This is completely my own theory, but I think about things like the title suggests. Let's talk about the rationale behind it.

First of all, UX design, when translated literally, means designing user experience, but the way people perceive experiences varies from person to person. In the end, it becomes important to design an experience that is generally considered good for the target demographic of the product. The concept of a common denominator is difficult; however, basically, literacy is distributed in a shape similar to a normal distribution or a pyramid.

The so-called 'ordinary' layer occupies a large part, and I believe that the resolution regarding the ordinary is crucial for taking the common denominator.

For that reason, it is necessary to be ordinary oneself. Otherwise, it would be beyond imagination to know what the ordinary layer is thinking. Of course, it can be supplemented through user interviews, but it’s always better to understand it oneself.

On the other hand, to provide a good experience, I believe one should not only be ordinary, but also be someone who has grown beyond the ordinary.

For example, let’s say you are providing an English learning app. The target is probably mostly beginners, and understanding their feelings is an absolute requirement; however, the levels of English proficiency are in a gradient, and naturally, there are also advanced users. It might be one approach to exclude the upper tier from the target, but if it is included, it is desirable for the designer to be someone who has risen from an ordinary beginner to an advanced level through study. For instance, saying, 'I am a returnee and have been able to speak English since I was little' would not suffice.

To summarize in abstraction, the conditions for being good at UX design are that one is originally ordinary and has the experience of reaching a higher level in that area through effort.

There is one more condition. Even after becoming a higher individual, one must not forget the feelings of being ordinary.

Once one becomes a higher individual, the level of what is considered 'normal' within oneself naturally rises. It’s necessary to have the power to remember what level the ordinary layer was at.

For example, in the microCMS we are developing, one can create APIs just by clicking through the management screen. For someone well-versed in backend, it might be common to test the generated API using curl. On the other hand, many frontend engineers are not accustomed to CUI operations. Hence, one of the created features is the API preview, which allows users to send requests to the API and check the response JSON directly from the management screen with just one click. This feature has received feedback from many users about its ease of use, yet it's interesting that very few headless CMSs have this feature.

Next, let’s move on to the topic of people who are good at teaching. I originally worked as a part-time tutor for six years during my university days. Among the tutors, there were several who I thought were good at teaching; but honestly, I felt that academic background didn’t matter. In fact, I thought that if someone was too highly educated, they tended to be worse at teaching.

This connects to the earlier discussion, as so-called genius types have their 'normal' level too high to understand why those who cannot do it can't grasp it. In contrast, those who have risen from mediocrity can understand that part well since they have experienced it themselves. They can recall how they understood things at that time and convey those methods.

In essence, they are good at adjusting their discussions to match the listener's level. I believe this is the ability that allows ordinary people to surpass geniuses through effort.

If you believe you might be good at teaching others, why not consider a career as a UX designer or product manager (which is similar to being a UX designer)?