Design Team Collaboration

🤦🏻 “How We Run Design Critiques at Figma” (https://lnkd.in/eERQmRnY), an honest case study by Noah Levin with helpful techniques and templates to run more effective design critiques ↓ 🚫 Most critiques are an avalanche of unstructured opinions. ✅ Good critiques are inspiring, and give you a plan of action. ✅ Critiques work best with 2–6 people in the room. ✅ Explain the problem before showing any work. ✅ Reiterate previous findings, decisions and research. ✅ Explain how far you are: 30%, 60% or 90% done. ✅ Explain what kind of feedback you are looking for. ✅ No Keynote/Powerpoint: Figma link + Observation mode. ✅ Assign a note-taker to capture key points (Google Doc). ✅ Show what you want to show: feedback is shaped by that. 🚀 Critique formats: 🎡 Round-the-room: everyone voices their feedback (2min / person). 🍿 Popcorn: freeform comments for flowing conversation. 🥁 Jams: for early explorations with brainstorms, group sketching. 🫱🏻🫲🏾 Pair design: for deep collaboration on a problem (small groups). 🤫 Silent critiques: for a large volume of written, structured feedback. 📋 Paper print-out: for complex flows and reviewing more at once. 📣 FYI critiques: for sharing context and invite feedback later. Design critiques are about applying critical thinking. It’s about how well a current iteration of design does what it’s trying to do. However, designers alone often don’t have the full picture. Don’t necessarily reserve critiques to design teams only: invite developers and stakeholders and PMs for early feedback. Don’t ask what people think — ask how well the design tackles a specific problem. And probably the most important thing is to enable a flowing conversations. Invite everyone to ask, to doubt, to scrutinize, but stay on point and gather structured feedback: that’s when good critiques emerge. Useful resources: Practical Design Critique Guide, by Darrin Henein https://lnkd.in/ey_cGKuc Mastering Design Critiques, by Jonny Czar https://lnkd.in/e_BYwNwf Anti-Behavior in Design Critiques, and How To Handle Them, by Ben Crothers https://lnkd.in/e4UrpsPs --- ⛵ Figma and Miro Templates Design Critique Meetings Guide (Figma), by Overflow https://lnkd.in/dE85MUAK Design Critique Template (Figma), by Janus Tiu https://lnkd.in/dCYp2MSY Design Critique Meeting (Figma), by Rodrigo Javier Peña https://lnkd.in/dP_8pCug Design Critique Playground Template (Miro), by Miroslava Jovicic https://lnkd.in/eryJShRd #ux #design

GM back with a new pocket guide - 10 principles for better design critique. I've sat in hundreds of design crits over 25+ years as a designer. These are tried and true. Hemeon’s Pocket Guide to Design Critique 01 / Same Team, Same Goal Critique is not a courtroom. It’s a shared effort to make the work better. The enemy is unclear thinking, weak craft, and lazy solutions. If it feels like combat, the culture is broken. 02 / Safety Is the Container People don’t risk honesty when they feel exposed. They perform. They defend. They shrink. Strong critique only happens inside trust. Tend the room before you touch the work. 03 / Honesty Without Harm Truth matters. So does delivery. Say the real thing, cleanly. You can be direct without being destructive. If people leave wounded instead of clearer, the moment failed. 04 / Critique the Artifact, Not the Human The work is not the person. The draft is not the designer. Speak to flows, clarity, and decisions. The moment feedback touches identity, growth stops. 05 / Don’t Break the Good, While Fixing the Bad. You can’t improve what you don’t yet understand. Naming strengths is not politeness. It’s precision. It tells the designer what to protect while they evolve. 06 / Taste Without Reason Is Noise “I don’t like it” is not critique. It’s mood. Real feedback anchors to users, goals, systems, constraints, or craft. If you can’t explain why, it’s preference. 07 / Turn Reactions Into Direction “Confusing” is a feeling, not feedback. Do the extra work. Translate reactions into requests. Direction moves the work forward. Vibes do not. 08 / Context Comes Before Solutions If you don’t understand the intent, you’re solving the wrong problem. Ask first. What’s the goal? What’s fixed? What’s fragile? Critique without context is theater. 09 / All Notes Are not Equal. A bug demands attention. A preference does not. When you label feedback clearly, the team can prioritize without emotional confusion. 10 / Many Voices, One Owner Choose a clear owner. 
Without ownership, critique becomes endless discussion. Thank you for reading. Drop a comment on the best tips you have for running a design crit. Would love to hear your ideas!

💡SQUACK Design Critique Framework It's nearly impossible to design a solid product in a vacuum—you always need feedback from others. Yet, giving and receiving feedback are often the most challenging parts of the design process. Without a clear framework, design review sessions can easily devolve into unproductive noise or, worse, feel like a lynching. SQUACK, proposed by UX coach Julie Jensen (https://lnkd.in/dCA8CTHc), is a structured framework that helps provide constructive and organized design feedback. Each letter represents a specific type of comment: 🟠 S (Suggestion) Personal ideas or preferences that may not be backed by data but offer alternative approaches. 🟠 Q (Question) Points of confusion or requests for clarification (e.g., "Why did you decide to use this component in the first place?"). 🟠 U (User Signal) Feedback grounded in data, user research, or real user behavior. It's objective feedback, not subjective opinions. 🟠 A (Accident) Minor mistakes like typos, alignment issues, or numerical errors can cause friction or misunderstanding. 🟠 C (Critical) Major concerns that present risks (business, usability, technical). These require further attention or redesign. 🟠 K (Kudos) Praise for successful elements or well-executed design choices. This is important for morale and motivation. ✅ Benefits of using SQUACK Design critique session participants can use initials (e.g., S, Q, C) to label their comments and even combine types (e.g., "Q+S") when providing feedback. This helps improve clarity & context and leads to better outcomes: ✔ Helps categorize feedback into distinct categories and separate subjective opinions from facts. ✔ Makes critique sessions more inclusive, especially for quieter participants. ✔ Encourages actionable and balanced feedback (not just what's wrong with design but also what's good about it). 🖼️ SQUACK example by Ya-Ching #UX #uxdesign #productdesign #design

One of the fastest ways to improve design is to critique effectively. Too often, teams say: “Make it better” or “I don’t like this.” ❌ Vague feedback wastes time, creates frustration, and slows progress. Here’s my go-to framework for constructive critique: 1️⃣ Does this solve the user problem? 2️⃣ Can the user scan it in 5 seconds? 3️⃣ Are visual hierarchies clear? 4️⃣ Is the interaction intuitive? 5️⃣ Does this support the business goal? ✅ Asking these 5 questions turns critique into actionable insights. - Teams move faster, - iterations improve, - and outcomes become measurable. How do you structure your design critiques? 💬 ----------------------------------------- Muhammad Azhar design partner for teams who need speed with quality.

For senior product designers technical skills aren't the blocker. It's things like influence and communication. Here's my framework for better design reviews: It will help you communicate your ideas more clearly and influence product decisions more effectively. 1️⃣ Share context before the meeting --- Send the work in advance with a short summary. Include: • What the project is • What problem it solves • Where the work is up to • What kind of feedback you need When people see the work beforehand, the session becomes a discussion instead of a presentation. 2️⃣ Present the work in this order --- 1. Context 2. Problem 3. Solution 4. Impact That means being able to explain: • What this project is about • What problem exists for the user • Why it matters for the business • How success will be measured If you skip this, people react to screens. If you include it, people respond to the actual problem. 3️⃣ Show more than the happy path --- Do not just drop a few final screens into the review. Show: • How the user gets there • What happens before and after • The wider journey • The interaction, not just the UI The closer the work is to done, the more important it is to show the prototype, not static frames. 4️⃣ Leave more room for discussion --- Make sure there is enough time for: • Questions • Challenges • Trade off discussions • Blind spots • Decisions The value is rarely in talking people through every screen. It is in surfacing what you might have missed. 5️⃣ Receive feedback without becoming defensive --- This matters more than most designers realise. You are not your work. When feedback comes in, ask: • Do I understand it • Is it accurate • Is it in scope • Do I agree • Do I need to investigate further Strong designers can stay open when the work gets challenged. 6️⃣ Close the loop afterwards --- A review is not finished when the call ends. Summarise: • Key takeaways • Decisions made • Action items • Next steps This builds trust and keeps momentum. --- Design reviews are not just about improving screens. They are one of the clearest signals of seniority. At a certain point, career growth is less about your ability to design in Figma and more about your ability to create clarity, guide discussion, and help teams make better decisions. This is also one of the areas in your role least likely to be impacted by rapid changes in technology so get good at it now. I hope that's helpful. --- Want more practical advice like this for your design career? Get my free email series, link on profile.

Most design feedback fails before it begins. "Make the button blue" "I don't like it" "Looks great!" "This feels off" These comments crush morale and create rework. After years of design feedback sessions, I've developed a 3-tier framework that transformed how my teams communicate about design: tier 1: technical feedback Execution quality Visual hierarchy Consistency with systems Accessibility standards Technical feasibility Example: "The contrast ratio here doesn't meet WCAG standards. Here's what would work better" tier 2: strategic feedback Business objectives alignment Problem-solution fit Competitive differentiation Performance metrics impact Resource requirements Example: "This approach might not support our conversion goals. What if we prioritized...?" tier 3: growth feedback Skill development opportunities Process improvements Collaboration patterns Career advancement Individual strengths leverage Example: "Your research synthesis shows depth. Have you considered leading the next sprint?" implementing this framework: label your feedback tier explicitly: "I have some tier 2 feedback about..." require specific examples for each comment vague feedback stays banned, regardless of tier create feedback request templates help teammates ask for the right tier of feedback practice deliberately start meetings by reviewing which tier you need after implementing this approach: design revisions decrease team satisfaction scores increase stakeholder alignment improve dramatically junior designers report feeling safer

Design critique is almost an art. Everyone knows they need it, but too often you walk out with a bitter aftertaste. The main idea behind design critique is to reduce the cost of bad decisions. Unlike code review, which checks the correctness of a decision, design critique checks its fitness for purpose. Basically, are we making the right trade-offs given the problem, users, and constraints? There is rarely a single “right” answer. As always with UX "it depends". Almost every team has its own flavor of these sessions. And most of them change their approach every quarter, because sessions rarely deliver real impact and run "just because". Even if you finally get it right, add one new team member, and you are back to square one. Here are 10 ways to improve your design critique sessions: 1. Share designs in advance Your colleagues need time to think. Send context and ask for focused input (“I’d like feedback on the navigation flow”). Hoping they’ll get it on the spot is risky, especially when half the room is multitasking while you are presenting. 2.Clarify goals before you start Open with the problem, user context, and the definition of “good enough”. Without that, feedback drifts and people get lost. 3. Use a facilitator This was a game-changer. Without moderation, critiques spiral into tangents or art direction. A facilitator keeps focus, pace, and peace. 4. Balance positive and negative Call out what works, not just what doesn’t. Otherwise, the session feels like a public punishment. 5. Frame feedback in terms of usability “Feels clean” isn’t meaningful. Ask: “Would a new user understand what happens next?” or “What assumption are we making here?” 6. Surface trade-offs Designers should show alternatives and explain why paths were chosen or dropped. This keeps critique anchored in constraints instead of preferences. Quite often designer didn't have time to explore anything and the rest of the room should know it, as at that point it's not about critique anymore but rather the path to fix that UX debt after. 7. Protect psychological safety Feedback is for the design, not the designer. Everyone should feel safe to speak, not just the loudest or most senior. 8. Capture decisions If nothing is documented, you didn’t critique - you just vibed. Record what changes, what stays, and what’s still open. 9. Keep scope focused One session can’t solve everything. If too many issues surface, the impact gets diluted, so prioritise. 10. Reflect on the critique itself Ask: did this session help? What was useful, what wasn’t? Treat critique as a process to improve, not just a meeting to run. Most critique sessions fail because either the wrong people are in the room (they don’t know the project or users) or the timing is wrong (too early for meaningful feedback, too late to make changes, or too rushed for real exploration). Audit your critique culture. You’ll know quickly whether it’s sharpening your product or just burning everyone’s time.

How do you critique UX design among your peers? Since the beginning of this year we established a new format - the weekly silent design roast. How does it work? - We take turns in facilitating the meeting to practice our facilitation skills - One team member shows the challenge they are facing - There is a short Q&A to make sure the challenge was understood - Team members comment on the board in 3 categories: screenshot annotations, general feedback, sharing love - There is no open discussion afterwards - Questions can be asked to the team members directly as all the comments are tagged with names Why? - People can concentrate on the challenge - Giving input is not connected to who is the "loudest" - The challenge is documented - We can learn from each others challenges and keep our minds fresh - We get fast input from different minds - Only 30 Minutes *Of course you still need to test with users *This text was written without any AI assistance

Earlier today, a young product designer told me that in his company, design reviews were largely focused on blame — instead of progress. I wish this surprised me. Reagrdless, I'm gonna say a whole lot here for the room as a whole — from #UX and #ProductDesign folks to the #ProductManagers and #VPs of whatever who take them to task: Design feedback should never be failure — it should always be FUEL. What I mean by that: if teams or their bosses treat critique like a courtroom — cross-examination, defense, judgment — innovation suffers and progress toward measurable results stops dead. Here’s the truth: If a team member flinches at feedback, that's not a design problem. It’s a culture problem. And in most cases, it's a culture where managers mistakenly think that by being "tough" on their teams they'll get better results. I am here to tell you that they could not possibly be more wrong. When feedback feels like a personal attack, people stop taking risks. They stop exploring alternatives. Hell, they stop tryign altogether because they're optimizing for safety — not quality. The result? Weaker, safer, less effective work that helps no one. Not the team, not the company and certainly not its users or customers. Leaders: YOU set the tone. Your team will only take feedback well — or speak up and tell you the truth you need to hear — if they know they’re SAFE doing so. Make it clear that critique is about progress, not performance. Encourage your team to share early. Praise exploration. Normalize unfinished work. Great products aren’t built in silence — they’re shaped through conversation. Designers: You can shift the tone. Normalize iteration by sharing early and often. Don’t let reviews be the first time stakeholders see the work. Start reframing feedback sessions — and don’t allow it to become an opinion fest by asking “what do you think?” No matter what you heaar, stick to these kinds of responses: “What’s not clear to you here?” “What were you expecting to happen instead?” “What assumptions did we make that didn't hold up in real-world use?” Everyone involved needs to lead with curiosity, not defense. When feedback is treated as exploration — NOT evaluation — everyone gets better. [ Photo: Adam Rutkowski ]

How do you actually get the most of design critique meetings? When I started out, my feedback process looked like this: Share my Figma screens and ask: “Thoughts?” And then... my teammates would start asking me questions to fill in the gaps or unintentionally give me wrong feedback. That’s when I realized I wasn’t getting bad feedback! I was just asking for it wrong. Another mistake: treating feedback like a test instead of a conversation. (10/10 would not recommend. 🥲) Every design team is different. And most probably, they all work for different projects with low visibility on what you're doing. So here’s what I try to do now: ✨ Set the context first- what I’m solving and who it’s for. ✨ Clarify what kind of feedback I need - navigation flow, UI details, visual hierarchy, etc. ✨ Share technical constraints upfront - so everyone knows the limitations. This tiny shift saves so much time and leads to feedback I can actually use. Still not perfect though! Curious, how do you ask for feedback in your team’s design critiques? #designcritique #uxdesign #feedback