重点 (Top highlight)
The following pet peeves are hopefully things that will resonate with most of you though also hopefully are things that we shouldn’t have to deal with anymore as design’s value is becoming more known. I also don’t mean any offense with any of what are expressed but it is my way of expressing my radical candour as I believe this world lacks it. Radical candour is one of my favourite concepts and I pray more of us practice it.
吨他下面的眼中钉是有希望的东西，将与你最共鸣，虽然也希望事情我们不应该再处理为设计的价值变得越来越知名。 我也不是说任何冒犯性行为，而是我表达自己极端坦率的方式，因为我相信这个世界缺乏这种行为。 激进的坦率是我最喜欢的概念之一，我祈祷我们更多的人实践它。
I’m using these illustrations because they represent my proverbial butt facing the people who utter these phrases (mostly recruiters, but sometimes higher-ups in the design industry and non-designers overall) as a comical way to say “I’m done with your platitudes. I’m done with your ignorance. And, I’m done with your inability to practice radically candour with me/us.”
我之所以使用这些插图，是因为它们代表了我面对那些说出这些短语的人(主要是招聘人员，有时是设计行业的高层人士和整体上非设计人员)面对面的屁股，这是一种滑稽的方式来表达“我已经完成了你的陈词滥调。 你的无知我已经做好了。 而且，您已经无法对我/我们进行彻底坦率的练习了。”
1.因此您学习了人为因素工程学吗？ 您何时，为什么或如何过渡到设计？ (1. So you studied human factors engineering eh? When, why, or how did you transition into design?)
Human Factors Engineering is all about human-centered design.
人为因素工程就是以人为本的设计。
Just because it has the word “engineering” in it doesn’t mean it’s about “software engineering”
仅仅因为其中包含“工程”一词，并不意味着它与“软件工程”有关
2.数字产品设计师是吗？ 那你知道什么语言？ (2. Digital Product Designer eh? So what languages do you know?)
“English and Mandarin — Chinese, thank you very much” is what I wish I would’ve said, but instead I only wish people knew the difference between digital product “design” and “development”.
我希望我会说“英语和普通话-中文，非常感谢”，但我只希望人们知道数字产品“设计”和“开发”之间的区别。
3.你知道奇迹吗？ 但是您知道Invision吗？ (3. You know Marvel eh? But do you know Invision?)
Because Marvel and Invision are totally different animals.
因为漫威和Invision是完全不同的动物。
The thing is it’s not about the tools, it’s about the skills — wireframing, mockups, prototyping, testing, interviewing, etc are skills — tools are ways to apply said skills, but tools are transferrable and easy to learn/pick-up if the skills are there.
关键不是工具，而是技巧—线框图，模型，原型设计，测试，面试等都是技巧—工具是应用上述技巧的方法，但是如果可以的话，这些工具是可转移的并且易于学习/使用有技能。
Also why Marvel over Invision? Well it’s only because it’s more bootstrapper-friendly (3 free prototypes > 1 free prototype after all).
还有为什么对Invision感到惊奇？ 嗯，这仅仅是因为它对引导程序更友好(毕竟3个免费原型> 1个免费原型)。
4.哦，看来您已经积累了很多经验，您为什么要为我们工作？ (4. Oh so it looks like you’ve amassed a lot of experience already, why do you want to work for us?)
I’ve amassed all this experience SO that I can prove to you that I’m worthy enough to work for you.
我已经积累了所有这些经验，所以我可以向您证明我值得为您工作。
It’s hard enough as it is to obtain paid product design work to address the whole paradoxical conundrum/dilemma of “need a job to get experience, need the experience to get a job”, but now you’re faulting me for having experience?
这已经够难，因为它是获得付费产品的设计工作，以解决整个矛盾的难题/两难“需要一份工作来获得经验，需要的经验找工作”，但现在你断层我有经验吗？
Please simply understand that most of us are trying to build our portfolios, prove our worth, gain the skills to be able to have talking points during an interview. We’re not picky, “beggars can’t be choosers” after all.
请简单地了解一下，我们中的大多数人都在努力建立自己的投资组合，证明自己的价值，获得在面试中能够发表意见的技能。 我们并不挑剔，毕竟“乞be不能成为选择者”。
5.你能使它看起来漂亮吗？ (5. Can you make it look pretty?)
Need I say more?
需要我多说？
6.好吧，您能告诉我市场上设计了多少个应用程序吗？ (6. Alright, can you show me how many apps you have designed in the market?)
Does a developer get grilled on how many apps they have released in the market?
开发人员是否对他们在市场上发布了多少应用程序感到不满意？
I’m not sure but I doubt it, the developer usually just gets asked to share their portfolio — Github profile.
我不确定，但我对此表示怀疑，通常只是要求开发人员共享他们的产品组合-Github个人资料。
The expectation of a developer to have apps shipped vs a designer to have apps shipped is ironically skewed to the wrong end of the stick.
具有讽刺意味的是，开发人员希望交付应用程序而设计人员希望交付应用程序的期望被错误地推向了错误的境界。
Designers are indeed asked for their portfolio too but there’s usually this added expectation of having a lot of shipped apps.
确实确实也要求设计师提供他们的产品组合，但通常会有更多的期望，希望有很多已交付的应用程序。
Designers usually don’t have a lot of opportunities to ship apps. Shipping apps requires a team effort and if you’re a budding designer, this isn’t something that can easily be done. The expectation is simply ridiculous.
设计师通常没有太多机会发布应用。 交付应用程序需要团队合作，如果您是一位崭露头角的设计师，那么这并非易事。 期望简直荒谬。
7.你是如此有企业家精神，为什么你不只是成为一名企业家？ (7. You’re so entrepreneurial, why don’t you just become an entrepreneur?)
There are so many things wrong with this question.
这个问题有很多错。
- Shouldn’t you want someone “entrepreneurial” who can, therefore, be “intrapreneurial” at your workplace? Unless if you have a toxic work culture and you don’t encourage people who possess an “entrepreneurial spirit” 您是否不想要一个可以在您的工作场所“创业”的“企业家”？ 除非您有一种有害的工作文化，并且您不鼓励具有“企业家精神”的人
- Speaking of which, “entrepreneurial spirit” doesn’t mean “want to be an entrepreneur” 说到这，“企业家精神”并不意味着“想成为一名企业家”
- What if you simply need to pay the bills and your parents are halfway across the world? 如果您只需要支付账单，而您的父母已经遍布世界的一半，该怎么办？
- What if finding a technical cofounder because you’re not a software/product coder/developer/engineer is like dating and finding a lifelong partner, to which is absolutely difficult whilst having to pay the bills with parents who live halfway across the world as an only child and live in a metropolitan with expensive rent to pay? 如果因为您不是软件/产品编码人员/开发人员/工程师而不是技术联合创始人，该怎么办就好比约会并找到一个终身伴侣，而要与住在世界各地的父母一起支付账单绝对是困难的独生子，住在大城市，房租高昂？
- What if settling on a business that won’t be disrupted easily or lose out to the competition given the exponential nature of how fast the tech world moves is not something you have the wherewithal to deal with right now? 如果考虑到技术世界移动速度的指数性质，要解决一个不会轻易中断或输给竞争对手的业务怎么办，那您现在没有什么钱可应付？
What if you simply don’t want to become an entrepreneur? Why even question their decision to apply to work for you? If they chose to work for you then they must have decided to not become an entrepreneur?
如果您根本不想成为企业家怎么办？ 为什么还要质疑他们申请为您工作的决定？ 如果他们选择为您工作，那么他们一定决定不成为企业家吗？
Why don’t you just practice radical candor and say “We don’t value people who possess an entrepreneurial spirit here, so you wasted your time applying here, but I’ll ask you anyway so as to appear empathetic when in reality I’m insecure about the fact that we won’t value someone like you at our company.”? The reason why you can’t or won’t choose to say this is because you’re scared of hurting someone’s feelings when in reality you would’ve done them a great favour if you were simply honest.
您为什么不只是练习激进的坦率，然后说：“我们在这里不珍视具有企业家精神的人，所以您浪费了在这里申请的时间，但无论如何我都会问你，以便在现实中表现出同情心。”对于我们不会珍视我们公司中像您这样的人这一事实，我感到不确定。”？ 之所以不能或不会选择说这句话，是因为您害怕伤害别人的感觉，而实际上，如果您只是诚实的话，就会给他们很大的帮助。
Also, please refer to my above pet peeve about addressing the whole “needing experience to get a job and needing a job to get experience” dilemma.
另外，请参考我上面的小观点，以解决整个“需要工作才能获得工作经验和需要工作来获得经验”的难题。
8.您是UX设计器还是UI设计器？ (8. Are you more of a UX Designer or a UI Designer?)
I don’t know, maybe it’s just me but if your position is advertised as UX/UI Designer, why even bother asking this question?
我不知道，也许只是我一个人，但是如果您的职位被宣传为UX / UI Designer，为什么还要打扰问这个问题呢？
If your position is not and is one or the other — I find in today’s day and age, just as a front-end developer should also know how to use an API, to expect a designer to be focused on one or the other is weird.
如果您的位置不是一个位置，另一个位置是另一个位置–在当今的时代，我发现，就像前端开发人员也应该知道如何使用API一样，期望设计师专注于一个或另一个，这很奇怪。
There are areas of overlap that to me are significant enough — that why should we even question when a digital product designer is applying for either/or of positions.
在我看来，有很多重叠的领域很重要-为什么我们甚至还要质疑数字产品设计师何时申请任职职位。
I understand why separating out UX Research from UX/UI Design has happened over the last few years or UX Writing as a separate discipline, but UX and UI Design are inexplicably tied and yes UX Design can sometimes be its own thing but more-or-less their overlap is so strong that I don’t see the point in asking this question.
我了解为什么在过去的几年中将UX研究与UX / UI设计分离开来，或者将UX写作作为一门独立的学科而发生，但是UX和UI设计莫名其妙地联系在一起，是的，UX设计有时可以成为自己的事情，但是或多或少除非它们的重叠是如此强烈，以至于我看不出要问这个问题的意义。
9.您应该只是网络OR，您应该只是做一些志愿者项目。 或者，您应该走出舒适区。 (9. You should just network OR, You should just do some volunteer projects. OR, You should just get out of your comfort zone.)
There so many things wrong with these statements.
这些陈述有很多错误。
- They’re cliched at best. 他们充其量只不过是老套。
- They’re callous at worst. 他们在最坏的时候很冷酷。
- They show a lack of empathy because they’re just lazy pieces of advice if given without taking any shred of time to understand what the person has already done. 他们表现出缺乏同情心，因为如果只是给出建议，他们只是懒惰的建议，而不会花费任何时间来了解这个人已经做了什么。
- I’ve mentored a few budding designers before and I’ve never said these things without understanding their context. What if they have a dying mother that they have to take care of so volunteer projects shouldn’t fly? What if they’ve already gone to countless networking events? What if they’ve already actually designed digital products abroad in multiple countries before such as Germany, the Bahamas, and the Middle East, so getting out of their comfort zone? More like, whoa, you have a huge comfort zone. 之前，我曾指导过几位崭露头角的设计师，但在不了解其上下文的情况下，我从未说过这些话。 如果他们有一个垂死的母亲必须照顾，那志愿项目就不应飞行怎么办？ 如果他们已经参加了无数次社交活动该怎么办？ 如果他们之前已经在多个国家(例如德国，巴哈马和中东)实际在国外设计了数字产品该怎么办，从而摆脱他们的舒适区呢？ 更像是，哇，您有一个很大的舒适区。
- They are simply ways for the design leader to say “I don’t have time for you, get out of my face. Lemme talk to someone more important, but I don’t want to say any of this to you because I suck at radical candour, I’d rather just take these cliches off the shelf to shut you up and expect you to say ‘thank you’ to make myself feel good that I’ve given ‘sage advice’”. 它们只是设计主管说“我没有时间陪你，滚出我的脸”的简单方法。 我想和一个更重要的人说话，但我不想对你说任何话，因为我对激进的坦率很烂，我宁愿把这些陈词滥调从架子上挡下来，然后期待你说“谢谢” “让自己感觉很好，因为我已经给了“明智的建议””。
I’m sorry, but take a little bit of your time to understand their circumstances before giving them off-the-shelf platitudes.
抱歉，在花点时间陈词滥调之前，请花点时间了解他们的情况。
Designers love to throw the word or shall-I-say buzzword of “empathy” around, but a lot of senior designers I find lack that same empathy towards more junior and up-and-coming designers.
设计师喜欢用“移情”这个词来形容，但我发现很多高级设计师都缺乏对更多初级和新兴设计师的同理心。
10.您的设计过程是什么？ (10. What is your design process?)
Truth-be-Told, I never understood this question. I don’t have a “my” process, that’s like asking a scientist “what is your process”. The design-thinking process is already an analogy of the scientific process, why does this question exist? I never understood it — what’s below is my process, what’s below is every practitioner’s process. There’s no “my” process, there’s “the” process.
实话实说，我从未理解过这个问题。 我没有“我的”过程，就像问一位科学家“您的过程是什么”。 设计思维过程已经是科学过程的类比，为什么存在这个问题？ 我从不理解它-下面是我的过程，下面是每个从业者的过程。 没有“我的”过程，有“的”过程。
And there are already industry standards like the following:
并且已经有如下行业标准：
What really confuses me is this insinuation that there is a personalization of this process. No scientist in their right mind would personalize their process, it’s supposed to be a standard process for the sake of keeping things objective, proper, and professional. It’s like calligraphy — there’s a set amount of strokes, there’s a set way to input those strokes, and there’s a set rhythm/rhyme to it that’s only begotten through practice.
真正使我感到困惑的是，这个过程存在个性化的暗示。 在他们的正确思维中，没有任何科学家会个性化他们的过程，为了保持事物的客观性，适当性和专业性，这被认为是标准过程。 就像书法一样-有一定数量的笔画，有固定的方式输入这些笔画，并且有一定的节奏/韵律，只有通过练习才能产生。
I’d rather the question be “given a situation where our business team still needs convincing the value of design, how would you handle it?”. Please be more contextual in asking questions about how I would handle the work given certain contexts/circumstances instead of asking something that can easily be obtained from googling this. It doesn’t make sense to have someone just regurgitate this textbook answer because frankly, it should be the only right answer to a textbook question. Unless if you’re trying to trip them up, to which I have to ask — why?
我宁愿问题是“鉴于我们的业务团队仍然需要说服设计的价值，您将如何处理呢？”。 在询问有关在特定上下文/情况下我将如何处理工作的问题时，请更具上下文相关性，而不是询问可以通过谷歌搜索轻松获得的内容。 仅仅有人反省这个教科书的答案是没有意义的，因为坦率地说，它应该是教科书问题的唯一正确答案。 除非您要尝试将它们绊倒，否则我必须要问-为什么？
你走之前！ 🥳 (Before you go! 🥳)
👏🏻 SPAM 50 CLAPS if you enjoyed this article, I’d love to share more!👨🏻💻 Connect with me on Linkedin💭 Comment your thoughts, feedback, anything!
👏🏻SPAM如果50个CLAPS你喜欢这篇文章，我很乐意分享更多！👨🏻💻 连接与我LinkedIn 💭 评论您的想法，反馈意见！
My name’s Tian Zhao and I’m a young professional with a background in industrial/systems/human-factors engineering from the University of Toronto who’s deeply and widely passionate about solving problems in a scalable, sustainable, and systematic manner. In particular, I’m incredibly interested in Industry 4.0 technologies such as what I’d like to call the “Computing Trinity”, which is divided into Cognitive (AI) + Connected (IoT) + Distributed (Blockchain) Computing. My mission is to apply design-thinking, exponential-thinking, and systems-thinking to optimize systems and processes in an effective, efficient, and expedient manner in everything I do.
我叫田钊，我是多伦多大学工业/系统/人为工程专业的年轻专业人员，他对以可扩展，可持续和系统的方式解决问题有着浓厚的热情。 特别是，我对工业4.0技术(例如我所谓的“计算三位一体”)非常感兴趣，该技术分为认知(AI)+互联(IoT)+分布式(区块链)计算。 我的任务是运用设计思想，指数思想和系统思想，以有效，高效和便捷的方式优化系统和流程。
翻译自: https://uxdesign.cc/my-top-10-pet-peeves-as-a-digital-product-designer-75e02778038
306
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
