作为最近了解UX和设计团队的国家的最新调查的一部分,我们向UX和设计专业人员询问了研究人员对其组织的设计者和开发人员的比例。虽然调查有557名受访者,但只有377人答复了他们公司的研究人员,设计师和开发人员的问题;本文基于他们的答案。(这些问题是可选的。)调查受访者是设计 - 社区成员(80%确定的设计或研发为主要作用),来自各种行业,在各种规模的公司工作。

This article presents typical researcher–to–designer and designer–to–developer ratios, as well as relationships between ratios and indicators of overall team impact and maturity. The presentation style of the ratios themselves is inspired byDr. Jeff Sauro’s reporting style for his findings from mid 2017.

Spoiler:报告的比率的频率分布仍然相似;但是,有指示组织跨组织的设计师到开发者的比例。

设计师与开发商的比例

报告的设计师对显影剂比率广泛分布,如下所示。然而,这是鼓励的,其中一半的受访者(50%)报告,他们组织的每10名开发人员至少有1名设计师。进一步的令人放心,不到10%的受访者报告在一个组织工作,比率仅为每50个开发人员或更多的1名设计师。

frequency distribution of reported designer to developer ratios
Half of respondents reported having at least 1 designer for every 10 developers at their organization.

The Researcher–to–Designer Ratio

There was also variability in the reported researcher–to–designer ratio, and similar encouraging patterns emerged: About half of respondents (54%) reported having at least 1 researcher for every 10 designers, and only 8% reported having 1 researcher for every 50 designers or more.

frequency distribution of reported researcher to designer ratios
About half of respondents (54%) reported having at least 1 researcher for every 10 designers.

It’s worth addressing that 13% of respondents were not sure of the designer–to–developer ratios at their organizations, and an even greater amount (24%) were unsure of their researcher–to–designer ratio. Given the relative complexity of many of the organizations surveyed, including overall organization size, team distribution and alignment, and variance in UX maturity — we know about these factors from additional questions asked within the survey — this lack of knowledge is not surprising. Designers or researchers on siloed teams within large, sprawling organizations may be able to answer these questions for the limited sample of their small team or project, but grapple with answering them when it comes to their entire organization.

The “Typical” Ratio: Has It Evolved?

The ratios with the highest number of responses were:

  • 研究员与设计师的比例:1 researcher per 5 or fewer designers (37%)
  • Designer–to–developer ratio:1 designer per 10 or fewer developers (50%)

因此,我们可以合理地将这些最常见的响应扩展到5个研究人员到5名设计人员到50名开发人员(1:5:50)的比例,如下所示。这一发现表明,研究人员 - 设计师到显影剂比例为1:5:100,Sauro博士在3年前报告。(好消息!)

The extended ratio represented with dots: 1 researcher to 5 designers to 50 developers
The most typical researcher–to–designer–to–developer ratio reported in the survey was 1:5:50.

与Sauro博士报告的相对较近的数据相比,设计师到开发人员比较似乎正在增加的事实是合理的,特别是考虑到我们自己的发现the number of UX professionals is increasing exponentially worldwide. As management recognizes that proper UX methodology substantially improves product quality, it stands that investments inscaling UX design-包括用户体验设计师的数量将会增加,设计师与开发者的比例也会随之增加。

Comparison to historical data, however, reveals relative stabilization. The extended 1:5:50 ratio equates to a typical percentage of 11% out of all staff working in UX, counting both researchers and designers (6 out of 56). In our2007 study on the ROI of usability, we found that the typical proportion of project budgets spent on UX was 10%–13% and concluded that best practices call for spending around 10% of a project’s budget on usability. Though we are comparing budget allocation in 2007 to staff allocation in 2020, there is little change in the typical overall allocation of UX resources over the past 13 years when taking this view.

Of course, these ratios will vary across teams, as the complexity and breadth of the product’s UI and domain influence what proportion of resources is appropriate for UX.

Designer-to-Developer比率如何与UX成熟和影响有关?

In addition to asking respondents about the researcher–to–designer and designer–to–developer ratios at their organizations, we asked them to agree or disagree with a number of statements that may indicate organizational UX maturity and impact.

为了轻松比较报告的比率与与这些陈述的一致意义之间的关系,报告的比率被缩合为3组:

  • 1:50 or lower ratio (relatively low ratio)
  • 1:11 to 1:50 (medium ratio)
  • 1:10 or higher ratio (relatively high ratio)
Designer–to–developer ratios condensed into 3 groupings

Designer–to–Developer Ratios and Impact

作为影响的衡量标准,我们要求受访者表明他们的团队是否已验证对许多指标的影响,包括:

  • 产品可用性
  • 产品的视觉设计
  • Cross-product consistency
  • Customer satisfaction
  • 品牌股权或忠诚
  • Revenue

As shown in the table below, there appears to be no effect of the designer–to–developer ratio on the team’s ability to impact these key business metrics.

Percentage of respondents across grouped ratios who reported having impact on various key business metrics (Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.)

Even accounting for the large error margins for the 1:50 or lower designer–to–developer group (this was a much smaller group size than the other two groups), the percentage of respondents who reported having proven impact on these metrics did not vary much across the 3 different ratio groups.

设计师到开发者比率和成熟度

We also asked participants whether or not they agreed to a number of statements that could be indicators of overall UX maturity, including:

  • Design consistency:在所有团队中使用共享模式库或前端样式指南。
  • Knowledge sharing: Research insights are shared in one place (e.g., a platform or digital location) that all team members can easily access.
  • 文档:A standard design process is documented and shared with external partners.
  • Value:内部设计团队成员和外部合作伙伴都很好地理解和商定了设计的作用。
  • Measurement:Design work is accountable to a set of consistent design metrics.
  • 社会化:设计团队成员有一种一致的方式来定义和积极分享与外部合作伙伴设计的角色和价值。
Percentage of respondents across grouped ratios who reported agreed with maturity statements (Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.)

如上表所示,出现了类似的趋势:设计师到开发者的比率与与成熟日常陈述的协议的可能性之间没有连接。

UX设计团队的数据是什么意思?

This data reveals 3 key take-away’s for UX design teams who wonder what the ideal researcher–to–designer–to–developer ratio is for their organization:

1.研究人员 - 设计师对开发者的比率正在增加

Regardless of its relationship to UX impact or maturity, the researcher–to–designer–to–developer ratio appears to be increasing, which is good news for design teams striving to build a development process that includes UX. When compared to the relatively recent data from Dr. Sauro, the ratio has increased from 1:5:100 to 1:5:50 within the span of about 3 years. Hopefully, this data can serve as a benchmark to continue to compare the evolution of these ratios in another few years.

2.继续稳定UX资源分配

When compared to historical data (our own study from 2007), the percent of resources allocated, whether that be staff or budget, continues to hover at around 10%. (The current estimate is 11%, but given the uncertainty of the estimate, we should not make much of the one percentage point difference.)

There is a huge observed growth in the number of UX professionals in the world. The way to reconcile these two observations is the main growth in the field has come from ever-more countries, industries, and companies embracing UX. Companies that do zero UX are not represented in our surveys, so the numbers we report are not the average of all companies in the world, but the average for those companies that have some amount of recognized UX activities. If we had a way of estimating across所有companies, including those that don’t care about UX and thus don’t answer UX surveys, then the ratios would be dramatically worse (dragged down by the many zero-UX companies) but would have improved over time (because there are fewer zero-UX every year.)

3. A Higher Designer–to–Developer Ratio Alone Does Not Mean Greater Maturity or Impact

Two data points — teams’ self-reported ability to impact key business metrics and likelihood of agreement with UX maturity statements — appear to have little to no relationship with a team’s designer–to–developer ratio.

这张带走对设计团队至关重要:A typical ratio alone does not ensure greater organizational impact, better designs, or more usable products.要了解您的设计团队的成熟度或影响力,可以更好地衡量对关键业务指标,设计团队健康的影响,以及设计质量,可用性和用户满意度的变化 - 而不是团队比率。更多的设计和UX工作人员可以支持团队提高这些措施的能力,但不能保证更好的UX或更大的影响。

Additional Considerations

本文只考虑德的影响gner–to–developer ratio on self-reported indicators of design-team impact and maturity. Though the data does not suggest a connection between the ratio and these measures, an open question remains: Does a higher ratio influence additional important factors, such as fullfilment and satisfaction of design-team members? Additional research could answer this question.