The topic for this article is in reality a sequel to one I wrote about in 2024 (you can read that first installment here). In that article I explained the reasons as to why the Design Process can at times be perceived as a lengthy one, and what factors influence it. I also provided some color to this topic courtesy of some products and engagements I went through in the past that are revelatory of processes that can be labeled “long” and “short”. This “sequel-article” is a more succinct follow up, and I’m aiming to dispel the concept of Process as something bloated. Hopefully what I’m about to write will spark some conversations/discussions/reflections, which is ultimately what I always aim to be a catalyst of.
Methodical. Merriam-Webster defines “Methodical” as “habitually proceeding according to method: systematic”. Somehow the association that the Design Process is tied with a lengthy set of tasks that requires a considerable amount of time has been imprinted for some professionals in the Technology field, typically those who are more on the periphery and have a very superficial knowledge of what the process actually entails. I’m going to reinforce that for a Design process to be successful, it requires a methodical approach to it, one that is tied with being thorough and systematic in its diligence. However, being methodical and thorough is not a synonym with being time wasteful or simply wasteful in general. One can be time efficient, while still being methodical and systematic on how tasks are achieved.
Bloated. Merriam-Webster defines “Bloated” as “often used figuratively to describe something as having grown excessively large”. I’ve witnessed across many teams I’ve worked with in the past, that usually the people raising the alarm on the length of the Design process, are usually the ones who think there’s virtue in cutting corners. These are usually the professionals for whom activities such as “user research”, “data insights”, “analytics”, and generally speaking, gaining a better understanding of the problem statement, users/clients, value proposition, and actually testing concepts before building them, are all “nice to have” and not essentials (essentially the principles of Human Centered Design). And these individuals are also usually the ones who are nowhere in sight, when something invariably goes wrong (and something always goes wrong), because some or all of those activities were bypassed, in order to “save time and money”, in what ultimately comes back to wreak havoc on what has been built (one way or another). I’m going to reinforce it once again: being systematic and thorough isn’t synonymous with bloated. The activities at the core of Human Centered Design don’t have a rigid number of days/weeks/months/years to be accomplished. They can be leveraged according to the available resources, and according to what teams can provide. Most of the fear and pushback in adopting the Design process, at least from what I have observed, comes from insecurity of those who are unfamiliar with it, and therefore try to undermine it before even trying to embark on it. Or those who have practiced it, and done it wrongly, or through a unique lens, and therefore have a distorted experience of it, one that makes them resent the virtue of the process itself. Either way it is usually professionals who refuse to partner and go beyond their comfort zone, and who implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) go on a path of sabotaging the endeavor.
Learn. Merriam-Webster defines “Learning” as “knowledge or skill acquired by instruction or study” and also “modification of a behavioral tendency by experience (such as exposure to conditioning)”. A large aspect of working in Technology, is about being able to parse through a considerable amount of information, efficiently, selecting what is pertinent for the professionals in the field to make good choices. It’s also about understanding the constant voracious apetite for what is new, for experimentation, for pushing the boundaries of what can be done. And ultimately being pushed out of one’s comfort zone (both as a creator and consumer of technology). Following a process is not about having a comfortable blanket of tranquility or even a shelter that avoids a storm altogether. It’s more about having a beacon, one that provides guidance and reassurance that while the storm is raging, there is indeed something that can guide us through it. That there is a destination ultimately. And while the Design Process may seem at times an Herculean-type series of tasks, that will take on forever, these are in fact, at least when managed by professionals who are experienced to tackle them, achievable in a sensical timeline, one where the benefits one reaps of going through it can be witnessed fairly quickly. The reason I started this point with “Learn” is that in order for this process to be successful, it has to be a convergence of so many points of view, but all of them have to be integrated through a well informed lens, and that is something that only becomes a reality through education.
Reflect. It’s ironic that across the many teams I’ve worked with and even during interviews I performed with various business representatives/organizations for different research endeavors, there’s always expressions that are repeated over and over again. “We had to do everything so rapidly…”, “”We were learning as we were going, we couldn’t stop…”, all sorts of expressions that come across as justifications for what were, at times at least, some questionable decisions. I’m a firm believer that every situation is indeed a learning one, whatever that situation may be. However I’m also very much a firm believer that informed decisions are the best ones, particularly when those decisions involve funds, time, and talent. If you are indeed in a position to set some solutioning endeavor in motion, and before jumping into it without considering how all variables come together, and in particular Design and its process, take the time to discuss with professionals in the field how a well applied Design process can make all the difference. Discuss timelines, talent, funding, activities, outcomes, alignment with other directives. The goal is to bring all these variables to the forefront, and to be able to position them in a way where everyone understands their role, tasks, costs, and just how a timeline will be established. Being thorough and methodical doesn’t mean taking forever: it means being responsible, aware, and better prepared for what comes next.
I’ll end this article with a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson:
“Nature is methodical, and doeth her work well. Time is never to be hurried.”
Design Process: Methodical versus Bloated was originally published in UX Planet on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
