‹ All writing

Name who decides before the design debate

Name who decides before the design debate

Name who decides before the design debate

Greg Herboek

Design process

The short answer

When design, product and engineering disagree, don't settle it by taste or by waiting for consensus. Name one decision owner before the discussion, hear each discipline, and write the call down with the dissent and what would reopen it.

When design, product and engineering disagree, don't settle it by taste or by waiting for consensus. Name one decision owner before the discussion, hear each discipline, and write the call down with the dissent and what would reopen it.

Original mobile concept in charcoal and bright yellow-green. A team app called Decisions shows Decision 14, Bulk edit: inline or panel?, marked Accepted. Owner: Product lead, named before review. Heard: Design, inline is faster for small edits; Product, bulk edit is the top v1 need; Engineering, inline strains large tables. The call: Bulk edit opens in a side panel for v1. Dissent: Design, recorded with reasons. Reopen if: tests show the panel slows small edits. Buttons: Comment and Propose a change. Beside the phone, dithered trails of small charcoal cubes arrive from three directions and meet at one solid yellow-green tower of cubes on a tile. Text: Illustrative concept. Everyone weighs in. One person owns the call.
Original mobile concept in charcoal and bright yellow-green. A team app called Decisions shows Decision 14, Bulk edit: inline or panel?, marked Accepted. Owner: Product lead, named before review. Heard: Design, inline is faster for small edits; Product, bulk edit is the top v1 need; Engineering, inline strains large tables. The call: Bulk edit opens in a side panel for v1. Dissent: Design, recorded with reasons. Reopen if: tests show the panel slows small edits. Buttons: Comment and Propose a change. Beside the phone, dithered trails of small charcoal cubes arrive from three directions and meet at one solid yellow-green tower of cubes on a tile. Text: Illustrative concept. Everyone weighs in. One person owns the call.

Illustrative concept, not client work or measured results.

Weighing in is not deciding

The GOV.UK Service Manual separates input from authority. The whole team works together on user needs; product managers prioritise and comment on design and technical solutions; developers advise on feasibility. The service owner "must have the decision-making authority to deliver on all aspects of a project." That is one government model, not a universal org chart, but the split travels: everyone weighs in, one person owns the call.

Google's Project Aristotle studied 180 teams and named structure and clarity among five dynamics of effective teams. A later team survey under that heading asks whether "Our team has an effective decision-making process." Consensus-driven decision-making was not significantly linked to effectiveness at Google. That is observational and doesn't make consensus harmful. It also isn't a substitute for naming who decides.

Weighing in is not deciding

The GOV.UK Service Manual separates input from authority. The whole team works together on user needs; product managers prioritise and comment on design and technical solutions; developers advise on feasibility. The service owner "must have the decision-making authority to deliver on all aspects of a project." That is one government model, not a universal org chart, but the split travels: everyone weighs in, one person owns the call.

Google's Project Aristotle studied 180 teams and named structure and clarity among five dynamics of effective teams. A later team survey under that heading asks whether "Our team has an effective decision-making process." Consensus-driven decision-making was not significantly linked to effectiveness at Google. That is observational and doesn't make consensus harmful. It also isn't a substitute for naming who decides.

Write the call down, dissent included

Michael Nygard's architecture decision records came from engineering, but the problem is familiar to design teams. Without the reasoning, a newcomer can only "blindly accept" a past decision or "blindly change" it. His short format keeps the context, the decision, its status and all its consequences, "not just the 'positive' ones." Reversed decisions stay, marked superseded.

In this illustrative concept, a team debates inline versus panel bulk editing. The record shows who owns the call, what each discipline said, the decision, design's recorded dissent and the test result that would reopen it. The older "inline everywhere" decision stays in the history, superseded.

Write the call down, dissent included

Michael Nygard's architecture decision records came from engineering, but the problem is familiar to design teams. Without the reasoning, a newcomer can only "blindly accept" a past decision or "blindly change" it. His short format keeps the context, the decision, its status and all its consequences, "not just the 'positive' ones." Reversed decisions stay, marked superseded.

In this illustrative concept, a team debates inline versus panel bulk editing. The record shows who owns the call, what each discipline said, the decision, design's recorded dissent and the test result that would reopen it. The older "inline everywhere" decision stays in the history, superseded.

Illustrative concept: From debate to decision. Three steps: 1, name the owner before the meeting starts; 2, hear each discipline and what would change their mind; 3, write the call down with the dissent and a reopen trigger. Beside it, the decision history for Bulk editing: Decision 14, Bulk edit in a side panel, Accepted, owner Product lead; Decision 11, Empty tables show a sample row, Accepted, owner Design lead; Decision 9, Inline editing everywhere, struck through and marked Superseded by 14, kept with its reasons. Note: Old decisions stay, marked superseded.
Illustrative concept: From debate to decision. Three steps: 1, name the owner before the meeting starts; 2, hear each discipline and what would change their mind; 3, write the call down with the dissent and a reopen trigger. Beside it, the decision history for Bulk editing: Decision 14, Bulk edit in a side panel, Accepted, owner Product lead; Decision 11, Empty tables show a sample row, Accepted, owner Design lead; Decision 9, Inline editing everywhere, struck through and marked Superseded by 14, kept with its reasons. Note: Old decisions stay, marked superseded.
Illustrative concept: From debate to decision. Three steps: 1, name the owner before the meeting starts; 2, hear each discipline and what would change their mind; 3, write the call down with the dissent and a reopen trigger. Beside it, the decision history for Bulk editing: Decision 14, Bulk edit in a side panel, Accepted, owner Product lead; Decision 11, Empty tables show a sample row, Accepted, owner Design lead; Decision 9, Inline editing everywhere, struck through and marked Superseded by 14, kept with its reasons. Note: Old decisions stay, marked superseded.
Illustrative concept: From debate to decision. Three steps: 1, name the owner before the meeting starts; 2, hear each discipline and what would change their mind; 3, write the call down with the dissent and a reopen trigger. Beside it, the decision history for Bulk editing: Decision 14, Bulk edit in a side panel, Accepted, owner Product lead; Decision 11, Empty tables show a sample row, Accepted, owner Design lead; Decision 9, Inline editing everywhere, struck through and marked Superseded by 14, kept with its reasons. Note: Old decisions stay, marked superseded.
Illustrative concept: From debate to decision. Three steps: 1, name the owner before the meeting starts; 2, hear each discipline and what would change their mind; 3, write the call down with the dissent and a reopen trigger. Beside it, the decision history for Bulk editing: Decision 14, Bulk edit in a side panel, Accepted, owner Product lead; Decision 11, Empty tables show a sample row, Accepted, owner Design lead; Decision 9, Inline editing everywhere, struck through and marked Superseded by 14, kept with its reasons. Note: Old decisions stay, marked superseded.

Before the next debate

Ask three questions. Does everyone know who owns this call before the meeting starts? Has each discipline said what evidence would change its mind? Is the dissent written next to the decision, with what would reopen it?

Before the next debate

Ask three questions. Does everyone know who owns this call before the meeting starts? Has each discipline said what evidence would change its mind? Is the dissent written next to the decision, with what would reopen it?

References

References

About Greg Herboek ›