Nick Cochrane

Figma is skipping the traditional IPO roadshow and going public via direct listing. And it's 40x oversubscribed. Most companies avoid direct listings. In a traditional IPO, investment banks buy shares at a discount and then sell them to institutional investors. The banks act as underwriters, which means they guarantee a minimum price and provide stability. Direct listings are different. No underwriters. No discount. No roadshow presentations to convince investors. Existing shares just start trading on the exchange at whatever price the market decides. This creates volatility risk as there's no price floor. But Figma doesn't need to worry about that. There's massive demand already baked in. When Spotify went direct in 2018, everyone predicted chaos. Instead, it traded relatively smoothly. Same with Slack in 2019. But why does this really matter for Figma? They capture the full market value instead of giving banks a discount. In traditional IPOs, banks often price shares 10-20% below market value to ensure a successful launch. That's money left on the table. Why give away value when you don't have to?

115

1 Comment

“Everything is design and design is everything.” - Emily Campbell Today, Kim Lenox, Emily and I had a conversation with a thousand people to discuss Figma’s new study exploring how work is changing for 7 roles involved in product development. The quote above sums it up. Roles are blurring. And, more people than ever see design as an integral part of their work. The full story is longer and even more interesting: - 64% of respondents identified with two or more roles, and over a third said their responsibilities span three or more roles. - 56% of non-designers say design tasks like prototyping are a major part of their work, up 12 percentage points in a year - 19% of time is now spent with AI tools, expecting to increase to 27% in the next 12 months. This time is taken from solo work time rather than work with colleagues. And, 57% say they’re spending more time on work that’s higher value and strategic. - 53% say deep knowledge is still needed to do a task well, less than a quarter believe AI reduces the need for expertise. Matt Walker and team built the study of 1200 respondents and 50 interviews, covering 67 tasks. Alia Fite, Emma Webster, and Alex Praeger created an amazing report from the findings. Chad Bergman and Greg Huntoon answered so many questions in today's discussion. The key here is it’s not just design. It’s not just product development. And, I would guess this trend is actually is bigger than just this field. I think at the heart of these changes are a strong desire to communicate intent from one expertise to another. From marketing to design. From design to development. From PM to development. And, I think we’ll see even more of this blurring moving forward.

90

15 Comments

UX costs nothing—until it costs everything. Every ignored friction point eventually resurfaces as support tickets, dropped leads, stalled onboarding, or lost renewals. We've seen this consistently across B2B platforms, member portals, and internal tools: → Poor navigation floods help desks → Inconsistent UI slows adoption and erodes trust → Bloated workflows quietly push users toward competitors Organizations often think they're avoiding UX costs, unaware they're already paying—through wasted time, constant patches, and staff burnout. High-performing teams don't see UX as a line-item luxury. They treat it as preventive ops. They measure it. Fund it. Protect it. Because solving root problems always costs less than endlessly triaging symptoms. If your support team is swamped or onboarding is stalled, it's probably not just a content issue. It's a UX issue—and you're already footing the bill.

57

5 Comments

Whether you’re trying to get hired or promoted, we’ve developed an obsession with “showing impact.” I’m guilty of it too. Many talented designers struggle with this. They work in organisations where tracking is incomplete, and they’re forced to choose between showing nothing or making up numbers. But here’s something to keep in mind: Awareness beats access. I’d rather work with someone who doesn’t have data but understands what their work affects. Than someone who has all the data and no idea what to do with it. If you don’t have perfect data, you can still show impact by thinking through these layers: 1. Behaviour --- What are the smallest user actions your design is meant to influence? For example: • Form submissions • Button clicks • Page visits These are leading indicators. You can directly influence them with design. 2. Product --- If hundreds or thousands of users perform that behaviour more often, what product metric would it influence? For example: • Activation rate • Engagement • Discoverability These are team-level outcomes. Your work should support one or more of them. 3. Business --- If that product metric improves, what business impact would it have? For example: • New MRR • Retention • Expansion These are your lagging indicators. They show up later, but they matter most to leadership. Even if you can’t measure these directly, talk about what you believe your work affected. Be honest about the gaps. You can also share what you would have tracked if the data had been available. If you can tell a plausible story using these three layers—behaviour, product, and business—you’re already showing strong strategic awareness. And you’re pointing to the organisational gaps that made measurement difficult. That mindset matters more than a dashboard.

60

12 Comments

Some observations about designers and Figma’s auto layout, both from my recent video (link in the comments) and my own anecdotal experience talking to and working with thousands of designers from many different design and design system teams over the last decade: 1️⃣ A common reaction is, “Your way is too complicated. All you have to do is {{ COMPLICATED THING 1 }} and {{ COMPLICATED THING 2 }} and it becomes much simpler.” 2️⃣ Some designers think their Figma files dictate the way a developer codes a design. 3️⃣ I never cease to be surprised by the hoops some will jump through to achieve a “best practice.”

43

13 Comments

New, from me: Hiring for Creativity in a World of UX Design Systems https://lnkd.in/gJY-Efdn Leaders depend on designers who can work within system constraints that demand assembly‑level consistency, yet when hiring, they value candidates who challenge assumptions, reframe problems, and propose unexpected solutions. Portfolios, however, often show neither, a gap many managers attribute to the rapid‑training pipelines of contemporary bootcamps. Managers express concern that the systems enabling efficient production may be narrowing the range of skills they see when hiring, leaving a profession caught between creative ideals and the industrial machinery shaping modern product design. Citations (and thanks) to Josh Therese Joe Matic Rahul Jeff Joshua Elizabeth Jude Emma Craig

83

3 Comments

Are you struggling to connect user insights to business impact? If you're in design or research, you know the challenge: moving past simple user needs to uncover what truly drives behavior. The Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) framework is the key to making that leap. This excellent text by my friend Itamar Medeiros, "Using Jobs To Be Done to Elevate your Design and Research Practice," breaks down exactly how JTBD can help you: - Gain sharper insights by focusing on user outcomes, not just demographics. - Improve collaboration by framing research in a way that aligns design, product, and engineering teams. - Win buy-in by connecting your design choices directly to business value and a more focused roadmap. If you want to elevate your influence and build more impactful products, this is a must-read. https://lnkd.in/dXGgv8sb #JobsToBeDone #JTBD #UX #CX #Design #UserResearch #ProductStrategy #ProductDesign #DesignThinking #GrowingDesignCulture #AmplifyingDesign #BusinessTransformationByDesign

77

3 Comments