Design Dialectic ~ Shanze

Digital Experience & Product Designer blending UX, technology, and storytelling. I write about designing with empathy, questioning conventions, and making digital spaces more inclusive.

[shanzefatimajaved]

Most teams I work with are shipping AI features. Not enough are thinking about the relationship.

Here's something that's been helping: identify the moments when your system doesn't know, and intentionally design what happens in those gaps. Don't just optimize for when it works - design for when it needs help, when it needs to ask questions, and when it needs to admit it got something wrong.

Getting it right impresses users once. Handling mistakes well brings them back.

[shanzefatimajaved]

The tools keep getting faster, but are we asking better questions?

We can prototype in minutes. Test with users across time zones. Deploy updates before lunch. But speed doesn't solve for depth.

I've seen teams ship 10 iterations of a feature that didn't need to exist in the first place because no one stopped to ask why we were building it.

Technology should amplify our thinking, not replace it.

The real competitive advantage isn't how fast you can ship. It's whether you're building something that matters

[shanzefatimajaved]

The Weight of Invisible Labor

I've been thinking about all the work that never makes it into the portfolio.

The Slack messages explaining why a button shouldn't exist. The three hour meeting where you convince stakeholders that the problem isn't the interface, it's the business model underneath it. The user interview where someone cries because they finally feel heard.

None of this shows up in a case study.

We talk about "impact" like it's measurable in conversion rates and task completion times. But some of the most important design work I've done this year has been saying no. Pushing back. Slowing down a team that wanted to ship fast and asking: who are we leaving behind if we do this?

That work is invisible. It doesn't screenshot well.

And yet it's the work that shapes whether a product feels human or just functional.

The stuff that doesn't render in Figma but shows up in how people feel when they use what we've built.

Design isn't just what you ship. It's also what you refuse to.

[shanzefatimajaved]

Lately I’ve been sitting with a tension I think every designer eventually runs into: the gap between what people say they want and what their lived reality actually needs.

The more time I’ve spent building for people whose experiences don’t mirror my own, the more I’ve realized how fragile those “insights” can be.

People rarely articulate the thing they’re actually struggling with. Sometimes it’s because they don’t have the vocabulary. Sometimes it’s cultural. Sometimes it’s emotional. And sometimes it’s because the problem is sitting beneath the surface, in that unspoken layer of context that doesn’t show up in tidy bullet points.

Design, at least the way I’ve learned to practice it, happens in that grey zone ; the space where you’re decoding, listening between the lines, and letting go of your own assumptions long enough for someone else’s truth to rearrange your work.

t’s messy, humbling, and forces you to choose curiosity over certainty every single time. But it’s also where the most meaningful ideas come from.

I’m learning to honor that space more. To hold my designs with a looser grip.

[shanzefatimajaved]

Stop Repeating. Start Iterating.

We often mistake movement for progress. We think that doing the same task over and over again constitutes "practice."

But repetition without intention is just data entry. It’s passive. It assumes the method is perfect and only the execution needs work.

True learning happens through iteration.

Iteration implies that with every trial, something changes. You adjust your stance. You rewrite the code. You change your tone. You get slightly better because you are paying attention to the feedback loop.

So, here is the metric I use to measure my own growth: Same situation, different action.

Until my behavior changes, I haven’t learned a thing.

[shanzefatimajaved]

This week made something click for me: Saying “yes” is actually the easiest part of design. Anyone can add another button or shortcut or option.

The hard part is the thing I’m still learning which is saying:

“Hold on. Does this really belong here?” “Is this solving a problem or just filling space?” “Are we building a product or collecting features?”

It sounds simple, but it changes everything.

[shanzefatimajaved]

 The Vibe Coding Workflow

The premise for vibe coding is simple: using AI to generate functional code based on a description of the desired outcome. The vibe, the look, the specific UX.

For us designers, this is the essential pivot:

Focus on the Final Pixel: We spend less time troubleshooting frameworks and more time ensuring the generated code perfectly captures the subtle shade of a gradient.

Rapid Prototyping: Have an idea for a niche moodboard generator, a custom color palette tool, or a strange experimental layout? Vibe Code it into a live test environment in minutes.

Concept is King: Our job has always been to articulate a complex concept clearly. Now, that same conceptual language becomes the input for the entire application.

The code now answers to the design.

A Question for Creatives:

What is the most niche, beautiful, or impractical design experiment you're going to Vibe Code first? What aesthetic detail have you always wanted a custom tool for?

[shanzefatimajaved]

Listening to the Things I Build

Lately, I’ve been thinking about how every project secretly has two versions of itself: the one you sketch, and the one that reveals itself only when you start building.

I’m working on a piece right now that was supposed to be “simple” ; just a clean interaction, a neat little loop between user and system. But the moment I started working from theory to building, the whole thing shifted. The user interviews didn’t confirm my assumptions, people noticed details I hadn’t even considered and completely ignored the things I thought would matter most. The timing felt off, and the narrative I had in my head didn’t land the same way once it moved into building stage.

But honestly, that’s the part I’m learning to appreciate.

There’s something humbling about watching a project slip out of your hands and become something slightly different. The “second version” isn’t the failure of the first; it’s the version that only emerges when you stop designing at people and start designing with them.

I used to treat these as mistakes as things to “fix” so the final prototype looked intentional. Now I’m starting to see them as the design itself. These moments of unpredictability force me to slow down, rethink the relationship I’m creating, and listen to what the system is trying to tell me.

Design isn’t about controlling everything, it’s about knowing what to listen to.

[shanzefatimajaved]

The more I design, the more I think good design is a kind of quiet language.

It doesn’t shout for attention. It doesn’t try to prove how clever it is.

It just meets people where they are.

It says: I see you. I thought about what you need.

As the designers we have to set the standard and keep coming back to it —

Not just making things usable or beautiful,

But making them feel like they were made with respect.

[shanzefatimajaved]

The Quiet Language of UX

The first time I designed something that didn’t require a screen, I finally understood what UX really meant.

As someone who entered UX through design sprints and wireframes, I used to think of user experience as an elegant flow, a well balanced screen, a smooth tap. But a few months ago, I found myself designing a physical escape room experience — for blind and low-vision teenagers. No screens. No visuals. Just sound, touch, and trust.

Helen Keller Services in New York, tasked us with creating a collaborative, immersive escape room that could be navigated entirely without sight.

The users? Teens who were blind or had low vision ; many of whom had never experienced the thrill of a traditional escape room.

What We Got Wrong at First

We started like many early accessibility projects do — with good intentions but the wrong instincts.

Our first instinct was to simplify. Make the puzzles easier. Reduce steps. But in our research — including forums like r/Blind and interviews with real users — one thing became clear:

Blind players don’t want simpler experiences. They want equitable ones.

They want to solve hard puzzles. They want to fail and try again. They want to be challenged — just like everyone else.

We weren’t designing for disability. We were designing for agency and users.

What I Learned About UX (That No Figma File Could Teach Me)

1. Inclusion is not an afterthought. It’s a design principle.

2. Multisensory design is powerful.

Touch and sound aren’t second best alternatives to sight. They’re interfaces of their own - ones that can be just as immersive, emotional, and intuitive.

3. Accessibility is not about “helping” — it’s about trusting.

You don’t need to handhold users. You need to build environments where they can lead.

How You Can Design for Inclusion Today

Whether you’re designing for a banking app or a museum, inclusion should be part of your baseline UX vocabulary.

Here are 3 ways to start:

Use sensory contrast: Don’t rely solely on color. Use audio, texture, size, or vibration to signal feedback.  Design for autonomy: If a user needs help at every step, something’s broken. Good UX empowers. Invite real users in: Especially disabled users. No simulation replaces lived experience.

A New Definition of UX

To me, UX is about designing trust.

And once you learn to build experiences with your ears and hands not just your eyes ; you start to see things more clearly.

[shanzefatimajaved]

What is "phygital"?

Today's transforming digital environment sees the merging of the physical and digital worlds—what's increasingly being called 'phygital'—that is reshaping our encounters with art and technology. This convergence offers rich seeds for exploration and almost seems tailor-made for Digital Arts.

Seamless integration of physical and digital elements occurs in phygital art to create immersive experiences. This approach stretches across and beyond the traditional boundaries of art, blending together the tangible materials of our physical world with digital technologies such as augmented reality, virtual reality, and blockchain. The term 'phygital,' in this case, refers to and reflects a harmonious fusion that enhances both the physical and digital realms.

Artists are spurred by the intensified interest in digital art, and especially by the emergence of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT's) to merge their digital works into forms that are more palpable. While we persist in probing the confluence of technology and art, the concept of phygital can and should lead to some truly innovative work. To us, the term phygital means taking both the physical and digital medium into account, when constructing an experience. An experience is something that connects on various levels — be it the physiological, the cognitive or the emotional and an experience is truly connective when it happens in real time.

[shanzefatimajaved]

Physicality as a Bridge in a Networked Society

In a networked society, physicality is experienced as a connector between the somatic and the abstract, the concrete and the virtual. It helps to provide a tangible basis for virtual communications and make the interaction more realistic and it makes it easier for people to feel for one another, which might not be easily achieved through texts or images. Such presence contributes a richness of the senses that enhances the feeling of presence, even in collective work environment such as studios or in other synchronous meetings that emulate face-to-face interaction. Finally, being in a physical space within a networked environment is a constant and timely assertion of the possibilities of touch, spatial, and real-time interaction as the drivers of communication and creativity.

[shanzefatimajaved]

How does the interplay of digital and physical space affect social worlds? 

Social media is one of the most effective means of activism and organization since people can share their opinions, and organize themselves and their movements across geographical space. However, there are frequent problems with relation between online activism and offline changes, where ‘clicktivism’ and other performative gestures on the internet do not always lead to actual changes in the world. There is a growing trend of overlapping of the physical and the digital environments, which results in a combination of online and offline activism. For instance, the hashtags like #BlackLivesMatter, which implies the struggle for black people’s rights, actively employed social networks to plan protests and rallies. In COVID-19 lockdowns proved that people can find connection and belonging through digital platforms. Even so, they cannot substitute direct superficial contact and may lead to perceived social isolation or disillusionment with the physical environment. The continuous use of the Social Networking Sites has also brought changes in social interactions and communication systems in a positive and negative way. The tools of digital activism are social networks, hashtags, stories, petitions, online protests, and other types of electronic disobedience. These enable the activist to disseminate messages, incubate supporters and keep pressure on targets. But there are also lots of drawbacks and difficulties connected with digital activism.These are; oversimplification of issues, fake news, virtue signaling without tangible action, authorities suppressing activism, algorithms restricting activists’ content, activists getting exhausted from constant exposure to social injustice, and corporate or political entities hijacking a movement. Some people questioned whether technology-enforced actions lead to more polarization and “echo chambers’ rather than positive communication. Ultimately, while digital activism has immense potential to raise awareness and mobilize people, it must be coupled with offline organizing and concrete action to create lasting change. There’s a need to critically examine how digital spaces shape our social worlds and to develop strategies that leverage technology’s benefits while mitigating its pitfalls.

[shanzefatimajaved]

How can creative work enhance ethical approaches to tech?

Creative work enhances ethical approaches to technology by embedding intentional friction, promoting diversity, and encouraging mindful engagement. By introducing interruptions—like Nextdoor’s checklists and rephrased prompts—designers slow users down to reflect on biases, reducing harmful actions such as racial profiling. Involving diverse perspectives ensures that lived experiences shape products, minimizing biased outcomes. UX strategies like dialog boxes or warnings nudge users toward critical thinking, as seen in Oakland’s police reform, where reflecting on decisions cut routine stops by 40%. Shifting from seamless automation to mindful design ensures that technology empowers users thoughtfully, fostering ethical interactions and mitigating the risks of bias

[shanzefatimajaved]

What makes the internet “public”? What makes it private?

The public nature of the internet is evident from the availability and accessibility of different technologies that use the internet. The passage also points out that such technologies as cryptocurrency, digital fabrication, and augmented reality are no longer exotic; they are part of the reality of people’s lives, for example, sitting at a cafe or children playing games. These aspects make the internet a public domain since it is almost impossible to access the internet without coming across some content that is not meant for one’s eyes. The availability of some code libraries which are available for download from repositories such as GitHub also suggests a public aspect of the internet. This openness enables fast advancement in technology and the transfer of new technological skills from one context to another. 

On the private side, Radical Technologies shows how some code and functionalities can be only available to the parties that created them. Some code may be patented and licensed only to paying partners making some areas of the internet private and limited. The text also describes the four major tech giants of the Apple, Amazon, Google, and Facebook, known in the text as “the Stacks,” that control much of what we experience in the digital realm. These companies’ dominance over large portions of online services, platforms, and user data indicates a privatization of large parts of the internet. 

Furthermore, the reuse of the code for other purposes, for example, using algorithms for fall detection for crowd monitoring or gender recognition for advertising purposes, suggests how the technologies presented as public can be repurposed for more personal, commercial use. Although the Internet is still open and many of its services are available to the public, the growing influence of major technology corporations and the fact that much of the underlying code and data are proprietary make it more private. 

[shanzefatimajaved]

Technology is a product of culture and as such, it contains cultural assumptions, prejudices and points of view of the designers and developers of the technology. This is best captured in aspects such as; the sexism in the gendered voice of virtual assistants, the algorithms underlying search engines and recommendation systems among others. There are still cases where data sets used in training the AI systems continue to perpetrate histories injustice where the models used are trained to be unjust and in the design choices where some users are valued more than the others. Technology advancement benefits and is developed to represent some groups than others, therefore, the resultant effect is that some groups are privileged than others. Sometimes the economic motivation and self-interest of companies in the tech sector can introduce biases in their design, that prefer interaction or usage over the interest of the user.