[krm01]

Designer–engineer here. After 15 years building products [1] ,from scrappy side projects to multibillion-dollar platforms, I’ve found the most productive way to think about design is as a growth accelerant. The OP reaches a similar insight but keeps it in the realm of product development. That framing is precisely where the friction between engineering and design tends to arise. Design isn’t about making the code look nicer... it’s the bridge between engineering execution and business growth.

Take Dropbox’s much-debated rebrand. Many on HN dismissed it as superficial. What they missed is that Dropbox’s growth had plateaued. The new visual language wasn’t meant to "improve the product" for existing power users. it was engineered to make the product feel approachable to an audience the company had never reached. It worked.

When designers focus on the measurable business impact of their work—and engineers stop treating design as a decorative afterthought—cross-functional frictions fade and growth compounds.

[1] https://fairpixels.pro

[baobun]

> When designers focus on the measurable business impact of their work—and engineers stop treating design as a decorative afterthought—cross-functional frictions fade and growth compounds.

Measurable business impact -> The dashboard becomes a battlefield and every team wants a modal for their feature release. Dark patterns come hand-in-hand.

I think the world would be better if individual designers focused less on business growth metrics and more on holistic User Experience.

[nickserv]

> The dashboard becomes a battlefield and every team wants a modal for their feature release. Dark patterns come hand-in-hand.

To me, this is exactly what the OP is going on against.

If it's not cohesive, it's bad design.

[4b11b4]

A well designed comment