How to work well with an async design partner

Async isn’t a compromise

A lot of teams assume good design work needs constant contact: daily stand-ups, quick calls, someone available at short notice. For some work, that’s true. But for focused projects like an audit, a single workflow redesign or regular design reviews, an asynchronous rhythm often produces better work, not worse.

Writing things down forces clarity. Recorded walkthroughs can be watched by the people who’d never make the meeting. And scheduled reviews stop the “quick question” interruptions that fragment everyone’s day. Aventropy is set up to work this way on purpose, with a small number of teams at a time.

Agree the rhythm before you start

The single most important thing is a shared rhythm everyone can rely on. Before work begins, agree:

• When live sessions happen, and how long they are.
• How quickly written feedback comes back, for example within one working day.
• Where work in progress lives, and how people are notified of updates.
• Who on your side gathers and combines feedback.
• What counts as urgent, and how to flag it.

Once that’s settled, nobody wastes energy wondering when they’ll hear back. It also makes time zones far less of an issue. A clear window of overlap for live sessions, plus reliable written turnaround, covers most of what teams need.

Brief in writing

Async work runs on context. A good written brief covers the problem, the people affected, the task, the constraints and the decision you need to make. It doesn’t need to be long. Half a page often does the job, as long as it’s specific.

The same goes for feedback. “I don’t like the table” is hard to act on asynchronously. “Reviewers need to see the amount before the supplier name, because that’s what they check first” can be picked up and acted on without a meeting.

Use recorded walkthroughs

For design work, a five-minute recorded walkthrough of a flow is often more useful than a thirty-minute meeting. The person presenting can explain the reasoning without interruptions, and everyone else can watch at a sensible time, pause and comment against the exact moment they’re unsure about.

We use these for most interim updates, and keep live sessions for the moments where discussion genuinely helps: kick-offs, prioritisation and final walkthroughs.

Keep a decision log

In a distributed setup, decisions evaporate fast. Someone misses a thread, a question gets reopened, and two weeks of work goes round in a circle. A simple shared log of decisions, the reasons behind them and open questions prevents most of it. It’s also invaluable when someone new joins the project.

Protect the live time

When you do meet, make it count. Send the material in advance, so the session is about decisions rather than presentation. Start with the question you need answered. End with a short recap of what was decided and who’s doing what next.

Is it right for your team?

Async engagements suit teams that are comfortable writing things down, have one person who can coordinate feedback, and have a clearly defined piece of work. They’re less suited to situations that need someone physically on site, or a full-time embedded designer for day-to-day delivery.

All of our engagements, from the UX Audit to Design Leadership, are designed around this kind of rhythm. If you’re not sure it’ll suit your team, ask us and we can talk it through.