Hard vs Soft Design
Martial arts often distinguish between “hard” and “soft” styles. Hard styles focus on direct, powerful strikes—punches and kicks designed to break through an opponent’s defences through sheer force. This is the approach many design leaders take when "battling" their organisations for greater influence, hoping to raise design's impact by pushing hard for recognition. While understandable, this forceful, head-on approach can be counterproductive, especially when designers face opponents with more authority or entrenched interests.
Soft styles of martial arts provide a different path, one that may resonate more deeply with design leaders. In disciplines like Aikido or Tai Chi, practitioners don’t confront their opponents with raw power; instead, they work with the opponent’s momentum, using circular, fluid movements to evade attacks and gently redirect energy. Rather than overpowering, they destabilise, throwing the opponent off balance by leveraging their own force. Hard styles like Karate may suit larger, stronger fighters, but soft forms are often favoured by smaller or older practitioners who find success through adaptability and finesse rather than brute strength.
Designers, in many ways, are like these Tai Chi masters. We aren’t going to “win” through brute force or sheer authority; instead, our strength lies in flexibility, adaptability, and redirecting organisational momentum in ways that favor design.
Consider, for example, a product management process you disagree with. The hard approach would be to confront it head-on and push for immediate change, but if it’s something the product and engineering teams are committed to, this is likely a losing battle. A soft approach would be to adopt the process wholeheartedly, then use its existing energy and momentum to influence outcomes in ways that align with design goals. By working within the flow rather than against it, we can achieve meaningful change without exhausting ourselves in unwinnable battles.