Designer Warns Against Mistaking AI Speed for Strategic Value
Tools accelerate execution, but one practitioner argues the profession still needs human judgment to determine what’s worth building.
Osman Gunes Cizmeci watches colleagues race toward AI proficiency. Figma plugins. Prompt engineering. Automated prototyping. The tools promise efficiency gains—and deliver them. What concerns him is what gets lost in the rush.
“Speed doesn’t equal strategy,” the New York–based designer said. “AI generates fifty layout options in minutes. But it can’t tell you which one solves the actual business problem.”
The distinction matters. Research from Nielsen Norman Group shows UX professionals increasingly valued for connecting design decisions to measurable outcomes. Conversion rates. Retention metrics. Customer satisfaction scores.
The Execution Trap
AI excels at tasks designers once handled manually. Component generation. Color palette suggestions. Wireframe variations. These capabilities free up time—theoretically for higher-level thinking.
But Osman Gunes Cizmeci sees a different pattern emerging. Teams produce more deliverables but invest less time understanding user needs. Prototypes multiply while research dwindles.
“You end up with beautifully executed solutions to problems nobody validated,” he said.
Industry data supports this concern. UX Design Institute’s hiring report found 77% of managers prioritize UX-specific qualifications, but problem-solving and empathy rank highest when evaluating candidates. Technical skills matter less than judgment.
What Automation Can’t Replace
Osman Gunes Cizmeci points to skills that remain distinctly human. Understanding context. Interpreting ambiguous user feedback. Balancing competing stakeholder interests. Knowing when standard patterns fail and custom solutions become necessary.
He references accessibility work as an example. AI can check color contrast ratios and flag missing alt text. But designing truly inclusive experiences requires empathy and cultural awareness—qualities algorithms struggle to replicate.
“Accessible design means understanding how different people navigate the world,” he said. “That’s not a computational problem.”
The 2026 Reality
Job postings increasingly list AI tool proficiency alongside traditional UX skills. The market wants both technical fluency and strategic thinking.
Osman Gunes Cizmeci argues designers should resist treating AI as the primary skill to develop. Instead, he advocates for what he calls “tool-agnostic competence”—the ability to solve problems regardless of which platform dominates.
“Figma could be replaced tomorrow,” he said. “Understanding user psychology won’t be.”
He sees the profession splitting into two camps. Designers who chase every new tool, constantly relearning platforms. And those who master fundamentals—research, systems thinking, business literacy—then apply whatever tools serve those ends.
The second group, he predicts, will weather industry changes more successfully.
“AI makes execution faster,” Osman Gunes Cizmeci said. “But it can’t decide what’s worth executing. That judgment remains human work.”