Don't trust the process
In this era, we can't trust the process anymore, at Anthropic, we are rewriting the process right now- Jenny Wen.
Follow up the video about Jenny Wen, Design Lead at Anthropic and former Director of Design at Figma, gave a speech about changing the designing process from traditional iterative to a whole new framework last year
She argue about why the ‘old process’ is failing.
Here are some alternative traditional process that she made:
- Start with solution (Solution first design)
- Care ruthless about detail
- Building Intuition
- Customizing the Map (Encourage people inventing new things)
- Design for smile
The Academic Dilemma
As a recent graduate, this feels very new and odd. At university, We were taught to worship the research-first approach: empathize, define problems through user interviews, validate everything before building. But, Starting with a solution? That would’ve failed any critique.
But Jenny’s point challenges this foundation: sometimes you don't know a problem exists until you see the solution. She shares the Claude Artifacts example, a researcher built a prototype showing interactive code on the side. The team didn’t realize users needed this until they saw it working. Traditional problem statements and user research would never have led them there.
Here’s what universities get right: rigorous research prevents building solutions nobody wants. But here’s what they miss: in rapidly evolving fields like AI, technology capabilities emerge before we understand their applications. You can’t research your way to discovering problems that don’t exist yet in users’ minds.
Is the “Process” Dead?
This isn’t about abandoning old process, it’s about knowing when to lead with it and when to follow. Maybe the traditional way is better for steady-state products, but for innovation? Not so much. Following a rigid diagram is like following a recipe—it helps you cook faster, but it won’t help you invent a new dish.
As technology evolves, our behavior and our society change with it. AI hasn’t just changed what we design; it has changed how we think. Perhaps the “academic way” will always be a step behind the “builder’s way”—and maybe that’s exactly how it should be.