Designer Team Dynamics and Trust

I once worked with a team that was, quite frankly, toxic. The same two team members routinely derailed meeting agendas. Eye-rolling was a primary form of communication. Side conversations overtook the official discussion. Most members had disengaged, emotionally checking out while physically present. Trust was nonexistent. This wasn't just unpleasant—it was preventing meaningful work from happening. The transformation began with a deceptively simple intervention: establishing clear community agreements. Not generic "respect each other" platitudes, but specific behavioral norms with concrete descriptions of what they looked like in practice. The team agreed to norms like "Listen to understand," "Speak your truth without blame or judgment," and "Be unattached to outcome." For each norm, we articulated exactly what it looked like in action, providing language and behaviors everyone could recognize. More importantly, we implemented structures to uphold these agreements. A "process observer" role was established, rotating among team members, with the explicit responsibility to name when norms were being upheld or broken during meetings. Initially, this felt awkward. When the process observer first said, "I notice we're interrupting each other, which doesn't align with our agreement to listen fully," the room went silent. But within weeks, team members began to self-regulate, sometimes even catching themselves mid-sentence. Trust didn't build overnight. It grew through consistent small actions that demonstrated reliability and integrity—keeping commitments, following through on tasks, acknowledging mistakes. Meeting time was protected and focused on meaningful work rather than administrative tasks that could be handled via email. The team began to practice active listening techniques, learning to paraphrase each other's ideas before responding. This simple practice dramatically shifted the quality of conversation. One team member later told me, "For the first time, I felt like people were actually trying to understand my perspective rather than waiting for their turn to speak." Six months later, the transformation was remarkable. The same team that once couldn't agree on a meeting agenda was collaboratively designing innovative approaches to their work. Conflicts still emerged, but they were about ideas rather than personalities, and they led to better solutions rather than deeper divisions. The lesson was clear: trust doesn't simply happen through team-building exercises or shared experiences. It must be intentionally cultivated through concrete practices, consistently upheld, and regularly reflected upon. Share one trust-building practice that's worked well in your team experience. P.S. If you’re a leader, I recommend checking out my free challenge: The Resilient Leader: 28 Days to Thrive in Uncertainty  https://lnkd.in/gxBnKQ8n

Design isn’t a layer. It’s the bridge when trust vanishes. Last quarter, a senior designer reached out.  Thoughtful.  Experienced.  Always met deadlines.  Yet she confessed: “I spend most days firefighting. Task after task. But I don’t feel trusted. I’m not part of the ‘big conversations.’ I’m just the person who makes it pretty.” She paused. Then said softly: “It’s as if my value evaporated — because I don’t get to shape the decisions, only the visuals.” And her words hit hard—because that’s the silent frustration of many talented designers: 🔸 You deliver pixel-perfect UI… only to find your voice is ignored in key meetings. 🔸 You interpret business goals — but don’t help set them. 🔸 You refine user flows — but never influence the roadmap. 🔸 Day in and day out, you’re executing, not leading. ⸻ The gap we’ve all felt: Doing, but not guiding. • You solve problems, but don’t define them. • You refine features — but never craft the why behind them. • You’re part of the team… but not part of the vision. That’s not failure—it’s exclusion. You’ve been invited to the party for design. But not for strategy. ⸻ Here’s where designers lose their power: They treat design as decoration — a final step in execution. They wait for instructions—never question the context. They treat stakeholders as distant clients —outsiders to be served, not collaborators to be challenged. ⚠️ But in the world of 2025, design isn’t optional. It’s the backbone of meaningful products. ⸻ Flip the script: Go from decorator to partner. Instead of waiting for briefs, influence them. Ask: What are we really trying to fix? Where could this break later? How will users feel? Instead of sketching screens, frame the problem. Start with “why before what.” Hold space for these questions in your team. Instead of being handed specs, shape them. Speak up: This is risky. What if we tested three flows? What might we miss? And instead of delivering assets, build accountability. Touch base after launch. Replay analytics. Tie your design to outcomes, not just pixels. ⸻ That’s the new role of design leadership. Not just beauty. Not just polish. But clarity, intention, direction. So that every decision carries your voice — before it becomes someone else’s story. ⸻ Here’s the transition: 🎯 From “I serve briefs” → To “I guide the questions and shape the brief.” 🚀 From “I craft visuals” → To “I craft the vision behind them.” 📈 From “I ship screens” → To “I ship measurable impact.” ⸻ If you’re done feeling sidelined — if you’re ready to claim your seat at the strategy table — drop me a message or fill out the featured section in my profile. Because in my UX bootcamp, “New Generation of Products,” we don’t just build designs… we build your strategic role in product teams.

Is product development a competitive sport inside your company? Throughout my career I have found product politics breeds a competitive environment that makes long-term individual and product team success precarious at best. Why compete against your product triad colleagues (product, design, engineering) when you are part of the same team? Why speak negatively about others and sabotage their work or opportunities when everyone can get farther faster by working together? I believe winning at all costs is not really winning at all. Or to put it another way, achieving a “win” at the cost of other people who could help you and your organization be more impactful is just not worth it. Yet it’s likely we have all come across individuals who are so consumed by a desire for recognition (or as they see it “success”) that they lose sight of the damage they are doing to themselves and to their team’s culture - the result being, everyone loses. When an environment encourages - or does nothing to prevent - competition, trust will be damaged. And a lack of trust impacts employee productivity, engagement and ultimately job satisfaction. "People do not decide their futures, they decide their habits and their habits decide their futures." - F.M. Alexander In a recent blog post, Sahil Bloom, summarized the above quote with the words - small things become big things. If you as a product leader look the other way when people undercut or disparage the contributions of colleagues ‘simply’ to get ahead, no one should be surprised if the level of trust between employees is low. Because competition between teammates was overlooked in the past, it is likely to be overlooked today (in the present), leading to a future where competition - and consequently a lack of trust - is considered the norm. What is the vision you have for your product team? For me, I seek to create a team where discussions have a foundation in curiosity not cut throat. I appreciate wanting to get ahead and challenging myself to be better. Yet disparaging another person or their efforts simply to be perceived as “better”, that isn’t for me. In the words of Ron Howard on the Master’s of Scale podcast, I prefer to stay true to my vision. To help you do the same, check out my latest newsletter (link in the first comment) as I share methods to reset a culture of competition.