Bulk Actions in Power Search • Signifyd

Signifyd's Power Search console is where fraud analysts and merchant review teams do their most consequential work. Dense, data-heavy, built for people who live inside it: filtering transactions, investigating anomalies, making calls on individual cases. Every decision either protects revenue or exposes the business to risk.

Power Search was one of my core product areas from the start. By the time Bulk Actions landed on the roadmap, I knew the product, the users and the competitive landscape well enough to have a clear point of view.

If a merchant needed to apply the same action to multiple cases, the only option was to open each one individually, carry out the action, add notes and move on. One case at a time, every time.

Several key merchants, including Walmart Mexico, Abercrombie & Fitch and Lenovo, still relied on a competitor tool, Accertify, specifically for bulk operations. As long as that gap existed, we were only part of their workflow. Displacing Accertify was a stated strategic goal. Bulk Actions was the most direct path there.

A previous design direction existed, parked in the backlog, proposed by my manager. My job was to pick it up and take it forward. I didn't. After reviewing it against how merchants actually used Power Search, I made the case for a different approach. I came with evidence, held the position and the team moved forward with my direction.

Additional constraints: the feature wasn't available to all user types, ruling out any placement prominent enough to leave blank space when absent. And the confirmation flow needed to handle ineligible cases cleanly — not every case in a selection could be actioned, and merchants needed to understand exactly why before committing.

Merchants could now select up to 200 cases and apply an action in a single operation. The trigger was unobtrusive by design: integrated without friction into a dense UI, invisible to users without access.

The confirmation modal was the hardest call. Not every case in a selection is eligible for every action. Silently filtering ineligible cases would have broken trust. Blocking submission until the selection was clean placed unnecessary cognitive load at exactly the wrong moment. I showed ineligible cases in a distinct state within the confirmation step instead, so merchants could see the full picture and course-correct before committing. In a fraud context, that moment of clarity before submission isn't a nice-to-have. It's the point.

An activity log gave visibility after the fact: what was actioned, by whom and when, accessible as a side panel without leaving the search view.

The feature shipped ahead of Black Friday. We'd set an ambitious onboarding target for Power Search and cleared it. I don't have the exact number to hand, but the reception from every merchant we'd demoed to was unambiguous. More importantly for the business, it reduced the dependency key accounts had on Accertify for bulk workflows. Signifyd became harder to replace. That was the goal.