UX Portfolio Truth Bombs
by Darren Hood, Ph.D.
In 2011, I began warning people about UX becoming “under siege.” Part of this “siege” involved the first phases of those seeking UX roles being asked for portfolios. It had been quite rare prior to that, but as a result of the confusion surrounding UX, it’s being equated with visual design, and the lack of UX maturity that spread during the earlier siege years (and is still expanding rapidly today) has made portfolio reviews commonplace.
In this blog post, extracted from a World of UX Podcast episode about the same topic, I’ll present some harsh truths about portfolios that many have missed, aren’t considering, or are just deliberately ignoring. It should be noted that there will be overlap among some factors. Here we go!
Portfolios Are Misleading
Portfolios often emphasize aesthetic appeal over substantive work, which can lead to biased evaluations. This focus on visual design can overshadow the true essence of UX, which is rooted in functionality and user-centered design. In addition to placing too much weight on the wrong things, portfolios can distract those evaluating talent from focusing on the more important things that ARE NOT in the portfolio. To keep a portfolio from being misleading, interviewers should focus on what a candidate brings to the table and evaluate those things, ESPECIALLY as they pertain to how they can make the team better. Interaction skills should also be assessed. A portfolio is not likely to shed light on these factors.
Portfolios Can Foster Discrimination
Ever had someone ask you to share your “best work?” Well, for some, that “best work” may have been created a few years ago. When leaning towards aesthetic reviewing, content can have what amounts to a dated appearance. A more seasoned practitioner who shared older examples is often discriminated against, as the reviewers opt for the “more exciting” presentation of work. Unfortunately (for everyone), the “more exciting” presentation doesn’t necessarily reflect who’s best suited for the role. In most cases, this is what happens and EVERYONE suffers the consequences of this misguided decision — the team, the organization, the users/customers, and the discipline as a whole — all due to someone’s being swayed by the cult of aesthetics (among other things).
The Cult of Aesthetic Influence
Speaking of the “cult of aesthetics,” the siege against UX also gave rise to the dreaded “UX/UI” acronym. It is not, and never has been, accurate, but it provided a sense of toxic comfort, as many who viewed UX as an arm of visual design embraced it and continue to infuse the associated mindset into many UX newcomers. The main problem resulting from this misdirection involves the expectations of practitioners AND stakeholders. Do UXers care about aesthetics, and should we? The answer is obvious. UX’s focus on aesthetics is, and has always been, minuscule compared to the rest of our responsibilities. This imbalance will remain a plague until addressed by practitioners AND leaders UNTIL the masses cease to be influenced (and deceived) by aesthetics.
The Unqualified Reviewer Problem
When the siege against UX began, there was a job boom and what’s known as the “UX gold rush,” with many people seeking to get into the discipline by any means necessary. During this season, in addition to a lack of qualified individual contributors on the market, there was a lack of qualified leaders. From 2011 onward, hordes of unqualified people took on UX leadership roles (e.g., directors, managers). For several years (and to this day), many have been in a position to review portfolios AND make personnel decisions without knowing what really matters. When the UX maturity of these individuals improves, the resulting problem will dissipate—WHEN.
UX Maturity Impact on Reviews
As mentioned in the previous segment, UX maturity plays a key role in the value and weight assigned to UX portfolios, as well as in how portfolios are analyzed when presented. When UX maturity is high, portfolios are not likely to be a factor AT ALL. Many high-maturity environments don’t even ask for them. In some cases where UX maturity is high and portfolios are requested, they are reviewed and weighted properly. When UX maturity is low, too much weight is placed on them. This contributes to poor decisions being made, which can and will detrimentally impact the influence and value of the UX team within the organization.
The Fundamentals Factor
To help overcome portfolio-related pitfalls, whether someone is a leader, practitioner, or applicant, being grounded in UX fundamentals can and will help someone have the proper foundation in the discipline, optimize their ability to bring sound levels of value, and evaluate talent in the areas where it really matters. Unfortunately, focus on UX fundamentals went by the wayside when the siege against UX began—including many viewing fundamentals as “old school,” which is an absolute travesty. UX is UX. Ignore fundamentals at your own (and your team’s and the discipline’s) risk. If you strive to demonstrate your understanding of fundamentals in your portfolio, you’ll appeal to a completely different class of practitioners than those who subscribe to the cult of aesthetics.
Actions Over Aesthetics
As mentioned previously, many overemphasize the purpose and value of aesthetics in UX circles today. UX, however, is more about actions than aesthetics. It’s more about how someone processes information than aesthetics. It’s more about facilitating decision-making than aesthetics. It’s more about the perception of affordances than aesthetics. Sadly, it’s very difficult to convince many of those occupying space in UX of these facts, and their portfolios reflect this.
Cultivating Genuine Skills
This one builds on the previous fundamentals segment, but expands by presenting a challenge. How much time do you ACTUALLY and DELIBERATELY spend on cultivating and growing your UX acumen? In addition to this serving as a key factor to personal development, it can also help facilitate and foster conversations that occur during the interviewing process. I have been a hiring manager in the past. I have always placed more weight on someone’s ability to engage in genuine conversations about the discipline. It helps provide insights about a person’s true commitment to and passion for the discipline. It’s also something a person can’t rehearse or fake their way through the moment. When you’re genuine, you’ll come across as genuine.
Prioritizing a Comprehensive Understanding of UX
For some portfolio presenters, their supposed understanding is confined to what’s in said portfolio. In many cases, this reduces one’s portfolio to a script and the presenter to being an actor. Many such people don’t have a broad and comprehensive understanding of UX. They only have a thorough understanding of their “script.” Want to excel during an interview and a portfolio presentation? Have a comprehensive understanding of UX in your proverbial hip pocket. In other words, be genuine and have a broad understanding of the discipline—especially as it pertains to how you’ve applied various UX methods in your work. After all, having been there, you should be able to speak accurately and expertly about what you did. Your portfolio is just a jumping-off point.
The EQ Divide
While many focus on tools, specializations, and the like, emotional intelligence (EQ) is an under-the-radar yet major differentiator for UX professionals. EQ helps with relationship building. EQ helps manage the pitfalls, challenges, and political ebbs and flows encountered during UX work. Interestingly, though representing one’s acumen regarding this topic can be done, many of those evaluating portfolios are so focused on other factors that they will ignore or won’t recognize it. Don’t let this discourage you. If you possess EQ skills, finding ways to demonstrate this in your portfolio (and/or providing jumping-off points) can help you address this differentiator.
Conclusion
When I landed my first full-time UX role in 2005, I was asked to provide a portfolio for the first time. I didn’t balk. I just created a collection of the work that I felt best represented my personal value proposition.
When that company decided to move its headquarters, I saw the writing on the wall. I also knew that I’d reached the ceiling of my personal development via that organization, so I decided to move on. In 2007, I interviewed with and was hired by one of the largest digital design agencies in the metropolitan Detroit area. I wasn’t asked to present a portfolio. I’ve done exercises since that time, but wasn’t asked to provide a portfolio for review again until about 4–5 years ago—a gap of about 15 years.
In addition to portfolios becoming weaponized for discrimination, the lack of UX maturity in leadership ranks has reduced an oft-flawed means of evaluation to nothing. Do you still need a portfolio? Well, it’s a necessary evil. The value placed on portfolios, however, is worth questioning.
I strongly encourage you to be aware of the pitfalls associated with portfolios, while preparing yourself to fully represent who you are and what you bring to the table.
About Dr. Darren
Dr. Darren Hood is a 30+-year UX practitioner with a broad professional footprint across B2B and B2C operations and holds a Ph.D. in Educational Leadership. In addition to serving as a UX manager, individual contributor, and freelancer in the business world, Darren is serving or has served as an adjunct professor at Michigan State University, Champlain College, Brandeis University, Lawrence Tech University, Kent State University, UCLA, and Harrisburg University. He is also one of the authors featured in “97 Things Every UX Practitioner Should Know.” He also regularly speaks at conferences and mentors people worldwide.
You can hear more from Darren by visiting the KaizenUX Medium blog landing page, the KaizenUX YouTube channel, or by listening to The World of UX with Darren Hood wherever podcasts are available.
Visit KaizenTees to check out my UX ≠ UI merch.
