Thanks, Liora :)

My approach to questions about weaknesses is to give responses that display my ability to reflect and refine. My answers are a pragmatic evaluation of myself as I relate to my ideal of what a great designer is.

When explicitly asked to talk about my weaknesses, I framed answers similarly to the summarized examples below:

- I strive to be a helpful team member within an end-to-end design process. When working with new engineers, I tend to make assumptions about communication styles, skill level, and approaches to agile workflows. I am learning to take more time to build individual relationships that optimize my contribution and yield more efficient releases.

- I want to be chasing after the most innovative and relevant solution to a given problem. During ideation, I tend to have an initial bias for the first idea that pops into my head. I’m learning that the concept of quantity over quality is helpful here and I try to stretch myself to ideate more broadly. Although it can be uncomfortable for me to maintain this practice, it grounds me to my problem, rather than a given path to a solution.

When asked how I would improve my process, I tie to concrete examples from real projects I’ve done. I talk through what I would have done differently for that specific project, and how I plan to convert that learning into a process improvement moving forward.

I think it’s important for designers to convey their ability to reflect and critique. I find it to be a valuable exercise for combatting the temptation to forsake the best interest of the user for my own. When I am given the opportunity to present a project from my portfolio or talk through a whiteboard session, I make it a point to incorporate my reflections and learnings. This helps to convey that I’m aware of my weaknesses and that I’m leveraging them for my continued growth.