UX and product design aren’t just roles—they’re responsibilities. I believe great design is rooted in understanding, not assumption. It requires systems thinking, ethical clarity, and an unwavering focus on the people behind the screens. My work blends experience, research, and structure to challenge outdated frameworks and redefine what it means to create digital products that last.
• Understanding is the foundation of all great design.
• Design is not decoration—it’s decision architecture.
• Systems should serve people, not the other way around.
A foundational look at how I approach UX, product strategy, and the future of design.
UX and product design have evolved fast—but not always clearly. Job titles have blurred, expectations have fractured, and many teams operate without shared understanding of what design is for. My philosphy exists to bring clarity to the chaos: to rethink roles, reconnect purpose, and help others reshape how design works within organizations.
A reframing of UX and product roles, designed to help:
• Clarify the difference between UX, UI, research, and product strategy
• Offer scalable team models across company sizes
• Spark deeper conversations about what design owes to people
In too many organizations, "UX" has become a catch-all. Visual designers get relabeled as UX. Researchers are deprioritized. Product strategy is unclear. As a result, talented people operate without alignment, and teams feel scattered. UX was meant to make things simpler—but too often, we’ve made ourselves hard to define.
The explosion of digital roles led to quick hires, blurred scopes, and misaligned teams. Design became more about aesthetics than intent. Instead of building structures for understanding users, teams focused on shipping screens. Without a clear internal definition of design's role, many companies lost sight of how it all fits together.
Solution-Oriented example - Building Structures - Understanding Human Needs
I didn’t want to create another rigid framework. I wanted something flexible—a lens, not a law. So I set a few boundaries:
If you were to quote me on this for understanding:
“This isn’t about renaming roles—it’s about realigning purpose.”
Across startups, agencies, and enterprise teams, I saw the same pain points: unclear job expectations, overlapping roles, and team members unsure of where they fit. Design orgs often lacked intentional structure. And leadership didn’t always know how to support the full scope of what UX should be doing.
What I propose isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. It’s a flexible model to rethink UX, product, research, and design operations. It offers naming clarity, role distinction, and organizational pathways for growth. The goal isn’t control—it’s coherence.
1. Role Confusion Is Common
Designers are called UXers, researchers are folded into product, and hybrid roles are overextended. Without clarity, teams can’t collaborate effectively—and talent gets misused.
2. Research Is Too Often Optional
Teams skip research when budgets shrink or timelines tighten. But building without understanding leads to rework, misalignment, and broken trust with users.
3. Design Is Treated as a Deliverable, Not a Strategy
Too many teams still treat UX as “making the screen look good” instead of driving experience and product direction from the start.
4. Scalability Is an Afterthought
Org structures, design systems, and workflows aren’t built to evolve. This leads to breakdowns as teams grow and digital ecosystems expand.
👉 These are the patterns that pushed me to rethink how we define UX, how we structure teams, and how we ensure design is built to last.
This framework was built from a combination of lived experience, structured research, and pattern recognition across industries. I audited job descriptions, org charts, and UX hiring models from startups to Fortune 100s. I spoke with designers, product managers, researchers, and execs about their team struggles and role confusion. I mapped where UX breaks down—then reverse-engineered where it could thrive. This wasn’t about reinventing the wheel, but realigning it so teams can finally move forward with clarity, purpose, and shared understanding.
Below is a shareable slide deck that outlines the full thinking behind my approach to redefining UX and product structure. It’s not meant to be prescriptive—just useful. You’re welcome to use it, adapt it, and build from it. I hope to see fruitful progress in our field of work.
Clear titles can help, but structure and culture matter more. This work only makes a difference if leaders are willing to align on what design really means.
It’s not one person’s job. It’s a capability that lives across research, design, product, and ops. Structure gives it power.
Everything starts with understanding. Without user insight, teams drift toward assumption, and products suffer.
This philosophy is still evolving. My goal is to spark clarity—and to help teams build better, with purpose.
