Prefer English?
Prefer English? Switch the website language for a better experience.
A UX/UI audit run upfront in Figma is the diagnosis that lets you redesign for the right reasons rather than for a simple facelift. It turns a cosmetic redesign into a strategic one, by pinpointing exactly which journeys are losing users, which components create confusion, and which visual decisions have never been challenged since the site was first built.
At Mazette.co, we have long seen clients arrive with a fixed idea: "we want a new design, something more modern." Nine times out of ten, behind that request lies a problem that has nothing to do with aesthetics. A purchase journey that is too long. A menu that hides strategic information. A visual hierarchy that pushes the wrong message forward. Without an audit, these problems survive the redesign — simply dressed up differently.
Skipping the UX/UI audit seems to save time and budget at the start, but it just pushes the cost further down the project timeline: fixes made mid-development in Webflow, endless back-and-forth on mockups, or worse, a redesign that needs redoing eighteen months later because the real problems were never addressed.
We once worked with a beauty e-commerce brand that had launched its redesign directly in Figma, without an audit, based solely on a brief that said "we want to look like these competitor brands." Six weeks of design work, a polished mockup, and a Webflow build kicked off. Except once we got to the build stage, we discovered that the cart abandonment rate came from a structural choice invisible in the static mockups: selecting product variants (color, size) triggered a full page reload. No mockup had ever revealed this, because nobody had tested the actual journey or analyzed existing behavioral data before starting to design. The result: three key screens had to be redone, two weeks of delay, and a budget overrun of 15%.
An upfront audit would have cost three to five days. Fixing it after the fact cost fifteen.
A UX/UI audit worthy of the name is not just an aesthetic opinion on the existing site. It combines quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis and a design system audit, all documented directly in Figma so it stays usable by the designers and developers who will take over.
This last point is often overlooked, yet it is decisive. An interface designed without considering Webflow's real constraints and possibilities ends up either being betrayed at the development stage, or requiring custom-built work that blows the initial budget. The audit needs to factor in a technical perspective on what the platform allows, right from the start.
The choice between an express audit and an in-depth audit depends on the size of the site, the age of the existing design and the business stakes of the redesign. A ten-page showcase site does not need the same level of investigation as a SaaS platform with a complex conversion funnel.
| Criteria | Express audit (2-3 days) | In-depth audit (1-2 weeks) |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Key pages, main journey | Entire site, all journeys and devices |
| Data analyzed | Existing analytics only | Analytics + user testing + heatmaps |
| Deliverable | Summary report + priority recommendations | Detailed report + corrective Figma wireframes |
| Best for | Showcase site, tight budget | E-commerce, SaaS, high-traffic sites |
In both cases, the audit needs to produce an actionable deliverable, not just a theoretical diagnosis. At Mazette.co, we systematically turn audit findings into recommendations that plug directly into the next Figma design file, so no time is ever lost between diagnosis and action.
The UX/UI audit is also the ideal moment to lay the foundations for the design system, or reassess it, before it gets translated into Webflow components. This is where you decide whether you are starting from a clean component library, or unknowingly carrying over inconsistencies accumulated over years of successive updates.
On a recent project for a professional training client, the audit revealed seven different variants of "call-to-action" buttons used across the site, each with its own border radius, shadows and spacing. No conscious decision had led to this drift: each new page had simply duplicated an existing button with slight modifications. The work on the Figma design system brought this down to three consistent variants, which were then mapped directly onto combo classes in Webflow. The gain was not just visual: future maintenance of the site became radically simpler.
This is precisely the connection our methodology at Mazette.co champions: the audit feeds the design system, the design system feeds the Figma design work, and the Figma design faithfully translates into Webflow components. Each step builds on the previous one instead of contradicting it.
Some signals do not lie: when they show up, jumping straight into design without a prior audit is like navigating without a map.
This last point deserves special attention. A failed redesign is almost never a matter of the designer's talent: it is very often a missing diagnosis upstream. Launching another redesign without fixing that step first means risking a repeat of the same failure in a different outfit.
A well-run Figma UX/UI audit does not slow down a Webflow redesign project: it prevents the far more costly slowdowns that happen when underlying problems resurface in the middle of development. It is an investment of a few days that protects against weeks of rework.
Our conviction, forged project after project: the quality of a redesign is decided before the first pixel is placed on the Figma canvas. Clients who agree to slow down at that moment — often against their instinct to "see something real, fast" — are consistently the ones who deliver on time and without budget surprises. If you are considering a redesign, let's talk first about what is not working before we talk about what will look good. It is a bit less exciting in the moment. It is significantly more profitable over time. You can learn more about how we structure this phase in our product design approach and our Webflow expertise, or simply contact us to discuss it.
Code
Over 120 companies have already stepped out of the shadows with us.
An express audit covering key pages and journeys usually takes two to three days. An in-depth audit, including user testing and a full analysis of every journey, typically spans one to two weeks. The duration mostly depends on the size of the site and the complexity of the conversion paths being analyzed.
It is possible, but risky: without an audit, the structural issues of the existing site are often reproduced in the new version with just a different coat of paint. This frequently leads to costly rework mid-development, once the real friction points are discovered too late.
A UX/UI audit analyzes the user experience, conversion journeys and design consistency, while an SEO audit focuses on technical structure, content and search engine positioning. The two are complementary and are best run in parallel before a redesign, to avoid sacrificing one for the other.
