UX

UX design process: necessary evil or secret weapon?

One tiny button move = $300 million revenue gain. How? Amazon actually watched users struggle before optimizing.

Take the case of a company with a surprisingly effective approach to the UX design process. They simply changed a button from “Register” to “Continue” (and made registration optional). That tiny change—just one word—resulted in a staggering $300 million sales increase the following year.

Why such a dramatic result? This company talked to their end users first and discovered people weren’t abandoning carts because the design wasn’t pretty enough—they just hated being forced to create accounts to buy a damn blender.

This isn’t fiction. The “$300 million button” is a famous case study from UX researcher Jared Spool. I’ve witnessed similar scenarios firsthand, watching design teams create solutions based on assumptions rather than user needs.

A thoughtful design process isn’t just extra paperwork. It’s what separates designs that look good in presentations from ones that actually work for real people. Think of it as choosing between a flashy sports car that breaks down constantly or a reliable vehicle that gets you where you need to go every time.

Let’s explore what a genuine user-centered design process looks like without all the jargon and buzzwords. When done right, it’s not a rigid set of rules but a helpful guide that keeps you focused on what truly matters.

What to expect?

  1. The problem with “process”
  2. Real talk: what actually matters and what’s just busy work
  3. Design is not what you make, but who you make it for
  4. When to break the rules
  5. Measuring success beyond launches
  6. Conclusion: process as a compass, not a cage

The problem with “process”

Most discussions about the UX design process feel like reading an IKEA manual written by a corporate lawyer. They’re either painfully academic (“leverage user-centric methodological frameworks to ideate iterative solutions”) or suspiciously simplistic (“just design what feels right!”).

No wonder so many designers roll their eyes when “process” comes up. The word itself has been beaten to death in countless Medium articles and agency pitch decks.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: process matters, but not in the way most people think.

The best design teams don’t worship the process; they respect it. They understand that process exists to prevent obvious mistakes and create space for actual creativity—not to turn designers into robots following flowcharts.

And they recognize the irony that sometimes the most creative solutions come from working within constraints rather than having unlimited freedom. As designer Charles Eames famously said: “Design depends largely on constraints.”

So rather than debating whether the process is good or bad, let’s focus on what moves the needle. What parts of the UX design process consistently lead to better outcomes, and which parts are just ritualistic busy work?

Let’s get into what actually matters.

Real talk: what actually matters and what’s just busy work

Let’s get brutally honest about the basics of UX design process. Not every project needs the full five-course meal treatment. Sometimes you need the whole enchilada; other times you just need the salsa.

Research: finding out if you’re solving the right problem

What’s essential: Understanding what keeps your users up at night. Whether it’s through formal user interviews or guerrilla research in a coffee shop, you need to know what problem you’re solving.

I once watched a team spend six months building an elaborate analytics dashboard that literally nobody used. Why? They skipped research and built something that answered questions nobody was asking. That’s like crafting the world’s most beautiful hammer when your users needed a screwdriver.

What you can skip: The 80-page research report nobody will read. Distill your findings into actionable insights that will inform decisions. Your team needs ammunition for better design, not a doctoral thesis.

Analysis: making sense of the mess

What’s essential: Alignment on success metrics. If you can’t articulate how you’ll know if your solution worked, you might as well be designing in a parallel universe. Both user needs and business goals need a clear definition.

What you can skip: Elaborate personas that state the obvious. “Meet Dave, 34, who wants a website that loads quickly and doesn’t crash.” Groundbreaking insight there, team. Focus on unexpected motivations and pain points, not demographic fluff.

Design: turning insights into solutions

What’s essential: Creating clear user flows that map how people will actually accomplish their goals. This is where you translate research into structure.

What you can skip: Pixel-perfect wireframes for every single screen. The fidelity of your deliverables should match the complexity and risk of your project. For a simple landing page? Rough sketches might be enough to communicate the concept.

Prototyping: making ideas tangible

What’s essential: Creating something testable before you commit resources to build it. This doesn’t always mean fancy interactive prototypes—sometimes paper prototypes work just fine.

What you can skip: Building every feature into your prototype. Focus on the riskiest assumptions—the parts most likely to fail or cause confusion. That’s where valuable learning happens.

Testing: reality check time

What’s essential: Putting your ideas in front of actual end users before you commit. Your brain is not representative of your user base, no matter how empathetic you think you are.

I’ll never forget watching a user trying to complete a “simple” task on an interface we’d designed. After five minutes of frustration, they looked up and asked, “Am I just stupid?” That wasn’t a user failure—that was a design failure we would have missed without testing.

What you can skip: Perfect testing conditions. Don’t wait for the ideal lab setup or the perfect participant recruitment. Imperfect testing beats perfect planning every time.

Iterative: admitting you didn’t nail it the first time

What’s essential: Building in time to learn and refine based on real usage. Version 1.0 of anything is just your best-educated guess.

What you can skip: Starting from scratch with each iteration. Good iteration is surgical—identify specific problems and fix them, don’t redesign the entire experience because one part isn’t working.

The most underrated step no one talks about

Follow-up research after launch – The most valuable insights often come when people actually use your product, yet this is precisely when most teams have already moved on to the next shiny project. Building in time to learn from what you shipped is perhaps the highest ROI activity in the entire design process.

Remember: the process should be your servant, not your master. The best designers know when to follow the recipe precisely and when to throw out the cookbook based on what their specific project needs.

As my first design mentor used to say: “Know the rules well enough to break them effectively.” That’s the difference between someone who does UX and someone who gets UX.

Design is not what you make, but who you make it for

Here’s the thing about user-centered design: it’s not a phase—it’s a mindset that transforms every stage of your process. It’s the difference between designing a car based on what looks cool in your sketchbook versus designing one based on actual humans with spines, arms, and an inexplicable desire to eat burritos while driving.

When companies fail at user-centricity, it’s rarely because they don’t know they should talk to users. It’s because they:

  • Talk to users too late (“We already built it, let’s see if they like it!”)
  • Talk to the wrong users (“Let’s ask our CEO’s nephew what he thinks!”)
  • Ask the wrong questions (“Do you like this design?” instead of “How would you accomplish X?”)
  • Ignore what users actually do (“They said they love it, but the data shows nobody’s using it…”)

I once watched a product team spend weeks debating button colors while completely missing that users couldn’t figure out how to start the core workflow. The team was so focused on the paint job, they forgot to check if the steering wheel was attached.

User-centric focus on users’ needs

Research: User-centered research means investigating actual problems, not just confirming your assumptions. It means asking “What keeps you up at night?” before asking “Would you use this?”

Analysis: A user-centered analysis cuts through corporate priorities to focus on what matters to humans. It means ruthlessly prioritizing based on user impact, not just technical feasibility or business desire.

Design: User-centered design means creating user flows that reflect how people think and work—not how you wish they would behave. It means designing for the messy reality of human behavior, not some idealized robot user.

Prototyping: User-centered prototyping means creating something people can react to honestly. It means embracing rough edges that encourage genuine feedback, not polished mockups that only invite compliments.

Testing: Truly user-centered testing means observing what people do, not just listening to what they say. It means creating scenarios that reflect real contexts, not sterile lab tasks.

Iteration: User-centered iteration means evolving based on actual usage patterns, not just stakeholder opinions. It means having the courage to recognize when your brilliant idea just isn’t working for real humans.

From theory to practice: making it real

The companies that nail user-centricity don’t just do occasional usability studies; they build ongoing relationships with their end users. They don’t treat user research as an event—they treat it as oxygen.

Take Intuit’s “Follow Me Home” program, where designers literally visit customers to watch them use the product in their natural environment. Or Slack’s practice of bringing in users weekly to test new features before they ship. These aren’t just nice-to-have practices—they’re competitive advantages.

As Bradee Evans, Principal UX Designer at Adobe, said:

“…the single most impactful and time-saving thing we could do was to stop designing for our users…”

This isn’t just altruism—it’s good business. Companies that incorporate user feedback throughout their process are 38% more likely to report revenue growth and 32% more likely to gain market share over competitors, according to a Forrester study.

Of course, being user-centered doesn’t mean taking every user request at face value (hello, “make the logo bigger” syndrome). It means understanding the underlying needs behind those requests. And sometimes what they need is to not be annoyed by your brilliant, unnecessary “innovations.”

Now that’s user-friendly.

Balancing act: user needs vs. business goals

Let’s address the elephant in the design room: business goals sometimes clash with what users want. Users typically want everything free, infinitely flexible, lightning-fast, and ad-free. Meanwhile, businesses need revenue, engagement metrics, and sustainable growth paths.

The mediocre designer sees this as an either/or situation: “Do we please the users or the stakeholders?” They end up playing a sad game of tug-of-war where nobody wins and everybody gets muddy.

The exceptional designer finds the sweet spots where business success and user satisfaction align like perfectly matched puzzle pieces:

  • Amazon’s “Buy Now” button serves users (convenience) and business (increased conversion)
  • Netflix’s “Continue Watching” feature helps users (less searching) and business (more engagement)
  • Apple’s ecosystem integration delights users (seamless experience) while locking them in (business win)

Business-specific essentials

Enterprise products:

  • Stakeholder interviews during research (because politics)
  • Technical feasibility checks during analysis (early and often)
  • Extra testing with actual end users (because internal users will be brutally honest in ways external customers might not be)

Consumer apps:

  • Competitor benchmarking during analysis (users have options)
  • Rapid prototyping cycles (market waits for no one)
  • A/B testing infrastructure (small improvements = big wins)

E-commerce:

  • Conversion funnel mapping during analysis (follow the money)
  • User friction audits during testing (each point of confusion = lost sales)
  • Continuous iteration based on purchase behavior (data should drive refinement)

Startups:

  • Problem validation during research (before solution creation)
  • MVP scoping during design (ruthless feature prioritization)
  • Ultra-fast prototyping (because time is literally money)

Finding the sweet spot

Here’s my battle-tested approach for aligning user needs with business goals:

  1. Translate business metrics into user benefits instead of “increase time on site,” think “help users discover more relevant content they enjoy.”
  2. Find user problems that, when solved, drive business metrics. Reducing form fields isn’t just user-friendly—it typically improves conversion rates too.
  3. Make the connection explicit, create a simple matrix showing how each design decision serves both user needs and business objectives. This becomes your shield when stakeholders push for user-hostile features.
  4. Measure both sides of the equation, track not just business KPIs but also satisfaction and frustration metrics. The sweet spot solutions improve both.

If your solution makes users happy but bankrupts the company, you’ve solved the wrong problem. And if it makes the company rich but users hate it, you’ve just created an opportunity for your competitors.

The best products aren’t compromises—they’re win-wins that leave users thinking “this company gets me” while stakeholders watch the graphs go up and to the right. That’s the art of user-centered design that actually ships and survives.

Remember: Users don’t care about your business goals, but you can’t serve users if your business fails. The magic happens when you find ways to achieve both in the same elegant solution.

When to break the rules

Sometimes the best process is throwing out the process. Not because the process is bad, but because creativity occasionally needs to jump the tracks to find brilliance.

Some warning signs your UX design process needs a shake-up:

  • When the same process produces the same mediocre results
  • When your team spends more time documenting the process than doing the actual work
  • When everyone can predict exactly what will be said in every meeting
  • When you’re hitting all your metrics but users still seem… meh

Great design teams view the process as a tool, not a religion. They’re not afraid to:

  • Skip unnecessary steps when time is critical
  • Add extra validation when risks are high
  • Bring in unusual perspectives when standard approaches fail
  • Question assumptions even late in the game

Good designers follow best practices. Great designers know when to break them.

The key is understanding why each step exists before you skip it. Breaking rules without understanding them isn’t rebellious—it’s just uninformed.

Measuring success beyond launches

How do you know if you’ve created something truly user-friendly? Hint: it’s not about how pretty it looks or even how many people initially use it.

The metrics that matter include:

  • Retention rates: Do people come back after their first use?
  • Task completion: Can users accomplish what they came to do?
  • Error rates: How often do users get stuck or make mistakes?
  • Support tickets: What are people struggling with enough to ask for help?
  • Unprompted positive feedback: Are users telling others about your product?

Gorgeous products fail because they never bothered to measure what happened after launch. They celebrated the launch party, high-fived over the initial downloads, and then scratched their heads when users disappeared faster than free donuts in a design agency.

Your product isn’t successful when it ships—it’s successful when it becomes a natural part of your users’ lives. Nobody opens Instagram to admire its interface. They open it to see photos of their friends’ dogs. If they’re noticing design, you’ve probably failed.

Conclusion: process as a compass, not a cage

The UX design process should be a compass that keeps you oriented toward true north, not a cage that restricts movement. The best designers aren’t those who rigidly follow every step, but those who understand the purpose behind each phase and adapt accordingly.

Remember:

  • Process exists to serve outcomes, not the other way around
  • User needs and business goals can (and should) coexist harmoniously
  • Great experiences rarely emerge from rigid thinking
  • The most important skill in design isn’t following process—it’s knowing when to question it

Next time someone asks you about your design process, resist the urge to recite the standard UX playbook. Instead, tell them: “It depends on the problem we’re solving, the people we’re solving it for, and the constraints we’re working within.” Because in the end, that’s the only design process that consistently delivers the best possible user experience and results.

Recent Posts

I spent $200 on ChatGPT Operator so you don’t have to (Seriously, don’t)

Robots doing all your work sounds perfect—until they’re stuck in loops, grabbing random tweets, and…

7 days ago

5 best email letter design examples to use in your email campaigns

Most emails are forgettable. Great ones hook you fast, look sharp, and drive clicks. Here’s…

1 week ago

Losing face: The battle of AI face swappers

We put top AI face swappers to the test—beards, glasses, head tilts, and more. Some…

2 weeks ago

How to look smart ass when you talk about icons

A deep dive into the smallest images in graphic design: the history of icons, their…

2 months ago

Visual hierarchy in graphic design

Learn how to use visual hierarchy to guide attention, prioritize elements, and create designs that…

3 months ago

WOKONEO use case: inspiring young minds through puzzles

WOKONEO, a puzzle book for kids that blends playful learning with creativity, featuring Icons8’s Color…

3 months ago

This website uses cookies.