Public design systems are worth it

Remember Web 2.0? Those were the days. Blogging, RSS, open APIs everywhere. It was a true marketplace of ideas. And we all benefitted from it. Every idea shared lifted every boat in the harbor. Everyday felt like it a brought a new discovery. My rose tinted glasses may be flaring up, but I don’t think I’m alone in thinking it was a special time. A better time.

Now let’s fast forward. The marketplace went bankrupt. Sharing ideas for the sake of sharing? How quaint. We’re very much in the, “what’s in it for me?” phase of the web.

I’m not mad–I’m disappointed. Ok, fine, I’m a little mad. But this seems to be the cycle. To quote Eric Hoffer: “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”

Public design systems are our marketplace of ideas

Design systems lagged behind the web a bit, so we’ve been gleefully in the movement lifecycle. It’s been our little Web 2.0 moment where work and ideas have been open. System teams publish their work for all to see. Am I naive enough to think this hasn’t at least a little bit about self-aggrandizement? Of course not. But the benefits remain.

Public design systems have lifted all boats in the harbor. Most design system teams do the rounds to see how other teams have tackled problems. Every system that raises bar puts healthy pressure on others to meet or exceed it. This shared ecosystem may be the most important facet of the design systems practice.

But things that begin as a movement don’t stay that way.

All good things…

There’s a growing trend to close down public systems. Funny enough, the first thing I did when I left Pinterest was clone the Gestalt repo. I had this spidey sense it wouldn’t be around forever. Yes, their web codebase is still open source, but the docs have gone private. That one stung. Gestalt wasn’t the first design system to be public. It wasn’t the best one either. But it’s hat was in the ring–and that’s what mattered.

But that’s only one design system, right? Sadly, I’m hearing more chatting about mounting pressure to privatize their systems.

This is an incredibly shitty idea.

It doesn’t seem like a shitty idea

I don’t want to paint some unrealistic picture. Making a design system public is a pain in the ass. There’s plenty of crap to deal with. The obvious one is how to handle confidential/proprietary information. There’s also risk of “speaking on behalf of the company”. Documentation is a company-owned property. Is every word vetted by people with law degrees? Probably not. And let’s not forget that going public brings gobs of added work.

There are plenty more reasons where those came from. A private design makes all those issues non-issues. With that out of the way, I’ll now explain why it’s still a shitty idea.

Decisions don’t exist in a vacuum

I think a lot of teams view the public/private decision through the lens of their own benefit. Ironically they’re missing how each system exists in a larger system.

That individual decision to go dark sets a precedent. It makes it that much easier for the next team to justify doing the same. The next thing you know, public systems are rare. Then gone altogether. And everyone’s flying blind.

These decisions are infectious. And on the flip-side, other teams take notice when a system opens up. Those cases make it easier to do the same. “Everyone’s doing it” is a powerful driver in the corporate world.

Sharing a design system may feel like a drag, or a luxury. But the ability to study/source other design systems is a necessity. One that’s taken for granted. Losing this resource will make design systems work much, much harder.

Going public is an unmitigated benefit for design systems

The statement above may seem hyperbolic. I don’t think it is. Yes, private is easier–but it lowers the ceiling of potential. Significantly. Here’s how.

It’s a quality forcing function

If the 2020’s have taught us anything, it’s that a product doesn’t need to be good to be valuable. It doesn’t need to be effective. It doesn’t need to work as advertised. It needs to make money.

But here’s the thing about design systems. Their value is entirely based on being good. Design systems don’t make money. They help companies work more effectively–which makes money. They do that by being good. For design systems, good takes the shape of well designed and engineered components. Clear guidelines for implementation. A strong, intuitive developer experience. Good equates to better output in less time. That right there enables design systems to pay for themselves (and then some).

But that payback depends on a high quality system. Which is why quality has to be at the center of everything a design system team does. “Work fast and break things” is anathema.

What in the hell does this have to do with public design systems? Well, I’ll tell you. I’ve yet to find a better forcing function for design system quality than making it public. Because it turns out that people care that much more when the whole damned world can see it.

I’ve worked on private and public systems. My experience is that public systems lead to higher quality end results. Without exception. It’s public presence drives more thought and attention to what gets published. It’s not something that’s discussed–it doesn’t need to be. It’s just understood. Documentation gets one more edit. Prop names get double checked. The layout and organization of visuals get more love and attention. Everything gets an extra coat of varnish before going out the door.

And you know who benefits? Everyone. The design system team benefits because they’ve delivered something better. The broader community benefits because they get to reference it. But more than anyone, the daily users of the system benefit the most. Instead of a half-assed wiki page, they have something people are willing to put their name behind.

Work behind company lines is notoriously bad. The things that don’t see the light of day don’t get as much polish. It’s critical to place a design system in a position to get as much polish as possible. It may not feel like a system’s documentation or library is external. But all those components in the product very much are.

It may not be right. It may not be fair. But people are going to take more pride in the work that the public at large will see. It’s a tale as old as time. You can fight it, or you can work with it.

It’s easier to access and use

Do you enjoy five-factor authentication to view a website? I understand the necessity of VPNs and security measures. But why not leave that for the things that actually need to be secure?

Building an org-wide habit of reading system documentation is challenging on its own. Throwing in extra friction is just plain mean.

It’s a recruiting funnel

Gestalt’s documentation was a positive reinforcing feedback loop for quality. The public presence attracted great talent. That allowed us to hire great talent. That great talent made our system better. And since our better system was available for all to see, it attracted even more great talent.

And it’s not rocket science why. People want to know what the hell they’re getting into with a job–especially now. Being an open book has the benefit of, well, being open. You can point to your system and say, “Hey, do you want to work on that?”

It’s pretty damned sweet for the interview process as well. Applicants actually have a genuine way to prep ahead of time. They can assess the system and have a general idea of what they’d be working on. That’s a win/win in my book.

It helps make a happier design system team

I’ve discussed the challenges design system teams can have with morale. A lot of that comes down to not feeling seen. That can be blunted by having a public system. That doesn’t guarantee that they’ll gain greater visibility within their org. But there’s a good chance they’ll collect some outside eyeballs. And that can go a long way to mellow bad mojo.

It’s also worth noting that a pinch of external validation can go a long way to build up internal cred. I don’t think it’s chance that Gestalt’s outside exposure aligned with more internal visibility.

It trains the next generation of system designers

The current generation of system designers and engineers won’t be around forever. Or even in a decade. The cast needs to be continually refreshed. And let’s face it, learning design systems is effin’ hard. You know what a great learning resource is? I’ll let you guess.

Design systems are becoming a larger part of the product development process. The market isn’t flooded with skilled design system peeps. And no, AI isn’t going to fix this. We’re already short people and none of us are getting any younger.

Open design systems are the library for people wanting to get into design systems. They’re a free resource to expand their understanding. There’s no college of design systems. Bootcamps exist, but they’re bootcamps–and I’ll leave it at that. The generation who shaped design systems didn’t create universities–they built libraries. Those libraries can train the next generation once people like me age out. When the libraries go, so does the transfer of knowledge.

Public doesn’t need mean full-monty-open

Public doesn’t mean everything’s flapping in the wind. Open source is great. Source available is awesome as well. But even a closed source design system can be public through its documentation. Yes, open source/source available lends itself to better public documentation. It’s easier to connect design, guidance and implementation when code is a hyperlink away.

But documentation without code is still valuable. And not just for designers. The thinking/logic behind how to compose an interface is valuable to all disciplines. And 99% of that is not proprietary in any way.

This isn’t some all-or-nothing kind of thing. Not everything needs to be public to be public.

Just take the goddamned win

I’ve found few things more valuable for a design system than to work with the garage door open. The value may not show up in a spreadsheet. It may not pump next quarter’s goals. But it has broad and long-lasting value. It’s such a small and simple gesture–in the relative sense–for so much in return.

I see the writing on the wall and I don’t like it. What we currently have only works if enough chip in. But it’s looking like it’s too tempting to pull the cord on an “unnecessary expense”. Cord-pulling tends to be contagious.

I hope I’m wrong. Or it’s just a phase. Otherwise we’ll all be lamenting the big, fat, L in our future.