Design Critique Sessions

I once dreaded design reviews. Now, I use them as a tool. All of us go through this shift. Negative feedback, constructive or not, made me defensive. It felt like an insult. I took it personally and often went through the five stages of grief: 1. Denial "They must have misunderstood my design; there's no way it's actually that bad." 2. Anger "How dare they criticize my work like that? They don't understand my vision at all!" 3. Bargaining "Maybe if I just tweak this one part, they'll see how great the overall concept is." 4. Depression "I'm clearly not cut out for this; maybe I should just give up." 5. Acceptance "Okay, okay, I will make the changes; maybe it will make the design better." Knowing how to receive and act on feedback is part of a designer's job and is also what differentiates good and bad designers. It took me a while to understand that. Here are some tips that can help you: 1. Be open-minded. Embrace new perspectives, even challenging ones. Critique aims to improve your design, not undermine your skills. 2. Ask clarifying questions if unsure. Request specific examples or detail explanations. 3. Your work isn't you. Feeling attached to designs is natural. Remember, critique isn't personal. View your design objectively. 4. Resist arguing. Listen fully and thank them for their input. If you disagree, reflect and follow up later. After you get the feedback, don't address it right away. Give yourself time to reflect on what was discussed. As I like to tell all my mentees: "Don't implement the feedback blindly. Push it through your own point of view. Use it as a guide, not as a requirement. You are the designer."

🤦🏻 “How We Run Design Critiques at Figma” (https://lnkd.in/eERQmRnY), an honest case study by Noah Levin with helpful techniques and templates to run more effective design critiques ↓ 🚫 Most critiques are an avalanche of unstructured opinions. ✅ Good critiques are inspiring, and give you a plan of action. ✅ Critiques work best with 2–6 people in the room. ✅ Explain the problem before showing any work. ✅ Reiterate previous findings, decisions and research. ✅ Explain how far you are: 30%, 60% or 90% done. ✅ Explain what kind of feedback you are looking for. ✅ No Keynote/Powerpoint: Figma link + Observation mode. ✅ Assign a note-taker to capture key points (Google Doc). ✅ Show what you want to show: feedback is shaped by that. 🚀 Critique formats: 🎡 Round-the-room: everyone voices their feedback (2min / person). 🍿 Popcorn: freeform comments for flowing conversation. 🥁 Jams: for early explorations with brainstorms, group sketching. 🫱🏻🫲🏾 Pair design: for deep collaboration on a problem (small groups). 🤫 Silent critiques: for a large volume of written, structured feedback. 📋 Paper print-out: for complex flows and reviewing more at once. 📣 FYI critiques: for sharing context and invite feedback later. Design critiques are about applying critical thinking. It’s about how well a current iteration of design does what it’s trying to do. However, designers alone often don’t have the full picture. Don’t necessarily reserve critiques to design teams only: invite developers and stakeholders and PMs for early feedback. Don’t ask what people think — ask how well the design tackles a specific problem. And probably the most important thing is to enable a flowing conversations. Invite everyone to ask, to doubt, to scrutinize, but stay on point and gather structured feedback: that’s when good critiques emerge. Useful resources: Practical Design Critique Guide, by Darrin Henein https://lnkd.in/ey_cGKuc Mastering Design Critiques, by Jonny Czar https://lnkd.in/e_BYwNwf Anti-Behavior in Design Critiques, and How To Handle Them, by Ben Crothers https://lnkd.in/e4UrpsPs --- ⛵ Figma and Miro Templates Design Critique Meetings Guide (Figma), by Overflow https://lnkd.in/dE85MUAK Design Critique Template (Figma), by Janus Tiu https://lnkd.in/dCYp2MSY Design Critique Meeting (Figma), by Rodrigo Javier Peña https://lnkd.in/dP_8pCug Design Critique Playground Template (Miro), by Miroslava Jovicic https://lnkd.in/eryJShRd #ux #design

Convincing your client to approve your design is not easy! Often, clients may not be aware of design principles but their input is invaluable because they are the final approvers.  So how do you ensure the client not only understands the design but also feels confident in its effectiveness? This is why our team presents the logo in real-life scenarios:  → Showing a logo in practical situations like products, billboards, social media, or business cards gives a tangible sense of its application. A flat design might look great on paper, but seeing how it will look practically creates a stronger connection. → Use slides to narrate how the design aligns with the brand’s identity and communicates its message. Visual aids like showing the logo in a monochrome version or alongside branding elements help clients visualize the bigger picture.  A good presentation will not only get approved faster but also ensure the client sees its value. In fact, more than 50% of our clients mention how interactive and personalised the presentation was making it easier for them to make a decision. Do you give your clients a practical overview of your logo? #graphicdesign

The biggest mistake PhD students make before the defense? Preparing to present, but not preparing to defend. They reread the thesis. They tidy the slides. They practice the introduction 10 times. But the defense is not just about knowing your thesis. It is about showing that you can defend your decisions. As a research mentor, one thing I always tell PhD scholars is: Your examiners are usually looking for clarity, ownership, and academic maturity. Here are some practical tips that genuinely help: 1. Prepare a 2-minute version of your study You should be able to explain: • what your study is about • why it matters • what gap it addresses • what your main contribution is 2. Make a “decision defense” sheet Create one page for the major choices you made: • Why this topic? • Why this methodology? • Why this sample? • Why these theories or variables? • Why this analysis approach? Many defense questions are really asking: Why did you do it this way and not another way? 3. Know your limitations before the examiner tells you Do not wait to be “caught.” Write down your top 3–5 limitations and prepare honest responses for each. A strong candidate does not deny weaknesses. They show they understand them and can think critically about them. 4. Prepare for the obvious questions properly Some questions come up again and again: • What is your original contribution? • Why does this study matter? • Why did you choose this method? • What are your key findings? • How does your work differ from previous studies? • What would you do differently now? Write your answers. Say them aloud. Refine them. 5. Practice speaking without reading You want to sound like the researcher who deeply understands the work. Practice answering in a calm, conversational way. 6. Prepare examples, not just definitions If asked about rigor, validity, sampling, coding, interpretation, or analysis, do not stay too theoretical. Show how you handled it in your own study. That makes your answers stronger and more convincing. 7. Learn to pause before answering You do not need to reply instantly. Take a breath. Think. Then answer clearly. 8. Separate criticism of the thesis from criticism of yourself This matters a lot. Examiners may challenge your methods, framing, or interpretation. That does not mean they think you are not capable. Do not become defensive. Listen carefully and answer the actual question. 📌 Do at least one mock defense with someone who will ask uncomfortable questions, not just easy ones. PS: What is one PhD defense tio you would add here? Share in the comments REPOST to help others Follow Dr Priya Singh, Founder Research Made Clear for more insights For research tutorials and AI tool guides, subscribe to my YT channel: https://lnkd.in/e8zWuWV2

You're not a designer, but everyone should think like one. This $20 book will change how you approach every business interaction. The Design of Everyday Things taught me why most businesses leak money - and it has nothing to do with strategy. Here's the breakdown: 1. Your communication needs a mental map. Norman's "conceptual models": Your audience builds a picture of how things work. Give them the right picture upfront. When information is laid out like a table-of-contents first, people remember 17% more of it. In beginners, recall jumped 42%. McKinsey uses this religiously - tell them what you're going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you told them. 2. People create desire paths - so pave them. You know those dirt trails cutting across campus lawns? Same thing happens in meetings. Everyone scans for the bottom line first. Eye-tracking found recruiters decide on resumes in under 8 seconds - but only when the headline was crystal-clear. So flip your approach: Start with the outcome, then explain why. Give people the shortcut they're already taking. 3. First impressions happen faster than thought. Norman's "visceral level": People react emotionally before logic kicks in. Princeton researchers found it takes just 100 milliseconds for the brain to lock in a judgment. If they can't instantly see themselves in your message, you've already lost. Make their problem impossible to miss in that first glance. 4. Design for your worst-case audience. Someone checking email during your pitch. Someone who's half-listening. Assume your slide competes with an inbox - because 9 out of 10 people multitask during virtual meetings. Norman's constraints principle: make misunderstanding impossible. Headers that summarize everything below. The distracted executive should still get your point. 5. Eliminate unnecessary decisions. Norman's "knowledge in the world": Don't make people think - make the right choice obvious. Any choice that takes longer than 100 milliseconds to confirm stops feeling automatic - and conversions fall. Amazon created one-click buying. Apple standardized on USB-C. Trader Joe's limits to 4,000 SKUs versus 30,000-50,000 elsewhere - and generates 4-5x more revenue per square foot. — I spent years thinking design was about making things pretty. Norman showed me it's about making things work. The difference between professionals who struggle and professionals who scale. Stop making people think harder. Start making their lives easier.

Are your presentations falling flat? Here’s how to master presenting in every setting. We now have to master 3 Worlds of Presentations: Virtual - hybrid - in person. Here’s all you need to know: Virtual Presentations 1. Boost your gravitas: In virtual settings, the presenter looks like everyone else. Inject energy with your voice and passion. 2. Raise your hands. They need to be chest-height to be visible. 3. Leverage chat & polls: Use chat features to encourage questions and feedback. Incorporate polls to engage your audience and gather real-time insights. 4. Ace the tech set-up: Lighting & sound matter. Familiarize yourself with the platform's tools (screen sharing, breakout rooms) before. Hybrid Presentations 1. Avoid two-class audience: Address both groups regularly to create inclusivity. 2. No hiding: Ask the remote group to have their cameras on. 3. Use Dual Screens: Set up a dual-screen layout where you can see both your slides and the audience. This helps you maintain eye contact and engage with both groups effectively. 4. Test Audio/Visual Equipment: Ensure all equipment works well in both environments. In-Person Presentations 1. Read the Room: Pay attention to body language and facial expressions to gauge audience engagement. Adjust your tone or pacing accordingly. 2. Utilize Movement: Move around the stage or room to create a dynamic presence. This helps to draw attention and energize the audience. 3. Encourage Interaction: Foster an interactive atmosphere by inviting questions and facilitating discussions throughout your presentation. 4. Avoid Death by Powerpoint: Resist the temptation to read from your slides. Slides are for the audience. No matter the setting, the key to a successful presentation is connecting with your audience. By tailoring your approach to each format, you can enhance engagement and leave a lasting impression. ♻ Please share to help your network and follow me Oliver Aust for daily tips on leadership communication.

🔥 During design interviews, presenting your case study can feel like a make-or-break moment. However, many designers can benefit from strengthening one essential skill: clearly communicating the impact of their work. In my latest video, I worked with Joshua McKenzie, a Senior Product Designer, to critique his case study presentation and help him elevate it to interview-ready status. The goal? Craft a compelling story that showcases his skills, approach, and outcomes 🏆. In this critique, we cover: - How to structure your case study for clarity and engagement. - The importance of pairing visuals with a strong narrative. - Why you need two versions of your case study: one to send, one to present. - How to effectively integrate data and metrics into your story. - Common presentation pitfalls (and how to avoid them). 👀 Watch the full critique and take your portfolio to the next level: https://lnkd.in/gcjxD7VJ Some key takeaways: - Structure matters: Start with a clear business problem and user challenge, then walk through your process step by step, ending with measurable outcomes. - Visuals over words: Avoid text-heavy slides—let your work speak for itself while you guide the story. - Tailor for the audience: Use a concise, visual version of your case study for live presentations and a more detailed, written version if sending out. - Leverage data: Metrics and insights show your impact and differentiate your thinking and work from others. - Practice storytelling: Your ability to communicate your work is just as important as the work itself. ✨ If you're preparing for design interviews or looking to refine your case study game, this video is packed with actionable advice to help you stand out! 💥

Documentation is not paperwork. It is a tool for learning, reflection, and professional growth. Working in the development sector has taught me one thing very strongly: if we don’t document our work, we may remember the experience—but we may lose the learning. Over time, I have made documentation an integral part of my journey. Whether it is a field visit, a stakeholder meeting, a challenge faced, a successful intervention, a training session, or simply a reflection from the day, I try to document it. I regularly document: 🔹 My Learnings – What did I learn today that I didn’t know yesterday? 🔹 My Challenges – What didn’t work? What barriers did I face? What could I have done differently? 🔹 My Field Visits – What did I observe? What did stakeholders say? What patterns did I notice? 🔹 My Reflections – How did the experience change my understanding of the problem, people, or system? 🔹 My Progress – What has changed over a week, month, or a longer period? I have found that documenting creates a powerful repository of experiences. A daily reflection helps me capture the small but important observations. A weekly reflection helps me identify patterns and connect different experiences. A monthly reflection helps me step back and ask: What impact am I creating? What am I learning? Where am I growing? And what needs to change? In this sector, where our work often involves complex systems, communities, government stakeholders, field realities, and constantly evolving challenges, documentation becomes even more important. It helps us move from: Experience → Reflection → Learning → Action → Improvement And good documentation doesn’t have to be complicated. Some tools that can make it easier: 📝 Google Docs / Microsoft OneNote – for detailed notes, reflections and field observations 📊 Google Sheets / Excel– for tracking activities, data, progress and follow-ups 🗂️ Notion – for creating a structured personal knowledge and learning repository 📱 Google Keep / Notes – for capturing quick observations and ideas on the go 🎨 Canva – for converting learnings and field insights into visually engaging stories 🧠 Miro – for mapping ideas, reflections, stakeholder journeys and systems 🤖 AI tools– for organising raw notes, identifying patterns, summarising reflections and turning observations into structured documentation For me, documentation has gradually evolved from “writing what I did” to “understanding why I did it, what happened, what I learned, and what I can do better next time.” And perhaps that is the real power. Your work creates experiences. Your documentation creates learning. Your reflection creates growth. But we should also ask: Are we documenting the learning that can help us create better impact tomorrow? #DevelopmentSector #Documentation #Learning #Reflection #ProfessionalGrowth #SocialImpact #DevelopmentWork #FieldWork #ContinuousLearning #KnowledgeManagement Maninder Singh M S Mahala Gandhi Fellowship VIDYA. S. MISHRA #me

Why UX Design Critiques Fail 🫥 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗩𝗮𝗰𝘂𝘂𝗺: Presenting designs without explaining the user, problem, or constraints leads to irrelevant feedback. Always frame the work before asking for input. 🔧 𝗦𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗶𝗻𝗴: Reviewers prescribe UI fixes instead of identifying problems. Train teams to articulate what's wrong, then let designers explore how to fix it. 🚲 𝗕𝗶𝗸𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴: Teams debate button colors on wireframes while ignoring structural flaws. Presenters must explicitly state the feedback level needed for each session. 🎨 𝗦𝘂𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗙𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸: "𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯'𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘵" isn't actionable. Anchor every critique to users, goals, or evidence. Replace personal taste with reasoning about real risks. 🛡️ 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝗟𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴: Designers who argue every point shut down honest feedback. Present your rationale briefly, then listen, clarify, and take notes. ✨ "𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗜𝘁 𝗣𝗼𝗽" 𝗦𝘆𝗻𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗲: Vague feedback wastes everyone's time. Facilitators must probe until fuzzy feelings become specific, actionable UX attributes the designer can address. 😤 Ego Trap: Taking feedback personally destroys psychological safety. You are not your design. Critique stress-tests the work, not your worth as a designer. 📣 𝗛𝗶𝗣𝗣𝗢 𝗘𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁: When the highest-paid person speaks first, everyone else falls in line. Have leaders speak last or use silent written critique first. 🐇 𝗥𝗮𝗯𝗯𝗶𝘁 𝗛𝗼𝗹𝗲𝘀: Without a facilitator and time limits, critiques derail into off-topic debates. Use a parking lot document and stay focused on the UI. 🧟 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗯𝘆 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗲: Incorporating every opinion creates Frankenstein designs. Critique gathers perspectives; the designer owns the final call on what actually gets implemented. 🕳️ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗛𝗼𝗹𝗲: Brilliant feedback means nothing if nobody captures it. Assign a note-taker, summarize action items, and share a written follow-up within 24 hours. ⏰ 𝗧𝗼𝗼 𝗟𝗮𝘁𝗲: Critiquing polished, partially-built work guarantees ignored feedback or expensive rework. Crit early on sketches and wireframes when change is still cheap. My full article about design critiques, including the process to do them right 👉 https://lnkd.in/gXhH--ar

Stop asking clients "what's your feedback?" Well, I don't mean don't ask for feedback. Obviously you should. But "what do you think?" is an open invitation to chaos. I made a small cheat sheet in Framer that you can bookmark for your next design review. Every designer has lived this meeting: you present refined brand concept and someone reopens the logo discussion. Someone else mentions a competitor. The color debate starts again. Suddenly the entire project is back at square one and you're playing design ping-pong with six people who all have different opinions about blue. The problem is that nobody defined WHAT kind of feedback the work actually needs right now. One trick I learned at IDEO is naming the feedback mode at the beginning of every session. Not "any thoughts?" but what kind of thinking we're doing today. Here's the framework I use: [Inspire mode] When we're exploring what the brand could become, ask questions like: → Which references feel closest to your ambition? → Which ones feel completely wrong? → Where should this brand sit culturally — more institutional or more experimental? [Challenge mode] When we need to stress-test the concept, ask: → Does this feel too safe or too bold for where the company is today? → What objections would users or investors raise? → Would this still feel right if the company scaled 10×? [Decide mode] When it's time to commit, ask: → Which direction best reflects the company's future, not just today? → What trade-offs come with this choice? → If we shipped this tomorrow, would you defend it publicly? [Refine mode] When the direction is right but the details need tuning, ask: → What parts feel strongest? → Where does something feel slightly off — even if you can't articulate why? → Where do you want more clarity or emphasis? [Polish mode] When the work is almost ready to ship, ask: → Anything unclear before launch? → Are there key use cases we haven't stress-tested? → Anything that makes you nervous about rollout? Once I started doing this, feedback sessions stopped being fight-or-flight situation. And the framing can be very simple in practice! For example: “For this review I’d love to stay in inspiration mode. I’m not looking for approval yet — I’m trying to understand what territory feels right for the brand. Which of these directions feels closest to your ambition, and which ones feel completely wrong?” Or later in the project: “Today we’re in refine mode. The concept is already chosen, so I’m mostly looking for signals on details — what parts feel strongest, and where something feels slightly off.” A tiny shift in framing, but it changes the entire conversation. I hope it might save you from at least one unnecessary “i don’t like this shade of blue” debate!