Critique is not review, and many other thoughts on an overlooked practice

TL; DR:

Critique and review are different. 🗣️Critique is simply about making the work better. Review is about assessing readiness for the next stage in the process.

Healthy critique requires ✨psychological safety✨. To make the work better means being able to discuss it openly, and frankly, warts and all. To do so in a constructive fashion requires that everyone involved know there will be no retribution for their work or commentary, as long as it's offered in good faith, and in the interest of learning and doing better.

Perhaps the biggest barrier to conducting critique is 🧱structural: 'making space' for critique by finding time, getting the right people in the room, and ensuring that the time is well-spent. When done ad hoc, the effort necessary feels greater than the reward. So, make it an ✅operational priority, something that just happens as part of the flow of work. This post is longer than usual, so use the table of contents to the right to navigate.

Why critique matters

Critique is essential for UX/design practice. Like, literally: it's at the essence of design.

"The practice of design is creation and criticism in dialogue with one another. And I think we’ve emphasized creation and completely lost the sense of criticism." Erika Hall, Finding Our Way

If you're UX/Design org wants to deliver high quality work, constructive critique practice is crucial.

I am moved to write this post because in my work across literally dozens of design organizations around the world, all have struggled handling critique effectively. Either...

• They don't conduct critique
• They conduct critique, but rarely
• They conduct what they call critique, but it's actually review

Wait? There's a difference between "critique" and "review"? Most definitely.

Critique is about making the work better.

Review is about assessing readiness for the next stage in the process.