Category: Blog

I’d like you to consider this a “yes … and” piece to complement Joe’s post. I’m just trying to contradict what he’s saying, but I’m just trying to give some context to initiatives and opportunities where AI can make a difference for people with disability. To be clear, I’m not saying that there aren’t real challenges or pressing problems with AI that need to be addressed; there are, and we’ve needed to address them, like, yesterday; instead, I want to take a moment to talk about what’s possible so that we can get it one day.

Other words

Joe’s article spends a lot of time addressing computer-vision types ‘ ability to create other words. He raises a number of true points about the state of affairs right now. And while computer-vision concepts continue to improve in the quality and complexity of information in their information, their benefits aren’t wonderful. He argues to be accurate that the state of image research is currently very poor, especially for some image types, in large part due to the lack of context-based analysis that exists in the AI systems ( which is a result of having separate “foundation” models for text analysis and image analysis ). Today’s models aren’t trained to distinguish between images that are contextually relevant ( which should probably have descriptions ) and those that are purely decorative ( which might not even need a description ) either. However, I still think there’s possible in this area.

As Joe points out, human-in-the-loop editing of ctrl text should definitely be a factor. And if AI can intervene and provide a starting point for alt text, even if the rapid reads,” What is this BS?” That’s not correct at all … Let me try to offer a starting point— I think that’s a win.

If we can specifically teach a design to consider image usage in context, it might be able to help us more swiftly distinguish between images that are likely to be beautiful and those that are more descriptive. That will clarify which situations require image descriptions, and it will increase authors ‘ effectiveness in making their sites more visible.

While complex images—like graphs and charts—are challenging to describe in any sort of succinct way ( even for humans ), the image example shared in the GPT4 announcement points to an interesting opportunity as well. Let’s say you came across a map that was simply the name of the table and the type of visualization it was: Pie table comparing smartphone use to have phone use among US households making under$ 30, 000 annually. ( That would be a pretty bad alt text for a chart because it frequently leaves many unanswered questions about the data, but let’s just assume that was the description in place. ) If your website knew that that picture was a pie graph ( because an ship model concluded this ), imagine a world where people could ask questions like these about the creative:

• Perform more people use have telephones or smartphones?
• How many more?
• Is there a group of people that don’t fall into either of these containers?
• How many people are that?

For a moment, the chance to learn more about graphics and data in this way could be innovative for people who are blind and low vision as well as for those with various types of color blindness, cognitive impairments, and other issues. Putting aside the challenges of large language model ( LLM) hallucinations, where a model only makes up plausible-sounding “facts,” It could also be useful in educational contexts to help people who can see these charts, as is, to understand the data in the charts.

What if you could ask your browser to make a complicated chart simpler? What if you demanded that the line graph be isolated into just one line? What if you could ask your browser to transpose the colors of the different lines to work better for form of color blindness you have? What if you demanded that it switch colors in favor of patterns? That seems like a possibility given the chat-based interfaces and our current ability to manipulate images in modern AI tools.

Now imagine a purpose-built model that could extract the information from that chart and convert it to another format. Perhaps it could convert that pie chart (or, better yet, a series of pie charts ) into more usable ( and useful ) formats, like spreadsheets, for instance. That would be incredible!

Matching algorithms

When Safiya Umoja Noble chose to put her book Algorithms of Oppression, she hit the nail on the head. Although her book focused on how search engines can foster racism, I believe it’s equally true that all computer models have the potential to foster conflict, prejudice, and intolerance. Whether it’s Twitter always showing you the latest tweet from a bored billionaire, YouTube sending us into a Q-hole, or Instagram warping our ideas of what natural bodies look like, we know that poorly authored and maintained algorithms are incredibly harmful. Many of these are the result of a lack of diversity in the people who create and build them. There is still a lot of potential for algorithm development when these platforms are built with inclusive features in mind.

Take Mentra, for example. They serve as a network of employment for people who are neurodivers. Based on more than 75 data points, they match job seekers with potential employers using an algorithm. On the job-seeker side of things, it considers each candidate’s strengths, their necessary and preferred workplace accommodations, environmental sensitivities, and so on. On the employer side, it takes into account each work environment, communication issues relating to each job, and other factors. Mentra made the decision to change the script when it came to the typical employment websites because it was run by neurodivergent people. They use their algorithm to propose available candidates to companies, who can then connect with job seekers that they are interested in, reducing the emotional and physical labor on the job-seeker side of things.

More people with disabilities can be used to create algorithms, which can lessen the likelihood that they will harm their communities. Diverse teams are crucial because of this.

Imagine that a social media company’s recommendation engine was tuned to analyze who you’re following and if it was tuned to prioritize follow recommendations for people who talked about similar things but who were different in some key ways from your existing sphere of influence. For instance, if you followed a group of nondisabled white male academics who spoke about AI, it might be advisable to follow those who are disabled, aren’t white, or aren’t men who also speak about AI. If you followed its advice, you might be able to understand what is happening in the AI field more fully and nuancedly. These same systems should also use their understanding of biases about particular communities—including, for instance, the disability community—to make sure that they aren’t recommending any of their users follow accounts that perpetuate biases against (or, worse, spewing hate toward ) those groups.

Other ways that AI can assist people with disabilities

I’m sure I could go on and on about using AI to assist people with disabilities, but I’m going to make this last section into a bit of a lightning round if I weren’t trying to put this together in between other tasks. In no particular order:

Voice preservation You might have heard about the voice-preserve offerings from Microsoft, Acapela, or others, or have seen the VALL-E paper or Apple’s Global Accessibility Awareness Day announcement. It’s possible to train an AI model to replicate your voice, which can be a tremendous boon for people who have ALS ( Lou Gehrig’s disease ) or motor-neuron disease or other medical conditions that can lead to an inability to talk. We need to approach this tech responsibly because it has the potential to have a truly transformative impact, which is why it can also be used to create audio deepfakes.
• voice recognition Researchers like those in the Speech Accessibility Project are paying people with disabilities for their help in collecting recordings of people with atypical speech. As I type, they are currently hiring people with Parkinson’s and related conditions, and they intend to expand this list as the project develops. More people with disabilities will be able to use voice assistants, dictation software, and voice-response services, as well as to use only their voices to control computers and other devices, according to this research.
• Text transformation. The most recent generation of LLMs is capable of altering already-existing text without giving off hallucinations. This is incredibly empowering for those who have cognitive disabilities and who may benefit from text summaries or simplified versions, or even text that has been prepared for Bionic Reading.

The importance of diverse teams and data

Our differences must be acknowledged as important. The intersections of the identities we exist in have an impact on our lived experiences. These lived experiences—with all their complexities ( and joys and pain ) —are valuable inputs to the software, services, and societies that we shape. Our differences must be reflected in the data we use to develop new models, and those who provide that valuable information must be compensated for doing so. More robust models are produced by inclusive data sets, which promote more justifiable outcomes.

Want a model that doesn’t demean or patronize or objectify people with disabilities? Make sure that you include information about disabilities that is written by people who have a range of disabilities and that is well represented in the training data.

Want a model that doesn’t speak in ableist language? You may be able to use existing data sets to build a filter that can intercept and remediate ableist language before it reaches readers. Despite this, AI models won’t be replacing human copy editors anytime soon when it comes to sensitivity reading.

Want a copilot for coding that provides recomprehensible recommendations after the jump? Train it on code that you know to be accessible.

I have no doubts about how dangerous AI can and will be for people today, tomorrow, and for the rest of the world. However, I also think we should acknowledge this and make thoughtful, thoughtful, and intentional changes to our approaches to AI that will reduce harm over time as well. Today, tomorrow, and well into the future.

Many thanks to Kartik Sawhney for supporting the development of this article, Ashley Bischoff for providing me with invaluable editorial support, and of course, Joe Dolson for the prompt.

I have a creative side. Alchemy is what I do. It’s a secret. Instead of letting it get done by me, I do it.

I have a creative side. This brand is never appropriate for all creatives. No everyone sees themselves in this way. Some innovative people practice technology in their work. I honor their assertion, which is true. Perhaps I also have a little bit of fear for them. However, my method is different; my being is unique.

Apologizing and qualifying in progress is a diversion. That’s what my head does to destroy me. I put it off for the moment. I may come back later to make amends and define. After I’ve said what I should have. Which is too difficult.

Except when it flows like a wine valley and is simple.

Sometimes it does. Maybe what I need to make arrives in a flash. I’ve learned to avoid saying it right away because they think you don’t work hard enough when you realize that sometimes the plan just comes along and it is the best plan and you know it is the best idea.

Maybe I work and work and work until the thought strikes me. Maybe it arrives right away, but I don’t remind people for three weeks. Sometimes I blurt out the plan so quickly that I didn’t stop myself. like a child who discovered a prize in one of his Cracker Jacks. I occasionally manage to get away with this. Yes, that is the best plan, per some observers. The majority of the time, they don’t, and I regret that joy has faded.

Joy should be saved for the meeting, where it will matter. not the informal gathering that two different gatherings precede that appointment. Nobody understands why these conferences occur. We keep saying we’re getting rid of them, but we keep discovering new ways to get them. They occasionally yet are good. Sometimes they detract from the real function, though. Depending on what you do and where you do it, the ratio between when conferences are valuable and when they are a sad distraction vary. also who you are and what you do. I’ll go back and forth once more. I have a creative side. That is the design.

Often, a lot of hours of diligent and diligent work ends up with something that is rarely useful. Often I have to accept that and move on to the next task.

Don’t inquire about the procedure. I have a creative side.

I have a creative side. My ambitions are not in my power. And I have no power over my best tips.

I can nail ahead, fill in the blanks, or use images or information, which occasionally works. Often going for a walk is what I can do. There is no connection between sizzling fuel and flowing pots, and I may be making dinner. I frequently have a plan for action when I wake up. The idea that may have saved me disappears almost as frequently as I become aware and a part of the world once more as a senseless wind of oblivion. For imagination, in my opinion, comes from that other planet. The one that we enter in goals, and possibly before and after death. But authors should be asking this, and I am not one of them. I have a creative side. Theologians should circulate mass armies throughout their artistic globe, which they claim to be true. But that is yet another diversion. And it’s miserable. Possibly on a much bigger issue than whether or not I am creative. But that’s not how I came around, though.

Often the result is mitigation. And suffering. Do you know the actor who is tortured by the cliché? Even when the artist attempts to create a soft drink song, a callback in a worn-out sitcom, or a budget request, that noun is accurate.

Some individuals who detest being called artistic perhaps been closeted artists, but that’s between them and their gods. No offence here, that’s meant. Your assertions are also accurate. However, mine is for me.

Designers acknowledge their work.

Disadvantages are aware of cons, just like queers are aware of queers, just like real rappers are aware of actual rappers. People have a lot of regard for designers. We respect, follow, and nearly deify the excellent ones. Of course, it is dreadful to revere any person. We’ve been given a warning. Better is what we are. We are aware that people are simply people. Because they are clay, like us, they squabble, they are depressed, they regret making the most important decisions, they are weak and hungry, they can be cruel, and they can be as ridiculous as we can. But. But. However, they produce this incredible issue. They give birth to something that may not exist before them and couldn’t exist without. They are the inspirations of thought. And since it’s only lying there, I suppose I should add that they are the inventor’s mother. Ba ho backside! That’s done, I suppose. Continue.

Because we compare our personal small accomplishments to those of the great ones, designers denigrate them. Wonderful graphics I‘m not Miyazaki, though. That is glory right then. That is brilliance straight out of the Bible. This unsatisfied small thing I created? It essentially fell off the turnip trailer. And the carrots weren’t actually new.

Artists is aware that they are at best Some. Yet Mozart’s original artists believe that.

I have a creative side. I haven’t worked in advertising in 30 years, but my previous artistic managers have been the ones who make my decisions. They are correct to do that. When it really counts, my brain goes flat because I am too lazy and simplistic. There is no treatment for artistic mania.

I have a creative side. Every project I create has a goal that makes Indiana Jones appear to be a retiree snoring in a balcony head. The more I pursue creativity, the faster I can finish my work, and the longer I brood and circle and gaze aimlessly before I can finish that work.

I can move ten times more quickly than those who aren’t innovative, those who have only had a short-cut of creativity, and those who have just had a short-cut of creativity for work. Only that I work twice as quickly as they do, putting the work out, just before I do it, When I put my mind to it, I am so confident in my ability to do a wonderful career. I have an addiction to the delay jump. The leap also terrifies me.

I am hardly a painter.

I have a creative side. never a musician. Though as a child, I had a dream that I would one day become that. Some of us criticize our abilities and fear our own selves because we are not Michelangelos and Warhols. That is narcissism, but at least we aren’t in elections.

I have a creative side. Despite my belief in reason and science, my decisions are based on my own senses. And bear witness to what comes next, both the successes and the disasters.

I have a creative side. Every term I’ve said these may irritate another artists who have different viewpoints. Ask a question to two artists, and three thoughts will be formed. No matter how we does think about it, our debate, our passion for it, and our responsibility to our own truth, at least in my opinion, are the best indications that we are creative.

I have a creative side. I lament my lack of taste in the areas of human knowledge that I know quite small, that is to say about everything. And I put my taste before all other things in the areas that are most dear to my soul, or perhaps more precisely, to my passions. Without my passions, I had probably have to spend time staring living in the eye, which almost none of us can do for very long. No seriously. No actually. Because a lot of career is intolerable if you really look at it.

I have a creative side. I think that when I leave, a small portion of me will stay in someone else’s head, just like a parent does.

Working frees me from worrying about my job.

I have a creative side. I fear that my little product will disappear without warning.

I have a creative side. I’m too busy making the next thing to devote too much time to it, especially since practically everything I create did achieve the level of success I conceive of.

I have a creative side. I think method is the most amazing mystery. I think it is so important that I’m actually foolish enough to publish an essay I wrote into a small machine without having to go through or edit it. I swear I didn’t do this frequently. But I did it right away because I was even more scared of forgetting what I was saying because I was as worried as I might be of you seeing through my sad gestures toward the gorgeous.

There. I believe I’ve said it.

I’ve been fascinated by shows since I was a child. I loved the heroes and the excitement—but most of all the stories. I aspired to be an artist. And I believed that I’d get to do the things that Indiana Jones did and go on exciting activities. Yet my friends and I had movie ideas to make and sun in. But they never went any farther. However, I did end up working in user experience ( UI). Today, I realize that there’s an element of drama to UX— I hadn’t actually considered it before, but consumer research is story. And you must show a compelling story to entice stakeholders, such as the product team and decision-makers, to learn more in order to get the most out of consumer research.

Think of your favorite film. It probably follows a three-act narrative architecture: the layout, the conflict, and the resolution, which is prevalent in literature. The second act shows what exists now, and it helps you get to know the figures and the challenges and problems that they face. Act two sets the scene for the fight and the action begins. Here, difficulties grow or get worse. The solution comes in the third and final work. This is where the issues are resolved and the figures learn and change. This structure, in my opinion, is also a fantastic way to think about customer research, and it might be particularly useful for explaining user research to others.

Use story as a framework when conducting analysis.

It’s sad to say, but many have come to view studies as being inconsequential. Research is frequently one of the first things to go when expenses or deadlines are tight. Instead of investing in study, some goods professionals rely on manufacturers or—worse—their personal judgment to make the “right” options for users based on their experience or accepted best practices. That may lead some groups, but that approach can so easily miss the chance to solve clients ‘ real issues. To be user-centered, this is something we really avoid. User study improves style. It keeps it on trail, pointing to problems and opportunities. Being aware of the problems with your goods and taking action can help you be ahead of your competition.

In the three-act structure, each action corresponds to a part of the process, and each part is important to telling the whole story. Let’s examine the various functions and how they relate to customer study.

Act one: installation

The basic study comes in handy because the layout is all about understanding the background. Basic research ( also called conceptual, discovery, or original research ) helps you understand people and identify their problems. You’re learning about the problems people face now, what options are available, and how those challenges impact them, just like in the films. To do basic research, you may conduct situational inquiries or journal studies ( or both! ), which may assist you in identifying both prospects and problems. It doesn’t need to get a great investment in time or money.

Erika Hall writes about the most effective anthropology, which can be as straightforward as spending 15 hours with a customer and asking them to” Walk me through your morning yesterday.” That’s it. Provide that one ask. Opened up and listen to them for 15 days. Do everything in your power to protect both your objectives and yourself. Bam, you’re doing ethnography”. According to Hall, “[This ] will definitely prove quite fascinating. In the very unlikely event that you didn’t learn anything new or helpful, carry on with increased confidence in your way”.

I think this makes sense. And I love that this makes consumer studies so visible. You can only attract participants and do it! You don’t need to make a lot of documentation. This can offer a wealth of knowledge about your customers, and it’ll help you better understand them and what’s going on in their life. That’s exactly what work one is all about: understanding where people are coming from.

Maybe Spool talks about the importance of basic research and how it may type the bulk of your research. If you can supplement what you’ve heard in the fundamental studies by using any more user data that you can obtain, such as surveys or analytics, or if you can identify areas that need more investigation. Together, all this information creates a clearer picture of the state of things and all its deficiencies. And that’s the start of a gripping tale. It’s the place in the story where you realize that the principal characters—or the people in this case—are facing issues that they need to conquer. This is where you begin to develop compassion for the figures and support their success, much like in the movies. And finally participants are now doing the same. Their concern may be with their company, which may be losing money because people are unable to complete specific tasks. Or probably they do connect with people ‘ problems. In any case, action one serves as your main strategy to pique the interest and interest of the participants.

When partners begin to understand the value of basic research, that is open doors to more opportunities that involve users in the decision-making approach. And that can help goods team become more user-centric. This gains everyone—users, the goods, and partners. It’s similar to winning an Oscar in terms of filmmaking because it frequently results in your goods receiving good reviews and success. And this can be an opportunity for participants to repeat this process with different products. The secret to this approach is storytelling, and knowing how to tell a compelling story is the only way to entice partners to do more research.

This brings us to work two, where you incrementally examine a design or idea to see whether it addresses the problems.

Act two: fight

Act two is all about digging deeper into the issues that you identified in operate one. In order to evaluate a potential alternative ( such as a design ), you typically conduct vertical research, such as usability tests, to see if it addresses the problems you identified. The issues may include unfulfilled needs or problems with a circulation or procedure that’s tripping users off. More problems will come up in the process, much like in the second action of a film. It’s here that you learn more about the figures as they grow and develop through this work.

Usability tests should generally consist of five participants, according to Jakob Nielsen, who found that that number of users can usually identify the majority of the issues:” As you add more and more users, you learn less and less because you will keep seeing the same things again and again… After the second user, you are wasting your time by observing the same findings regularly but hardly learning much new.”

There are parallels with storytelling here too, if you try to tell a story with too many characters, the plot may get lost. With fewer participants, each user’s struggles will be more easily recalled and shared with other parties when discussing the research. This can help convey the issues that need to be addressed while also highlighting the value of doing the research in the first place.

Usability tests have been conducted in person for decades, but you can also conduct them remotely using software like Microsoft Teams, Zoom, or other teleconferencing software. This approach has become increasingly popular since the beginning of the pandemic, and it works well. You might consider in-person usability tests like attending a play and remote sessions as more of a movie watching experience. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Much more in-depth research is conducted on user experience. Stakeholders can experience the sessions with other stakeholders. Additionally, you’ll also hear their reactions in real-time, including surprises, disagreements, and discussions of what they’re seeing. Much like going to a play, where audiences get to take in the stage, the costumes, the lighting, and the actors ‘ interactions, in-person research lets you see users up close, including their body language, how they interact with the moderator, and how the scene is set up.

If conducting usability testing in the field is like watching a play that is staged and controlled, where any two sessions may be very different from one another. You can take usability testing into the field by creating a replica of the space where users interact with the product and then conduct your research there. Or you can meet users at their location to conduct your research. With either option, you get to see how things work in context, things come up that wouldn’t have in a lab environment—and conversion can shift in entirely different directions. You have less control over how these sessions end as researchers, but this can occasionally help you understand users even better. Meeting users where they are can provide clues to the external forces that could be affecting how they use your product. Usability tests in person offer a level of detail that is frequently absent from remote testing.

That’s not to say that the “movies” —remote sessions—aren’t a good option. A wider audience can be reached through remote sessions. They allow a lot more stakeholders to be involved in the research and to see what’s going on. Additionally, they make access to a much wider user base geographically. But with any remote session there is the potential of time wasted if participants can’t log in or get their microphone working.

The advantage of usability testing, whether conducted remotely or in person, is that you can ask real users questions to understand their reasoning and understanding of the problem. This can help you not only identify problems but also glean why they’re problems in the first place. Additionally, you can test your own hypotheses and determine whether your reasoning is correct. By the end of the sessions, you’ll have a much clearer picture of how usable the designs are and whether they work for their intended purposes. The excitement centers on Act 2, but there are also potential surprises in that Act. This is equally true of usability tests. Unexpected things that are said by participants frequently alter how you view things, and these unexpected developments in the story can lead to unexpected turns in your perception.

Unfortunately, user research is sometimes seen as expendable. Usability testing is often the only method of research that some stakeholders believe they ever need, especially in this regard. In fact, if the designs that you’re evaluating in the usability test aren’t grounded in a solid understanding of your users ( foundational research ), there’s not much to be gained by doing usability testing in the first place. Because you narrow down the subject matter of your feedback without understanding the needs of the users. As a result, there’s no way of knowing whether the designs might solve a problem that users have. In the context of a usability test, it’s only feedback on a particular design.

On the other hand, if you only do foundational research, while you might have set out to solve the right problem, you won’t know whether the thing that you’re building will actually solve that. This demonstrates the value of conducting both directional and foundational research.

In act two, stakeholders will—hopefully—get to watch the story unfold in the user sessions, which creates the conflict and tension in the current design by surfacing their highs and lows. And in turn, this can encourage stakeholders to take action on the issues raised.

Act three: resolution

The third act is about resolving the issues from the first two acts, while the first two acts are about understanding the background and the tensions that can compel stakeholders to take action. While it’s important to have an audience for the first two acts, it’s crucial that they stick around for the final act. That includes all members of the product team, including developers, UX experts, business analysts, delivery managers, product managers, and any other parties who have a say in the coming development. It allows the whole team to hear users ‘ feedback together, ask questions, and discuss what’s possible within the project’s constraints. And it gives the UX design and research teams more time to clarify, suggest alternatives, or provide more context for their choices. So you can get everyone on the same page and get agreement on the way forward.

Voiceover narration of this act is typically used with audience input. The researcher is the narrator, who paints a picture of the issues and what the future of the product could look like given the things that the team has learned. They offer the stakeholders their suggestions and suggestions for how to create this vision.

Nancy Duarte in the Harvard Business Review offers an approach to structuring presentations that follow a persuasive story. The most effective presenters” set up a conflict that needs to be resolved” using the same methods as great storytellers, Duarte writes. ” That tension helps them persuade the audience to adopt a new mindset or behave differently”.

This type of structure aligns well with research results, and particularly results from usability tests. It provides proof for “what is “—the issues you’ve identified. And “what could be “—your recommendations on how to address them. And so forth.

You can reinforce your recommendations with examples of things that competitors are doing that could address these issues or with examples where competitors are gaining an edge. Or they can be as visual as quick sketches of a potential solution to a problem. These can help generate conversation and momentum. And this continues until the session is over when you’ve concluded by bridging the gaps and offering suggestions for improvement. This is the part where you reiterate the main themes or problems and what they mean for the product—the denouement of the story. This stage provides stakeholders with the next steps, and hopefully, the motivation to take those steps as well!

While we are nearly at the end of this story, let’s reflect on the idea that user research is storytelling. The three-act structure of user research contains all the components for a good story:

Act one: You meet the protagonists ( the users ) and the antagonists ( the problems affecting users ). This is the plot’s beginning. In act one, researchers might use methods including contextual inquiry, ethnography, diary studies, surveys, and analytics. These techniques can produce personas, empathy maps, user journeys, and analytics dashboards.

Act two: Next, there’s character development. The protagonists face problems and difficulties, which they must overcome, and there is conflict and tension. In act two, researchers might use methods including usability testing, competitive benchmarking, and heuristics evaluation. Usability findings reports, UX strategy documents, usability guidelines, and best practices can be included in the output of these.

Act three: The protagonists triumph and you see what a better future looks like. Researchers may use techniques like presentation decks, storytelling, and digital media in act three. The output of these can be: presentation decks, video clips, audio clips, and pictures.

The researcher plays a variety of roles, including producer, director, and storyteller. The participants have a small role, but they are significant characters ( in the research ). And the audience is one of the stakeholders. But the most important thing is to get the story right and to use storytelling to tell users ‘ stories through research. In the end, the parties should leave with a goal and an eagerness to fix the product’s flaws.

So the next time that you’re planning research with clients or you’re speaking to stakeholders about research that you’ve done, think about how you can weave in some storytelling. In the end, user research is beneficial to everyone, and all parties must be interested in the conclusion.

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.

I’ve lost count of the times when promising ideas go from being useless in a few months to being useless after working as a solution designer for too long to notice.

Financial items, which is the area of my specialization, are no exception. It’s tempting to put as many features at the ceiling as possible and expect something sticks because people’s true, hard-earned money is on the line, user expectations are high, and crowded market. However, this strategy is a formula for disaster. Why, you see this:

The perils of feature-first growth

It’s simple to get swept up in the enthusiasm of developing innovative features when you start developing a financial product from scratch or are migrating existing client journeys from paper or phone channels to online bank or mobile apps. They may think,” If I may only add one more thing that solves this particular person problem, they’ll enjoy me”! What happens, however, when you eventually encounter a roadblock caused by your security team? not like it? When a difficult-fought film fails to win over viewers or fails due to unanticipated difficulty?

The concept of Minimum Viable Product ( MVP ) is applied to this. Even if Jason Fried doesn’t usually refer to this concept, his book Getting Real and his audio Redo frequently discuss it. An MVP is a product that offers only enough significance to your users to keep them interested without becoming too hard or frustrating to use. Although the idea seems simple, it requires a razor-sharp eye, a ruthless edge, and the courage to stand up for your position because it is easy to fall for” the Columbo Effect” when there is always” just one more thing …” to add.

The issue with most fund apps is that they frequently turn out to be reflections of the company’s internal politics rather than an experience created exclusively for the customer. This implies that the priority should be given to delivering as many features and functionalities as possible in order to satisfy the requirements and wishes of competing internal departments as opposed to crafting a compelling value statement that is focused on what people in the real world actually want. These products may therefore quickly become a muddled mess of confusing, related, and finally unlovable client experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

The significance of the foundation

What is a better strategy, then? How may we create products that are user-friendly, firm, and, most importantly, stick?

The concept of “bedrock” comes into play here. The mainstay of your product is really important to consumers, and Bedrock is that. It’s the fundamental building block that creates benefit and maintains relevance over time.

The rock has got to be in and around the standard cleaning journeys in the world of retail bank, which is where I work. Individuals only look at their existing account once every five minutes, but they also look at it daily. They sign up for a credit card every year or two, but they check their balance and pay their bill at least once a quarter.

The key is in identifying the main tasks that individuals want to complete and therefore persistently striving to make them simple, reliable, and trustworthy.

But how do you reach the foundation? By focusing on the” MVP” strategy, giving convenience precedence, and working incrementally toward a clear value proposition. This means avoiding pointless extras and putting your people first, making the most of them.

It even requires having some nerve, as your coworkers might not always agree with you immediately. And dubiously, occasionally it can even suggest making it clear to customers that you won’t be coming to their house and making their breakfast. Sometimes you may need to use the sporadic “opinionated user interface design” ( i .e. clunky workaround for edge cases ) to test a concept or to give yourself some room to work on something more crucial stuff.

Functional methods for creating financially successful items

What are the main learnings I’ve made from my own research and expertise?

1. What trouble are you trying to solve first and foremost with a distinct “why”? For whom? Before beginning any project, make sure your goal is completely clear. Make certain it also aligns with the goals of your business.
2. Avoid putting too many features on the list at after; instead, focus on getting that right first. Choose one that actually adds benefit, and work from that.
3. When it comes to financial items, clarity is often over richness. Eliminate unwanted details and concentrate solely on what matters most.
4. Accept constant iteration: Bedrock is not a fixed destination; it is a dynamic process. Continuously collect customer opinions, make product improvements, and advance in that direction.
5. Stop, glance, and listen: You must test your product frequently in the field rather than just as part of the shipping process. Use it for yourself. Move the A/B testing. User comments on Gear. Speak to users and make adjustments accordingly.

The core dilemma

This is an intriguing conundrum: sacrificing some of the potential for short-term progress in favor of long-term stability is at play. But the return is worthwhile: products built with a focus on rock will outlive and surpass their rivals over time and provide users with long-term value.

How do you begin your quest for rock, then? Take it slowly. Start by identifying the underlying factors that your customers actually care about. Focus on developing and improving a second, potent have that delivers real value. And most importantly, make an obsessive effort because, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, Alan Kay, or Peter Drucker ( whew! The best way to foretell the future is to make it, he said.

International active film translation in English is a difficult path to move across. When done properly, it can make a house enduring in the minds of video fans. When done incorrectly, it is always a meme and, in today’s tech-savvy times, it goes down in disgrace. [Ne Zha as a narrative and]…

The article Ne Zha 2 and the Secret of Making a Great Dub for Anime and Donghua appeared first on Den of Geek.

KPop Demon Hunters, a musical action-musical animated feast from Netflix and Sony Animation, has rapidly grown to be a global social phenomenon. Interestingly, I noticed a young woman wearing a Huntr/x clothing while a man raved about how much he and his companion enjoyed the movie when I went to the top of the Empire State Building with some buddies this past weekend. Part of the movie &#8217, s cross-generational appeal lies within the song, which has become so popular that some beat are now real-life chart-topping visits. It&#8217 ;s broken records on Spotify and Billboard, with Huntr/x becoming the first female group to top the Billboard Hot 100 since Destiny &#8217, s Child. S CHILD, STINY, AND MORE! !

Without even mentioning the Oscar debate, this film is poised to invade the GRAMMY prize season. See as Ejae, Rumi, and the other people on Huntr/x reach their full potential earlier in the year as a result of their singing voices. And Ejae may, because she and a bunch of different great musicians and artists made the song of the summers, one which got a lot of people in the West engaged in K-pop and made them love the movie yet more. The sing-along type is currently playing in theaters this weekend, where it quite likely will surpass any other dramatic originals opening in the same frame, making the social phenomenon unlikely to end anytime soon.

But in time for the sing-along, this mark that Honmoon with all the music from Kpop Demon Hunters ranked. And to ensure that this ranking was fair, I omitted Twice’s” Strategy” from the list because it’s already a pre-existing song and the” Love Maybe” song cue ( though it’s a funny easter egg to Jinu voice actor Ahn Hyo Seop’s K-drama Business Proposal ). &nbsp,

9. ” Score Suite” ( Marcelo Zarvos )

A score suite is required for each song, and Marcelo Zarvos ‘ KPDH successfully stokes the epic music. It has a great atmosphere as you delve into the world &#8217, s mythic legend between beast hunting and the music artists who protect the surface earth. Lea Salonga, by contrast, is also missing one crucial element that makes this hotel truly stand out: the typical music.

One of Broadway’s finest vocalists always, Celine, sings in the movie for like a minute, but she doesn’t even make the soundtrack. Likewise this hotel, which is separated from the rest of the picture, is a sufficient sequencing of Salonga’s famous skill. Additionally, it is comparable to many additional fantasy scores. &nbsp,

8. Takedown &#8221 ( Twice version: Jeongyeon, Jihyo, and Chaeyoung ) &nbsp,

Key members of the fictional K-pop experience group Double: Jeongyeon, Jihyo, and Chaeyoung sing this conclusion credits diss record. And they do so the style of Disney, which famously would outsource rising pop stars back in the day to sing more radio-friendly covers of their original movies ‘ biggest songs. Still,” Takedown” is just a banger in its own right, dedicating itself to the proper investigation and evoking a fantastic commercialized version of the song. Additionally, it highlights all of the vocalists ‘ distinctive voices.

7. Takedown &#8221, ( Huntr/x ), &#8220,

Before KPop, I was persuaded that Kendrick Lamar had won the title of the greatest diss track ever with &#8220. ” Then” Takedown “arrived to… well, not steal it from him, but get close to his level. This” Takedown” rendition of the song, in contrast to the Twice version, is a fun illustration of why Huntr/x are such a fun K-pop band and skilled demon hunters.

It’s genuinely funny to see how their music includes battling evildoers. I love the bit where Mira is knocking around a demon and it bounces rhythmically. Then, shouting,” That’s the beat!”, she becomes inspired. It’s a great example of how their responsibilities as musical artists and demon hunters go hand in hand, and juxtaposing both in a standout pissing contest montage with the Saja Boys is a comedic delight as well. &nbsp,

6. Soda Pop” ( Saja Boys ) &nbsp,

Putting” Soda Pop” so low on the list hurts because it &#8217, s been the song I can’t stop playing this summer. It’s infectious, as Mira says during their opening scene. The Saja Boys, the demon boy band, surprises, charms, and captivates their own small fan base with a fantastic musical entrance song. Also, it is a clever double entendre, as this seemingly sweet bubblegum pop song, which compares a lover to a soda pop, is merely an allegory for these demon boys who wish to SUCK THEIR SOULS.

Heck, the first ten times I played it, I didn’t even notice. Although I do believe it to be an earworm, it is egregiously short. Despite the harmonizing vocals of Andrew Choi, Neckwav, Danny Chung, Kevin Woo, and SamUIL Lee reaching chillingly high levels of serotonin, the song is devoid of a bridge. My issues with” Soda Pop” are also exemplified by the film itself, as I keep clamoring for MORE! I need more films. ” Just like that, I also need more” Soda Pop. ” Oh well, get back to the fan art until the official sequel announcement is made. &nbsp,

5″. Free “( Ejae as Rumi, Andrew Choi as Jinu),”

Rumi and Jinu’s stunning R&amp, B duet encapsulates both their romantic tension and their viewpoints on one another, their identities, and their backgrounds. I can only imagine that this song will become the new karaoke for every annoying couple you know. A strong song that sounds like a fresh take on Alan Menken love themes like” A Whole New World” and” I See the Light” was written by songwriters Jenna Andrews, Stephen Kirk, and Mark Sonnenblick. The fact that both parties are able to see one another beyond their respective traumas, which makes the romantic climax ( Jinu has to abandon his family, and Rumi must make herself known ), is what drives this particular episode’s success. &nbsp,

It has even greater thematic significance than the other aforementioned songs because of the complexity of their characters and the lyricism that exemplifies them. Did I just say that Free &#8221 is superior to Free &#8220, A Whole New World? &#8221, Well, I am listening to it more than I had ever done with that Aladdin track. &nbsp,

4. What It Sounds Like&#8221, ( Huntr/x ) &nbsp,

The film’s final product of Rumi&#8217, his self-discovery, and the only four-minute song in the entire scene. Rumi is at a pivotal moment as she embraces her true self. An epic, heart-pounding action song that brings the girls together, it is a showstopping last stand. It is a powerful motivational track that inspires people to face the evil of the world without any justifications. In fact, I’ve been practicing this song for a while, and it has a positive effect on my mood. The girls &#8217, voices unite as one, and the drums accelerate, culminating in a high-energy finale. It only sends chills, man. &nbsp,

3. ” Golden&#8221, ( Huntr/x ),”

Golden may have been the summer’s song, but it’s not the best in the movie. I know, crazy. I believe you understand why; it’s mostly a Rumi song, with Zoey and Mira each having about one line each. When the other girls are sidelined for the majority of the second act, it also serves as an example of my issues with the overall movie. I promise you I adore this movie overall. No more hiding, &#8221, as Rumi sings. I’m living my truth, and I’m… Anyway”, Golden “is still a banger. &nbsp,

The entire world is aware of this now, as it continues to do so in the charts and in the Oscar discussions. It is an exceptional celebration and underscores the brilliance of Rumi singing voice and co-songwriter Ejae, who was previously told she was” too old” to become a K-pop idol. Ejae has since established herself as a remarkable songwriter and vocalist with a range that makes you want to cry. Similar to Rumi, the story follows an underdog artist who finds her niche in the world. This resonates with everyone, which is a golden testament to the song &#8217, s excellence.

2. The song” Your Idol” ( Saja Boys ) is a slang expression.

The hypnotic siren song of Saja Boys, which captivates an entire crowd and draws them into their demise, is as addictive as Gwi-Ma’s hellfire. The visual spectacle, the pounding drumbeats, the insane demon-like choreography, the Sajas being hotter in their demon form, and it &#8217 are all too good. One of the best and most memorable villain songs and musical numbers ever recorded, right up there with Scar’s” Be Prepared,”” In The Lion King,” and” Big And Loud &#8211, Pt. 2 “in Cats Don&#8217, t Dance. You speculate, in part, that Gwi-Ma&#8217, their ever-increasing power, and their captivating song will help the Sajas win.

Time be honest, I would consume them, and you would know that they could as well as the vocals would consume me as the rhythm intensified. It’s an unsettling earworm that seeps under your skin and catches you by its spell. &nbsp,

1. &nbsp”, How It’s Done” ( Huntr/x )

Imagine this in your head. You’re watching a movie at the Netflix-owned Paris Theater a month before the marketing even kicks off. You have no idea it’s a musical. You go” Oh!” when the Huntr/x sings their intro song following their adorable fan introduction. This is going to be fantastic! &#8221, Then you proceed to have the best time of your life. Nothing will stop me from feeling the same way about the instant adrenaline rush from” How It’s Done,” and I bet you do as well. &nbsp,

” How It’s Done” is a fantastic mood-setter that firmly establishes the enjoyable experience you &#8217, ll have while watching KPDH. Each girl exhibits her distinct qualities and abilities in perfect harmony with” Golden” and” How It Sounds Like,” with the exception of Rumi, who can sing high notes and Zoey is the lyricist and rapper, Mira, the dancer and visual artist, and the vocalist who can hit high notes. With the mere sight of their leads kicking demon ass in a Spider-Verse-esque kinetic frenzy, falling with style from a destroyed private jet to the stage, slaying demons, and singing in front of their thousands of fans, Maggie Kang and Chris Appelhans ‘ talented artists and the direction of their stars will captivate you and leave you in awe.

This is undoubtedly one of the most imaginative animated sequences in recent years and a raw character introduction that will instantly convert you to a Huntr/x fan.

The first post on Den of Geek was K-Pop Demon Hunters Soundtrack Songs Ranked: From Catchy to Golden.

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, which stars Terence Stamp as the mourning trans Bernadette Bassenger, is even more important, moving, beautiful, interesting, and nasty than when it first rolled over the property down under on discharge in 1994. Writer/director Stephan Elliott’s now-cult classic should be studied for its performances, social commentary, and expert indulgence ]… ]

The first article on Den of Geek was titled Remembering Terence Stamp’s Most Underappreciated Performance.

KPop Demon Hunters, a musical action-musical animated feast from Netflix and Sony Animation, has rapidly grown to be a worldwide social standard. Interestingly, when I went to the top of the Empire State Building with some buddies this past weekend, I noticed a younger woman wearing a Huntr/x clothing while a person gushed about how much he and his companion enjoyed the film. The song, which has become so well-known that some beat are then real-life chart-topping hits, plays a key role in the movie&#8217, s cross-generational charm. Huntr/x became the first girl group to top the Billboard Hot 100 since Destiny &#8217, s Child, breaking information on Spotify and Billboard. DESTINY&#8217, S CHILD!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Never mind the Oscar communicate, this movie is poised to invade the GRAMMY honor season. Just observe as Ejae, Rumi&#8217, s singing words, and the other women who work on Huntr/x find way to their EGOT possible early next year. And Ejae ought to because she and a number of other outstanding artists and composers created the summer’s song, which piqued the interest of many people in the West and made them adore the film even more. The sing-along type is currently playing in theaters this weekend, which is very likely to put it on par with any other musical originals that come out in the same frame.

This finish Honmoon with all the music from K-pop Demon Hunters just in time for the singalong. And because it’s now a pre-existing song, I made the” Like Probably” song cue a “funny spring egg to Jinu voice actor Ahn Hyo Seop’s K-drama Business Proposal” and Twice’s” System” to make sure this position was good. &nbsp,

9. ( Marcelo Zarvos )” Score Suite”

Each music necessitates a rating suite, and Marcelo Zarvos ‘ KPDH successfully ignites the incredible rhythm. As you delve into the world’s mythical legend between monster hunters and the music artists who guard the surface world, it has a great atmosphere. Lea Salonga, by contrast, is also missing one crucial feature that makes this suite actually stand out: the typical soundtrack.

One of Broadway &#8217, s finest singers ever is the singing voice of Celine, gets like a minute to speak in the film, but she doesn’t even look on the music. In contrast, this set, which is kept separate from the rest of the movie, provides a respectable example of Salonga’s famous talent. Additionally, it is equivalent to a lot of different dream scores. &nbsp,

8. &#8220, Takedown &#8221, ( Twice version: Jeongyeon, Jihyo, and Chaeyoung ) &nbsp,

This conclusion credits trash track is sung by vital members of the real-life K-pop experience group Double: Jeongyeon, Jihyo and Chaeyoung. And they do it in the same way as Disney, which infamously would later hire up-and-coming pop stars to perform more radio-friendly covers of the songs from their original films. Even so,” Takedown” is a banger in its own right, doing the due diligence and bringing up a fantastic commercialized version of the song. It also highlights all the vocalists &#8217, signature voices.

7. Takedown &#8221, ( Huntr/x ), &#8220,

Before KPop, I was convinced Kendrick Lamar had secured the title of &#8220, best diss track ever. Takedown then “arrived to… well, not steal it from him, but get close to his level.” This” Takedown” rendition of the song, in contrast to the Twice version, is a fun illustration of why Huntr/x are such a fun K-pop band and skilled demon hunters.

It’s genuinely funny seeing how their music process involves battling minions of the underworld. I adore the scene where Mira is knocking around a demon and howls in rhythmically. Then she becomes inspired by the song” That&#8217, s the beat! ” It’s a great reminder as to why their duty as demon hunters and musical artists go hand-in-hand, juxtaposing both qualities against an exceptional pissing contest montage with the Saja Boys is a comedic delight as well. &nbsp,

6. Soda Pop” ( Saja Boys ) &nbsp,

Because I can’t stop playing the song” Soda Pop” this summer, putting it so low on the list hurts. It’s infectious, Mira says during the opening scene of the film. ” The demon boy band&nbsp, Saja Boys, surprises, charms, and captures their own small fanbase with a fantastic musical entrance song. This seemingly sweet bubblegum pop song, which treats a lover to a soda pop, serves only as an allegory for these demon boys who want to SUCK THEIR SOULS, which is also a clever double entendre.

Heck, the first 10 times I played it, I didn’t even catch it. While I do think it’s an earworm, it’s egregiously short. The song lacks a bridge despite the harmonizing vocals of Neckwav, Neckwav, Danny Chung, Kevin Woo, and SamUIL Lee, who all have incredibly high levels of serotonin. My criticism of” Soda Pop” is also a reflection of the film itself, as I continue to demand more! I need more movie! I also need more Soda Pop, just like that. ” Oh well, get back to the fan art until the official sequel announcement is made. &nbsp,

5″. Free “( Ejae as Rumi, Andrew Choi as Jinu),”

The beautiful R&amp, B song that Rumi and Jinu perform is a duet that not only encapsulates their romantic tension but also their perspectives on each other, their identities, and their backgrounds. I have no idea what this song will become for every obnoxious couple you know. A strong song that sounds like a fresh take on Alan Menken love themes like” A Whole New World” and” I See the Light” was written by songwriters Jenna Andrews, Stephen Kirk, and Mark Sonnenblick. ” This time, the romantic climax is derived from the fact that both parties are able to see each other beyond their respective traumas ( Jinu suffers from abandoning his family, and Rumi is compelled to conceal her demon identity ). &nbsp,

It has even greater thematic significance than the other aforementioned songs because of the complexity of their characters and the lyricism that exemplifies them. Wow, did I just say &#8220, Free&#8221, is better than &#8220, A Whole New World? Well, I’m listening to it more than I’ve ever done that Aladdin track. &nbsp,

4″. What It Sounds Like&#8221, ( Huntr/x )&nbsp

The film’s final four-minute song, Rumi’s self-discovery, and the epic culmination of his. It is a significant moment for Rumi as she embraces her full half-demon identity. It is a showstopping last stand that is an epic, heart-pounding action song that connects the girls. It is a powerful motivational track that inspires people to face the evil of the world without any justifications. In fact, I have been exercising to this song, and it has a positive impact on my mood. The girls &#8217, the voices ring out as one, and the drums sway, leading to a high-energy conclusion. Man, it sends nothing but chills. &nbsp,

3. ” Golden&#8221, ( Huntr/x ),

” Golden “may have proven to be the song of the summer, but it’s not the best song in the film. I am aware of this crazy. You may be aware of this because it’s mostly a Rumi song, with Zoey and Mira each having about one line each. It’s also emblematic of my issues with the overall film when the other girls are sidelined for much of the second act. I’ll promise you, overall, I adore this film. No more hiding, &#8221, as Rumi sings. I&#8217, m living my truth…. Anyhow, Golden is still a hit. &nbsp,

The whole world knows this by now, as it keeps &#8220, going up up up &#8221, in the charts and the Oscar talks. It is a unique celebration that highlights the talent of co-songwriter Ejae and singer-songwriter Rumi, who was previously told that she was” too old” to become a K-pop idol. Ejae has since established herself as an exceptional performer with a vocal range that makes you want to cry, and as a remarkable songwriter, as shown by this. Similar to Rumi, it is a story of an underdog artist who thrives and discovers her place in the world. This is a powerful illustration of the excellence of the song’s excellence because it resonates with everyone.

2. &nbsp”, Your Idol” ( Saja Boys )

The hypnotic siren song of the Saja Boys captivates a whole audience and leads them to their demise. Gwi-Ma’s hellfire is equally addictive. The visual spectacle, the pounding drumbeats, the insane demon-like choreography, the Sajas being hotter in their demon form, and it &#8217 are all too good. Truly, and this is coming from the soul, &#8220, Your Idol&#8221, is one of the best and catchiest villain songs and musical numbers ever recorded, right up there with Scar’s” Be Prepared “in The Lion King and” Big And Loud &#8211, Pt. 2 “in Cats Don’t Dance,” You have a sneaky idea that Gwi-Ma&#8217, their ever-increasing power, and their captivating song will make the Sajas prevail.

Time be honest: they would consume me, and you know they can consume you too as the rhythm gets more intense and so do the vocals. It’s a disturbing earworm that penetrates under your skin and casts a spell on you. &nbsp,

1.  ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Imagine this in a way that is hypothetical. You’re in the Netflix-owned Paris Theater, watching a movie a month before the marketing even begins. You are unaware that it is a musical. Then, you go, Oh! when the Huntr/x sings their intro song following their adorable fan introduction. this is going to be a blast! Then you move on to the most wonderful time of your life. Nothing will ever make me forget the sudden rush of adrenaline that comes out of” How It’s Done,” and I bet you will experience the same reaction. &nbsp,

The fantastic mood-setter” How It’s Done” establishes the enjoyable experience you’ll have while watching KPDH. Each girl exhibits her unique qualities and abilities in perfect equivalence, in contrast to” Golden” or” How It Sounds Like,” where Zoey is the lyricist and rapper, Mira is the dancer and visual artist, and Rumi is the vocalist who can hit high notes. The talented artists and the direction of Maggie Kang and Chris Appelhans will captivate you and leave you in awe with the mere sight of their leads kicking demon ass in a Spider-Verse-esque kinetic frenzy, falling with style from a destroyed private jet to the stage, slaying demons, and singing in front of their thousands of fans.

Unquestionably one of the most creative animated sequences in recent years, and it features a raw character introduction that will convert you right away to a fan of Huntr/x.

The first post KPop Demon Hunters Soundtrack Songs Ranked: From Catchy to Golden was a result of Den of Geek.

Across the country this weekend, the following refrain echoed between movie theaters: “I’m done hidin’, now I’m shinin’, like I’m born to be.” Those words, sung by the trio Huntr/x, come from the Korean animated film KPop Demon Hunters, whose theatrical opening weekend earned approximately $18 million dollars at the North American box office, taking […]

The post Netflix Should Embrace Having the Number One Movie at the Box Office appeared first on Den of Geek.

Netflix and Sony Animation’s action-musical animated extravaganza, KPop Demon Hunters, has quickly become a global cultural phenomenon. Anecdotally, when I went to the top of the Empire State Building with some friends this past weekend, I noticed a young girl wearing a Huntr/x shirt while a stranger gushed about how much he and his friend enjoyed the film. Part of the film’s cross-generational appeal lies within the music, which has become so popular that several beats are now real-life chart-topping hits. It’s broken records on Spotify and Billboard, with Huntr/x becoming the first girl group to reach #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 since Destiny’s Child. DESTINY’S CHILD!!!

This is a movie poised to infiltrate the GRAMMY award season, never mind the Oscar talk. Just watch as Ejae, Rumi’s singing voice, and the other women who work on Huntr/x get halfway to their EGOT potential early next year. And Ejae should, because she and a bunch of other great singers and songwriters made the soundtrack of the summer, one which got a lot of people in the West interested in K-pop and made them love the movie even more. Furthermore, the cultural phenomenon is unlikely to conclude anytime soon, as the sing-along version is  playing in theaters this weekend where it very well could top any theatrical originals opening in the same frame.

So in time for the sing-along, let’s seal that Honmoon with all the songs from Kpop Demon Hunters ranked. And to make sure this ranking was fair, I excluded the “Love Maybe” song cue (though it’s a funny easter egg to Jinu voice actor Ahn Hyo Seop’s K-drama Business Proposal) and Twice’s “Strategy” since it’s already a pre-existing song. 

9. “Score Suite” (Marcelo Zarvos)

Each soundtrack necessitates a score suite, and Marcelo Zarvos’ KPDH effectively ignites the epic rhythm. It has a wonderful atmosphere as you delve into the world’s mythological lore between demon hunters and the musical artists who protect the surface world. The normal soundtrack, meanwhile, is also missing one key point that makes this suite really stand out: Lea Salonga.

One of Broadway’s finest vocalists ever is the singing voice of Celine, gets like a second to sing in the movie, but she doesn’t even appear on the soundtrack. Conversely this suite, which is separated from the rest of the film, is a satisfactory sampling of Salonga’s legendary talent. It also is comparable to numerous other fantasy scores. 

8. “Takedown” (Twice version: Jeongyeon, Jihyo and Chaeyoung) 

This end credits diss track is sung by key members of the real-life K-pop sensation group Twice: Jeongyeon, Jihyo and Chaeyoung. And they do so the style of Disney, which famously would outsource rising pop stars back in the day to sing more radio-friendly covers of their original movies’ biggest songs. Still, “Takedown” is just a banger in its own right, committing to the due diligence and evoking a great commercialized version of the song. It also highlights all the vocalists’ signature voices.

7. “Takedown” (Huntr/x)

Before KPop, I was convinced Kendrick Lamar had secured the title of “best diss track ever.” Then “Takedown” arrived to… well, not steal it from him, but get close to his level.  In contrast to the Twice version of the song, this “Takedown” rendition is a fun example of what makes Huntr/x such a fun K-pop group and solid demon hunters.

It’s genuinely funny seeing how their music process involves battling minions of the underworld. I love the bit where Mira is knocking around a demon and it bounces rhythmically. She then gets inspired, shouting, “That’s the beat!” It’s a great reminder as to why their duty as demon hunters and musical artists go hand-in-hand, juxtaposing both qualities against an exceptional pissing contest montage with the Saja Boys is a comedic delight as well. 

6. “Soda Pop” (Saja Boys) 

Putting “Soda Pop” so low on the list hurts because it’s been the song I can’t stop playing this summer. As Mira says during their intro scene, “It’s infectious.” The demon boy band  Saja Boys, surprises, charms, and captures their own small fanbase with a fantastic musical entrance song. Also, it is a clever double entendre, as this seemingly sweet bubblegum pop song, which compares a lover to a soda pop, is merely an allegory for these demon boys who wish to SUCK THEIR SOULS.

Hell, I didn’t even catch it the first 10 times I played it. While I do think it’s an earworm, it’s egregiously short. Despite the harmonizing vocals of Andrew Choi, Neckwav, Danny Chung, Kevin Woo, and SamUIL Lee reaching chillingly high levels of serotonin, the song is devoid of a bridge. My issues with “Soda Pop” is also emblematic of the movie itself, as I keep demanding “MORE! I need more movie!” Just like that, I also need more “Soda Pop.” Oh well, back to the fan art mines until that official sequel announcement is made. 

5. “Free” (Ejae as Rumi, Andrew Choi as Jinu) 

The beautiful R&B song that Rumi and Jinu perform is a duet that not only encapsulates their romantic tension but also their perspectives on each other, their identities, and their backgrounds. I can only imagine that this song will become the new karaoke for every annoying couple you know. Songwriters Jenna Andrews, Stephen Kirk, and Mark Sonnenblick wrote a strong song that sounds like a new take on Alan Menken love themes like “A Whole New World” and “I See the Light.” This time, the romantic climax is derived from the fact that both parties are able to see each other beyond their respective traumas (Jinu suffers from abandoning his family, and Rumi is compelled to conceal her demon identity). 

Due to the intricacy of their characters and the lyricism that exemplifies them, it has even greater thematic significance than the other aforementioned songs. Wow, did I just say “Free” is better than “A Whole New World?” Well, I am listening to it more than I had ever done with that Aladdin track. 

4. “What It Sounds Like” (Huntr/x) 

The epic culmination of Rumi’s self-discovery and the sole four-minute song in the film. It is a significant moment for Rumi as she embraces her full half-demon identity. An epic, heart-pounding action song that brings the girls together, it is a showstopping last stand.  Above all, it is a powerful motivational track that inspires individuals to confront the evil of the world with their full selves, without any apologies. In fact, I have been exercising to this song, and it has a positive impact on my mood. The girls’ voices unite as one, and the drums accelerate, culminating in a high-energy finale. It sends nothing but chills, man. 

3. “Golden” (Huntr/x)

“Golden” may have proven to be the song of the summer, but it’s not the best song in the film. I know, crazy. I think you know why; it’s mostly a Rumi song, with Zoey and Mira having, like, one line each. It’s also emblematic of my issues with the overall film when the other girls are sidelined for much of the second act. I promise you I adore this movie overall. “No more hiding,” as Rumi sings. I’m living my truth…. Anyway, “Golden” is still a banger. 

The whole world knows this by now, as it keeps “going up up up” in the charts and the Oscar talks. It is an exceptional celebration and underscores the brilliance of Rumi singing voice and co-songwriter Ejae, who was previously told she was “too old” to become a K-pop idol. Since that time, Ejae has proven herself to be an exceptional artist with a vocal range that sends chills down the spine and a remarkable songwriter, as exemplified here. Similar to Rumi, it is a story of an underdog artist who thrives and discovers her place in the world. This resonates with everyone, which is a golden testament to the song’s excellence.

2.  “Your Idol” (Saja Boys)

The hypnotic siren song of Saja Boys, which captivates an entire crowd and draws them into their demise, is as addictive as Gwi-Ma’s hellfire. The visual spectacle, the intense drumbeats, the insane demon-like choreography, the Sajas being hotter in their demon form—it’s all too good! Truly, and this is coming from the soul, “Your Idol” is one of the best and catchiest villain songs and musical numbers ever recorded, right up there with Scar’s “Be Prepared” in The Lion King and “Big And Loud – Pt.2” in Cats Don’t Dance. You briefly believe that the Sajas will also prevail due to Gwi-Ma’s ever-increasing power and their captivating song.

Time be honest: they would consume me, and you know they can consume you too as the rhythm gets more intense and so do the vocals. It’s an unsettling earworm that seeps under your skin and catches you by its spell. 

1.  “How It’s Done” (Huntr/x)

Imagine this… hypothetically. You’re in the Netflix-owned Paris Theater, watching a movie a month before the marketing even begins. You have no idea it’s a musical. Then when the Huntr/x sings their intro song after their cute fan introduction, you go, “Oh! this is going to be a blast!” Then you proceed to have the best time of your life. Nothing will make me forget the instant adrenaline rush that stirs from “How It’s Done,” and I bet you feel the same too. 

“How It’s Done” is a fantastic mood-setter that firmly establishes the enjoyable experience you’ll have while watching KPDH. In contrast to “Golden” or “How It Sounds Like,” each girl exhibits their unique qualities and abilities in perfect equivalency: Zoey is the lyricist and rapper, Mira is the dancer and visual artist, and Rumi is the vocalist who can hit high notes. The talented artists and the direction of Maggie Kang and Chris Appelhans will captivate you and leave you in awe with the mere sight of their leads kicking demon ass in a Spider-Verse-esque kinetic frenzy, falling with style from a destroyed private jet to the stage, slaying demons, and singing in front of their thousands of fans.

This is undoubtedly one of the most imaginative animated sequences in recent years and a raw character introduction that will instantly convert you to a Huntr/x fan.

The post KPop Demon Hunters Soundtrack Songs Ranked: From Catchy to Golden appeared first on Den of Geek.

” Any post” you might have? is perhaps one of the worst ways to ask for suggestions. It’s obscure and unfocused, and it doesn’t give a clear picture of what we’re looking for. Getting good opinions starts sooner than we might hope: it starts with the demand.

When we realize that receiving input can be seen as a form of design study, it might seem counterintuitive to begin the process with a question. In the same way that we wouldn’t perform any studies without the correct questions to get the insight that we need, the best way to ask for feedback is also to build strong issues.

Design criticism is not a one-time procedure. Sure, any great comments process continues until the project is finished, but this is especially true for layout because architecture work continues iteration after iteration, from a high level to the finest details. Each stage requires its unique set of questions.

And suddenly, as with any great research, we need to examine what we got up, get to the base of its perspectives, and take action. Problem, generation, and analysis. This look at each of those.

The query

Being available to input is important, but we need to be specific about what we’re looking for. Any comments,” What do you think,” or” I’d love to hear your mind” at the conclusion of a presentation are likely to garner a lot of different ideas, or worse, to make everyone follow the lead of the first speaker. And next… we get frustrated because vague issues like those you turn a high-level moves review into folks rather commenting on the borders of buttons. Which topic may be a savory one, so it might be difficult to get the team to switch to the subject you wanted to concentrate on.

But how do we get into this scenario? It’s a combination of various aspects. One is that we don’t often consider asking as a part of the input approach. Another is how healthy it is to keep the issue open and assume that everyone else will agree. Another is that in nonprofessional conversations, there’s usually no need to be that exact. In summary, we tend to undervalue the value of the concerns, so we don’t work to make them better.

The work of asking good questions guidelines and focuses the criticism. It also serves as a form of acceptance, outlining your willingness to make comments and the types of responses you want to receive. It puts people in the right emotional position, especially in situations when they weren’t expecting to provide feedback.

There isn’t a second best method to request feedback. It simply needs to be certain, and sensitivity can take several shapes. The period than depth model for design critique has been a particularly helpful tool for my coaching.

” Stage” refers to each of the steps of the process—in our event, the design process. The type of input changes as the customer research moves forward to the final design. But within a single stage, one might also examine whether some assumptions are correct and whether there’s been a suitable language of the amassed input into updated designs as the job has evolved. The layers of user experience could serve as a starting point for future inquiries. What do you want to know: Project objectives? user requirements? Functionality? the content Interaction design? a system of information architecture UI design? navigation planning Visual design? Branding?

Here’re a few example questions that are precise and to the point that refer to different layers:

• Functionality: Is it desirable to automate account creation?
• Interaction design: Take a look through the updated flow and let me know whether you see any steps or error states that I might’ve missed.
• Information architecture: This page contains two competing pieces of information. Is the structure effective in communicating them both?
• User interface design: What do you think about the error counter at the top of the page, which makes sure you see the next error even if it is outside the viewport?
• Navigation design: From research, we identified these second-level navigation items, but once you’re on the page, the list feels too long and hard to navigate. Do you have any suggestions for how to handle this?
• Visual design: Are the sticky notifications in the bottom-right corner visible enough?

How much of a presentation’s depth would be on the other axis of specificity. For example, we might have introduced a new end-to-end flow, but there was a specific view that you found particularly challenging and you’d like a detailed review of that. This can be especially helpful from one iteration to the next when it’s crucial to highlight the areas that have changed.

There are other things that we can consider when we want to achieve more specific—and more effective—questions.

A quick fix is to get rid of the generic qualifiers from questions like “good,” “well,” “nice,” “bad,” “okay,” and” cool.” For example, asking,” When the block opens and the buttons appear, is this interaction good”? is it possible to look specific, but you can identify the “good” qualifier and make the question” When the block opens and the buttons appear, is it clear what the next action is” look like?

Sometimes we actually do want broad feedback. That’s uncommon, but it can occur. In that sense, you might still make it explicit that you’re looking for a wide range of opinions, whether at a high level or with details. Or perhaps just say,” At first glance, what do you think”? so that it’s clear that what you’re asking is open ended but focused on someone’s impression after their first five seconds of looking at it.

Sometimes the project is particularly broad, and some areas may have already been thoroughly explored. In these situations, it might be useful to explicitly say that some parts are already locked in and aren’t open to feedback. Although it’s not something I’d recommend in general, I’ve found it helpful in avoiding falling into rabbit holes like those that could lead to further refinement but aren’t what’s important right now.

Asking specific questions can completely change the quality of the feedback that you receive. People who have less refined critique abilities will now be able to provide more useful feedback, and even experienced designers will appreciate the clarity and effectiveness gained from concentrating solely on what is required. It can save a lot of time and frustration.

The iteration

Design iterations are probably the most visible part of the design work, and they provide a natural checkpoint for feedback. Many design tools have inline commenting, but many of them only display changes as a single fluid stream in the same file. These types of design tools cause conversations to end after they are resolved, update shared UI components automatically, and require designers to always display the most recent version unless these would-be useful features were manually disabled. The implied goal that these design tools seem to have is to arrive at just one final copy with all discussions closed, probably because they inherited patterns from how written documents are collaboratively edited. That approach to design critiques is probably not the best approach, but some teams might benefit from it even if I don’t want to be too prescriptive.

The asynchronous design-critique approach that I find most effective is to create explicit checkpoints for discussion. For this, I’ll use the term iteration post. It refers to a write-up or presentation of the design iteration followed by a discussion thread of some kind. Any platform that can accommodate this type of structure can use this. By the way, when I refer to a “write-up or presentation“, I’m including video recordings or other media too: as long as it’s asynchronous, it works.

Using iteration posts has a number of benefits:

• It creates a rhythm in the design work so that the designer can review feedback from each iteration and prepare for the next.
• Decisions are made immediately available for future review, and conversations are also always available.
• It creates a record of how the design changed over time.
• It might also make it simpler to collect and act on feedback depending on the tool.

These posts of course don’t mean that no other feedback approach should be used, just that iteration posts could be the primary rhythm for a remote design team to use. From there, there can be additional feedback techniques ( such as live critique, pair designing, or inline comments ).

I don’t think there’s a standard format for iteration posts. However, there are a few high-level elements that make sense to include as a baseline:

1. The goal
2. The layout
3. The list of changes
4. The querys

Each project is likely to have a goal, and hopefully it’s something that’s already been summarized in a single sentence somewhere else, such as the client brief, the product manager’s outline, or the project owner’s request. In every iteration post, I would copy and paste this, so I could do it again. The idea is to provide context and to repeat what’s essential to make each iteration post complete so that there’s no need to find information spread across multiple posts. The most recent iteration post will have everything I need if I want to know about the most recent design.

This copy-and-paste part introduces another relevant concept: alignment comes from repetition. Therefore, repeating information in posts is actually very effective at ensuring that everyone is on the same page.

The design is then the actual series of information-architecture outlines, diagrams, flows, maps, wireframes, screens, visuals, and any other kind of design work that’s been done. It’s any design object, to put it briefly. For the final stages of work, I prefer the term blueprint to emphasize that I’ll be showing full flows instead of individual screens to make it easier to understand the bigger picture.

It might also be helpful to have clear names on the artifacts so that it is easier to refer to them. Write the post in a way that helps people understand the work. It’s not much different from creating a strong live presentation.

For an efficient discussion, you should also include a bullet list of the changes from the previous iteration to let people focus on what’s new, which can be especially useful for larger pieces of work where keeping track, iteration after iteration, could become a challenge.

Finally, as mentioned earlier, it’s crucial that you include a list of the questions to help you guide the design critique in the desired direction. Doing this as a numbered list can also help make it easier to refer to each question by its number.

Not every iteration is the same. Earlier iterations don’t need to be as tightly focused—they can be more exploratory and experimental, maybe even breaking some of the design-language guidelines to see what’s possible. Then, later, the iterations begin coming to a decision and improving it until the feature development is complete.

I want to highlight that even if these iteration posts are written and conceived as checkpoints, by no means do they need to be exhaustive. A post might be just a concept to start a conversation, or it might be a cumulative list of all the features that have been added gradually over the course of each iteration until the full picture is achieved.

Over time, I also started using specific labels for incremental iterations: i1, i2, i3, and so on. Although this may seem like a minor labeling tip, it can be useful in many ways:

• Unique—It’s a clear unique marker. Everyone knows where to go to review things, and it’s simple to say” This was discussed in i4″ with each project.
• Unassuming—It works like versions ( such as v1, v2, and v3 ) but in contrast, versions create the impression of something that’s big, exhaustive, and complete. Attempts must be exploratory, incomplete, or partial.
• Future proof—It resolves the “final” naming problem that you can run into with versions. No more files with the title “final final complete no-really-its-done” Within each project, the largest number always represents the latest iteration.

The wording release candidate (RC ) could be used to indicate when a design is finished enough to be worked on, even if there are some areas that still need improvement and, in turn, require more iterations, such as” with i8 we reached RC” or “i12 is an RC” to indicate when it is finished.

The review

What typically occurs during a design critique is an open discussion, with a back and forth between parties that can be very productive. This approach is particularly effective during live, synchronous feedback. However, when we work asynchronously, using a different approach is more effective: we can adopt a user-research mindset. Written feedback from teammates, stakeholders, or others can be treated as if it were the result of user interviews and surveys, and we can analyze it accordingly.

This shift has some significant advantages, making asynchronous feedback particularly effective, especially around these friction points:

1. It removes the pressure to reply to everyone.
2. It lessens the annoyance caused by swoop-by comments.
3. It lessens our personal stake.

The first friction point is having to feel pressured to respond to each and every comment. Sometimes we write the iteration post, and we get replies from our team. It’s just a few of them, it’s simple, and there isn’t much to worry about. But other times, some solutions might require more in-depth discussions, and the amount of replies can quickly increase, which can create a tension between trying to be a good team player by replying to everyone and doing the next design iteration. If the respondent is a stakeholder or a person directly involved in the project, this might be especially true. We need to accept that this pressure is absolutely normal, and it’s human nature to try to accommodate people who we care about. Responding to all comments at times can be effective, but when we consider a design critique more like user research, we realize that we don’t need to respond to every comment, and there are alternatives in asynchronous spaces:

One is to let the next iteration speak for itself. The response is received when the design changes and a follow-up iteration is made. You might tag all the people who were involved in the previous discussion, but even that’s a choice, not a requirement.
• Another option is to respond politely to acknowledge each comment, such as” Understood. Thank you”,” Good points— I’ll review”, or” Thanks. These will be included in the upcoming iteration. In some cases, this could also be just a single top-level comment along the lines of” Thanks for all the feedback everyone—the next iteration is coming soon”!
• Another option is to quickly summarize the comments before moving on. Depending on your workflow, this can be particularly useful as it can provide a simplified checklist that you can then use for the next iteration.

The swoop-by comment, which is the kind of feedback that comes from a member of a team or non-project who might not be aware of the context, restrictions, decisions, or requirements, or of the discussions from earlier iterations, is the second friction point. On their side, there’s something that one can hope that they might learn: they could start to acknowledge that they’re doing this and they could be more conscious in outlining where they’re coming from. It can be annoying to have to repeat the same response repeatedly in swoop-by comments.

Let’s begin by acknowledging again that there’s no need to reply to every comment. However, if responding to a previously litigated point might be helpful, a brief response with a link to the previous discussion for additional information is typically sufficient. Remember, alignment comes from repetition, so it’s okay to repeat things sometimes!

Swoop-by commenting can still be useful for two reasons: first, they might point out something that isn’t clear, and second, they might have the power to fit in with a user’s perspective when they are seeing the design for the first time. Sure, you’ll still be frustrated, but that might at least help in dealing with it.

The personal stake we might have in relation to the design could be the third friction point, which might cause us to feel defensive if the review turned out to be more of a discussion. Treating feedback as user research helps us create a healthy distance between the people giving us feedback and our ego ( because yes, even if we don’t want to admit it, it’s there ). In the end, putting everything in aggregate form helps us to prioritize our work more.

Always remember that while you need to listen to stakeholders, project owners, and specific advice, you don’t have to accept every piece of feedback. You must examine it and come to a decision that can be justified, but sometimes “no” is the best choice.

As the designer leading the project, you’re in charge of that decision. In the end, everyone has their area of expertise, and as a designer, you are the one with the most background and knowledge to make the right choice. And by listening to the feedback that you’ve received, you’re making sure that it’s also the best and most balanced decision.

Thanks to Mike Shelton and Brie Anne Demkiw for their contributions to the initial draft of this article.

One of the most powerful gentle abilities we have at our disposal is the ability to work together to improve our designs while developing our own abilities and perspectives, regardless of how it is used or what it might be called.

Feedback is also one of the most underestimated equipment, and generally by assuming that we’re already good at it, we settle, forgetting that it’s a talent that can be trained, grown, and improved. Bad opinions can lead to conflict on projects, lower morale, and long-term, undermine trust and teamwork. Quality comments can be a revolutionary force.

Practicing our knowledge is absolutely a good way to enhance, but the learning gets yet faster when it’s paired with a good base that programs and focuses the exercise. What are some fundamental components of providing effective opinions? And how can input be adjusted for isolated and distributed function settings?

We can find a long history of sequential opinions on the web: code was written and discussed on mailing lists since the beginning of open source. Currently, engineers engage on pull calls, developers post in their favourite design tools, project managers and sprint masters exchange ideas on tickets, and so on.

Design analysis is often the label used for a type of input that’s provided to make our job better, jointly. It generally shares many of the concepts with suggestions, but it also has some differences.

The material

The material of the feedback serves as the foundation for all effective critiques, so we need to begin there. There are many versions that you can use to design your information. The one that I personally like best—because it’s obvious and actionable—is this one from Lara Hogan.

This equation, which is typically used to provide feedback to users, even fits really well in a design critique because it finally addresses one of the main issues that we address: What? Where? Why? How? Imagine that you’re giving some comments about some pattern function that spans several screens, like an onboard movement: there are some pages shown, a stream blueprint, and an outline of the decisions made. You notice things that needs to be improved. If you keep the three components of the equation in mind, you’ll have a mental unit that can help you become more precise and effective.

Here is a post that could be included in some feedback, and it might appear fair at first glance because it appears to partially fulfill the requirements. But does it?

Not confident about the keys ‘ patterns and hierarchy—it feels off. Does you alter them?

Observation for style feedback doesn’t really mean pointing out which part of the software your input refers to, but it also refers to offering a viewpoint that’s as specific as possible. Do you offer the user’s viewpoint? Your expert perspective? A business perspective? The perspective of the project manager A first-time user’s perspective?

I anticipate that one of these two buttons will go forward and the other will go back when I see them.

Impact is about the why. Just pointing out a UI element might sometimes be enough if the issue may be obvious, but more often than not, you should add an explanation of what you’re pointing out.

I anticipate that one of these two buttons will go forward and the other will go back when I see them. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow.

The question approach is meant to provide open guidance by eliciting the critical thinking in the designer receiving the feedback. Notably, in Lara’s equation she provides a second approach: request, which instead provides guidance toward a specific solution. While that’s a viable option for feedback in general, in my experience, going back to the question approach typically leads to the best solutions because designers are generally more at ease in being given an open space to explore.

The difference between the two can be exemplified with, for the question approach:

I anticipate that one of these two buttons will go forward and the other will go back when I see them. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Would it make sense to unify them?

Or, for the request approach:

I anticipate that one of these two buttons will go forward and the other will go back when I see them. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same pair of forward and back buttons.

At this point in some situations, it might be useful to integrate with an extra why: why you consider the given suggestion to be better.

I anticipate that one of these two buttons will go forward and the other will go back when I see them. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons so that users don’t get confused.

Choosing the question approach or the request approach can also at times be a matter of personal preference. I did rounds of anonymous feedback and I reviewed feedback with other people a while back when I was putting a lot of effort into improving my feedback. After a few rounds of this work and a year later, I got a positive response: my feedback came across as effective and grounded. Until I changed teams. Surprise surprise, my next round of criticism from a specific person wasn’t very positive. The reason is that I had previously tried not to be prescriptive in my advice—because the people who I was previously working with preferred the open-ended question format over the request style of suggestions. However, there was one person in this other team who now preferred specific guidance. So I adapted my feedback for them to include requests.

One comment that I heard come up a few times is that this kind of feedback is quite long, and it doesn’t seem very efficient. Yes, but no. Let’s explore both sides.

No, this kind of feedback is actually effective because the length is a byproduct of clarity, and giving this kind of feedback can provide precisely enough information for a sound fix. Also if we zoom out, it can reduce future back-and-forth conversations and misunderstandings, improving the overall efficiency and effectiveness of collaboration beyond the single comment. Imagine that in the example above the feedback were instead just,” Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons”. Since the designer receiving this feedback wouldn’t have much to go by, they might just make the change. In later iterations, the interface might change or they might introduce new features—and maybe that change might not make sense anymore. Without explaining the why, the designer might assume that the change is one of consistency, but what if it wasn’t? So there could now be an underlying concern that changing the buttons would be perceived as a regression.

Yes, this style of feedback is not always efficient because the points in some comments don’t always need to be exhaustive, sometimes because certain changes may be obvious (” The font used doesn’t follow our guidelines” ) and sometimes because the team may have a lot of internal knowledge such that some of the whys may be implied.

The equation above is not intended to provide a predetermined template for feedback, but rather a mnemonic to reflect and enhance the practice. Even after years of active work on my critiques, I still from time to time go back to this formula and reflect on whether what I just wrote is effective.

The atmosphere

Well-grounded content is the foundation of feedback, but that’s not really enough. The soft skills of the person who’s providing the critique can multiply the likelihood that the feedback will be well received and understood. It has been demonstrated that only positive feedback can lead to sustained change in people. It can be determined by tone alone whether content is rejected or welcomed.

Since our goal is to be understood and to have a positive working environment, tone is essential to work on. I’ve tried to summarize the necessary soft skills over the years using a formula that resembles the one for content: the receptivity equation.

Respectful feedback comes across as grounded, solid, and constructive. It’s the kind of feedback that, whether it’s positive or negative, is perceived as useful and fair.

The time when feedback occurs is known as timing. To-the-point feedback doesn’t have much hope of being well received if it’s given at the wrong time. When a new feature’s entire high-level information architecture is about to go live, it might still be relevant if the questioning raises a significant blocker that no one saw, but those concerns are much more likely to have to wait for a later revision. So in general, attune your feedback to the stage of the project. Early iteration? Iteration that was later? Polishing work in progress? Each of these needs a different one. The right timing will make it more likely that your feedback will be well received.

Attitude is the equivalent of intent, and in the context of person-to-person feedback, it can be referred to as radical candor. That entails checking whether what we have in mind will actually help the person and improve the overall project before writing. This might be a hard reflection at times because maybe we don’t want to admit that we don’t really appreciate that person. Hopefully that’s not the case, but it can happen, which is fine. Acknowledging and owning that can help you make up for that: how would I write if I really cared about them? How can I avoid being passive aggressive? How can I encourage constructive behavior?

Form is relevant especially in a diverse and cross-cultural work environments because having great content, perfect timing, and the right attitude might not come across if the way that we write creates misunderstandings. There could be many reasons for this, including the fact that occasionally certain words may cause specific reactions, that nonnative speakers may not be able to comprehend all thenuances of some sentences, that our brains may be different and that our world may be perceived differently; hence, neurodiversity must be taken into account. Whatever the reason, it’s important to review not just what we write but how.

A few years back, I was asking for some feedback on how I give feedback. I was given some sound advice, but I also got a surprise comment. They pointed out that when I wrote” Oh, ]… ]”, I made them feel stupid. That wasn’t my intention at all! I felt really bad, and I just realized that I provided feedback to them for months, and every time I might have made them feel stupid. I was horrified … but also thankful. I quickly changed my spelling mistake by adding “oh” to my list of replaced words (your choice between aText, TextExpander, or others ) so that when I typed “oh,” it was immediately deleted.

Something to highlight because it’s quite frequent—especially in teams that have a strong group spirit—is that people tend to beat around the bush. It’s important to keep in mind that having a positive attitude doesn’t necessarily mean passing judgment on the feedback; rather, it simply means that even when you give difficult, or difficult feedback, you do so in a way that’s respectful and constructive. The nicest thing that you can do for someone is to help them grow.

We have a great advantage in giving feedback in written form: it can be reviewed by another person who isn’t directly involved, which can help to reduce or remove any bias that might be there. The best, most insightful moments for me came when I shared a comment and asked a trusted person how it sounds, how can I do it better, or even” How would you have written it”? I discovered that by seeing the two versions side by side, I’ve learned a lot.

The format

Asynchronous feedback also has a significant inherent benefit: we can devote more time to making sure that the suggestions ‘ clarity of communication and actionability meet two main objectives.

Let’s imagine that someone shared a design iteration for a project. You are reviewing it and leaving a comment. There are many ways to accomplish this, and context is of course important, but let’s try to think about some things that might be worthwhile to take into account.

In terms of clarity, start by grounding the critique that you’re about to give by providing context. This includes specifically describing where you’re coming from: do you have a thorough understanding of the project, or is this your first time seeing it? Are you coming from a high-level perspective, or are you figuring out the details? Are there regressions? Which user’s point of view do you consider when providing feedback? Is the design iteration at a point where it would be okay to ship this, or are there major things that need to be addressed first?

Even if you’re giving feedback to a team that already has some background information on the project, providing context is helpful. And context is absolutely essential when giving cross-team feedback. If I were to review a design that might be indirectly related to my work, and if I had no knowledge about how the project arrived at that point, I would say so, highlighting my take as external.

We frequently concentrate on the negatives and attempt to list all the things that could be improved. That’s of course important, but it’s just as important—if not more—to focus on the positives, especially if you saw progress from the previous iteration. Although this may seem superfluous, it’s important to keep in mind that design is a field with hundreds of possible solutions for each problem. So pointing out that the design solution that was chosen is good and explaining why it’s good has two major benefits: it confirms that the approach taken was solid, and it helps to ground your negative feedback. In the longer term, sharing positive feedback can help prevent regressions on things that are going well because those things will have been highlighted as important. Positive feedback can also help, as an added bonus, prevent impostor syndrome.

There’s one powerful approach that combines both context and a focus on the positives: frame how the design is better than the status quo ( compared to a previous iteration, competitors, or benchmarks ) and why, and then on that foundation, you can add what could be improved. There is a significant difference between a critique of a design that is already in good shape and one that isn’t quite there yet.

Another way that you can improve your feedback is to depersonalize the feedback: the comments should always be about the work, never about the person who made it. It’s” This button isn’t well aligned” versus” You haven’t aligned this button well”. Just before sending, review your writing to make changes to this.

In terms of actionability, one of the best approaches to help the designer who’s reading through your feedback is to split it into bullet points or paragraphs, which are easier to review and analyze one by one. You might also consider breaking up the feedback into sections or even across multiple comments if it is longer. Of course, adding screenshots or signifying markers of the specific part of the interface you’re referring to can also be especially useful.

One approach that I’ve personally used effectively in some contexts is to enhance the bullet points with four markers using emojis. A red square indicates that it is something I consider blocking, a yellow diamond indicates that it needs to be changed, and a green circle provides a thorough, positive confirmation. I also use a blue spiral � � for either something that I’m not sure about, an exploration, an open alternative, or just a note. However, I’d only use this strategy on teams where I’ve already established a high level of trust because it might turn out to be quite demoralizing if I deliver a lot of red squares and change how I communicate that.

Let’s see how this would work by reusing the example that we used earlier as the first bullet point in this list:

• 🔶 Navigation—I anticipate that one of these two buttons will go forward and the other will go back when I see them. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons so that users don’t get confused.
• � � Overall— I think the page is solid, and this is good enough to be our release candidate for a version 1.0.
• � � Metrics—Good improvement in the buttons on the metrics area, the improved contrast and new focus style make them more accessible.
• Button Style: Using the green accent in this context, which conveys a positive action because green is typically seen as a confirmation color. Do we need to explore a different color?
• Tiles—It seems to me that the tiles should use the Subtitle 2 style rather than the Subtitle 1 style given the number of items on the page and the overall page hierarchy. This will keep the visual hierarchy more consistent.
• � � Background—Using a light texture works well, but I wonder whether it adds too much noise in this kind of page. What is the purpose behind using that?

What about giving feedback directly in Figma or another design tool that allows in-place feedback? These are generally difficult to use because they conceal discussions and are harder to follow, but they can be very useful in the right context. Just make sure that each of the comments is separate so that it’s easier to match each discussion to a single task, similar to the idea of splitting mentioned above.

One final note: say the obvious. Sometimes we might feel that something is clearly right or wrong, and we don’t say it. Or sometimes we might have a doubt that we don’t express because the question might sound stupid. Say it, that’s fine. You might have to reword it a little bit to make the reader feel more comfortable, but don’t hold it back. Good feedback is transparent, even when it may be obvious.

Another benefit of asynchronous feedback is that written feedback automatically monitors decisions. Especially in large projects,” Why did we do this”? There’s nothing better than open, transparent discussions that can be reviewed at any time, which could be a question that arises from time to time. For this reason, I recommend using software that saves these discussions, without hiding them once they are resolved.

Content, tone, and format. Although each of these subjects offers a useful model, improving eight of the subjects ‘ observation, impact, question, timing, attitude, form, clarity, and actionability is a lot of work to put in all at once. One effective approach is to take them one by one: first identify the area that you lack the most (either from your perspective or from feedback from others ) and start there. Then the second, followed by the third, and so on. At first you’ll have to put in extra time for every piece of feedback that you give, but after a while, it’ll become second nature, and your impact on the work will multiply.

Thanks to Brie Anne Demkiw and Mike Shelton for reviewing the first draft of this article.