When I started my professional life, software was built and users were trained to use the software they were provided to work with. Software was complex, users lacked proficiency in tech and it was a standard to learn all detailed procedures and instructions to operate with the software — but, somehow, it worked. It worked for stand-alone software, that runs only on the user’s machine. No internet. No browser. No problems. Right?

Then, web-based software started to be a business differentiator. Making the move from desktop standalone software to web software was imperative for businesses to strive in the “digital era”.

That was when usability got its wings. It was impossible not to know who Jakob Nielsen was, the father of the 10 usability heuristics for user interface design, sold has a magic formula to measure your web software’s success. I can’t count how many expert usability assessments I’ve made based on those usability heuristics, and I lost track of how many times I quoted the ISO-9241–11 norm of Usability and Ergonomics.

Because of that “UX hype”, an incredible decade of UX-driven software development followed. Approximately ten years where we, designers, felt as the gatekeepers of the experience, the guardians of the truth, the champions of the users, the defenders of their needs. During those years, UX was the new cool kid on the block, invited to every party, because it was the differentiation factor for most digital businesses, and no one wanted to be left out. Companies that did not have one UX specialist, that did not perform usability testing, or didn’t, at least, run some kind of focus groups, were believed to be doomed (and no company wanted to be the next Kodak).
As you can imagine, this was also an era where companies would fake — a lot!! — to be perceived as user-centered companies.
Because of this fake-it-until-you-make-it-user-centered-culture, I believe that this was the main reason that led the “defenders” of the UX disciplines, (and of course, some consulting companies that profit a lot from this), to develop something called the “Design Maturity Model”.

This Design Maturity Model is, in an extremely simplified phrase, a model to assess if the company is really a user-centered one, or if it’s very far from achieving the desired user-centered mindset. Design Maturity Models come in different sizes and shapes and, despite names and levels varying a lot from model to model, generally, the highest level is about leveling if companies still live that “glorious era” and perpetuate the perfect user-centered culture — where designers are the center of everything because they are the “voice” and the impersonation of their users — and lower levels are about assessing if designers are the make-up artists that “put lipstick on a pig”, being the pig, the software that is being developed.

—Wow, measuring the design maturity seems very smart, a great way to understand how the company thinks regarding the user’s experience, so why is your mind debating? you may ask.

Well, I’ve fought, a lot, so that companies I work with develop a user-centered approach. Not a mindset, an approach. I always strive for data-driven decisions, backed up by real observations, of the real end-users, using the software we are building. I’ve worked in waterfall, scrum, kanban, mixed, and alternative development methodologies/processes. I’ve worked with anthropologists, social scientists, engineers, data scientists, operations, strategists, QAs, designers, marketing, sales, support, etc. I’ve worked with giant companies and small ones. People that met me along the way know that I always held my sword really high, ready to fight those who dared to develop software based on assumptions, without ever clarifying, testing, or validating them with real end-users. (I am pretty sure those people are smiling while reading this!)

I always thought the most important thing for a company to be successful was: to learn the best way users could perform their tasks, by observing them, in their real context, doing their real jobs, while using their software.
This thinking was my absolute rock and where my user experience mindset emerged. This was the essence of my day-to-day work. This was the teachings that I passed on to all my pupils, my colleagues, my managers, my friends and family.

I was wrong.

The most important thing for a company to be successful is to make money.

Oh no, why would you write that? my dear readers may wonder.
Well, one day I decided to wake up and read the news. News about businesses never state things like “Y company increases users’ happiness by X percent and users perform their tasks with an X percent increase in effectiveness and efficiency when using their product.” Those are probably product metrics, that serve as vanity metrics on sales pitches, but not anything to be stated in the news.

News about companies are, often, about money: who much companies sell, how much they are worth, how much they profit, how much their executives earn, how much they spend on innovation and stuff. Money. Money. Money.

And I come to understand that the way the world talks is the way the world moves. That is why it is important to understand what is being said.

So, I woke up from my design bias dream and asked myself: when assessing a company’s success, how often is it about measuring design? It is about measuring the business: money getting in the company, money getting out of the company, money going into people’s pockets. Design is never the core. Money is.

Design is about solving user’s problems. Successful businesses are about selling solutions to solve user’s problems. They are tightly related but they are not the same goals.I got it, then: design is only important for any company if it helps the company to make money by 1) fulfilling its objectives (helps to achieve product milestones) and 2) being a business differentiator (helps to win deals).

So, my new way of thinking is that designers should also be learning about the business, customers (the buyers, not the users), marketing, and product growth. In the same way, all people in the company should be learning why and how their users use their software to do their tasks, in order to perform their jobs.

So… while reading about design maturity assessments, I realized it should never be framed as whether the company respects our design discipline, if the development processes are aligned with our design practice, if the product discovery involves our design skills, if the design has a seat at the executive table.
Why should an executive leader sponsor a waste of money to know the answer to questions like “how mature is the design in your company?”. What are these metrics telling us about 1) how design helps achieve product milestones or 2) how design works as a differentiator? What valuable and actionable information will you use to improve your products with design maturity measurements?

If you wish your executive leader to sponsor improvements on your product’s experience, you should show them how important it is to spend time measuring everything regarding our product’s use: the kind of data we collect, why we collect it, how often we do it, its sources, its quality, and, most important, what we do with the information we collect.

Measure design maturity and you will have data to act on models or processes. Measure product experience, interaction, use and you will have data to improve the product, provide better experiencies, solve user’s problems.

Collect data and be informed, because one key result that companies may find really interesting, and very useful, is that:

Generally, low-scoring experience metrics collected from your product’s observation with real users, in their real context, are directly related to low levels of design maturity in the company. :)

Now that designers are aware that the most important thing for a company to be successful is to make money, may the companies be also aware that the faster way for them to do so is by learning the best way users could perform their tasks, using their software, by observing them, in their real context, doing their real jobs.

TLDR summary being:
The focus of a designer should never be about achieving high levels of design maturity. It should always be about solving user’s problems while helping the company profit.