How to evaluate design tools | Figma Blog (opens in new tab)

Choosing a design tool should be treated as a structured team project, not a simple feature comparison. The right choice depends on factors such as team size, remote distribution, workflow, collaboration needs, and existing pain points. Figma recommends a phased process that typically takes about a month and combines stakeholder input, defined criteria, hands-on testing, and documented feedback.

Phase 0: Lay the Groundwork

• Treat the evaluation like a product launch or design sprint and include it in the team’s quarterly planning.
• Create a workback schedule, allowing roughly:
  • Two weeks for preparation
  • Two weeks to test tools on short-term projects
• Set a firm decision deadline so the process can end early if one tool clearly stands out.
• Identify stakeholders across design, product, development, marketing, and project approval teams.
• Consider forming a cross-functional working group with regular check-ins and a shared communication channel.
• Document milestones, formal feedback, and informal observations in a shared workspace.
• Set expectations that adopting a new tool may require several weeks of ramp-up before productivity returns to normal.

Phase 1: Define the Problem

• Clarify what the team actually needs before comparing specific products.
• Consider team characteristics such as:
  • Size and expected growth
  • Whether members work in one office or remotely
  • Onboarding and scalability requirements
• Identify concrete pain points in the current workflow, including moments where collaboration breaks down.
• Gather feedback from people outside the immediate design team, especially developers, product managers, and marketers.
• Focus on specific scenarios such as developer handoff rather than vague dissatisfaction.

Phase 2: Establish Evaluation Criteria

• Convert the team’s needs and pain points into a small number of priority themes.
• Productivity is one important theme, covering activities such as:
  • Individual design work
  • Sprint planning
  • Design critiques
  • Developer handoff
• Match criteria to the team’s circumstances:
  • Large teams may prioritize consistency, shared libraries, and design-system support.
  • Fast-growing teams may emphasize onboarding and scalability.
  • Distributed teams may place greater weight on collaboration and communication.

The practical recommendation is to invest in preparation before testing tools. A documented, stakeholder-informed evaluation helps teams choose software that fits their real workflows and reduces the disruption and cost of a poorly planned migration.