Brittany Cheng Betten

Over the years I've tried many approaches to design critiques with the teams I've managed. Without fail these 4 simple principles impact the effectiveness of design critiques greater than anything else when established as ground rules. For presenters: ✦ Describe the problem you're solving ✦ State the target audience* ✦ Specify the feedback you're seeking All of the above can be done in less than a minute, either verbally or in written format. For participants: ✦ Ask questions before comments "I think you should go with blue instead of red" is less effective than first asking "Why did you choose red for this?" The additional context that comes from asking questions will lead to more effective feedback. Design critiques are the easiest and most important thing design teams can do to improve design quality. Alone they are not a silver bullet. But they are the foundation for all other improvements to design quality. If you're not holding regular design critiques (usually weekly), this is step 1 for improving design quality. If you're already holding regular design critiques but not doing the 4 principles above well, this is step 1 for improving your design critiques. Better critiques. Better quality. * "Everyone" is rarely acceptable as the target audience. Even if the feature being presented is intended for everyone, 99% of the time there's a specific segment or archetype you're aiming for. #design #critiques #quality

356

14 Comments

Reflecting on some recent advising sessions, something I don't see talked about as much is how critical it is to have an incredibly strong, unified* Design leadership team in order to build an even stronger design team and product. Why this is so critical 👇 What I’ve seen happen when you DON’T have that unified Design leadership team: 1. Massive gaps in the user experience – Let’s start with the obvious one. When Design leaders are staying neatly in their corners and not communicating, the experience degrades pretty quickly. Especially where the "seams" of their teams/org are. We've all seen (and let's be real…probably have been guilty of at times) the navigation structure that clearly shows the org chart vs. what users actually need. This can happen way too quickly without that unified team. 2. A lack of Design’s ability to influence product direction — The best Design leadership teams work together, pushing each other, to have a unified perspective of what the big things are to tackle in the user experience that leverages the unique expertise of the Design functions, all the way from it being grounded in research, to it having a compelling narrative. When they have that unified perspective and are all consistently sharing that perspective, it is so much easier for cross-functional partners to understand and buy-in on it. 3. Design works against Design — When Design leaders don't have a shared perspective on what is important (both in the user experience and the culture), don't have the right level of visibility into each other's work, or even worse, when they don't have mutual respect for each other, it leads to the leaders (mostly) inadvertently working against the progress of the other leaders/teams vs. together toward a unified vision. 4. A limit to the flexibility and scalability of the Design team – To build great experiences at scale, having the flexibility of shifting people to focus on different parts of the product is critical. When the culture and processes are dramatically, instead of it being exciting for that person to focus on a new space, it is incredibly disorienting, slows everything down, and can quickly lead to burnout. *A note on when I say "unified". I don't mean at all that they agree on everything. In fact, the opposite. They push each other the most, early and often. However, they have shared respect, cultivated by their leader, and shared responsibility around aligning within a timely manner. THEN they support each other in any way they can with hurdles they may each face (e.g. cross-functional buy-in or team-wide communication). ——— Is this interesting? Let me know if you want me to share more on how exactly you can cultivate this strong design leadership team –OR– if you want more personalized advice around this, set up some time with me here: https://lnkd.in/g-vyymtW

14

This is a great post for designers moving into management/leadership roles. The nature of your job changes dramatically and it's important to figure out the most effective ways to help your team and the company. As noted in the article, it's very easy to have your time consumed by managerial tasks (operational work). Being deliberate about how you want to spend your time, focusing on the change you want to bring about and working consistently towards that end are critical skills to learn. #UX #Design #DesignLeadership https://lnkd.in/e_g4TRJx

7

2 Comments

A/B testing is not product design. In recent years, it’s become fashionable to use lots of small A/B tests to try to build and refine products and experiences—even though there is no evidence that this actually works. I've worked with companies that went all in on A/B testing over all other methods and are now in deep trouble. While A/B testing can be a powerful tool in the right hands, it can also be an incredibly dangerous tool in the wrong hands. And I think most product and tech teams don’t have the sophistication to pull off A/B testing properly. I've written in the past that you can’t A/B test your way to product transformation, and Tony Fadell explains why in his book Build: “A/B and user testing is not product design. It’s a tool. A test. At best a diagnosis. It can tell you something’s not working, but it won’t tell you how to fix it. Or it can show you an option that solves one hyperlocal issue but breaks something else downstream.” — Tony Fadell. That final point is so critical. A/B testing done poorly will result in runaway butterfly effects, where these small tests lead up to big, unknown changes long term in your products. A/B testing is what you should do once you know the product design — once you have the vision. If you don’t know the vision and why you are building something, you shouldn’t be anywhere near A/B testing. What becomes really dangerous is when a company starts doing multiple hyperlocal A/B test experiments on the same page and then tries to slam together the results from multiple tests into one vision. Fadell also talks about how user panels/focus groups aren’t very useful. You can’t ask users what to build (but you can ask them about their pain points). Why? Because they can’t conceive of what has never been built before. I highly recommend Fadell’s book Build to anyone looking to either learn how great products and experiences get made or to learn how to get better at product development. It’s one of the best product and business books I have read in years. #productdesign #ux #abtesting #testing #data #userresearch

109

20 Comments

Somtimes the content that can up your UX game comes from unlikly sources. This article puts into context some of the best places to start!

10

Worthy Read: The UX Research Reckoning is Here by Judd Antin In the recent waves of tech layoffs, Judd Antin explores why UX researchers have been so impacted. He argues this “reckoning” is due to UX researchers focusing too much on what he calls “middle-range research” that centers on user understanding and product development. It’s worth reading this post as well as his follow-up based on the robust discussion it generated. Check it out here: https://buff.ly/44td5r5 ❓ What do you think is the biggest challenge facing UX researchers today: balancing business value with user insights, or shifting focus between micro, middle-range, and macro research? #prodmgmt #ux #engineering

76

14 Comments

The biggest mindset shift most senior PMs / Designers / Eng Mgrs / TLs who are building customer-facing products in midsized & large companies must make: Your main job is to make your product win. While it may seem like this Job # 1 should be obvious to all, it really isn’t. Here are some other leading contenders for Job # 1: - Main job is to make my manager happy - Main job is to make execs happy - Main job is to keep stakeholders happy - Main job is to keep team members happy - Main job is to build excellent systems - Main job is to get promoted - Main job is to launch as promised - Main job is to create user delight - Main job is to create customer value (some people LOVE saying this one) Now, I understand that we live in the real world and that there are “good reasons” why the above contenders are at least worthy of consideration. But I am saying what I am saying precisely because we live in the real world and because I think you should do your best to improve your odds of *long-term career success*. You see, as a passionate & ambitious product person who builds the mindset of making your product win as your Job # 1, you will do things & learn things that most of your other peers are not doing & learning. And by doing that over the long arc of your career, you will position yourself to reach closer to whatever is your optimal success potential. This is clearly not the only possible path and it may not be the right path for some / many (no single path can be). But it is at least worth considering if it seems to feel right to you. Most people spend years / decades in mid-sized & large companies and yet are never even told that this is an option they should consider for their long-term career success. If that is you, I want you to view this post just as a possibly helpful pointer. If it doesn’t resonate, that’s totally fine. But if it does resonate, you might over the long-term see yourself becoming a more competent, a more effective, and possibly even a more happy product person.

929

55 Comments

Hot take: Product and design are the same job (and designers are better at it). The job is figuring out what to build, why, and communicating that in a way a team can execute against. In big companies I see designers operating like junior PMs anyway — they get briefed into a PRD and then lead the feature from there to shipped. Their edge is they are highly literate communicating visually in addition to verbally. Where designers often get stuck is a belief that their PM will always know more about the problem space and customer needs than they do. In fact, design work is so detail-oriented, I think the opposite is actually true. Designers have to *really* know their customer to translate a PRD into an elegant experience. They just don’t get the same credit for it. TLDR; PMs, level up your visual design skills. The designers are coming. What do you see as the future of the product / design function?

8

1 Comment

Many designers complain that they can’t get their ideas into a product backlog. Most of the time this is true depending on the maturity of your team and if your company sees value in the design field, but most of the time, backlogs are product driven. If you want to advocate how to get your ideas you need to convince how the designs are going to impact the business. Saying to PM’s: “The UI looks bad and outdated” is such a bad pitch and will fall on deaf ears. You need to speak “business” and as a designer you need to know how your ideas can make them money. Now, you’re probably thinking “well how can I do that” considering it’s hard to use ARR on designs. This is where we introduce the RICE framework. https://lnkd.in/exaD4xNY . Learning this will help you know the impact of your designs, the reach of the customer base, how confident you are on the designs and estimations and how much effort the business needs to invest in this idea. I will be writing an in depth post on this soon but thought I’d leave this tip on a Sunday night as I am having the designer insonomia.

8

7 Comments

The first step in fixing a problem is first admitting there’s a problem. In that spirit, here’s a short video summary of culture anti-patterns on Eng / PM / Design teams. (might help explain what you have seen on your current team or on previous teams)

144

11 Comments

🗣️ Pssst! Many (most?) UX/Design orgs have way more people than are actually necessary to deliver great user experience. This is something I was first clued into in 2014, speaking with a design leader who had recently left a Silicon Valley software company to run a team at a bank. She told me how the team she inherited had 20 people, but, given her team's straightforward remit (showing balances, transaction activity, and other basics), she should only need 10 folks to deliver a quality user experience. But then she said something that I've replayed in my head at least weekly since then. She said that she was stunned to realize that, given the complexity of her product organization, she actually needed 40 people to cover all the work and relationships. This is when I realized that many design orgs were not "user-centered" or "customer-centered," but "product-centered." And these product teams are bloated (from the perspective of delivering meaningful customer value), which drives design teams to be bloated as well (again, from the frame of reference of delivering user/customer value). What I didn't know at the time was the trend (and cult) of agile transformations and SAFe, which I now believe to be the primary culprit of this bloat. Shortly before I left Adaptive Path, I lead a team that designed the entire ecommerce experience (for desktop and mobile web) for a major brand, including landing pages, category pages, detailed product pages with reviews, shopping cart and checkout functionality, wishlists, address books, birthday reminders, and more. We had 5 people. For a team covering all those things to be effective in-house now, you'd need at least 15, and many would have so much more. I know what I'm saying may strike a sensitive chord in this time of layoffs and difficulty finding work. And I'm not saying we should cut UX/Design teams in half—these teams need to be this size to ensure quality UX is delivered in these contexts. But I suspect the convulsions we're experiencing are in some part due to a realization that these product development organizations are fundamentally misshapen to deliver the kind of value expected of them.

549

98 Comments

Why is it still so hard to to create, design, build and launch products people love to use? (Two words: Executive Alignment) It took me years to understand this principle and even longer to make it a key part of my product leadership toolbox. Fortunately, you don't have to wait that long because the UX Researchers Guild is hosting an event this Thursday (Aug 15) featuring Tamara Adlin on this exact topic. I'm not one to endorse LinkedIn events often, but after following Tamara's work for some time, I can honestly say her experience and practical approach to helping product professionals advance their career is second to none. If you're a product leader, researcher or simply want to create better alignment between cross-functional teams & executive needs... Then you don't want to miss this event. 🗓 Mark your calendars! 🗓 https://lnkd.in/eshTB4Nc (Repost for others ♻️)

9

1 Comment

I'd like to share some valuable lessons that have completely transformed the way I approach communications. Plus, I've added some tips for product designers and design partners. 💡Case 1: Answer the Question I thought I knew how to answer questions until I got this feedback: "When an executive asks you a question, start with a clear 'yes' or 'no', or state 'I don't know, but I will get back to you by X date'." While variations exist, the key is to answer the question first. Too much information usually doesn't help - Answer the question, then let them ask probing questions. This advice resonated with me so much that I created a desktop wallpaper to look at it every day. 🤝 Case 2: Manage Meeting Effectively Another tip I learned is how to manage meetings. Based on tips from mentors and coworkers, here are three essential points to remember: 1. Why we are here: Ensure every meeting has a clear purpose. No one has time for irrelevant meetings. 2. What we aim to achieve: Clearly define the meeting's objectives. 3. What decisions we will make: Identify decision-makers and criteria.
 Applying this to design meetings, merely sharing in-progress designs often lacks value. Instead, structure the meeting to: 1. Clearly define the meeting's purpose and type: For example, specify if it’s a review and instruct people on the type of review you need. 2. Clarify the objectives: Are we finalizing designs to send to engineering, or aligning on problem statements with products? 3. Identify decision-makers and criteria for decisions: Then, make a decision. Of course, in both cases, summarize the outcome of the meetings and share it right away. ✨ Case 3: Clarify Expectations At workplaces, confusion and fires happen. Sometimes you're not sure what's going on. You don't want to overpromise or overstep, but you need to know what action is required. When I heard this question "What am I accountable for?" in the middle of a foggy meeting, my brain just cleared. Yes. We need clear ownership and accountability to navigate ambiguous situations. It was a sentence that resonated with me, and I still remember how we were able to move on to the next steps. To build on this, I also advise my partners to communicate their asks clearly. I hear a variety of design requests. Some people articulate their asks with intended outcomes, expectations, and timelines, while others just share desires and disappear. Clarity in your asks is key—it's almost a job requirement. Remember, others can't read your mind. If you believe in your idea, it's important to articulate it clearly. #CommunicationTips #ProductDesign #DesignPartnerships

40

6 Comments

Wow, it is nice to see some of the impact the course I authored with Designlab is having on teams both big and small. Emilyann Gachko thank you for sharing this case study and how it was received by the team at The Home Depot :) If you are interested in increasing your design skills through #usability and #accessibility check out the course. #ux #design #hcd https://lnkd.in/gEdC3NBV

11

Reader feedback for my latest post about how to use AI and my PRD template to never have to write a PRD from scratch again. Read the full post here: https://lnkd.in/eJjVXJUJ

8

We pour weeks (or months) into research, UX audits, and brainstorming sessions, thinking we’re making progress. But let’s be real—most of it ends up buried in a forgotten folder, never to be seen again. Then, a couple of years later, we do it all over again. The same problems. The same “fresh” ideas. The same waste of time. Leadership tends to be too excited about newness. How do we get out of this loop? Read here: 👇 https://lnkd.in/gpPSFehR

31

4 Comments

🔥Hot Take for PMs: Please don't hand me a solution to a problem. Instead, focus on detailing the problem and help me understand the why. We will ideate and find a solution together. Next week, in our first episode of ⚫️Bounce, Claire and I continue to unpack the PD + PM working relationship. Buckle up. Subscribe today - links in comments 👇

60

23 Comments

Let me tell you about the one time I paired a design team with their product folks to work with a group of customers who had recently lost a loved one. It was an incredible project that led to a huge simplification of old, well-intentioned processes to help people. Together, we radically improved the experience by reducing the time it takes to report the Loss of a Loved One from 30 minutes down to 45 seconds. The outcomes were beyond expectations. By creating a process that spoke directly to the awful pain and needs of survivors, customer retention shot straight up and their assets remained under management in the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars. That type of “innovation” is easy to come by when you genuinely exercise empathy, listen, and co-create a way to pair their needs with those of the business. If you invest in providing time and empathy to earn trust and loyalty, the money and assets will follow. Designers can help make this happen. We can’t and shouldn’t own the work (that’s your role President Business), but dammit, we can put one hell of a huge dent in the problems and challenges people have daily. My name is Greg Storey and I love working with your designers who do not have a dedicated design leader or a design ops role. We can do good things together to improve your team’s skills, processes, maturity, and cross-functional relationships. I have done this work many times at all sizes and scales, from small teams of ten to global enterprise programs of thousands. I'm looking to work with a team or two fractionally on a quarterly basis. Act now, right now! Supplies are limited. If that's not you, then take two seconds and share this story with your network! Tell your Uber driver about it. Use this tale to break the ice whit the poor person who has to sit in the middle seat on the flight home. Jump in front of a live news broadcast and say my name. Whatever it takes to help me find teams that need the kind of vision, guidance, and growth I provide in spades. #design #fractionalleadership #designervsgoliath

36

3 Comments

Sometimes I get asked why as someone in the design and product areas I end up referring so much about remote work (in terms of policies) and async work (in terms of operations). It's often a matter of leverage, and this of course has more impact the larger the company is. For example, shifting design critique from calls (doesn't scale, creates silos, verbal feedback is not precise, conversations can tail easily) to async posts means automatically documenting decisions, have a clear log of feedback that can be analyzed, have space for tail discussions that can happen, opens up to the whole company. One operational change becomes the conduit for a massive gain in terms of quality of the work, time saved, documentation, and transparency. So if I have to choose... sometimes I end up focusing more on these changes in processes that are universal across the company more than a smaller change that is design specific. It's just more efficient and reaps major advantages.

59

2 Comments