The design team had done everything right.
Research was solid.
The user flows were clear.
Stakeholders had been involved early.
On paper, this was a good piece of work.
Then came the design critique.
The room was quiet at first. Someone finally spoke.
“I am not sure this works.”
Another voice followed.
“It feels a bit off.”
A third added, “I think we should rethink the whole thing.”
No one could quite explain why.
By the end of the session, the designer left deflated. Not because the work was bad, but because the feedback felt heavy and directionless. What should have been a moment of alignment became a moment of doubt.
A week later, progress slowed. Confidence dipped. The team became cautious.
The design was not the problem.
The critique was.
I have seen versions of this story repeat across teams and organisations. Strong designers. Good intentions. Poorly delivered feedback.
Design critiques can make or break a team’s culture, and most teams underestimate how much power sits in that room.
Over time, I have learned that effective critique is not about being blunt or honest. It is about being intentional.
Here is what has consistently worked for me.
First, focus on objectives, not opinions.
Critiques often derail when feedback starts with preference. “I like this” or “I do not like that” centres the conversation on taste. Taste is personal. UX is contextual.
When feedback is anchored to objectives, the conversation changes. What problem are we solving? What user behaviour are we trying to influence? What constraints are we operating within?
Objectives give feedback direction. Opinions create noise.
Second, ask questions before making statements.
Statements shut doors. Questions open them.
Asking “What led you to this decision?” or “What assumptions were you working with here?” invites understanding before judgement. More often than not, it reveals constraints, trade-offs, or insights that were not obvious at first glance.
Good critique starts with curiosity, not conclusions.
Third, separate the work from the person.
This is subtle, but it matters more than most teams realise.
Designers care deeply about their work. When feedback blurs into commentary about the individual, confidence erodes quietly.
“There is a usability issue here” keeps the focus on the work.
“You did not think this through” shifts the focus to the person.
One builds trust. The other drains it.
Fourth, be specific about what feels off and why.
Vague feedback creates frustration. “It is not there yet” or “Something feels wrong” leaves designers guessing.
Specific feedback creates momentum. Pointing to a particular interaction, assumption, or moment of friction turns confusion into action. It tells the designer that their work was engaged with properly.
Specificity is a form of respect.
Finally, offer alternatives, not just criticisms.
Good critique does not stop at what is wrong. It explores what could be different.
Offering alternative directions invites collaboration instead of defensiveness. It keeps ownership with the designer while expanding the solution space.
Critique should feel like problem-solving together, not judgment from above.
Good critique does not tear work down.
It builds clarity, confidence, and better designers.
Teams that get this right move faster, not slower. Designers take healthier risks. Trust compounds quietly.
If feedback feels heavy, the problem is usually not the design.
It is the delivery.
Nonso,
Your friendly UX Mentor,
Helping designers think clearly, grow confidently, and build work that actually works.
Explore practical UX resources at uxdesignresources.com