How I’m Using AI
A silhouette of a person with data flowing into their mind. Made with AI
AI has already proven to be a powerful tool. I use it daily for tasks like creating to-do lists based on my energy levels, writing introductions to potential clients, and even getting feedback on my YouTube thumbnails. It can feel like having a personal assistant who’s always on-call. But as impressive as it is, something about the experience still feels a little strange.
As a designer who thinks a lot about user experience, I’ve started to ask myself a few very real-world questions:
Is AI really helping me get things done?
When I collaborate with AI to form a plan, how much of that plan do I actually implement?
And when I do take action, how much of the AI output am I truly using?
In other words, am I really saving time with AI…or does it just feel like I am?
My Tools
ChatGPT
The tool I use most is ChatGPT. I have a Plus subscription and it’s easily my most reliable assistant. I use it to help shape ideas, structure my thinking, and push my writing forward.
For example, most of my blog posts start with a rough draft that I’ve written and then drop into ChatGPT. I ask it to build out the idea more fully, and what I get back is a sort of written wireframe. It’s a rough but structured version of what I had in mind. Then I go through and revise it in my voice. UX designers should recognize this approach. It’s the same process we use to go from wireframes to high-fidelity mockups. ChatGPT is like a very capable design partner who doesn’t mind putting the polish on my rough idea.
I also use it to help plan my content releases. I’ll drop in everything I’m hoping to get done and ask it to create a strategy for the week. That output helps me time-box my tasks and focus on what needs to happen right now, not what needs to happen tomorrow.
It also helps me run the business side of my UX consulting. From drafting intro emails to refining service descriptions for my website, ChatGPT helps me find the tone and clarity I’m after. And when it comes to social media, I use it to help me figure out which messages should come from my personal voice versus my brand voice.
UX Pilot
UX Pilot is another tool I rely on. I started on the free plan and immediately saw value, so I upgraded to the annual Pro plan. That might surprise some people. I’m a UX and product designer after all, shouldn’t I be able to do this stuff without a tool like UX Pilot? And doesn’t using it put me out of a job?
I don’t think so.
Every design I’ve generated from UX Pilot has been a starting point. I never use the output as-is. I treat it like a napkin sketch. Something to respond to and iterate on but not the final concept. The generated output sparks conversation, and that conversation leads to better ideas. And each time the design shifts or a new idea is introduced, I can go back to UX Pilot and use it to generate more refined starting points.
V0, Replit, and Loveable
These are tools I’m still exploring. I haven’t committed to any of the paid tiers, but I’m intrigued by the potential.
The most exciting possibility is that these tools could allow me to bypass Figma in some scenarios. If I can sketch out a wireframe on paper or iPad, feed that into UX Pilot, and generate a high-res layout that follows the company’s design system — then hand that off to V0 or Replit for production-level code — that’s a game changer.
It means I could go from rough concept to developer-ready handoff in a much tighter loop. These tools also make it easier to generate interactive prototypes that are more realistic than what Figma’s prototyping tools typically offer.
In-App AI
I do most of my writing in Craft, which has built-in AI features. Sometimes I use those. Other times I use Apple’s writing tools. They’re fine for first drafts, especially if I’m stuck.
Figma’s AI, on the other hand, has been a letdown. The marketing promises a lot, but in reality it feels more like Siri — useful if you say the magic phrase exactly right, but useless in most other cases. I’d love it if Figma could generate realistic placeholder content or use real-world sounding text to ground layouts, but it rarely delivers.
The Dangerous Illusion of Skipping the Process
One of the biggest red flags I’ve seen as AI becomes more accessible is the way it enables bad leadership habits.
Some leaders already treat design like a vending machine. Insert idea, get a pretty mockup. They don’t engage with the problem or the process and they just want execution. Now with AI, those same leaders feel validated. They don’t need a designer anymore. AI will give them exactly what they asked for.
The problem no one seems to see is that when you eliminate the thinking part of design, you also eliminate the challenge to your assumptions. You eliminate discovery. You eliminate context. And you eliminate validation.
Now your blind spots go from small cracks in your vision to full-on blinders. You skipped over the messy part where ideas are questioned and refined, and now you’re shocked when your product doesn’t resonate.
And before someone chimes in with, “We put it in front of some users and they said it was good,” let’s be honest here, asking someone what they think after the thing is built is not feedback, it’s politeness. No one’s going to tell you your crayon drawing is ugly.
The real test comes after launch. That’s when you find out whether your product actually fits a need or if you just built something fast and loud.
Conclusion
AI is powerful. Sometimes it feels like it’s launching you into space. But after the excitement fades, I often stop and ask: how much did I actually get done today?
It’s easy to confuse planning with progress. It’s easy to live inside these tools and feel like you’re covering miles of ground, only to look down and realize you’re on a treadmill.
I don’t see AI as a threat to good design. I see it as the ultimate multi-tool. But like any tool, it’s only as valuable as the person using it. Skipping the hard parts of creation isn’t streamlining, it’s sleepwalking.
💬 Join the conversation on LinkedIn
