was the word the whole sprint was built around.

Reflection

Three things YIP taught me.

1. Civic design demands emotional sensitivity. Designing for young Indians curious about politics means designing for nervousness, skepticism, and information overload all at once. Every design choice, from copy to color, had to respect that. "Optimize for engagement" without that respect would have produced a better-performing-by-metrics and worse-for-democracy product.

2. Simplification is architecture, not reduction. The insight from user research kept paying out: users didn't want less information, they wanted better structure. The best design move in the sprint wasn't a UI decision, it was deciding to not shorten the content and instead invest in the map around it.

3. Three weeks is enough if the research is sharp. 400+ respondents in two parallel tracks gave us the insight that moved the mentor from a feature to the core of the product. A slower, more qualitative approach would have shipped a different product. The sprint format forced triangulation across secondary, quantitative, and qualitative research, and the convergence is what made the design decisions feel certain.

YIP was the project that taught me design can matter in civic contexts, and how much of that work happens before you open the design tool.

✶ Thanks for reading

That’s the case study, front to back.

If you want to dig into anything I skimmed over, process, edge cases, the trade-offs that didn’t fit on the page, reply by email or send this to a teammate.

✶ Read next