As we are edging towards an unlivable planet one fast fashion haul at a time, it is overdue to recon with the impact of Consumption Design.Everyday life has become one big consumerism fever dream. We are constantly tempted and pushed to buy stuff we dont need or even want, bydesign.Social media, once a place to connect, now a platform to sell, sell, and sell more. Instead of looking at pictures of your friends trip to Greece, you look at influencers promoting the seasons must-have products. And what a coincidence, you can immediately buy that product from seamlessly integrated shopping interfaces. No need to think; just buy. The algorithms prioritising sales content and the complementing built-in shopping experiences are carefully designed to make consumption compelling, easy and well thoughtless.But you dont need to use social media to experience pushy shopping experiences. E-commerce in general is designed to provoke mindless, impulse purchases. One-click-by buttons have come about specifically to minimise friction in the checkout process to leave less time to rethink purchases. Not to mention the meticulous use of social proof, urgency and other nudges to trigger reactive purchases.When users are making buying decisions on a whim it is easy to spend more than they can afford. But worry not, buy-now-pay-later is here to save the day! Momentarily cash-strapped customers can now opt for a microloan without leaving the checkout process. Novel financing solutions are designed to facilitate excessive consumption even if it leads to crippling debt.And finally, we need to mention that the products themselves we are so keen on accumulating are designed to break or go out of style quickly to keep us coming back to buy more or upgrade to the latest versions.The bottom line is that products, services and experiences are designed to drive or support excessive consumption. This is Consumption Design.What is Consumption Design?Consumption Design is a term to encapsulate the power of design in influencing consumer behaviour. It encompasses a broad range of strategies and methods aimed at manipulating what and how much peoplebuy.Influencing consumption decisions through design is not a new phenomenon. Consumer engineering has existed for over a century, and it is the origin of Consumption Design.A short intro to consumer engineeringIn the 1920s, America faced a problem it had never faced before: overproduction. Factories had become too efficient in producing goods and consumers were too slow or poor to buy them. To solve this conundrum, the leaders of the economy choose to train people to become obedient consumers. In other words: engineer consumers.We must shift America from a needs, to a desires culture. People must be trained to desire, to want new things even before the old had been entirely consumed. We must shape a new mentality in America. Mans desires must overshadow his needs.Paul Mazur, a partner at Lehman Brothers (Seesource)If you are wondering, slowing down production to avoid manufacturing excess stuff wasnt even considered an option. Earnest Elmo Calkins, the father of consumer engineering, argued that slowing down would mean turning back the page to earlier and more primitive times when people got along with little and made everything last as long as possible. What a horrid prospect. A clean planet and a slower lifehow primitive.Calkins was also the one who declared consumer engineering as the new business science where increased demand is created through artificial obsolescence and marketing:Goods fall into two classes, those we use, such as motor cars or safety razors, and those we use up, such as toothpaste and soda biscuits. Consumer engineers must see to it that we use up the kinds of goods we merely use.Earnest ElmoCalkinsConsumer engineers had the important task of creating consumer demand through the appearance of product innovations, new colour variations, creating new applications and finding other ways of making goods desirable.From Consumer Engineering to Consumption DesignDuring the past 100 years, we realised we can do more than artificial obsolescence and marketing to increase consumption. We have become experts in manipulating decision-making by exploiting psychological insights and mental shortcuts (nudging, urgency, social proof, etc). We mastered optimizing user flows to craft shopping environments that encourage impulse purchases. We have established and normalized more pervasive ways to create desire for non-essential products.Consumer engineering, with a narrow focus on product design and marketing, has evolved into a more encompassing Consumption Design, that captures a variety of strategies and methods aimed at influencing consumer decisions.Consumer engineering also had a narrow focus in the sense that it only considered how to increase consumption.Consumer engineeringOn the other hand, Consumption Design allows us to question the purpose, impact and ethics of influencing purchase decisions. Do we want to design for excessive, mindless consumption, or sustainable, mindful consumption?Consumption DesignWhy you should care about Consumption DesignPrimarily because you might be a Consumption Designer yourself and you need to understand the impact of yourwork.Impact 1: People are fed up with overconsumptionThe thing is, people are getting tired of being pushed to consume all the time. Im talking about your users, the people you are designing for, the people who use your products.They complain that it has become too easy to buy stuff they dont even want thanks to one-click buy buttons and seamless checkouts.They are upset that they go broke spending too much because of pushy or gamified shopping experiences.They are becoming fed up with influencers shoving useless, low-quality products down their audiences throats.For a user-centred designer, these are clear indicators of user dissatisfaction and pain points. Seeing these, we should ask ourselves: how do we justify the push for excessive consumption when it makes our users distressed andunhappy?Impact 2: The planet is inshamblesIt is not only your direct user who is negatively impacted by all this unnecessary consumption but also the planet. The planet that you live on and that your kids and grandkids are going to liveon.The production and disposal of all the useless cr*p pollutes the planet contributing to climate change and other environmental problems. As conscious designers understanding our responsibility to use design for good, we should ask ourselves: how do we justify the push for excessive consumption when it so obviously harms theplanet?Impact 3: Exploitation along the supplychainIf a T-shirt is $5 in the store, how could the dozens of people who grew the cotton, sewed the t-shirt, packaged and delivered that T-shirt be fairly paid? Nohow. To produce the useless stuff as cheaply as possible (so that the company can maximize profit) people are exploited along the supplychain.Regardless of which reason resonates with you the most, one thing is clear: designing for excessive consumption isharmful.The takeawayWe live in a world designed to keep us in the consumption hamster wheel. As designers, we shape and build this world with the decisions we make. That is why its crucial that we recognise our impact and change course as soon as possible.We need to start championing designing for mindful and sustainable consumption. Either by challenging practices at companies that design for excessive consumption or by choosing to use our skills and knowledge at companies that are already on the mission of sustainable consumption.Consumer culture had to be invented; designers helped invent it. If thats the case, then we can invent something better. We dont have a choice. As designers, we dont have to wait. [] Instead of imagining how to make a better widget, we should be dreaming about remaking our willfully ignorant acceptance of consumer culture.Cliff KuangDesigners helped get us into the climate crisis. Can they help get usout?What now?Please share this article with a friend or colleague! We need to raise awareness and start a discussion to ignite change and start designing for mindful and sustainable consumption. If you have ever been frustrated by mindless overconsumption, help spread the word about Consumption Desing.Hi, Im Anna, UX researcher, and advocate for mindful consumption by design. I post about this topic semi-regularly on LinkedIn if you want to follow, and I drive Kind Commerce to challenge pushy e-commerce designs.Are you a Consumption Designer? was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Designers often overshare when its not in their best interests toContinue reading on UX Collective

Design has little value for a team driven by outputs. But any Product team that hopes to deliver outcomes will never make that shift without embracing designmethods.It is a truth universally acknowledged that value requires working code in the hands of our customers. Build, measure, and learn after all has to start withbuild.The trouble begins when working code becomes conflated withvalue.Its easy for executive stakeholders to start thinking that if we cannot deliver value without delivering code, it means that code is whats valuable. Often, stakeholder pressure to deliver their ideas on time becomes the primary metric of success. Executives want numbersand its very easy to measure shipping velocity and pretend that it is a proxy for the value wedeliver.In an environment where value and velocity are the same thing, adding any work that impacts timelines goes against the incentives in play. So naturally when UX design shows up to talk about Process and Research and other capitalized nouns, the conversation turnssour.I hear the same thing from many product leaders: user research slows us down, and UX design process is a waste of time. All we need from UX is visual designs for usable experiences. Why are you doing all this other stuff? Whats theROI?Or, more honestlywhats in it forme?Yes, indeedin this context, the design work has little impact on the value delivered. But design is also the key for getting out of that environment. If PMs can stop working at cross-purposes with UX, the outcome is orders-of-magnitude improvementsnot only to the product, but to the product practiceitself.In a single-loop learning context, both of you are wasting yourtimeProcess is the clay that product managers shape to make good products. The result of a PMs work is not so much the product itself as the mold by which an idea gets turned into a roadmap, into epics, into requirements, and soon.Of course PMs aspire to be the originators of ideas as well; to drive the customer collaboration at the heart of the Agile Manifesto that defines truly valuable software. But in many orgs, senior stakeholderswhether in Product, in Sales, or all the way from the executive suitealso have ideas. And depending on org politics, their ideas can carry a lot moreweight.In these orgs, PMs are still expected to perform all the rituals of product management: compose PRDs, fill out strategy canvases, establish metrics, and all the other things that came part and parcel with their latest Agile Transformation. But the real output of these product managersthe thing they are incentivized to dois features in the backlog, and code in production.John Cutler once posed an extremely interesting question: if your development team could choose whether or not to hire a PM, would they? Putting on our Jobs-to-be-Done hat, I think its worth asking an analogous question here: if you could choose to hire those rituals, would you? Do they help you achieve yourgoals?In this context, I think the answer isno.When decision-making comes from outside of the Agile organization, any process represents a burden imposed from the top down rather than an enabler of value. Ship our ideas, but make it look Agile. Use your own judgment to come to our conclusions.But thats the opposite of good Product practice! Product managers dont want to work like this! So its only natural that, faced with the incentives they have, they are eager to sweep away any steps that theycan.Which brings ustoDesign and the win-conditionWhat is the ROI of UX? Often, this question is askedand interpretedas badfaith.But asked in good faith, I think its a very fair question. What can this new thing do for me? Regardless of whether you use JTBD, user stories, product hypotheses, or some cutting-edge methodology Ive never heard of, every product feature will have some kind of win condition: this will be our user, the output we produce will change that users behavior in this way, and the new behavior will be advantageous for our businessmodel.That win condition is key to any modern outcomes over outputs approach; if you cant answer how will it get us to the goal? then you shouldnt do it. This logic is at the heart of a product managers job, and even mediocre PMs will exercise it when prioritizing delivery work. Its good to say no to ideas if they are not the best way to reach our desired business-level outcomes.If what youre working on doesnt have a clear line back to metrics that matter to the businesswhy are you working onit?Those same PMs, however, often dont hesitate to turn to a designer and ask for some artifact without a clear sense of why. Millions of personas, service blueprints, and wireframes get produced and then abandoned in Confluence because there was never a purpose for them toserve.These artifacts are not inherently without ROI. The reason they have no value is because they were created without a valuable goal in mind. The question why are we doing this design stuff? must be reframed as is design helping us reach ourgoal?But before we can answer that question, we have to establish what that valuable goalnot just the next task on our checklistactuallyis.Your best practices arentWhat do I mean by task, as opposed to goal? Well, if your answer is the framework says then its a task. No matter how widely-adopted it might be, not a single methodology out there is so precious that it has value in its own right. They are all just one way to get you to the thingthat customer value that the software you are making is supposed to deliver to theuser.And yet a great number of software development activities have replaced measurable benefit with sheer ubiquitychosen because of their status as best practices rather than a coherent win condition. You dont have to go any further than user storieswhich are now used for things like as a system I want to connect to the database to get the datato see evidence of professionals reaching for the nearest tool, rather than the bestone.A best practice is only as good as your understanding of what you want to get out of it. If you dont know what it is youre hoping to achieve, no methodology in the world will helpyou.Halt and Catch FireS01E01When it comes to design, this is a remarkably common situation. After a decade of being sold design thinking product teams still dont really know exactly what it is for. When I ask what stakeholders hope to do with the artifact theyre asking for, most will stop mid-sentence because they lack an answer beyond weve always asked forit.Fortunately, designers have become accustomed to answering the question of what good is this? Design practice has been developing an antidotethe so-called Danish Design Ladderto transition from low-impact Design As Decoration to strategic and deliberate Design As Culture that begins with establishing shared and valuable goals, rather than merely contracts aroundoutputs.This approach to choosing methods is exactly what Product needs to attain escape velocity from the infamous BuildTrap.Thinking like a designer about how you do product management, not justproductBefore you ask the question what can design do for me? take the time to think about what it is you actually want to do. If you define your goal as ship the feature then you are wasting your own time as well as your designers time.PMs who really want to be mini-CEOs need to be able to quantify the value of the goals they want to achieve. Once that work is done (and it is work, a lot of work) they should start to investigate all their methods to answer the all-important question: Is this way helping us reach the goal, and are there betterways?The questions designers ask while designing software are just as effective when asked while designing process.For anyone able to define real goals measured in terms of outcomes, rather than velocity to outputs, the value of design becomes clearbecause that is the environment in which the feedback loops of the design process can actuallyoperate.Back in the early 2000s, product managers pushed back against Agile as well, until they realized that it was a better way of building valuable software. 20 years later, when product managers wonder whether they should say no to design, it gives me faith that they are ready to take the next stepbut only if theyre ready to think about what that question reallymeans.How PMs can turn process from a time-waster into their greatest superpower was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

An exploration of what the rapid integration of generative AI means for how we design and develop software.In March 2023, I wrote an article exploring the initial impact of ChatGPT on the design industry. At that time, we were just beginning to grasp the potential of generative AI technologies. Now, reflecting on the changes weve seen, its clear that the landscape for designing and developing software has shifted seismically. Im struck by how dramatically our conversations have evolved in such a short span of time. Tools like ChatGPT and AI-powered features have become embedded into everyday workflows, making products smarter and enabling us to do and achievemore.Weve witnessed an unprecedented flurry of AI announcements, integrations, and pivots from tech giants and startups alike. Microsoft has bet big on OpenAI, Google scrambled to launch Bard and stumbled again with Gemini and Meta launched their own proprietary and open source models. Apple also launched their take that rebranded AI, with some notable differences.Examples of recent challenges companies have faced when launching AI features.Amid this AI gold rush, many of us find ourselves grappling with questions that have only grown more complex over time: How will these technologies reshape our roles? What new skills do we need to develop? And perhaps most pressingly, where is all of this actuallygoing?In this follow-up article, I revisit some of my earlier assessments, explore the current state of AI in design and software development, examine some telling parallels with other technological revolutions, and offer an updated perspective on how we, as designers working in product development, can navigate this rapidly evolving landscape.More profound than electricity orfire?Soon after ChatGPT launched, there were some very bold claims about the impact LLMs would have. Sundar Pichai (Google CEO) claimed it will be more profound than electricity or fire while others have, more recently, poured cold water on the idea. Goldman Sachs has questioned the economic viability of generative AI, pointing to how the approx $1trn spend has little to show for so far. So are we any clearer about which it is? There are some parallels we can study to attempt to understand where we are rightnow.One of the most important things to humanitymore profound than electricity or fire.SundarPichaiThe history of predicting when full self-driving (FSD) cars would be ready provides an interesting reference point for understanding where we are with generative AI today. Despite significant advancements, achieving full autonomy remains challenging, mirroring the current state of generative AIpromising but still facing substantial hurdles.By the middle of next year, well have over a million Tesla cars on the road with full self-driving hardware. Elon Musk,2019Its not that self-driving cars didnt materialiseyou can go to San Francisco today and see Waymo FSD taxis on the roads. However, optimizing for one environment and generalising for an entire region or country are two very different problems. Achieving 90% FSD is somewhat clear and attainable, but closing the final gap is where the real complexity and hard work lies. Beyond the technical challenges of ensuring FSD works reliably on various types of roads and accommodate the myriad edge cases of human behavior, there are significant regulatory challenges that compound the complexity that hinder progress.Waymo self-driving cars are disabled by protesters with traffic cones that confused their sensors. Image is a screengrab from TikTok / Safe StreetRebelSo what does this have to do with generative AI? Over the last 18 months, much like the recent wave of self-driving car innovation, companies have poured huge budgets and resources into generative AI. Many teams were tasked with creating POCs (proof of concepts) to illustrate what integrating LLMs and other generative AI models might mean for their products, services, or industries. People in boardrooms got excited by demos, and some companies rushed results to market, only to fall flat. We are now witnessing what Aidan Gomez calls the POC death cycle where companies struggle to transition from experimentation to deploying models in production.There have been several high-profile examples that highlight this challenge. Most recently, we saw Figma backstepping after they launched a new (since pulled) AI feature called Make Designs, a prompt driven interface used to create new screen designs that generated designs for a weather app that had uncanny similarities with Apples version. Google has also continued to face more trouble with its overhaul of search that advised users to put glue on pizza or eat rocks. These incidents demonstrate that, much like self-driving technology, moving from experimentation to production is very difficult, even for companies with significant resources and toptalent.Comparison of Apples weather app alongside a generic app created by Figmas new feature, which has since been pulled. Image courtesy of AndyAllen.Post-peak generative AISo where do we go from here? Well according to Gartner, in August 2023, we are now at or already past the peak of inflated expectations for generative AIwhere people are excited and optimistic about future applications, with few of the downsides. The far side of this however the trough of disillusionment. This phase often sees a decline in enthusiasm and a more realistic understanding of the technologys limitations. This will perhaps be accelerated by the previously mentioned false starts we have seen recently. However, its also a crucial period where more practical and sustainable uses of generative AI begin toemerge.2023 Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies, Gartner.Some companies are already taking a different approach to how they adopt AI technologies. Apple has very intentionally avoided using the term, with their recent keynote focusing instead on Apple intelligence. Their AI offerings were also tellinginstead of peppering features across the experience, they took a very measured approach, focusing only where they believe it adds significant value to the user experienceand dialing it back where there is greater risk, such as with image generation. This careful integration highlights a strategic shift towards enhancing functionality without overhyping the technology. They are also integrating ChatGPT across the platform for certain queries, meaning that if things go wrong, the error is on those third parties and notApple.Apples AI Bitmoji creates images on demand but limits them to intentionally cartoonish outputs, managing expectations and the potential for misuse in the process. Image creditApple.This measured approach is indicative of the next chapter, where AI transitions from being the central feature to becoming more seamlessly embedded within experiences. Instead of AI being a headline-grabbing feature, it will be a powerful background component that enhances user interactions and productivity. This shift towards subtle, integrated AI reflects a maturing understanding of the technology's strengths and limitations, ultimately leading to more reliable and user-friendly applications.Considering the impact generative AI will have on how we design and develop software, its clear that this technology is here to stay in some form. Teams and individuals who arent yet experimenting with how these technologies will disrupt their products, services, or workflows should start doing so immediately. The shift is actually already underway if you know where tolook.Supernormal AIIn product design, the concept of supernormal refers to creating products that feel immediately familiar and comfortable to users, despite being new or innovative. This approach emphasizes subtlety and refinement rather than overt novelty. The goal is to design objects that blend seamlessly into everyday life, offering a sense of reliability and timelessness. This concept was championed by designers like Naoto Fukasawa and Jasper Morrison in the early2000's.Supernormal exhibition, Axis Gallery Tokyo 2006. Image copyright Naoto FukasawaDesign.This idea of supernormal design provides a useful metaphor for how AI experiences might evolve. As AI features become more commonplace and users grow familiar with how they work, the need to highlight them will decrease. For example, the sparkle icon has become a defining feature of many AI features within products. Initially, signaling AI functionality to users was necessary, but this will evolve to become more intuitively useful and naturally integrated into users daily routines, enhancing their experience without drawing attention. Jordan Singer, who leads AI design at Figma, discussed this integration:The sparkle icon has become ubiquitous for AI, we had many debates early on. I said we shouldnt use the sparkle at all because AI should feel really deeply integrated. But I think we want to ease our way into people learning about our new capabilities, making sure it is recognizable. JordanSingerAn example button (credit Edoardo Mercat) with the now ubiquitous sparkle icon that indicates AI functionality.Its worth remembering that there was a time when Apple had to explain how swipe to unlock and pinch to zoom worked. Now, these features are so commonplace that it seems strange they ever needed explanation. Similarly, as we learn these new AI affordances, the obvious indicators may start to disappear as AI features become more deeply embedded into product experiences.https://medium.com/media/1cd9c80a63ec4dead1881489b55e874f/hrefWith their latest AI features, Apple is already providing a glimpse at what this future may look likewhere AI is a deeply integrated background capability that enables enhanced versions of existing experiences.Apple has defined the table stakes for what an AI-powered device should be able to do. Some of the new Apple Intelligence features dont even feel like AI, they just feel like smarter tools. Sara Perez, TechCrunchDesigning the (AI)systemAI is fundamentally changing how we build software, augmenting and evolving our capabilities. This is already happening in many areas, as we can see with the success of GitHubs Copilot for example, which has quickly become integrated into developer workflows. However, AI adoption in product design has been slower, partly due to the complexity of visual spatial canvases compared to code, which is better suited to text-based LLMs. There are indications of how design will changehowever.One example already referenced is Figmas Make Designs feature. Despite the problems it faced at launch, it provides a useful glimpse at how product design could evolve. It uses an off-the-shelf LLM in combination with advanced system prompts, that include custom design systems, to generate a first draftdesign.We feed metadata from these hand-crafted components and examples into the context window of the model along with the prompt the user enters describing their design goals. The model then effectively assembles a subset of these components, inspired by the examples, into fully parameterized designs. NoahLevinWhile the demo was focused on generating screens for a new app from scratch, this is a less common problem design teams, particularly those in-house and anyone working with their own design systems. In fact the real value is in enabling designers to integrate this feature with their design systems to generate first drafts aligned with their brand or existing applications.For product designers this could have a profound impact. Instead of spending our team building wireframes, we may increasingly focus our effort on building the underlying systems, ensuring that the foundations for generative AI systems are robust and adhere to codified best practices and accessibility standards.https://medium.com/media/cb2eca112fa35d8b47225a82fa2cee1e/hrefIn this scenario, the work of designers shifts to ensure that the systems are aligned with the product principles, values, and strategic goals of the organization. By creating a solid design framework, designers will enable AI tools to generate consistent and high-quality outputs that reflect the brands identity and user experience standardsfor use by a wider range or roles across organisations.There could be similar impact for other design roles. UX researchers will also see their roles augmented by AI tools and methodologies. While their core mission of understanding user needs and behaviors will remain, AI will enhance their ability to gather, analyze, and interpret data. By integrating AI into their workflows, small teams will be able to cover more ground, at greater depth, than was possiblebefore.UX writers may also shift their focus towards the underlying systemsin their case, developing style guides and vocabularies rather than crafting specific UI text. These guides will serve as the foundation for AI tools that generate user interface content, ensuring consistency in tone, terminology, and style across all AI-generated outputs. This approach is already available with tools like Frontitude, which allow UX writers to maintain control over the brand voice while leveraging AI to handle large volumes of repetitive content generation tasks.Frontitude, an AI writing assistant for designteams..In each of these examples, the role of design becomes more strategic, enabling designers to have a more impact. It does also beg the obvious question of whether we will need as many designers as we do today? Design roles, as we currently define them, will probably decrease over time. Design has always been in a state of flux however, and my optimistic view is that our roles will evolve to meet new requirements. The boundaries and definitions that we apply to what we do today wont be the same tomorrow.Expanding scope and blurringrolesAI significantly broadens the influence of product development roles, including design, UX research, product management, and engineering. It enables us to do more within our existing roles and take on tasks previously outside our scope. This expansion blurs existing boundaries, introducing both challenges and opportunities.For example, product designers might start writing product requirements documents (PRDs) and strategy documents, traditionally the domain of product managers (PMs). Tools like ChatPRD assist in creating well-structured PRDs quickly, allowing designers to contribute to product strategy and improve team collaboration.Similarly, AI-powered tools, like Uizard and Canva enable non-designers to create UX flows and UI prototypes. This helps PMs draft initial designs, facilitating early alignment and deeper understanding, ultimately accelerating the design process. If anyone feels threatened by such tools, its probably a good indication that they need to diversify their skillset. If one thing is clear its that generative AI is only going to continue to displace such tasks, with increasing levels of disruption as models get smarter and morecapable.Magic design from Canva, enabling non-designers to quickly and easily create compelling designs.In any case, much of the work needed to ship high quality software lies in the soft skillssetting a vision, bringing people on a journey, influencing and collaborating across disciplines to get our ideas into production. Much of this doesnt change significantly with AIIn fact they will become more important than ever. As Lenny Rachitsky notes, people excel at people stuff, such as aligning stakeholders and creating amazing experiences.What are people best at? People stuff! Aligning opinionated stakeholders, unblocking blockers, pushing teams to work harder, creating amazing experiences, getting buy-in on big ideas, understanding and acting on nuance, etc.these soft skills are where AI wont take over for a long while, and thus they are the skills you should be cultivating more than ever.Lenny RachitskyThere are also new tools emerging that show the potential for the role of software engineers to also get disrupted. Devin is a, according to the creators website, tireless, skilled teammate, equally ready to build alongside you or independently complete tasks for you to review. While its pitched at enabling engineers to focus on more interesting problems, it also opens the door for people with a less technical background to write software.https://medium.com/media/6c8f59e40b2565073c093780c7309dd5/hrefOnce again, this doesnt necessarily mean that the role of engineers will be displaced but rather that the boundaries between roles will become more and more blurred over time. If a designer can mock-up a front-end page to illustrate the design intent (powered by a companys design system for example), it can only be a good thing in my opinion. It doesnt mean that designers will be responsible for putting that work into production, as we have seen beforecrossing this chasm is not straightforward.These examples point to an emerging frontier within design that has gained a lot of attention recentlythat of the design engineer. People like Jordan Singer (mentioned above), Rasmus Anderson and Julius Tarng point to what future blended roles might look like. They are generalists that span the worlds of design and software. For those who occupy this space, AI tools can turbocharge what they can accomplish. I believe that this points to how product design in particular mayevolve.As we navigate this new landscape, its important to remember that while our roles may evolve, the core principles of designunderstanding people and solving their problemsremain unchanged. AI will let us do more than ever before, and our adaptability, curiosity, and optimism will be key to thriving as the field evolves. Im reminded of this quote and reframing of AI by James Buckhouse which sums up the challenge and opportunity well forme.AI will not mean the death of artists, intellectuals, or anyone else. Instead, it will mean our rebirth, but only if we make it so. Heres how: we must stop thinking of AI as Artificial Intelligence, and instead think of it as Augmented Imagination. James BuckhouseJohn Moriarty leads the design team at DataRobot, an enterprise AI platform that helps AI practitioners to build, govern and operate predictive and generative AI models. Before this, he worked in Accenture, HMH and Design Partners.The expanded scope and blurring boundaries of AI-powered design was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Good design starts here.Continue reading on UX Collective

Weekly curated resources for designersthinkers andmakers.Recently, multiple businesses worldwide, including banks, airlines, TV channels, and more, were forced to suspend their operations due to a faulty cybersecurity update to Windows. The update took down thousands of computers, causing them to boot loop and crash to a blue screen of death. Suddenly, our beloved icons were gone, and we thrashed around helplessly without them. This may be a good time to think a little about the processes by which Microsoft became such a huge monopoly.The blue screen of death: have GUIs truly defeated iconoclasm? By NeelDozomeEditor picksWhy you should have a brag document Your secret weapon for performance reviews and interviews.By TedGoasOur company is acquired. Now what? Business as usual applies no more to us UX professionals.ByMeltemWhy not all voices should be equal We need to start centering decisions of those deeply impacted.By MarielleSam-WallThe UX Collective is an independent design publication that elevates unheard design voices and helps designers think more critically about theirwork.A curated collection of free typefaces Make methinkCool self In my simplest definition, its the version of you that feels like youre being yourself and feels cool. Naturally, this hinges on how we define cool. So in the fewest words I can muster, cool means being authentic, confident, calm, and original.The paradox of builders & users Builders are different. Every time they open their own product, they spot problems. Theyre constantly thinking of opportunities to change thingsarguably for the better. The optimisation brain is on full revolutions.Steve Jobs: the objects of our life Part of Steves brilliance was how he learned to support the creative process, encouraging and developing ideas even in large groups of people. He treated the process of creating with a rare and wonderful reverence.Little gems thisweekBack of the TV UX By Chris RBeckerGoing offroad for a better design system By TripCarrollDangerous metaphors in AI By Luis BerumenCastroTools and resourcesNever hide your email unsubscribe link A cautionary tale of email deliverability, retention, and LTV.By Rosie HoggmascallHow to make tables fit on small screens Spoiler: you probably cant and maybe you shouldnt.By LitsaBabalisA designers introduction to AI The brief exploration of a (kinda) new design material.By FelixKalkuhlSupport the newsletterIf you find our content helpful, heres how you can supportus:Check out this weeks sponsor to support their worktooForward this email to a friend and invite them to subscribeShare open positions on our jobboardSponsor aneditionBlue screen of death, brag document, designing tables for small screens was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Exploring how to design interfaces that feel intuitive and forgiving, even when users make mistakes.Source: https://dribbble.com/shots/4291349-MistakeWeve all been there. Youre rushing to book a flight, fingers flying across the keyboard, and just as youre about to click Confirm, BAM! You accidentally select the wrong departure date. A wave of panic washes over you as you scramble to fix the mistake, hoping it hasnt cost you a small fortune. Errors like these are a common occurrence when interacting with digital interfaces, and they can be a real pain to dealwith.These little hiccups, these moments of frustration, often expose areas where technology falls short of providing a smooth and intuitive user experience. Theyre the digital equivalent of a banana peel on the sidewalk, and they happen to the best of us. But while some errors are simply minor annoyances, others can have significant consequences, leading to lost time, data, or even financial losses.In this article, I am going to take a closer look at interface errors. Ill explain the difference between slips and mistakes, and share some ways to design intuitive, error-tolerant interfaces that make it easier for users to recover when they makeerrors.Slips vs.MistakesWhen it comes to interface errors, its important to understand the difference between slips and mistakes.SlipsSlips occur when the users intent is correct, but they accidentally execute the wrong actionlike clicking the wrong button or entering an unintended value.Imagine scheduling a team meeting using Google Calendar. You diligently set the date, time, and carefully add all participants. However, while fine-tuning the meeting agenda, you accidentally overlook the Notify participants checkbox before saving the event. As a result, no notifications are sent, leaving your team uninformed about the meeting. This is a classic slip: your overall intention was correct, but a simple oversight in the workflow led to a communication breakdown.MistakesMistakes, on the other hand, happen when the users underlying goal or plan is flawed, leading them to take the wrong action in the firstplace.Youre setting up a team meeting in Google Calendar, aiming for a productive one-hour brainstorming session. You carefully select a time slot that appears free for all participants and send out the invitations. However, what you dont realize is that your free Google Calendar account has a 40-minute limit for meetings.Because youre unaware of this limitation, the meeting unexpectedly ends after 40 minutes, disconnecting all participants. This interruption causes confusion and disrupts the flow of discussion, potentially leading to frustration and wastedtime.The mistake stems from an incorrect mental model of the systems functionality, highlighting how a users understanding (or lack thereof) can significantly impact their experience and lead to unintended consequences.Designing for Error PreventionWhile some errors are simply unavoidable, interfaces can be designed in a way that minimizes the occurrence of both slips and mistakes, and makes it easier for users to recover when they dohappen.Preventing SlipsWhen it comes to slips, the key is to design interfaces that make it difficult for users to accidentally take the wrong action. This couldinvolve:A clear visual hierarchy acts as a roadmap for users, guiding their attention to the interactive elements. A well-structured hierarchy aligns with users natural tendencies to scan for visual prominence. By strategically using size, color, contrast, and placement, designers can signal which elements are clickable buttons, editable fields, or draggable components, making the interfaces functionality instantly understandable.Implementing inline validation to provide immediate feedback as users fill out forms can helps users correct errors in real-time, reducing frustration and improving the completion rate.Chunking and progressive disclosure can help to reduce cognitive load and minimize the risk of users losing track of their current step in a multi-step process.Providing clear and unambiguous labels for buttons, links, and other controls, so theres no confusion about what each elementdoes.Implementing safeguards, such as confirmation dialogues, to catch potentially harmful actions before theyre executed.For example, Jitter, a tool for creating animations from Figma designs, demonstrates how progressive disclosure can help prevent slips caused by cognitive overload. Instead of bombarding users with information about how to instal the Figma plugin right away, Jitter strategically reveals instructions based on the users chosen workflow. This measured approach ensures users receive only the information they need at each step, reducing cognitive load and minimizing the risk of errors or accidental clicks due to feeling overwhelmed.Source: https://mobbin.com/screens/a7725b24-f16a-4d16-b0e9-935ffea824edIntercom effectively implements confirmation dialogues to prevent slips, especially when dealing with potentially irreversible actions. For example, the Archive and Block options for contacts, both of which can have significant consequences, are positioned closely together. To mitigate the risk of users accidentally selecting the wrong option, Intercom requires explicit confirmation before proceeding. This confirmation step not only acts as a safety net to catch potential slips but also empowers users to reverse an accidental click before any unintended consequences occur.Source: https://mobbin.com/screens/adad8065-0cfb-414c-ae1f-24538f061d19The registration pop-up in Figma provides users with inline validation for the email input field. In the example below, the mistype is detected and the user is prompted to correct it with a singleclickSource: https://mobbin.com/screens/a3b9500b-9f95-47f0-a176-3450efd9e90aPreventing MistakesMistakes, on the other hand, require a slightly different approach. Since these errors stem from the users underlying goal or plan being flawed, the focus should be on helping them develop a correct mental model of how the systemworks.This couldinvolve:Using familiar metaphors and metaphors that align with the users existing mental models. Users dont approach systems in isolation; they bring expectations shaped by their experiences with other products and interfaces. As Jakob Nielsens Law of Internet User Experience, often applied more broadly, suggests, users prefer systems that work in ways they already understand. By incorporating familiar metaphors and design patterns, you tap into those existing mental models, reducing the learning curve and minimizing the potential for mistakes caused by unfamiliarity or confusion.Sometimes it is impossible to follow only established patterns, especially when dealing with novel features. In these situations, nudges and contextual guidance can help users discover the correct actions and avoid mistakes. By providing helpful tooltip, hints, or suggestions at the point of interaction, designers can gently steer users towards the optimal path, reducing the likelihood of errors stemming from uncertainty or a lack of understanding.Nielsens Help and Documentation heuristic emphasizes that while its ideal for a system to be usable without any extra help, it is necessary to provide help and documentation to assist users. However, a knowledge base can be overwhelming, especially to novice users. Generative AI suggests a great approach: incorporating chatbots trained on the knowledge base, which can communicate with users in natural language and help them in context, for example IBM Watson Assistant or Google Dialogflow.Novice users often make mistakes when faced with unfamiliar systems or features. This is where proactive guidance, like the contextual suggestions provided by the Otter chat interface, can be invaluable in preventing errors. For example, new Otter users might not fully grasp the full potential of the chat feature, leading to unproductive interactions or a sense of being lost. By offering contextually relevant suggestions, Otter guides users towards meaningful actions, preventing the Blank Canvas Syndrome that can lead to frustration and mistakes. This proactive approach helps users learn by doing, fostering a smoother and more error-free experience from theoutset.Source: https://mobbin.com/screens/838ca45b-08ae-424e-a40a-26bf79c6f94fIntercom employs several effective approaches to introduce users to the interface:They leverage metaphors, using familiar categories like inboxes and views to explain the information architecture.The visual hierarchy is designed to guide user attention. A dimmed background draws focus to the side panel. The inclusion of a human photo in the tooltip leverages Gestalt principles, ensuring its the first place users look. The tooltip message effectively uses chunking, separating the information into two one-sentence parts, utilizing the Serial PositionEffect.Source: https://mobbin.com/screens/f0180cbf-58b1-42f3-a262-63dc6c70e2d1Graceful recoveryIn an ideal world, our designs would be so intuitive and error-resistant that missteps would be rare. However, the reality is that users are human, and human error is a natural part of any interaction. Even with the most well-intentioned design efforts, unforeseen circumstances, slips of attention, or gaps in understanding can lead to unintended actions. Thats why its not enough to focus solely on error prevention; we must also design for graceful recovery. When errors do happen, its crucial to provide users with a clear, straightforward path to get back on track, minimizing frustration and helping them achieve theirgoals.Here are some key ways to design for graceful error recovery:A key principle of graceful error recovery is ensuring users can quickly recognize when theyve made a mistake. A system that clearly communicates its status empowers users to self-correct. By providing clear and timely feedback about the systems statewhether an action was successful, whats currently processing, or any changes resulting from their inputusers can readily track the impact of their actions and identify any unintended outcomes. This aligns with Nielsens heuristic Visibility of System Status, which emphasizes the importance of keeping users informed about whats happening inside the system at alltimes.Once a user has identified a mistake, the system should provide clear and readily accessible options for reversing the action or getting assistance. This could include prominent Undo buttons, readily available help documentation linked within error messages, the option to connect with a human support agent,etc.Even when errors occur, the system should be designed to minimize their impact and prevent data loss or other irreversible damage. This could involve: a) Autosaving user progress: Regularly saving the users work can help to easily recover it if an error forces them to restart or lose their current session.b) Providing clear warnings before irreversible actions: If an action cannot be undone (e.g., deleting a file permanently), the system should clearly warn the user and require confirmation before proceeding.c) Offering safe modes or sandboxes for experimentation: Allow users to explore features or make changes in a safe environment where mistakes wont have lasting consequences.Recovery codes for two-factor authentication are a great example of this proactive approach. By generating and prompting users to store these codes, services like Basecamp provide a safety net if a user ever loses access to their second authentication factor.Basecamp further emphasizes the importance of these codes by employing a Von Restorff Effect or the Isolation Effect visually highlighting the potential threat of losing access and strategically placing the recovery code option within that message. This combination of proactive problem-solving and clever design effectively guides users towards a solution before they encounter a criticalerrorSource: https://mobbin.com/screens/765b19a9-910d-437a-b32c-b8b77e13369dAdditional resourcesDesigning for error recovery is an ongoing learning process. Here are some additional resources that can provide furtherinsight:What Is Error and Types of Errors in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) in video by AlanDixUsability Heuristic 5: Error Prevention by Katie Sherwin fromNN/gThe Design of Everyday Things, Chapter 5Human error? No, bad design by DonNormanDesigning Better Error Messages UX by VitalyFriedmanThe Nature of User Errors lesson byUxcelFinal thoughtsIn the end, embracing errors as a natural part of the human experience and proactively designing for their prevention and graceful recovery is crucial for creating delightful, user-friendly interfaces. By understanding the different types of errors users might make, such as slips and mistakes, and employing thoughtful strategies to address both, designers can empower users to confidently engage with digital products and services, fostering a sense of trust, control, and satisfaction.Do you know any other effective techniques for designing for error tolerance and recovery? Feel free to share your thoughts in the commentsbelow!Designing for forgiveness: How to create error-tolerant interfaces was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

A quantitative approach to design ROI that puts collaboration at the centerContinue reading on UX Collective