As I’ve been keeping a pulse on the design workforce, @Bryan’s LinkedIn post got me thinking about how leaders are positioning their teams and how we can be teaching others to do this with their teams efficiently.
Most design collaboration fails before it even starts, not because teams don’t care or lack skill, but because their systems aren’t set up to align intent with execution.
Some teams lead with business goals. Others lead with user needs. Both can work, but both fall short when they’re not connected by the systems, processes, and people that make collaboration possible.
Curious how some of our folks in here navigate this with your teams?
Where does your team typically start, business goals or user needs? Why?
How and at what point do you connect the two so collaboration doesn’t break down?
We’ve got some really knowledgeable people in here, excited to hear some opinions. We’re collecting real-world approaches for a future leadership spotlight. @EricZ@mario_yks@pablo@resalern@Kike_Pena@Chomparani_Ali@emiliano.chinchelli
Check out Bryan’s LI post and interview with Ian Batterbee if you want to learn a bit more.
Hi Nathali, based on my experience, I’d say that both concepts are not mutually exclusive, and neither comes before the other. You’re right that leading a team with only one perspective will eventually fail because it neglects a key part of the team’s success in the company.
My approach to this scenario is always a system that allows me to measure user needs and, above all, translate them into measurable and effective outcomes for the company. Understanding that user insights not only impact their behavior but also the business impact is our mission as leaders.
Love this @kike_Pena! When people say balance the user needs and business goals, it’s more nuanced based on the systems in place. It’s not some pendulum.
I do believe that design teams need more support building rigor into how they think about the user side so that stakeholders can have a shared understanding.
It’s funny. It seems to be a pattern here. I’ve witnessed this issue time and time again. In fact, last year, I wrote something that it is related to this topic (The hidden cost of mediocrity).
In my opinion, it seems to be popular among the design industry to try to explain how we add value to things or why our efforts matter instead of asking what is the most meaningful thing we can do. It’s frustrating at times and a big opportunity in other cases.
Yes, it’s a “system” issue, but it’s also deeply rooted in culture. Misalignment culture often leads to conversations like this one: Business goals versus User Needs, ROI versus creativity, Value over people. I believe these are symptoms, and every solution I’ve come up with has been tailored to specific situations. I don’t think there’s a universally successful recipe to remedy this problem… at least, I haven’t found one yet.
Love both of these perspectives! They get at two sides of the same coin.
@Kike_Pena Love ittttttt! What sticks out to me, is the idea of building a system that connects user understanding to measurable business outcomes. It’s a clear way to keep teams grounded in both perspectives. I’d also agree with @Bryan, that design teams need that rigor.
And @pablo, your point about culture being the deeper root sticks out. Even with the right systems, if the culture defaults to “business vs. user,” it’s hard to sustain alignment. We’re on the hunt for this recipe! haha.
Huh, another great way to look at this, Ben. I think no matter which way you slice it, it can often turn into that “chicken or the egg” debacle. Thanks for chiming in.
While mediocrity may deliver short-term results, it is excellence that drives long-term success and innovation. As professionals dedicated to technology and product development, let us strive to create work that is not only effective but also meaningful and lasting.
I find that teams get into the mindset of more is more. You capture this additive mindset well in your article.
Putting more features in front of users often slows down their time to value. It becomes harder for them to see what’s truly useful. That’s the challenge of managing a product over time… needs evolve, but some users resist losing features even after their value fades.
