Executive orders arrive with the fanfare of urgent necessity, though their actual urgency often proves debatable. The recent "Improving Our Nation Through Better Design" directive falls into this category—well-intentioned but perhaps historically naive about the timeline required for meaningful institutional change. Ana Monroe and Aaron Meyers, both of GSA’s Service Design team, offer practical perspectives on both the promise and peril of attempting to redesign government in a presidential term.

Their team at the General Services Administration achieved measurable success: a 37% reduction in GSA's digital footprint over three years, full marks on a Government Accountability Office audit, and the establishment of federal digital experience standards. These accomplishments required navigating the peculiar challenge of convincing auditors to soften their institutionally neutral tone, which Monroe diplomatically explained "sometimes comes across as slightly negative" in written form. Such victories illustrate both the potential for design thinking in government and the byzantine nature of federal culture change.

The executive order's scope reveals both ambition and confusion about design's true nature. While it correctly acknowledges both online and offline spaces, Monroe and Meyers warn of the professional divide between digital and physical design disciplines. As Monroe notes, exporting a three-dimensional book layout to digital format—essentially converting it to a webpage—typically produces chaos. This technical reality points to a deeper conceptual problem: the persistent misconception that design means "button colors and wall paint" rather than what Charles Eames defined as "the intentional arrangement of resources to achieve a particular goal."

Monroe's experience suggests that successful government design initiatives require what she calls "crazy unicorns"—professionals who bridge multiple disciplines. Her former GSA team included specialists who could simultaneously understand HR data requirements, IT infrastructure, and service design principles. This multidisciplinary approach proved essential when creating composite measures that tracked both digital and physical interactions, such as in Meyers’ experience with some Department of Labor programs serving coal miners who require paper forms alongside computer-savvy urban workers. To serve these customers, Meyers’ team had to offer fundamentally different design challenges serving the same policy objective.

The three-year timeline presents the EO’s gravest weakness. Government relationships with citizens span from prenatal care to probate court—a lifetime-plus commitment that makes brief policy experiments seem almost frivolous. Meyers recalls websites that updated only every four years because that matched their underlying program cycles. Against this institutional reality, a three-year design push appears both inadequate and potentially wasteful unless it builds upon existing expertise. Monroe's pragmatic hope is simple: "I hope they listen to people this time around." Her team's work proved that government design reform is possible, but only with sustained commitment, cross-functional collaboration, and recognition that many federal employees are already practicing good design principles—they simply lack coordination and strategic support to scale their efforts.

Get guidance built for this EO.

We’ve watched countless well-meaning research initiatives produce beautiful reports that produce elaborate charts that nobody reads and insights that nobody implements.

None of us has time or leeway to walk that road again, so we documented what actually works in the newest edition of the HCD Discovery Guide.

We know the process in this book works because we tested it in the real world—reducing a major federal agency's digital footprint by 37% while maintaining service levels and earning perfect audit scores.

The HCD Discovery Guide distills those hard-won lessons from government agencies managing everything from disability claims to student loans—contexts where failure means real hardship for real people.

Learn to structure research that reveals urgent customer needs, recruit people who will give you honest feedback, and translate findings into recommendations that survive organizational politics. These aren't academic theories; they're survival tactics from the trenches of public service. Because if you're going to ask people for their time, you might as well learn something that actually leads to better outcomes.

What we’re into this week

The story of Beekman 1802 hits hard: job loss, community loss, followed by a long period of building back. In Brent Ridge and Josh Kilmer-Purcel’s journey, this has ended up in a thriving business built on kindness—something we’re really leaning into these days.

Give it a listen on Reconsidering episode 50: Kindness is a strategy

Credits

Interview: Aaron MeyersProducer: Ana MonroeArticle: Abigail AdamsArtwork: Study for a Border Design. 1890/1897. Charles Sprague Pearce Artist, American, 1851 - 1914. via the National Gallery of Art. Treatment by Ishmael Interactive.Referenced report: Digital Experience:Agency Compliance with Statutory Requirements

Get full access to Ishmael Interactive at ishmaelinteractive.substack.com/subscribe