top of page

Designing for Impact: Metrics That Matter

  • Writer: Alex Dihel
    Alex Dihel
  • Jun 29
  • 2 min read

Updated: Sep 25

TL;DR

Across three major initiatives, I led operational changes that improved structure, speed, and clarity in our design org. These changes drove measurable results: role clarity up 137%, onboarding time down 51%, QA rework down 83%, stakeholder satisfaction up 44%, and about $14.5K saved in tooling, while maintaining full team retention during organizational restructuring.

Window and sources: quarter-length windows per case study, Jira and intake analytics, internal audits, pulse surveys, license review.



Why Design Needs Metrics - Beyond Aesthetics

Design quality shows up in how teams work, not only how things look. The right metrics reveal where friction lives, how work flows, and whether changes actually help people do their jobs.

This summary highlights three initiatives and links to full case studies for the details behind each result.



Organizational Clarity Drives Retention and Confidence

When roles and ownership are unclear, speed and morale suffer. We stabilized the team during an active transition by clarifying scopes, setting a simple cadence, and making ownership visible.


Results:

  • Team role clarity, 40% → 95% (+137%)

  • Team retention, 100% maintained during a high-risk transition

  • Collaboration rating, +43%

  • Manager confidence in resourcing and scope, 45% → 88%


Definitions: role clarity is the “I know what I own” survey item, collaboration rating is a cross-discipline survey index.



Systemized Design, Streamlined QA

Inconsistency across teams and repetitive QA cycles slowed delivery. We rebuilt the operating stack, a shared playbook with Figma templates, async QA, and clear routing so designers focus on meaningful work.


Results:

  • Brand guideline adoption, 46% → 92%

  • Onboarding time for new designers, 3.5 weeks → 1.7 weeks (51% reduction)

  • QA task reopen rate, 18% → 3% (83% reduction)

  • Brief-to-QA cycle time, 57% faster

  • Visual consistency, +49% from internal audits


Attribution: shared playbook and templates lifted adoption, the QA split and async checklists cut reopen rates and cycle time.

Read the full case study → Scaling Design with Systems, Not Stress



Operational Efficiency Without Creative Compromise

Scattered intake, vague briefs, and tool sprawl created waste. We centralized intake with templates and SLAs, tuned triage, and audited licenses to remove confusion without blocking creative work.


Results:

  • Brief completeness at intake, 42% → 87%

  • Time to first review, 5.5 days → 2.1 days (62% reduction)

  • Unplanned scope changes decreased

  • Stakeholder satisfaction with QA, 48% → 87%

  • Tooling savings, about $14.5K (year-to-date)


Attribution: the intake funnel and templates improved brief quality and on-time delivery, the license audit removed waste while keeping access for specialized work.




Bottom Line

Systems make creative work easier. With clear roles, a shared playbook, async QA, and lightweight governance, teams move faster, keep quality high, and avoid burnout.

For details and methods, read the three case studies above, leadership through transition, scaling with systems, and streamlining ops without sacrificing creativity.

 
 
bottom of page