The State of Design Systems: Where have we been and where are we going?
Disclaimer: the opinions and views expressed in this article are my own. They do not represent the views of any current or previous employers or organizations.
It’s been a turbulent couple of years in the world, in tech, in design systems, and in many of our personal lives. What effects are intertwined? Is there anything we can and should do differently? How has the market shifted? How does this impact our daily work?
I’d like to address some of these concerns from my own perspective: as someone who has felt the effects of layoffs, interviewed with companies, and joined several teams in 2023.
I’ve had the opportunity to talk to many companies in the layoff/rehiring cycle about what they are looking for in design personnel and design systems. They’ve provided key insights into why design systems didn’t work at their companies and what they hope to see next in the industry.
To get started, we should understand the simple definition of a design system and its success criteria. Even if you already know what a design system is, I’d recommend reading through so we speak the same language throughout this conversation.
What is a design system?
At its core, a design system is a product for digital products.
When designers advocate for organizations to build one, they typically compile a list of benefits. They look at the company’s needs and make a proposal that likely looks similar to this:
A successful design system offers:
Simplicity
Efficiency
Scalability
Maintainability
Accessibility
Consistency
Then, they talk about the ways they accomplish this list via a design system. I’ve pitched lists like this and I’ve seen the results in the last year. The results aren’t as promising as I wish and it’s got me asking a key question that I think many design system practitioners should be asking as well.
The big question design system practitioners should be asking
“What can I do for you exactly right now?”
I think this question reveals two underlying sentiments we should seek to understand: ruthless honesty and incisive delivery:
Ruthless Honesty: Making tough realizations about the state of an industry, business, project, or team.
Incisive Delivery: The ability to take those realizations, accept them, and sprint into practical action.
Making tough realizations is critical to accept our new reality and move into an honest and adjusted strategy. It’s unpleasant but especially critical in the wake of pervasive layoffs and new technology.
How did design systems and their makers do in 2023?
In 2023, the design systems industry did not thrive.
In general, tech did not thrive. This impacted design systems on two levels:
At the business level: Businesses found themselves in tough financial situations, affecting funding for design system teams.
On an individual level: The individuals that make up these teams experienced emotional hits and anxiety spikes.
Businesses are made up of individuals. To understand the business implications, the individuals must first be understood. So, let’s start there.
Individuals in tech have been forced into dealing with unfortunate realities that affect their livelihoods. Many times, it’s not their fault. So what can they do?
As technologists, the way we answer that question will be largely shaped by our own experiences, so here’s mine.
My 2023 recap - Let’s talk about layoffs
I’ve had the pleasure of a wonderful career thus far. It’s been filled with people who truly wanted to see me grow and solve complex problems. I am who I am today because of each person who took a chance on me—to you, I am very grateful.
That being said, 2023 held its own unique challenges:
I was affected by 2 major layoffs
I adapted to 3 different companies in 1 year
I was unemployed for a total of 6 months (~3 months per layoff)
I submitted over 90 job applications
I completed over 45 interviews
I attended every local networking event I could and spoke to other experts in my field to gather additional information about the state of the industry.
While this looks daunting, I am one of the fortunate compared to many of my peers. I’ve connected with many whose year in the industry was far more challenging, with a profound impact on their lives.
To understand the current mental perspective of our design system teams, we must address the unpleasant elephant in the room: layoffs.
If you work in tech, you’ve likely been affected by layoffs in some capacity. Maybe you were the one laid off, or it was your loved one or friend. Maybe you had to be the one to deliver the news to your team, or make the seemingly impossible call on your business’ financial situation. You might even feel like your role is next. We've all accumulated stress from it, and should recognize this tension on our own teams and the teams we go on to join.
As you reflect on your own journey, pause and celebrate the fact that you are still here reading this article and caring about how design systems operate. As a design system practitioner, you know the work is still important. It solves critical problems the world faces. If you are job searching currently, let me affirm your suspicions, and offer encouragement: The hiring process is broken. I’m sorry for what you are going through. Keep finding ways to be kind to yourself. It’s not your fault, you’ve got this.
“What can I do for you exactly right now?”
I bring up this sensitive topic because it’s real. It’s where people are at and we can’t get around it. Through my own experiences with layoffs, I’ve found an opportunity for myself: 45+ interviews became 45+ conversations with real-world teams seeking to navigate the current climate.
I found many defeated, frustrated, and pessimistic attitudes from those interviewing. Many were stuck in a layoff/rehire cycle. Many surviving teams expressed understandable concern and personal stress about rehiring another design systems designer. All I really could ask was: “What can I do for you exactly right now?”
The answers I got from these teams were simple, yet profound. They spoke to their core frustrations with the design system practice and I think we ought to do our best to listen.
One trend we should leave in 2023
Our industry needs to stop over-advocating for design systems. It leads to unachievable goals for your team and a bad reputation for the practice.
The teams I spoke with emphasized that there was a significant deficit between what the design system team advertised and what was delivered. However, perhaps the more concerning point they made was:
Even if all of the success criteria was met, when it came to downsizing, the design system appeared redundant at best.
(That word, redundant, can be especially jarring for those of us familiar with layoffs.)
How is this possible? To find out, let’s revisit the success criteria from earlier. A successful design system offers:
Simplicity
Efficiency
Scalability
Maintainability
Accessibility
Consistency
At the end of the stakeholder presentation, the same question is always asked: “How will it make or save us money?” To which we answer something like: “It’s an investment that will accrue over time.”
The glaring problem with this model is it does not work if we don’t follow up with that accrual. How will stakeholders know their investment is paying off if we don’t show them? And, if we’re honest with ourselves, are we actually delivering on what we promised?
“Stop over-advocating for design systems. It leads to unachievable goals for your team and a bad reputation for the practice. ”
Our definition of a design system reveals another fundamental reason for why our teams appear redundant:
At its core a design system is a product for digital products.
By solving for redundant use-cases across products and platforms, we appear redundant ourselves. When viewed as an expense on a spreadsheet, it appears that in theory the core product(s) could exist without the design system.
When a stakeholder has made this realization and seeks to understand the value of the design system, too often they are met with resistance from the design system team and negative feedback from its consumers. This leads to the belief that the design system team is over-promising and under-delivering.
From my conversations, stakeholders would hear things like this from design system consumers:
“The design system is too complicated. It takes longer to incorporate the design system than it does to just make something new.”
“We have to customize things that the design system team gives us anyway, which makes it more complicated for us to manage.”
We know design systems have worked in the past, so why does it feel like they’re failing all of the sudden? I think we’ve forgotten something fundamental in our definition of a design system:
At its core a design system is a product for digital products.
The design system is not for us, it’s for the products. The key to success, like any digital product, is in the hands of the consumers. This frustration was common among each team in the layoff/rehiring process. Given the core definition of a design system, I believe our industry has begun to overlook a critical error in our practice.
The #1 offense in the design systems practice
The #1 offense in the design systems practice is getting in the way of product. Here’s why:
A design system that doesn’t serve its product teams is a failed system. The official business term for that is a “money pit.” It’s easy to become numb to negative feedback over time, but we really ought to pay attention when a consumer says “This isn’t working for me.” Our industry has developed a widespread and dangerous attitude to feedback, especially given our vulnerable position in the business.
These examples are not meant as an attack on you or your team, but rather a cautionary tale. Be careful when sentiments like these arise within your design system team:
“X team just doesn’t know what this component should be used for.”
“No one knows how to use design tokens!”
“We need to spend more time educating product teams on how design systems work.”
That last one hurts a bit for me personally. I love helping people learn about new things that I’m passionate about. But I’ve had to ask myself a hard question:
Since when has UX been founded on the principle that the user needs to be taught how to use the product?
If the user should naturally understand the product, why do we treat our design system consumers differently? Do we assume that because of their job description they should “just get it?” or “they should want to learn?” Whatever the reason, I think it’s worth realigning our goals with product goals.
Product’s goal: Make an experience that the end user will love. (Ideally, this aligns with business goals since people pay money to use something they love.)
Design system teams should focus on: Supporting product’s goal by making an experience that product teams will love and can’t live without.
Too often, design system teams want to prescribe the end product. It’s well intended, but it can get in the way. When we align our goals, we can be the jet fuel that propels product teams forward. This should be one of the most coveted reviews from a product team:
“The design system team’s work helps us so much that if we got rid of it, our jobs would be near impossible.”
Parting thoughts
Leaders and consumers should be bought into the vision of the design system because it’s working for them right now. And yes, design systems are constantly growing and evolving. In that sense, they are never truly “done.” But, our success should be made apparent to those who have invested in us. And when it’s not working, we should pivot and let our stakeholders know we’ve heard them.
Where are your leaders’ and consumers' heads at this moment? They want to know, “What can you do for me exactly right now?”
To answer this you must be ruthlessly honest about the state of yourself, your team, and your design system and make a plan for incisive delivery. Don’t wait to implement that plan. (Especially if that plan is a well-deserved career break or vacation 😉).
You must track and report your success frequently. Doing this is critical for survival. Here are some ideas:
Build close relationships with product teams and gather personal testimonials about how the design system team continually supports their goals
Show how the design system aids consumers by simplifying frontend problems, freeing them to focus on core issues
Show how the design system team has improved brand recognition and consistency across multiple platforms
Compare accessibility scores in your products before and after the design system was implemented (or between library versions)
You’ll notice these ideas are right in line with our original success criteria. I don’t think our list was broken. But, we need to back up our promises with real numbers and stories. On the other side, we should be honest about when something isn’t working, and pivot in a new direction.
“...design systems are constantly growing and evolving....they are never truly ‘done.’ But, our success should be made apparent to those who have invested in us. And when it’s not working, we should pivot and let our stakeholders know we’ve heard them.”
Right now, many business leaders and product teams are forced into being extremely tactical and scrappy. If the design system can’t work within their parameters, it’s likely to lose support.
Here’s my advice on how to keep going:
If you are a design system consumer, speak up when the system is not working for you. You are the user – it’s your right. We’d also love to hear when it’s going well!
If you are a design system practitioner, be open-minded and appreciative of all consumer feedback. Seek it out. Collaborate.
While long-term goals are important, try to have some aggressive short-term goals to give your investors a sure return.
Be kind to yourself and others. We’ve all had a wild ride 💜
