Designing for teams that are still figuring it out

“The goal isn’t a final version. It’s forward movement without losing your footing.”

Most startup teams I work with aren’t stuck.
They’re not spiraling. They’re not “waiting for clarity.” They’re not frozen in decision limbo.

They’re moving.

Decisions happen mid-motion. Messaging sharpens while things are already live. Positioning gets clearer because something shipped and got poked by the real world — not because someone disappeared into a Notion doc and emerged enlightened.

Founders usually understand this instinctively.
Change itself isn’t the issue.

The tension shows up later — in how teams hold the work when clarity refuses to sit still (that slightly sweaty, are we okay? feeling).

Why Change Gets Misread

Somewhere along the way, we learned to treat change like a correction.
Like proof the last version messed up.

That framing doesn’t come from startups. It comes from more stable environments — the kind where change means something broke and now we’re fixing it. In fast-moving teams, that logic quietly stops making sense.

The idea of getting 1% better resonates for a reason. James Clear didn’t frame it as a motivational slogan in Atomic Habits — it’s a compounding reality. Small, intentional shifts matter because they’re allowed to exist before everything is fully resolved.

That same logic applies to how work evolves.

Not Everything Should Change at the Same Speed

Here’s where teams get tripped up.

Not all outputs are created equal.

A website moves slower — and honestly, good. It touches more teams, takes more effort to implement, and usually signals a clearer point of view. A v1 might live for weeks or months before becoming a v2 — not because iteration is taboo, but because clarity needs a minute to marinate (like leftovers that somehow taste better the next day).

Updates aren’t knee-jerk reactions.
They’re earned.

Pitch decks? Totally different energy.

They live closer to the conversation. Decks flex depending on who’s across the table — especially when you’re talking to high-stakes investors or potential clients. The goal isn’t consistency for consistency’s sake. It’s relevance. A deck that adapts isn’t scattered — it’s paying attention.

Things start to wobble when teams expect every asset to behave the same way.

Design for teams in motion

Revisions vs. Improvements

This is where language quietly messes with momentum.

When every change is labeled a “revision,” the work starts to feel fragile. Each update carries this weird emotional weight, like the last version failed an unspoken test.

Over time, that pressure either slows teams down or pushes them to prematurely lock things in “just so they don’t have to touch it again.”

When changes are framed as improvements, the vibe shifts.

Work doesn’t need to be right.
It just needs to reflect what’s been learned so far (think: progress photos, not a grand reveal).

That one reframing alone changes how teams move.

Making Room for Structure and Play

Not all progress is clean. Or linear. Or spreadsheet-friendly.

Some changes are guided by data and performance.
Others come from poking at something out of curiosity and seeing what breaks (or surprisingly works).

Early experiments don’t always come with tidy metrics attached. Sometimes unstructured change is exactly what shakes something loose and reveals what actually matters. The issue isn’t experimentation — it’s expecting every experiment to immediately behave.

Messy doesn’t mean wrong. Sometimes it just looks like Marie Kondo’s before photo, or your wardrobe chair that’s doing a lot of emotional labor right now.

The teams that move well tend to hold both truths at once:

They leave room to explore.
And they know when to consolidate.

They think in versions, not endpoints.
They let work evolve instead of overprotecting it.
They decide which changes deserve to land — and which ones can stay a little feral.

What This Looks Like When It’s Working

Change doesn’t need defending in startup environments.
It’s already baked into the job description.

What usually gets lost isn’t care — it’s intention. Speed has a way of flattening nuance if nothing’s anchoring it.

Iteration isn’t reacting to every new thought.
And it’s not locking things down out of fear.

It’s letting work evolve at the same pace as understanding.

Some things move slowly. Others flex freely. Some experiments stay messy on purpose. None of that signals instability — it signals momentum with a point of view.

The goal isn’t a final version.
It’s forward movement without losing your footing (or your sanity).

That’s what designing for teams that are still figuring it out actually looks like.

You don’t need everything figured out.
You need work that can keep up with how fast you’re learning.

That’s the space The Mood Lab designs in.