Laura Costantino

I’m developing a theory about why so many people find it challenging to learn how to use a piece of software. I would love it if y’all can help me refine this idea. It’s inspired by years spent as my entire extended family’s tech support and teaching students in UX learn tools like Figma on their own. My theory is that people tend to assume if they don’t know how to do a thing in the software, then there are one of two problems. 1. The software doesn’t do it.  2. It’s incredibly complicated and not worth bothering with. These limiting beliefs inhibit their sense of agency and hamper their ability to search for something. The result is people who either don’t bother searching for a solution, or who give up too easily after attempting a search and defaulting to belief 1. However, more recently I’ve started seeing another missing piece of this puzzle. People seem to have forgotten why computers were invented in the first place. They are at their core productivity machines. Long before entertainment came to our computers, they were for engineers and secretaries. Their primary utility was saving time doing mundane tasks. But if you don’t internalize that, you perceive computers as these mystical boxes of tech that are hard to understand. As a result, your primary assumption about any block with a piece of software is that it must be you who are “stupid” or “incapable” of making it work. Similarly, you may believe that if this is cumbersome for a person to do, it must be cumbersome for a computer as well. But if we can get students to flip this mental model and always remember that machines were, first and foremost, meant to alleviate tedium in basic tasks, then we empower everyone to search for a solution. And when no solution can be found, they should be mad at the machine for being insufficient, not wrongfully assume it’s their own incompetence. As a teacher, I haven’t figured out if this is objectively true, but my observations have led me here. Now, I am trying to figure out how to make this a teachable skill. 

10

11 Comments

Excellent article by Vitaly Friedman

1

Moderna's CEO Says Staff Should Consult ChatGPT 20 Times a Day. Read about what that could mean, and other curated articles at the intersection of AI, design and creativity in this issue of Being Designerly Read more 👉 Link in comment #Designerly #Design #UX

1

1 Comment

I don't often find examples of good UX design in the wild, but I stumbled on this one the other day while walking my dog in our neighborhood. For context, this is a roll-off dumpster with a port-a-potty attached to it. Having been a home remodelling contractor, I can attest to the fact that it's not uncommon that you will need a dumpster AND a port-a-potty on site for the duration of the project. This is a good example of looking at the entire customer experience beyond just the main task. Genius.

135

23 Comments

Craft infuses everything we do at Slack, across all functions. It's been that way from day one. It helps us make people's working lives more simple, productive, and pleasant. It's something we can always improve upon, and that we are ever committed to. Tomorrow I share my perspective at #config2024 on how care and attention to craft leads to great software design. But if you don't want to wait, you can read about my perspective here, on our Slack.design blog. Craft is a commitment we all have to our customers. It's something software makers should care deeply about. If you have ideas, questions, or feedback on the topic, drop them in the comments and let's get the conversation started!

216

5 Comments

One of the most interesting UX research projects a #uxdesign er can do is presenting his/her own case studies. I've given a Walmart Health telehealth case study now, three times. Each time the presentation gets shorter, punchier and more compelling. The more you tell the story, the better it gets. The more fun it gets. The more exciting the story feels. Over time you anticipate where the punch lines are. The a-ha moments. And you quickly learn where they aren't. The best way to learn how to tell your case study stories is to practice. Wanna help me? If you're in health in any capacity—especially in enterprise digital engagement—and you'd like to hear my pitch, I'd love to practice. Hit me up on DMs. (If you're a designer at a related health tech company, like Hinge Health, Pair Team, Amazon Health, 25madison, CVS Health, Google Health, One Med, etc, even better.)

53

Why is the UX community so hesitant to turn our UX powers onto ourselves and our industry? Two issues seem to dominate LinkedIn lately. The first one is the very real situation that our industry has too many folks and not enough jobs. UXers I know with decades of experience are having difficulty getting interviews. Junior UXers are competing against more experienced UXers for the same roles. How many juniors have turned the UX lens onto themselves and done a competitive review of the people they are competing with? I see too many junior portfolios that feel junior, and that will not fly if your competition has truly polished work and real experience at larger companies. So goal number one should be to get parity with your portfolio so that it doesn't automatically get tossed. That might mean leveling up on core skills first to even be able to design a good enough portfolio. And the obsession with case studies is baffling if you don't have any real work to showcase. A well-done case study about a school project won't compete against a real project. Now, we get to the second issue on LinkedIn. All of us mean senior UXers who are telling people to level up, get better, and learn more. Folks who sell courses and bootcamps and other junk love fanning the flames of discord to more junior UXers. It's those gatekeepers keeping you down! Where is the positivity?! Indeed, where is the positivity? What is there to be positive about? As I said, folks with DECADES of real UX experience cannot even get phone screens. New UXers are struggling trying to compete with wave after wave of experienced UXers dropped into the job search ocean due to layoffs. UX researchers have been cut disproportionality from teams. It kinda sucks right now. When we give advice that isn't all cheerleader rah rah, we get crap for it. You don't need pats on the head and tummy scratches unless you are a dog. We don't need cheerleaders-we need to know what to do, and most of us just don't know what to do to survive this current wave of chaos. The few folks who regularly are trying to provide actionable advice also get labeled as gatekeepers. Many of these people spend hours every week producing content for free, for the UX community. Real content, not fluff. Yet they are the gatekeepers. I said this in a comment yesterday and will repeat it here: Unless a person is the hiring manager and can prevent you from getting a specific job, they are not gatekeepers. Advice and thoughts can't keep you from your dreams. If UX is the field for you and you are determined to make it no matter what, then do that. A UXer advising folks that this might not be a good time to be a UXer is an opinion and you should evaluate opinions for truth or value and then move on. As with all advice, take the good, reject the rest. And look into who is selling you this gatekeeper crap, because chances are they are trying to sell you something because they can't get a job either.

56

11 Comments

[Part 3] Design Hiring in X- Large orgs A question in the air but not asked explicitly is how do I standout among 100s of applications. Here is my honest take on standing out: We live in a relative world. Our brains perceive things in comparison only. Recruitment also has a factor of relativity whether we like it or not, want it or not, believe it or not. As much as we want it to be fair and absolute, it is extremely hard. Your compounding from the past matters a lot in standing out. The compounding can be in the form of skill, tags and relevant experience. Mis-hire is costly in any org (large or small). Hiring managers are extremely cautious about bad hires. Good hiring managers are ok to have no people than the wrong people. So right hiring is super important for the team and the larger org. Given the responsibility on the shoulders, hiring managers usually take a safe route of tags in hiring. They pin their probability of success on the past of the candidate. The candidate went to a premium design institute that is usually hard to get into. The candidate worked with premium brands that is usually rigorous. The candidate won specific award that is hard to get. The common denominator is the HARD part. The hypothesis here is, if someone strived and proved by winning all the hard battles, then they will thrive in this org’s high performance culture as well. Your great past gives that ticket to confidence. If you went to NID/IIT/NIT, if you cracked FAANG/Startup Unicorns/F100, if you filed multiple patents, if you won the red-dot/cannes multiple times, that says something about you. It gives confidence to hiring managers. Typically in the screening, these tags get picked. Honestly speaking the evidence of this hypothesis has misfired badly but works 70% of the times. The other 30% times, design managers fail gracefully showing data about the past. Despite selection based on the past, it failed 🤷‍♀️ So karthi, if I am not from a premier institute or a branded org, does it mean that I will never be selected? Honest answer is our ATS will not select you. The rule engine will not pick your resume. The human in that loop aka the recruitment team may pick you, provided you showcase a relevant skill. I'll share a recent experience from a hiring process for a demo designer position. Despite my explicit instructions to senior staff and new graduates not to apply, my recruitment team and I received over 100 applications in less than six hours. We had disabled the rule engine and painstakingly reviewed each application, spending approximately a minute on each resume. We focused on identifying relevant experience without relying on tags. This process highlighted how often applicants fail to showcase their relevance in their resumes or portfolios. Interestingly, the position required expertise in Figma, yet all the portfolios we received were in PDF format🫣 Standing out without relevant past for tomorow 🫶 #mynotes #hiring #design

115

17 Comments

Etsy was recently seen A/B testing AND eventually shipping a more visible search with the help of a higher contrast orange background button color (instead of a ghost-like icon only approach). Full screenshots: https://lnkd.in/gVJThW3W Now I don't work for Etsy (as much as I'd love to design some experiments for/with them) so we can't see the actual numbers beyond this feint probabilistic residue from the public domain. However, the amazing Andrey Andreev who runs experiments at Metro recently ran a very similar one and shared a solid result on GoodUI - with a positive impact to sales and searches. N = 896,009 SRM Check = Pass p-val on Increased Sales = 0.0139 (I know some people might like this to be even lower for a primary metric; but there is also reinforcing evidence on increased searches with an even lower p value at "ultra stat-sig" levels using Ron Kohavi's language; p < 0.00000001). I inverted the a/b test and categorized it under the Filled Vs Ghost Button pattern - further weakening the ghosts and strengthening the high contrast filled button styles on multiple metrics. https://lnkd.in/gmD8Exvc Thanks Andrey for a somewhat of an unintended replication, as I know your source of inspiration came from somewhere else on this one. :) Have you tested anything similar or different. If so, what did you discover? I'd be super curious to see more examples where increases to search have either ❌ failed or ✅ succeeded. Please share independent of outcome. ps. We also have a handful of similar "visible search" experiments where companies tested adding or hiding search: https://lnkd.in/gvWqzrK5 - further supporting this direction. [EDIT]: Note the additional confounders / variables in the Metro test - a stronger border, a change in background color of the search box as per Jakob Nielsen comment. They may be similar along the lines of the increased visibility theme - but possible additional variables nevertheless. #experimentation #ecommerce #replication #optimization #ui #ux

381

28 Comments

Today I’m sharing some resources for writing inclusive content. Maybe you’re a UX writer, content specialist, or designer who writes. If you’ve been wondering how to make your words work for more people, then these resources will help you! Content makes such a big difference in how inclusive and accessible things will be, so you have a lot of power! Resources: Accessibility Strategies for Your Content Team from Deque Systems, Inc (article) - https://lnkd.in/eigMrhY7  Content Design for Accessibility: Why It Matters and How To Do It on Medium (article) - https://lnkd.in/eEyXTQkf Creating Accessible Content: 5 Rules for Writers from Bureau of Internet Accessibility (article) - https://lnkd.in/ebPbVq_G Creating accessible content from Texthelp (article) -  https://lnkd.in/eV6SNS-K  Dyslexia friendly style guide from the British Dyslexia Association (article) -  https://lnkd.in/e36z8Pwk 50 Ways To Make Your Content Accessible by Stephanie H. (article) https://lnkd.in/eAdghX52 Marketers in Progress: How we’re building accessibility into our content practice from Siteimprove (article) -  https://lnkd.in/gffkJFm3 Neuroinclusive Content Design from axe-con (video) - https://lnkd.in/dkeGjMmC Plain language guidelines from Plain Language . Gov (site) - https://lnkd.in/eSQRFt-A If you have accessibility resources for content then please share them in the comments! And I'd especially love some recommendations for videos. I only have one video on this list, and it would be great to have a wider range of options so people can use what works for them. #Accessibility #A11y #AccessibilityMatters #UXWriting #Content #ContentWriting #AccessibleContent

47

10 Comments

As a UX professional navigating the turbulent waters of job searching for the past year, I've witnessed firsthand the seismic shifts in our industry. The recent layoffs in the United States and downsizing in every sector have sent waves of uncertainty through every community. AI's relentless advance prompts a reevaluation of once-in-demand roles and skills. The key is adapting to the changes around us. Change is not easy, but embracing it in an AI-dominating world might help me or, at least, the designers out here. Our jobs may look different, but the core of what we do remains the same: to create experiences that resonate and feel inherently human. My job hunt continues a relentless journey that has tested my resilience and spirit. It's been a year of introspection, facing the harsh reality that the industry I dedicated my life to is changing in front of me. The layoffs were not just a professional setback but a personal blow, shaking the very foundations of what I believed my career to be. It's traumatic, I must say. Each rejection email reminds me of the uncertainty looming over my design passion. The silence after interviews feels like an echo of doubt, questioning my worth and my place in a world where AI seems to overshadow human creativity. Yet, as I reflect on this evolution, I can't help but see a silver lining. AI is not a replacement for design; it's a new canvas, a creative partner. The tools that threaten our livelihoods are the same ones that can amplify our capabilities. AI can handle the repetitive and the mundane, freeing us to delve deeper into the essence of design - empathy, storytelling, and human connection. But amidst this heartbreak, a flicker of hope refuses to die. I am still here, fighting, believing in the value of human-centered design. My journey is far from over; it's merely taken a detour. I am more than my job title; I am a storyteller, an empath, and a creator. And no amount of AI can replace the human touch, which is the essence of authentic design. No AI, I repeat, can replace human emotions in any way. So, I continue to search, to learn, and to adapt. I am a UX professional without a job, but not without a purpose. I will find my place again and emerge stronger, armed with new skills and a renewed vision for the future of design. To my fellow designers, let's not view this as an end but as a transformation. Let's harness AI's potential and continue to push the boundaries of what design can be. Our journey is far from over; it's simply taking a new, exciting path.  #JobHunt #uxjobs #AIinUX #uxdesigner #layoffs

31

AI is the buzzword of the day, but it's simply the next step in our technology evolution. Evolving generative AI interactions are repeating human-computer interaction history. Remember those green screens and books filled with computer prompts, or learning how to use a search engine? Perhaps you do, maybe you don't, but either way AI has modified the way we do this by using natural language! #AI #technologyevolution #naturalanguageprocessing

6

A real-world rant on design, data security, and user experience: This week I had a frustrating experience with Citi account verification process that highlights critical flaws in design, data security, and user experience. After adding my Citi card to Google Wallet (at Citi's prompt), both my cards were immediately locked as a precaution against fraud. I called Citi, entered my full card number, and even provided the secret password I set up at account creation. That wasn't enough. Passed to a representative, I was asked to "fully verify" my account with a code sent to any phone number I chose. Yes, any number—not just the one linked to my account! I triple-asked if they could send the code to any number, not just the phone number on my account...which they confirmed. Next, they asked for the number of any external checking account. Yes, you read that right. They wanted the number to a checking account...any checking account! This baffling request left me questioning Citi's security protocol, and whether I should even have any accounts with them. After asking for a supervisor to verify this was protocol, they said one would call me back during regular business hours. That was 5 days ago; they never called. Citi's process not only fails to verify identity effectively but compromises user trust and data security. Designing systems that prioritize genuine security and seamless user experiences not only enhances data protection, but provides a feeling of security and trust to the user that can increase customer conversion and loyalty. Citi 's process only has me doubting the multiple accounts I hold with them. Good design is more than just products—it's about creating secure, trustworthy experiences. Oh, and my cards remain locked....Sorry, Citi. There's no way I'm giving a full external checking account number over the phone to have it jotted down on a Post-It note. And yes, this is legit! I called the number directly on the back of my card. #UXDesign #DataSecurity #UserExperience #DesignThinking #CustomerExperience

🚨 Important Update for Adobe Users 🚨 Recently, Adobe faced backlash due to ambiguous language in their Terms of Service (TOS) that led a lot of people to believe the company claimed ownership over user-created works. This misinterpretation caused significant concern among creatives who rely on Adobe software (myself included). Adobe has since acknowledged the issue and pledged to revise the TOS to clarify their stance, ensuring that users retain ownership of their creations. https://lnkd.in/dTyc6DMX #Adobe #CreativeCommunity #TOS #UserRights #DigitalArt #CreativeSoftware

1

Someone has to say it! Tobias saying it makes it even more legit. Meet and work with a lot of young folks who are looking for mentors at workplace thinking they would be hand held at every step. While guides are there, one needs to walk the path and grind towards a path set by the mentor. Things don’t happen on their own. Blaming is another aspect of design folks where stakeholders are held responsible for what’s happening around them without introspecting why is it happening and what one can do to change that behaviour around by using design frameworks and improving the craft on a daily basis. So much of entitlement will never get us anywhere. #designlife

11

I'm still thinking about Dovetail's AI release from last month... ...because I think it's one of the best examples we have of the power of agentic UX. It's not that any one feature is supremely valuable. Imagine if Dovetail had just shipped one of these features, like suggested highlights 🥱. That would have been a snooze. (This is how most companies are approaching AI UX right now.) Instead, Dovetail looked at each step of the user journey and figured out how an AI agent could pull cognitive weight 💪 from end to end. 💪 ✨ Magic Transcribe ✨ Magic Summarize ✨ Magic Highlight ✨ Magic Cluster ✨ Magic Search Yes, it makes implementation more complicated. But we know the power of a holistically designed experience: the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Together, these features transform the UX from a solo SaaS endeavor into a partner-based journey. Dovetail's features are still early-stage (they acknowledge the quirks), but it gives us a vision for the future of agentic UX. And boy, do we need a collective intuition for what that looks like. Two other predictions about the agentic future of UX: 1️⃣ I don't think an AI agent has to autonomously take actions on the user's behalf to be defined as an "AI agent." Every experiences will blend autonomous actions and passive support...based on the user's comfort and difficulty of the task. 2️⃣ I don’t think it matters if the AI agent is labeled as an “agent” or if it exists as a collection of unbranded agentic features. (As long as agentic workflows are supporting throughout the user's journey.) ----- Follow Empathy & AI for more ✨ Research, Design, Humanity in the AI era. ✨ ----- #innovation #userexperience #ai #artificialintelligence #genai #humancenteredai

63

3 Comments

This was wrong. Full stop People need opportunities to reinvent and rebrand themselves. With a number like 1,800 layoffs, no doubt this was done in a 9 box fashion and those who landed in the three bottom left boxes were eliminated. Even though the CEO said that 1,050 were low performers, he just branded all 1,800 the same…because, who knows what box they fell into. Regardless of the box, this was impersonal and unprofessional. Bad form Intuit. I believe in people. I believe in their potential. Take the high road. Be a leader. #leadership #leaders #layoffs

5

1 Comment

When we talk about responsible and ethical AI, it goes beyond inclusive language and content - it's also about designing model behavior that can identify and respect experiences that are uniquely human. If this is a real example from Meta AI, it's wildly cringe: https://lnkd.in/gWqpU7nx

19

5 Comments