This is an open invitation to product leaders, hiring managers, and design teams everywhere: fight the urge to hire designers based on their visually appealing portfolios alone. Instead, seek out groups of designers who have critical thinking abilities, who can ask good questions, and who approach problems with curiosity and humility.

The Alluring Appeal of Aesthetics

It is simple to see why it is so tempting to hire someone with a stunning visual sense. Snaps of professional-looking interfaces are an immediate, hands-on guarantee that a designer is capable of delivering something beautiful. For managers burdened by the responsibility of hiring the right person, this seems like a short cut around talent discovery. Design, of course, does not happen in a vacuum. The poorly documented, messy steps in the design process—where actual innovation is happening—involve user research, iterative problem-solving, collaborative ideation, testing, and the learnings derived from failure.

A refined portfolio demonstrates exactly what a designer wants it to demonstrate. It is a carefully told story, often with style taking precedence over substance. Seldom does it contain their failures, the blind alleys they pursued, or the nuanced compromises they were forced to make. It does not convey how they worked with users, negotiated with engineers, reacted to data, or argued—and even changed—their minds when faced with criticism. In reality, it provides little insight into their thinking.

The Genuine Art of UX/UI Design

Great UX/UI professionals are introspective and thoughtful. They start with empathy, examining the root of user pain and its deeper motivations. They analyze business requirements, challenge common assumptions, and probe hypotheses. Achieving a harmonious blend of aesthetics and usability, simplicity and completeness, elegance and accessibility is their strength. They recognize that success is not in the mere aesthetic appeal of a design system, but in its utility and simplicity for users.

Curious designers ask themselves questions like:

  What problem, I ask, are we really solving?

Whom are we serving, and what could success look like for that person? How does this interaction add to the user experience as a whole?

What are the constraints that face us—technical, business, or time—and how do we shape our design within those?

They are not academic exercises in themselves, but rather the daily reality of product design. They are, nonetheless, too often overlooked in portfolios, in spite of their significant value. They merit a closer look.

The Problem with Portfolio-Polishers

1. Surface-Level Design Without Depth

Many portfolios today are filled with unsolicited redesigns of popular apps— Netflix, Spotify, Airbnb—where the designer changes the UI for the sake of aesthetics but ignores real business and user needs.

These projects often lack:

• Research: No user interviews, no data-backed decisions.
• Constraints: No budget, timeline, or technical limitations considered.
• Impact: No measurable outcomes—just subjective improvements

Hiring such designers means bringing in people who can make things look good but can’t justify their decisions when challenged.

2. Over-Reliance on Trends Over Fundamentals

Dribbble and Behance are full of:

• Excessive animations that look cool but harm usability.
• Unrealistic UIs (e.g., apps with no text, just icons).
• Dark mode everything without considering accessibility.

A designer who blindly follows trends without understanding why they exist will create visually appealing but dysfunctional products.

3. Lack of Problem-Solving Skills

Stop evaluating engineers on trivia. Focus on:

• Problem-solving Many case studies follow a cookie-cutter structure:
  1. We identified a problem (often vague).
  2. We conducted user research (usually superficial).
  3. We designed a solution (without exploring alternatives).
  4. Users loved it! (no real validation).

Real UX/UI work involves:

• Trade-offs: Balancing business goals, user needs, and tech feasibility.
• Iteration: Accepting that the first idea is rarely the best.
• Collaboration: Working with PMs, engineers, and stakeholders—not just working in Figma.

A portfolio-polisher may struggle when asked:

• How would you handle pushback from developers?
• What if the data contradicts your design?
• How do you prioritize features with limited resources?

real-world scenarios (e.g., debugging, system design).

• Collaboration and communication skills.
• Growth potential (can they learn, not just recite algorithms?).

How to Identify Designers Who Actually Think

1. Look for Real-World Problem Solving

• Instead of judging portfolios by aesthetics, assess:
• Complexity of problems tackled: Did they work on ambiguous challenges?
• Decision-making process: Can they explain why they chose a solution over alternatives?
• Outcomes: Did their work lead to improved metrics (conversion, retention, usability)?

Ask in interviews:

• Tell me about a time your initial design failed. What did you learn?
• How do you handle conflicting feedback from stakeholders?