Once during a design manager interview for a scale-up company, I was asked how many designers I previously managed. At the time I confidently responded with the number five (not realizing the nuanced nature of the question). It turned out that the position required experience in leading a team of at least eight individuals (it’s the current size of the team they hire for), and I was informed they were not willing to move forward with my application.
I didn’t think that my response would cause an issue as it was not a group-level position and in my previous role, I had built a team and all of the associated design processes from scratch. Building a team from the ground up requires proving to the business that this was the right investment and building processes across the organization while leading the team at the same time. It can be a complex and challenging task. And my team was highly successful and exceeded all of the company's expectations. So I believe this experience has prepared me well for leading slightly larger teams effectively. However, quantitative metrics received priority over responsibilities complexity, in this case.
Designer Path
This situation prompted me to reflect on the nature of design teams and their tendencies in the industry. The need to choose a manager path early on in the career leads to a lot of Head-of-Design folks that are lacking hands-on experience. They focus solely on building organizational structures, and hiring managers of managers, even when the team may be struggling due to a lack of individual contributors or an overabundance of designers with too little work. This approach is used repeatedly across companies without adequately addressing the organization's needs. And this emphasis on structural growth as a sign of success often results in just more meetings and minimal progress for the company.
Designer Path
This situation prompted me to reflect on the nature of design teams and their tendencies in the industry. The need to choose a manager path early on in the career leads to a lot of Head-of-Design folks that are lacking hands-on experience. They focus solely on building organizational structures, and hiring managers of managers, even when the team may be struggling due to a lack of individual contributors or an overabundance of designers with too little work. This approach is used repeatedly across companies without adequately addressing the organization's needs. And this emphasis on structural growth as a sign of success often results in just more meetings and minimal progress for the company.
FUTURE TRENDS
Now I see that several companies have already begun to flatten their structures (even though now it is seen as a layoff disaster), which indicates a shift towards smaller, more efficient, and professional teams. I believe that this is the way forward for design teams and that leaders need to prioritize both individual contributors and structural efficiency to promote the best outcomes.
Now I see that several companies have already begun to flatten their structures (even though now it is seen as a layoff disaster), which indicates a shift towards smaller, more efficient, and professional teams. I believe that this is the way forward for design teams and that leaders need to prioritize both individual contributors and structural efficiency to promote the best outcomes.
