How Product Designers Can Break The “Creative” Stereotype
One terrifying Product meeting at a time
We’ve all heard stereotypes about “Creatives.” We’re maligned as prima donnas, dealing in the intangible, unquantifiable realm of aesthetics and brand equity; it’s all just a bit too abstract and touchy-feely for our more data-driven co-workers to handle. Stereotypes happen. If you’ve got ‘designer’ in your title, some folks are going to assume you’re the artsy-fartsy, “right-brained” type. I want to provide you with some tips on combating that misconception, but first some context for why this is especially relevant for Wayfair’s designers:
Wayfair recently merged our UX and UI teams into a single team of Product Designers. There are a bunch of reasons we did this but what I’m most excited about is something that, at first glance, could seem like a distinction without a difference: this newly-formed team of designers reports to a Product Director, not a Creative Director. I know how thrilling the nuances of org charts can be, but try to contain your excitement. Here’s why I think this is a big deal…
Design Council describes three ways a business might use design:
I. As a ‘service’: design is treated as an organizational function with a narrowly defined remit and designers are mainly technical experts that fulfill pre-defined tasks.
II. As a key perspective in the development process: design and designers are involved in the process of new product / service development, from beginning to end. In this case, design plays a more influential, sometimes strategic role, and it is considered at the same level as other functions (e.g. marketing, advertising).
III. As a strategic perspective: design shapes business strategy and, often, designers act as process leaders.
In my six years at Wayfair, I’ve seen how the role of design has evolved and become more firmly established in the corporate culture. While certain work streams have made use of design as a strategic perspective for some time, this latest org change, in my view, makes this possible (if not yet a reality) for our Product team.
Designers of Wayfair, we have arrived.
No pressure.
So, you’re a Product Designer. You’ve got a seat at the table, shaping the future of your site/app/etc, and it’s on you to break the “Creative” stereotype. Luckily, Design Thinking offers an amazing framework for cultivating solutions based on quantitative and qualitative data, and you know your stuff. What could go wrong?
The following are some of the ways it could go wrong, pitfalls to avoid as you’re collaborating with your data-driven, business-savvy stakeholders.
1. Saying “I feel like…” when presenting your point of view.
Don’t do this. You can read this New York Times op-ed on the subject, but the short version is: whether purposeful or not, this is often a way to preemptively shield yourself from criticism by stifling debate. When you preface your statement with “I feel like,” the implication is that these are your feelings we’re discussing, and as such should not be invalidated by another person. People respond (or rather, don’t) accordingly, and the conversation typically moves on without a thorough examination of your proposal. At the end of the day, we should all want the best ideas brought forward — no matter whose idea it is — and if your language isn’t serving to make that possible, that’s a problem.
2. Not including analysts early enough or often enough.
Maybe you’re “right-brained” and they’re “left-brained,” but chances are you’re both hopelessly addicted to caffeine. Invite the analyst on your next project to grab a cup of coffee, or throw a quick one-on-one conversation on their calendar. Your BI team looks at your company’s metrics to determine the “whats” and the “hows,” and when it comes time for you to shed some light on the “whys” with your UX skillz, you are going to want their input. Whether they’re helping you determine where in the user flow the experience might be broken, or helping you interpret the results of an A/B test, they are the yin to your yang. If nothing else, think of it this way: you don’t want your introduction to this person to be the meeting where you’ve all gathered ‘round to hear just how hard your recent feature blew it.
3. Forgetting that you, too, need to synthesize your findings.
In regard to competitive research: for the love of all that is good and decent in this world, DO NOT hold a meeting where you present myriad screenshots of competitors, one by one, while members of the group chime in with “I like that one” or “meh” as you work up to the big reveal of “your favorite.” I’ll write the longer version of this advice in a future post on competitive research (update: this post exists now), but what you should be trying to accomplish with said research is a fairly objective* assessment of the competitive landscape that aims to establish what is conventional and identify where you have an opportunity to align with said conventions or improve upon them to deliver a better user experience. Doing so should require that you’re taking some kind of tally of the frequency with which certain elements are observed across the sites/apps/etc that are included in your research. Personally, I build out crazy-looking spreadsheets like this one:
I’m not suggesting you present this, but I highly recommend that you do this. Because when your product manager asks “have you thought about ___?,” you’ll have an answer for them, rooted in these findings. Like a boss.
What you should present is the synthesis of your work. Show a succinct executive summary of your findings, any recommendations you have, and then as needed, provide any relevant data you’ve collected to support those recommendations. If your recommendation is “We should do X” then it wouldn’t hurt to have a stat readily available reading “45 out of 50 sites observed do X” — or some other explanation as to how you’ve arrived at your recommendation that doesn’t require magical thinking. Also, keep those screenshots ready for any visual learners who prefer an illustrative example.
4. Hiding behind those “objective” findings…
While you should strive for objectivity — as your goal should be to advocate for improvements on behalf of your users (not what you think would be, like, a really cool thing to do) — the reality is, it’s all subjective. There’s a reason I have an asterisk on “objective” in the last section: you can try to objectively look at two dozen sites in your competitive research, but some amount of subjectivity was at play when you whittled the entirety of the Internet down to two dozen sites. There’s an inverse to the “I feel like…” shield, so be sure not to fall victim to it: presenting your findings as beyond reproach (because they’re cold, hard facts, right? Get over yourself) and closing yourself off from alternative points of view. So be aware, as you’re breaking your “I feel like…” habit and generating your badass competitive research, that there is such a thing as overcompensating. Of course, it’s totally appropriate to push back and say, “based on what I observed in conducting this research, I think ___.” The worst that can happen is someone questions your methodology, and maybe as a result you find there’s a flaw in there somewhere. And from that moment forward, you’ll be a better designer for having discovered that. YAY!
5. “Washing your hands of it”
There’s no such thing. If you want to be a strategic partner in product development, you need to stay committed. Fully understanding the business goal will likely require asking your Product and BI partners a lot of questions — don’t be afraid of doing this. If you don’t think there’s an actual user problem being solved, you should feel an obligation to speak up. Actively participate in the vetting of any hypothesis put forward. Your product manager is not a client, so the whole “it’s what the client wanted” mentality doesn’t fly. Your responsibility (everyone’s responsibility) is to the user, and sometimes you’ll need to remind yourself of that. What can be even more challenging — but vital to your role as a product designer — is reminding others of that.
Conclusion
The aim with this post is to provide some practical tips for Creatives, not some pompous effort to identify “the truth” behind these left-brain/right-brain stereotypes. But to wrap up…
…The truth behind these left-brain/right-brain stereotypes is, obviously, that most of us lie somewhere between the caricatures that exist for both groups, and where we fall on that spectrum is subject to change over the course of our lives. But what’s also true is that there are totally practical reasons to have people in your company that inhabit either extreme…just not as product designers. If you’re Wayfair, you need some esoteric, trend-spotting Creatives with a finger on the pulse of interior design, so you can deliver something unique and aspirational alongside established, tried-and-true home styles. You do this for the customer who doesn’t quite know their style, but will know it when they see it, and trusts you to show it to them. But you also need the data wonks capable of understanding the inputs, outputs and velocities involved in product fulfillment with an astounding degree of certainty, such that a customer can shop from an enormous selection of sofas, have one shipped for free and on their doorstep…two days from now.
It takes all kinds of personalities to build a great product, and hopefully employing some of the tips above will help you navigate this new territory. Preconceived notions of what it means to be a “Creative” may result in some initial skepticism, but the perspective you provide is too valuable to let those stereotypes get you down, and your success will change minds.
PS: Wayfair is hosting a “drunk user testing”-inspired event on July 20th, in partnership with Drizly, Creative Mornings, General Assembly, and Boston Tech Freelancers. Tickets are $5 per person, which includes admission, small bites, and exclusive access to emerging features. Oh, and also: FREE beer and wine provided by Drizly!
