Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

UX Is Not A Verb

by Tim R. Todish
4 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

Helping clients understand that UX is a holistic process, not a single action, can benefit everyone working on a project.

“Okay, so how long to UX it?”

This question is asked of me in just about every estimating meeting we have.

Sure it’s a joke, and I laugh. But I also cry just a little each time because, like any good joke, it has an element of truth to it.

UX has become ubiquitous. A search for “UX” on LinkedIn returns almost 200,000 results. But even with UX being everywhere you turn, it seems that many people, especially those not “in the industry” (i.e. clients), don’t have a solid grasp of what UX actually means. Even those of us in the industry don’t have a clear definition of what a UX designer is or does.

Look at any handful of UX Designer job descriptions out there and you’ll come up with dozens of different descriptions and requirements: from wireframing/prototyping, to information architecture, to user research, to being able to create, “stunning [visual] designs,” and on and on.

If we can’t agree on how to define UX how can we expect our clients to understand? In order for us to avoid the headaches that can result from misaligned expectations and misunderstood roles and responsibilities we must, at the very least, be able to explain to our clients the importance of our craft.

They must understand that “UXing it” isn’t just about churning out a few wireframes and making something look nice. It is about putting the user at the center of the design process and what that really entails. We also need to be able to explain why all of it is important to them.

All clients want to create a great experience for their users. If you were to ask, most of them would say they care about their users’ needs. In fact, many of them will even tell you exactly what their users want. As we all know, however, that generally equates to “we know exactly what we think our users should want.” This is where it falls on us as UX professionals to educate our clients and coworkers.

Our team was recently working with a client on an iPad application for members of their sales team. They explained the idea to us and it sounded like a very cool application. It was an interactive product configurator of sorts that, on the surface, made a lot of sense and would have been a lot of fun to build. The problem was, we knew that they hadn’t really talked to their user base.

We explained to them the importance of gaining insight from actual users and convinced them that we should go out and meet with some reps and distributors to talk about their processes and the ideas for the application. After two days of talking with users it became very clear that the application that was being proposed was not at all what their users needed.

If we would have jumped straight into “UXing it” by creating wireframes, for example, we would have wasted countless hours and dollars building a product that no one actually wanted or needed. By taking a step back and viewing UX as a holistic process rather than a single action or deliverable, we were able to more clearly identify the problem and therefore come up with an appropriate solution.

Unfortunately, these situations are all too common. They can, however, serve as excellent illustrations that the UX process—loosely defined here as user-centric design—will not only result in a better experience, but it will improve the bottom line.

There are various formal UX processes out there that you can implement or borrow from. The Cooper Goal Directed Design Process is a great one. It can be a bit heavy from a time and deliverable standpoint, however, so it might not fit every budget. If you’re interested in learning more, I’d highly recommend getting a copy of About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design.

Lean UX is another great approach to consider. Inspired by the Lean Startup methodology, Lean UX focuses less on deliverables and more on moving quickly from concept to something tangible that you can use to test your hypotheses. In his book Lean UX: Applying Lean Principles to Improve User Experience, author Jeff Gothelf lays out the Lean UX process and offers several examples of how it’s been successfully used.

One particularly interesting story he shares involves a project he worked on with a team from PayPal. Armed with a prototype they had created in Axure, the product team broke up into smaller groups and hit the local malls testing the prototype with various people. When they got back together at the office that afternoon they were able to quickly identify which ideas had merit, and which ones did not. The very next day, they were able to begin refining the features they identified as important and start working them into the prototype for further testing. This example shows yet again the value of viewing UX as a process with the user at the center.

Too often, UX is narrowly defined as one of the many disciplines that make up UX as a whole (e.g., wireframing, information architecture, etc …). On your next project, if you’re asked to “UX it,” stand up for yourself and kindly explain that UX is a holistic process. It’s not a box you can tick off a to-do list. Use the examples and processes noted above to explain and defend your position.

Hopefully, little by little, we can chip away at the idea that UX is a verb and move toward a shared understanding of what it really means to “UX it.”

 

Image of bullet through apple courtesy Shutterstock

post authorTim R. Todish

Tim R. Todish

Tim Todish has been working in the Web/RIA industry for more than 10 years. After cutting his teeth on HTML, ASP and SQL, he shifted his focus from back-end technologies to developing rich front-end experiences with early builds of Flex and AIR. Tim has a passion for using technology to create engaging user experiences across multiple devices.

From his years working closely with creatives and designers for companies including Meijer, Inc and Crowe, Tim has developed the unique ability to view both the technical and creative sides of any challenge. This has also honed his talent for bringing “techies” and “non-techies” together, fostering cross-cultural communication between the two.

Tim is currently working as a UX Designer for Maestro.

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

Find out why slapping badges and points into your app doesn’t work and what six principles from real game design actually drive long-term engagement.

Article by Montgomery Singman
Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Chapter 2: The Solution
  • The piece argues that gamification fails when game aesthetics are borrowed, but game logic is not. Real game designers use six principles to bring real engagement: authentic mastery, meaningful choice, flow-calibrated challenge, rewarded exploration, self-expressed identity, and real social interdependence. The fix isn’t more mechanics; it’s making the experience itself worth repeating.
Share:Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Chapter 2: The Solution
5 min read

Learn how one product designer built a faster, sharper workflow where AI does the scaffolding, judgment owns the outcome, and nothing ships without a traceable why.

Article by Pavel Bukengolts
The Spiral Climbs: Ideas Are Expensive, Systems Are Cheap
  • The piece explores that design is no longer about designing screens but owning systems, bets, and outcomes. But the core judgment, empathy, and research are irreplaceable. I chain Miro, Figma, VS Code, GitHub, and Jira into one traceable loop from idea to learning. AI takes on the exploration and scaffolding. People own architecture, security, and accountability. A 48-hour operating cadence of small, measurable bets, linked artifacts, and documented decisions keeps speed honest.
Share:The Spiral Climbs: Ideas Are Expensive, Systems Are Cheap
6 min read

Discover why the points, badges, and streaks in your favorite apps aren’t really gamification.

Article by Montgomery Singman
Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Chapter 1: The Problem
  • The piece claims that most apps misuse gamification, copying superficial mechanics like points and badges that trick rather than motivate people, and that the experience itself is what truly drives engagement, just like good games do.
Share:Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Chapter 1: The Problem
4 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Get Paid to Test AI Products

Earn an average of $100 per test by reviewing AI-first product experiences and sharing your feedback.

    Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

      This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and