The “right problem” problem

By Roxi Nicolussi • February 2026

I have a love-hate relationship with the internet. Love: The internet helped me come into my queer identity and find community. Hate: it is a place of death threats and live-streaming hate crimes. That tension — between the intention of what we build and the real effects it has — is at the heart of what I call the “right problem” problem: we’re often solving problems that don’t really exist, or solving them in ways that create bigger problems.

Design doesn’t start and end at a pixel. When we design something, we design its impact. There are several common patterns I’ve seen across projects, big and small, that lead to solving the wrong problem in the wrong way(s);

We become producers, not questioners. If you’ve been on product teams, you’ve seen it: the highest-paid person in the room has an idea, and the rest get busy building it.

Second, we prioritize speed, novelty and “shipping” over consequences. Deceptive patterns are everywhere in trending apps; we design nudges and dark patterns that advantage short-term metrics at the cost of trust and dignity.

Third, we think short-term. We solve a visible pain point because it feels urgent and brag- able. We rarely pause to ask whether it’s the right solution or look toward the root problem.

So what can we do differently? Here are pragmatic shifts I use with teams that help move from hammering to helping.

Throw out your solution-focused.

Do not assume the solution is a UI. Ask for a blank canvas: what is the real job to be done? This forces you to consider service changes, policy tweaks, communication strategies or incentives before defaulting to a new product.

Zoom in and zoom out.

Use service blueprints to map the full system: people, channels,
processes, data flows, and policies. When I map workflows across 30+ teams, the value isn’t pretty diagrams — it’s discovering intersection points where small changes make a huge difference.

Think in futures over features.

Futures thinking pushes teams beyond “what’s next” into “what could happen.” This doesn’t predict the future; it identifies signposts and helps you design resilient options. If one future brings an ethical hazard, you can steer toward solutions that don’t.

Ask the right questions — and keep asking them.

When someone hands you a solution, interrogate it:

• Why are we building this?
• Who benefits — and who might be harmed? How will it be misused?
• How will we measure success beyond vanity metrics?
• Have we considered non-digital alternatives?
• Are we the right people to build this?

If the answers are thin or evasive, pause.

Push for pilots, experiments, or policy work that validates the need before committing resources.

Design with accountability.

An explicit code of ethics helps teams call out when work crosses a line. Mike Monteiro created a Designers’ Code of Ethics that is a great place to start.

Small changes, measured over time.

Outcomes beat outputs. A hundred small, tracked interventions across a system can outweigh one shiny feature. Don’t be seduced by portfolio showpieces; build an evidence base that your work actually improves people’s lives.

Redistribute power in the room.

Make space for lived experience and decouple influence from job title. Include the people who know the problem space the best.

Designer, you are powerful.

Design with intention. Ask the difficult questions.
Think bigger than the thing in front of you.

The people we impact are not edge cases — they are real humans like me, like you, who live complicated lives at the intersection of technology, policy and culture. We have the power to shape what that future looks like. Let’s use it well.