One of the biggest mistakes I see organizations make when it comes to their internal user experience is how they procure software. Too often, companies buy platforms that are completely unfit for purpose or have been deployed straight out of the box with no configuration.

The Problem with Poor Software Procurement

This problem is more damaging than most people realize. There’s a naïve assumption that because employees have to use these systems, usability doesn’t really matter. But it absolutely does. A clunky system kills productivity, frustrates employees, and even leads to workarounds that undermine security and consistency. I’ve worked with plenty of organizations where staff actively seek alternatives just to avoid the headache of using their official tools.

Features vs. Usability: Understanding the Difference

There is also a huge difference between a product having the right features and a product being usable. Take Microsoft Office or Adobe Photoshop — both are feature-rich, but they come with steep learning curves. If we don’t rethink software procurement with usability in mind, we’ll keep investing in systems that hinder rather than help.

A Better Way: User-Focused Procurement

I was recently speaking with Sarah Zama from Oxford University, and she introduced me to the term user-focused procurement. The idea is simple but powerful: instead of being dazzled by flashy demos from sales teams, organizations should demand a clean install of the software and test it with real users before committing to a purchase. That way, you can truly gauge how intuitive it is — without the carefully curated experience that vendors want you to see.

Taking It Further: Prototyping Before Procurement

But I think we can go even further. Before even looking at available products, organizations should run a prototyping phase — a process where they map out what the ideal user experience should look like. Then, they can evaluate whether existing tools align with those needs. No system will match the vision perfectly, but at least this approach makes compromises explicit. It also serves as a clear functional specification for vendors, allowing teams to see whether a tool can be configured to deliver what they actually need.

Conclusion: A New Approach to Software Selection

This isn’t just some woolly, wishy-washy notion of caring for users — it's solid business practice. Before investing in a platform, it’s essential to assess the risks associated with it, and one of the biggest risks is user failure. If employees struggle to adopt the system or find workarounds, the intended productivity gains simply won’t materialize. Even if adoption does occur, the system may ultimately fail to deliver the efficiency and improvements the organization hoped for.

Ignoring usability in software procurement is a gamble that organizations can’t afford to take. The real measure of success isn’t just the feature list — it’s whether the tool empowers users and drives actual business outcomes.

As we step into 2025, it's time for some honest reflection about our roles as design leaders. Despite our best intentions, too many of us still get caught up in the day-to-day minutiae of individual projects, leaving little time to demonstrate our strategic value to the organization.

With UX teams under increasing pressure from economic uncertainty and budget cuts to prove their worth, 2025 needs to be the year we take action. While delivering great user experiences remains crucial, we must also excel at promoting our work and demonstrating its concrete business impact. That's why I've created this checklist of essential activities.

Here's your essential to-do list for the year ahead:

Schedule Stakeholder Deep-Dives

Start the year by booking one-on-one meetings with key stakeholders. These aren't just status updates – they're opportunities to understand their goals, demonstrate how UX can help achieve them, and conduct what I like to call "stakeholder user research." The insights you gain will be invaluable for aligning your work with organizational priorities.

Craft a Business-Aligned UX Strategy

Take time to create a UX strategy that explicitly connects your team's work to company objectives. Find your organization's strategic plan and draw clear lines between improved user experiences and business outcomes. This document will become your north star for prioritization and a powerful tool for stakeholder communications.

Establish Clear Operating Policies

Well-defined policies might not sound exciting, but they're crucial for working smarter, not harder. Document your team's ways of working, decision-making frameworks, and standard procedures. This will help you avoid common pitfalls, work more efficiently, and importantly, demonstrate your team's professionalism to the wider organization.

Develop an Internal Communications Strategy

Your team's great work deserves visibility. Create a comprehensive plan for internal communication that might include:

• Regular newsletters highlighting UX wins and their business impact
• Lunch-and-learn sessions to share knowledge
• An internal blog documenting your process and successes
• Design communities to engage interested colleagues

Create Self-Service UX Resources

Empower your colleagues to handle basic UX activities independently. This isn't about making your team redundant – it's about scaling your impact and creating UX advocates across the organization. Consider developing:

• Self-paced training materials
• Access to user testing platforms
• Basic analytics dashboards
• Design system documentation

Build Your UX Playbook

Bring everything together in a comprehensive playbook that serves as your team's central repository. Include your strategy, policies, resources, and success stories. Make it publicly accessible if possible – external validation can significantly boost your internal credibility.

I understand this might feel like a lot to tackle alongside your regular project work. But remember: demonstrating and communicating your value is just as important as delivering it. Without proper visibility, even your best work might go unrecognized.

If you'd like to discuss implementing any of these suggestions in your organization, I'd be happy to have a chat. Just drop me an email.“ Sometimes it helps to talk through these challenges with someone who's been there.

I've noticed a concerning shift in how organizations are handling their design budgets lately. You're probably seeing it too - companies are tightening their belts, and unfortunately, senior design leaders are often the first casualties of these cuts. It's understandable from a pure numbers perspective as they are the most expensive resource. But losing these leaders creates a significant void in strategic design oversight and user advocacy that's hard to fill.

Worse still, some organizations are removing their internal design capabilities entirely and instead relying on agencies. Although an agency can do an excellent job, they will not provide the design leadership and direction that organizations require.

The Impact of Losing Design Leadership

Let me tell you what happens when design leadership disappears from an organization. The strategic vision that once guided product development starts to fade. You see it happening - teams that previously shaped innovative solutions now find themselves simply implementing other people's ideas. The disconnect between user needs and business decisions grows wider by the day.

You might recognize this pattern in your own organization. Junior designers become trapped in execution-only roles, missing out on growth opportunities. Their valuable insights get buried under stakeholder demands. Before you know it, your design practice loses its strategic edge and struggles to deliver the value you know it can bring.

 

If you are a design leader or have ambitions to become one, you might want to consider attending my Design Leadership Workshop this coming February. And don’t forget I also have a workshop on website conversion optimization in January.

 

Introducing a Solution: The Fractional Design Lead

Let me share an alternative approach that's gaining traction: the fractional design lead. Think of it as having an experienced design leader working with you for just a day or two each week. This setup works when you can't justify a full-time senior position but still need that strategic guidance.

The value of this arrangement lies in its flexibility. You get someone who can steer your design efforts in the right direction, keeping everything focused on your users while aligning with your business goals. It's a smart way to maintain high-level design leadership without breaking the bank.

What makes me think this approach has potential is how it supports your existing team. Junior designers get the mentorship they need to grow, while having someone in their corner who understands design thinking. This protection from well-meaning but misguided stakeholder requests ensures your team can focus on creating truly user-centered solutions.

Don't misunderstand me, this is not a replacement for a full-time design lead. It saddens me that we're seeing the cuts we are in the design sector at the moment. However, we're not going to change that reality by moaning. A fractional design lead offers the best solution in a bad situation.

Benefits of a Fractional Design Lead

Now, let's explore what makes a fractional design lead valuable. Having worked with organizations who have adopted this model, I've seen firsthand how it can deliver significant benefits while addressing the challenges of our current economic climate. Here are the key advantages I've observed:

• Save Money: You get access to seasoned leadership at a fraction of the cost of a full-time position. Perfect for keeping design standards high while managing those tight budgets we're all dealing with.
• Start Quickly: Tired of those endless recruitment cycles? You won't need to wade through countless CVs or sit through interview after interview. A fractional design lead can hit the ground running within days.
• Keep Design at the Top Table: Your users' needs stay front and center in decision-making. Having a design voice at a strategic level ensures products and services actually solve real problems.
• Scale With Your Needs: The role grows or shrinks alongside your organization. When times are busy, increase the hours. When things slow down, scale back. Simple.
• Grow Your Team: Your junior designers won't feel lost or unsupported. They'll have someone to learn from, bounce ideas off, and help them develop. The result? Better design work across the board.

Is a Fractional Design Lead Right for You?

If your organization is struggling to maintain a strategic design vision, or if your junior designers are lacking the guidance they need, it might be time to consider a fractional design lead. Here are a few questions to reflect on:

• Are you struggling to keep a cohesive and strategic vision for your design work?
• Do your designers need mentorship and a champion who can advocate for them?
• Has design been undervalued at a leadership level since the economic downturn?

If any of these questions resonate, it might be worth exploring whether a fractional design lead could provide the support your team needs.

Navigating Challenging Times

Sure, times might be tough right now, but your design standards don't need to suffer. I've seen how a fractional design lead can make a real difference, giving you that strategic direction while staying within budget constraints. You can still deliver exceptional work, mentor your team, and keep users at the heart of everything you do.

I’m Happy to Discuss This With You

If you find yourself wishing that your organization had stronger design leadership but are unsure how to make it happen, please drop me an email. I am happy to discuss how we can build the business case and see if we can get you the support you need.

Hey there!

Let's talk about what's coming up in UX for 2025. Trust me, we're in for some exciting changes - from AI getting smarter to AR/VR finally hitting its stride. I've been keeping a close eye on these trends, and I'd love to share what I think is coming our way.

The Evolution of AI Interfaces

For a start AI is breaking free from those basic chatbot boxes we're all used to. It's weaving its way right into the apps we use every day, making them smarter and more helpful. Obviously we have the consumer tools like "Apple Intelligence" that is already rolling out across iOS and macOS.

Meanwhile, Microsoft are focusing on bring AI to the enterprise market and in particular on introducing AI agents, which is another big trend I will come to in a moment.

What's really cool about all this is how AI is becoming part of the furniture, so to speak. Instead of being this separate thing you have to go to, it's just there when you need it, making your everyday tools work better without getting in the way.

For us UX designers, this is where things get truly interesting. We have an incredible opportunity to design interfaces that make AI feel natural and helpful, rather than complicated or intrusive. It's all about making AI feel almost invisible, where the technology seamlessly integrates and isn’t the center of attention, enhancing our apps to be more responsive and personalized to users' actual needs.

The Rise of AI Agents

As I said, In 2025, AI agents are set to become indispensable tools for UX designers, capable of analyzing user behavior, creating personas, and even generating design mockups autonomously. For example, platforms like Relume are integrating AI to streamline design processes, allowing designers to focus on strategic decision-making. 

However, as we embrace these advancements, it’s crucial to ensure that AI agents operate ethically and without bias. Implementing comprehensive AI ethics training and establishing robust governance frameworks are essential steps in this direction. 

Rather than replacing human roles, AI agents will serve as collaborative partners, augmenting our capabilities and enabling us to deliver more personalized and efficient user experiences. Our role will evolve into guiding these AI tools to align with both business objectives and user needs, ensuring that technology enhances rather than detracts from the human experience.

The Growth of AI Personalization

Talking of AI, get ready for AI personalization to go mainstream in 2025. Sure, Amazon's been doing it forever, but now we're going to see it everywhere.

Imagine websites that actually get you - knowing what you need before you do. Interesting, right? But it also brings up some tricky questions about privacy and data use.

Our challenge will be finding that sweet spot between helpful and creepy. How do we keep users feeling in control while still delivering that magic touch of personalization?

The Potential Maturing of AR/VR

With Apple's Vision Pro and Meta's Orion making waves in 2024, I believe 2025 could be the year when AR and VR finally hit their stride, provided both companies can offer more consumer-friendly price options. As these gadgets become more accessible, we will need to consider how our applications and sites work in these immersive spaces.

The real challenge for UX designers will be identifying meaningful applications for these platforms. When does an AR/VR experience genuinely enhance user value? How do we design interfaces that feel natural and intuitive within these new environments? Most importantly, how do we ensure our solutions solve real user problems rather than just showcasing the technology?

Think about your navigation app coming to life in front of you, or learning about anything just by looking at it. The possibilities are endless, but we've got to make sure we're adding real value, not just fancy bells and whistles.

A Stabilizing UX Job Market

Let's be honest - 2024 was a challenging year for UX. Many organizations had invested in user experience with unrealistic expectations, treating it as a quick fix rather than a long-term commitment. When they didn't see immediate results from their under-resourced teams, they pulled back. But there's a silver lining for 2025.

Companies are starting to understand that successful UX requires proper investment and infrastructure. We're seeing a shift towards building more comprehensive internal UX teams, with organizations finally allocating the resources needed for meaningful impact.

Interestingly, this trend is favoring in-house talent over external providers. Agencies and freelancers are increasingly being asked to support and supplement internal teams rather than replace them entirely. This means external UX professionals will need to adapt their service offerings and approach.

Of course, our roles will continue to evolve. As AI takes over more of the tactical work, we'll need to focus more on strategy, empathy, and team leadership. Adaptability isn't just helpful anymore - it's essential for survival in this changing landscape.

Wrapping Up

2025 is shaping up to be quite a ride for UX. Between AI leveling up, AR/VR gaining ground, and a renewed focus on what users really need, we've got our work cut out for us.

The key? Stay curious, keep learning, and never forget that we're designing for real people, not just users. Technology's great, but it's how it helps people that really matters.

• Notion Post Launch Optimization Template
• Signup to a Notion account

I've witnessed this scenario countless times: organizations invest substantial resources into launching a new website, only to neglect post-launch optimization once it goes live. This oversight is a critical mistake that can significantly undermine the long-term success of your digital presence. Today, let's delve into the crucial topic of post-launch optimization and explore why many organizations are failing to capitalize on this essential process.

The Post-Launch Optimization Challenge

When it comes to post-launch website management, many organizations typically fall into one of two categories:

• They completely abandon post-launch optimization, treating the website as a "set it and forget it" project.
• They implement sporadic updates, primarily focusing on adding new features or updating information, without a structured post-launch optimization strategy.

Both of these approaches miss a critical opportunity in the post-launch phase: leveraging real-world data to enhance the website's effectiveness in meeting organizational objectives. This oversight isn't just a minor misstep—it's a significant waste of potential and a failure to implement proper post-launch optimization techniques.

Consider this: it's only after a website goes live that we begin gathering authentic data about user interactions. This post-launch data is invaluable for improving your site's performance through targeted optimization efforts, yet it often goes unused.

Harnessing the Power of Post-Launch Data for Optimization

Let's explore an example of how we can leverage post-launch data for effective optimization. Tools like Microsoft Clarity can provide crucial insights into user behavior, enabling targeted post-launch optimization. Through these tools, we can identify:

• Key exit points where users are abandoning the site
• Instances of excessive "rage clicking," signaling areas in need of immediate improvement
• Moments where users click on non-clickable elements, highlighting opportunities for interface improvements
• Unusual scrolling patterns that can guide our strategy
• Quick returns to previous pages, indicating potential issues to address

All these behaviors serve as red flags, indicating potential issues with specific pages or user flows that require attention in your post-launch optimization efforts. However, identifying these problems is just the initial step. The real challenge—and the key to successful—lies in how we process and act on this valuable information to continuously improve our website's performance.

Microsoft Clarity is invaluable for identifying areas for improvement post-launch.

From Data to Action: A Structured Approach

Once we've pinpointed problem areas using tools like heat maps and session recordings, we need a systematic way to form hypotheses and test improvements. This is where many organizations falter. They either ignore the data entirely or make knee-jerk changes based on individual opinions rather than evidence.

What we need is a structured process for managing and prioritizing potential improvements. To help with this, I've created a Notion template that demonstrates how to structure a post-launch optimization backlog. You can access this template here. Additionally, I've recorded a video walking through the process, which you can watch below:

[Insert video embed code here]

Now, let me walk you through my approach to this challenge:

1. Idea Submission

Create a system where anyone in the organization can submit improvement proposals. Each proposal should include:

• A concise description of the proposed change
• Supporting data (e.g., screen recordings, screenshots, analytics)
• Evidence justifying the proposal
• Estimated impact and effort required
• Potential implementation barriers

This approach ensures that all ideas are considered and backed by some level of evidence.

Any suggested improvement should come with a written proposal explaining why it deserves consideration.

2. Internal Review

Once proposals are submitted, they need to be reviewed internally. The most viable options should be selected based on:

• Effort required
• Likelihood of success
• Target audience importance
• Potential impact

This step helps prioritize resources and focus on changes that are most likely to yield significant improvements.

3. Test Planning

For proposals that make it through the review process, the next step is to create a detailed test plan. This should include:

• Test methodology
• Success metrics
• Estimated impact
• Required effort
• Any constraints or weaknesses in the testing process

A well-thought-out test plan ensures that you're not just making changes for the sake of change, but actually measuring the impact of your optimizations.

Before implementing a proposal, create a test plan.

4. Test Execution and Reporting

Once the test plan is approved and scheduled, it's time to run the test. After completion, a report should be prepared, including:

• A description of the test
• Summary of findings
• Detailed test methodology
• Data collected
• Recommendations for next steps

This report serves as the basis for deciding whether to implement the change, refine and retest, or abandon the idea altogether.

After testing a proposal, create a report and evaluate the results. Only then should it proceed to production.

5. Implementation or Iteration

If the test results are favorable, move forward with implementing the change on your live site. If not, consider refining the approach and running another test, or move on to the next proposal in your backlog.

The Benefits of Structured Post-Launch Optimization

By adopting this kind of structured approach to post-launch optimization, you stand to gain several benefits:

• Data-Driven Decision Making: You're basing changes on real user behavior, not just hunches or opinions.
• Continuous Improvement: Your website becomes a living, evolving entity that gets better over time.
• Resource Efficiency: By prioritizing and testing changes, you avoid wasting time and money on ineffective updates.
• Organizational Alignment: The structured process helps align different departments around common goals for the website.
• Better User Experience: Ultimately, this approach leads to a website that better serves your users' needs.

Overcoming Common Obstacles

Of course, implementing such a process isn't without its challenges. You might encounter resistance from team members who are used to making changes based on gut feelings or who are resistant to the additional steps involved. Here are some strategies to overcome these obstacles:

• Education: Help your team understand the value of data-driven optimization. Share case studies and success stories.
• Start Small: Begin with a pilot project to demonstrate the effectiveness of the process.
• Streamline: Use project management tools to make the process as smooth and efficient as possible. For example, you might want to make use of the sample post launch optimization Notion template I have provided.
• Celebrate Wins: Highlight successful optimizations to build momentum and buy-in.

Remember, the goal isn't to create bureaucracy, but to ensure that every change you make to your website is purposeful and impactful.

Conclusion: Embracing Continuous Improvement

Post-launch optimization isn't just about fixing what's broken—it's about continuously improving your website's ability to meet both user needs and organizational objectives. By implementing a structured, data-driven approach to post-launch optimization, you can turn your website from a static digital brochure into a dynamic, ever-improving asset.

Don't let your website stagnate after launch. Embrace the power of post-launch data, implement a structured optimization process, and watch as your website's performance improves over time. Your users—and your bottom line—will thank you.

If you need help with post-launch optimization for your website, just reach out! I’d love to chat about how we can customize this strategy to fit your needs and goals. You can also learn more about this approach and other methods of improving your site’s effectiveness with my workshop on conversion optimization.

I've been thinking about an important shift in our industry that we've discussed in the Agency Academy I run. It's time we dive into this subject and explore how we can adapt our approach to stay competitive.

The landscape for web design agencies and freelancers is evolving, but don't worry - this isn't about abandoning our core services. Instead, it's about recognizing and charging for the expertise we often give away for free.

While DIY platforms and templates have made the technical aspect of web design more accessible, our strategic knowledge is more valuable than ever. It's time we position ourselves not just as implementers, but as strategic partners who offer both consultancy and implementation.

Let's break down why this matters and how you can make the most of it:

The Real Value: Knowledge Alongside Implementation

Clients can get a website from many places, but what they truly need is strategic insight to align their digital presence with their business goals. This is where we excel. Our experience, understanding of user behavior, and ability to see the big picture are incredibly valuable assets.

By offering both consultancy and implementation, we're not just building websites; we're comprehensively solving business problems. This approach allows us to charge separately for our knowledge and our technical skills, potentially increasing our overall project value by 20-30% or more.

Adding Consultative Services to Your Offerings

To make this transition, start by expanding your service offerings. Alongside your existing web design and development services, consider adding:

• Digital Strategy Workshops: Help clients align their digital presence with their business goals.
• User Experience (UX) Audits: Identify pain points in existing digital products and prioritize improvements.
• Performance Optimization Consulting: Improve website speed, SEO, and conversion rates.
• Technology Stack Consultation: Guide clients in choosing the right technologies for their needs.
• Custom Training Programs: Empower client teams while maintaining your role as the expert implementer.
• Coaching and Mentoring Services: Offer ongoing support to help clients develop their digital strategy skills and make informed decisions about their online presence.

The key is to focus on outcomes rather than features. Instead of just selling a redesign, sell the strategy behind it, and then implement that strategy.

Packaging and Pricing Your Expertise

Justifying higher rates for consultative work as a freelancer who also handles implementation can be challenging, but there are several compelling reasons to do so:

• Strategic value: Consultative work focuses on high-level strategy and business outcomes, which typically have a greater impact on the client's success than implementation alone.
• Specialized expertise: Consultancy leverages your years of experience and industry knowledge, offering insights that go beyond technical skills.
• Problem-solving focus: As a consultant, you're solving complex business problems, not just delivering a product.
• Outcome-driven approach: Emphasize that you're selling outcomes and strategies, not just features or deliverables.
• Separate pricing structure: Consider packaging consultancy as fixed-price "products" distinct from implementation work. This helps clients understand the unique value of each service.
• Language and positioning: Position your consultative services as "strategic advisory" to differentiate them from implementation work.

By clearly communicating the distinct value of your consultative services and focusing on the outcomes they provide, you can justify charging higher rates for this aspect of your work, even as the same person delivering both services.

Benefits of the Combined Approach

This shift benefits both us and our clients. Here's why:

For your agency:

• Increased perceived value and higher overall project fees
• Stronger, longer-lasting client relationships
• Diversified revenue streams
• Opportunity to develop and charge for proprietary methodologies

For your clients:

• Comprehensive solution: strategy plus implementation
• More effective digital presence aligned with business goals
• Access to expert knowledge throughout the project lifecycle
• Long-term value beyond just immediate deliverables

Embracing Your Role as Both Strategist and Implementer

As we wrap up, I want to emphasize that this transition is about expanding our role, not changing it entirely. We're not abandoning implementation to become pure consultants. Instead, we're recognizing the full value of what we offer: both strategic insight and technical expertise.

This shift might feel daunting, but remember, you already have the knowledge. It's just a matter of packaging and presenting it as a distinct, valuable service alongside your implementation work. Start small if you need to - maybe offer a paid strategy session before your next website project. See how it goes, and build from there.

If you would like to discuss this further, you should consider joining the Agency Academy. Let’s share our experiences, ask questions, and support each other in this transition. Remember, we're all in this together. By embracing our dual role as consultants and implementers, we can add more value, command higher rates, and build stronger relationships with our clients.

Hi everyone.

I run a lot of workshops within organizations. They're great for connecting people, allowing space for questions, and inspiring teams. But here's the thing: I'm not convinced they're the best method of training staff in most cases.

Don't get me wrong, workshops have their place and I enjoy running them. They create a shared learning environment, foster discussion, and can be incredibly motivating. However, they come with some significant drawbacks that we need to address.

Key Challenges with Workshops

First, let's consider the retention problem. Unless people immediately apply what they've learned in a workshop, they tend to forget it. Even if they do use the information right away, without regular application, that knowledge fades over time. It's just how our brains work.

Then there's the issue of staff turnover. When employees who attended a workshop leave, they take that knowledge with them. New hires miss out unless you repeat the workshop, which can be expensive and logistically challenging.

Speaking of logistics, getting everyone in the same place at the same time is always a headache. There's always someone on vacation, out sick, or unable to attend for various reasons. This leads to knowledge gaps within teams.

Workshops also tend to be one-size-fits-all solutions, which is problematic when you have attendees with varying levels of experience. Some people might be bored, while others struggle to keep up.

Lastly, workshops require intense concentration, which can be exhausting for participants. By the end of a long session, people's attention spans are stretched thin, and their ability to absorb information diminishes.

The Alternative: Self-Learning Resources

So, what's the alternative? I'm a strong advocate for self-learning resources broken down into small, focused lessons. These could teach specific skills like "how to run a 5-second test" or "how to edit a page on the CMS." I find this approach far more effective when I implement them in organizations.

These resources could take various forms: short videos, step-by-step written instructions, or even checklists. Some content could be universal and purchased off-the-shelf (like "writing for the web"), while other material would need to be custom-made for your organization.

Imagine organizing all of this in a UX playbook alongside policies, procedures, standards, and more general educational content like "why accessibility matters." You could even integrate these resources directly into your tools. For example, embedding how-to guides within your CMS so people can access instructions right when they need them.

Speaking of playbooks, if you're an agency owner or freelancer, I've created one just for you! It includes easy-to-follow guides, client education materials, and tools to help simplify your web design projects. Check it out here.

Benefits of Self-Learning Resources

I've found that self-learning resources offer numerous benefits for organizations:

• Consistent knowledge base: Everyone accesses the same information, ensuring standardized knowledge across the organization, regardless of when they joined.
• Self-paced learning: Staff can engage with material when it's most relevant and revisit as needed, accommodating different learning styles and schedules.
• Always available: No waiting for the next workshop to learn crucial skills. This immediate access can significantly reduce downtime and boost productivity.
• Scalable: Once created, these resources can be used by unlimited employees across various departments and locations.
• Cost-effective: After the initial investment, ongoing costs are minimal compared to repeated workshops, offering a high return on investment over time.
• Flexible: Easy to update and expand as processes and technologies evolve, ensuring learning materials remain current and relevant.
• Personalized learning: Employees can focus on areas most relevant to their roles or skill gaps, creating a more tailored experience.
• Measurable results: Digital learning resources often include analytics, allowing you to track engagement and assess training effectiveness.
• Continuous learning culture: Readily available resources encourage employees to take ownership of their professional development, fostering a growth mindset.
• Remote team support: Self-learning resources are particularly valuable for organizations with remote workers or multiple office locations, ensuring consistent training regardless of physical location.

Finding the Right Balance

Don't get me wrong – I'm not saying we should completely do away with workshops. They still have value, especially for team building, brainstorming, and tackling complex problems that benefit from group discussion. But they shouldn't be your only, or even primary, method of training and knowledge sharing.

By investing in a robust set of self-learning materials, you're not just training your current staff – you're building a knowledge infrastructure that will serve your organization for years to come. It's about creating a culture of continuous learning, where employees are empowered to seek out information and improve their skills on an ongoing basis.

Moving Forward

So, the next time you're tempted to schedule another workshop, ask yourself: Is this the most effective way to share this knowledge? Or could you create a resource that will have a more lasting impact?

Let's have an honest conversation about invitations to tender (ITTs). We've discussed this topic in the Agency Academy, and I believe it's time to address this significant issue in our industry.

If you've been in the digital industry for any length of time, you've likely encountered them. They're a staple of the procurement process, especially in larger organizations and government bodies. But here's the thing: they're not working. Not for agencies, not for clients, and certainly not for the projects themselves or their end users.

As someone who's been on both sides of the fence - writing proposals and evaluating them - I've seen firsthand how this process can fall short. So, let's break down why ITTs are problematic and explore some alternatives that could lead to better outcomes for everyone involved.

The Agency Perspective: A Costly Gamble

For agencies, responding to an ITT is often a significant investment of time and resources. It's not uncommon for teams to spend weeks crafting the perfect response, only to find out they were just there to make up the numbers. This isn't just frustrating; it's economically unsustainable.

The amount of work involved in pitching is substantial. Agencies often have to dedicate significant resources to preparing detailed proposals, which takes time away from billable work and ongoing projects. This investment is made with no guarantee of success, and often with the knowledge that they may have little to no chance of winning the bid.

Moreover, the limited information provided in most ITTs makes accurate pricing nearly impossible. Agencies are forced to make educated guesses about the scope and complexity of the work, often leading to either overpricing (and losing the bid) or underpricing (and losing money on the project). This lack of information and the absence of an opportunity to conduct necessary research puts agencies in a precarious position.

To mitigate these risks, agencies often have to add a buffer to their pricing, which can make them less competitive. Alternatively, they might lowball their estimates to win the bid, potentially setting themselves up for financial strain or a compromised project quality down the line.

The Client's Dilemma: Paying More for Less

Clients might think they're getting a good deal through competitive tendering, but the reality is often quite different. The costs associated with preparing unsuccessful bids don't just disappear - they're factored into the rates of successful projects. This means clients are indirectly paying for all those failed proposals, essentially subsidizing the entire tendering process across the industry.

Furthermore, the ITT process often rewards the best sales pitch rather than the most suitable agency. Clients end up with partners who excel at writing proposals but may not be the best fit for their specific needs. In many cases, agencies tell the client what they want to hear rather than what they need to know, leading to misaligned expectations and potential project failures down the line.

The Project Suffers: Inflexibility and Missed Opportunities

Perhaps the most significant drawback of the ITT process is its impact on the projects themselves. The rigid specifications laid out in most tenders leave little room for agencies to bring their expertise to bear on the project's scope and approach.

This inflexibility continues throughout the project, as the fixed scope makes it challenging to adapt to new insights or changing requirements. It can also lead to tension between the client and agency over what's considered "in scope," potentially damaging the relationship and the project's success.

Moreover, the selection process is often weighed too heavily towards the cheapest price, NOT the best value. This can result in subpar outcomes, as the focus shifts from delivering quality and innovation to merely meeting the minimum requirements at the lowest cost.

The fixed scope also means there's limited opportunity to respond to insights gained during the project, including crucial user testing results. In the fast-paced world of digital, this inflexibility can lead to outdated solutions or missed opportunities for improvement. Without the ability to pivot based on user feedback, projects risk delivering products that don't meet actual user needs, regardless of how well they adhere to the original specifications.

A Better Way Forward

So, what's the solution? While I understand the need for accountability and fairness in procurement processes, especially in public sector organizations, we need to find a middle ground that works better for all parties involved.

Here are a few ideas to consider:

1. Focus on track record and capabilities: Instead of detailed project specifications, evaluate agencies based on their past performance, case studies, and overall capabilities. This approach allows clients to select partners based on their proven expertise rather than their ability to write a compelling proposal.
2. Paid discovery phase: Consider paying a preferred supplier to conduct a brief discovery phase. This allows for a more accurate project scope and budget, benefiting both the client and the agency. For instance, give the preferred supplier a budget you want to work within and pay them a tenth of that to run a review and recommendation phase to define the project and work out what can be delivered within that price.
3. Phased approach: Break larger projects into smaller, more manageable phases. This reduces risk for both parties and allows for more flexibility as the project progresses. Each sub-project can be individually costed and can inform the next, allowing for adaptability and continuous improvement.
4. Value-based selection: Shift the focus from the lowest price to the best value. This might involve considering factors like the agency's expertise, proposed approach, and potential ROI. By doing so, clients can ensure they're getting the best solution for their needs, not just the cheapest option.

Implementing these changes won't be easy, especially in organizations with entrenched procurement processes. The approach of using ITTs makes sense when you're buying a fixed product or service, but it doesn't work well with digital services, which are inherently more fluid and require ongoing collaboration and adaptation.

Ideally, the relationship needs to be more like hiring a contractor based on time and materials. But I accept that this is a big change to ask for, especially in larger organizations and the public sector. The alternatives suggested above can serve as a middle ground, allowing for more flexibility and better outcomes while still maintaining a structured procurement process.

By adopting these approaches, we can create a system that benefits all parties involved:

• Agencies can invest their resources more efficiently, focusing on projects where they can truly add value.
• Clients can make more informed decisions, getting better value for their investment and forming partnerships with agencies that are truly suited to their needs.
• Projects can be more flexible and responsive to changing requirements and new insights, leading to better outcomes and more innovative solutions.

The potential benefits - more successful projects, better client-agency relationships, and more efficient use of resources - make it worth pursuing these changes. It's time for our industry to move beyond the outdated ITT process and embrace a more collaborative, flexible, and value-driven approach to project procurement.

If you're considering hiring an agency and find this approach intriguing, don't hesitate to reach out. I'd be delighted to discuss in more detail how you can implement these ideas.

Until next time,

Paul

Whether you're part of a UX team, running an agency, or freelancing, there's a service you should be offering. I include myself in this too.

This realization struck me while preparing for my design leadership workshop next week (and yes, it's not too late to sign up!). I was thinking about how most design teams are under-resourced, as I mentioned in a previous newsletter. We, therefore, need to be more strategic about how we spend our time.

One issue is that we often get pulled into projects that shouldn't exist because they don't meet real user needs. We try to advocate for discovery phases to research user requirements, but many colleagues don't grasp what a discovery phase entails. Often, the decision to move forward with a project has already been made.

The same goes for those of us working externally. By the time a client reaches out, the project is already defined and approved. We can't influence its direction as much as we should.

So, we need to take elements of a discovery phase, combine them with a SWOT, repackage them, and present them as a new service we offer.

Enter SUPA: Strategic User-Driven Project Assessment

This is where the Strategic User-Driven Project Assessment (SUPA) comes in. Yes, I know, another acronym. But bear with me – there's a method to this madness.

Why SUPA? Well, in a world drowning in jargon and buzzwords, sometimes you need to fight fire with fire. SUPA isn't just catchy; it's a trojan horse. It's designed to grab the attention of those business analysts and managers who love their TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) and make them sit up and take notice. Plus, let's be honest, who doesn't want to be SUPA at their job?

But bad puns aside, SUPA represents a critical service that we, as UX professionals, need to champion more forcefully. It's our chance to get in at the ground floor of projects, to shape them before they become runaway trains of misguided objectives and wasted resources.

What is SUPA?

In essence, SUPA is a pre-emptive strike against poorly conceived projects. It's a comprehensive assessment that evaluates the potential success of a project from a user-centric perspective, before significant resources are committed. Think of it as a health check for ideas – we're diagnosing potential issues before they become full-blown problems.

Now, I can already hear some of you thinking, "But isn't this just a discovery phase by another name?" And you're not entirely wrong. SUPA does incorporate elements of discovery, but it's more focused, more strategic, and crucially, it's packaged in a way that speaks directly to business priorities.

Selling SUPA to Your Organization or Clients

The key to selling SUPA is to frame it in terms of risk mitigation and resource optimization. Here's how you might pitch it:

"SUPA is a strategic assessment tool that helps organizations validate project ideas before significant investment. It ensures that we're not just building things right, but that we're building the right things."

Emphasize that SUPA can:

1. Prevent costly missteps by identifying potential issues early
2. Align projects more closely with user needs and business goals
3. Optimize resource allocation by prioritizing high-value initiatives
4. Improve project success rates and ROI

For in-house teams, position SUPA as a way to strengthen your role as strategic partners rather than just executors. For agencies and freelancers, it's an opportunity to add value right from the project's inception, potentially leading to longer-term engagements.

What SUPA Covers

Ultimately a SUPA is delivered as a report or presentation focusing on the following areas:

1. Audience Assessment: This is about clearly defining who we're building for. We need to ask: Is this project targeting a high-value audience for the organization? Do we understand this audience's needs and behaviors? Have we validated our assumptions about them?
2. Need Assessment: Here, we're digging into the 'why' of the project. Does it address a genuine, validated user need? How critical is this need? Are there existing solutions that users are employing as workarounds? This step helps ensure we're not building solutions in search of problems.
3. Feasibility Check: This is where we get practical. Do we have the necessary resources – time, budget, skills – to deliver an excellent user experience? Is the project scope realistic? Are there any technical constraints we need to consider? This step helps prevent the all-too-common scenario of overpromising and under-delivering.
4. Risk Mitigation: Every project has risks, but not all risks are created equal. In this step, we identify potential design risks – things like usability issues, accessibility concerns, or misalignment with UI guidelines. But we don't stop at identification; we also provide concrete suggestions for mitigating these risks.
5. Recommendations: This is where we bring it all together. Based on our assessment, should the project proceed from a UX perspective? If yes, what guardrails need to be in place? If no, what alternative approaches might better meet the identified needs? This isn't about being gatekeepers, but about steering projects towards success.

SUPA Activities: From Research to Recommendations

To create a comprehensive SUPA report, you'll need to engage in a variety of UX research and analysis activities. Here's a breakdown of key activities for each area of the SUPA report:

Audience Assessment

• Stakeholder interviews
• User interviews or focus groups
• Surveys to gather quantitative data
• Creation of user personas or journey maps
• Analysis of existing user data or analytics

Need Assessment

• UX competitive analysis
• User journey mapping
• User story cards
• Contextual inquiry
• Card sorting or tree testing to understand user mental models

Feasibility Check

• Evaluation of design complexity vs. user needs
• Assessment of potential user pain points in proposed solutions
• Review of user expectations vs. project scope
• Analysis of user tech literacy vs. proposed technology
• Identification of potential accessibility challenges
• Evaluation of current user behaviors vs. required behavior changes

Risk Mitigation

• Heuristic evaluation of existing systems or prototypes
• Accessibility audit
• Security and privacy assessment
• UI guidelines alignment check
• Usability testing of early concepts or prototypes

Recommendations

• Workshop with key stakeholders
• Prioritization exercises (e.g., MoSCoW method)
• Creation of low-fidelity prototypes or wireframes
• Development of a phased approach or MVP definition
• Presentation of findings and recommendations to leadership

Remember, the goal is to conduct these activities efficiently, focusing on gathering just enough information to make informed recommendations. The exact mix of activities will depend on the project's scope, timeline, and available resources.

SUPA and Business Analysis: Complementary, Not Competitive

I can almost hear some of you thinking, "Wait a minute, isn't this treading on the toes of our business analysts?" It's a fair question, and one we should address head-on.

Yes, there's some overlap between SUPA and traditional business analysis. Both aim to validate ideas and assess project viability. However, SUPA isn't about replacing or competing with business analysts – it's about complementing their work with a laser focus on user needs and experience.

Here's how SUPA differs from and enhances business analysis:

1. User-Centric Perspective: While business analysts excel at evaluating market trends, competitive landscapes, and financial viability, SUPA brings a deep understanding of user behavior, needs, and pain points. We're not just asking "Can we do this?" or "Should we do this?", but "Will users actually want or use this?"
2. Experience Quality Focus: Business analysis typically covers whether a project can be delivered within constraints. SUPA goes further, assessing whether it can be delivered with a high-quality user experience. We're considering factors like cognitive load, accessibility, and user satisfaction – areas where UX professionals have unique expertise.
3. Design Risk Assessment: While business analysts identify general project risks, UX professionals are uniquely positioned to spot potential design and usability risks early. We can foresee issues that might not be apparent in a business requirements document but could significantly impact user adoption.
4. Bridging Business and User Needs: SUPA acts as a bridge, translating between business requirements and user needs. We're not replacing the business case, but enhancing it with insights that ensure the final product not only meets business objectives but also genuinely serves its users.
5. Prototyping and Visual Communication: UX professionals can quickly mock up concepts or create low-fidelity prototypes to validate ideas. This visual approach can provide stakeholders with a clearer understanding of the proposed solution than written specifications alone.

The key is collaboration, not competition. Ideally, SUPA should be conducted in partnership with business analysts. While they dive deep into market analysis and business viability, we bring our understanding of user behavior and experience design to the table. Together, we create a more holistic view of the project's potential.

By positioning SUPA as a complement to existing business analysis processes, we're not stepping on toes – we're strengthening the foundation of project planning. We're ensuring that user needs are considered just as carefully as business needs from the very beginning.

Implementing SUPA in Your Work

I hope I've convinced you of the value of SUPA for us as UX professionals and for our organizations. Now, the question is, "Where do we start?"

Start small. You don't need to roll out SUPA as a full-fledged service right away. Begin by incorporating elements of it into your existing processes. For example, when you're brought into a new project, ask for a short meeting to run through these assessment points. Frame it as a way to ensure you're fully aligned with the project goals and can deliver the best possible outcomes.

As you demonstrate the value of this approach – perhaps by identifying a potential issue early or by suggesting a more user-centric direction that resonates with stakeholders – you can gradually formalize it into a distinct service offering.

For those of you working in agencies or as freelancers, consider offering SUPA as a standalone service. It could be a great way to get your foot in the door with new clients, showcasing your strategic thinking and potentially leading to larger projects down the line.

The Future of UX is SUPA

As UX professionals, we often lament that we're brought in too late in the process, forced to put lipstick on the proverbial pig. SUPA is our chance to change that narrative. It's about shifting our role from just designing interfaces to shaping product strategy.

By offering SUPA, we're not just improving individual projects – we're elevating the entire field of UX. We're demonstrating that user-centered design isn't just about pretty interfaces or smooth interactions; it's about building the right things, for the right people, in the right way.

Need Help Getting Started?

If you're excited about implementing SUPA in your organization but feel unsure about where to begin, I'm here to help. I offer coaching services to guide you through your first SUPA process, ensuring you have the tools and confidence to make it a success. For those who prefer a more hands-off approach, I'm also available to conduct SUPA assessments for your projects directly.

Whether you use me or not, don't let another project start without proper user validation.

I’m not sure if it’s just me, but it feels like a strange time in UX right now. I’m noticing many layoffs in our field, budget cuts, and a decline in work for external suppliers. It seems we’re going through another shift in our industry, which tends to happen every few years due to technological advancements or economic factors.

In this email, I’d like to share my thoughts and best guesses about what might be happening and what the future could hold.

However, I want to begin by clarifying what I don’t believe is happening: I don’t think the user experience field is being replaced by AI.

AI Is Not Making Our Jobs Redundant

While AI may streamline processes and reduce job numbers in the field, I believe the risk of AI replacing you anytime soon is minimal.

This is due to the current nature of AI. It excels in areas like data analysis and written language but remains weak in other domains, such as:

• Strategic planning.
• Emotional intelligence.
• Creative thinking.

Fortunately, these are the three core skills essential for user experience design. Therefore, I see no reason to worry about the impact AI may have on our jobs. While AI will inevitably change how we work, it won't diminish the need for our roles.

So, if AI isn't driving the changes I'm observing, what is? It could simply be economic and political factors.

The Broader Economy May Be A Factor

There is a lot happening in the world right now that creates uncertainty. We have the war in Ukraine, conflicts in the Middle East, a cost of living crisis, and upcoming elections in the US. Additionally, the long-term effects of COVID have changed business operations and put significant economic pressure on governments.

It's not surprising that organizations are looking to cut costs and are hesitant to start new initiatives. They are waiting to see how these issues unfold.

However, we can't solely blame the broader economy. There is also issues specific to UX that are affecting the situation.

The Honeymoon is Over

To begin with, we are witnessing the end of the honeymoon period in user experience design. For some time, user experience was the buzzword in business. Similar to digital transformation, senior management became aware of this discipline. Success stories from companies like Apple and Uber sparked a frenzy of investment in user experience.

They were further seduced by statistics we all threw around like:

Every dollar invested in UX results in a return of $100, representing a 9,900% ROI.

Many of these companies did not prioritize user experience effectively. They either underinvested or had a culture that hindered genuine user-centric delivery. As we know, you can't just bolt on UX to an existing organization.

As a result, it has often fallen short of management's expectations. Now, we see them starting to cut back, drawn in by the allure of the next big thing—AI.

To complicate things further, this initial excitement, along with the maturing of the discipline, has led to another issue.

The Maturity Problem

The excitement around UX has attracted many people to the field, especially with the rise of UX bootcamps.

Meanwhile, significant progress is being made in the discipline. We are discovering what works and what doesn’t. UX patterns and best practices are emerging, leading to fewer problems that need solving.

Of course, every project has its nuances. However, we can achieve results faster than ever because we build on the solutions found by others in the past.

These two factors—more professionals and fewer problems—have created an oversaturated market. At least that is my current working hypothesis.

So, what comes next?

What Comes Next

Well, your guess is as good as mine. In the short term, we will probably see more of the same: more layoffs and more budget cuts. Unless the current economic and political uncertainty decreases, we are unlikely to see any improvements.

However, it ultimately depends on how organizations choose to integrate UX in the long run. The importance of user experience is here to stay. Consumers now expect a good user experience, and that expectation will only increase. Bridget van Kranlingen from IBM consulting put it well when she said:

"The last best experience that anyone has anywhere becomes the minimum expectation for the experience they want everywhere."

The question is: how will organizations choose to deliver on it?

As I see it, they have three options:

• They could recognize the importance of user experience and create strong, well-supported UX teams. While I believe some will take this approach, I doubt it will be the majority.
• They may abandon the idea and outsource everything to external suppliers. I think more will take this route, but it will come with challenges. This approach doesn't address the internal barriers to creating a great user experience. As a result, they will only achieve superficial improvements, mainly in user interfaces.
• They could democratize user experience by creating centers of excellence that promote best practices across the organization. These centers would empower others to become UX advocates. While this approach may work for some organizations, I don't see it becoming the mainstream solution.

I believe most will adopt a hybrid approach. Organizations will likely have some in-house staff while also relying on outside resources for support.

To make this work, organizations will need strong in-house UX leaders to tackle internal issues that undermines the user experience. That's why I'm focusing on this area. It has the potential for meaningful improvements that can deliver the largest return on investment for organizations.

But what about you? What should you be doing?

What Should You Do?

I don’t think you need to worry too much. Yes, things may be tough for a while, but if you hang in there, they will stabilize.

Newcomers to the sector are at the greatest risk. You may be forced to shift to related fields as job openings decrease.

However, experienced UX designers can feel secure in their roles. You may work externally instead of in-house, but your job is safe.

As for experienced UX leaders who have a track record for delivering results, the future looks bright. UX is here to stay. As long as you demonstrate your value, you should be fine.

Demonstrating value is crucial for all of us. Now that the initial excitement has faded, we must show management that our work makes a real impact. We need to focus on delivering what matters to them, not just on user needs.

For those who advocate for UX but don’t work directly in the field (I’m looking at you, marketers), we need your support now more than ever. You know that user experience is vital for delivering on your objectives. So, I would encourage you to keep promoting the importance of UX design. We need to ensure it isn’t seen as a failed experiment or reduced to making superficial changes on the website. If that happens, your job will become so much harder.

Of course, these are just my opinions, and I could be completely wrong. I would really like to hear your thoughts on the future and any downturns you might be noticing.