On this page
Guwahati, India
IST
Projects
/ FYBR.
Case study · 2026 · Self-initiated concept · Service design · Mobile app
Make a garment’s impact
readable at the rack.
Fybr. is a clothing tag and an app. Shoppers see a checked A–E grade next to the price, scan to see why, and keep the garment’s history when they repair, resell or recycle it.
Role
Solo: research, service design, UI
Timeline
Apr – May 2026
Type
Self-initiated concept
Status
Concept. Not tested with shoppers yet
Platform
Printed swing tag, plus a phone app
01 · The short version
Fybr., on one screen
Problem
Shoppers pick between near-identical tees in seconds, with only a price and a vague “eco” tag to go on.
What I found
EU rules will soon require this data. Nobody has designed how a shopper actually reads it, or who is to blame when it’s missing.
What I made
A checked A–E grade on the price tag, a scan that explains it, and a record that stays with the garment after the till.
Jump to the product ↓
02 · How it came together
Six steps, four decisions, all leading back to the tag.
The process at a glance before the detail: what I did, what each step left behind, and how a finding became a screen.
Read each line left to right: what the research found, the decision it led to, what the critique changed, and the screen where you can see it.
03 · The problem
Shoppers do care. They just can’t see the impact when they choose.
Saturday, 4 pm, a fast-fashion store in Pune.
Two black tees: ₹499 and ₹549. One will last.
Nothing on either tag says which.
Shoppers are told sustainability is their job, like switching to paper straws. But brands hold all the facts. The shopper gets the guilt without the information.
An example built from what shoppers told me in interviews. The brands are made up.
2–8%
of global greenhouse-gas emissions are linked to fashion
UN Alliance for Sustainable Fashion
92M
tonnes of textile waste every year
Niinimäki et al., 2020
79T
litres of water used by the industry every year
<1%
of clothing material is recycled into new clothing
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017
Why now: the passport is becoming law
Most work on these passports is about following the rules: collecting, storing and checking data. Almost none of it asks how a 22-year-old at a clothes rack will read it. That is the gap I worked on.
Problem statement
Impact data already exists in the supply chain, and passports will soon make it mandatory. But shoppers can’t see, trust or act on it at the moment they choose, so sustainability stays one person’s burden instead of a shared one.
04 · Research
I looked at what a passport holds, and at what shoppers actually read.
Who holds the data
All of it comes from someone other than the shopper, and none of it reaches the tag.
The shopper knows the least but is asked to care the most. The design has to shift that back onto the brands.
What shoppers told me
I usually just pick what looks good and fits my budget. I don’t really think about how it’s made.
Shopper interview
I’ve seen tags like eco-friendly, but I don’t know what that means, or if it’s actually true.
Shopper interview
If the information was simple and right in front of me, I might consider it. I won’t go searching.
Shopper interview
Five findings, five design moves
Labels people already trust, and what Fybr. borrows from each
05 · People
Three shoppers, one rack, three different worries.
These are shopping habits, not types of people: one person can be all three in a week. I designed for Riya first. If the tag works for someone with 90 seconds and no interest, it works for everyone.
My estimate from interviews and desk research. Today the experience drops at “Compare”, when the claim can’t be checked, and ends in the bin. With Fybr. it rises at the rack and carries on after the till.
The problem, rewritten
Shoppers need one sign they can trust at the rack, with details they can check and a clear next step after buying. That way, brands share the responsibility.
My bet
If shoppers see a checked grade next to the price, they’ll compare impact the way they already compare price. And brands will share more, because missing data lowers their grade.
06 · How I worked
From a dashboard nobody would open to a tag everyone already reads.
The steps are mapped in “How it came together” near the top. This is the storyboard from my first concept: the whole service in six moments.
The service in six moments, from my mid-semester storyboard: context in store, the grade at the rack, scan for the why, linking at the till, an honest receipt, passing it on.
07 · Structure and flows
Only the tag is required. Everything after it is a door you can choose to open.
How the app is organised, the two journeys that matter, what happens when things go wrong, and who does what behind the scenes.
Most shoppers stop at the tag, and that is fine: the grade already did its job. Every later step is optional, and “No thanks” at the till still gets an honest receipt.
When things go wrong
08 · Key decisions
Five choices, and what each one cost.
Three rules: readable in a glance, easy to check, fair to the shopper. The tag is the product; everything after it is optional.
The product
One tee, from the rack to its second owner.
Follow a ₹549 organic tee, grade B. Only the tag is required. Every step after it is optional.
01
A grade beside the price
The brand registers the tee and an independent checker confirms its claims. What reaches the rack is one letter, printed where shoppers already look.
Works with no phone, no app and no account.
Letter, colour and position together, never colour alone.
Scan, result, then the grade explained. The scan frames the tag and says what to do: fit it in the frame, or tap it. The result sheet shows the grade, water and how much of the chain is traced. “What does B mean?” opens the A–E scale and the three things the grade is built from.
02
Scan for the why
The passport says why it is a B, who checked each claim, and how it compares with a typical tee.
Three reasons, each marked “checked by GOTS” or “stated by the brand”.
Impact as “against a typical tee (estimate)”, never “you saved”.
Passport, then the journey in two parts. At a glance: stage 7 of 9, water and carbon against a typical tee, and how far it travelled. How it was made: each stage dated, placed and marked “verified” or “brand says”, with a route map at the end.
03
Compare, then keep the one you buy
Riya puts the ₹499 tee next to the ₹549 one. Loom & Co’s missing data is named, and it keeps their tee at a D. Whatever she buys joins her wardrobe, even if she bought it online.
“Not shared by Loom & Co” instead of a silent blank.
₹50 more buys a B and roughly twice the life.
Compare, add an online order, then home. Compare ends on one button: pick the B. A tee bought online joins the wardrobe from an order link, its care label or a forwarded e-mail. Home leads with scanning and shows your impact as an estimate.
04
Keep it going, then pass it on
The wardrobe keeps the garment’s story going: care from its passport, repairs you booked, and a way to pass it on.
Fybr. only shows what it can know: passport data, care labels and what you told it.
The record belongs to the garment, so the next owner sees the same history.
The wardrobe two ways, then one piece. By category, every piece shows its grade. By brand, pieces sit in brand folders. The item page brings care from the passport and four next steps: tailor, resell, recycle, share. Resell passes the history on; your details stay behind.
Visual system
It should look like a clothing label, not a green app.
Quiet greys and black ink. The grade is the only thing in colour, so it is the first thing you see.
Grade
Meaning
A
Among the best 20% of its kind
B
Better than most
C
About average, or capped for missing data
D
Worse than most
E
Among the worst 20%
App background
#EFEEEB · Warm grey, like card stock
Cards
#FAFAF8 · One step lighter
Ink
#121212 · Text and the main button
Secondary text
#6B6965 · 4.7:1 on the background
Type: Instrument Sans for the app, with small labels in a regular sans instead of monospace. The letter grade always appears with its colour, so it works in black-and-white print and for colour-blind shoppers.
What changed
My first version gave shoppers homework. The final one gives them an answer.
Testing plan
Riskiest bet first: will anyone even notice the grade?
Nothing here is tested yet. This is the order I would test in, and what would count as a pass.
Reflection
Transparency is a design problem before it is a data problem.
What’s still missing
This is my own concept with example data. The grades are a proposal, not a scientific impact study, and nothing has been tested with shoppers or shops yet. Next: run the rack test, check the grading with a textile impact expert.
Next project
Kitorii →