SUMMARY
Purpose: Peer Feedback is a structured method for cross-functional team members to critique and improve UX design work through collaborative review.
Design Thinking Phase: Ideate
Time: 60–90 min session + optional follow-ups
Difficulty: ⭐⭐
When to use:Before finalising wireframes or prototypes for client or stakeholder presentationsDuring sprint reviews when multiple design options are on the tableWhen integrating feedback loops into remote or hybrid product teams
What it is
Peer Feedback is a collaborative technique used in design teams to evaluate work-in-progress through constructive input from fellow designers, researchers, or cross-functional peers. It supports design quality, clarity of UX intent, and fosters team alignment without formal hierarchy.
📺 Video by NNgroup. Embedded for educational reference.
Why it matters
Design isn’t a solo act. Even the strongest individual contributor benefits from diverse feedback. Peer Feedback encourages open dialogue, encouraging clearer reasoning, surfacing blind spots, and revealing opportunities to improve the user experience early and often. Over time, it builds a shared culture of design rigour and humility.
When to use
- Team retros to reflect on recent design sprints or releases
- Early-stage exploration (to prevent over-committing to weak ideas)
- Pre-handoff reviews with engineers and writers to ensure feasibility
Benefits
- Rich Insights: Helps uncover user needs that aren’t visible in metrics.
- Flexibility: Works across various project types and timelines.
- User Empathy: Deepens understanding of behaviours and motivations.
How to use it
- Prep the artefacts: Choose 1–2 design deliverables (wireframes, journeys, prototypes) that are ready for review. Add relevant context—goals, personas, known issues.
- Select participants: Invite 3–6 peers from your discipline or cross-functional team. Include at least 1 non-designer if you’re validating usability or alignment.
- Define feedback format: Set expectations: is it open discussion, silent critique, or dot-voting on patterns?
- Run the session: Present the artefact, then step back to let others share. Limit pitching or defending unless clarifications are vital.
- Record key themes: Use sticky notes, digital boards, or live notes to capture patterns, not individual opinions.
- Follow up: Group related feedback into actionable next steps and re-share updated progress if needed.
Example Output
- “Navigation hierarchy is unclear between Step 2 and Step 3—consider progressive disclosure.”
- “Too much cognitive load in the onboarding flow. Suggest splitting into two screens.”
- “CTA text works well in desktop but looks vague in mobile context.”
- “Multiple reviewers flagged confusion around the payment icons—needs visual hierarchy check.”
Common Pitfalls
- Feedback without context: Jumping into critique without clarifying the problem or user goals dilutes usefulness.
- Designers getting defensive: Treating feedback as personal judgement discourages openness and learning.
- Too generic: Comments like “this doesn’t feel right” without examples or alternatives don’t help advance the design.
10 Design-Ready AI Prompts for Peer Feedback – UX/UI Edition
How These Prompts Work (C.S.I.R. Framework)
Each of the templates below follows the C.S.I.R. method — a proven structure for writing clear, effective prompts that get better results from ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, or any other LLM.
C.S.I.R. stands for:
- Context: Who you are and the UX situation you're working in
- Specific Info: Key design inputs, tasks, or constraints the AI should consider
- Intent: What you want the AI to help you achieve
- Response Format: The structure or format you want the AI to return (e.g. checklist, table, journey map)
Level up your career with smarter AI prompts.Get templates used by UX leaders — no guesswork, just results.Design faster, research smarter, and ship with confidence.First one’s free. Unlock all 10 by becoming a member.
Prompt Template 1: “Generate constructive peer feedback for an early-stage wireframe”
Generate constructive peer feedback for an early-stage wireframe
Context: You’re a senior product designer leading an internal design review.
Specific Info: The work-in-progress includes [3 mobile screen variations] for a [B2B onboarding flow] aimed at reducing time-to-value. Known tensions include [confusion over main CTA placement] and [inconsistent microcopy].
Intent: Use AI to simulate thoughtful peer feedback that reflects patterns from real design critiques.
Response Format: Provide a bullet-point list of at least five observations, with tone-neutral suggestions for improvement.
Ask clarifying questions if the context or flow goals are unclear.
Suggest one follow-up principle or heuristic that could guide refinements.
Prompt Template 2: “Summarise peer review feedback into themed insights”
Summarise peer review feedback into themed insights
Context: You’ve just concluded a group feedback session with four UXers reviewing a complex dashboard refresh.
Specific Info: Notes include 42 individual comments, some contradictory. Areas discussed include layout hierarchy, control density, and colour usage.
Intent: Cluster feedback into themes to identify actionable next steps.
Response Format: Output a table with 3 columns — Theme, Supporting Quotes (anonymised), and Action Recommendation.
Ask questions to resolve contradictory inputs before clustering.
Prompt Template 3: “Craft a critique framework for a UX team peer review”
Craft a critique framework for a UX team peer review
Context: You're building a feedback ritual for a growing design team during weekly design syncs.
Specific Info: Team includes junior to senior designers. Work ranges from user flows to high-fi prototypes. Need to keep sessions on time and respectful.
Intent: Create a critique template that supports actionable yet kind feedback.
Response Format: Output a checklist that includes intro setup, framing questions, and closing actions.
Include a suggestion to post-review follow-ups for accountability.
Prompt Template 4: “Turn design critiques into refined hypothesis statements”
Turn design critiques into refined hypothesis statements
Context: You're iterating on sign-up form UI based on peer feedback.
Specific Info: Peers mentioned confusion over ‘Next’ button meaning and lack of data confidence at field level.
Intent: Transform these into testable, design-language-aligned hypotheses.
Response Format: List each hypothesis, followed by implicit assumptions and measurement method.
Check assumptions about behaviour if not obvious from critique notes.
Prompt Template 5: “Facilitate async peer feedback in a remote design team”
Facilitate async peer feedback in a remote design team
Context: You manage a distributed UX team across 3 time zones. Live critique is impractical.
Specific Info: Figma files shared every Thursday; feedback is needed by Monday.
Intent: Design a repeatable async process that maintains quality and collaboration.
Response Format: Provide a 5-step async framework including tools, timings, prompts.
Add options to scale this process as team or projects grow.
Prompt Template 6: “Assess visual design consistency in peer-reviewed prototype”
Assess visual design consistency in peer-reviewed prototype
Context: Reviewing UI prototype after team feedback round.
Specific Info: Screens reviewed include account settings, notifications, and profile edit. Feedback includes 'button styling feels inconsistent' and 'spacing varies'.
Intent: Identify where inconsistencies occur based on atomic design principles.
Response Format: Provide a checklist of design system mismatches, ideally component-level.
Ask about the system guide used if issues cannot be mapped directly.
Prompt Template 7: “Develop summary quotes for presenting peer feedback to stakeholders”
Develop summary quotes for presenting peer feedback to stakeholders
Context: You’re compiling insights for senior execs from a recent design team share-out.
Specific Info: Themes include friction in new user flow and success with voice UI.
Intent: Translate peer feedback into polished, attributable summary quotes.
Response Format: Output 4–6 quotes using ‘UX Team said’ or ‘One designer noted’ format.
Ensure quotes reflect patterns, not isolated opinions or hot takes.
Prompt Template 8: “Highlight cognitive load issues from peer perspective”
Highlight cognitive load issues from peer perspective
Context: Evaluating a payment flow based on design team critique.
Specific Info: Peers mentioned multiple tooltip activations, unclear labels and decision complexity.
Intent: Use feedback to list key sources of overload for users.
Response Format: Provide a prioritised list (High / Medium / Low) with short fixes.
Clarify if this is B2C or enterprise context to guide weighting.
Prompt Template 9: “Simulate design feedback from a user research pov”
Simulate design feedback from a user research pov
Context: No researcher available this sprint; design team is peer reviewing instead.
Specific Info: Flow is for first-time app launch; feedback so far focused on layout.
Intent: Simulate user-flavoured peer critique using research framing.
Response Format: Output 5 user-centred observations tied to usability heuristics.
Ask for target user segment if not stated.
Prompt Template 10: “Map out actions based on multi-role critique input”
Map out actions based on multi-role critique input
Context: Cross-functional team gave informal feedback post-design review.
Specific Info: Feedback came from PM, engineer, copywriter, and junior designer.
Intent: Prioritise individual comments into design, content, or backlog tasks.
Response Format: Output a table with 3 columns — Role, Feedback, Proposed Action.
Prompt for due dates or version alignment if needed.
Recommended Tools
- FigJam: For shared in-session feedback on designs in context.
- Pastel: Great for async UI reviews with visual annotations.
- Miro + Loom: Combine visuals with explanation walkthroughs in distributed teams.
- Notion: For structured documentation and follow-up synthesis after feedback sessions.
