Attributes of High-Performing Designers, Part 2: Flexibility
When I’m asked what makes for a strong designer or design team, I keep returning to the same attributes: 1) transparency — and an open design process; 2) flexibility — and principled points of view; 3) joy — and a passion for the art and craft.
In this series, I unpack what those attributes mean and how they result in high performance. If you missed part 1 on transparency, check it out here. Read part 3 on joy here.
Flexibility. For some designers, it means editing your design because a stakeholder wants it done a different way. For others, it means taking on those really fast turnaround projects without too much complaining (grinding our teeth while you grin and bear it). And still others, it means changing your design because engineering says they can’t build it in the time allowed.
Honestly, it’s all those things, but it’s also more. I define flexibility as:
the ability to champion user-centered solutions that are grounded in principles, while also actively taking in new input and proactively modifying those solutions based on that new or evolving information.
Flexibility is not about handing others full control over the design direction; it’s also not about the absence of a design point of view. Imagine a lawyer building their case in court, not a kid confronted by a bully. Someone who always executes on what others tell them is acting like a “pushover” or “pixel pusher” — their value comes from software skills, not design thinking. On the flip side, you don’t want to pick up your sword anytime someone has design feedback. If you’re someone who “goes to war” over your opinions, you‘ll be turning yourself into a pariah and miss out on more than just feedback.
Our job is to develop and champion user-centered solutions. This means we get paid to have an opinion about our specialty. If you are a visual designer, you likely champion gestalt principles and have detailed viewpoints on color or line. Interaction designers champion usability heuristics and have detailed viewpoints on navigation flows. Your experience (plus all the data you collect) makes its way into your ideas. If you don’t articulate or champion those ideas, are you really using your knowledge?
So you should champion that solution and why it fits into your vision. But this vision is not a baby chick you’ve nursed to life; it does not depend on you for survival. It is instead a precocious child who really wants a candy bar, but won’t get it until grocery shopping is done and the candy is paid for. You have to do the work before you get the reward.
Every time we pick a solution/direction for a concept, we’re making decisions. Those choices, I believe, are grounded by design principles guiding your work. “Design principles” suffer from overuse, underuse and general confusion. So what do I mean here? Think of it as evidence presented to a jury of your peers. Designers need to be prepared to speak to the assumptions/information they used to make their design decisions.
- What user research insights/findings guide you in that direction?
“Users 75% of the time browse their phone in between other tasks. So this design must prioritize mobile browsing.” - Did previous testing or competitor approaches play an influence?
“Because our users are already familiar with related services, I’m relying on common patterns they would be familiar with to reduce learning.” - Are we following design best practices such as visual design approaches (i.e. clear hierarchy or color accessibility) or interaction design conventions (i.e. use success messages or confirm destructive actions)?
“I’ve decided to use a tool tip here because usability would improve if we rely on recognition rather than recall.” - Should we adhere to industry best practices (i.e. ecommerce add to cart buttons or product tiles on category pages)
“I’d added shipping information to the Order Summary page because it’s known to meet customer expectations and aligns with other retailers.”
A brief detour: In undergrad, I studied with a communications professor who required a companion document for each assignment. In this document, you had to describe all the choices you made and to what effect. For example: I used a blue headline because it matched the brand colors and distinguished the title from the body copy. That decision document (20+ pages) was always far longer than the final project artifact, but it was an helpful exercise in revealing the unspoken, quick decisions we make. Next time you write an email, consider noting all the choices you make (typeface, opening line, subject line, line breaks). Keeping a default is still a choice 😉
Since design is a team sport (see part 1), we get the answers to all those questions above by working with others. In fact, these other experts help us make sense of the problem so we have to seek out their input. We should confirm what we think we know and seek out what we don’t know. Active listening is a great way to think about this; it’s the idea that we make a conscious effort to listen to others to build a shared understanding. Asking questions, repeating back what we thought we heard, and focusing on their meaning rather than just the words. Flexibility means that if we are confronted with new info, we seek to answer the question, “Does this impact my work?” on our own. That doesn’t mean we take action on all of it. Instead, we come to it with a gut feeling that it’s relevant, until you or other information determines differently.
Our expert design principles and valuable inputs from other experts (internal or external) will evolve and grow over a project. By proactively modifying or iterating our designs, we don’t let that new input go to waste. Our ability to channel this knowledge into our visuals helps bring everyone onto the same page. We could use those visuals with experts to confirm our new knowledge or use it to present new questions. Iteration isn’t a failure, it’s a feature.
Another brief detour: Design is an amalgamation of many inputs. It’s why some people say, “I’ll know it when I see it.” Modifying designs is their way of evolving their knowledge; with each round, they build a perspective using your “evidence”. So, if you have stakeholder like that, transparency is going to be really important, along with structuring your design process to treat stakeholder reviews like iteration phases.
My experience in startups has been very dynamic (understatement? probably.) — new information and opinions was coming in all the time. My engineering and product management peers work with me to track all those incoming threads so we can assess what’s really important. That’s especially easy for a designer operating on principles. They are the guidelines you can come back to to help you make those assessments.
Going back to our courtroom metaphor, imagine you were a lawyer before DNA testing. You may have seen evidence that said Bob committed a crime, according to your expert interpretation. But this new DNA technology came along, and now you can see the evidence in a new light with less errors. The same evidence now indicates that Bob did not commit the crime. This new data requires revisiting your specific trial plan, but your role and primary goals are still the same, grounded by principles.
Why flexibility makes for better outcomes
Better decision-making. To me, this is the greatest benefit. Those design principles and the information you’ve collected have become the landmarks during change. Here’s some ways flexibility shows up in making decisions:
- If engineering hits a roadblock with a design, you can use those principles to your design choices to vet proposals from your engineer. “ I moved that component because I want customers to focus on this task first. What if we did X so they can still focus on this task?”
- If product management isn’t feeling good about a particular design direction, review your design principles with them to check for alignment. “I followed ecommerce best practices for this page because we’re on a tight timeline. I can spend more time on this page or explore new approaches, but is the timeline flexible?”
- If stakeholders give lots of negative feedback during a design review, remind them of your evidence and goals to contextualize your choices and focus the conversation on their concerns. “I moved that component because research showed … and this project intends to … Is there another way you think we could do that? Why do you think this isn’t an effective approach?”
Better work relationships. People want to work with people who feel amenable; they know that you’ll approach them with curiosity and positivity. Even if you don’t take their direction or advice, they should feel considered and respected. Holding your opinions too deeply or closely will make you seem adversarial and suspicious — especially when you step outside their comfort zone. It’s a hard balance between representing your point of view and being open to feedback. But when you put in the effort to flexible and principled, others will notice and want to involve you in the future.
Puts projects (back) on track for timelines or dependencies. I’ve seen a lot of articles about the “ambiguity” of modern business, but there is a stubborn, pervasive belief that execution can be a straight line that is on time, on budget and with high quality. Anyone who has worked in any organization (nonprofit, academic, industry, you name it) has personally experienced that reality is rarely so formulaic. Flexibility gives designers a way to respond to changing requirements or a deluge of input — no matter who they come from.
Prevents rework late in the game. No one likes to revisit a design after it’s deemed approved and/or ready to develop. We’ve often developed a mental model of the problem in a specific way, so it can be frustrating to have to throw that out and start over. But, a flexible mindset means that we’ll embrace the messiness of information, methodically parsing and applying it along the way.
Lessens the emotional toll on the designer. Designers are by our nature, makers. So when we hear that someone hates our idea, it can’t help but feel personal — we pride ourselves on our approach and think deeply about what we’re doing. Being flexible makes it easier for us to separate our identity and self-worth from the work, because we expect things to change and the process to be iterative. This is incredibly important in keeping your spirits up. It can also help you cope with tradeoffs to designs. When you need to steer away from your design concepts, you can still be confident in delivering strong work because you’ve maintained your principles (or intention) to the end.
By embracing flexibility, we can worry less about our ideas “winning” or
“losing” and instead focus on learning and finding good enough.
In part 1, I explored transparency. In part 3, I explore joy.
I’d love to hear from you about any attributes I’m missing or more examples of how these principles play out for you.
