Blog

Systems Over Surfaces

In 2025 we need to start building systems for content consumption and input instead of focusing only on apps, websites, SEO and other surface level tactics. Too many people get caught up in trying to learn how to design liquid glass or chat UI design patterns, which drives me mad. Unless you are working for Apple designing their UI, there is no need for you to learn how to design glass. You would not use it for anything of your own. You will use their glass UI when you have to, but otherwise your designs should reflect your brand’s CI, not Apple’s visual language.

The same applies to chat UI patterns. These exist for the platforms that use them, so unless you are designing for those platforms there is little point in spending time creating patterns like this. These are surface decisions. Your focus should be on your client’s needs, on how they are going to distribute information and instruction for consumption, and on how you will get engagement through input and interaction. That means building systems that work across multiple contexts and not being distracted by trends that exist only at the surface.

Learning from others is valuable, but the goal should be to centralise all of your content so it is consistent and avoids unnecessary repetition. Once the content foundation is in place, you need a way to capture input, whether that comes through text, voice, gestures or interactions that result in a response, action and reaction. This is where systems thinking pays off because a strong system can adapt to many different surfaces without being redesigned each time.

When we talk about content consumption in this context, we are not talking about endlessly scrolling through a feed on Instagram or TikTok. We are talking about business and visibility. Every company should have a central resource where its content can be stored and distributed no matter how or where it is consumed. That might be on mobile, on desktop websites, inside apps, through Google search or via ChatGPT. It might be read or listened to, presented in words or in visuals. It might need a rich interface, or it might not need one at all. Whatever the format, it needs to be consistent, accessible, and able to adapt to different environments without losing clarity or impact.

Once you have addressed how content will be consumed, you must think about how people will interact with it. What will the input look like, and how will that input influence what is consumed or how the user engages? Will they add a product to a cart, submit a form, leave a review, or trigger a specific action in a system? These are system level decisions that must work across many surfaces. The possibilities for capturing and responding to input are countless and they change depending on where, when and how the interaction happens.

This is the new frontier and it is still largely unknown. I am not offering fixed solutions because there is no single interface any more. We have to design for many possible environments and sometimes we will be designing for no interface at all. With the promise of non screen devices becoming a reality, and with the likelihood of limited visual opportunities such as subtle metrics or visual cues in something like meta glasses, we need to start preparing for a completely different type of interactive experience. That is only possible if we think in systems, not in surfaces.

Which is why it makes no sense to waste time learning how to make liquid glass effects or trendy chat UI patterns unless you are specifically designing for the companies and platforms that use them. Instead, invest your time in understanding how content will be seen, how it will be distributed, and what people are actually going to interact with in the context of your brand or your client’s business. Build systems that can adapt to any surface because in the years ahead those surfaces will keep changing and the systems you create now will decide whether you can keep up.

Design Systems Should Power Prototypes

Design systems have helped create consistency but they have not done enough to support prototyping. Designers are still limited by the tools available to them. Most systems provide a UI kit, instructions on how components work, and some code snippets for developers. Few go beyond this to support rapid prototyping and testing.

Developers rarely work closely enough with design to help produce testable outputs. Designers are left working in isolation without working prototypes while still expected to test and validate ideas.

Some teams are investing in better tools but most of what is being discussed still sounds theoretical. There is little that has actually landed. With the current focus on AI, many stakeholders are hesitant to invest in more foundational improvements.

AI is likely where the biggest opportunity lies. A well defined design system already includes the rules. Designers should be able to describe what they need and the system should be able to build it. There is no need to redraw or re spec every time a new feature is added.

Even without AI, a simple builder should be achievable. Not a chat interface. Just a basic drag and drop system driven by the design system where a designer can select components and apply properties. It should not even require a designer but to prevent abuse and poor decisions designers should still be in control. A working prototype should be easy to create.

Coded and interactive would be ideal. Even if it uses dummy data it should be realistic enough to test and get real feedback. That feedback should be tracked through interaction data and human observation. Findings can then be shared, iterated on, and tested again.

Tools should get out of the way. The goal is to understand problems and design the right solution. Designers who care about visuals can contribute by refining components in the system. Those interested in interaction can focus on motion and behaviour. Those focused on UX can work faster with better tools.

There is value in getting something on screen quickly. Watching users interact with an idea and seeing where it works or fails is what matters. The process, tools, and systems exist to support that, not get in the way.

If you work on a design system ask what more you could be doing to get ideas into users hands faster.

Beyond Design Systems

Design systems have become standard practice across most modern teams. Ask anyone what a design system is and you’ll hear the same few things: a centralised repository of components, visual styles, documentation, and usage rules. It’s a way to speed up production, drive consistency, and align teams working on digital products. Most of the time, that means some UI kits in Figma and a coded library of reusable front-end components. Useful, but often treated as a fixed asset library rather than a foundation for creative thinking.

Depending on who you speak to, design systems are either a lifesaver or a creative constraint. Designers might feel boxed in by too much rigidity. Engineers may appreciate the efficiency. Brand teams enjoy the consistency. All of these perspectives are valid. They come from different needs. The real value isn’t the assets themselves. It’s the system-level thinking that enables teams to work from the same foundation while still leaving space for interpretation and originality when it’s appropriate.

Systems Create Trust

When design systems are done well, they drive trust. Not just with the customer, but inside the organisation too. Everyone is working from the same visual and behavioural playbook. Patterns are predictable. Teams aren’t reinventing basic components every week. This makes everything smoother, particularly at scale. There’s no need for twelve versions of the same button, each with a different hover state. As long as the system leaves space to go beyond the default when needed, it works. The value comes from shared standards, not enforced uniformity.

Design systems should also carry the rationale behind every component. Why a card looks the way it does. What behaviour is expected from a modal. What principles guide these decisions. A strong system communicates this context clearly. It’s not just documentation, it’s design leadership at scale.

Extend the System Beyond the Interface

Visual components are only one layer of the system. There’s no reason to stop there. Voice and tone are just as critical to brand coherence as colour and typography. Yet they’re often treated as secondary, or worse, left undocumented entirely.

A robust system should provide clear guidance on language. Not just grammar and phrasing, but the intent behind it. What the brand sounds like. What words should be used. Which ones should be avoided. This is especially valuable for teams producing interface copy, marketing materials, and legal content. If a brand’s look is tightly governed but its language is all over the place, trust erodes. Customers notice the disconnect.

Even better is when the system supports the production process itself. Legal disclaimers, product descriptions, and error messages are often repeated, tweaked, and reviewed under pressure. Having templates, tone guidelines, and an approval system in place dramatically improves both quality and speed. A writing system is just as important as a visual one. Most brands don’t have one.

Production Environments Need Structure Too

In high-pressure production environments such as internal creative teams, in-house agencies, or large-scale marketing teams, efficiency is non-negotiable. Yet these teams are often operating with scattered resources. Brand guides are handed out in PDF format. Visual assets are dumped into folders. Nobody knows what’s approved, what’s current, or what’s been deprecated.

These brand environments need their own system. Not just asset storage, but proper organisation. Marketing asset creation often lacks the same level of care applied to digital product design. A system for social templates, video formats, typography rules, and usage dos and don’ts is not hard to set up, but it’s rarely done with intention. Instead, teams scramble under deadline pressure, redoing work that should have been templated.

When I worked in an in-house agency, I kept thinking how much smoother things would be if we’d defined our formats in advance. Not just the look, but the production specs. That way we wouldn’t lose hours figuring it out every time. It’s basic design ops. Yet many brands haven’t taken ownership of this foundational layer.

Design Systems as Internal Products

When working in agency environments, the default suggestion was often to adopt an off-the-shelf design framework. While helpful for some, they often came with a steep learning curve and felt too abstract or generic. Instead, we built our own design systems tailored to the work we actually did. Not as a replacement for creativity, but as a baseline to launch from.

These weren’t complex design systems. They were smart templates for components we used frequently. They helped us move faster, produce more consistently, and freed up time to focus on the more complex or unique aspects of a brief. That’s the point. Systems aren’t just about constraints. They serve as multipliers. They let people spend less time re-solving solved problems and more time doing the work that adds real value.

It’s not about sameness. It’s about structure. And that structure can be a huge enabler for creativity, especially when it’s flexible enough to evolve.

Systems Beyond the Screen

Interfaces are no longer limited to screens. Design systems must evolve accordingly. As interaction moves beyond desktop, tablet, and mobile into voice, wearables, and emerging input formats, the system has to do more than standardise pixels. It has to define sound, behaviour, intent, and tone across multiple modalities.

Auditory and conversational interfaces are already part of the experience. AI assistants, voice UIs, and LLM-powered tools are becoming more common in product and service delivery. This demands a new kind of system thinking. The golden thread is no longer just the visual language. It’s the consistent application of a brand’s voice, structure, and intent across every touchpoint, in every format.

To make this work, brands will need systems that train AI models in how to speak, what to prioritise, and how to uphold the values and tone of the company. GPT-style tools will need structure, not just input. A prompt library, content hierarchy, tone calibration, and dialogue frameworks all become part of the system. These help maintain clarity, intent, and identity at scale.

An AI agent operating on behalf of a brand must know when to offer help, when to stay silent, how to escalate, and what not to say. If these models are to become extensions of a brand, then the system must give them a framework to act within. That turns the design system into something closer to an operating system. One that powers intelligent branded experiences instead of static UIs.

Ownership of this work will vary. Some companies may form new roles and teams to manage it. Others will rely on cross-functional collaboration between design, content, brand, product, and legal. Agencies may build the foundation. AI tools may help evolve it. Regardless of who maintains it, these systems must move beyond visuals to remain useful in the years ahead.

Keep the System Flexible

The challenge going forward is balance. A good system creates consistency, but not at the cost of creativity. A loose system invites interpretation, but can lead to chaos. Somewhere in between is a system that scales with the organisation, evolves with the work, and supports its use across both human and machine-driven interactions.

The best systems are not rigid rulebooks or chaotic archives. They are structured foundations that support better thinking, clearer communication, and more meaningful experiences, wherever and however they are delivered.

What is a design system?

A design system is a living ecosystem that serves the teams working on deploying products. As a central repository, it can be a combination of a coded components, design guides, brand assets and rules of engagement. This is usually an independent project run by a dedicated team who maintain the overall repository, code all the components, deploy updates and create all the assets for consumption by the teams across an organization.

The following are some of the most common categories within a design system.

Styleguide Commonly referred to as a living style guide is a visual reference of all the design assets that make up a brand and it’s supporting media and include things like colour, type, layout and other assets to help the design team consistently utilize the brand assets. This is constantly growing as more and more assets are added and the brand evolves.

Visual Language The brand will share the visual assets and their usage to best communicate effectively across media and contain a variety of produced assets such as video, icons, illustrations, and photography.

Design Language Every great design starts with a definition of the values and the standards to which a design effectively comes together and communicates seamlessly across multiple media. Principles are shared to help teams better understand why decisions were made and how best to apply them.

Pattern Library A coded repository of atomic-like assets for developers to easily consume to reduce the amount of churn and repeated assets that need to align across a project and function in a consistent way. This is usually html and css and some basic javascript. It can be, but not necessarily include complicated coded assets such as angularJS, jQuery and React, as technology changes so quickly code might be redundant before going live. The coded assets are both visual, functional and can be executable.

Voice & Tone Effective content and communication requires a brands voice and tone, while also including guidelines on how to effectively add content to communicate consistently across media.

Brand Guidelines Brand assets can be downloaded and appropriate guidelines shared to ensure consistent brand usage and avoid dilution of the brand and incorrect deployment creating confusion when developing brand assets.

Added to that, guidelines, legal documentation, how to contribute, get support and update logs are essential to maintaining a design system.

I hope you found this very basic guideline useful. Design systems are ever increasing in their detail and functionality and I’m sure in the future I will explain in more detail all the new features you can add and why you would need them. Whether you’re a designer, a developer or running teams and projects, a design system has to be the best way to create a consistent product, increase productivity and align your teams to your companies product vision.