Choosing tools for scaling design

Tools and processes are intertwined. A company or a department or an individual has a way of doing things—that’s the process. They also have software to carry out the process—those are the tools.

Ideally, they should be loosely coupled. You should be able to change your tools without necessarily changing your process. So swapping out, say, one framework or library for another shouldn’t involve fundamentally changing the way you work. Likewise, trying a new way of working shouldn’t require you to use unfamiliar tools.

When it comes to scaling design within organisations, the challenges are almost always around switching processes (well, really it’s about trying to change culture, but that starts with changing processes—any sufficiently advanced process is indistinguishable from culture). All too often, though, I see people getting hung up on the tools.

We need to get more efficient in how we deliver designs …so let’s switch over to this particular design tool.

We should have a design system …so let’s get everyone using this particular JavaScript framework.

I understand this desire to shortcut the work of figuring out processes and jump straight to production solutions. For one thing, it allows you to create an easy list of requirements when it comes to recruiting talent: “Join our company—you must demonstrate experience and proficiency in this tool or that library.”

But when tools and processes become tightly coupled like this, there’s a real danger of stagnation. If a process can be defined as “the way we do things around here”, that’s not something you want to tie to any particular tool or technology. Otherwise, before you know it, you’re in the frustrating situation of using outdated tools, but you can’t swap them out for newer or better-suited technologies without disrupting everyone’s work.

This is technical debt (although it applies just as much to design). You’re paying a penalty in the present because of a decision that somebody made in the past. The problem isn’t so much with the decision itself, but with the longevity of its effects.

I think it’s important to remember what a tool is: it’s a piece of technology that enables you to work faster or better. You should enjoy using your tools, but you shouldn’t be utterly dependent on any particular one. Otherwise, the tail starts wagging the dog—you are now in service to the tool, instead of the other way around.

Treat your tools like cattle, not pets. Don’t get too attached to any one technology to the detriment of missing out on others.

Mind you, if you constantly tried every single new tool or technology out there, you’d never settle on anything—I’m pretty sure that three new JavaScript frameworks have been released since you started reading this paragraph.

The tools you choose at any particular time should be suited to what you’re trying to accomplish at that time. In other words, you’ve got to figure out what you’re trying to accomplish first (the vision), then figure out how you’re going to accomplish it (the process), and only then figure out which tools are the best fit. If you jump straight to choosing tools, you could end up trying to tighten a screw with a hammer.

Alas, I’ve seen plenty of consultants who conflate strategy with tooling. They’re brought in to solve process problems and, surprise, surprise, the solution always seems to involve purchasing the software that their company sells. I’ve been guilty of this myself: I see an organisation struggling to systemise their design patterns, and I think “Oh, they should use Fractal!” …but that’s jumping the gun. They might be better served with something simpler, or something more complex (I mean, Fractal is very, very flexible but it’s still just one option—there are plenty of other pattern library tools out there).

Once you separate out the tools from the process, there’s an added benefit. Making the right technology choice is no longer a life-or-death decision. You can suck it and see. Try out the technology and see if it works. If it’s working, great! Carry on using it. If it’s not working, that’s okay too. Try something different.

I realise I’m oversimplifying things, but I honestly believe that the real challenge is not choosing the right tools, but figuring out the right process for your team.

Have you published a response to this? :


James Nash

Yet another great post by @adactio “You should enjoy using your tools, but you shouldn’t be utterly dependent on any particular one. Otherwise, the tail starts wagging the dog—you are now in service to the tool, instead of the other way around.”

# Posted by James Nash on Wednesday, May 9th, 2018 at 5:47pm


RT @erinmkidwell: “Treat your tools like cattle, not pets.” Choosing tools for scaling design

# Posted by Quietstars on Wednesday, October 3rd, 2018 at 11:56am

1 Like

# Liked by ⓕⓣ on Thursday, May 10th, 2018 at 7:50pm

Previously on this day

5 years ago I wrote 100 words 048

Day forty eight.

7 years ago I wrote Mobilism hot topics panel

Got questions? Lemme ‘ave ‘em.

9 years ago I wrote Ampersand

Five weeks ‘till Brighton goes type mad.

9 years ago I wrote Podchatting

Listen in to a conversation I had about responsive web design.

12 years ago I wrote Orangutans, Oxen and Ogham Stones

Liveblogging Sean McGrath’s closing keynote at XTech 2008 in Dublin

15 years ago I wrote Greetings from Sitka, Alaska

The Spirit Of Endeavour has docked in the lovely town of Sitka. I’ve tracked down an internet cafe and I finally managed to upload some pictures to Flickr. I’ve also updated the gallery right here.

17 years ago I wrote Random New Media Company Generator

I’ve noticed a trend in the naming conventions of local New Media companies (although I’m sure this trend applies beyond the boundaries of Brighton & Hove).

18 years ago I wrote jonathanmacybiggs

Here’s a great site I found in my referral logs: Jonathan Macy Biggs. Behold the beautiful design and validating pages!

18 years ago I wrote $95,000 Adventure @

I’ve just finished reading this incredible but true story: