Pattern: Design Dimension Scoring

Pattern: Design Dimension Scoring

Category: Quality Assurance Source: garrytan/gstack (/plan-design-review) Status: Cataloged Evaluation: RD-0013

When to Use

When reviewing a design (UI, architecture, workflow, deliverable layout) and a subjective "looks good" is insufficient. Provides a structured scoring framework that makes design quality measurable and improvement actions concrete. Useful for design reviews, client deliverable QA, and tracking design quality over time.

How It Works

  • Define dimensions: Select 5-8 design quality dimensions relevant to the artifact type
    • Examples: clarity, consistency, accessibility, information hierarchy, visual balance, responsiveness, brand alignment, interactivity
  • Score each dimension: Rate 0-10 with written justification for each score
    • 0-3: Critical gaps requiring immediate attention
    • 4-6: Functional but with clear improvement opportunities
    • 7-8: Good — meets professional standards
    • 9-10: Exceptional — reference quality
  • Identify gaps: Any dimension below target threshold triggers a remediation plan
    • Specific, actionable improvement steps (not vague "make it better")
    • Estimated effort for each improvement
  • Track over iterations: Re-score after improvements to verify progress

Example

The factory's intranet department page is reviewed before launch. Dimensions scored: clarity (7), consistency (8), accessibility (5), information hierarchy (6), visual balance (7), responsiveness (4). Two dimensions fall below the 6/10 threshold: accessibility (missing alt text, insufficient contrast on secondary elements) and responsiveness (layout breaks at tablet widths). Specific fixes are prescribed and re-scored after implementation: accessibility rises to 8, responsiveness to 7.

Tradeoffs

Pro Con
Makes subjective design quality measurable Scoring is still subjective — calibration needed
Creates clear improvement targets Over-scoring dimensions can lead to over-engineering
Tracks quality improvement over time Adding dimensions increases review time
Produces documentation for client deliveries Risk of "teaching to the test" — optimizing scores vs. actual quality

Factory Usage

  • Wesley (Web Designer): Score visual deliverables before client handover
  • Uma (UX Designer): Score usability dimensions for digital talent interfaces
  • Quinn (QA Engineer): Include dimension scores in QA reports for design-heavy deliverables