UX is evolving rapidly, with AI integration and a shift towards distributed expertise. UX will be like a pancake: spread thin but still delicious. As the field expands, career paths will flatten, but opportunities for expertise and impact will grow. Embrace these changes to stay ahead in the field.
Unfortunately, I don’t see it coming. In industries with very complex systems that require extensive domain knowledge, having decentralized UX resources often leads to disconnected user experiences and reinforces silo thinking. There is still a significant alignment issue among different teams that design leadership tries to manage. It's also uncertain whether decentralized designers can effectively synchronize themselves. Without some form of centralization, everyone could end up creating their own rules and practices.
This is why I believe a hybrid team holds the best potential: a centralized team that dispatches designers to decentralized units. Win-win.
Agreed. There has to be a sense of unification of practices and standards. There have to be opportunities for the designers to meet and exchange (I don't think that's what Jacob is suggesting btw).
For example, one of the things my specific product team did on our product was create a forum for us to share product direction with users and for them to share their feedback. It was a tremendous experience for all and was led to some very innovative solutions that we (or they) wouldn't have thought of if we didn't have this ongoing dialogue.
Anyway, having a centralized product/UX platform for the team to come back to allows designers to share ideas like these so the rest of the design team can take these to their respective product areas.
Now this is just a process improvement. Visual and interaction discrepancies are much easier to imagine if designers didn't have their own "home base."
The hybrid approach you're suggesting is absolutely the move.
I think where a lot of designers can improve is influencing business direction. This goes beyond product design and user experience itself. Only a select lucky designers get to play at this table, but maybe most don't have interest here. But, again, this is where team hierarchy comes into play again—you have to work your way up to this seat at the table and it takes a long time.
Even though it appears to be commodification (less need for specialization due to a proliferation of standards, patterns, and demand), it is a misnomer and the business community is incorrect to assume UX is becoming cheaper, or that it can be socialized as a set of best practices like Design Thinking, or can be automated. Design is fundamentally about innovation which cannot be commodified by definition, business leaders should be reminded only disruption happens to those who fail to innovate. It's like believing there in a perpetual motion machine.
The problem with declining demand for UX is due to quality in supply, where the profession has turned away from design and innovation practices and into purely product management roles and Figma operators. The term commodification actually sends the false signal, and marginalizes the fact the market got saturated with PMs calling themselves UX. Big business realized after the peak of hiring around the pandemic they do not need so many talking head PMs who do nothing but talk and manage and they're as expensive as engineers who actually produce something at the end of the day. This may be one reason why we saw this title of "Product Design" organically emerge because the market sees differentiation is necessary
There may be less specialization, due to the ability to perform better as a "UX Unicorn." But at the same time, even with embedded UX in each product, many products will be big enough to need multiple UX staff, and then some specialization within that set of colleagues will be inevitable becuase each person usually gravitates to preferring some tasks over others.
Unfortunately, I don’t see it coming. In industries with very complex systems that require extensive domain knowledge, having decentralized UX resources often leads to disconnected user experiences and reinforces silo thinking. There is still a significant alignment issue among different teams that design leadership tries to manage. It's also uncertain whether decentralized designers can effectively synchronize themselves. Without some form of centralization, everyone could end up creating their own rules and practices.
This is why I believe a hybrid team holds the best potential: a centralized team that dispatches designers to decentralized units. Win-win.
Agreed. There has to be a sense of unification of practices and standards. There have to be opportunities for the designers to meet and exchange (I don't think that's what Jacob is suggesting btw).
For example, one of the things my specific product team did on our product was create a forum for us to share product direction with users and for them to share their feedback. It was a tremendous experience for all and was led to some very innovative solutions that we (or they) wouldn't have thought of if we didn't have this ongoing dialogue.
Anyway, having a centralized product/UX platform for the team to come back to allows designers to share ideas like these so the rest of the design team can take these to their respective product areas.
Now this is just a process improvement. Visual and interaction discrepancies are much easier to imagine if designers didn't have their own "home base."
The hybrid approach you're suggesting is absolutely the move.
I think where a lot of designers can improve is influencing business direction. This goes beyond product design and user experience itself. Only a select lucky designers get to play at this table, but maybe most don't have interest here. But, again, this is where team hierarchy comes into play again—you have to work your way up to this seat at the table and it takes a long time.
Hi Jakob, I and many others have been calling it the commodification and consolidation of roles in our industry since around 2015, here's a recent one: https://medium.com/@marzism/every-industry-goes-through-some-form-of-commodification-3be7ad017260
Even though it appears to be commodification (less need for specialization due to a proliferation of standards, patterns, and demand), it is a misnomer and the business community is incorrect to assume UX is becoming cheaper, or that it can be socialized as a set of best practices like Design Thinking, or can be automated. Design is fundamentally about innovation which cannot be commodified by definition, business leaders should be reminded only disruption happens to those who fail to innovate. It's like believing there in a perpetual motion machine.
The problem with declining demand for UX is due to quality in supply, where the profession has turned away from design and innovation practices and into purely product management roles and Figma operators. The term commodification actually sends the false signal, and marginalizes the fact the market got saturated with PMs calling themselves UX. Big business realized after the peak of hiring around the pandemic they do not need so many talking head PMs who do nothing but talk and manage and they're as expensive as engineers who actually produce something at the end of the day. This may be one reason why we saw this title of "Product Design" organically emerge because the market sees differentiation is necessary
In this context, how do you see the evolution of UX researcher? The evolution of the UX Strategist ... And other profiles.
There may be less specialization, due to the ability to perform better as a "UX Unicorn." But at the same time, even with embedded UX in each product, many products will be big enough to need multiple UX staff, and then some specialization within that set of colleagues will be inevitable becuase each person usually gravitates to preferring some tasks over others.