The design nabla
A mindset approach to design successful digital products.
This is a work in progress about my mindset and thinking process on how to solve UI/UX and general digital product design. I don’t know exactly how this is going to evolve, but I want to put it out there for anyone that makes sense of it, can be helped by it, or even reach out to have any comments about it. All welcome!
TL;DR
Usability, Feasibility and Sustainability are the three core values to maintain balanced during all steps of the design and implementation process, and can be achieved by the designer by Empathizing (with the user), Adapting (with devs) and Negotiating (with the stakeholders).
Design is a very ambiguous thing, in a sense that sometimes you don’t know how successful it is until someone invests in it, tries to develop it or tries to use it. As a designer I’ve been asked countless times how is my approach to design successful products, meaning that at least I have an idea of what I’m actually doing. And the reality, a lot of times, is that it depends on the environment that you are. I’ve worked for both startups and small apps and large corporations, and in all of them I’ve come to realize that it doesn’t matter how well established your design process is, there’s a lot of differences in both compromises and implications.
It’s not about the design process itself, it’s how you adapt that process through the right mindset.
So the design process varies depending on the team you are working with, the expectations of stakeholders, and your advocacy of the user in question; you cannot be inflexible in a world where everything changes fast every time. So regularly my answer is: it’s not about the design process itself, it’s how you adapt that process through the right mindset. And it is very important to apply to your design thinking, critical if you are into software design.
That’s why I created the Design Nabla.
Usability, Feasibility and Sustainability are the three core values (vectors) to maintain balanced during all steps of the design and implementation process, and can be achieved by the designer by Empathizing (with the user), Adapting (with devs) and Negotiating (with the stakeholders).
Of course, there’s some basis on what I’m suggesting here, and I always say that this is thanks to countless battles, victories and failings in my career, combined with my periodical return to these no-expiration-date knowledge resources.
Why nabla?
By researching on these three concepts, and understanding that there's a equal balance between them I thought of a triangle, but not a traditional one, so I remembered the math symbol ∇.
The nabla is used in vector calculus as part of the names of three distinct differential operators: the gradient (∇), the divergence (∇⋅), and the curl (∇×). The symbol is also used in differential geometry to denote a connection. You can see all about it here.
On a personal approach, It is a triangle, but also an inverted one, so if we think about semiotics, the balance is very gentle and fragile, and also there’s no less important vector here, all three are needed to succeed, and they need to be constantly maintained and adjusted to keep that balance.
The vectors
In this section I'll explain what I'm talking about these 3 vectors and their relation between each other.
Usability
Will this product or feature of the product will improve the experience of the person using it?
The vector of Usability in the Design Nabla is the value that will give the user a better experience; UX in its pure and aspirational form. The lack of Usability will result in a product or feature that nobody needs or even understands, making it fail even before release; no matter how much of an easy update and or profitable it may seem.
It is possible by the power of empathy.
In this, the designer must be the advocate of the people using the product, asking if that is actually something that is an improvement for the user’s satisfaction in the product. Also giving time to think about the features presented by the other two vectors, questioning them, researching on hard data like Usability Tests, Google Analytics or UX Research Databases to backup the designer’s or the team’s ideas.
Feasibility
Will this product or feature of the product be easy to develop?
The vector of Feasibility in the Design Nabla is the value that will give the team the perspective of development; It is rationality and the sense of tangible aspirations. The lack of Feasibility will result in a product far too time consuming to release or even impossible to begin with, no matter how much of a great idea or benefit for both the user and stakeholders will be.
It is possible by the power of Adaptation.
In this, the designer must be aware of the possibilities of the development team to understand how the product or feature can be optimized for development, by compromising or sectioning the features in phases for partial releases. It is also important to understand how the development flow is structured. By this I don’t mean that the designer must be a coder, but understanding code principles, structuring and modulation, will make the deliverables of the designer to the developers far more understandable, reachable and fulfillable for development.
Sustainability
Will this product or feature be able to pay for its development, or even give profit to the company?
The vector of Sustainability in the Design Nabla is the value that will give the answer if the feature can sustain itself on the financial expectations of the stakeholder ; It is the colder and more realistic part of the product’s success. The lack of Sustainability will result in a product with more red numbers than benefits on a company or investor doomed to an unsustainable product, no matter how much of an innovation on the user’s experience is.
It is possible by the power of Negotiation.
In this, the designer must be in line the stakeholders vision and be able to communicate properly and transparently about the importance of the two other vectors for optimization in both development costs and fast delivery; and customer satisfaction and good word-of-mouth for better reach of the product. It is also important that the designer should live and feel the company’s mission and vision to be able to transform the product into something that will make it fulfill them.
The conclusion (for now)
Design is the most organic part of any product, and can (and must) adapt to the best possible outcome for all parts involved in the process of its creation and release into the world. That's why we, as designers, have the opportunity and responsibility to have all these hats and develop all these manners of soft skills to make the best products possible.
The next steps
I'll be expanding the relation between these vectors with real-world examples to further understand the relation between all parts of the process and my further thinking on how to approach specific problem solving in each of them.
Thanks for reading!
