Note: This post explores a topic that makes many design leaders and designers uncomfortable: organizational politics. If you’ve ever felt like navigating relationships and influence is somehow “not what you signed up for” as a design leader, this one’s for you.

The P-word problem

Let’s face it, when someone says “office politics,” most of us immediately think of the worst behaviors we’ve witnessed: backstabbing colleagues, credit-stealing managers, or those people who seem to spend more time manipulating than actually working. I get it. I’ve seen bad politics destroy teams, projects, and derail talented people’s careers.

But here’s the thing: when design leaders proudly declare “I don’t play politics,” what they’re really saying is “I’m going to ignore the complex human dynamics that determine whether my team succeeds or fails.” And that’s a problem.

I learned this the hard way early in my career. I had this idealistic notion that if I just did excellent work and championed my team and the users, everything else would fall into place. I believed in a meritocracy where the best ideas would win. Leadership would see the value. Resources would follow.

Spoiler alert: that’s not what happened.

When ignoring politics backfired

I remember being blindsided when a critical hire I desperately needed got rejected — not because the business couldn’t afford it, but because I hadn’t built the right relationships with finance and workforce planning. I’d focused all my energy on my design team and cross-functional partners, but I’d completely ignored the people who controlled the budget. They didn’t understand what this role would do or why it mattered. And whose fault was that? Mine.

Meanwhile, another leader in the organization — someone whose work was less directly impactful than what my team was delivering — got every request approved. Why? Because they’d invested time in helping those budget-holders understand their team’s value. They’d built relationships. They had communicated impact in terms that mattered to finance. They’d done the political work I’d been too “principled” to do.

That was my wake-up call. Politics wasn’t optional. It was a core leadership competency I’d been neglecting.

What politics actually means

If the word “politics” just elicited some sort of instinctive recoil from you, you’re not alone. Let’s reframe this. When I talk about organizational politics, I’m not talking about manipulation or self-serving behavior. I’m talking about organizational intelligence: understanding the complex web of motivations, relationships, power structures, and decision-making patterns that exist in every company.

Think about it this way: as designers, we invest enormous energy in understanding our users. We map their motivations, needs, pain points, and goals. We study their behavior. We build empathy. We do this because understanding people is how we create value for them.

Why would we not apply that same rigor to understanding the people we work with? The executives who control resources, the middle managers who can champion or block your work, the cross-functional partners whose support you need, even the junior employees whose insights might surprise you?

Good politics is applied empathy. It’s user research for your organization.

Good politics vs. Bad politics

Here’s where we need to draw clear lines, because not all political behavior is created equal.

Good politics looks like:

Building genuine relationships: I make it a point to have regular 1:1s and coffee chats with leaders across the organization, not because I need something from them right then, but because I’m genuinely interested in understanding their challenges and see how I can add value. When I eventually do need their support, we already have a foundation of mutual respect.

Strategic communication: When I’m advocating for design headcount, I don’t just talk about user experience. I translate our impact into metrics that matter to the CEO, CFO, CTO, and other decision-makers: reduced support costs, improved conversion rates, and decreased development rework. Same work, different framing — and it lands.

Coalition building: Before proposing a major design initiative, I identify who else in the organization would benefit from it. Product management wants faster iteration? Engineering wants better handoffs and fewer last-minute changes? Customer success wants fewer escalations? Great — now we’re all championing this together, not just design shouting into the void.

Transparent influence: I’m always clear about what I’m trying to accomplish and why. There’s no hidden agenda. I’m trying to build a stronger design culture because I believe it will help the company succeed. Period.

Bad politics looks like:

Zero-sum thinking: I once watched a leader torpedo another team’s project because they saw it as competition for executive attention. Both teams suffered. The company suffered. That’s not politics, that’s sabotage.

Information hoarding: Using what you know as leverage, or deliberately keeping others in the dark to maintain power is antithetical to everything design stands for.

Credit stealing: Taking credit for your team’s work or other people’s ideas to make yourself look good destroys trust faster than anything else.

Playing people against each other: I’ve seen leaders create conflict or competition between colleagues to advance their own position. This destroys once-healthy cultures.

The difference? Good politics serves the mission and the people. Bad politics serve only yourself.

Why Design leaders can’t afford to ignore this

Here’s why this matters specifically for design leadership:

Most of us are entering organizations where design isn’t fully understood or valued yet. We’re often building something new or transforming something that exists. That means we’re asking for resources, attention, understanding, and trust before we’ve proven ourselves. We’re advocating for changes to how the company operates.

Without organizational intelligence, you can’t:

• Secure the budget your team needs to deliver impact

• Protect your people from being treated as order-takers

• Elevate design in strategic conversations

• Navigate resistance to design-led approaches

• Build sustainable influence that outlasts individual projects

I’ve seen talented design leaders fail because they couldn’t navigate organizational dynamics. They had the vision, the skills, and the talent, but they couldn’t build the support systems necessary to execute.

I know what some of you are thinking: “But I got into design to advocate for users, not to play corporate games.”

I hear you. Many of us were drawn to design because we care about people and want to solve real problems. The political side of leadership can feel uncomfortable, even wrong. It can feel like we’re compromising our values or becoming the thing we dislike about corporate culture.

So here’s how you reframe it: Understanding organizational dynamics isn’t about abandoning your values but rather about making sure your values actually have impact.

You can have the most user-centered vision in the world, but if you can’t secure the resources to execute it, if you can’t build support from leadership, and if you can’t navigate resistance from other departments, your users never benefit from your vision.

Political awareness isn’t selling out. It’s growing up as a leader.

Practical frameworks for ethical political navigation

So how do you develop organizational intelligence without losing your integrity? Here’s what I’ve learned:

Know your stakeholders: Who are the decision-makers, influencers, and blockers for what you’re trying to accomplish? What are their goals, concerns, and success metrics? What keeps them up at night?

Invest before you need to withdraw: Build relationships when you don’t need something. Help others succeed. Share credit generously. Create goodwill that compounds over time.

Speak multiple languages: Learn to translate design value into the terms that matter to different audiences. Your CFO cares about different things than your CPO, who cares about different things than your CTO. They’re all valid perspectives.

Find your allies: Who else in the organization shares your goals, even if they’re coming at it from a different angle? Engineering might care about reducing technical debt. You care about design systems. That’s a natural alliance.

Be transparent about your intentions: I always try to be clear about what I’m working toward and why. “I’m advocating for this hire because I believe it will help us move faster and reduce rework. Here’s the ROI case.” No hidden agendas.

Read the room: Pay attention to organizational dynamics. How are decisions really made? Who has informal influence? What are the unwritten rules? When is the right time to push, and when should you wait?

Stay true to your principles: There will be moments when the political move conflicts with your values. That’s your line. Don’t cross it. There’s always another way.

When politics go too far

Let me be clear: there are bright lines you should never cross, no matter how politically advantageous it might seem. Some non-negotiables I drew for myself:

• Don’t throw someone under the bus to protect yourself

• Don’t take credit for work that isn’t yours

• Don’t deliberately mislead to advance your agenda

• Don’t use your position to punish people who disagree with you

• Don’t build relationships purely as transactions

If you find yourself in an environment where these behaviors are required to succeed, that’s not a political challenge; that’s a toxic culture. And sometimes the most politically savvy move is recognizing that and finding a healthier organization.

The Long Game

Here’s what I’ve learned over the years: the leaders who last, who build something sustainable, who create real change, they’re the ones who mastered organizational dynamics without losing their integrity.

They understand that politics isn’t about manipulation. It’s about understanding people, building authentic relationships, communicating effectively, and creating the conditions for good work to have impact.

They know that you can’t advocate for users if you can’t advocate for your team. And you can’t advocate for your team if you don’t understand how your organization actually works.

Your turn

I know this topic makes many design leaders uncomfortable. We’d rather talk about design systems, research methodologies, or craft. But if you’re stepping into leadership — or if you’re already there and wondering why your great ideas keep hitting walls — this is the work.

Start small. Map your stakeholders. Build one new relationship with someone outside your immediate circle. Learn what matters to your CEO, CFO, or head of operations. Start seeing your organization as a complex system to understand, not an obstacle to overcome.

Politics isn’t a dirty word. It’s just people, complexity, and the challenge of creating change in imperfect systems. And if we can bring the same empathy, curiosity, and strategic thinking that we bring to our design work, well, that’s when the magic happens.

What’s your relationship with organizational politics? I’d love to hear your experiences: the good, the bad, and the ugly lessons learned. Understanding people isn’t playing games. It’s leadership.

Note: This post explores a pattern I've observed throughout my career working with established companies that have become victims of their own success. If you've ever wondered why some businesses seem resistant to design investment despite having the resources, this framework might help explain what's happening and what we can do about it.

"If it ain't broke, why fix it?"

I can't tell you how many times I've heard this phrase in executive and strategy meetings. For many companies that have enjoyed sustained success, this becomes more than just a saying; it becomes a dangerous business philosophy. And let's face it, it can also feel like handcuffs, especially for design leaders trying to drive transformation.

I remember sitting in a quarterly business review at a company that had been a market leader for over fifteen years. The numbers looked good; customer acquisition was steady, revenue was growing, the economic tailwinds were helping, and leadership was celebrating another successful quarter. When my team and I presented research showing that customer satisfaction scores were declining and competitors were gaining ground with more intuitive experiences, the response was immediate: "But our customers are still choosing us, so clearly what we're doing is working."

That moment crystallized something I'd been seeing across multiple organizations. Companies weren't just resistant to change; they were actively choosing not to see the signals that change was necessary.

Over the years, I've worked with companies that experienced their "good times" — periods when everything seemed to be working smoothly. Customers were coming in, revenue was solid, and the business model felt validated.

And yet, I noticed something counterintuitive that kept me thinking.

Even as these businesses celebrated their past successes and coasted on established momentum, design was consistently under-prioritized. Not because people didn't care about their users or the experience, but because it was genuinely not a priority to see what needed fixing (or rethinking) when the company believed it was still riding the wave of previous wins.

When past success creates future blind spots

Companies that have consistently enjoyed success often believe they've cracked the code. They had their moment. Maybe it was being first to market, nailing a particular customer segment, or building something that really resonated at the right time. The problem is that they assume the formula will work indefinitely.

But I've learned that this creates a dangerous blind spot. When businesses continue to operate based on what worked in their heyday, they stop actively listening to the real signals around them. They overlook the fact that customer needs are evolving, competitors are emerging with better solutions, and market conditions are shifting beneath their feet.

The human cost of this is significant. I've watched talented designers and researchers leave organizations because their insights were consistently dismissed as "nice to have" rather than strategically important. Teams become demoralized when they see clear opportunities for improvement but can't get buy-in to address them. Meanwhile, customers start experiencing friction that goes unaddressed, leading to the slow erosion of loyalty that doesn't show up in quarterly reports until it's too late.

Meanwhile, design becomes a "nice-to-have" rather than a strategic necessity. The company genuinely believes they're still benefiting from their previous success, completely overlooking the potential for design to help them:

• Recognize and respond to evolving customer expectations

• Stay ahead of emerging competitive threats

• Identify new growth opportunities in changing markets

• Build the adaptability needed to thrive in different conditions

In these contexts, investment in design feels unnecessary because leadership doesn't see the cracks forming in their foundation.

The pattern I kept seeing

As I reflected on this challenge, I realized there was a deeper pattern at play. These companies weren't just resting on their laurels; they had become victims of their own success. We're talking about businesses that had found something that worked really well, often years or even decades ago, and had built entire organizational identities around that success.

This created what I started thinking of as a potent combination: Legacy success + Present Momentum + Future blindness.

Legacy success: They had proven formulas and established ways of doing things that had delivered results in the past.

Present momentum: They were still generating revenue and meeting targets, creating the illusion that everything was fine.

Future blindness: They weren't actively scanning for changes in their environment or disrupting themselves before someone else did.

I call this the Success Inertia Effect, and once I started looking for it, I saw it everywhere.

Is your company experiencing the Success Inertia Effect? Five warning signs

If you're wondering whether your organization might be stuck in this pattern, here are the signals I've learned to watch for:

1. "Our customers haven't complained" is used as evidence that everything is fine. This usually means the company isn't actively seeking feedback or has made it difficult for customers to provide it.

2. Competitive analysis focuses only on direct competitors, not companies solving similar problems differently. When teams only look at others doing exactly what they do, they miss entirely the disruptive approaches that could benefit them.

3. Success metrics haven't evolved in years. Companies experiencing this effect continue to measure what made them successful in the past, rather than what will make them successful in the future.

4. New ideas are consistently met with "we tried that before" or "that's not how we do things here." This shows the organization has stopped learning from both failures and changing contexts.

5. Design and research insights are treated as opinions rather than data. When qualitative insights about user needs are dismissed or not taken seriously because they don't align with existing assumptions, it's a clear sign of the effect taking hold.

Visualizing the effect

To help myself (and others) understand this dynamic better, I developed a simple framework that maps companies along two key dimensions:

Organizational Learning & Adaptability (High vs. Low)

Current Performance & Momentum (Strong vs. Weak)

Companies in what I think of as the "inertia zone," those with strong current performance but low adaptability, are coasting on past success while missing critical signals about their future. That very momentum can blind them to some critical realities:

• Customer needs that have evolved since their initial success

• New competitors who are solving problems in fundamentally different ways

• Market shifts that make their original advantages less relevant

• Internal processes and systems that worked then but create friction now

Compare this to companies that might be struggling with current performance but are highly adaptable. These companies often see design as essential for reinvention and invest in understanding their changing landscape as a survival strategy.

The stakes are higher than you think

I've seen what happens when companies wait too long to address this effect. One organization I worked with spent three years not prioritizing user research showing their user experience was becoming outdated. They pointed to stable customer numbers as proof they were fine. But when a competitor launched with a significantly better user experience, customer defection happened rapidly — within six months, they lost 30% of their user base to the new entrant.

The reality is that customer loyalty built on past success can evaporate quickly when better alternatives emerge. And in today's market, those alternatives are emerging faster than ever.

What this means for design leaders

If you find yourself facing these challenges within your organization, I've learned a few strategies that can help:

Make the invisible visible. These companies aren't ignoring signals on purpose — they genuinely don't see them. Document the gaps between what customers actually need today versus what the company thinks they need. Use research to expose evolving expectations and pain points that might not show up in traditional business metrics.

One approach that's worked for me is creating "day in the life" journey maps that show the cumulative friction customers experience. When you present these alongside competitive experiences that solve the same problems more elegantly, it becomes harder to dismiss the need for change.

Reframe design as future-proofing. Instead of positioning design as fixing what's broken, position it as ensuring continued success. I've had success showing how design visioning and thinking help companies stay ahead of shifts rather than react to them after it's too late.

Try language like: "Our success gives us the opportunity to evolve from a position of strength rather than react from a position of necessity."

Connect the dots to competitive threats. Find examples of companies in adjacent markets or with similar customer bases who have been disrupted by more design-forward competitors. Sometimes, seeing what happened to others in similar situations is the wake-up call leadership needs.

I always recommend focusing on companies that were similarly successful before being disrupted, as it makes the threat feel more real and immediate.

Build allies across the organization. You can't fight this battle alone. Build allies in sales, customer service, marketing, or product management who are also close to the customer and who hear things directly, to support and add to your insights. When multiple departments start raising similar concerns, it becomes harder to dismiss them as isolated opinions.

Start with small wins that build credibility. Pick one area where you can demonstrate clear impact without requiring massive organizational change. Once you've proven value in a contained way, you'll have more leverage to tackle bigger systemic challenges.

Focus on improvements that have a measurable business impact, such as reduced support tickets, increased conversion rates, or improved task completion times.

The bigger picture

Not all successful companies suffer from this — I want to be clear about that. But those that do often share one thing: they're so focused on preserving what made them successful that they stop actively working to understand what will make them successful in the future.

As design leaders, I believe we have a unique opportunity to help these organizations develop what I think of as "success radar": the ability to sense when conditions are changing and adapt accordingly. Design, at its core, is about staying connected to human needs and finding creative solutions to evolving problems.

The truth is, what made a company successful five years ago might not be what makes it successful tomorrow. Customer expectations evolve. Markets shift. New solutions emerge. The companies that recognize this and invest in design as a strategic capability, not just a service function, are the ones that will continue to thrive when their original advantages are no longer enough.

What I've learned is that overcoming the Success Inertia Effect isn't just about proving design's value; it's about helping our organizations develop the humility to question their own success and the courage to evolve before they have to.

The most successful design leaders I know aren't just advocating for better experiences; they're helping their companies build the organizational muscle to continuously evolve. That's the difference between companies that sustain success over decades and those that become cautionary tales about what happens when you stop listening to the world around you.

Have you encountered this pattern in your own work? I'd love to hear about your experiences helping organizations move beyond the comfort of past success. A note until next time: sometimes the biggest risk to future success is being too attached to what worked in the past.

Note: One challenge that keeps surfacing in conversations with other leaders — about themselves or their teams — is navigating those tough moments where our expectations and realities collide. It's so important to develop a toolkit to address these inevitable scenarios in the workplace, especially when you're just entering into leadership roles. I find this topic so important that Courtney Kaplan and I selected it as the focus of a workshop we led for DMBA students at CCA last week. Today, let's explore how we can transform these potentially challenging situations into opportunities for growth.

Possibly unsurprisingly, the most challenging moments in design leadership rarely center on the craft of design itself. Instead, they come up in those crucial conversations we have to navigate — whether it's delivering tough feedback, aligning with stakeholders, or addressing team dynamics. These conversations are where real leadership happens, and how we handle them can make or break our effectiveness as design leaders.

Let's talk about that gap between what we hope to achieve and the constraints we face — what I call "the delta." This gap becomes most apparent in our day-to-day communications, and how we bridge it often defines our success as leaders.

Understanding the communication delta

In my experience, this delta typically shows up in three key scenarios:

• Performance feedback: You need to give constructive feedback to a team member who is underperforming or a peer who is being difficult. You want to be supportive, but you also need to be clear about the improvements required. Navigating this conversation without demotivating the person can be tricky.

• Stakeholder misalignment: A key stakeholder has a vision that doesn’t align with the user research or the design direction you’ve been pursuing. Convincing them to see the value of your approach without dismissing their concerns requires diplomacy and a deep understanding of their perspective.

• Team dynamics: When tensions arise within the team — whether over design decisions, workload distribution, or personality clashes — your role as a mediator is crucial. You need to facilitate a conversation that resolves the issue while maintaining team morale and cohesion.

Embracing the communication delta

Rather than avoiding these difficult conversations, we should approach them as opportunities to strengthen relationships, clarify expectations, and move projects forward. Here's what I've learned works:

1. Prepare with empathy: Before entering a difficult conversation, take a moment to consider the other person’s perspective. What might they be feeling? What are their primary concerns? By understanding where they’re coming from, you can frame the conversation in a way that acknowledges their viewpoint while still addressing the issues at hand.

2. Be clear and direct: Ambiguity is the enemy of effective communication, especially in difficult conversations. Be clear about the purpose of the discussion, the issues that need to be addressed, and the desired outcomes. Avoid sugarcoating the message — this can lead to misunderstandings and prolonged issues.

3. Listen actively: One of the most powerful tools in any tough conversation is active listening. Give the other person space to express their thoughts and feelings without interruption. Reflect back what you’ve heard to ensure understanding and to show that you’re genuinely engaged in the dialogue.

4. Focus on solutions, not blame: When conversations get tough, it’s easy to slip into a defensive or accusatory stance. Instead, keep the conversation focused on finding solutions. What steps can be taken to address the issue? How can both parties work together to move forward? Framing the discussion around problem-solving rather than fault-finding can lead to more constructive outcomes.

5. Follow-up: After a difficult conversation, follow up to ensure that any agreed-upon actions are being implemented and that the relationship remains positive. This shows that you’re committed to the resolution and helps reinforce trust.outcomes over time.

Getting to zero delta (at least, as close as possible)

Navigating difficult conversations is an inevitable part of design leadership. It's where we prove our ability to handle the complexities of organizations and manage the interpersonal dynamics that are essential to project success and the overall impact of Design.

The way we handle these conversations can either close the communication delta or widen it. Through my experiences building and leading design teams, I've learned that approaching tough talks with empathy, clarity, and a focus on collaboration is key to creating a more cohesive, productive work environment.

These conversations aren't just about delivering a message — they're about connecting, understanding, and guiding your team through the complexities of corporations. With the right approach, you can turn these challenging moments into opportunities for growth and stronger relationships.

In my next post, we'll explore how to build resilience in design teams during periods of organizational change. See you then!

Note: Welcome back to my latest post series, adapted from my recent appearance on the Samelogic podcast! In these past few posts, I’ve done a deeper dive into some of the topics we discussed in the interview, which centered on leadership, hiring, and inclusivity in UX design. Give it a listen if you want to learn more!

On the podcast, Dwayne Samuels asked me what advice I would give to aspiring UX leaders. This question got me thinking, and I found myself still reflecting on it after our conversation was over. What are the secrets to success in the design field? What wisdom do I wish I could give my younger self?

Like design itself, design leadership is a process of trial and error. I’ve spent many years of my career figuring out what works (and what doesn’t!), making mistakes, and learning how to best support my teams while growing individually as a leader and design practitioner. I can’t say there’s any single piece of advice I can give that’s 100% foolproof, but I hope that by sharing some of my biggest learnings, I can set you up for success. If you’re looking to take your first plunge into a leadership role, or advance your current one, here’s some advice from my journey that might help you along the way.

Seek mentorship beyond your field

Mentorship is important. Strike that — mentorship is extremely important. When I look back on my own career path, I’m reminded that I probably wouldn’t be where I am today if others hadn’t invested in mentoring me. But the other piece to this, which doesn’t get talked about nearly as much, is that you can get even more out of mentorship when you expose yourself to areas beyond your current field. As I mentioned in my conversation with Dwayne, I never limited myself to learning just from UX leaders, designers, or design-adjacent professionals. Looking back, that helped me build so many foundational skills that have been critical to my success as a leader.

The takeaway? Don’t limit yourself to design. Instead, take every opportunity to learn from someone, no matter what their specialty is. Engineering, product management, marketing, HR, sales, operations, analytics… Whenever you have a chance to exchange information, even if it’s not a formal mentor-mentee relationship, you’re expanding your perspective and building expertise that will power your career down the line.

Collaborate to build empathy

In my earlier post on key skills for design leaders, I talked about empathy and why it’s important from a leadership and design standpoint. When you can understand the challenges others face, you can more easily find solutions. If you can’t put yourself in other people’s shoes, you’ll always be limited as a designer — but empathy isn’t only for the users. It’s also a key skill for collaborating with your team and cross-functional partners. Leaders who make an effort to understand different perspectives can collaborate and drive alignment more easily.

How do you develop empathy? Look for ways to create an open dialogue across functions. Set up collaborative workshops to co-create and break down silos. Start ongoing meetings to review goals and timelines. Discuss pain points and share ideas with other teams. Each time you do this, you’re building trust and growing your understanding of your coworkers — and you’re also helping them understand you!

Turn your weaknesses into strengths

Sometimes, we can turn what we think of as “weaknesses” into something we can leverage to have a positive impact. Early in my career, I was extremely focused on having everything look and function a certain way. You can call it perfectionism if you want (I think that’s something we experience a lot as designers and researchers)! In any case, when an outcome didn’t meet my quality standards — maybe a feature didn’t work the way I imagined or something wasn’t implemented quite right — I would get frustrated: “Why can’t you just see things my way? Why aren’t you creating things the way I’m asking you to?”

What I realized was that moments like those were actually learning opportunities. What was the reason my Engineering partners made the decisions they did? What constraints or challenges were they facing? Was there something I was missing? The more I invested in understanding how things were built, the more empathy (there it is again!) I developed for my engineering partners. Since then, some of my best, most productive relationships have been with engineering teams. My high standards became a motivator for collaborating and finding better solutions through curiosity and communication. The key was finding a way to channel what was once a weakness into something productive.

Embrace what sets you apart

It’s going to sound cliche, but bear with me: Your differences are one of your biggest assets. I grew up feeling like a square peg in a round hole. I always seemed to view things differently than everyone else, and that could feel like a disadvantage. But being different is a superpower, and I credit a lot of my biggest successes to being able to see the world and approach problems in a different way.

As a designer, you’ll go a long way when you can bring a unique perspective to the table, so don’t shy away from that! Voice your unique insights. Challenge the status quo. Don’t be afraid to think outside the box. This is how you inspire your teams, unlock new ideas, and succeed in a space that thrives on innovation.

Moving forward and moving up

It’s funny to be asked about my biggest learnings from my own career, since a lot of the time, I feel like I’m still learning! And as I think about it now, that might be the biggest piece of advice I can give to new and aspiring design leaders: Always be learning, and don’t lose your natural curiosity.

Becoming a strong design leader is a process, and there will be mistakes and missteps along the way. The good news is, each of those pitfalls is also a learning opportunity — you just have to be willing to actually, well, learn from it. It’s a marathon, not a sprint, so seek connections and mentorship, embrace your differences, and look for ways to leverage your weaknesses. That’s the secret to evolving as a designer and as a leader. See you next time!

Note: This is my next post based on my recent interview for the Samelogic podcast, where we discussed the ins and outs of building successful UX and design teams. Check it out if you want to learn more, or take a look at my last two posts for a deeper dive. 

Think about your path to your first leadership role. Did you jump in headfirst, or did you have help? I’m willing to bet that you (like me, and like most of us) had support along the way: someone — a mentor or a manager — who saw a spark of something in you and helped you cultivate it. 

Leadership on your team can (and should!) be developed over time, but in order to do that, you have to be able to identify it and nurture it in your hires. That’s where the real work starts. With that in mind, let’s talk about how to spot future leaders, create opportunities for them to succeed, and support their ongoing growth and development. 

Identifying future leaders

In my last post, I covered a lot of the qualities I look for in candidates when I’m hiring. When you’re intentional about your hiring strategy and bring in people with a growth mindset, you’re already creating the right conditions for leadership within your team. However, those traits may or may not translate into true leadership. So how do you identify that quality in your current team members? 

As a leader, part of your job is always having your eyes open for high performers. The only way to do that is by staying close to your team and actively observing them and how they show up — both in their individual work and in the ways they work with others. Take the time to really observe each of your reports, and ask yourself:

• Are they seeing gaps in the system and taking the initiative to close them? Are they putting processes, frameworks, and principles in place to improve how things are done? (I talked about this a lot in an earlier post, but I think it’s worth repeating!)

• How are they showing up as a colleague? Are they putting in effort to help others succeed, instead of focusing on just their own achievements?

• Do they have a solution-focused mindset? Do they approach challenges with creativity and curiosity?

• How are they influencing the culture? Are they contributing to a collaborative environment and making others feel seen, heard, and supported?

A lot of times, people mistake leadership potential for being the loudest voice in the room or the most extroverted personality. Your responsibility is to watch for people who show patterns of support and initiative — people whose actions consistently benefit those around them and the broader organization. 

Investing in growth

Talent has a habit of slipping away when you don’t create the conditions for it to flourish. For this reason, you should see nurturing leadership talent as an ongoing process. As a leader yourself, sometimes you see strengths in others that they might not see in themselves, so the question becomes, how do you help them see those strengths, too? How do you help them grow those strengths and connect them to opportunities? 

You’re in a unique position to do this by:

• Being intentional about career conversations: Set aside time for discussions about your team members’ long- and short-term goals. Do they have any skills they want to develop or projects they want to take on? The more you absorb from these talks, the easier it will be to connect your reports with the right opportunities. 

• Prioritizing skill development: Whenever possible, budget resources for growing your team’s skills through workshops, seminars, certifications, or other forms of training. Remember to take their goals into account!

• Exposing your team to different functions: Designers and UXers tend to be very function- and team-centric. But even if your reports want to stay on the design track, exposure to cross-functional leaders and teams helps them expand their thinking and develop empathy. As I’ve said before, this is so important for design leaders!

• Giving stretch assignments: You have a broader view of the goings-on in your company than your reports. Look for ways to give them projects that will challenge them or create ownership opportunities while playing to their strengths. These projects should be ambitious but achievable with regular check-ins, support, and feedback. 

• Building a culture of coaching and mentorship: Connect your reports with mentors or peer coaches who can help them learn and grow. Encourage them to have regular conversations about skill development, current challenges, and career goals. Ideally, you should be pairing people with complementary skills and goals, but cross-functional mentorship can also be a great learning opportunity. 

This is all in support of building a culture that encourages continuous learning, where leadership and growth opportunities are accessible to everyone on your team. Recognizing and acting on their strengths and goals will empower them to take on more ownership and help them grow as individuals — and, by extension, as a team. 

Paving the way to success

Most of the time, great design leaders, or leaders in general, don’t develop in a vacuum. They emerge because someone invested in their potential and encouraged them to refine their skills through mentorship, projects, and other opportunities. The time and energy you put into nurturing that potential now will help your team thrive today — and be felt by future teams tomorrow. That’s part of your job as a leader, and if you’re anything like me, you’ll find it more fulfilling and inspiring than you would ever expect.

In my next post, I will share insights from my journey for those aspiring to become design leaders. See you then!

Note: In case you missed my last post in this series, here's some context: I recently appeared on the Samelogic podcast, where I talked about building successful design teams. There was a ton of great stuff there, so give it a listen if you're curious (and be sure to check out my last post, which expands on our discussion of inclusivity in design hiring)!

What makes a design candidate truly stand out in today's competitive market? If technical expertise is the first thing that comes to mind, you're not wrong — but that's just table stakes. Whether I'm hiring a junior designer or a senior leader, the candidates who truly shine have traits that go beyond raw talent and experience. While these qualities might be less tangible than a strong portfolio, they're what makes it possible for designers to grow, contribute, and eventually lead with impact.

Growth potential

You hear the term "growth potential" get thrown around a lot in hiring. Because different hiring managers may have different definitions, it can be hard to pinpoint what this term actually means, but I'll share mine: I'm looking for candidates who show initiative to drive positive change, regardless of their level. What were the instances when they were not okay with the status quo, they saw an opportunity to do things differently, and they pushed forward to accomplish that. For junior designers, this might look like improving internal documentation,  suggesting a new team ritual, or coming up with an efficient way of using a tool. For more senior folks, it could mean reimagining entire workflows or processes. It's one thing to identify problems, but taking steps to solve them shows both ambition and action. Even small improvements count — I'm always excited to hear candidates share stories about how they've made things better in their previous roles.

Leadership mindset

Here's something that might surprise you: leadership qualities matter at every level of design. You don't need a fancy title to demonstrate leadership — it shows up in how you collaborate, how you communicate your ideas, and how you influence others. I look for candidates who can share examples of times they've taken initiative, brought others along with their ideas, and built support for their vision. Maybe they led a project, mentored an intern, or simply helped their team adopt a new tool. As Jared Spool said, "You become a leader when you gain a few followers."

Empathy

Being able to look at things from the user's point of view is what distinguishes a good designer from a great one. This is crucial for everyone on the team, from junior designers to directors. Empathy in design can look like:

• Understanding your teammates' unique goals, challenges, and strengths

• Doing deep research to understand problems and pain points from multiple angles

• Not relying on assumptions about what the user may or may not need

• Partnering with cross-functional teams to expose yourself to new perspectives

• Sharing your point of view while remaining open to others' perspectives

Our job as designers is to take the user's side, to understand their challenges, and share that knowledge with others. None of those things are fully possible without empathy.

Adaptability

No two design roles or organizations are exactly alike. A designer joining a startup might need different skills than someone joining an established tech company. Some teams might need quick iterations and constant collaboration, while others might require more independent work and detailed documentation. The most successful designers — at any level — are those who can read the room, understand the context, and adjust their approach accordingly.

Other soft skills (with a caveat)

I'll preface this by saying that technically, all the other traits I've listed so far are soft skills, too. But there are plenty of others that can range from "nice-to-haves" to non-negotiables, depending on the role and level:

• Communication

• Collaboration

• Decision-making

• Conflict resolution

• Coaching ability

• Coachability (different, but just as important!)

• Emotional intelligence

• Composure under pressure

When I interview someone, my goal is to find the right balance of soft and hard skills based on the team's needs and the role's level. Side note: that's also why you can build a strong culture by having a mix of junior and senior folks on your team!

Closing thoughts

Full disclosure: Narrowing down my top recommended qualities to just five wasn’t an easy task. There's so much that goes into being a strong designer, and these demands evolve as you progress in your career. Even still, these traits consistently stand out when I look back on the most successful designers I've encountered — from fresh graduates to seasoned leaders.

I look for these qualities in all my hires, and I continue to work to refine them in myself. They've served me well throughout my career, and I've watched them serve others well too. Whether you're just starting your design journey or looking to take that next big step, focusing on these five qualities will give you the foundation to grow, contribute, and eventually lead with impact.

Note: I recently had the opportunity to appear on the Samelogic podcast. During our chat, Dwayne Samuels and I discussed several topics related to building strong Design teams. There were so many great discussion points that I’ve decided to break down the highlights into a couple of posts, starting with this one on inclusivity in UX hiring. This is a major aspect of team building that deserves a closer look, and it’s one I haven’t yet addressed on this blog. I hope you find it useful!

Throughout my career, I’ve had a lot of chances to think about hiring for design — what works, what doesn’t, and what the formula is for building a thriving team. I’ve published some of my thoughts on this topic in my last few posts, but one thing I didn’t touch on was the issue of inclusivity. 

Over the years, I’ve seen how common hiring practices can feel outdated, counterproductive, and exclusive. As leaders, I believe we have a responsibility to make sure our hiring processes are as fair and equitable as possible, but too often we miss out on great talent because we’re creating unnecessary barriers in how we assess candidates. But I also believe it’s possible to change our approach to hiring for design functions to benefit both the candidates and our teams. 

Rethinking outdated practices

Just because something has worked in the past, that doesn’t always mean it will work in the future, or even that it’s working now! Take design exercises as an example. I have a lot of strong opinions about these, but they mostly boil down to this: design exercises and other take-home projects are not the optimal way to assess a candidate’s skills or fit. 

Why? A few reasons:

1. Design doesn’t happen in a vacuum. We don’t expect the designers, researchers, and writers on our teams to operate without support, collaboration, and feedback from their peers and cross-functional partners. So why have we made a siloed practice like design exercises become such a big part of the hiring process? You could have someone who nails a take-home exercise but doesn’t collaborate well with other team members. On the flip side, you could also overlook someone who didn’t do well on their assignment but would have been an amazing addition to the team. The conditions we’re putting our candidates through with these exercises don’t reflect reality, so why are we basing our hiring decisions on them? 

2. Take-home exercises are inefficient. I know from experience how time-consuming these projects can be. These assignments can be multiple hours of work on the candidate’s end and a non-trivial amount of review time on the hiring team’s. And for what? Those resources could be better spent elsewhere. In addition, despite the hiring manager’s best efforts to “time box” the exercise, many candidates will work on it for as long as they want or as long as it takes, which leads me to my next point…

3. Inclusivity problems. Picture two candidates applying for the same role. One is single and early in life with lighter responsibilities. The other is a single mom juggling two kids and a demanding day job. Who do you think will have more time and energy to put into a design exercise? These candidates might both be equally talented and dedicated, but by giving them both the same task, you’re creating an uneven playing field. I’m not singling anyone out here, but it’s just a fact. People’s life situations can affect how well they perform on take-home projects, which is why these exercises can introduce a lot of inequality into the hiring process. 

As leaders, we need to rethink how we’re assessing candidates. The industry is evolving, and we should be, too. If we want hiring to be more inclusive, efficient, and realistic, we have to create processes that reflect reality  —  as well as the values we preach in design: empathy, collaboration, and inclusion.

Redesigning design hiring

The question remains: How do we make hiring more inclusive? I think this is simpler than a lot of people believe, and as hiring managers, it can actually save us headaches in the long run. We’re designers, so why not think about hiring the same way we think about design problems?

We can do that by asking questions like:

• Where are the gaps in the current system? Are there aspects of our hiring processes that make it harder for certain candidates to succeed?

• Are we prioritizing collaboration? How can we replace isolated tasks with scenarios that reflect what real-life design work actually looks like?

• How is this process fitting into people’s lives? Is the experience fair? Are we accommodating people’s schedules and life situations? 

• Can we simplify further? What steps can we refine or eliminate to reduce friction on both ends?

• Does this align with our values? Are we emphasizing empathy, flexibility, and collaboration?  

• Have we prototyped and tested our process? Are we testing our hiring criteria to see how it works for diverse candidates? 

• Are we iterating? Are we seeking input from candidates and hiring teams to improve and refine our systems? 

• Is there a feedback system in place? Are we providing a way for candidates and hiring teams to share their feedback about the process? 

There are plenty of ways to improve our hiring processes. We just have to be willing to adjust the approach. If you really want to use, say, an exercise to evaluate someone’s expertise, it just means making it more inclusive and true to reality. Try replacing a take-home assignment with a cross-functional whiteboard session. Incorporate portfolio presentations into the interview process. There are so many ways to see how candidates interact with others, develop their ideas, manage conflicts, and respond to real-time feedback. Get creative, and you can design a process that’s more fair, accurate, and comprehensive. 

Putting the human back in hiring

As designers, we’re focused on putting people at the heart of our work. We should be doing the same in our hiring. Outdated practices can leave behind talented candidates, so I would advise any design leader to take a hard look at their current system. Ask yourself where the gaps are, create processes that simulate real-life work, and always be willing to seek feedback and iterate. 

If we really want to build stronger, more inclusive, and better-performing teams, we need to approach hiring with the same empathy we apply to everything else we do. Putting people back at the center helps us uncover candidates’ true potential. The result: a space for diverse talent to thrive, make meaningful contributions, and elevate the whole organization. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic, and I’ll see you next time!

Note: Thanks for joining me in my series on building a design organization and creating a broader design culture within a company. You may remember that last time, we chatted about doing damage control after a bad hire. This time, let’s get into a more positive topic: spotting and landing the right candidates. 

A couple of posts ago, when I was talking about red flags and pitfalls you may run into as you’re hiring your new team, I also touched on the idea of green flags, the qualities that (in my opinion) any design leader should want in their hires. Today, I’d like to go deeper on that subject, because knowing what to look for in a candidate is just as important as knowing what to avoid. 

But it doesn’t end with recognizing the right candidate. Once you know you’ve found someone who will benefit your org, your next challenge is making sure they choose you. After all, if they’re the right fit for you, they’re probably the right fit for someone else, so how do you make sure they end up on your team  —  especially when they might have multiple other offers?

My take on green flags

I’ll admit this is going to be subjective. Different design leaders are going to prioritize different things, so my list might not be the same as yours. However, over the years I’ve gotten a pretty good feel for the signs that (to me, at least) indicate a candidate is exceptional. 

So what specific traits should you be looking for? Well, for starters, I pay attention to honesty, authenticity, and humility. Being humble doesn’t mean candidates should be downplaying their accomplishments, but it has set several interviewees apart in my eyes. Beyond that, though, I find that the best candidates are curious, engaged, and genuinely interested in helping the team grow and contributing to the culture. They stand apart even more if they offer to contribute beyond just the expectations of their role. That’s a quality I (and I’m guessing many other leaders) appreciate. 

Keep your eyes peeled for candidates who ask questions like: 

• “What does the team need that’s a gap right now?”

• “How can I contribute outside of what’s mentioned in the job description?”

• “What challenges are you currently facing, and how could I help solve them if I were in this role?”

• “How can I help coach and mentor junior members on the team?”

• “What are some process improvements that I could contribute to?” 

• “How would someone in this role uphold and support this team’s values?”

When I think about stand-out candidates I’ve interviewed in the past, what they all had in common was that they didn’t just check the boxes on paper. From our first interview, they showed that they would bring something positive to the team and the company, and they didn’t disappoint. 

Here are a couple of examples:

• I had one candidate who stood out because they showed an amazing level of authenticity and maturity during our interviews. It was clear that this person genuinely wanted to help the team get better if they came aboard  —  and they did. They invested in mentoring others and helped set a tone for a supportive culture.

• There was another candidate I remember who showed great interest in improving design advocacy and education within the broader company. They even proposed a few ways they would move that initiative forward if hired. I brought them on, and they really invested in making our “lunch and learn” program a success. 

When you’re early in the process of building a design team, this is so important! The examples your hires set can change the overall dynamic, so keep an eye out for people who will demonstrate the values you’re looking for.

Sealing the deal

No matter what green flags you look for in your design interviews, you’ll still have to deal with the challenge of closing the right candidate when you find them  —  especially when they’re talking to multiple companies. 

When you have a tight budget, you might not be able to compete on just price. I’ll be honest, if you have someone who’s hyper-focused on base salary, you may lose them. This can be an issue in startup environments and early-stage design teams where budgets are limited.

That said, if you understand a candidate’s other motivations, you may still be able to land them. 

What are they looking for besides the money? Growth opportunities? Coaching and mentoring? A chance to do mission-oriented work? A supportive culture? Work-life balance? Flexibility? Make it clear how your team will provide those things in a way that other teams can’t. 

Not every candidate will go for this, and some will take a hard line about compensation, which is fine. But I’ve found that for many candidates, the money is just one piece of what they’re looking for. Figure out what those other pieces are, and prove that your team is where to find them, and you’ll have an easier time making the hire, even when there’s competition. 

A final word

Hiring is a marathon, not a sprint. You’ve come this far, so stay dialed into your green flags and work to understand not just what a candidate can offer you, but what you can offer them. When you can learn to spot promising candidates and find a way to resonate with what they’re looking for, you’ll be on your way to building a winning team. 

In the next post, we’ll talk about what inclusive design hiring looks like and why it’s important to revisit some of the outdated practices that might not be so human-centered. See you next time!

Note: Welcome back to my post series for the Executive Designer, focusing on building a successful design org from the ground up. In my last post, I discussed red and green flags to look for as you’re building your team, as well as what to do when you and the rest of the hiring committee don’t see eye-to-eye. If you manage these challenges well, you can avoid many bad hires, but what happens when one slips through the cracks?

This isn’t something any design leader wants to hear (and believe me, I don’t like saying it, either), but let’s face it: hiring mistakes happen. No matter how solid your process is, bad hires can never be completely avoided. Sure, you can minimize the chances of making a mistake by thoroughly screening for values and experience, but at some point, you’ll bring on a candidate who just isn’t the right fit. 

So, what’s an up-and-coming design executive to do?

Knowing when to cut your losses

I remember a time when I hired someone who I really thought was the right fit for the role. Their experience and skills matched what we needed, and they seemed aligned with our values. The hiring panel was generally, if not unanimously, in favor of extending an offer. The team was excited about bringing them on. And the candidate accepted …

Fast forward a few months, the new employee was having a hard time adjusting to the team. While they interviewed really well for seniority, maturity, and dealing with ambiguity, it was not matching up in real life. Feedback – sometimes strongly worded – was coming from product managers, engineers, and marketers (all key partners to this individual) and other business stakeholders that they were not feeling included in the design process, and they struggled to get their feedback incorporated early enough without affecting the timelines of their projects. This designer struggled showing up as a senior member who would be able to set an example for others. Their approach was fixed with very little room to adapt to the needs of the context they were in, which resulted in disagreements and misalignments.

In response to this feedback, I worked with this individual extensively to improve their performance. I believed that they were capable of more than they were delivering, and I wanted to give them every opportunity to be successful, and they expressed receptiveness to this coaching and help. But despite offering them additional support and setting very specific and measurable goals for how to improve, the situation was not changing.

I had to make the call that this was not the right fit for the team and the company.

It’s easy to fall victim to the sunk-cost fallacy in these situations. “I’ve already put so much time into this person! There has to be a way to make this work!” 

It’s true that hiring and onboarding is expensive, and takes a lot of time and effort from many people. But you have to be honest with yourself and your team, especially when your design team is new and growing. This is the right time to course-correct for the culture you want to build. Also, you’ve done a lot to form relationships and get buy-in for design at your company, so you don’t want to risk letting problems drag out. If you’ve done everything you can think of and the situation still isn’t improving, that’s usually a sign that it’s time to part ways. Trying to keep pushing forward will just dig a deeper hole.

Damage control

When you realize you’ve made a hiring mistake, you need to act quickly but don’t panic. The last thing you want to do is get sloppy, bring in the first replacement you can find, and then end up with another bad fit. 

Instead, you need to take a step back to reflect on the situation. Debrief with your reports and the others involved in the hire to figure out next steps. What is the fallout of this going to be for your team? What will your transition plan look like? 

Even more important is reflecting on what went wrong. More importantly, how can it be prevented the second time around? Was it a performance issue? A lack of clear expectations? Misalignment? Something else? You have to be honest with yourself here, or you’ll risk repeating the same mistake. Again, talk to the cross-functional team, business leaders, and stakeholders, besides the design team — and seek feedback. If they were close to the problem, they may have noticed things you didn’t. 

Bonus: When you’re the hire that doesn’t work out

Here’s something you might not have thought about: What if you’re the wrong hire? What if someone hires you to build a design org from scratch and it doesn’t work out? 

This can be a tough situation, but it’s also an important learning opportunity. Just like when you’re the one who made the bad hire, you need to take a moment to reflect on what went wrong. Put your researcher hat on and do a root cause analysis. 

• What was in your control? 

• Could you have allocated money differently? 

• Could you have failed faster? 

• Could you have approached things more iteratively? 

• Could you have formed stronger relationships and built more trust within the organization? 

Remember, you shouldn’t be blaming yourself. Instead, focus on gathering data that will help you improve in the future. Some leadership roles just don’t work out, but if you’re thoughtful, you can make sure the next one is the right fit. 

Learning from your mistakes

The big takeaway from all this is that even though hiring mistakes happen, what really matters is what you do next and what you learn from them. The best way to handle bad hires is by recognizing when you’ve made one and course-correcting without getting emotional. You also need to be willing to honestly reflect on what went wrong and what you can do to avoid the same problem later on. I believe you can turn even the biggest hiring mistake into a learning opportunity—but to do that, you have to be willing to learn. 

Look out for my next post to learn more time-tested tips for building a winning design team!

Note: Hello again! In this series, we’re focusing on what new design leaders need to do in order to build a winning design team (and a broader design culture) from scratch. If you’re just joining me, I’d recommend you start with my earlier posts on getting buy-in, the early role of the design executive, working with TA, and a hiring toolkit for design. Otherwise, let’s dive in.

There are challenges that every design leader eventually faces (and that every design leader probably wishes they didn’t have to face). Ideally, they don’t come up often, but they can, and when they do, they can wreak havoc on your budding design team. 

I’m talking about the inevitable pitfalls in interviewing, the ones that can impact not just the hiring process, but the organization at large. And if you’re a new design exec, understanding these risks isn’t enough. You have to be able to recognize and respond to them in a way that doesn’t break your relationships while also not resulting in a bad hire. 

In this post, I’ll focus on two of the most common challenges you may face while building your design team: identifying red flags and managing those moments when you and/or others on the hiring panel butt heads. 

Lean on your values

While everyone likes to think they have a strong bird’s eye view of what their team needs (and what it definitely doesn’t), some red flags are easier to spot than others. That said, even if you can’t get a perfect picture of a candidate and how they’ll work with others on your team (which, let’s be honest, can be hard to do even on full teams), you can still weed out some of the most obvious warning signs. 

I remember interviewing a candidate who started their presentation by saying, “I’m well-known in the so-and-so community, and a lot of you here might already know who I am.”

None of the panel members, myself included, knew who this person was. To add to the awkwardness, one of our values in this particular Design Org was “Be humble.” Now, candidates can’t be expected to turn every interview into a research project, but if this candidate had researched the company's values or any specific qualities emphasized in the job description for this role, they might have realized that starting their interview with a boast might not have been the right move. (For more on screening for values and culture fit, check out my last post.) 

The moral of the story? Keep your values in the back of your mind as you’re interviewing. Candidates who demonstrate those values aren’t just showing culture fit; they’re also showing they’re invested in embodying those values.

Clarify, clarify, clarify

Prioritizing values isn’t the only way to screen for red flags. I was once interviewing another candidate who presented their process of building a feature in a very linear way. They said something along the lines of, “We conducted research, validated concepts, built a winning candidate, launched it, and succeeded.” 

Now, this may have been the reality of the project, but it always gives me pause when a design candidate provides such a happy path or high-level answer. To get clarity in these cases, I might ask questions like:

• How were your initial insights developed?

• What was your role in gathering these insights?  

• Who were you primarily targeting?

• What methods were most useful for this audience?

• What did the conceptualizing phase look like?

• What were some of the challenges you faced?

• Did you use any other data to inform your decision-making, and if so, which data?

• Who was the core team working on this? What did your collaboration look like?

A little prodding revealed that this designer didn’t contribute to any of the early stages of the project; they had spent most of their time executing the final designs. There’s nothing outright wrong with this, but what our team needed was someone who could be in the weeds early on in a project, not just get it over the finish line. 

Situations like these illustrate why it’s so important to dig deeper with your questions. Don’t read into people’s responses only what you want to hear. High-level answers can be a good starting point, but when it comes to building a team—especially from scratch—you can’t afford to make assumptions.

Green flags

What experiences like these have taught me is that successful design hires often display a few common “green flags,” such as:

• Great communication  

• Authenticity

• Humility in the ways they talk about their achievements (framing them in the context of a team effort)

• Providing clarity about their contributions and the challenges they’ve faced

Of course, every design team has slightly different needs, but in my experience, these traits are the most likely to lead to a positive outcome. 

Remember, when you’re interviewing, you’re not just listening to the answers themselves. You’re listening to what the answers tell you about the candidate, their personality, their values, and their mindset. The takeaway? Pay attention to the stories a candidate tells you about their work. They can reveal a lot. 

Managing disagreements

What happens when your hiring panel is excited about a candidate, but you aren’t—or vice versa? This really depends on the situation. 

Let’s say the hiring panel said yes to a candidate, but you picked up on something the others didn’t. In this situation, you can probably say no to the hire without too much fallout, as long as you’re clearly communicating what you noticed to the rest of the team so they can look out for the same thing in the future. In this situation, you are in a great position to help coach and guide the team on a signal they should look out for.

But what about a situation where everyone else on the panel is a no, but you’re a yes? If you’re an org leader or hiring manager, you always have the final vote, and when there’s a tie, the decision may fall to you—but that doesn’t mean you should be trying to overrule the decision of the team. 

Why? Because if you’re having to make that type of executive decision, there’s probably something more going on. This is where it pays to do a root cause analysis and understand where you’re misaligned. Is it an issue with the interview process or the questions or the panel? A lack of clarity about the role and responsibilities? Getting to the bottom of the mismatch is better than forcing a candidate through when everyone else is against it. (Besides, is that a dynamic you really want to create on your team? Talk about starting off on the wrong foot!)

Avoiding problems before they become problems

The best time to scan for red flags is before you’ve made the hire. Getting ahead of issues like poor culture fit, problematic traits, and misaligned experiences can save you headaches in the future. The same goes for managing disagreements on the hiring panel. You have to be willing to take a step back and reassess what’s behind those conflicts, not just throw your weight around, if you want the best possible outcome.

That said, sometimes hiring still goes wrong, even when you do everything right. Knowing what to do in those situations can help you minimize the damage, so be sure to tune in for my next post on hiring mistakes if you want to learn more. See you then!

Note: Welcome back to my mini-series on building a design organization from the ground up, from getting buy-in for design as a new executive to building out a successful team. In case you missed it, in my last post, I explored the importance of developing a relationship with Talent Acquisition to set the stage for successful hiring. Now, it’s time to go deeper. 

When you’re a new leader tasked with building a design organization, whether from scratch or from a scrappy existing team, you can expect to be involved (very involved) in the hiring process. On the surface, this can seem intimidating, especially if you’re building a team from nothing. The choices you make now will set the stage for the long-term future of design within your organization. 

Now, if you’ve played your cards right and gotten TA in your corner, you’ve already positioned yourself well. But what’s the secret to finding the right talent—not just for individual roles, but for the company as a whole? Let’s take a closer look. 

Connections & Networking: The best way to source candidates

Want to know the secret to successful hiring? It starts before you’ve had your first interview. It may even start before you yourself get hired! 

Put simply, the best way to source strong talent is to leverage a resource you should already have developed: your professional network.

Of course, recruiters, job portals, and other pipelines can be valuable, but in my experience, they’re far from the best way to find the right candidates. Why? Because when you have connections established already, you can remove a lot of the guesswork from seeking out prospects. 

I’m not just talking about reaching out to people you’ve worked with directly. I’m talking about tapping into second- and third-degree connections: people who know people you trust and who can connect you to people you’ve never worked with before. These referrals are likely to be more in line with your needs than cold intros, which is important for avoiding mismatches early in the team-building process. 

Take advantage of the goodwill you’ve built in the industry. Get your name out there. Attend industry events, take on speaking engagements, and expand your reach on LinkedIn. Form and nurture those connections, even when you’re not currently hiring or job-seeking. Think of this as a passive investment. You might not see the benefit right away, but when the time comes to start building a team, you’ll find that you have plenty of people to have coffee with—people who can connect you to the best talent in the industry. 

Screening for culture

When you’re first building a team, screening for culture can feel like a bit of a black box, even if you’re working for an established company. The reason is that in order to hire for culture, you have to understand the culture you’re hiring for. 

With this in mind, my biggest advice to new design leaders is to: 

• Clarify what kind of culture you’re trying to build. 

• List the values you’re looking for (such as respect, leading with curiosity, mutual support, etc.) and understand what each one looks like in action.

• Tailor your interview questions to screen for those values. 

For example, if you’re hiring for a fast-paced startup environment, you might know you need someone who can wear many different hats and operate under high amounts of stress. In practice, this might mean they can keep their cool in high-stakes, high-pressure situations (or help others on their team do the same). 

To screen for these behaviors in an interview, you might say something like: “Tell me about a time you were working on a big project and noticed some of your team members were getting stressed out. Were you able to defuse the situation? If so, how?” A candidate’s response to this question can help you clarify whether they have the calm and presence you’re looking for. 

All that being said, culture fit shouldn’t be the end-all-be-all. Building a design team where everyone thinks and behaves exactly the same doesn’t foster creativity and innovation. This is why it can help to view hiring as an additive process. Your goal is to bring in people with diverse values and perspectives who can each contribute something positive to the team. Let’s say, “culture-add” vs. “culture-fit”.

Sharing career progression ladders (It’s more important than you think!)

It’s easy to forget that when you’re interviewing a candidate, they’re interviewing you, too. And when you’re trying to attract world-class talent to a brand-new team, one of your biggest assets is the potential for career growth. 

This is why you should be sharing career progression ladders early in the hiring process. Open up that dialogue with a candidate as early as you can, and you can have a much more meaningful conversation about…

• Where they will fall within the organization

• What skills and behaviors they’ll need to bring to the table (not just for the role they’re interviewing for, but for future roles, too)

• What their career trajectory might look like

• How the organization will support their learning and development

• What mentoring, leadership, and community contributions look like within the organization

…and much more. 

When you can speak honestly about these things, you can help candidates visualize their future at the company and show that you’re invested in their growth. Don’t be shy—ask them what’s important to them in their career. Express your genuine interest in their success. This encourages them to be more open about their goals, but more importantly, it sets expectations early on. If the hire goes through, future career conversations will be much easier. 

Putting it all together

As you can see, I believe hiring and interviewing should be a holistic process. It’s both art and science—we are designers, after all! Finding the right candidate is about more than just shopping for skills; it’s about connecting to quality prospects through your network, having open conversations, aligning on values, and laying the foundation for a long-term relationship. 

The big takeaway? Don’t neglect the human side of hiring. As the one in charge of building your team, handling this process thoughtfully can have a lasting impact. 

Next time, we’ll take a hard look at some pitfalls and red flags to watch out for when interviewing. Avoiding hiring mistakes is just as important as finding the right candidates, so don’t forget to stay tuned!

Note: Welcome to another post in my series on building a design org from the ground up. In previous posts, I explored getting buy-in for design after joining a company, as well as what you can expect your role to look like as a brand-new design executive. I encourage you to give them a read if you haven’t already!

At long last, we’ve arrived at the elephant in the room (and arguably the reason you started reading this series in the first place): hiring for design. Some design leaders are fortunate enough to be brought onto a fully staffed team, or at least a skeleton crew, but you can’t count on that always being the case. And while one of your early responsibilities is to build a team that will execute on a company’s vision, this isn’t something you can—or should—do alone. This is where Talent Acquisition comes in, and your collaboration with them can make or break your hiring process. 

Building a relationship with Talent Acquisition: Why it’s important 

I’m always surprised by how little emphasis leaders tend to place on their relationships with Talent Acquisition. TA will help you attract and secure the people you need to build a best-in-class design organization, but to make the most of this resource, you need to build a relationship that’s more than just transactional. 

Think about any partnership you have at work—the people you’re in the trenches with on any given day. Think about how much energy you invest in your relationships with engineering partners, product management, data… You and these other teams are working on solving the same problems. As a result, you work to build relationships. You develop a shared language and an incredible level of collaboration. 

Why wouldn’t you want that same level of partnership with the people responsible for helping you build your team? 

When you have a close collaboration with Talent Acquisition, the process of hiring becomes more efficient, successful, and (dare I say) fun. Investing in this relationship might not be as intuitive as other cross-functional partnerships, but when you do, it really pays off. You get to build off each others’ energy when reviewing applications, setting up panels, calibrating feedback, and extending offers. You’ll get to a point where you can look at a resume together and know within a minute whether or not a candidate will be a good fit. 

As an organizational leader, I’ve consistently gotten great feedback about this approach—and TA is always pleasantly surprised by this level of partnership, which they rarely ever get. No one thrives in a “throw it over the wall” kind of culture, but when you co-create during the hiring process, it works like magic. People like solving problems together. Take advantage of that, and in the process, you’ll build a great team—and a lasting relationship with your TA partners. 

“Help us help you”: Educating TA on what you need

All that said, there’s more to working with TA than just investing in the relationship. To make the most of that relationship, you also need to make sure they fully understand the type of designers you’re looking to hire. 

When I was at Achieve, Talent Acquisition had zero experience hiring for design—especially at the level I was looking for. I had the opportunity to educate them on what the different design functions were and why they were important to the organization. It was a significant time investment, but it paid off by helping us narrow the talent pool and ended up saving me time I otherwise would have spent talking to irrelevant candidates. 

Sitting down with TA early on lets you share how you look for the right talent, how you assess and communicate with that talent, what questions to ask, and how to ask them. Some tips for doing this:

• Consistently collaborate on reviewing portfolios. Discuss your views on which candidates are ideal and which aren’t, and explain your reasoning. 

• If possible, get the TA team actively involved in portfolio presentations. This will give them another way to participate in the process, hear feedback directly, and learn the types of things the team is looking for in candidates directly (and what “good” looks like). This went a long way for me.

• Invite TA to be part of design team meetings, brown bag sessions, and any other relevant meetings as the team grows. This will give them a 360-degree view of the team, the value you deliver, and what you’re looking for. 

• Get feedback from your TA partners on the interviewers who are participating in the process. They have a front-row seat to the candidate experience and can give you great insights that will help you grow your team and improve the process.

No matter how much experience TA has in hiring for design, making them feel like a key part of the hiring process will really help you. The more they understand your needs and what makes a great designer, the more efficient they’ll be at matching you with the best talent. 

Co-creating your way to success

Working with Talent Acquisition isn’t just about handing off a wishlist and waiting for them to deliver you the ideal team. You’ll have much more success when you co-create—not just for your budding design team, but for the company as a whole. Prioritize that relationship, especially early on, and give them the best view possible into exactly what makes a good fit. This will jumpstart your hiring and pave the way for smoother collaboration in the future. 

In my next post, we’ll dig deeper into hiring, including screening for culture fit and the importance of sharing career progression ladders during the interview process. Nailing these points is key to attracting the people you need for an aligned, motivated, and high-performing design team. See you next time!

Note: This is the next in a series of posts on building out a team after joining a company as a design executive. In case you missed it, check out my last post on managing budget and getting buy-in for design at your new company. (Hint: It’s not as simple as it sounds!)

Does this situation sound familiar? You’ve just been brought on as a design leader at a company hoping to build a functioning team. You have the budget, leadership wants to prioritize design, and you’re ready to go… but the team itself doesn’t exist yet. 

This is a very real challenge you may face when you’re hired to start a design organization. You’re expected to hit the ground running, but bringing in new people doesn’t happen overnight. Who will deliver the work before you’ve made those first few hires? What can you expect your work to look like in the meantime?

Getting directly involved

I hate to break it to you, but when you first start at an org with no existing design team, you may have to contribute directly to projects. Getting your hands dirty probably isn’t exactly what you signed up for, but it is what you know, and that experience will come in handy in the days and weeks before your first hires are brought on. 

Remember that at this point you can also lean on design-adjacent teams, like Product and Marketing to fill in the gaps. Even though they don’t have your expertise, you can still leverage their insights and tool knowledge until your team is fully operational. These early collaborations can also help you establish cross-functional relationships that will allow you to cement your value within the organization. (I talked more about why this is important in my last post.) 

Prioritize high-leverage work

This is where a lot of new design leaders get tripped up. They default to being an individual contributor or a manager when their time could be better spent leading. Even though you might need to roll up your sleeves at first, you have to remember not to fall into an unhealthy pattern. You don’t scale by doing all the work yourself. You scale by doing what you were brought in to do: build the design organization. This is what’s going to compound your impact and show the company leadership a return on their investment. 

If you do need to contribute directly…

1. Timebox your work. Decide on an amount of time investment beforehand and hold yourself to it. 

2. Do only what absolutely needs to get done, then re-elevate yourself to higher-level involvement. Don’t get caught up in perfecting designs—that’s not what you’re being paid to do!

3. Focus on the areas where your work will have the most leverage. In your case, that means hiring good people and getting them involved in the work as soon as possible. 

It’s easy to lose track of what’s important when you’re the only person on the team, but you have to avoid getting too caught up in day-to-day tasks until you have the right people under you. Burying yourself in projects takes away bandwidth and time that you could be using to build the best design team you possibly can—and in the long run, that will have more impact than you ever will on your own. 

Of course, now you’re probably wondering, “So how do I bring on the best talent—and how do I do it as efficiently as possible?” You’re in luck, because this is exactly what I’ll be talking about in my next post. Stay tuned for more, and until then, remember: Your top priority as a new design leader isn’t to do the work yourself, but to find the best possible people to do it at scale. That’s how you deliver real value.

Note: This is the first in a series of posts on building out a design team after joining a company as a design executive. For a deeper dive into hiring for a design team, check out my previous post on building a design org from scratch.

Here’s the assumption most new design executives make: If a business has hired me, they’ve already bought into the value of design. This is a common misconception. It’s true that when a company decides to bring in a design leader, it’s a sign that they understand the importance of design. But that doesn’t always mean the organization knows…

1. What kind of team it needs. 

2. How to integrate that team into the enterprise. 

3. How to ensure that the team is adding value and delivering on business goals. 

At Achieve, I transformed a scrappy, three-person design team into an accomplished, 30-person department in under a year. A lot went into that transformation behind the scenes, and much of it focused on addressing these three points. As a new design leader, a lot of the heavy lifting still lies ahead of you, so how do you lay the groundwork for success?

Understanding buy-in

As I touched on earlier, there’s a misconception that once a company decides to bring you on, the foundation for building out your team has already been laid. The reality is that when you’re hired, you’re often stepping into a business that recognizes the need for design but doesn’t know how to implement it. If they did, they would have done it already!

Getting the company on board means building relationships from day one. Talk to people from different departments and ask questions. Gather as much information as you can to get a better picture of the internal dynamics, what the company needs, and where design can make the biggest impact. Look for chances to share your knowledge and start proving your value—not just to your own team, but to your partners across the organization. Think of this step as building political capital. 

Why is this important? Well…

Budgeting realities

Just because your company wants to build a design team, that doesn’t mean they’re just going to hand you a blank check. Sometimes you’ll get a clear budget and expectations about what the team will look like, but that’s not always how it happens. Other times, you’ve been brought in precisely because the org doesn’t know how much designers cost, how many they need, or what it means to have them on the team. In this case, you’ll have to be able to figure out the costs and justify every hire. 

To get ahead of this, I always recommend bringing up the budget during your own interview. You should be asking questions like: 

• What kind of budget am I going to have for building this team? 

• Do you have an idea of what kind of team you’re looking for me to hire? (If you’re inheriting an established team, try to understand what that looks like, as well.)

• Do you have a preference on where team members are located? Is the team fully local, fully remote, or partially remote?

The answers to these questions can tell you a lot about what kind of resources you’ll have to work with, even if they can’t give you an exact number. 

Some companies are especially sensitive to cost, which is why it’s important to know how to prioritize—and that’s where research and relationship-building come in. Maybe what the business needs is a designer now and a researcher later. Maybe it’s the other way around. No matter what, you have to be able to justify your decisions, especially if senior leadership hasn’t done this before. 

This is where it also pays to make the business case for design. (I talked about this more in a previous post.) You need to be ready to do the math and show an ROI on the money that’s being spent. And guess what? The more you can do this, the more the org will invest in design. Even when budgets start small, they tend to increase the more you can show an impact. Over time, you start to cement your place in the organization, and that’s where the magic happens.

Laying the groundwork

Landing the job is only the beginning. Establishing yourself as a design executive is where the real work starts, and that means advocating for design, navigating budget, and building your team strategically as you prove your value. Get this part right, and you’re well on your way to building a successful team. 

In future posts, we’ll zoom in on your early design roles, what to look for in hiring, pitfalls to avoid, and other important aspects of hiring a design team. Building a design org is an art, one that requires creativity and adaptability, but with the right strategy, you can set the stage for excellence. Stay tuned for more on this topic!