Figma Design Systems: The Broken Promise

Figma design systems promised a revolution in collaborative design, offering a dream of perfect consistency at scale. They offered a dream of perfect consistency at scale. However, this dream morphed into a nightmare of “design by spreadsheet”. We now face a reality where design systems function as corporate control mechanisms rather than creative tools. Consequently, we must examine how an obsession with structure smothers the very soul of design. This article explores the uncomfortable truth behind the modern fixation on systems over creativity.

The Bureaucracy of Design

Design systems should empower creativity. Ideally, they speed up workflows. Unfortunately, they often become strict compliance tools. Managers wrap these tools in the language of efficiency. Yet, they use them to enforce control.

Designers currently fight the constraints of Figma design systems instead of actually creating innovative work with the tool. They fear deviating from established components. Breaking the “rules” becomes a sin. Therefore, the design process turns into paperwork. We simply fill out checkboxes to stay compliant.

Furthermore, discussions shift away from user impact. Instead, we argue about token specifications. We debate whether a hue violates a strict code. Thus, the system serves itself rather than the people. Figma created an illusion that centralisation equals clarity. In reality, it breeds stagnation.

When Tokens Replace Taste

In the beginning, tokens seemed like magic. You define colours and typography once. Everything updates automatically. This concept promised a unified language for design and code.

However, practice reveals a different story. Design tokens now act as endless layers of abstraction. They multiply faster than the problems they solve. You start with ten tokens. Soon, you manage hundreds.

Consequently, cryptic names often confuse the team. As a result, we lose the human meaning behind a colour choice. Furthermore, we forget exactly why a specific spacing feels right. Ultimately, this represents a failure of philosophy rather than engineering. We have effectively replaced intuition with the illusion of mathematical rigour. In essence, we turned art into algebra.

The Consistency Trap in Figma Design Systems

Figma made componentisation incredibly easy. You drag, drop, and nest elements effortlessly. Nevertheless, a major problem exists. Context does not scale.

Components know how they look. But they do not know why they exist. A button in a checkout form serves a specific purpose. That same button in an error modal serves a different emotional need. Yet, systems enforce sameness. They mistake aesthetic consistency for functional clarity.

This leads to a UX “uncanny valley”. Everything looks consistent. However, it feels disconnected. The product lacks rhythm and warmth. The human touch disappears. Good systems should teach us when to break the rules. Figma rewards compliance instead. As a result, designers think less and manage more.

Collaboration or Committee?

Multiplayer collaboration stands as Figma’s biggest triumph. Yet, it also poses a dangerous threat. It creates a false sense of alignment. Multiple designers edit the same file. This looks like teamwork. Often, it is just collective micromanagement.

Everyone sees every move. Consequently, design becomes a performance. Teams over-document their decisions. They add layers of approval. They fear misunderstanding.

The craft of design turns into design by committee. We polish innovation until it becomes bland. Figma’s openness amplifies this human psychology. It flattens opinions until only consensus remains. We produce safe, predictable, and forgettable work.

Scalability Myths in Figma Design Systems

Figma pitches design systems on scalability. But most systems do not need to scale. The majority of teams do not build massive multinational platforms. They build one or two products. Yet, they spend months building infrastructure for Google-level complexity.

Figma’s business model shapes this culture. The company thrives when organisations standardise. Every new library justifies more enterprise plans. This forms a trap for designers.

Teams spend months refining the system instead of the product. The user sees no benefit. We mistake this busy work for productivity. In the end, the system becomes the product.

The Rise of Design Bloat

Years ago, we fought inconsistency. Today, we fight design bloat. Modern Figma files contain thousands of components. They become heavy and slow.

These tools should simplify design. Instead, they create complexity debt. You open a file and enter a maze. You find frames inside frames. Efficiency becomes a mirage. We spend more time managing systems than making choices.

Reclaiming Design Judgment

The biggest casualty is judgement when designers prioritise strict adherence to the rules of complex Figma design systems. We codify every decision into tokens. Therefore, designers stop exercising taste. We stop asking if something feels right. We only ask if it follows the system.

Good design emerges from tension. It comes from pushing boundaries. Rigid systems punish this deviation. The culture shifts from exploration to maintenance.

We must rethink our philosophy. Make systems adaptive, not absolute. Encourage rule-breaking when it serves the user. Simplify token management. We must bring emotion back to design.

Design systems should liberate us. They should amplify taste, not replace it. Tools must honour human intuition. Figma cannot systematise judgement. We must reclaim that power for ourselves.