The Tools We Choose

A note: I wrote this prior to Config and Figma’s release of a suite of new generative and expansive features, about which I’ll have more to say soon. Suffice it to say, I think Figma’s growing feature set convinces me even further of the points I make below.

Within Experience Design, selecting the right tools is crucial, as their capabilities determine how we are able to articulate and communicate our design visions. Over the past few years, Figma has emerged as a significant player in the design world, particularly known for bridging the gap between design and development. Some of its features, like #semantic structure of elements, #auto-layout, and #annotations, have helped designers effectively convey their design intent to developers for implementation, with more clarity and specificity.

For a designer with a well-defined vision, Figma speeds the process of translating creative intent into working code, and resolving uncertainties that inevitably arise during that transition. For that we can be grateful!

While Figma excels in aiding the precise articulation and execution of a design vision, there are certain phases of the creative process where its strengths may not align perfectly with a designer’s needs.

In the early stages of design exploration, where we thrive on the freedom to experiment, to try different approaches without the immediate need to define or explain every element, the precision of Figma is less advantageous. This is the time to discover and push the “edges of the canvas” and embrace wrong solutions; to figure out what is right about those early mistakes, what can be salvaged from them, and what can be safely discarded – as part of the creative journey.

Figma is incredibly valuable once you have culled the obviously-unworkable ideas from your consideration set, and you are ready to articulate your vision precisely to team members, developers, and clients. Its ability to streamline design specifications and ensure consistency across various platforms is a definite advantage compared to the options historically available to UX architects and designers. (Though I’ll make a passionate case for the utility and flexibility of Axure Software Solutions and its vastly superior prototyping and interaction design articulation capabilities, its steep learning curve and price point has always made it a specialist’s tool.)

The templates and community resources available in Figma are perfect for situations where the design objective is not so much to conceive of an entirely new approach to a problem, but to apply well-worked and well-tested approaches to a specific niche or project; speeding up the process of bringing a design vision to life, ensuring that design elements are not only visually appealing but also functional and ready for implementation.

Designers, however, should be mindful of when to transition into using Figma in their process. Choosing Figma too early is akin to picking up a specific set of brushes and watercolors, when you’ve yet to decide if your goal is to paint or to sculpt.

Digital tools for the conceptualization and exploration stages – where creative freedom should be maximized – are sadly lacking. Pen and paper, whiteboard and markers, pushpins and Post-Its: these are still some of the best mediums we have at hand, precisely because their purposes are so unbounded.