With the electrification of motor vehicles comes a rapid improvement to their technologies, creature comforts, and modern conveniences, but as the industry races into a new era of engineering it appears as though aesthetics have been left behind. Classic cars are far from banal showcasing genuine wood dashboards, fine natural leather upholstery, and brilliant metallic detailing encapsulated by handsome sculptural forms. Echoing this hand craft and machine artistry is SANAYI313 as they launch their Lounge Collection informed by the golden age of automotive design. The Istanbul-based interdisciplinary practice is as much a cultural institution as it is a diverse creative business whose modus is maximalist expressions through minimalist details.So it comes as no surprise that the studio found inspiration in an auto repair shop tucked away in the Maslak neighborhood where warehouse architecture litters one of Istanbuls first planned industrial zones. The products are the outcome of our daily-life encounters, a dialogue between the spirit and culture of this industrial zone and aesthetic beauty, says SANAYI313 creative director, Enis Karavil. Elements within the space are mirrored in the highly textural kit of parts employed to build each model. Hard-wearing materials including stainless steel, painted metal, maple burl veneer, leather, and glass come together for a series of equally functional and sculptural furniture pieces.The fine-tuned furnishings are a survey of bulky forms comprising distinctive designs: a lounge chair of two varieties, a daybed, a coffee table, a dining table, and side tables. Their simple forms and perfect proportions allow for clear articulation of material finish from grain to sheen. Whats more, the perception of each object is altered by its tactile and visual properties.The 14313 Lounge Chair in maple burl veneer has a formidable, monolithic presence as if chiseled from thick marble slabs, but becomes far more approachable when upholstered in leather for a cushioned feel and comfortable experience. Sharing in the suppleness of leather while juxtaposed with a maple burl veneer frame is the 19313 Daybed. The low-slung seating and prominent armrests add a sense of luxury to its simple silhouette.Slightly more complex is the plinth-like 33313 Coffee Table, which gives the impression of being formed from multiple blocks, is made entirely of maple burl veneer and can be styled or used in a variety of interior applications. The 21313 Dining Table is of an even grander scale featuring a rounded rectangular glazed tabletop with a stainless steel frame that rests atop two structural, cylindrical legs of the same finish. The studios signature tiered 07313 Twin Side Tables are also rethought, reworked, and realized in stainless steel to complement the fresh creative direction.SANAYI313 dignifies what some might call visual pollution in this homage to a bygone era of automotive prowess, supercharging spaces with a little more horsepower. For me, the ideal home is all about creating an environment that is an authentic expression of ones individuality. And I truly enjoy seeing our products in such environments, adds Karavil. Since our signature approach is to focus on refinement, perhaps the ideal client would be someone with an appreciation for the quality of exclusive creations.To shop this and other products from the studio visit sanayi313.com.

In the world of athletics, professional and weekend warriors alike learn that the recovery process is as crucial to peak performance as the training itself. Muscles need to warm up before workouts, and are ideally treated afterward to manage the wear and tear of pushing performance limits. Nike, in collaboration with Hyperice, is adding a pair of tools to the recovery game with two new tech-enabled wearables on the horizon the Nike x Hyperice Recovery Boot and Recovery Vest each designed to make athletes feel better and look and literally feel cool in the process.If you dont know Hyperice by name, you probably know of their technology in some form or another. The California-based brand has carved out a reputation as one of the most popular recovery technologists in the sports industry, a repute primarily built upon their percussion massage therapy tool, the HyperVolt 2 Pro, alongside other innovative methods to ease soreness and aid recovery.Hyperices design language across their entire catalog evokes what hoops fans know as Mamba mentality, the intense dont quit philosophy famously associated with the Laker icon, Kobe Bryant, perhaps no surprise considering the brand cites the late NBA star as an early adopter and collaborator.The boot is designed with built-in controls giving the wearer the ability to adjust the boots dynamic air compression treatment. Athletes can synchronize the heat and compression of both shoes with the press of a button, or choose to run the left and right shoes individually, selecting from three distinct levels of compression and heat powered by a battery pack in each shoes insole.The new Nike x Hyperice Recovery Boot sports the look of a Nike basketball sneaker, with an upper design somewhat reminiscent of the 2016 special edition Nike MAG Back to the Future, sneakers equipped with self-lacing technology. In the case of the new Recovery Boot, the therapeutic footwear has been outfitted with Hyperices Normatec technology, a series of dynamic air compression bladders that fill and empty to massage the feet and ankles while also applying heat. The reputed effect is a reduction in muscle soreness and improved circulation, while also keeping the fluid between muscles and tissues maximally lubricated.With the boot designed for legwork, the new Nike x Hyperice vest is tasked to work on the upper body using Hyperices thermal technology, a mechanism engineered to deliver localized heating and cooling. Its designed with a sleek fit ensuring a comfortable fit and maximum mobility while delivering therapeutic benefits. For anyone who runs hot during and after workouts, putting on the vest could help push endurance limits, while also promoting recovery without the hassle of ice or heat pads.Professional athletes like LeBron James have already been using these devices. From the moment I tried the Nike x Hyperice boots and vest while they were still in development more than a year ago, remarked James. I knew they were going to change the game for athletes warm-up and recovery.The Nike x Hyperice vest allows for instant heating and cooling, without the need for ice or liquid, to help athletes dial their body temperatures to their exact specifications during warmups and cooldowns.Interested? Alas, youll have to wait after this summer. Nike plans to first use these two recovery technologies at the Olympics in Paris before announcing availability and pricing for us mere mortals with aching muscles.Sign up to receive updates on the Nike x Hyperice releases here.This post contains affiliate links, so if you make a purchase from an affiliate link, we earn a commission. Thanks for supporting Design Milk!

Figma AI tools: Im not worried about my job anytime soon based on what Isaw.The features are awesome but were far off from replacing designers. Thats coming from someone immersed in AI every day of theweek.I didnt attend Figma Config 2024 because I could catch up on it virtually, which I did after the fact. The thought of 14,000 designer types in the same place? Im sure theres a Groucho Marx quote somewhere in there about aclub.But Idigress.The Figma AI tools are interesting, and having used almost every application known to designerkind to wireframe (QuarkXpress, anyone?), I thought I could add the been there, done that perspective.My overall take: Im not worried about my job anytime soon, and thats coming from someone immersed in AI every day of theweek.Ive said this before, and Ill say it again: until someone can write a perfect product requirements document, designers are safe. There is so much nuance in developing some experiences that using AI seems quite a tall task, especially with existing applications where you have to modify work designed by imperfect humans.And enterprise? Goodluck!However, there is a quite of bit of usefulness to the features here (who else gets upset by seeing a Figma file that has frame 54831?) that will speed up the workflow of designers immensely and hopefully will make files much more understandable, but some features still seem liketoys.People often forget that designers are valued not for the artifacts they create but for how they align through storytelling and knowledge. Thats not about renaming layers or creating content, its about weaving a tale that generates value.I would pay for a feature like renaming layers. Credit toFigma.Renaming layersGrade: A-Renaming frames in Figma is an information architecture problemsomething that most designers have struggled with since Photoshop 3.0 introduced layers, bringing us to layer 0, layer 1, and layer 2something that plagues everyone in design when seeing frames 34541 and wondering what itmeans.And now Figma is at least attempting to fix this. Please, and thank you. Im sure theyll be missteps, but at least attempting it will make Figma a better application. This should greatly increase the usability and organization of most Figmafiles.It will also train designers to organize their files better when they see Figmas patterns.Generating visual and written content is a time saver. Credit toFigmaGenerating visual and writtencontentGrade: B+As I wrote in another blog post about generating fake data, it is a time-consuming task that most designers hate. If Figma can accurately generate data from previously entered content, I will throw a party. I will see prototypes with realistic content that accurately test designs so developers wont run into edgecases.When watching the video, I was also impressed with the translation features, but thats something my companys platform does today, so its not much of astretch.Additionally, having the image generation tools directly integrated into Figma is incredible. There are already plug-ins that do thisthink user profile photosbut having this built right in will provide a more integrated experience, and that Ilike.believe were a bit far off from generating new designs. Credit toFigma.Generating newdesignsGrade: C+How often do you generate a new website or application from the very beginning?Yes, I dont do that mucheither.Ive always encountered situations where an application design exists (poorly), and weve had to work around it and improve it slowly. That meant dealing with many imperfect flows and designs that had to be gradually improved, none of which AI can donow.Additionally, much of the design work happening now is very cookie-cutterthink the 3-panel marketing website that can be a copy-and-paste job, or using an existing table componentso it might render this tool as a toy for awhile.All of the examples I saw in the Figma Keynote were fancy tape recorder examplesapplications that already existso that doesnt have much usefulness in my world because were already designing features that pretty muchexist.As a tool to generate new ideas for analogous inspiration?Absolutely. I could see it as a way to explore concepts quickly, especially during design sprints. Designers too often get stuck in the rut of their existing design systems, so this could be a great application to explore newideas.Visual search is an idea thats always struggled. Credit toFigma.Visual searchGrade: CThis is what Open AI and similar tools do bestlook at existing content and find things so it should excel here. Figma has leveraged that.As a tool to look for variations of a screen will save an incredible amount of time, especially in environments where designers move fast and treat design artifacts like fast food. The current set of artifacts that we have to go through to find a particular screen that is misnamed from a designer who worked there a long timeago?Its hours.Well use previous assets for new features but itll take a long time to get this right, and this is based on real world experience. I give it a B because its trial and error to start, but it will improve overtime.Auto prototypingGrade: C-This. Is.Hard.It looked cool from the very outset, but when we built one of those prototypes for demonstration purposes, we spent a lot of time tweaking animations and adding the special sauce that made them fun, and all I saw from the video was simple point-and-click actions and not muchelse.I really see usefulness upfront when wiring things together, but the real magic will come from the designer, rendering this feature a toy until they can add magic. The wiring is the easy work, but 80 percent of rest mattersmore.ConclusionMy take, again: Im not worried about my job anytimesoon.I agree that it will change some tasksPortfolios will be much easier to create, imagination will be augmented in a way similar to ChatGPT, and simple tasks will be become easier, which are the tasks that take up valuable time from the more strategic thinking all of us really want todo.But for self designing prototypes? My take is that existing human behaviors get in theway.Its the same problem with self-driving cars: its the humans around them and the rules they dont follow. It will take systems time to anticipate our predictably unpredictable behavior, down to our poorly organized Figma files, weird naming, the need to come up with something different.This is still a wonderful set of features thats still in betatheyre learning with the rest of usso Im excited to see what they come up with. These tools will not replace the original and strategic thought needed to create great experiences.My take is much closer to the article Dont be fooled by Figmas new AI features in that well still play a pretty big role in the process and itll only be about the right tasks that are rote, not all thetsks.Thats where great designers comein.Figma AI tools: Im not worried about my job anytime soon was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Laying the groundwork for creating statistically valid personas.Photo by cottonbro studioPersonas are more than just UX and product design concepts; they are strongly anchored in psychology ideas about personality types. The significant overlap between persona and personality is not coincidental. Alan Cooper, credited with pioneering the incorporation of personas into UX research, may not have been completely aware of the psychological underpinnings, but the parallels are enormous and unmistakable. Personas, as used in psychology and UX research, refer to individuals as fullbeings.Taking this holistic perspective allows UX researchers to shed light on similar groups of users who differ fundamentally. Recognizing these qualitatively different groups provides product managers and UX designers with a more meticulous lens through which they can predict and observe user behavior.As a UX researcher who has developed statistically validated personas for an app with more than 7 million daily users, Ive realized that beyond a certain point in an apps evolution, its important to remember that users are more than just numbers and metrics. Its easy to become absorbed by the vast array of data and to try summarizing it using descriptive statistics. However, as UX visionaries, we have a mission to remind businesses that users are more than these numbers. We must acknowledge that, given the large scale of the user base, it is impossible to meet the needs of every single user. Nonetheless, this fact should not be seen as a burden; rather, the app should strive to do its best in this regard. To this end, we, as UX ambassadors, are tasked with analyzing and introducing groups of users who are, in one way or another, similar to each other. While every user is unique, this uniqueness has its limits, and there are seldom outliers who cannot be grouped on a larger scale. It is our duty to identify and introduce these broader groups to businesses, ensuring that the needs of particularly special and unique user segments are not overlooked.To this end, I aim to introduce a relatively new approach in the field of quantitative UX research, albeit an established one in psychology: the person-oriented approach. Adopting this approach can significantly impact the strategies businesses develop based on our deliverables as UX researchers.Exploring approaches in UXresearchVariable-Oriented approachThe variable-oriented approach in quantitative UX research investigates and reports on variables such as user satisfaction, NPS, etc., in an isolated context where they are reported based solely on their descriptives, such as average and standard deviation. These provide a general overview of the user base but do not extend beyond that point. Even when researchers aim to identify general patterns within this approach, they may utilize analyses like regression, correlation, and ANOVA solely to test their hypotheses and predict general trends for the future, as well as to investigate possible reasons for the observedmetrics.Person-Oriented approachContrary to the common variable-oriented approach, there is person-oriented approach which doesnt take users as the sum of the variables we can measure. But instead, it introduces users as human beings as unbreakable wholes which should not only be studied in their entirety, but also should be appraised and investigated regarding their unique beings. As Bergman and Trost havewritten:According to the person-oriented paradigm, the individual is an active agent in the person-environment system. The system is hierarchical and must be studied by carefully separating its different levels (from the molecular to the global). At each level, the system functions as an integrated, organized totality that is formed by the interactions among the elements, and the totality derives its meaning from these interactions and all elements considered simultaneously (Magnusson, 1990). Magnusson also introduced the concept of the person-oriented approach and developed it theoretically together with Bergman (Bergman & Magnusson, 1997; Magnusson, 1988,1999).Key features:Holistic analysis:Holism, as opposed to reductionism, provides researchers with a method to study how the unique characteristics of individuals (or personas) and the interactions among these characteristics within an individual (or persona) define who they are. This is not just theoretical; there are also tools and analytical methods that support this perspective.Emergence:Adopting a holistic approach in studying usersknown as the person-oriented approachallows us to view them as complex systems. One of the fundamental characteristics of complex systems is the unpredictability of their future behaviors when analyzed using common linear statistical methods. This aligns with a key principle in UX research, which is to focus on asking retrospective questions and observing past or current behaviors, rather than attempting to predict future behaviors of users. After all, users are humans, and humans are complex systems, to say the least. This unpredictability in the behavior of a complex system is referred to as emergence. In other words, human (or user) behavior emerges from a complex mix of characteristics, context, and their interactions, which we may perceive as a single, complete entity. While its not impossible to predict what might emerge from a given set of characteristics and interactions, the methods required for such predictions are far from those currently used in UX research. I will explore these methods and discuss how we, as UX researchers, could employ them in a futurearticle.Respecting, instead of eliminating, outliers and uniqueness:Traditional statistical methods have the tendency to remove outliers and unique data points to achieve a semblance of stability, creating an illusion of control and predictability in an inherently unpredictable world full of uncertainties. This approach has helped humans and businesses survive for a long time but has also contributed to significant downfalls in the history of economics and corporate ventures. Despite our desire to grasp reality with simple numbers like averages and medians, the truth is more complex than weimagine.In UX research, users exemplify this phenomenon. No matter how much we attempt to summarize user behavior using averages and descriptive metrics, they consistently surprise us. This element of surprise is what truly keeps the field of UX research vibrant; without it, the role of UX researchers would become redundant, as mere data collection would suffice. Thus, the uniqueness of users is not just a challenge; it is what sustains us. As quantitative UX researchers, we must never underestimate this factor by relying solely on traditional linear statistical methods. Instead, the statistical methods employed in the person-oriented approach not only preserve outliers and unique elements in the data and analyses but also strive to integrate them meaningfully into the broader context of the entire user community.Persona Template Fromvisme.coUser personas as anoutcome:Adopting a holistic perspective and respecting users as human beings, and thus complex systems, leads to the revelation of another crucial characteristic of users collective behavior: self-organization. This phenomenon can be studied at two different scales within user communities and societies.Firstly, it can be analyzed in terms of how the entire user base, viewed as a single entity, behaves and interacts with our product. Secondly, it often reveals how this cohesive entity can be segmented into similar clusters or groups of users, known as Personas in the field of UX. These personas are self-organized, emergent groups that are unique and qualitatively distinct from each other, yet each group can be studied as a cohesive whole, akin to a single person. Understanding these dynamics might enhance our ability to thrive in the unpredictable world weinhabit.Common statistical methods:As quantitative UX researchers, we often handle categorical or ordinal datasets. The Person-Oriented approach introduces two key methods for analyzing suchdata:Latent class analysis: This technique is utilized to identify self-organized groups of users (personas) based on categorical data, such as that obtained from a one-time survey. It helps in pinpointing distinct user segments within thedata.Latent transition analysis: This method tracks how personas evolve over time. It requires data gathered from surveys conducted at regular intervals, allowing researchers to observe changes in user behavior and group dynamics.I plan to explore these methods and demonstrate how to conduct them to develop statistically valid personas in a futurearticle.Should we eliminate the variable-oriented approach from our toolkit as UX researchers?TLDR; NO, itdepends!When to use a variable-oriented approachYour product isnew.You dont know your user-base at all and want to gain a general overview.You dont want to take any strategic decisions.You want to perform simplified comparisons.When to take a person-oriented approachYour product is well-established in themarket.You want to enhance user engagement with the addition of new features.You want to address deficiencies in yourproduct.You want to understand how the interactions of your users with your product change overtime.You want to achieve a detailed understanding of yourusers.Image Created byMyselfThe need for a balanced researchstrategyTo maximize the effectiveness of UX research, it is essential to employ both variable-oriented and person-oriented approaches. While the former provides a broad overview of user behaviors, the latter offers a deep, personalized understanding of user interactions. Together, they equip UX researchers and product managers with the comprehensive insights needed to make informed strategic and product decisions, ensuring that both broad and specific user needs are met.This balanced approach not only enhances user satisfaction but also drives product success by ensuring that user experiences are both broadly appealing and deeply personalized.How to balance the 2 research approachesThe current landscape of UX research significantly lacks awareness of alternative approaches for investigating users. This is why I have emphasized the benefits of adopting the person-oriented approach in this article. However, in a scenario where UX researchers are well-informed about the available options, it becomes logical to utilize these two approaches where they are most suitable. Specifically, the variable-oriented approach is ideal for gaining a broad overview of user behaviors, while the person-oriented approach is best suited for achieving a deep, personalized understanding of users and their interactions with the product. By strategically applying both approaches, products can potentially maximize engagement by fully respecting and addressing the needs, frustrations, and goals of theirusers.Introducing the person-oriented approach in UX Research was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

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.