You're debating feature priorities with clients in mobile design. How do you reach a consensus effectively?

Start by understanding the key goals of the project and what the users really need. Use data, like user feedback or competitor analysis, to show why certain features should come first. A visual tool, like a chart that compares the impact of each feature with the effort needed, can help everyone see which features offer the best value (Impact Effort Matrix). Focus on the must-have features for the initial launch and suggest adding less critical features later. Keep the conversation open, listen to concerns, and offer iterations when needed. Finally, (most important) document the agreed priorities to avoid any confusion later. This way, everyone stays on the same page, and the project can move forward smoothly.

One of the soft skills design must have is hearing more than talking so active listening to the clients especially the end users and understand their point of view. We must remember we are not designing for ourselves but for the client and users and also business goals of the clients. I would ensure that we listen to them but not to accept all what they say but logically argue which create a good discussion leading to arrival to a mutually agreeable solution which take into account all the stakeholders.

In my experience, truly understanding a client begins by letting go of assumptions. Once, I was working with a healthcare app client who wanted to add a lot of advanced features, but after speaking with their end-users—doctors who were always pressed for time—it became clear that simplicity mattered more. I listened carefully, conducted user interviews, and empathized with their daily challenges. We pivoted our focus to emphasize speed and intuitive navigation. This mutual understanding didn't just align our goals, it turned a potentially tense debate into a partnership where the client saw how our proposed direction met their actual, underlying needs. Active listening, more than anything, made the difference

Even you can't say to client, but keep this in mind that client find difficult to articulate their needs and that is whY as part of the design process we have concept of initial brief and redefined brief and designers are trained to follow process and tools to convert initial brief into redefined brief or actionable brief by validation and discovery. This is the important phase to articulate what exactly we need to work on and only after this we should be actually start working on solving or designing for it.

One thing I've found incredibly helpful is breaking down complex design concepts with analogies. A while back, a client wanted to add a flashy animation feature that would slow down the onboarding flow. Instead of just rejecting the idea, I compared the user journey to a smooth airport check-in: the quicker you get people to their seat (or desired app feature), the happier they are. I shared some real-world examples, like how Instagram keeps the photo-sharing experience fast and straightforward. By framing our conversation around the user's experience and showing real ROI data, the client started seeing things not from the perspective of "cool features," but from the lens of how each decision impacts the user’s path.

Balancing client and user needs is like walking a tightrope—you’re always swaying between two points. Once, a retail client wanted an elaborate product showcase on their app. We knew, however, that users wanted an easy checkout process above all else. I suggested a compromise: an optional showcase that could be accessed with a single swipe, but wasn’t forced on users. I backed this with data on how checkout friction impacts sales. It wasn't just about saying no to their ideas; it was about presenting solutions that aligned their business objectives with the user's comfort. It was eye-opening for the client, and we ended up with a solution that respected both perspectives without compromising on usability.

One time at work, I was part of a project that stalled because we were trying to do too much at once—it was overwhelming both for us and the client. That's when I introduced the MVP approach. I shared the story of Slack, which started with a simple chat function before expanding into the robust tool we know today. I helped the client see that launching with core functionalities would allow us to gather genuine user feedback quickly. They realized they could save money and time by first focusing on essentials. It's always better to get something valuable into users' hands early on and improve it based on real-world use, rather than chasing perfection from the start.

Designer' mindset also need to be a collaborator and that helps them facilitating the discussion with all their stakeholders to bring out the best outcome for the project as well as the final deliverables.

I've found that nothing beats a good workshop for gaining consensus. For instance, with a travel app client, we ran a design sprint where everyone—developers, marketers, and even customer support—contributed to defining core features. This cross-functional approach let everyone have a voice, including the client, which made them more open to considering our user-centric feature priorities. During the sprint, rapid prototyping helped them visualize the app quickly, making it easier for them to understand why certain features needed to come first. It wasn't just about having a meeting; it was about making feature prioritization a collaborative and visual experience

I caution, not agreeing on goal with a good discussion with compelling arguments on all side. Don't accept everything what clients says, it's important to listen to them but not necessarily agreeing to all what they say but if you don't find the good reasoning or if that is not good for the final deliverables in terms of user requirements or impacting the quality negatively, it's better not to agreeing for it.

In my experience, when the goals are clear, the debates become productive rather than endless. I remember a fintech project where the client wanted to keep adding new features, but we lacked a guiding metric for what success looked like. We paused, and I led a session to define what "success" meant: reducing customer support calls by 20% and improving onboarding completion rates to 80%. Once we all agreed on those clear, measurable targets, it was easier to prioritize features that helped us move towards those outcomes. This shared understanding turned what could have been a tug-of-war into a collective push towards the same goals