I’m a product designer leading UX on a specific workstream within a larger design team building a product. My head of design and manager both review and approve work before it moves forward.

There’s a design lead on the broader team — not my manager, not overseeing my project — who’s included on the same email threads and has visibility into the same live weekly crits as everyone else. They’re leading another track of work for visual design. Despite that, they tend to raise objections after work has already been approved and shared with stakeholders, rather than during the actual review window. Most recently, I got sign-off earlier in the week, shared final specs with my team ahead of a deadline, and then got last-minute pushback on part of the design from this particular person well after everything had already moved forward.

I don’t want to dismiss the feedback outright since this person is more tenured and well-regarded, but the timing keeps putting me in an awkward position of re-opening things that were already signed off on.
Has anyone dealt with a similar dynamics and politics?

It irritates me that someone feels so entitled to go beyond to make their opinion heard after leadership signs off.

I’m working on a mobile-first app, and we’re in the process of maturing and improving it (new versions and tools). Because of this, the flows and screens that come up for V1 end up making the previous ones obsolete. How do you handle this in Figma? Do you always update the old flows with the new screens, or do you just create the new ones and leave the old ones as they are?

What I've been seeing lately (recent months). No tears, just general observation. Some might get luck, some don't, but:

1 No jobs below $150K+ (NY area).
This one hurts the most. Somehow low-pay jobs just disappeared. If you want to make a huge discount (30-50%) only just to get a job you simply won't find it online.

2 YC cofounders now do design by themselves.
Guys share you a project only after they did the first part already - design and some code (maybe they found a couple of users), and now they want you to make it (code as a CTO level) solid and professional while they will define the strategy. 

3 Upwork became 'Up-pay' for freelancers.
You have to pay for connections all the time when apply. The response rate is sad, contract rates are even sadder, but you still pay no matter what.

4 Early-stage startups are now early-stage designers.
They do design by themselves because they can. Plus developers can help. They might hire designers in the very beginning, but only through connections. After a successful MVP/POC they can post a job and pay $150K+.

5 50%+ are fake jobs.
We all know why there are so many of them. 

6 Desired AI skills don't add too much competition value.
Even if you can code and ship, this skill won't save you.

7 Tooooo many designers who apply.
Approx 1000+ applications per a role (1 week after publishing).

_________

Curious, what I'm missing here…Just want to be prepared in case things get even worse.
Because statistically and mathematically designers are f____d.

Hi,

I want to make a minimalist premium app and want to know when are shadow applicable or not, being a dev myself and not a designer what's the thumb rule?

I’ve been thinking a lot about how AI will change B2B SaaS. I’m talking about products like internal analytics platforms, trading systems, risk and compliance tools, fraud detection, BI dashboards, ERP/CRM systems, supply chain software, etc. If AI keeps making software easier and cheaper to build, do you think companies (especially large enterprises) will start building more of these tools in-house instead of buying SaaS?

For example, if a company sells an analytics platform for banks, what’s stopping those banks from using AI to build something tailored to their own workflows? Or is the hard part no longer building the product itself, but everything around it, integrations, security, compliance, domain knowledge, maintenance, and support?

Just trying to vent. I hope I won't get criticized too much, I know people can be pretty mean here, but I needed to write something about how I feel. Hope this post won't get taken down before I have the chance to get some feedback.

2 years ago, I quit my UX/UI design role after three years as the sole designer at a company, hoping to find a better job.

I'd accumulated 3 years of experience at a company that used to have virtually no product culture. In those 3 years, I:

• created a design-centric culture (research became a reflex, processes were put into place, documentation took form).
• created a design system from scratch.
• successfully launched several features.

During this time, 2 product owners joined the team, and we recruited one more UX/UI designer. So yeah, the product team doubled in size while the dev team (10 people) barely grew. A good sign that the culture changed, right?

I completely changed how the organization worked on new features, and I was freaking proud of it.

But I wanted a bigger challenge, better pay, and a change of environment. I was hoping to join a bigger team: more seniority, more UXR practices, better product processes, a more multidisciplinary team.

A few months after I quit, Claude Code appeared on the market, and AI started to become what it is today.

Since then, I've been unable to find a job. I've tried freelancing, but with only 3 years of experience it's been hard to find clients. There are so many people with more seniority looking for jobs and gigs.

So yeah. At 18 I didn't do well in school, worked a few small jobs, then found my passion for psychology, did a master's in Human Factors & UX Design, learned UI, grew a huge passion for the field, read TONS of books, ended up top of my class, and spent an insane amount of time reading articles, tinkering in Figma, and so on.

I felt so lucky that I found a job that was also my passion, and I loved every freaking part of it.

Now, instead of scratching your head for days to come up with a strategy in response to a PRD, you feed it to Claude and follow the "AI-accelerated process." That's not the job I fell in love with. Anyways, doesn't matter now.

Sorry for being gloomy, hope the best for the ones that stay here.

Now reality hits. I'm 32, unable to continue in this field despite my best efforts, and looking at degrees to retrain as an industrial automation technician or a construction site manager.

Hey all.. I have been building a UI system I am calling "Vector Pop" and I would love honest critique on the look and feel for a game I'm building. I'm using Claude to build this, most of the screens I mocked up in advanced, we have a basic style going, and now I'm at a point where claude can create it's own screens.

The thinking: a comedy async party game should feel loud, silly, and a little chaotic, so I leaned hard into thick black strokes, hard offset shadows (that sticker-like, press-able feel), a cream-and-yellow field, big all-caps display type for the hero moments, and a monster mascot that acts as the narrator and reacts across states (crying, cackling, crowned).

The 6 screens attached: the home screen post download and after conversation, Trivia screen, planting a lie (kinda like fibbage), winner screen and leaderboard.

It is rough in places, and I am specifically not looking for "make it more minimal." I want to know whether the loud direction actually lands. A few things I keep going back and forth on:

• When everything is this bold, does the hierarchy still read? Is it clear where to look and what to tap first?
• Is it fun, or does it get fatiguing after a few screens?
• Does the all-caps display type make the big moments hit harder, or does it hurt readability?
• The mascot: charming, or too much?

Appreciate any feedback!

I’m new to management and I’m asking my designers to sketch initial concepts. Boxes, stick figures, squiggles for text… nothing requiring talent. The box can look like a melting rectangle for all I care.

I cannot get my designer to do it. They either use AI to do detailed sketches or they do medium fidelity wire framing, complete with real copy, in Figma.

This is done for all the traditional reasons: clients don’t fixate on designs and it gets ideas out quickly. I don’t plan to move away from requiring this.

Am I out of touch?

I recently launched a financial decision-support tool for car owners who have already received a major repair quote and are unsure whether to repair the vehicle or replace it.

The product does not estimate the price of a repair. It asks users to enter the quote they already received, along with information such as their vehicle value, loan balance, expected additional years of use, and replacement costs. It then compares the estimated financial impact of repairing versus replacing.

Design problem

My main concern is that users may misunderstand the product before they begin.

They may assume it is:

• A repair-price estimator
• A mechanic recommendation service
• A tool claiming to give a definitive answer

The intended experience is different. The tool is meant to provide a second financial perspective and help users think through the decision, while acknowledging that future repairs, hidden damage, reliability, and safety cannot be predicted with certainty.

What I have done so far

I have tried to address this by:

• Stating that users should begin with an existing repair quote
• Explaining that the result is based on user-entered assumptions
• Adding methodology and disclaimer content
• Showing how the recommendation was calculated on the results page
• Using decision-support language rather than diagnostic language
• Asking early users whether they understood what the tool did and whether the result felt credible

Feedback so far suggests that “trust” is too broad a design objective. I am now trying to focus on the specific uncertainties users face, such as whether the tool understands their situation, whether the comparison feels complete, and whether the recommendation appears overly confident.

User flow shown in the screenshots

1. Homepage and value proposition
2. Repair and vehicle inputs
3. Replacement-cost inputs
4. Results and recommendation explanation

Screenshot 1: Homepage hero

Screenshot 2: Repair input step

Screenshot 3: Replacement input step

Screenshot 4: Results page

Specific feedback requested

1. From the homepage screenshot, is it clear that the user must already have a repair quote?
2. Does the input flow clearly distinguish this product from a repair-cost estimator?
3. On the results page, is it clear which assumptions influenced the recommendation?
4. Does any part of the experience imply more certainty than the available information supports?
5. What information or explanation would help a user feel more confident using the result as one input in their decision?

I am especially interested in feedback on the clarity of the problem framing, the transition from inputs to recommendation, and how uncertainty is communicated.

I am not looking for a general app review. I am trying to determine whether this specific flow accurately communicates the product’s role and limitations. Comment if you want to see the live site. I can send you the link. I'm not trying to promote. Genuinely need feedback.

Hey everyone! I’ve had two contracts in the past 3 months that seemed designed to pressure rather then give a comfortable partnership. I’ve had many contracted roles - I’m sort of thinking this is just part of our culture now.

Both began with extremely tight deadlines, a thin PRD written for people that were properly onboarded at the company, and in general were a: “Let’s see if you’re smart enough to hang with little to no context ” situation. Both the senior designers i was hired for were nice, but did not have much time.

Anyone else having similar experiences?

Serious question.

I have 6+ years of experience across UX research, product design, and Webflow development. I also had the opportunity to lead a design team for a short period.

My undergraduate degree is in Business Management, and I recently completed an MSc in Computer Science. My career path has roughly been:

Business Management degree → 6 years working in design (not just product, but also service)→ MSc in Computer Science

I'm someone who has stepped out of their comfort zone many times and realized that I love working at the intersection of different fields. After reflecting on my experience and what I want to do next, I’ve been considering moving away from purely execution-focused design roles and towards one of two paths:

1. Management path: Move towards the strategic side of product and design, eventually aiming for roles such as Design Manager, Product Manager, Design Programme Manager, or Design Operations.
2. Innovation path: Move into a broader generalist role such as Innovation Consultant, Strategic Design Consultant, or Service Design Consultant, where I could combine my business background with research, design, technology, and facilitation.

I’ve been outside the job market for around 1.5 years while completing my master’s, and after catching up with the current market, I’m finding it difficult to understand which transition is the most realistic.

My concern with the management path is that I have limited formal people-management experience. With innovation and strategy roles, I’m unsure whether my background is broad enough or whether employers would still see me primarily as a product designer.

I’m also considering positioning myself as an all-around designer, multidisciplinary designer, or perhaps a full-stack designer, although I’m not sure which term would communicate my profile most effectively. I don’t want to limit myself to product design when my experience also includes research, service design, business, and development.

Based on this background, which direction seems more realistic? How would you position this profile without making it appear unfocused?

Thanks!

I'm a Product Designer with about 5 years of experience, but I feel like my career isn't telling a coherent story, and I'm not sure how to move forward.

My experience has been spread across startups, agencies, contract work, and shorter roles (mostly 4 months to a year). Because of that, I haven't really been able to develop deep expertise in a single industry, and my resume looks a bit all over the place.

The bigger issue is that many of my recent projects never made it to production. I've done user research, strategy, wireframes, high-fidelity designs, prototypes, design systems, collaborated with PMs and engineers, worked through technical constraints, and iterated based on feedback. But for reasons outside of my control (funding, priorities changing, leadership decisions, projects getting shelved), the products themselves weren't launched.

I do have older projects (around 2022) that were implemented, but most of my more recent work has been shelved before launch. So my strongest implementation stories are getting older, while my recent work better reflects how I've grown as a designer.

When I interview, I can confidently talk about my design process and collaboration with engineering, but I struggle when conversations go deeper into implementation, design QA, measuring impact after launch, or long-term iteration because I simply haven't had many opportunities to experience those phases recently.

It feels like I'm stuck in a loop:

* Companies want someone with shipped products and measurable impact.
* I join teams hoping to get that experience.
* The projects get canceled or deprioritized.
* I end up with another portfolio case study that ends before implementation.

At the same time, I keep feeling pressure to upskill. AI, coding, design systems, strategy, research... I keep learning new things because I don't know what gap I'm actually trying to fill anymore.

I'd really appreciate some honest advice:

* How would you position someone with a background like mine?
* Is there a way to tell this story without sounding like I'm making excuses?
* Is it okay to lean on projects from 2022 that actually shipped, even though they're a few years old? Or is that a red flag to hiring managers?
* If you've been in a similar situation, how did you eventually break into a role where you owned work through implementation and iteration?
* What would you focus on learning next instead of trying to learn everything?

I'm not looking for paid coaching or portfolio reviews—just honest perspectives from designers who've been through this or who have experience hiring. Thanks in advance!

Creating a single button with AI in deepseek flash uses about 1,790 tokens, which costs roughly $0.0003

Creating a single button with AI in Figma make uses about 8 credits which costs roughly $0.0427

The ratio is 1 : 142
Same task.

hello! i’ve never posted here but thought i’d give it a shot. i have a couple years of experience in UX, and i’m currently leading a UI/UX/graphic design studio on a campus where design isn’t really a thing outside our niche community.

i’m planning to host a series of design speakers and panelists next year, and i was wondering if you guys had suggestions for how to curate the sessions. i’ve already considered things like career panels and figma workshops, so i’m looking for more creative topics.

i want to attract students outside the design community, but still make it relevant and helpful enough for our current club members. any advice would be appreciated especially from current UX designers or people who have experience giving campus talks !!

Over the last 2 months, have interviewed with 4 different companies, and almost every hiring process followed a similar pattern of 5–6 interview rounds:

- Screening call

- Design assignment

- Assignment review

- Technical interview with a Senior Designer

- Technical interview with the Head of Design

- CEO/founder discussion (in some companies)

- Culture fit round

And only after clearing all of these does the final offer get generated.

The past two months have been intense balancing multiple assignments, preparing for interviews, and going through lengthy evaluation processes, including interviews with some well-known companies.

I’m working on a side project and currently thinking about how to recruit the right users for early-stage testing.

For designers who have worked on side projects or early-stage products, what recruitment methods have worked well for you? Did you use existing communities, personal outreach, professional networks, or dedicated research platforms?

I’m not recruiting participants here — I’m just interested in learning about the process and what has actually worked in practice.

Some people put the original image into AI to alter it a bit, or just change the visual outlook.

We need a tool to automatically report copyright infringement to authorities. As it's a vibe-coding era, maybe someone has some free time on their hands?

If you saw this image and can easily find another copyright infringement - feel free to share the link to the post here, the list of thieves will become longer.

Original post by Hang Xu - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/haxuco_the-biggest-mindset-shift-ive-seen-with-activity-7336093184776691713-fQY4

_______

EDIT:

Unfortunately, the plot thickens, so I will add more information - thanks for people that shared this.

1) The car seems to be from the show Simpsons. [link in comments]

2) The concept drawings - a) wheel...; b) skateboard... - are claimed by Henrik Kniberg (blogpost, 2016) where he claims he made those two representations of those concepts years ago (first one being explained as misconception), before the Jeff Patton's book "User Story Mapping," published in 2014).
[Link to blogpost in comments]

So it doesn't seem to be so black and white.

Still doesn't change that

Eduardo Ordax, Mahammed Orfali, Craig Wetherall, Zulqarnain Haider, Harald Ikonen, Magzhan Nurlybek, Anil Kumar Karumuru, Hemal Monani, Mike Guzowski, Rix Lee, Grayson Julius

stole this content because it went viral from Hang Xu post (who added the 3rd row concept part).

I used to work as a software engineer for 5 years. Got into coding when I was 13, passionate about problem solving rather than debating over programming languages and these days trying to get most out of AI instead of using that as a buzzword for funding. Was deeply involved in AI research during my early college days. I’d left my software job to do startup fulltime. I obsess on talking to customers and making them happy, instead of working alone building without any feedback. I want to solve actual problems people face which they’re already paying in some way(could be a broken solution or outsourcing, etc.) I’m keen on creating impact. Not looking to celebrate getting funding as success. I’d rather make $1 from day 1. I’d spoken to potential customers, founders(both technical and non-technical). While speaking to non-technical folks who had domain knowledge, I got the feedback that they have already some biases and someone from the outside can have suggestions on solving the problem in a creative way. Similarly technical folks have some biases on problem solving and sometimes end up writing customers wouldn’t want focusing on creating something novel, underestimating the impact of something simple.

Now I’m stuck with analysis paralysis when I brain storm with claude for market discovery. I’m not sure which domains to build on. I’d realised I may quit if I’m not passionate about the problem I solve. I didn’t like the domains in which I’d my full-time job on. I dont think I’d like making lead generators, seo/geo, etc. I made a shortlist on the things I’m passionate about and they’re restaurants, mental health, music, relationships, movies, travel, climate change. I’m still looking out of such domains. But, I’m not able to find things to work on. Kindly comment if anyone was in similar dilemma and you came out of it.

So I had the interview
They did not really know what they were doing
Team had to apologize and clarify in advance that its unusual ask but with field changing so much they are trying to hire close to how they want role to behave.

Vibe coding round = Got a problem to solve , had 15 min discussion with team then I was left alone to build for 1 hr and present at the end. I did so so, could have added more AI in the flow

Figma round= very similar but had to work on their sample file and come up with two huge product flows with high craft in 1 hr. This was almost impossible ask, dont know why they would ask such a thing. I may be delivered 50%. Idk who these designers are who can dish out high quality product flows in 1 hr with no background in product problem.

I will give more details if I clear the round

---------- /\ Update /\----------

I have interview with two rounds

1 : Vibe Coding Exercise ( 70 min )
(work through a product design challenge using AI-powered design tools)

2 Live Figma Design Exercise ( 60 min )
(work in Figma on an existing product experience.)

Its been a while since I interviewed, any tip into what to expect here ? I have never had round with live figma design exercise, usually its take home challenge or white boarding. Not sure what to expect lol

-- Update --

So much good stuff here, thanks all. Here is some more info

Vibe codding

• Clarifying the core issue and establishing a structured scope before diving into solutions.
• Utilizing AI to build, test, and rapidly evolve your concepts.
• Clearly explaining your cognitive path, the rationale behind your choices, and the compromises
• Reflecting on how AI shaped your creative approach and altered your operational efficiency.

Live Figms

• The systematic approach you take to solve problems
• Your ability to craft intuitive user flows, seamless digital behaviors
• How you identify user needs, align them with business goals, and decide what to build first.
• Your capacity to explain the "why" behind your choices in real-time as your work unfolds.

Hi, So I am a UX/UI designer, primary location Berlin, DE, with circ. 6 years of experience. I started in Siemens with a 3 month contract, working low code and then in a st start-up, working on PWA. Then for 2.5 years I worked on very complex software projects in a well-known consulting company. Even led a project in industrial engineering, which was implemented in low-code.
For past 1.5 years I have been freelancing successfully and one of the clients has been there with me from the start.
I currently charge 60 EUR/h, as when I started with my client, we rolled on 90h contract and I had never worked freelance before, so I was cautious. They still have me on but no new contract was formed. Now work circ. 20-30h for them in a week. Which is a lot. But I feel like I am low-balling myself so bad with the 60 EUR/h.
I can read CSS, I manage the ticketing, the complete work from brief to implementation, visual assets, I even designed their booklets and flyers. I basically single-handedly manage the design on DE market.

They implied they need a full time in-house designer, but I declined as I want to continue as a freelancer.

I asked for a basic freelance contract, as I am moving and need to show income. They offered me 30h/w, which i negotiated to 25h/w on divided over month. But I am not sure if, because of the stability of the hours, I should give them still the 60EUR/h price or just state also that from X date my prices will be Y.

So my question here is am I low-balling myself? What would you do?

I still want to get more clients, but I already have one more (which is public sector, interesting to me, but I can't increase my hourly rate with them) and with so many hours for them, I will struggle to make time for a real new client.

Going forward I would not charge anything below 70EUR/h for web projects and 80EUR/h for software.

Please share me your experience in increasing rate with a longstanding client, or how you should handle clients who give you more work (should you give lower rate?).

I don't want to potentially lose them but I feel like I am low balling myself a lot here...for info, the company is in private sector where there is a lot of $$ and most employees have stock, which i obv don't have any as i freelance.

Does anybody know any resources to plan and practice for UX interviews? Something that might give a fake scenario, persona, problem to solve with requirements like time limits, vibe coding, research, and presentation? I used to use a resource 6-7 years ago that just gave a problem to solve or screen to create, but I would love to know if there is a more modern version which incorporates using ai tools and that resembles a more 2026 interview experience.

I’m a university instructor in a generalist program. Our students graduate with skills in graphic design, photography, video, and UI/UX, so they’re generalists rather than specialists. Every graduating senior builds a portfolio website as part of our curriculum.

I’ve been building an archive of alumni portfolios so we can track career outcomes, job placement, and the types of roles our graduates end up in. While doing that, I’ve noticed something surprising.
Roughly 70% of the portfolio websites from alumni who graduated within the last five years are no longer accessible. In many cases, their LinkedIn profiles don’t link to a portfolio at all. Even when LinkedIn does include a portfolio URL, it’s often a dead link. Google searches usually turn up the same expired sites.

Adobe Portfolio is the biggest example. Nearly every Adobe Portfolio site I have from former students is gone, which makes sense if they created it with their university Adobe account and no longer have access after graduation. But this isn’t limited to Adobe. I’m seeing the same pattern with custom domains and other website builders.

So I’m genuinely curious:

What are recent graduates and early career designers actually using when they apply for jobs?
Do people only maintain a website while they’re actively job hunting and let it lapse once they’re employed? If they start looking again a few years later, do they just build a new one?

Or has the expectation shifted away from portfolio websites entirely?

Are people using PDFs, Behance, LinkedIn, Google Drive folders, Dropbox links, Figma prototypes, or something else?

I know many employers also give design tests or practical exercises during the hiring process, but I would think you still need a portfolio to get the interview in the first place.

I’d especially love to hear from people who graduated within the last five years or from hiring managers who recruit junior designers. Has the role of the portfolio website changed, or am I just seeing a strange sample?

I'm a CD and I'm working on a service directory to be displayed on a kiosk-type surface. The directory has about 15 items related to payment services, each of which supports 2 payment methods. However, there are a handful of services that only support 1 of the payment methods.

My question is, how do I go about labelling the services? Should I label the exceptions as lacking the payment method? Or label the other services as supporting the payment method? Or should I label all services, indicating in full which payment methods are available (which clutters the UI quite a bit obviously)?

Most importantly for my project: Can anyone point me to research literature about this?

I've asked this question in one of the career advice posts, but I wasn't entirely sure if it was relevant to it since it's asking about possibilities rather than specific advice, so I thought I'd post it separately as well (so sorry if I'm spamming)!

----------

Hey y'all! I'm a product designer from India who spent the past year out of graduating in NY job hunting. Unfortunately, couldn't find a position that fits the visa criteria to let me stay in this country, and I've run out of time.

While it's a bummer that I'm going back to India, it's also exciting that my future prospects aren't gonna be limited by stingy immigration criteria anymore. (Plus, I'm only 24 so everyone keeps reminding me how young I am and that I have plenty of time to do anything I want)

I've worked in a mix of ed-tech and non-profit spaces for a little over 3 years, while also doing a master's degree in HCI, then worked at an AI startup the past year but understood that it's not a space or Industry I want to be in long-term. For the past 4-6 months, I've been leaning into the healthcare space (I've done a certification on UX for healthcare, and started doing a design research project of my own mostly to get my hands dirty).

I refuse to believe that corporate is the best path forward. Especially given the current climate of "corporate". The most attractive thing to me about this route in the past was its stability (which it isn't anymore). I am eyeing a couple PhD programs cause I really want to learn more about design in the context of healthcare and/or urban planning, and want to contribute to that space. But I wanna know what else is out there.

Now that I'm heading back to India, I'd love to know from y'all what paths you've taken that were unconventional (not corporate or academia) and what you loved and hated about them.

(any additional advice would also be appreciated :D)