In order to analyze a design and whether it meets its goals, there must be agreement on the problem that needs to be solved. Agreed-upon design objectives for the work.Once boundaries are set, participants, duration, and formality can be determined. Critiques will only prove beneficial if there are unambiguous boundaries for what can and should be critiqued. Too often critiques become unwieldy due to lack of scope. Throughout this article you’ll observe 3 underlying themes of effective critiques: They can happen at any stage in a design process, and usually there will be different critique sessions for several iterations of the same design. (Both roles can involve multiple people.) Critiques can, and should be, crossdisciplinary. The presenter shares the design, while the critiquer acts as the critic, offering informed thoughts or perspectives. In a standalone critique, there are two roles: the presenter and the critiquer. In this article we will focus specifically on standalone critiques. Design reviews, in contrast, are usually evaluations of a design based on a set of heuristics they can be done by a usability expert or in a meeting held at the end of the creative process in order to gain approval and move forward. Standalone critiques are gatherings with the sole purpose of improving a particular piece of work. There are two distinct breeds of design critiques: standalone critiques and design reviews. It does not mean simply judging a design. Definition: A design critique refers to analyzing a design, and giving feedback on whether it meets its objectives.Ī design critique usually manifests as a group conversation with the ultimate goal of improving a design.