UX design is a broad term that encompasses various disciplines. There’s research, interface design, branding, testing, animations — and more. Which means it’s practically impossible to be equally good at everything. There are points in one’s career when we have to make decisions about which skills to double down on and which ones to ignore.
It’s easy to get lost in this whole process. That’s when a skill categorization framework comes to the rescue.
By visually mapping the level of expertise you have in each of the core UX design skills, you can better understand your current skill as a designer and plan your next steps more strategically.
Let’s look deeper at different ways to develop as a UX designer.
There are four main skillset archetypes in UX design (or any other profession to be fair). One can become an
Each archetype has its own strengths and trade-offs, and no single path is better than the others — it’s all about aligning your skills with your goals and the needs of your team or organization. Let’s explore all of these in depth.
An I-shaped designer is a specialist in one specific area.
An example could be a UI designer who can deliver amazing visuals but can’t really handle the UX or strategic part of the process or a UX researcher who is great at getting insights but struggles to make anything tangible out of them.
It doesn’t mean that an I-shaped designer knows only one skill. By exposure alone, they’ll develop a breadth of UX-related skills. However, I-shaped designers put most of their focus on developing skills in their single area of choice.
Pros
Cons
T-shaped designers, similarly to I-shaped ones, have a single area of expertise in which they shine. However, they also dedicate effort to developing a strong foundation in other skills related to their work.
For example, one can be primarily a UI designer but still possess a decent skill set in user research to conduct interviews on their own. They might not be as skilled in research as specialized UX researchers, but they can still do the job.
There are many types of T-shaped designers. Some have two or three secondary skills, while others are multi-tools with a solid baseline in any area of UX design.
Pros
Cons
A T-shaped designer with more than one area of expertise is often referred to as
You don’t have to be an absolute expert in all those areas. You can be 10 out of 10 researchers and 6 out of 10 branding gurus, and I would still consider you an N-shaped designer.
It all comes down to being able to comfortably call yourself “above-average” at more than one thing.
Pros
Cons
An X-shaped skillset is quite a recent term, and it might be problematic to grasp at first, so let me put it in simple terms.
X-shaped designers have solid fundamentals across all areas of UX design (similar to T-shaped designers), but they excel at connecting the dots between them rather than executing in any of those areas.
For example, X-shaped designers understand research, data analysis, branding, and prototyping, but they don’t necessarily excel at executing in these areas.
What they shine as is understanding how these areas inform each other and how to connect the dots.
They don’t have to be great at data analysis or conducting user research, but they know how to connect these two disciplines for the best results, including
While an M-shaped designer can perform greatly in many more areas, an X-shaped designer excels at making various design areas contribute to a shared goal.
So they’re connectors first and executors second.
Pros
Cons
So, what type of designer should you be?
There’s a common belief that the progress is linear. That is
Although that’s one of the ways to develop, it’s not the only path. There are exceptional I-shaped experts who earn way more than M- and X-shaped leaders.
It’s more about figuring out what gives you the most joy:
Also, keep in mind it’s not a lifetime decision. You can be a well-rounded T-shaped designer today, but double down on a newly learned skill and become an I-shaped designer tomorrow.
Adaptation is the key.
As long as you are consciously making decisions about what type of designer you want to be and why, the exact path you choose doesn’t matter. If it doesn’t work, you can change that.
LogRocket's Galileo AI watches sessions and understands user feedback for you, automating the most time-intensive parts of your job and giving you more time to focus on great design.
See how design choices, interactions, and issues affect your users — get a demo of LogRocket today.
There’s no universally “best” design language. This section breaks down when Linear-style design works well, how to build beyond it (or start from Radix UI), why it felt overused in SaaS marketing, and why conversion claims still need real testing.
Minimal doesn’t always mean usable. This comparison shows how Linear-style UI keeps contrast, affordances, and structure intact, unlike brutalism’s extremes or neumorphism’s low-clarity depth effects.
Linear-style UIs look simple, but the theming system has to do real work. Here’s how to meet WCAG 2.2 contrast requirements across light, dark, and high-contrast modes — whether you’re using a UI library or rolling your own tokens.
As product teams become more data-driven, UX designers are expected to connect design decisions to metrics. But real value comes from interpreting data, questioning assumptions, and bringing human behavior back into the conversation.
Learn more →
One Reply to "Defining your UX skillset: T-shaped vs. I-shaped vs. M-shaped vs. X-shaped"
The article offers a clear breakdown of UX skillset shapes—T-shaped, I-shaped, M-shaped, and X-shaped—helping professionals understand how depth and breadth of skills impact their roles. Recognizing these distinctions allows UX designers to identify growth areas, balance specialization with collaboration, and better position themselves in teams, ultimately enhancing both career development and project outcomes.