Sean Madden

With no affiliation, sharing this as I know it will be good. Peter Merholz's ideas have been instrumental in my shaping of design teams. As iF Design point out here - the right environment around the design team is key to producing a successful team. The role of the leader is to create that environment.

14

2 Comments

Most enterprise leaders treat design as an aesthetic luxury. But as CDO at eleopard, I see it differently. When your software is clunky, you aren’t just looking at an ugly interface. You are looking at frictional loss. You are paying for your employees to fight their tools instead of using them. I’ve seen companies waste millions on "pretty" templates that don't scale and "quick patches" that just hide deeper architectural failures. At eleopard, we’ve drawn a line in the sand. We don’t do patchwork, and we don't do "flashy" for the sake of trends. In my latest article, I break down our engineering-first approach to UX: ✅ Custom over Templates: Why "off-the-shelf" is a long-term liability. ✅ Design as a Blueprint: How we use Figma to eliminate the "interpretation gap" for developers. ✅Risk Mitigation: Using interactive prototypes to kill bad ideas before they become expensive code. ✅Implementation Freedom: Why we favor WordPress + Elementor to keep your architecture out of "walled gardens." If your enterprise software has become a bottleneck rather than a bridge to growth, it’s time to stop patching symptoms and start solving root causes. Read the full manifesto here: https://lnkd.in/gDAW4fuV #EnterpriseUX #ProductDesign #ROI #eleopard #DigitalTransformation #Leadership

25

Inspired by a recent conversation with Ray Dollete, Kyle Sziraki, and Mike Margolin, I’ve been thinking about the long, slow trade we’ve made — from active cognitive engagement to passive receiving: ✨ 1997 — Automation Bias “If the system says so, it must be right.” Pilots and operators over-rely on automated alerts (Parasuraman & Riley, 1997). ✨ 2007 — The GPS Effect “If you can Waze it, you don’t need to navigate.” We reach our destinations, but lose our mental maps (Ishikawa et al., 2008; Parush et al., 2007). ✨ 2011 — The Google Effect “If you can Google it, you don’t need to remember.” We remember where to find things, not what the things are (Sparrow et al., 2011). ✨ 2015 — The Algorithmic Curation Effect “If it’s not in your feed, you don’t need to research.” We focus on what’s right in front of us, and forget to dig deep (Eslami et al., 2015). ✨ Today — The AI Infallibility Effect (to coin a term!) “If you know how to ChatGPT it, you don’t need to think.” This is the perceived omniscience and closure of AI: The sense that it delivers final answers, not merely suggestions. The consequent mental shift — from thinking and researching to *receiving truth* — is one of the most profound psychological realignments of the digital age. When do you think the tide really began to turn? What was the critical pivot? ~1995 (Netscape), ~2001 (Internet goes mainstream), ~2004 (Facebook), ~iPhone (2007), ~2012 (Google Knowledge Graph), ~2015 (Facebook’s algorithmic news feed), ~2017 (TikTok), ~2023 (ChatGPT) … Or something else?

30

12 Comments

Most deep tech brands lead with complexity. Quantum breakthroughs. AI models. Patents and roadmaps. But luxury brands learned long ago that the story of craft matters more than the craft itself. Taste isn’t about elitism—it’s about restraint. It’s knowing what not to show, what not to say, and when to let silence do the work. As deep technologies like AI and quantum computing move from the lab to the world, the companies that lead will be the ones who communicate with elegance, not excess. Because when everything is powerful, taste becomes the real differentiator.

17

2 Comments

Designers already sit at the center of product teams. This blog shows how we can lead more effectively—by backing our instincts with real user feedback.

11

I'm design system obsessed. 🙋‍♀️ Qualified Digital recently shared the three most common reasons design systems fall short, and I wanted to add my personal POV from building and scaling systems firsthand. Adoption – If the system feels optional, confusing, or slower than old habits, teams simply won’t use it, no matter how well it’s designed. We help teams build confidence through trainings that align design and development around how (and why) to use the system. Documentation – When guidance lives in our head instead of a clear, shared source of truth, inconsistency creeps in fast. Real fast. Annotations and documentation go hand-in-hand with every design system we touch. Governance – Without ownership and rules for evolution, design systems quietly fracture into one-off decisions and workarounds, which breaks down the purpose of the system in the first place. Do you have a Figma Pharoh? Let us tell you! If any of this sounds like you or your team, it’s okay—we totally get it. We’ve been there too! You’ve got the pieces and the intentions; that’s already half the battle. When we help clients with design systems, we go beyond just the atoms, elements, and components. We make sure your team feels confident in the driver’s seat. That means workshops to get everyone up to speed, clear documentation for reference, and governance rules that keep everything running smoothly for everyone on the team. And yes—we’re always around for questions… or just to celebrate the little wins (like finally getting that button to behave).

14

2 Comments

GV (Google Ventures) have a long history of hiring former designers and design leaders to support their portfolio companies. Folks like Jake Knapp, John Zeratsky, Kate Aronowitz, Daniel Burka, Braden Kowitz, Vanessa Cho, and Tom Hulme. In my latests podcast interview, Kate Aronowitz explains why this is, and what designers bring to the table. Interestingly it's not about craft, but rather the way they see the world with a beginners mind.

46

4 Comments

Our industry is facing a huge problem. The pace of new technology is staggering. But most companies don’t know how to harness it. Here’s a neuromuscular interface demo. It's pretty exciting. But I can't get too excited because most organizations I see are still coming to terms with basic applications for AI....let alone how to design for agents, invisible interaction and autonomy. Which way are we headed everyone? 1. A Netflix v Blockbuster reckoning where the most nimble companies accelerate and win? 2. Or the majority of emergent tech and AI startups dismissed as “ahead of their time?"

68

19 Comments