Category: Blog

Your blog category

  • I am a creative.

    I am a creative.

    I am a creative. What I do is alchemy. It is a mystery. I do not so much do it, as let it be done through me.

    I am a creative. Not all creative people like this label. Not all see themselves this way. Some creative people see science in what they do. That is their truth, and I respect it. Maybe I even envy them, a little. But my process is different—my being is different.

    Apologizing and qualifying in advance is a distraction. That’s what my brain does to sabotage me. I set it aside for now. I can come back later to apologize and qualify. After I’ve said what I came to say. Which is hard enough. 

    Except when it is easy and flows like a river of wine.

    Sometimes it does come that way. Sometimes what I need to create comes in an instant. I have learned not to say it at that moment, because if you admit that sometimes the idea just comes and it is the best idea and you know it is the best idea, they think you don’t work hard enough.

    Sometimes I work and work and work until the idea comes. Sometimes it comes instantly and I don’t tell anyone for three days. Sometimes I’m so excited by the idea that came instantly that I blurt it out, can’t help myself. Like a boy who found a prize in his Cracker Jacks. Sometimes I get away with this. Sometimes other people agree: yes, that is the best idea. Most times they don’t and I regret having  given way to enthusiasm. 

    Enthusiasm is best saved for the meeting where it will make a difference. Not the casual get-together that precedes that meeting by two other meetings. Nobody knows why we have all these meetings. We keep saying we’re doing away with them, but then just finding other ways to have them. Sometimes they are even good. But other times they are a distraction from the actual work. The proportion between when meetings are useful, and when they are a pitiful distraction, varies, depending on what you do and where you do it. And who you are and how you do it. Again I digress. I am a creative. That is the theme.

    Sometimes many hours of hard and patient work produce something that is barely serviceable. Sometimes I have to accept that and move on to the next project.

    Don’t ask about process. I am a creative.

    I am a creative. I don’t control my dreams. And I don’t control my best ideas.

    I can hammer away, surround myself with facts or images, and sometimes that works. I can go for a walk, and sometimes that works. I can be making dinner and there’s a Eureka having nothing to do with sizzling oil and bubbling pots. Often I know what to do the instant I wake up. And then, almost as often, as I become conscious and part of the world again, the idea that would have saved me turns to vanishing dust in a mindless wind of oblivion. For creativity, I believe, comes from that other world. The one we enter in dreams, and perhaps, before birth and after death. But that’s for poets to wonder, and I am not a poet. I am a creative. And it’s for theologians to mass armies about in their creative world that they insist is real. But that is another digression. And a depressing one. Maybe on a much more important topic than whether I am a creative or not. But still a digression from what I came here to say.

    Sometimes the process is avoidance. And agony. You know the cliché about the tortured artist? It’s true, even when the artist (and let’s put that noun in quotes) is trying to write a soft drink jingle, a callback in a tired sitcom, a budget request.

    Some people who hate being called creative may be closeted creatives, but that’s between them and their gods. No offense meant. Your truth is true, too. But mine is for me. 

    Creatives recognize creatives.

    Creatives recognize creatives like queers recognize queers, like real rappers recognize real rappers, like cons know cons. Creatives feel massive respect for creatives. We love, honor, emulate, and practically deify the great ones. To deify any human is, of course, a tragic mistake. We have been warned. We know better. We know people are just people. They squabble, they are lonely, they regret their most important decisions, they are poor and hungry, they can be cruel, they can be just as stupid as we can, because, like us, they are clay. But. But. But they make this amazing thing. They birth something that did not exist before them, and could not exist without them. They are the mothers of ideas. And I suppose, since it’s just lying there, I have to add that they are the mothers of invention. Ba dum bum! OK, that’s done. Continue.

    Creatives belittle our own small achievements, because we compare them to those of the great ones. Beautiful animation! Well, I’m no Miyazaki. Now THAT is greatness. That is greatness straight from the mind of God. This half-starved little thing that I made? It more or less fell off the back of the turnip truck. And the turnips weren’t even fresh.

    Creatives knows that, at best, they are Salieri. Even the creatives who are Mozart believe that. 

    I am a creative. I haven’t worked in advertising in 30 years, but in my nightmares, it’s my former creative directors who judge me. And they are right to do so. I am too lazy, too facile, and when it really counts, my mind goes blank. There is no pill for creative dysfunction.

    I am a creative. Every deadline I make is an adventure that makes Indiana Jones look like a pensioner snoring in a deck chair. The longer I remain a creative, the faster I am when I do my work and the longer I brood and walk in circles and stare blankly before I do that work. 

    I am still 10 times faster than people who are not creative, or people who have only been creative a short while, or people who have only been professionally creative a short while. It’s just that, before I work 10 times as fast as they do, I spend twice as long as they do putting the work off. I am that confident in my ability to do a great job when I put my mind to it. I am that addicted to the adrenaline rush of postponement. I am still that afraid of the jump.

    I am not an artist.

    I am a creative. Not an artist. Though I dreamed, as a lad, of someday being that. Some of us belittle our gifts and dislike ourselves because we are not Michelangelos and Warhols. That is narcissism—but at least we aren’t in politics.

    I am a creative. Though I believe in reason and science, I decide by intuition and impulse. And live with what follows—the catastrophes as well as the triumphs. 

    I am a creative. Every word I’ve said here will annoy other creatives, who see things differently. Ask two creatives a question, get three opinions. Our disagreement, our passion about it, and our commitment to our own truth are, at least to me, the proofs that we are creatives, no matter how we may feel about it.

    I am a creative. I lament my lack of taste in the areas about which I know very little, which is to say almost all areas of human knowledge. And I trust my taste above all other things in the areas closest to my heart, or perhaps, more accurately, to my obsessions. Without my obsessions, I would probably have to spend my time looking life in the eye, and almost none of us can do that for long. Not honestly. Not really. Because much in life, if you really look at it, is unbearable.

    I am a creative. I believe, as a parent believes, that when I am gone, some small good part of me will carry on in the mind of at least one other person.

    Working saves me from worrying about work.

    I am a creative. I live in dread of my small gift suddenly going away.

    I am a creative. I am too busy making the next thing to spend too much time deeply considering that almost nothing I make will come anywhere near the greatness I comically aspire to.

    I am a creative. I believe in the ultimate mystery of process. I believe in it so much, I am even fool enough to publish an essay I dictated into a tiny machine and didn’t take time to review or revise. I won’t do this often, I promise. But I did it just now, because, as afraid as I might be of your seeing through my pitiful gestures toward the beautiful, I was even more afraid of forgetting what I came to say. 

    There. I think I’ve said it. 

  • Humility: An Essential Value

    Humility: An Essential Value

    Humility, a designer’s essential value—that has a nice ring to it. What about humility, an office manager’s essential value? Or a dentist’s? Or a librarian’s? They all sound great. When humility is our guiding light, the path is always open for fulfillment, evolution, connection, and engagement. In this chapter, we’re going to talk about why.

    That said, this is a book for designers, and to that end, I’d like to start with a story—well, a journey, really. It’s a personal one, and I’m going to make myself a bit vulnerable along the way. I call it:

    The Tale of Justin’s Preposterous Pate

    When I was coming out of art school, a long-haired, goateed neophyte, print was a known quantity to me; design on the web, however, was rife with complexities to navigate and discover, a problem to be solved. Though I had been formally trained in graphic design, typography, and layout, what fascinated me was how these traditional skills might be applied to a fledgling digital landscape. This theme would ultimately shape the rest of my career.

    So rather than graduate and go into print like many of my friends, I devoured HTML and JavaScript books into the wee hours of the morning and taught myself how to code during my senior year. I wanted—nay, needed—to better understand the underlying implications of what my design decisions would mean once rendered in a browser.

    The late ’90s and early 2000s were the so-called “Wild West” of web design. Designers at the time were all figuring out how to apply design and visual communication to the digital landscape. What were the rules? How could we break them and still engage, entertain, and convey information? At a more macro level, how could my values, inclusive of humility, respect, and connection, align in tandem with that? I was hungry to find out.

    Though I’m talking about a different era, those are timeless considerations between non-career interactions and the world of design. What are your core passions, or values, that transcend medium? It’s essentially the same concept we discussed earlier on the direct parallels between what fulfills you, agnostic of the tangible or digital realms; the core themes are all the same.

    First within tables, animated GIFs, Flash, then with Web Standards, divs, and CSS, there was personality, raw unbridled creativity, and unique means of presentment that often defied any semblance of a visible grid. Splash screens and “browser requirement” pages aplenty. Usability and accessibility were typically victims of such a creation, but such paramount facets of any digital design were largely (and, in hindsight, unfairly) disregarded at the expense of experimentation.

    For example, this iteration of my personal portfolio site (“the pseudoroom”) from that era was experimental, if not a bit heavy- handed, in the visual communication of the concept of a living sketchbook. Very skeuomorphic. I collaborated with fellow designer and dear friend Marc Clancy (now a co-founder of the creative project organizing app Milanote) on this one, where we’d first sketch and then pass a Photoshop file back and forth to trick things out and play with varied user interactions. Then, I’d break it down and code it into a digital layout.

    Along with design folio pieces, the site also offered free downloads for Mac OS customizations: desktop wallpapers that were effectively design experimentation, custom-designed typefaces, and desktop icons.

    From around the same time, GUI Galaxy was a design, pixel art, and Mac-centric news portal some graphic designer friends and I conceived, designed, developed, and deployed.

    Design news portals were incredibly popular during this period, featuring (what would now be considered) Tweet-size, small-format snippets of pertinent news from the categories I previously mentioned. If you took Twitter, curated it to a few categories, and wrapped it in a custom-branded experience, you’d have a design news portal from the late 90s / early 2000s.

    We as designers had evolved and created a bandwidth-sensitive, web standards award-winning, much more accessibility-conscious website. Still ripe with experimentation, yet more mindful of equitable engagement. You can see a couple of content panes here, noting general news (tech, design) and Mac-centric news below. We also offered many of the custom downloads I cited before as present on my folio site but branded and themed to GUI Galaxy.

    The site’s backbone was a homegrown CMS, with the presentation layer consisting of global design + illustration + news author collaboration. And the collaboration effort here, in addition to experimentation on a ‘brand’ and content delivery, was hitting my core. We were designing something bigger than any single one of us and connecting with a global audience.

    Collaboration and connection transcend medium in their impact, immensely fulfilling me as a designer.

    Now, why am I taking you down this trip of design memory lane? Two reasons.

    First, there’s a reason for the nostalgia for that design era (the “Wild West” era, as I called it earlier): the inherent exploration, personality, and creativity that saturated many design portals and personal portfolio sites. Ultra-finely detailed pixel art UI, custom illustration, bespoke vector graphics, all underpinned by a strong design community.

    Today’s web design has been in a period of stagnation. I suspect there’s a strong chance you’ve seen a site whose structure looks something like this: a hero image / banner with text overlaid, perhaps with a lovely rotating carousel of images (laying the snark on heavy there), a call to action, and three columns of sub-content directly beneath. Maybe an icon library is employed with selections that vaguely relate to their respective content.

    Design, as it’s applied to the digital landscape, is in dire need of thoughtful layout, typography, and visual engagement that goes hand-in-hand with all the modern considerations we now know are paramount: usability. Accessibility. Load times and bandwidth- sensitive content delivery. A responsive presentation that meets human beings wherever they’re engaging from. We must be mindful of, and respectful toward, those concerns—but not at the expense of creativity of visual communication or via replicating cookie-cutter layouts.

    Pixel Problems

    Websites during this period were often designed and built on Macs whose OS and desktops looked something like this. This is Mac OS 7.5, but 8 and 9 weren’t that different.

    Desktop icons fascinated me: how could any single one, at any given point, stand out to get my attention? In this example, the user’s desktop is tidy, but think of a more realistic example with icon pandemonium. Or, say an icon was part of a larger system grouping (fonts, extensions, control panels)—how did it also maintain cohesion amongst a group?

    These were 32 x 32 pixel creations, utilizing a 256-color palette, designed pixel-by-pixel as mini mosaics. To me, this was the embodiment of digital visual communication under such ridiculous constraints. And often, ridiculous restrictions can yield the purification of concept and theme.

    So I began to research and do my homework. I was a student of this new medium, hungry to dissect, process, discover, and make it my own.

    Expanding upon the notion of exploration, I wanted to see how I could push the limits of a 32×32 pixel grid with that 256-color palette. Those ridiculous constraints forced a clarity of concept and presentation that I found incredibly appealing. The digital gauntlet had been tossed, and that challenge fueled me. And so, in my dorm room into the wee hours of the morning, I toiled away, bringing conceptual sketches into mini mosaic fruition.

    These are some of my creations, utilizing the only tool available at the time to create icons called ResEdit. ResEdit was a clunky, built-in Mac OS utility not really made for exactly what we were using it for. At the core of all of this work: Research. Challenge. Problem- solving. Again, these core connection-based values are agnostic of medium.

    There’s one more design portal I want to talk about, which also serves as the second reason for my story to bring this all together.

    This is K10k, short for Kaliber 1000. K10k was founded in 1998 by Michael Schmidt and Toke Nygaard, and was the design news portal on the web during this period. With its pixel art-fueled presentation, ultra-focused care given to every facet and detail, and with many of the more influential designers of the time who were invited to be news authors on the site, well… it was the place to be, my friend. With respect where respect is due, GUI Galaxy’s concept was inspired by what these folks were doing.

    For my part, the combination of my web design work and pixel art exploration began to get me some notoriety in the design scene. Eventually, K10k noticed and added me as one of their very select group of news authors to contribute content to the site.

    Amongst my personal work and side projects—and now with this inclusion—in the design community, this put me on the map. My design work also began to be published in various printed collections, in magazines domestically and overseas, and featured on other design news portals. With that degree of success while in my early twenties, something else happened:

    I evolved—devolved, really—into a colossal asshole (and in just about a year out of art school, no less). The press and the praise became what fulfilled me, and they went straight to my head. They inflated my ego. I actually felt somewhat superior to my fellow designers.

    The casualties? My design stagnated. Its evolution—my evolution— stagnated.

    I felt so supremely confident in my abilities that I effectively stopped researching and discovering. When previously sketching concepts or iterating ideas in lead was my automatic step one, I instead leaped right into Photoshop. I drew my inspiration from the smallest of sources (and with blinders on). Any critique of my work from my peers was often vehemently dismissed. The most tragic loss: I had lost touch with my values.

    My ego almost cost me some of my friendships and burgeoning professional relationships. I was toxic in talking about design and in collaboration. But thankfully, those same friends gave me a priceless gift: candor. They called me out on my unhealthy behavior.

    Admittedly, it was a gift I initially did not accept but ultimately was able to deeply reflect upon. I was soon able to accept, and process, and course correct. The realization laid me low, but the re-awakening was essential. I let go of the “reward” of adulation and re-centered upon what stoked the fire for me in art school. Most importantly: I got back to my core values.

    Always Students

    Following that short-term regression, I was able to push forward in my personal design and career. And I could self-reflect as I got older to facilitate further growth and course correction as needed.

    As an example, let’s talk about the Large Hadron Collider. The LHC was designed “to help answer some of the fundamental open questions in physics, which concern the basic laws governing the interactions and forces among the elementary objects, the deep structure of space and time, and in particular the interrelation between quantum mechanics and general relativity.” Thanks, Wikipedia.

    Around fifteen years ago, in one of my earlier professional roles, I designed the interface for the application that generated the LHC’s particle collision diagrams. These diagrams are the rendering of what’s actually happening inside the Collider during any given particle collision event and are often considered works of art unto themselves.

    Designing the interface for this application was a fascinating process for me, in that I worked with Fermilab physicists to understand what the application was trying to achieve, but also how the physicists themselves would be using it. To that end, in this role,

    I cut my teeth on usability testing, working with the Fermilab team to iterate and improve the interface. How they spoke and what they spoke about was like an alien language to me. And by making myself humble and working under the mindset that I was but a student, I made myself available to be a part of their world to generate that vital connection.

    I also had my first ethnographic observation experience: going to the Fermilab location and observing how the physicists used the tool in their actual environment, on their actual terminals. For example, one takeaway was that due to the level of ambient light-driven contrast within the facility, the data columns ended up using white text on a dark gray background instead of black text-on-white. This enabled them to pore over reams of data during the day and ease their eye strain. And Fermilab and CERN are government entities with rigorous accessibility standards, so my knowledge in that realm also grew. The barrier-free design was another essential form of connection.

    So to those core drivers of my visual problem-solving soul and ultimate fulfillment: discovery, exposure to new media, observation, human connection, and evolution. What opened the door for those values was me checking my ego before I walked through it.

    An evergreen willingness to listen, learn, understand, grow, evolve, and connect yields our best work. In particular, I want to focus on the words ‘grow’ and ‘evolve’ in that statement. If we are always students of our craft, we are also continually making ourselves available to evolve. Yes, we have years of applicable design study under our belt. Or the focused lab sessions from a UX bootcamp. Or the monogrammed portfolio of our work. Or, ultimately, decades of a career behind us.

    But all that said: experience does not equal “expert.”

    As soon as we close our minds via an inner monologue of ‘knowing it all’ or branding ourselves a “#thoughtleader” on social media, the designer we are is our final form. The designer we can be will never exist.

  • An Holistic Framework for Shared Design Leadership

    An Holistic Framework for Shared Design Leadership

    Picture this: You’re in a meeting room at your tech company, and two people are having what looks like the same conversation about the same design problem. One is talking about whether the team has the right skills to tackle it. The other is diving deep into whether the solution actually solves the user’s problem. Same room, same problem, completely different lenses.

    This is the beautiful, sometimes messy reality of having both a Design Manager and a Lead Designer on the same team. And if you’re wondering how to make this work without creating confusion, overlap, or the dreaded “too many cooks” scenario, you’re asking the right question.

    The traditional answer has been to draw clean lines on an org chart. The Design Manager handles people, the Lead Designer handles craft. Problem solved, right? Except clean org charts are fantasy. In reality, both roles care deeply about team health, design quality, and shipping great work. 

    The magic happens when you embrace the overlap instead of fighting it—when you start thinking of your design org as a design organism.

    The Anatomy of a Healthy Design Team

    Here’s what I’ve learned from years of being on both sides of this equation: think of your design team as a living organism. The Design Manager tends to the mind (the psychological safety, the career growth, the team dynamics). The Lead Designer tends to the body (the craft skills, the design standards, the hands-on work that ships to users).

    But just like mind and body aren’t completely separate systems, so, too, do these roles overlap in important ways. You can’t have a healthy person without both working in harmony. The trick is knowing where those overlaps are and how to navigate them gracefully.

    When we look at how healthy teams actually function, three critical systems emerge. Each requires both roles to work together, but with one taking primary responsibility for keeping that system strong.

    The Nervous System: People & Psychology

    Primary caretaker: Design Manager
    Supporting role: Lead Designer

    The nervous system is all about signals, feedback, and psychological safety. When this system is healthy, information flows freely, people feel safe to take risks, and the team can adapt quickly to new challenges.

    The Design Manager is the primary caretaker here. They’re monitoring the team’s psychological pulse, ensuring feedback loops are healthy, and creating the conditions for people to grow. They’re hosting career conversations, managing workload, and making sure no one burns out.

    But the Lead Designer plays a crucial supporting role. They’re providing sensory input about craft development needs, spotting when someone’s design skills are stagnating, and helping identify growth opportunities that the Design Manager might miss.

    Design Manager tends to:

    • Career conversations and growth planning
    • Team psychological safety and dynamics
    • Workload management and resource allocation
    • Performance reviews and feedback systems
    • Creating learning opportunities

    Lead Designer supports by:

    • Providing craft-specific feedback on team member development
    • Identifying design skill gaps and growth opportunities
    • Offering design mentorship and guidance
    • Signaling when team members are ready for more complex challenges

    The Muscular System: Craft & Execution

    Primary caretaker: Lead Designer
    Supporting role: Design Manager

    The muscular system is about strength, coordination, and skill development. When this system is healthy, the team can execute complex design work with precision, maintain consistent quality, and adapt their craft to new challenges.

    The Lead Designer is the primary caretaker here. They’re setting design standards, providing craft coaching, and ensuring that shipping work meets the quality bar. They’re the ones who can tell you if a design decision is sound or if we’re solving the right problem.

    But the Design Manager plays a crucial supporting role. They’re ensuring the team has the resources and support to do their best craft work, like proper nutrition and recovery time for an athlete.

    Lead Designer tends to:

    • Definition of design standards and system usage
    • Feedback on what design work meets the standard
    • Experience direction for the product
    • Design decisions and product-wide alignment
    • Innovation and craft advancement

    Design Manager supports by:

    • Ensuring design standards are understood and adopted across the team
    • Confirming experience direction is being followed
    • Supporting practices and systems that scale without bottlenecking
    • Facilitating design alignment across teams
    • Providing resources and removing obstacles to great craft work

    The Circulatory System: Strategy & Flow

    Shared caretakers: Both Design Manager and Lead Designer

    The circulatory system is about how information, decisions, and energy flow through the team. When this system is healthy, strategic direction is clear, priorities are aligned, and the team can respond quickly to new opportunities or challenges.

    This is where true partnership happens. Both roles are responsible for keeping the circulation strong, but they’re bringing different perspectives to the table.

    Lead Designer contributes:

    • User needs are met by the product
    • Overall product quality and experience
    • Strategic design initiatives
    • Research-based user needs for each initiative

    Design Manager contributes:

    • Communication to team and stakeholders
    • Stakeholder management and alignment
    • Cross-functional team accountability
    • Strategic business initiatives

    Both collaborate on:

    • Co-creation of strategy with leadership
    • Team goals and prioritization approach
    • Organizational structure decisions
    • Success measures and frameworks

    Keeping the Organism Healthy

    The key to making this partnership sing is understanding that all three systems need to work together. A team with great craft skills but poor psychological safety will burn out. A team with great culture but weak craft execution will ship mediocre work. A team with both but poor strategic circulation will work hard on the wrong things.

    Be Explicit About Which System You’re Tending

    When you’re in a meeting about a design problem, it helps to acknowledge which system you’re primarily focused on. “I’m thinking about this from a team capacity perspective” (nervous system) or “I’m looking at this through the lens of user needs” (muscular system) gives everyone context for your input.

    This isn’t about staying in your lane. It’s about being transparent as to which lens you’re using, so the other person knows how to best add their perspective.

    Create Healthy Feedback Loops

    The most successful partnerships I’ve seen establish clear feedback loops between the systems:

    Nervous system signals to muscular system: “The team is struggling with confidence in their design skills” → Lead Designer provides more craft coaching and clearer standards.

    Muscular system signals to nervous system: “The team’s craft skills are advancing faster than their project complexity” → Design Manager finds more challenging growth opportunities.

    Both systems signal to circulatory system: “We’re seeing patterns in team health and craft development that suggest we need to adjust our strategic priorities.”

    Handle Handoffs Gracefully

    The most critical moments in this partnership are when something moves from one system to another. This might be when a design standard (muscular system) needs to be rolled out across the team (nervous system), or when a strategic initiative (circulatory system) needs specific craft execution (muscular system).

    Make these transitions explicit. “I’ve defined the new component standards. Can you help me think through how to get the team up to speed?” or “We’ve agreed on this strategic direction. I’m going to focus on the specific user experience approach from here.”

    Stay Curious, Not Territorial

    The Design Manager who never thinks about craft, or the Lead Designer who never considers team dynamics, is like a doctor who only looks at one body system. Great design leadership requires both people to care about the whole organism, even when they’re not the primary caretaker.

    This means asking questions rather than making assumptions. “What do you think about the team’s craft development in this area?” or “How do you see this impacting team morale and workload?” keeps both perspectives active in every decision.

    When the Organism Gets Sick

    Even with clear roles, this partnership can go sideways. Here are the most common failure modes I’ve seen:

    System Isolation

    The Design Manager focuses only on the nervous system and ignores craft development. The Lead Designer focuses only on the muscular system and ignores team dynamics. Both people retreat to their comfort zones and stop collaborating.

    The symptoms: Team members get mixed messages, work quality suffers, morale drops.

    The treatment: Reconnect around shared outcomes. What are you both trying to achieve? Usually it’s great design work that ships on time from a healthy team. Figure out how both systems serve that goal.

    Poor Circulation

    Strategic direction is unclear, priorities keep shifting, and neither role is taking responsibility for keeping information flowing.

    The symptoms: Team members are confused about priorities, work gets duplicated or dropped, deadlines are missed.

    The treatment: Explicitly assign responsibility for circulation. Who’s communicating what to whom? How often? What’s the feedback loop?

    Autoimmune Response

    One person feels threatened by the other’s expertise. The Design Manager thinks the Lead Designer is undermining their authority. The Lead Designer thinks the Design Manager doesn’t understand craft.

    The symptoms: Defensive behavior, territorial disputes, team members caught in the middle.

    The treatment: Remember that you’re both caretakers of the same organism. When one system fails, the whole team suffers. When both systems are healthy, the team thrives.

    The Payoff

    Yes, this model requires more communication. Yes, it requires both people to be secure enough to share responsibility for team health. But the payoff is worth it: better decisions, stronger teams, and design work that’s both excellent and sustainable.

    When both roles are healthy and working well together, you get the best of both worlds: deep craft expertise and strong people leadership. When one person is out sick, on vacation, or overwhelmed, the other can help maintain the team’s health. When a decision requires both the people perspective and the craft perspective, you’ve got both right there in the room.

    Most importantly, the framework scales. As your team grows, you can apply the same system thinking to new challenges. Need to launch a design system? Lead Designer tends to the muscular system (standards and implementation), Design Manager tends to the nervous system (team adoption and change management), and both tend to circulation (communication and stakeholder alignment).

    The Bottom Line

    The relationship between a Design Manager and Lead Designer isn’t about dividing territories. It’s about multiplying impact. When both roles understand they’re tending to different aspects of the same healthy organism, magic happens.

    The mind and body work together. The team gets both the strategic thinking and the craft excellence they need. And most importantly, the work that ships to users benefits from both perspectives.

    So the next time you’re in that meeting room, wondering why two people are talking about the same problem from different angles, remember: you’re watching shared leadership in action. And if it’s working well, both the mind and body of your design team are getting stronger.

  • From Beta to Bedrock: Build Products that Stick.

    From Beta to Bedrock: Build Products that Stick.

    As a product builder over too many years to mention, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen promising ideas go from zero to hero in a few weeks, only to fizzle out within months.

    Financial products, which is the field I work in, are no exception. With people’s real hard-earned money on the line, user expectations running high, and a crowded market, it’s tempting to throw as many features at the wall as possible and hope something sticks. But this approach is a recipe for disaster. Here’s why:

    The pitfalls of feature-first development

    When you start building a financial product from the ground up, or are migrating existing customer journeys from paper or telephony channels onto online banking or mobile apps, it’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of creating new features. You might think, “If I can just add one more thing that solves this particular user problem, they’ll love me!” But what happens when you inevitably hit a roadblock because the narcs (your security team!) don’t like it? When a hard-fought feature isn’t as popular as you thought, or it breaks due to unforeseen complexity?

    This is where the concept of Minimum Viable Product (MVP) comes in. Jason Fried’s book Getting Real and his podcast Rework often touch on this idea, even if he doesn’t always call it that. An MVP is a product that provides just enough value to your users to keep them engaged, but not so much that it becomes overwhelming or difficult to maintain. It sounds like an easy concept but it requires a razor sharp eye, a ruthless edge and having the courage to stick by your opinion because it is easy to be seduced by “the Columbo Effect”… when there’s always “just one more thing…” that someone wants to add.

    The problem with most finance apps, however, is that they often become a reflection of the internal politics of the business rather than an experience solely designed around the customer. This means that the focus is on delivering as many features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and desires of competing internal departments, rather than providing a clear value proposition that is focused on what the people out there in the real world want. As a result, these products can very easily bloat to become a mixed bag of confusing, unrelated and ultimately unlovable customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

    The importance of bedrock

    So what’s a better approach? How can we build products that are stable, user-friendly, and—most importantly—stick?

    That’s where the concept of “bedrock” comes in. Bedrock is the core element of your product that truly matters to users. It’s the fundamental building block that provides value and stays relevant over time.

    In the world of retail banking, which is where I work, the bedrock has got to be in and around the regular servicing journeys. People open their current account once in a blue moon but they look at it every day. They sign up for a credit card every year or two, but they check their balance and pay their bill at least once a month.

    Identifying the core tasks that people want to do and then relentlessly striving to make them easy to do, dependable, and trustworthy is where the gravy’s at.

    But how do you get to bedrock? By focusing on the “MVP” approach, prioritizing simplicity, and iterating towards a clear value proposition. This means cutting out unnecessary features and focusing on delivering real value to your users.

    It also means having some guts, because your colleagues might not always instantly share your vision to start with. And controversially, sometimes it can even mean making it clear to customers that you’re not going to come to their house and make their dinner. The occasional “opinionated user interface design” (i.e. clunky workaround for edge cases) might sometimes be what you need to use to test a concept or buy you space to work on something more important.

    Practical strategies for building financial products that stick

    So what are the key strategies I’ve learned from my own experience and research?

    1. Start with a clear “why”: What problem are you trying to solve? For whom? Make sure your mission is crystal clear before building anything. Make sure it aligns with your company’s objectives, too.
    2. Focus on a single, core feature and obsess on getting that right before moving on to something else: Resist the temptation to add too many features at once. Instead, choose one that delivers real value and iterate from there.
    3. Prioritize simplicity over complexity: Less is often more when it comes to financial products. Cut out unnecessary bells and whistles and keep the focus on what matters most.
    4. Embrace continuous iteration: Bedrock isn’t a fixed destination—it’s a dynamic process. Continuously gather user feedback, refine your product, and iterate towards that bedrock state.
    5. Stop, look and listen: Don’t just test your product as part of your delivery process—test it repeatedly in the field. Use it yourself. Run A/B tests. Gather user feedback. Talk to people who use it, and refine accordingly.

    The bedrock paradox

    There’s an interesting paradox at play here: building towards bedrock means sacrificing some short-term growth potential in favour of long-term stability. But the payoff is worth it—products built with a focus on bedrock will outlast and outperform their competitors, and deliver sustained value to users over time.

    So, how do you start your journey towards bedrock? Take it one step at a time. Start by identifying those core elements that truly matter to your users. Focus on building and refining a single, powerful feature that delivers real value. And above all, test obsessively—for, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, Alan Kay, or Peter Drucker (whomever you believe!!), “The best way to predict the future is to create it.”

  • 10 Questions Small Business Owners Should Ask Before Hiring a Marketing Agency

    10 Questions Small Business Owners Should Ask Before Hiring a Marketing Agency

    10 Questions Small Business Owners Should Ask Before Hiring a Marketing Agency written by John Jantsch read more at Duct Tape Marketing

    Listen to the full episode:  Overview In her first ever solo episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, Sara Nay—CEO of Duct Tape Marketing and author of “Unchained: Breaking Free from Broken Marketing Models”—shares the questions every small business owner should ask before hiring an agency, consultant, or freelancer. Drawing from her 16 years of […]

    10 Questions Small Business Owners Should Ask Before Hiring a Marketing Agency written by John Jantsch read more at Duct Tape Marketing

    Listen to the full episode:

     Overview

    In her first ever solo episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast, Sara Nay—CEO of Duct Tape Marketing and author of “Unchained: Breaking Free from Broken Marketing Models”—shares the questions every small business owner should ask before hiring an agency, consultant, or freelancer. Drawing from her 16 years of experience, Sara highlights real-world horror stories and arms business owners (and agencies!) with the keys to transparency, ownership, and collaboration. If you want to avoid getting stuck with expensive, opaque, or unproductive marketing partnerships, this episode is packed with the practical, empowering guidance you need.

    About the HostSara Nay (5)

    Sara Nay is CEO of Duct Tape Marketing, host of the Agency Spark Podcast, and author of “Unchain: Breaking Free from Broken Marketing Models.” She helps small businesses and agencies build ownership, transparency, and strategic clarity into every marketing engagement.

    Actionable Insights

    • Small business owners are too often locked into expensive, long-term marketing contracts—with little clarity on results or account ownership.
    • Always ask: Who owns my marketing assets and accounts? (Spoiler: It should be you, not the agency.)
    • Demand transparency in reporting, regular reviews, and ongoing education—don’t settle for reports you don’t understand.
    • Insist on strategy before tactics; don’t hire a vendor who just wants to “do SEO” or “run ads” without understanding your business.
    • Avoid long-term contracts and “handcuff” clauses; month-to-month and clear exit paths are healthiest for all sides.
    • Meet the real team you’ll work with—not just a charismatic salesperson. Ask to speak with the actual day-to-day contacts.
    • Ask how agencies use AI and what remains human-led; look for “AI + human” answers, not “AI instead of human.”
    • Ensure your team stays informed and involved; agencies should empower, not gatekeep.
    • Ask for a sample report, a clear plan for strategy, and specific examples of what the agency will teach you along the way.
    • The best agencies leave you better educated, more empowered, and with true ownership—never dependent or in the dark.

    Great Moments (with Timestamps)

    • 00:01 – Why Small Businesses Get Stuck with Bad Agencies
      Real-life stories of businesses trapped by contracts, lost assets, and confusing reports.
    • 04:16 – The 10 Essential Questions to Ask Before Hiring an Agency
      Sara’s practical checklist for choosing the right partners.
    • 06:45 – You Must Own Your Assets
      Why account ownership is non-negotiable for small businesses.
    • 08:42 – Strategy Before Tactics (Always!)
      How to connect tactics to your bigger business goals and avoid wasted spend.
    • 10:53 – The Danger of Long-Term Contracts
      Why month-to-month is the gold standard in today’s marketing landscape.
    • 13:20 – AI, Human Touch, and the Future of Agency Work
      What to look for in agencies navigating the new marketing tech landscape.
    • 15:38 – Involvement, Education, and True Collaboration
      How agencies should keep you informed, empowered, and ready to grow.

    Insights

    “You should always own your website, accounts, and assets—never let an agency hold them hostage.”

    “Great agencies start with strategy, not just tactics—they want to understand your business, not just sell you what’s in their toolkit.”

    “Transparency, collaboration, and education are non-negotiables—if you’re not getting them, find a better partner.”

    “Marketing is complicated, but you shouldn’t be kept in the dark. The best agencies leave you smarter, more empowered, and in control.”

    Sara Nay (00:01.218)

    Hello and welcome to another episode of the Duck Tape Marketing Podcast. This is your host, Sara Nay, taking over for John Jantsch today as host and also doing my first ever solo podcast because I am fired up about a specific topic right now.

    So to give you a little bit of backstory, about a week ago on LinkedIn, I posted a couple stories of conversations that I had had with small business owners recently. And I led the post saying that I am sad and mad and fired up all at the same time. And so the conversations I had with two separate business owners, the first one was with a small business owner who has been paying an SEO company $8,000 a month and is locked into

    three-year contract with him. On top of that, he had no idea if he was getting any results from the efforts and he didn’t know how to get out of the contract because he signed this three-year commitment.

    Another story that I told on LinkedIn was another conversation I had with a different business owner, and he has been paying $10,000 a month for Google Ads to an agency. But the issue is the agency owns the Google Ads account, and on top of that, he doesn’t have access to it, and he has no idea how much of the money that he’s paying every month is going towards the agency’s management fees or the actual ads.

    In both of these scenarios, the business owners were receiving reports from the agencies every month. They had no idea what the reports actually mean. It looked like foreign language to them. And so they’re spending money on marketing. They’re not really getting a return and they’re locked into these situations, both a bit stuck. The SEO scenario, he’s stuck because he signed a three year contract. The Google ads scenario, he’s stuck because this agency owns

    Sara Nay (02:00.457)

    his ads accounts. And so these stories fire me up. I’ve been speaking with, interacting with small businesses for about 16 years at Duct Tape Marketing and I wish that these were unique stories but unfortunately I hear things like this all of the time. And I think it comes from two different areas. think there’s, marketing is hard, it’s complex. A lot of people get into business because they’re passionate about something or they see an opportunity and all of sudden they need to start

    understanding and learning marketing because that’s how you spread the word about your business. And so there’s a lot of people in the small business space as business owners that haven’t been properly educated about marketing and so they don’t really understand how to go about or purchase marketing from partners that are out there.

    There’s also unfortunately some agencies that I believe take advantage of small business owners. I actually wrote a whole book on the topic. It’s called Unchained Breaking Free from Broken Marketing Models. We’ll add a link to the show notes. But I believe the best path forward for small businesses is the path where they’re owning their marketing and they’re collaborating with partners to actually get the work done moving forward. So as I said, fired up on this topic, I’m here to educate small

    small businesses on how to ask the right questions when it comes to hiring an agency or a fractional CMO or a consultant. And I’m also here, if you’re an agency fractional CMO or consultant listening to this episode as well, I encourage you to write down these list of questions and answer them honestly to see where you stand on these items. Because I believe again, the best path forward is transparency and collaboration, working together, empowering small businesses.

    versus keeping what we do behind the scenes in secret. And so with all of that being said, I wanna dive in as a follow up to my initial LinkedIn post, I did a second post that was essentially 10 questions to ask as part of the sales process to the agency that you’re considering hiring. And so these questions are very focused on understanding the type of partnership you’re getting into. And so I wanna make that very clear. There are other questions you should ask

    Sara Nay (04:16.377)

    top of this except like such as their work experience and speaking to referrals and reading different case studies and all of that stuff this these ten questions are very focused on understanding the partnership that you’re getting into so if you’re a small business listening to this write these down the next time you’re considering hiring an agency a consultant a fractional CMO a contractor a freelancer ask these questions so you’re better prepared to Understand what the relationship will look like moving forward so the first question and in some cases

    I would argue is the most important is who owns the market my marketing assets and accounts and so this one is very important because I’ve heard so many stories over the years of marketing agencies owning the accounts on behalf of their clients and so they’re building these assets that their client is basically handcuffed to this agency moving forward and so the scenario I said in the opening with the example of the person spending $10,000 a month

    Google ads, the agency owned the account. And so when they parted ways, the small business basically lost their Google ads setup because they had to start from scratch over again. So that’s one scenario. Another scenario I hear very often, unfortunately, is a agency basically builds a website for the client and they own the website, the URL, hosting, all of the things. And so now all of sudden the small business is tied to this agency until they

    part ways and then they essentially have to rebuild this website from scratch when I would argue a website in a lot of cases is one of the most important assets when it comes to small business marketing. And so you absolutely should be asking this question when you’re considering working with an agency or outsourced solution. It’s who’s going to own the accounts and their answer should be you. You small business owner will own the accounts and we will give you, or you can give

    us access to the accounts as managers or whatever the setup would be and then when we part ways you kick us out and you continue to own this asset that we would have spent all of this time building together. So that should always be the answer I believe is you should own your website, you should own your paid accounts, you should own technology and tools, AI platforms that people are bringing in. Like you should be the owner as the small business and the agency should be granted access to your account.

    Sara Nay (06:45.903)

    so you can kick them out when you part ways. Another question, number two on the list is how will you measure success and how often will we review it? And so again, in the opening, I shared those two stories of the person paying for SEO services and the other one paying for Google Ads. They were getting a report that looked like foreign language every single month and they have no idea what it means. And so that doesn’t help anyone, ultimately.

    And so when you’re asking an agency that you’re considering to work with, how will you measure success and how often will we review it? You wanna see that they’re measuring success for certain things on a daily basis, some on a weekly basis, some on a monthly basis. Maybe they’re diving into certain metrics on a quarterly basis. It really just depends on what all you’re tracking in terms of the cadence. But you wanna…

    have an agency that you’re working with that has a clear plan for measuring what they’re going to measure, how they’re going to measure it, how they’re going to report on it, how they’re going to analyze it, how they’re going to use it to drive their decisions. And then how often will we review it is really important as well because I’ve heard so many stories about companies just sending this report that they don’t understand and that’s all the reporting that they get. I believe that you should be speaking with your agency or your fractional CMO or whoever you’re outsourcing or delegating or working

    with for marketing, you should be meeting with them on a regular basis to talk through the specific metrics that you agree to track together. And then you should be using those metrics to then guide your quarterly marketing planning moving forward. And so it’s really important to determine what to measure, how it’s going to measure, agree on a communication cadence, and then look to the agency to be educating you on what the metrics mean and why they’re important and how they’re deriving decisions moving forward.

    Thank

    Sara Nay (08:42.165)

    Question number three, how do you connect tactics to strategy? So I actually was just speaking to a new client of ours and he told me yesterday that he believes he’s wasted about $100,000 on bringing in marketers to execute on tactics. And the reason he believed none of that was successful was because he didn’t have a proper strategy in place. And so I absolutely agree with him in that scenario. There have been so many stories.

    that I’ve heard over the years where someone will pitch, you need email marketing, or you need paid advertising, or you need SEO work, because that’s what we know. And so they’ll bring in an agency to do just those things, but the agency hasn’t taken the time to learn the business or what they’re trying to accomplish or where they’re trying to go or who their ideal clients are or what message resonates with them. And so they’re skipping through all of that because they’re staying in their lane of tactics that they’re comfortable with without understanding

    understanding what the overall strategy is for the specific business and why that specific tactic will help reach their goal. So if you’ve been following along with Duct Tape Marketing, we’ve been saying strategy before tactics for as long as we’ve been in business. And so this one really is very, very important to me. Okay, number four. What happens if I want to end the contract?

    Actually, on my LinkedIn post, someone commented, based on that one specifically, that he had an agency send him a contract that basically said, after we end our agreement, you can’t work with any other similar solutions for a two-year period.

    That’s insane to me. And so with that, think, you know, 12 month contracts even is long because marketing is evolving. It’s shifting. It’s changing for our clients. We are only planning out a quarter at a time. So three months at a time because we need to understand what’s working, what’s not working, what’s shifting, what’s changing, how SEO is evolving. And so locking people into longer contracts, I just think it’s hard on both the agency to predict, but also the small business owners.

    Sara Nay (10:53.513)

    because if they’re not happy, they’re gonna be locked into this long term, spending money, wasting money, where they could have shifted to a different solution. So as long as we’ve been in business at Duct Tape Marketing, we have always done month to month contracts in our consulting engagements, and I think that’s absolutely what you should be asking for and looking for in any agency work moving forward. Number five, who will I actually work with on the day to day?

    also heard a lot of stories over the years of I had this incredible sales call with this agency and I was so impressed and this person had all of this experience and they sold me into this engagement and I got locked into a six month contract, let’s say, and then all of a sudden I was working with an intern level marketer and so I was sold on this thought leadership, this viewpoint and then I was handed something completely different. And so think it’s really important as part of the sales process is if you’re talking to someone, it’s am I gonna work with

    in strategy and retainer or I’m gonna work with other people on the team. If so, who are those other people? How long have they been with you? What is their experience? And also, can I talk to them if you want? I think that’s a good, fair follow-up question. Can I speak to the people that I’ll be working with as well? So get to know who your main point of contacts are gonna be in the beginning of the engagement throughout the full engagement moving forward.

    Number six for questions is how do you report on results and can I see a sample? This one’s also important. I highlighted the importance of reporting earlier on another question, but hopefully they answered that if you’re interviewing them successfully. They talked you through it. They’re gonna educate. They’re gonna simplify. They’re gonna work together. They’re gonna collaborate on reporting, but then ask for an example of the reporting. And so if they are saying it’s gonna be simple and easy to understand, the next step

    is okay great, show me what your reporting looks like for a current client and hopefully then they’re willing to then show an example reporting for a client, stripping out any identifying information, but then also they’re able to talk you through what it looks like and why and how they put it together and the reasoning behind certain things. So that’s a great follow-up question to that reporting one earlier. Number seven, how do I integrate AI and what is still human led?

    Sara Nay (13:20.045)

    And so I think this is a really important question. I am all about AI when it comes to elevating humans. And so I think that all marketing agencies should be bringing in different forms of AI to help elevate and improve the work that they’re doing.

    but not to just replace themselves or just to work faster ultimately. And so we offer for all of our clients when we get started, we offer a package called Strategy First. So 30 to 45 day engagement consists of a ton of research and putting together a marketing strategy and plan. As part of that, we use AI to give us more information than we ever had before. So for example, one of the steps in that is doing competitive research. Before we used to have to

    out and look at, do all of the work manually. And so we could only get, you know, as much information as we could spend on that component. But now we still do work manually. We still go out and we look at the competitors websites and social profiles and what they’re in, content upgrades and all the stuff we can find online. But we’re also able to pull a deep research report in a tool like chat GPT that gives us pages and pages of research on their competitors in a much more detailed way than we ever have before.

    And so in that scenario, we are using humans to analyze the competitors, but we’re using AI to give us more information to be able to make better decisions moving forward. And so you wanna look for those types of answers when you’re asking agencies how are they using AI. You wanna understand that they’re using AI because they should be. If they’re fearing it, they’re being left behind. But you also wanna make sure that they’re using AI with the human plus AI reprogramming.

    approach, not just the replacing humans with AI approach, or you will end up not getting great results, I believe, over time because the value is elevating our work we can do with AI below us. Number eight, how do you ensure my team stays involved and informed? And so a bit of a red flag, would say here is if someone says, we’ll just handle all of your marketing, your SEO and your ads, and we’ll just, you know, we’ll send you a report and you just

    Sara Nay (15:38.24)

    focus on your business and your growth and you’re gonna have all these leads come in. I don’t think that’s gonna be a great scenario. What you wanna hear here is we are going to involve you in the process. We are going to educate you along the way. We are gonna learn as much from you as possible on the front end and able to do our work on the back end. We are going to work on mastering your tone of voice and your style and we are gonna master your thought leadership perspective. So you are

    able to focus on where you should be in your business in the CEO seat or whatever it might be, but it’s gonna take some time for us to get up to speed. We are gonna learn, we’re gonna involve you in your team, we’re gonna collaborate with you, we’re gonna educate you along the way versus, oh, we’re just gonna do our special magic work over here and you all stay over here. That doesn’t necessarily work. Number nine on the list, we’re getting there. What’s your process for creating strategy before execute?

    This one is probably the nearest to my heart. It’s something that we’ve again been teaching strategy before tactics for years. I truly believe that every

    Marketing plan should start with a deep strategy dive and so we have something called the marketing strategy pyramid The foundation is the business strategy if you’re bringing in a marketing agency They should take some time on the front end to understand your business What is your mission your vision your values your current revenue your growth goals? Do you want to sell one day? They need to be understanding those things deeply so then they can work on the middle part of our pyramid, which is the marketing strategy

    component because the marketing strategy needs to guide the business where the business is trying to go. Once a marketing strategy is mapped out, then in our pyramid we have a system strategy and a team strategy. And so I fully believe that when working with an agency or a marketer of any kind, they should come in, understand the business strategy, create the marketing strategy, analyze the team. Then you can say, okay, here’s what we should be doing from

    Sara Nay (17:49.632)

    from a marketing perspective and now here’s who we can have to help. so strategy before execution all day every day. And then last question and one of my favorites as well, I like all these questions I guess, is what will you teach me along the way? And so there…

    I think as I said earlier beginning in this episode, I think some of the challenges in the small business space is marketing is complicated, it’s evolving, there’s a lack of education. People don’t get into business to become marketers, but they are forced to in a lot of ways. And so if you’re bringing in an agency, a fractional CMO, a consultant, a freelancer, if you’re bringing in anyone, you should be asking, what will you teach me along the way? Because their job in my view is to educate clients, to set clients

    up for success to be able to make better marketing decisions moving forward. You’ve all heard it, leave it better than you found it. That’s how we approach all of our engagements. come in, we educate, we empower, we uplift, we give our clients ownership because my goal is, let’s say we part ways in the future because maybe you’re hiring someone in-house, you’re in a much better spot from an educational empowerment standpoint than you ever have before. So that is my list of tips.

    I am passionate about this topic I could go on and on but I appreciate you listening to again my first ever solo episode on the duct tape marketing podcast Again, I wrote a book called unchain breaking free from broken marketing models It’s all about taking ownership instead of renting your marketing So if any of this resonated with you today recommend grabbing a copy of that book My name is Sarah nay, you can find me on LinkedIn as well. I would love to connect with you there Thank you so much for listening

    and we will see you next time.

    powered by

  • Design for Amiability: Lessons from Vienna

    Design for Amiability: Lessons from Vienna

    Today’s web is not always an amiable place. Sites greet you with a popover that demands assent to their cookie policy, and leave you with Taboola ads promising “One Weird Trick!” to cure your ailments. Social media sites are tuned for engagement, and few things are more engaging than a fight. Today it seems that people want to quarrel; I have seen flame wars among birders.  

    These tensions are often at odds with a site’s goals. If we are providing support and advice to customers, we don’t want those customers to wrangle with each other. If we offer news about the latest research, we want readers to feel at ease; if we promote upcoming marches, we want our core supporters to feel comfortable and we want curious newcomers to feel welcome. 

    In a study for a conference on the History of the Web, I looked to the origins of Computer Science in Vienna (1928-1934)  for a case study of the importance of amiability in a research community and the disastrous consequences of its loss. That story has interesting implications for web environments that promote amiable interaction among disparate, difficult (and sometimes disagreeable) people.

    The Vienna Circle

    Though people had been thinking about calculating engines and thinking machines from antiquity, Computing really got going in Depression-era Vienna.  The people who worked out the theory had no interest in building machines; they wanted to puzzle out the limits of reason in the absence of divine authority. If we could not rely on God or Aristotle to tell us how to think, could we instead build arguments that were self-contained and demonstrably correct? Can we be sure that mathematics is consistent? Are there things that are true but that cannot be expressed in language? 

    The core ideas were worked out in the weekly meetings (Thursdays at 6) of a group remembered as the Vienna Circle. They got together in the office of Professor Moritz Schlick at the University of Vienna to discuss problems in philosophy, math, and language. The intersection of physics and philosophy had long been a specialty of this Vienna department, and this work had placed them among the world leaders.  Schlick’s colleague Hans Hahn was a central participant, and by 1928 Hahn brought along his graduate students Karl Menger and Kurt Gödel. Other frequent participants included philosopher Rudolf Carnap, psychologist Karl Popper, economist Ludwig von Mises (brought by his brother Frederick, a physicist),  graphic designer Otto Neurath (inventor of infographics), and architect Josef Frank (brought by his physicist brother, Phillip).  Out-of-town visitors often joined, including the young Johnny von Neumann, Alfred Tarski, and the irascible Ludwig Wittgenstein. 

    When Schlick’s office grew too dim, participants adjourned to a nearby café for additional discussion with an even larger circle of participants.  This convivial circle was far from unique.  An intersecting circle–Neurath, von Mises, Oskar Morgenstern–established the Austrian School of free-market economics. There were theatrical circles (Peter Lorre, Hedy Lamarr, Max Reinhardt), and literary circles. The café was where things happened.

    The interdisciplinarity of the group posed real challenges of temperament and understanding. Personalities were often a challenge. Gödel was convinced people were trying to poison him. Architect Josef Frank depended on contracts for public housing, which Mises opposed as wasteful. Wittgenstein’s temper had lost him his job as a secondary school teacher, and for some of these years he maintained a detailed list of whom he was willing to meet. Neurath was eager to detect muddled thinking and would interrupt a speaker with a shouted “Metaphysics!” The continuing amity of these meetings was facilitated by the personality of their leader, Moritz Schlick, who would be remembered as notably adept in keeping disagreements from becoming quarrels.

    In the Café

    The Viennese café of this era was long remembered as a particularly good place to argue with your friends, to read, and to write. Built to serve an imperial capital, the cafés found themselves with too much space and too few customers now that the Empire was gone. There was no need to turn tables: a café could only survive by coaxing customers to linger. Perhaps they would order another coffee, or one of their friends might drop by. One could play chess, or billiards, or read newspapers from abroad. Coffee was invariably served with a glass of purified spring water, still a novelty in an era in which most water was still unsafe to drink. That water glass would be refilled indefinitely. 

    In the basement of one café, the poet Jura Soyfer staged “The End Of The World,” a musical comedy in which Professor Peep has discovered a comet heading for earth.

    Prof. Peep: The comet is going to destroy everybody!

    Hitler:  Destroying everybody is my business.

    Of course, coffee can be prepared in many ways, and the Viennese café developed a broad vocabulary to represent precisely how one preferred to drink it: melange, Einspänner, Brauner, Schwarzer, Kapuziner. This extensive customization, with correspondingly esoteric conventions of service, established the café as a comfortable and personal third space, a neutral ground in which anyone who could afford a coffee would be welcome. Viennese of this era were fastidious in their use of personal titles, of which an abundance were in common use. Café waiters greeted regular customers with titles too, but were careful to address their patrons with titles a notch or two greater than they deserved. A graduate student would be Doktor, an unpaid postdoc Professor.  This assurance mattered all the more because so many members of the Circle (and so many other Viennese) came from elsewhere: Carnap from Wuppertal, Gödel from Brno, von Neumann from Budapest. No one was going to make fun of your clothes, mannerisms, or accent. Your friends wouldn’t be bothered by the pram in the hall. Everyone shared a Germanic Austrian literary and philosophical culture, not least those whose ancestors had been Eastern European Jews who knew that culture well, having read all about it in books.

    The amiability of the café circle was enhanced by its openness. Because the circle sometimes extended to architects and actors, people could feel less constrained to admit shortfalls in their understanding. It was soon discovered that marble tabletops made a useful surface for pencil sketches, serving all as an improvised and accessible blackboard.

    Comedies like “The End Of The World” and fictional newspaper sketches or feuilletons of writers like Joseph Roth and Stefan Zweig served as a second defense against disagreeable or churlish behavior. The knowledge that, if one got carried away, a parody of one’s remarks might shortly appear in Neue Freie Presse surely helped Professor Schlick keep matters in hand.

    The End Of Red Vienna

    Though Austria’s government drifted to the right after the War, Vienna’s city council had been Socialist, dedicated to public housing based on user-centered design, and embracing  ambitious programs of public outreach and adult education. In 1934 the Socialists lost a local election, and this era soon came to its end as the new administration focused on the imagined threat of the International Jewish Conspiracy. Most members of the Circle fled within months: von Neumann to Princeton, Neurath to Holland and Oxford, Popper to New Zealand, Carnap to Chicago. Prof. Schlick was murdered on the steps of the University by a student outraged by his former association with Jews.  Jura Soyfer, who wrote “The End Of The World,” died in Buchenwald.

    In 1939, von Neumann finally convinced Gödel to accept a job in Princeton. Gödel was required to pay large fines to emigrate. The officer in charge of these fees would look back on this as the best posting of his career; his name was Eichmann.

    Design for Amiability

    An impressive literature recounts those discussions and the environment that facilitated the development of computing. How can we design for amiability?  This is not just a matter of choosing rounded typefaces and a cheerful pastel palette. I believe we may identify eight distinct issues that exert design forces in usefully amiable directions.

    Seriousness: The Vienna Circle was wrestling with a notoriously difficult book—Wittgenstein’s Tractus Logico-Philosophicus—and a catalog of outstanding open questions in mathematics. They were concerned with consequential problems, not merely scoring points for debating. Constant reminders that the questions you are considering matter—not only that they are consequential or that those opposing you are scoundrels—help promote amity.

    Empiricism: The characteristic approach of the Vienna Circle demanded that knowledge be grounded either in direct observation or in rigorous reasoning. Disagreement, when it arose, could be settled by observation or by proof. If neither seemed ready to hand, the matter could not be settled. On these terms, one can seldom if ever demolish an opposing argument, and trolling is pointless.

    Abstraction: Disputes grow worse when losing the argument entails lost face or lost jobs. The Vienna Circle’s focus on theory—the limits of mathematics, the capability of language—promoted amity. Without seriousness, abstraction could have been merely academic, but the limits of reason and the consistency of mathematics were clearly serious.

    Formality: The punctilious demeanor of waiters and the elaborated rituals of coffee service helped to establish orderly attitudes amongst the argumentative participants. This stands in contrast to the contemptuous sneer that now dominates social media.  

    Schlamperei: Members of the Vienna Circle maintained a global correspondence, and they knew their work was at the frontier of research. Still, this was Vienna, at the margins of Europe: old-fashioned, frumpy, and dingy. Many participants came from even more obscure backwaters. Most or all harbored the suspicion that they were really schleppers, and a tinge of the ridiculous helped to moderate tempers. The director of “The End Of The World” had to pass the hat for money to purchase a moon for the set, and thought it was funny enough to write up for publication.

    Openness: All sorts of people were involved in discussion, anyone might join in. Each week would bring different participants. Fluid borders reduce tension, and provide opportunities to broaden the range of discussion and the terms of engagement. Low entrance friction was characteristic of the café: anyone could come, and if you came twice you were virtually a regular. Permeable boundaries and café culture made it easier for moderating influences to draw in raconteurs and storytellers to defuse awkward moments, and Vienna’s cafés had no shortage of humorists. Openness counteracts the suspicion that promoters of amiability are exerting censorship.

    Parody: The environs of the Circle—the university office and the café—were unmistakably public. There were writers about, some of them renowned humorists. The prospect that one’s bad taste or bad behavior might be ridiculed in print kept discussion within bounds. The sanction of public humiliation, however, was itself made mild by the veneer of fiction; even if you got a little carried away and a character based on you made a splash in some newspaper fiction, it wasn’t the end of the world.

    Engagement: The subject matter was important to the participants, but it was esoteric: it did not matter very much to their mothers or their siblings. A small stumble or a minor humiliation could be shrugged off in ways that major media confrontations cannot.

    I believe it is notable that this environment was designed to promote amiability through several different voices.  The café waiter flattered each newcomer and served everyone, and also kept out local pickpockets and drunks who would be mere disruptions. Schlick and other regulars kept discussion moving and on track. The fiction writers and raconteurs—perhaps the most peripheral of the participants—kept people in a good mood and reminded them that bad behavior could make anyone ridiculous.  Crucially, each of these voices were human: you could reason with them. Algorithmic or AI moderators, however clever, are seldom perceived as reasonable. The café circles had no central authority or Moderator against whom everyone’s resentments might be focused. Even after the disaster of 1934, what people remembered were those cheerful arguments.

  • Design Dialects: Breaking the Rules, Not the System

    Design Dialects: Breaking the Rules, Not the System

    “Language is not merely a set of unrelated sounds, clauses, rules, and meanings; it is a totally coherent system bound to context and behavior.” — Kenneth L. Pike

    The web has accents. So should our design systems.

    Design Systems as Living Languages

    Design systems aren’t component libraries—they’re living languages. Tokens are phonemes, components are words, patterns are phrases, layouts are sentences. The conversations we build with users become the stories our products tell.

    But here’s what we’ve forgotten: the more fluently a language is spoken, the more accents it can support without losing meaning. English in Scotland differs from English in Sydney, yet both are unmistakably English. The language adapts to context while preserving core meaning. This couldn’t be more obvious to me, a Brazilian Portuguese speaker, who learned English with an American accent, and lives in Sydney.

    Our design systems must work the same way. Rigid adherence to visual rules creates brittle systems that break under contextual pressure. Fluent systems bend without breaking.

    Consistency becomes a prison

    The promise of design systems was simple: consistent components would accelerate development and unify experiences. But as systems matured and products grew more complex, that promise has become a prison. Teams file “exception” requests by the hundreds. Products launch with workarounds instead of system components. Designers spend more time defending consistency than solving user problems.

    Our design systems must learn to speak dialects.

    A design dialect is a systematic adaptation of a design system that maintains core principles while developing new patterns for specific contexts. Unlike one-off customizations or brand themes, dialects preserve the system’s essential grammar while expanding its vocabulary to serve different users, environments, or constraints.

    When Perfect Consistency Fails

    At Booking.com, I learned this lesson the hard way. We A/B-tested everything—color, copy, button shapes, even logo colors. As a professional with a graphic design education and experience building brand style guides, I found this shocking. While everyone fell in love with Airbnb’s pristine design system, Booking grew into a giant without ever considering visual consistency.  

    The chaos taught me something profound: consistency isn’t ROI; solved problems are.

    At Shopify. Polaris () was our crown jewel—a mature design language perfect for merchants on laptops. As a product team, we were expected to adopt Polaris as-is. Then my fulfillment team hit an “Oh, Ship!” moment, as we faced the challenge of building an app for warehouse pickers using our interface on shared, battered Android scanners in dim aisles, wearing thick gloves, scanning dozens of items per minute, many with limited levels of English understanding.

    Task completion with standard Polaris: 0%.

    Every component that worked beautifully for merchants failed completely for pickers. White backgrounds created glare. 44px tap targets were invisible to gloved fingers. Sentence-case labels took too long to parse. Multi-step flows confused non-native speakers.

    We faced a choice: abandon Polaris entirely, or teach it to speak warehouse.

    The Birth of a Dialect

    We chose evolution over revolution. Working within Polaris’s core principles—clarity, efficiency, consistency—we developed what we now call a design dialect:

    ConstraintFluent MoveRationale
    Glare & low lightDark surfaces + light textReduce glare on low-DPI screens
    Gloves & haste90px tap targets (~2cm)Accommodate thick gloves
    MultilingualSingle-task screens, plain languageReduce cognitive load

    Result: Task completion jumped from 0% to 100%. Onboarding time dropped from three weeks to one shift.

    This wasn’t customization or theming—this was a dialect: a systematic adaptation that maintained Polaris’s core grammar while developing new vocabulary for a specific context. Polaris hadn’t failed; it had learned to speak warehouse.

    The Flexibility Framework

    At Atlassian, working on the Jira platform—itself a system within the larger Atlassian system—I pushed for formalizing this insight. With dozens of products sharing a design language across different codebases, we needed systematic flexibility so we built directly into our ways of working. The old model—exception requests and special approvals—was failing at scale.

    We developed the Flexibility Framework to help designers define how flexible they wanted their components to be:

    TierActionOwnership
    ConsistentAdopt unchangedPlatform locks design + code
    OpinionatedAdapt within boundsPlatform provides smart defaults, products customize
    FlexibleExtend freelyPlatform defines behavior, products own presentation

    During a navigation redesign, we tiered every element. Logo and global search stayed Consistent. Breadcrumbs and contextual actions became Flexible. Product teams could immediately see where innovation was welcome and where consistency mattered.

    The Decision Ladder

    Flexibility needs boundaries. We created a simple ladder for evaluating when rules should bend:

    Good: Ship with existing system components. Fast, consistent, proven.

    Better: Stretch a component slightly. Document the change. Contribute improvements back to the system for all to use.

    Best: Prototype the ideal experience first. If user testing validates the benefit, update the system to support it.

    The key question: “Which option lets users succeed fastest?”

    Rules are tools, not relics.

    Unity Beats Uniformity

    Gmail, Drive, and Maps are unmistakably Google—yet each speaks with its own accent. They achieve unity through shared principles, not cloned components. One extra week of debate over button color costs roughly $30K in engineer time.

    Unity is a brand outcome; fluency is a user outcome. When the two clash, side with the user.

    Governance Without Gates

    How do you maintain coherence while enabling dialects? Treat your system like a living vocabulary:

    Document every deviation – e.g., dialects/warehouse.md with before/after screenshots and rationale.

    Promote shared patterns – when three teams adopt a dialect independently, review it for core inclusion.

    Deprecate with context – retire old idioms via flags and migration notes, never a big-bang purge.

    A living dictionary scales better than a frozen rulebook.

    Start Small: Your First Dialect

    Ready to introduce dialects? Start with one broken experience:

    This week: Find one user flow where perfect consistency blocks task completion. Could be mobile users struggling with desktop-sized components, or accessibility needs your standard patterns don’t address.

    Document the context: What makes standard patterns fail here? Environmental constraints? User capabilities? Task urgency?

    Design one systematic change: Focus on behavior over aesthetics. If gloves are the problem, bigger targets aren’t “”breaking the system””—they’re serving the user. Earn the variations and make them intentional.

    Test and measure: Does the change improve task completion? Time to productivity? User satisfaction?

    Show the savings: If that dialect frees even half a sprint, fluency has paid for itself.

    Beyond the Component Library

    We’re not managing design systems anymore—we’re cultivating design languages. Languages that grow with their speakers. Languages that develop accents without losing meaning. Languages that serve human needs over aesthetic ideals.

    The warehouse workers who went from 0% to 100% task completion didn’t care that our buttons broke the style guide. They cared that the buttons finally worked.

    Your users feel the same way. Give your system permission to speak their language.

  • Welcome to Derry Suffers From the Same Problem as the It Movies

    Welcome to Derry Suffers From the Same Problem as the It Movies

    It: Welcome to Derry is a show that It fans really want to love, and there are plenty of reasons to do so. The series, coming from It alums Andy Muschietti, Barbara Muschietti, and Jason Fuchs, has a gorgeous color palette and does a terrific job of creating its 1960s setting. The various intertwining stories […]

    The post Welcome to Derry Suffers From the Same Problem as the It Movies appeared first on Den of Geek.

    The first trailer for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie features a lot of familiar faces and voices. There’s Jack Black as Bowser, Chris Pratt as Mario, Charlie Day as Luigi, etc. We even get a new favorite with Benny Safdie as Bowser Jr., bringing in a new dimension from the games. But the most significant character is the one who only gets a couple lines in the trailer, even if the person speaking them is notable.

    The trailer features Rosalina, voiced by Brie Larson. Although a relatively recent addition to the Super Mario canon, Rosalina has already endeared herself to gamers, and she’s sure to do the same for moviegoers.

    Rosalina debuted, appropriately enough, in Super Mario Galaxy, the 2007 video game for the Nintendo Wii. While Galaxy contains the standard Mario plot in which Bowser kidnaps Princess Peach, forcing Mario and his brother Luigi to travel the cosmos to rescue her, director Yoshiaki Koizumi adds another wrinkle in the form of Rosalina.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Rosalina lives within the Cosmic Observatory alongside Lumas, living star creatures (like the adorable lil’ nihilist previously seen in The Super Mario Bros. Movie. When Bowser steals the Power Stars from the Cosmic Observatory to make his escape with Peach, Rosalina tasks Mario with recovering the Stars so that she can turn the Observatory into a rocket to chase after his beloved.

    In other words, Rosalina serves as a gameplay driver in Super Mario Galaxy, giving a reason for the star collecting mechanic of the title. Were she just that, she probably wouldn’t have garnered the fan-following she has. However, Rosalina has won over so many gamers because backstory that unfolds throughout Mario’s adventure. Through a storybook conceit, players learn that the orphaned Rosalina helped reunite a Luma with its parents when she was a girl, and has since become something of a mother figure for all of the star creatures.

    That combination of familial warmth and cosmic reach makes Rosalina an ethereal figure, a warm and reassuring character at the center of the Mario universe. Later games in the franchise only underscore those qualities. In 2010’s Super Mario Galaxy 2, Rosalina initially appears as a Cosmic Spirit who aids Mario, particularly when the player dies too many times. Later, she sends support to Baby Mario and tells the Lumas about magical Green Stars.

    Since then, Rosalina has gone the way of most supporting characters in a Mario game, joining in on their racing and sports activities. Players can put Rosalina behind the steering wheel for Mario Kart, they can have her compete for the gold against Sonic the Hedgehog characters in Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games, and she can beat up Solid Snake in Super Smash Bros. Those who want to put Rosalina into more of a traditional adventure can choose her as the player character after unlocking her in Super Mario 3D World.

    Fun as all of these off-shoot games are, they don’t get at the true appeal of the character, established in the two Super Mario Galaxy games. Rosalina represents a cosmic good that lends meaning to the Mario story. Fans love her for both her tragic backstory, and also for the enduring kindness she represents, especially as she meets out that kindness on a galactic scale.

    We only get to see a few glimpses of Rosalina in the trailer for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, but it’s clear that Illumination has translated those elements for the film. Even when she takes down a giant robot created by Bowser Jr., Rosalina does it with simplicity, grace, and a great deal of power. Moviegoers may not know who she is yet, but Rosalina is clearly destined to become a new favorite.

    The Super Mario Galaxy Movie releases April 3, 2026.

    The post The Super Mario Galaxy Movie: Meet Your New Favorite Character Rosalina appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • Stranger Things Finale Spoilers Are So Real Even the Cast Isn’t Allowed to Watch It

    Stranger Things Finale Spoilers Are So Real Even the Cast Isn’t Allowed to Watch It

    The cast of Stranger Things won’t see the series finale before its release on New Year’s Day. They’ll have to wait, just like us. Noah Schnapp, who plays Will Byers in the hit Netflix series, confirmed to EW that the final episode is being kept under wraps, saying that he’s watched episodes five and six, […]

    The post Stranger Things Finale Spoilers Are So Real Even the Cast Isn’t Allowed to Watch It appeared first on Den of Geek.

    The first trailer for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie features a lot of familiar faces and voices. There’s Jack Black as Bowser, Chris Pratt as Mario, Charlie Day as Luigi, etc. We even get a new favorite with Benny Safdie as Bowser Jr., bringing in a new dimension from the games. But the most significant character is the one who only gets a couple lines in the trailer, even if the person speaking them is notable.

    The trailer features Rosalina, voiced by Brie Larson. Although a relatively recent addition to the Super Mario canon, Rosalina has already endeared herself to gamers, and she’s sure to do the same for moviegoers.

    Rosalina debuted, appropriately enough, in Super Mario Galaxy, the 2007 video game for the Nintendo Wii. While Galaxy contains the standard Mario plot in which Bowser kidnaps Princess Peach, forcing Mario and his brother Luigi to travel the cosmos to rescue her, director Yoshiaki Koizumi adds another wrinkle in the form of Rosalina.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Rosalina lives within the Cosmic Observatory alongside Lumas, living star creatures (like the adorable lil’ nihilist previously seen in The Super Mario Bros. Movie. When Bowser steals the Power Stars from the Cosmic Observatory to make his escape with Peach, Rosalina tasks Mario with recovering the Stars so that she can turn the Observatory into a rocket to chase after his beloved.

    In other words, Rosalina serves as a gameplay driver in Super Mario Galaxy, giving a reason for the star collecting mechanic of the title. Were she just that, she probably wouldn’t have garnered the fan-following she has. However, Rosalina has won over so many gamers because backstory that unfolds throughout Mario’s adventure. Through a storybook conceit, players learn that the orphaned Rosalina helped reunite a Luma with its parents when she was a girl, and has since become something of a mother figure for all of the star creatures.

    That combination of familial warmth and cosmic reach makes Rosalina an ethereal figure, a warm and reassuring character at the center of the Mario universe. Later games in the franchise only underscore those qualities. In 2010’s Super Mario Galaxy 2, Rosalina initially appears as a Cosmic Spirit who aids Mario, particularly when the player dies too many times. Later, she sends support to Baby Mario and tells the Lumas about magical Green Stars.

    Since then, Rosalina has gone the way of most supporting characters in a Mario game, joining in on their racing and sports activities. Players can put Rosalina behind the steering wheel for Mario Kart, they can have her compete for the gold against Sonic the Hedgehog characters in Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games, and she can beat up Solid Snake in Super Smash Bros. Those who want to put Rosalina into more of a traditional adventure can choose her as the player character after unlocking her in Super Mario 3D World.

    Fun as all of these off-shoot games are, they don’t get at the true appeal of the character, established in the two Super Mario Galaxy games. Rosalina represents a cosmic good that lends meaning to the Mario story. Fans love her for both her tragic backstory, and also for the enduring kindness she represents, especially as she meets out that kindness on a galactic scale.

    We only get to see a few glimpses of Rosalina in the trailer for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, but it’s clear that Illumination has translated those elements for the film. Even when she takes down a giant robot created by Bowser Jr., Rosalina does it with simplicity, grace, and a great deal of power. Moviegoers may not know who she is yet, but Rosalina is clearly destined to become a new favorite.

    The Super Mario Galaxy Movie releases April 3, 2026.

    The post The Super Mario Galaxy Movie: Meet Your New Favorite Character Rosalina appeared first on Den of Geek.

  • Toy Story 5 Trailer Makes Buzz and Woody Obsolete

    Toy Story 5 Trailer Makes Buzz and Woody Obsolete

    At the climax of Toy Story 3, the unthinkable seemed to be happening. Buzz, Woody, Jessie, and the rest of Andy’s toys found themselves in a trash heap, riding a conveyor belt toward an incinerator. Although the toys try for a while to find some means of escape, they finally realize it’s useless. And so […]

    The post Toy Story 5 Trailer Makes Buzz and Woody Obsolete appeared first on Den of Geek.

    The first trailer for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie features a lot of familiar faces and voices. There’s Jack Black as Bowser, Chris Pratt as Mario, Charlie Day as Luigi, etc. We even get a new favorite with Benny Safdie as Bowser Jr., bringing in a new dimension from the games. But the most significant character is the one who only gets a couple lines in the trailer, even if the person speaking them is notable.

    The trailer features Rosalina, voiced by Brie Larson. Although a relatively recent addition to the Super Mario canon, Rosalina has already endeared herself to gamers, and she’s sure to do the same for moviegoers.

    Rosalina debuted, appropriately enough, in Super Mario Galaxy, the 2007 video game for the Nintendo Wii. While Galaxy contains the standard Mario plot in which Bowser kidnaps Princess Peach, forcing Mario and his brother Luigi to travel the cosmos to rescue her, director Yoshiaki Koizumi adds another wrinkle in the form of Rosalina.

    cnx.cmd.push(function() {
    cnx({
    playerId: “106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530”,

    }).render(“0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796”);
    });

    Rosalina lives within the Cosmic Observatory alongside Lumas, living star creatures (like the adorable lil’ nihilist previously seen in The Super Mario Bros. Movie. When Bowser steals the Power Stars from the Cosmic Observatory to make his escape with Peach, Rosalina tasks Mario with recovering the Stars so that she can turn the Observatory into a rocket to chase after his beloved.

    In other words, Rosalina serves as a gameplay driver in Super Mario Galaxy, giving a reason for the star collecting mechanic of the title. Were she just that, she probably wouldn’t have garnered the fan-following she has. However, Rosalina has won over so many gamers because backstory that unfolds throughout Mario’s adventure. Through a storybook conceit, players learn that the orphaned Rosalina helped reunite a Luma with its parents when she was a girl, and has since become something of a mother figure for all of the star creatures.

    That combination of familial warmth and cosmic reach makes Rosalina an ethereal figure, a warm and reassuring character at the center of the Mario universe. Later games in the franchise only underscore those qualities. In 2010’s Super Mario Galaxy 2, Rosalina initially appears as a Cosmic Spirit who aids Mario, particularly when the player dies too many times. Later, she sends support to Baby Mario and tells the Lumas about magical Green Stars.

    Since then, Rosalina has gone the way of most supporting characters in a Mario game, joining in on their racing and sports activities. Players can put Rosalina behind the steering wheel for Mario Kart, they can have her compete for the gold against Sonic the Hedgehog characters in Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games, and she can beat up Solid Snake in Super Smash Bros. Those who want to put Rosalina into more of a traditional adventure can choose her as the player character after unlocking her in Super Mario 3D World.

    Fun as all of these off-shoot games are, they don’t get at the true appeal of the character, established in the two Super Mario Galaxy games. Rosalina represents a cosmic good that lends meaning to the Mario story. Fans love her for both her tragic backstory, and also for the enduring kindness she represents, especially as she meets out that kindness on a galactic scale.

    We only get to see a few glimpses of Rosalina in the trailer for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, but it’s clear that Illumination has translated those elements for the film. Even when she takes down a giant robot created by Bowser Jr., Rosalina does it with simplicity, grace, and a great deal of power. Moviegoers may not know who she is yet, but Rosalina is clearly destined to become a new favorite.

    The Super Mario Galaxy Movie releases April 3, 2026.

    The post The Super Mario Galaxy Movie: Meet Your New Favorite Character Rosalina appeared first on Den of Geek.