Why AI is exposing design’s craft crisis

This is why you want design engineers

The designer learns their proposals aren’t strategic input — they’re suggestions engineers will simplify into whatever is actually buildable.

There’s a lot of relatable stuff in here:

This happened so many times, in so many companies, that it became the pattern. Designers create mockups. Engineers override them based on technical constraints the designer didn’t know existed. The designer spends days in “alignment meetings” trying to advocate for the user, but can’t speak the technical language needed to actually influence the decision. Business stakeholders step in to make product calls because they can at least understand the technical constraints, even if they don’t understand users.

We’ve reached a place where, as the author says, “growth imperatives override design principles”

growth teams route around design, making decisions that move metrics even when they compromise user experience.

The root cause is simple: most product decisions are fundamentally technical. They involve technical constraints, technical trade-offs, technical debt, and technical feasibility. If you can’t participate in technical conversations, you can’t influence product strategy.

Enter design engineers:

These aren’t people who abandoned design for engineering. They’re people who refused to treat design as separate from implementation.

So?

The question isn’t whether designers should code. The question is whether designers should understand the medium they’re designing for. Whether they should be able to evaluate their own work. Whether they should have enough technical fluency to advocate for users when technical decisions are being made.

That’s the baseline for strategic relevance.

It’s so easy now-a-days to “fake technical competence in an industry that stopped valuing technical craft”.

(Via Nick Simson.)