1. Pick an angle, even if it closes some doors
Our first review was a recent grad who’d rebuilt their portfolio after a reviewer knocked how it looked. The new version was fine. What we couldn’t find was an angle, and we couldn’t tell who the site was for. You can do really well with a fairly simple portfolio if your positioning and story are right. We judge a portfolio by whether it lands interviews with the audience you picked, and whether we like the look has nothing to do with it.
A role can get a thousand applicants right now, so companies can hold out for the person who fits exactly. Nate’s example was a candidate whose whole site is about cloud infrastructure for big enterprise teams. They can’t apply to much else, but when that role opens, they get the interview. A one-liner about bringing clarity and aligning teams does the opposite, because every product designer could write it. Yes, picking a direction closes doors. Tim’s point was that being very compelling for the roles you want beats being lukewarm for all of them, and choosing now doesn’t stop you from changing your mind later.
Rewrite your homepage line so it names a skill and an industry, like Nate’s example of a product designer who builds design systems for healthcare. Not sure what you’d pick? You have more opinions than you think, starting with specialist or generalist, hands-on craft or leading a team. If you have to apply broadly, Nate’s trick is to point a few domains at the same site and change the wording per domain, so the healthcare link speaks healthcare and the fintech link speaks fintech.
2. Your case study is selling you
Tim put it simply: a case study isn’t a celebration that work got done. The product is just the vehicle. What you’re selling is how you solved a real problem, so the reader needs to see why the problem was real and why your answer was good. A title that’s only the product’s name tells a reviewer little beyond your industry. Nate checks the problem statement the same way. If it’s framed as an outcome the business needed rather than a feature to build, he takes that as mid-level thinking or better.
Headers and homepage cards should do the same job. If each card says why the project mattered and what you did, a reviewer who opens only one still learns something from the rest. One mid-level case study already told its story through its section headers. Nate’s only miss was the title, and Tim added one more: a header that just said “Why this mattered.” Put the reason itself there instead.
Start with the title and rewrite it as a short claim covering the outcome, what you did to get there and who it was for. Then check the body. Tim’s view on length is to include whatever the story needs, as long as it hangs together, while Nate flagged a case study that stayed high level and asked the reader to trust that the process happened. Tim noted that some people see a designer’s visible reasoning as what separates them from AI. Show the options you weighed and why you picked one, until the reader reaches your decision alongside you.
3. You can estimate impact nobody measured
A designer who’d mostly worked at small startups asked how to show impact when nobody tracked anything. Tim started with a ladder. Usability findings sit near the bottom. Feature adoption is a rung up, engagement is higher again, and outcomes like behavior change, time saved, retention and conversion sit closer still to money. Impact is the currency people further up the chain care about, and the closer your outcome gets to financial impact, the more it counts.
If you never saw the numbers, do the math yourself. What share of users would this help at minimum adoption, and at maximum? What’s each of them worth over a year? Businesses run on estimates, and you already did the thinking that justified the project. A case study isn’t a background check or a legal document. Stay honest and act in good faith, but you’re allowed to estimate. Present it as the size of the opportunity, never as a number you’re sure you hit.
Qualitative feedback still belongs in the case study. Let it inform your intent and back up the numbers you’re predicting, but don’t stop there. For each project, find the highest rung you can honestly argue for and show your math.
4. Turn a few switches off
One site had motion in some places and not others, heavy grid lines, a lot of all caps, a very stylized font and a video, all competing on the same screen. Tim’s read was that too many switches were on, and the good work would shine more with less going on. His advice was to strip it back, then add things in one at a time, on purpose. Your site does have to pass a first sniff test. After that, good writing carries a perfectly okay design a long way.
Another site had been made with AI’s help, and it showed. Tim’s take is that AI is a great tool, but if you keep its defaults it’s making decisions for you, and cutting those signals makes it easier for people to connect with you. There he’d remove the eyebrow labels and the zoom effect on images, both AI favorites, plus most of the all caps, which are hard to read. Any interaction should give the reader something back, like a way to see an image larger.
Start by deleting the eyebrow labels and most of the all caps. Drop qualifiers that put you on the back foot too, like how many years you’ve spent in each area. It’s your site, so name the field and own it. Then, once a month, change one thing so the site feels more like you and less like a template.
5. The application math isn’t about you
Tim walked through who actually reads your materials. An ATS checks your resume against the job description and usually ignores your site. A recruiter works from what passes. Then someone in HR or a recruiter’s manager makes a very quick visit to your portfolio, mostly to see if you seem like the right kind of person. Only a handful reach the design lead, who might make one quick visit or spend an hour reading everything you’ve written. A thousand applicants can become a hundred, then twenty, then four to six.
Tim used to design software that helped people get job interviews, and for the designers they worked with, the number was 100 to 200 applications per interview. Plenty of the people who miss out could have done the job well. So if you’ve sent 60 applications this month for roles you’re qualified for and heard nothing, you may not have sent enough yet. If you’re landing interviews at all, you’re one of the few out of a thousand worth talking to, and that’s a sign you’re doing something right.
Rejection notes need the same perspective. One candidate was told by a design lead that their work wasn’t at the level the company wanted. Nate’s view is that feedback like that mostly tells you what that company needs, and it ranks below feedback on whether your portfolio fits your own direction. Track applications per interview, and don’t give up before you’ve sent enough for that number to mean anything.
The Q&A covered a few quick ones too. You don’t need separate resumes for software and for people; one single-column resume built for the ATS covers nearly every case. Nate leans generalist in this market, with agencies as the exception, since they tend to hire specialists. A niche only earns its keep when there’s competition to get past. And no, experienced designers don’t lose their value for lack of new ideas. Good work comes from process more than inspiration, and Tim judges people by how they show up and the care they bring.
