Sadly the majority of the “redesigns” only concern aesthetical changes without looking at the structure and goals that a design has to serve.
Of course the fundamental task of understanding the problem isn’t done. That would involve talking to stakeholders and doing deep research–having to actually think, which is painful. But since all worthwhile solutions involve going through that phase of understanding we should dive deeper into why these redesign concepts are a step into the wrong direction.
Lets take a look at the attempt to refurbish Linkedin. If you start asking questions to why these design decisions were made, it gets clear that they’re not resilient at all.
What if someone decides to list 20 skills? Is the neoclassical typeface still readable for people that don’t have a Retina screen? Is it even the best legible choice for copy text? The slideshow feature for scrolling through the positions might look fancy at first, but if you look at the usecase of this, it doesn’t serve the visitors objective. You want to get all positions and companies at a glimpse — it’s about the career progression not specific positions. There’s even a whole website about why you shouldn’t use carousels!
Designers, think in real world situations, understand what you are designing (information architecture) and have a reason for each design decision you make. Only in that way we can distance ourselves from the roles as mere surface polishers.
Oh, before I forget… how about a redesign concept for things that really matter? Simplifying tax declarations? Improving public signage? Designing an interface for hightech surgery machines? I guarantee you that this will look better in your portfolio than any Facebook redesign concept could ever do.