Browsing designers’ portfolios I noticed that most case studies focus on anything but design: user research, metrics increase, prototype testing, photos of whiteboards, and so on. And when I finally get to see the design, it’s pretty often underwhelming. Visually, it doesn’t look on par with all the work and process that was described before.

Why is that? Why are craft and execution almost never the centerpiece of a product design case study? Because the nature of working in a product company never incentivizes creating appealing interfaces and never emphasizes aesthetics.

Usually, designers get to work on a product with an established visual language, patterns, and components. Designers use design systems, and the bigger the product, the more robust the design system. It has everything: components, interaction patterns, standardized pages, modals, and screens. Everything was already designed before us, and the need to create anything from scratch goes down to zero. In a big enough company, the designer’s role is more of an assembler rather than a designer. And when we accept this role, we stop creating anything new or go the extra mile to make software truly incredible. This led us to where we are today: we have tons and tons of depressing software, and the only desire users have is to finish the task, close it, and move on.

I understand that it is incredibly hard to justify the creation of a new component, unique screen, or interaction to the team, and rightfully so. A new success modal or a feature-selling screen means more time to design, develop, test, and maintain it. It becomes counter-intuitive to deviate from the design system and come up with a unique solution because it is way more financially viable to simply copy-paste an existing one. However, those unique screens and interactions are what make the product exciting, and they help to achieve those conversion rate or metrics increases we aim for. Visually striking products get an immense competitive edge, they are perceived as more valuable, delightful, and easier to use. This directly influences users’ desire to use the product, boosts word-of-mouth and, on a broader scale, builds the company’s brand as one making quality products. But still, more often than not, we opt for the production line approach instead of handcraft.

It is our direct responsibility to design stunning interfaces and create unique and delightful interactions that make people feel joy by using the software and eventually fall in love with it. It cannot be achieved by simply assembling interfaces from the existing design system components, no matter how beautiful and well-crafted those components are, by repeating them over and over it becomes impossible to evoke emotions in a person who’s been using the product for some time.

I do not advocate for creating a unique solution each time we design a new feature: if it’s a utility flow, a screen that comes up infrequently, or an established pattern that fits well into the overall design, there’s no need to reinvent it. We need to be strategic about building new solutions and think of it as spending not only our resources but also the resources of the team. But there are still plenty of moments when it makes sense to break from the design system, where it will make a difference:

1. When it’s a feature or a flow with an outsized impact on a product.

If you look at most SaaS products’ onboarding flows they are highly customized, and you rarely encounter a similar screen after you finish the onboarding. And there’s a reason for this: well-crafted and tailored onboarding will greatly influence a person's decision to use the product. That’s why teams invest a tremendous amount of time and effort into making the first experience impeccable.

2. When an emotional response directly influences the conversion rate into the desired action.

This often applies to feature-selling or success screens for important features — by adding a unique design solution, even purely because of its novelty, it triggers curiosity in people, and makes them more likely to try it out. But please no more confetti 🙏

3. When using existing components for the specific problem creates suboptimal experience.

We should not be solving the design problems by users’ expense, just because it’s easier for the team to develop and for us to justify the solution. Come up with the solution that will fit perfectly for the task at hand, and test it with users to be sure in it.

4. When the task itself is to bring an emotional response.

There are plenty of times we want to engage people while they are using our product, and that doesn’t apply only to like buttons on social media. Identify those moments in your product and design a delightful interaction for them, it will have a sizeable impact on the users' experience.

Another problem with reusing existing solutions is that by doing so, designers don’t develop their visual skills, leaving a feeling of dissatisfaction and making it harder to be proud and passionate about the work we create. This shows in case studies and portfolios, and when the time comes to look for a new job, we face a paradox: we don’t practice visual skills at work, but we are judged by them when we go through the hiring process. This, by the way, reminds me of the hiring process for developers, who are judged by the leet-code proficiency, which has little to do with the actual work.

We treat visual skills as something we develop while working on day-to-day tasks, but quite often it’s simply not true. We do so much other stuff: conduct user research, analyze data, evaluate A/B tests, looking for product improvements, negotiate and align with stakeholders, the list goes on. And the less developed the visual skills are, the more attention designers pay to those other things, and avoid improving their craft. Since there’s indeed many obstacles to practice visual design at work, we need to treat these skills the same way as public speaking or storytelling: something that is crucial for our success but rarely applied. This means we need to practice them deliberately outside of work. It will help to build up confidence, become better craftsmen, and inevitably it will trickle down into our day-to-day work on the product. A designer with exceptional visual skills brings way more value to a company than one without.

This is the exact added value we bring to the table: making software look great, exciting and delightful to use. As soon as designers realize this and level up their visual and interaction skills, it will become way easier to sell themselves, and all the drama of designers not having a seat at the table in a product company will be gone. Because literally, no other role can make spectacular jaw-dropping design other than us. And trust me, there’s a lot of software that can use our help ;)

Additional reading

Back to top