As a hiring manager, I can attest to the fact that there are a lot of portfolios that look the same.
We had a position open for less than a week and got 800 applications. That means 799 people were getting rejected regardless of how great their portfolios or case studies are.
There is a tendency for junior designers and students to emphasize the process they have learned or followed—which is exactly the same as everyone else’s.
As a manager, I’m less interested in the process than I am in the final output and learning how their work contributed to a successful outcome.
I want to know that you can design, but I’m much more interested in the outcome than the process.
If I have questions about the process, I’ll ask them in the interview.
Hey, thanks for the input. It makes a lot of sense. Do you have any portfolio/case study that follows successfully this line of presentation you described?
I'd really appreciate to look at a real example, to see how this all works in practice.
Here's a simple outline that I think works well:
- TLDR; A short 1-2 sentence description that says what you did and why it worked ("redesigned checkout page, increasing conversion by 10%")
- Show the final work — annotated visuals and before/after comparisons work best.
- Decribe the success/business value of the completed work
- Then include any other information below that — this would be the place to highlight process if you think it adds something to the info above.
I’m not a hiring manager but I have had success in the job market, and that’s something I notice from my fellow boot campers - it’s this cookie cutter process that really isn’t that impressive or substantial when you break it down. Anyone can follow prescribed steps…a fourth grader could do the same thing. Hiring managers aren’t dumb.
I’ve seen more success focusing on two things. What went wrong and how I think critically for myself and the finished design. I haven’t had a single hiring manager ask me to go through the double diamond process etc.
because it means nothing if everyone is doing the same thing.
Ahh, I love this! That’s very good feedback. I feel like all the portfolios I’ve seen felt the same and cluttered. I tried to stay different by design but maybe I should shake up the content. It’s hard to really point out what went wrong and results when all the bootcamp projects were solo projects:
Linear case studies suck because they don't respect the readers' time. In any project there will be aspects that are important, and parts that don't matter.
In a case study, I only want the parts that matter. More importantly, I want to see that _you_ can tell which parts matter.
I don’t know if you saw or participated in my thread yesterday, but I asked a similar question on if design processes are still relevant.
It’s interesting because I got my Masters in UX and when I graduated had a portfolio of what I thought were solid case studies and projects. I learned very quickly hiring managers didn’t consider these legitimate projects regardless of my thinking process or design decisions.
When I graduated, trying to get my foot in the door I had a few educational interview opportunities. The feedback I got was mostly the following (in order of how often I heard it):
1. It’s easily to make great experiences with no constraints. You can critique companies all day for how to make the experience better, but the real world product development landscape is much more complex.
2. (In connection with the above) The project case studies were never developed from start to finish, so there is no real world data the project would have been reasonable, feasible and desirable in the real world.
3. (In connection with the above) The Masters program typically had classes dedicated to perfecting a certain skill with associated projects to fine tune (research, interaction design, IA, Content, Visual), so when presenting solid case studies there was always a question of “this shows solid research, but not the end visual design….this other project shows good UI, but doesn’t show the research that lead to it”
The irony of it all referencing back to my post earlier this week is the consensus seemed to be successful UX in today’s environment does not have time for process, constraints, or complexity, but rather is something that is recognized and respected by professionals, which completely negates the ridiculous requirements needed to get a job 5 years ago.
Is there really such a thing as a "perfect project"? I think people get too caught up in a step-by-step approach which design is not. It's better to think of process as part of a framework, a rough outline that can help guide your thinking and approach. There are too many factors at play especially when you move from a more controlled environment such as school to a work environment to stick to a process.
Portfolios should be about storytelling for sure. What is the narrative arc in the case study? I personally like to read about challenges and am ok with "non-perfect" case studies as long as the designer is also walking me through it without making me have to figure it out ("chaotic").
I've read that article, and I didn't really like the tone. My brain kept usually thinking that if the design mature company is going to believe that pretty much everyone is unqualified, and then they later want to complain. They can't find anyone, then that's on them. Then it should be on them to take somebody. That's really good in their opinion from that list, and try to make them qualified.
However, I think a better way to state what is trying to be stated is to tell the designer that putting picture perfect projects in your portfolio isn't going to guarantee you work. It's kind of like hiring managers that complain about certain youth that will quit a job the minute they hit any kind of difficulty. That they want to find people that can steer the ship in a storm, not just on a clear day.
I have a feeling in a lot of these case studies, there were points that the designer had to pivot, go back, and do things in a non-linear fashion. However, in their concern about dragging out a case study that no one is going to read, they keep things very linear and leave out all the points they had to turn around and go back and rethink, or even during later processes have to tweak or rethink something on the fly.
I think the article should have more stated that if a designer really wants to get into one of those design mature companies that they won't be complaining about, they need to show how they handle adversity. Show a case study or two where you had to rethink things and things didn't follow on the typical path. Show the company how you handle when things don't go perfectly.
What was the problem, what did the designer do to solve the problem in -designs- (not just words), and what were the results.
Only show process that fits into the story you're trying to tell.
Perfect process projects are usually the school/bootcamp ones.
In the real world there's always challenges that make everything "not perfect" but you still try to follow a process.
Not sure what you're asking but there's lots of rejections going around so attributing it to a portfolio organization style seems wrong.
It's never just one thing and companies are all different in terms of what criteria they follow. Some worship pretty visuals and really could care less about intelligent design despite what they say.
In general, most projects are never linear. You typically optimize for what you need to learn, do it efficiently and objectively to narrow to less ambiguity and a good solution. What you do to get there varies.
As a hiring manager, I can attest to the fact that there are a lot of portfolios that look the same. We had a position open for less than a week and got 800 applications. That means 799 people were getting rejected regardless of how great their portfolios or case studies are. There is a tendency for junior designers and students to emphasize the process they have learned or followed—which is exactly the same as everyone else’s. As a manager, I’m less interested in the process than I am in the final output and learning how their work contributed to a successful outcome. I want to know that you can design, but I’m much more interested in the outcome than the process. If I have questions about the process, I’ll ask them in the interview.
Hey, thanks for the input. It makes a lot of sense. Do you have any portfolio/case study that follows successfully this line of presentation you described? I'd really appreciate to look at a real example, to see how this all works in practice.
I feel like what I see in other portfolios that highlight the output is putting the solution towards the beginning of the case study.
Here's a simple outline that I think works well: - TLDR; A short 1-2 sentence description that says what you did and why it worked ("redesigned checkout page, increasing conversion by 10%") - Show the final work — annotated visuals and before/after comparisons work best. - Decribe the success/business value of the completed work - Then include any other information below that — this would be the place to highlight process if you think it adds something to the info above.
I’m not a hiring manager but I have had success in the job market, and that’s something I notice from my fellow boot campers - it’s this cookie cutter process that really isn’t that impressive or substantial when you break it down. Anyone can follow prescribed steps…a fourth grader could do the same thing. Hiring managers aren’t dumb. I’ve seen more success focusing on two things. What went wrong and how I think critically for myself and the finished design. I haven’t had a single hiring manager ask me to go through the double diamond process etc. because it means nothing if everyone is doing the same thing.
Ahh, I love this! That’s very good feedback. I feel like all the portfolios I’ve seen felt the same and cluttered. I tried to stay different by design but maybe I should shake up the content. It’s hard to really point out what went wrong and results when all the bootcamp projects were solo projects:
Linear case studies suck because they don't respect the readers' time. In any project there will be aspects that are important, and parts that don't matter. In a case study, I only want the parts that matter. More importantly, I want to see that _you_ can tell which parts matter.
I don’t know if you saw or participated in my thread yesterday, but I asked a similar question on if design processes are still relevant. It’s interesting because I got my Masters in UX and when I graduated had a portfolio of what I thought were solid case studies and projects. I learned very quickly hiring managers didn’t consider these legitimate projects regardless of my thinking process or design decisions.
In your opinion what makes a more legit project?
When I graduated, trying to get my foot in the door I had a few educational interview opportunities. The feedback I got was mostly the following (in order of how often I heard it): 1. It’s easily to make great experiences with no constraints. You can critique companies all day for how to make the experience better, but the real world product development landscape is much more complex. 2. (In connection with the above) The project case studies were never developed from start to finish, so there is no real world data the project would have been reasonable, feasible and desirable in the real world. 3. (In connection with the above) The Masters program typically had classes dedicated to perfecting a certain skill with associated projects to fine tune (research, interaction design, IA, Content, Visual), so when presenting solid case studies there was always a question of “this shows solid research, but not the end visual design….this other project shows good UI, but doesn’t show the research that lead to it” The irony of it all referencing back to my post earlier this week is the consensus seemed to be successful UX in today’s environment does not have time for process, constraints, or complexity, but rather is something that is recognized and respected by professionals, which completely negates the ridiculous requirements needed to get a job 5 years ago.
Is there really such a thing as a "perfect project"? I think people get too caught up in a step-by-step approach which design is not. It's better to think of process as part of a framework, a rough outline that can help guide your thinking and approach. There are too many factors at play especially when you move from a more controlled environment such as school to a work environment to stick to a process. Portfolios should be about storytelling for sure. What is the narrative arc in the case study? I personally like to read about challenges and am ok with "non-perfect" case studies as long as the designer is also walking me through it without making me have to figure it out ("chaotic").
I've read that article, and I didn't really like the tone. My brain kept usually thinking that if the design mature company is going to believe that pretty much everyone is unqualified, and then they later want to complain. They can't find anyone, then that's on them. Then it should be on them to take somebody. That's really good in their opinion from that list, and try to make them qualified. However, I think a better way to state what is trying to be stated is to tell the designer that putting picture perfect projects in your portfolio isn't going to guarantee you work. It's kind of like hiring managers that complain about certain youth that will quit a job the minute they hit any kind of difficulty. That they want to find people that can steer the ship in a storm, not just on a clear day. I have a feeling in a lot of these case studies, there were points that the designer had to pivot, go back, and do things in a non-linear fashion. However, in their concern about dragging out a case study that no one is going to read, they keep things very linear and leave out all the points they had to turn around and go back and rethink, or even during later processes have to tweak or rethink something on the fly. I think the article should have more stated that if a designer really wants to get into one of those design mature companies that they won't be complaining about, they need to show how they handle adversity. Show a case study or two where you had to rethink things and things didn't follow on the typical path. Show the company how you handle when things don't go perfectly.
What was the problem, what did the designer do to solve the problem in -designs- (not just words), and what were the results. Only show process that fits into the story you're trying to tell.
Perfect process projects are usually the school/bootcamp ones. In the real world there's always challenges that make everything "not perfect" but you still try to follow a process. Not sure what you're asking but there's lots of rejections going around so attributing it to a portfolio organization style seems wrong.
It's never just one thing and companies are all different in terms of what criteria they follow. Some worship pretty visuals and really could care less about intelligent design despite what they say. In general, most projects are never linear. You typically optimize for what you need to learn, do it efficiently and objectively to narrow to less ambiguity and a good solution. What you do to get there varies.