Thoughts, musings, and opinions.
September 18, 2025
I've sat, over the years, in many, many design reviews. One of the most difficult things to learn early on in my career was how to separate design critique from my personal feelings. It's something that quite a decent number of design colleagues and friends & I have discussed.
What I found was that it took effort & training from both sides. All to often, feelings would get hurt, resentment would linger, arguments would occur, and animosity could extend into subsequent reviews.
The catalyst for me, the thing that made me start to examine this more, was almost 20 years ago now at a tech company in the SF Bay area. I was a Senior Interaction Designer on a newly formed team of SR & JR designers, UI developers, and researchers. We were in the process of creating what would eventually become a 'UX Design Team'.
Our team had been formed after an executive moved over as VP of Design. He was well-intentioned & had an interest in design, but zero training or experience. "UX Design" had recently become the new buzzword in Silicon Valley tech and he was caffeinated.
One of the things we implemented as the team grew was to have twice-weekly design reviews. Everyone getting together to share what we were working on and get feedback from each other. On this one particular session, I was one of the presenters.
This is early on in the mobile space, when employees were still provided company owned phones, and the app-stores were in their infancy. I’m working on a system for managing what apps were authorized for installation on these devices. It had on-device components and IT backend tools for Mobile Device Management.
So, I finish my presentation, and we’re going around the table, my colleagues sharing insights which we discuss. As it gets to this VP, he says one sentence. “That design is shit.” That’s all. Tells me to try again. No feedback, no insight into what specifically he deemed to be “shit”, nothing helpful or constructive.
I was, shall we say, a bit stunned and very irritated. A jumble of emotions flooded in. Afterward, my other colleagues unanimously had my back. They were just as stunned & angry. That made me feel better, pouring cold water on all of the doubt that crept in. Perhaps the worst part is that the team never respected him again.
Let’s be honest though, your designs being ‘ripped apart’ by your director in the design world wasn’t new to me. Previous critiques from more senior, experienced design leaders, stung & could be brutal, but they always explained where they were coming from, & provided feedback on how to rethink and improve my work. You LEARNED from them.
Some 20 years on, that one instance is still irritating, but it was also a critical lesson for my own leadership.
Design critiques are not (should not be) personal.
Eventually, I would lead and mentor other designers and teams. In every one of my subsequent roles, that moment has been with me. I used its power for good. I used it as a lesson. I always made sure to mentor younger designers, as well as other team members; product managers, developers, marketers.
There is a right and wrong was to critique a design idea and which one you employ begins with the setting of expectations. You need to learn HOW to critique. It is not about ripping a thing apart, or “scoring points”.
About 10 years ago, I put together a presentation.
It was pretty simple. I still use it today. I begin by telling that story. The story of the leader who didn’t know how to lead.
Here it is. I always started this presentation by asking about the title image. Surprisingly some didn’t get it.
Critiques are meant to improve output, rather than hinder progress. Collaboration and feedback improves your work. The designer who owns the design should own the critique session. Reviews should be conducted early and often in the process.
Proper feedback can reveal critical design flaws. Proper feedback lets you know if you're on the right track.
The person who owns the design. Explain what you are showing, convey what you have done, and be clear about where you need help. Communicate what stage you are at in the process. Walk through your rationale. Provide context. Accept any feedback graciously & thoughtfully. The commentary is (should be) on the work, NOT you. Take notes during the feedback.
Have a Moderator to help keep people focused and make sure the presenter has a successful critique. They should make sure the feedback doesn’t veer away from the presenter’s scope; be a time-keeper. The moderator sends anything requiring deeper discussion to a ‘parking lot’. Explain that questions should be held/written down until the end.
Those critiquing the design. Ask yourself, ‘How can I help this person improve their work?’ Hold your questions until the presenter is done, unless it is a clarifying question. Write down any feedback you think of. Frame it for understanding and action. Your feedback should be useful. Speak about the design NOT the designer. Avoid the pronoun ‘you’. Understand what they have done. See the opportunities to improve. Be specific about what is working and what is not. Speak from the target-customer-user’s perspective. YOU are not the user.
That’s pretty much it. What have you done? How have you handled difficult situations. What feedback do you have for me on this subject?
Here’s a link to the PDF of my presentation — feel fee to use. Download
August 4, 2025
As sort of a follow-on from my previous post about the changing state of product management and design, I’ve been mulling product design and UX from the perspective of 'Systems Thinking’; hopefully articulating a mature and comprehensive view of what modern product design really is—systems thinking applied across technology, business, and human behavior.
In seeking out a new job, I see huge swings in the definition and understanding of ‘Product Designer’. Many people hear 'Designer' or 'UX' and think artist, someone who draws graphics and user interfaces (UI). People used to ask what I did, and for a long time I would say ‘Basically I draw for a living.’ That was really inaccurate and cheapened what I do. In reality I was always a ‘systems thinker’. An Interaction Designer.
I started out as a Product Manager. I learned graphic and Web design, and quickly moved on to front-end code with html/css, and then usability. This was partly a necessity in understanding the technologies I was working with, but I actually found it extremely interesting and enjoyable.
For almost 6 years I’d been working in technology at larger companies. MP3.com, Vivendi-Universal, CNET, Kintera. After a layoff, I pivoted—going back to school to formalize the design skills I’d been using for some time, and diving more into the psychology of human-computer interaction. It was a boot camp before there were boot camps for this stuff. I learned a lot even if I already knew most of the coursework—I even helped teach the class about Web 2.0 and CSS—the curriculum was a bit behind.
That was 20 years ago.
My next few titles evolved. Creative Director > Senior Interaction Designer > User Experience Designer > Product Designer. Product design seemed to capture what I really did. A hybrid between interaction designer and product manager. That sufficed for many years. Over time lines blurred. Graphic designers started doing UI, Web designers learned about usability and user testing.
Today, as a product designer (and maybe that’s just not the right title any more), I am thinking about much more than just the screen or the UI or even just the user interaction. I am thinking about the order of operations in the code, the tech stack. The functionality.
All along, I’d been practicing visual design, creating UI, page layout, information architecture, interaction design, requirements gathering, conducting user research and design testing.
The technological dependencies like the server speeds, redundant systems, databases, API structures, billing components, security. How all of that fits together. I’m thinking about the product as a whole entity.
I’ve recently began viewing that as 'Systems Thinking'. Not a new term, but I feel like it more accurately describes what I do, beyond the current conventional perception of ‘Product Designer’.
A human-centered, design-thinking, information architectural, systems-focused product manager
July 21, 2025
The future of product management and design is transforming rapidly. Roles once defined by siloed tasks and specialized tools—product managers, UX designers, visual designers, researchers, and developers—are evolving.
With the rise of AI and large language models, the repetitive, mechanical aspects of our work—wire-framing, documentation, code scaffolding, user research synthesis—are increasingly offloaded to intelligent assistants. What’s emerging is a new model: humans as strategic thinkers, decision-makers, and subject matter experts, guiding the tools rather than being limited by them.
Having started my career as a T-Shaped product manager/designer (Thanks in part to being handed a copy of "Don't Make Me Think" by Steve Krug 20 years ago) I've seen the industry separate into silos - PM, UX, Visual, Research, Developer - each with their own sets of tools, and now it seems like things are converging back together again, yet vastly changed.
When I started we were writing detailed specification documents. Outlining the minute details, everything that the team needed to know. Documenting functionality. Walk, turn left. Stop, Look around. Open the door. Walk through the door. How would a user need to interact with the product. What order of information would be presented to them. Define every step. What mood and tone did we want to create? Does it work? Where does it fail?
As a product manager, you would consult with the SMEs for each discipline and combine that with your own knowledge and business requirements.
You compiled it into a document that was disseminated to the team. We would review, make changes and then begin building.
Over time things evolved. We became much more agile, there were more specialized teams. UX Design exploded as a discipline. UI-focused front-end code libraries and frameworks were born. Specialized teams to collect and analyze data, conduct product and user research, rigorous QA that worked tirelessly to find bugs in the product until (hopefully) they couldn’t find any more. Design Systems blossomed.
In less than a year, things have dramatically changed.
It is now possible for someone utilizing AI to research and vet an idea, prompt for copy, visual designs, images, vibe code framework, and have the beginnings of a workable, usable digital product, but it would still just be a beginning.
This is where knowledge, experience, and taste — experts in a field — come into play. Is the idea a good one? Is the code designed the right way? Are there things we missed? How will someone using the product feel? These are the questions and problem statements that only a human can really conceive.
Roles are beginning to converge and consolidate.
How exactly? That is not yet clear. What is clear is that the tools are now evolving very fast, but the knowledge and creative thinking part has been and always will be the primary skill someone - a thinking human - is going to need in the future.
What are your thoughts?
July 11, 2025
The future of product management and design is transforming rapidly. Roles once defined by siloed tasks and specialized tools—product managers, UX designers, visual designers, researchers, and developers—are evolving.
Over 20 years ago, I was a product manager for a non-profit technology platform where I worked directly with a Human-Computer Interaction specialist.
I became very ineterested in human behavioral psychology and began studying it, and how it applied to computers, and design on the Internet. I devoured Steve Krug's seminal book 'Don't Make Me Think'. My HCI colleague would eventually present my designs at a small one-day seminar where Mr. Krug analyzed my work in front of the group, providing valuable insights & giving it a positive review.
I was hooked.
July 3, 2025
Recently, I had a conversation with prospective client who chose to go with a different product designer because they felt I didn't have a strong background in mobile design. I was taken aback by that assessment. Mostly since I'd been designing for mobile screens longer than iPhone & Android devices have been around, but also because for the last decade or so, I think of it simply as screen design. You really can't control how your digital, screen-based product is going to be used (outside of controlled hardware exclusivity, maybe). Mobile-first, responsive, adaptive, native, desktop, are all screens. Then you have varied sizes and resolutions. Portrait orientation or landscape? There are so many permutations. Are users stationary, walking, on a train, plane, or in an automobile? Do they have any disabilities--permanent or situational? A product designer needs to account for, and be able to design, digital screen experiences that are flexible and adaptable.
Anyway - that led me to dig into my waaaaay-back design archives (dusty old hard drives) and pull up some of my early MOBILE screen designs. These were on candy bar phones, Razrs, Sidekicks, and more--all with different screen dimensions, different operating systems and different carriers each with their own unique tech stack. And probably 8 or 16-bit graphics.
It's very likely a lot of those reading this interacted with them. Some 20-ish years ago. The first mobile versions of Twitter, MySpace, and Facebook. (2006/2007)