Balancing user needs with business objectives is key to creating effective product experiences. What I've learned over the past 20+ years is that having data points from user research makes discussions around business objectives much easier and more fluid. I'd almost say that, most of the time, you end up meeting customer needs while advancing the original business goals. This serves as a powerful pursuit. However, it’s not always plain sailing. Once I have a clear view of both sides, I prioritize the user needs that align with business goals. For example, if the business objective is to increase user engagement, I would look for opportunities to streamline the user flow or introduce features that enhance the user experience, ultimately leading to greater retention and satisfaction.

Throughout the design process, I continuously test assumptions with users, using feedback to iterate and refine the design. This helps ensure we stay aligned with both user expectations and business objectives. In cases where there is a conflict, I facilitate open discussions with stakeholders to explore solutions that satisfy both sides, often by suggesting alternative approaches that meet user needs while still delivering business value. By keeping both perspectives in balance and maintaining a focus on outcomes, I ensure that the design drives both user satisfaction and business success.

For an internal project at a securities bank, we were designing a new feature for a data product that involved a significant shift in the user interface. The design proposed a more streamlined and intuitive experience using an off-the-shelf component called AG Grid. However, some stakeholders, particularly from the engineering team, were resistant to this change. They were concerned that adopting this new design would require ongoing rework of the existing infrastructure, potentially leading to delays. Additionally, there were concerns about the licensing costs associated with this approach.

To address this, I first took the time to fully understand their concerns and constraints. I met with the engineering team to discuss the technical challenges they anticipated and explored ways to minimize the impact of the design change, such as simplifying certain interactions or prioritizing features to reduce implementation complexity.

I then advocated for the design by clearly communicating the user-centered reasoning behind the decision. I presented data from user research, showing that the proposed design covered 99% of the use cases we would be designing for and how it would significantly improve consistency and development efficiency, reduce friction, and ultimately drive higher engagement.

Managing stakeholders throughout the design process varies from project to project, as each stakeholder has their own "home base" of thinking—some are more conceptual, some more technical, and others have a mix. My goal is to clearly articulate the design rationale and purpose in a way that resonates with each stakeholder’s perspective, focusing on what they care about most. This requires framing the design through different lenses, ensuring it's understandable and relevant to their specific priorities.

Building and maintaining strategic relationships is crucial here. The best work I’ve delivered has come when those relationships were at their strongest, and a sense of camaraderie acted as a cultural glue across teams. Of course, it's not always this seamless, and I don’t rely on perfect relationships to drive success. If feedback conflicts with the design vision, I engage in open, collaborative discussions to explain how their input might impact the broader user experience or business goals. In such cases, I aim to balance accommodating the feedback with preserving the integrity of the design vision, often suggesting alternative solutions that still align with the core vision and objectives.