Run a design critique that produces actionable feedback
Focus critique on a design question, task, constraints, and evidence, then separate observations, risks, suggestions, and decisions so feedback can guide revision without becoming a vote on taste.
Frame the question before showing the screen
A design critique examines how a proposal addresses a task. It works best when participants understand the question, the relevant constraints, and the kind of feedback needed. Showing a finished-looking workshop page without context often invites comments about personal preference while leaving the consequential behavior unexplored.
Connect feedback to consequences
Begin with the intended task and the decision currently open. Explain what is fixed, what is provisional, and what evidence exists. Ask reviewers to connect comments to a visible detail and a plausible consequence. Keep suggestions separate from the problem they address so the designer can consider more than one response. Write the decision the artifact is meant to support at the top of the working document. Keep the people, task, and practical constraints visible beside it. This gives contributors a common reference when the discussion drifts toward tools or presentation. The artifact should expose uncertainty rather than quietly settle it through confident formatting. Assign unresolved questions to a person who can investigate or decide them, and keep their status explicit.
Critique a booking review page
Critique a fictional workshop-booking review page. Ask whether someone can verify the session and understand the final commitment. Have reviewers identify unclear information, missing states, and recovery questions before proposing visual changes. Record each comment with its rationale and the part of the task it affects. Give a colleague the working artifact and a clear purpose, then ask them to explain what they would do next. Compare their interpretation with the intended use. A mismatch may come from missing context, ambiguous language, or a decision that the team has not actually made. Repair the source of the mismatch rather than adding a verbal explanation that will disappear as soon as the artifact leaves the meeting.
Return preferences to the task
If feedback becomes a contest of preferences, return to the task and ask what consequence the preference would change. If a senior voice determines the discussion immediately, allow individual written observations first. If reviewers raise an unresolved service rule, assign an owner rather than expecting the designer to settle it through layout. Keep feedback proportionate to what the artifact can show. A rehearsal may expose confusing instructions, while a diagram may reveal missing ownership; neither automatically establishes how frequently the problem occurs in the real service. State the observation precisely and separate its interpretation. This preserves the value of the issue without attaching a larger claim that the activity was not designed to support.
Turn comments into decisions and questions
End with decisions, questions, and follow-up owners. Explain which suggestions will be explored and which require more evidence. Review the revised artifact against the original concern, not merely whether every comment was implemented. A productive critique improves the team's understanding and next action; agreement about visual taste is neither necessary nor sufficient. Keep unresolved service questions visible so the next revision does not quietly turn a guess into a requirement.
Worked decision
This date is hard to verify names a task problem. I prefer a blue panel names a preference that still needs a consequence and rationale.
References & further reading
Examples and exercises in this guide are original teaching scenarios.
