The market is volatile; a monolithic product organisation cannot compete. I propose a 'Two-Speed' structure: a Stability Engine to protect core P&L, and an Innovation Lab for zero-to-one AI exploration.]
Simple north star metrics have failed generative AI and true value lies not in short-term engagement, but in its reliability, alignment and long-term compliance. We need a new executive-level KPI.
Screen-centric user interface is ending. As ambient and generative AI takes over, the traditional UX funnel is quickly becoming a drag, not a core asset. Shift investment to the robust, multi-modal back-end platforms that drive real utility.
Traditional agile frameworks are proving too slow to manage the pace of AI innovation and our focus must shift from optimising operational sprints to accelerating strategic decision-making.
The current canvas-based approach to UX design has a critical problem; as GenAI models mature, the low-value work of placing pixels will be fully automated, freeing designers to focus on high-leverage system architecture. We must pivot our teams now to embrace prompt engineering and critical judgement over execution speed.
Prioritising speed over veracity with GenAI presents an untenable risk; a landmark legal judgement or new regulation will force an abrupt industry pivot. We must proactively embed grounding architectures now, transforming a liability into a sustainable strategic asset.
Design files as the source of truth is a strategic error; the cost of design lives in the hand-off gap. DesignOps must move beyond the file to establish the coded component library as the definitive contract for products.
Too many teams rush to build wireframes before defining the foundational user problem. This tactical focus creates 'Screen Debt': beautiful interfaces built on shaky strategic ground. We need to flip the process, prioritising the strategic 'why' to ensure sustainable growth.