Modular Design Systems for Scaleups

I refuse to maintain four copy-paste libraries; layered architectures keep us sane.

Context

In a rapidly scaling organization, both marketing and product teams face immense pressure to deliver high-quality experiences at speed. Our previous approach, however, was a constant source of friction and inefficiency. Marketing needed to launch campaigns quickly with consistent branding, while product teams required a robust, reusable set of UI components to accelerate feature development. The problem was a fragmented design and development landscape: designers were creating one-off assets, developers were building redundant components, and brand consistency was a constant battle. This led to slower time-to-market, increased technical debt, and a diluted brand experience across our various touchpoints.

Recognizing these challenges, I spearheaded the development of a modular design system. My vision was to create a layered architecture that could serve the distinct, yet interconnected, needs of both marketing and product without duplicating effort or sacrificing consistency. This system is built upon three core layers: foundational "core" components that provide the basic building blocks, "brand" components that encapsulate our unique visual identity, and "context" components that adapt to specific use cases (e.g., marketing landing pages vs. in-app features). This layered approach ensures that while teams can move with agility, every new experience remains cohesive, on-brand, and built upon a solid, reusable foundation. The result is a significant acceleration in delivery speed, a reduction in design and development overhead, and a unified brand presence that scales with our ambition.

Stack I leaned on

• Figma variables + Style Dictionary: Figma serves as our single source of truth for design. We leverage Figma's powerful variables feature to define our design tokens (colors, typography, spacing, etc.). Style Dictionary then acts as a bridge, transforming these Figma variables into platform-agnostic tokens that can be consumed by various development environments, ensuring perfect synchronization between design and code.
• Storybook with Chromatic: Storybook is our interactive UI component explorer, allowing developers and designers to view, test, and document components in isolation. We integrate Storybook with Chromatic for automated visual regression testing, ensuring that any changes to components don't inadvertently introduce visual bugs across different browsers or devices.
• Tailwind tokens: For rapid and consistent styling, we utilize Tailwind CSS. Our design tokens, generated via Style Dictionary, are integrated directly into Tailwind's configuration, allowing us to build highly customizable and responsive UIs while strictly adhering to our design system's principles.
• Linear + Notion release notes: Linear is used for managing the design system's development backlog and tracking component requests. Notion serves as our central repository for detailed release notes, documentation, and guidelines, ensuring that all teams are aware of updates, new components, and best practices for utilizing the design system.

Playbook

1. Classified tokens into core, brand and context layers and versioned them in Git: The first critical step was to meticulously classify our design tokens. We organized them into three distinct layers: "core" tokens (foundational elements like spacing, typography, and basic colors), "brand" tokens (specific brand colors, fonts, and imagery), and "context" tokens (variations for specific use cases or platforms). All these token definitions were versioned in Git, ensuring a single source of truth and enabling collaborative development and easy rollback.
2. Synced Figma to code via Style Dictionary: To maintain perfect synchronization between design and development, we implemented a robust pipeline using Style Dictionary. This tool automatically transforms our design tokens defined in Figma variables into various platform-specific formats (e.g., CSS variables, JavaScript objects), which are then consumed directly by our codebase. This eliminates manual translation errors and ensures that design changes are instantly reflected in code.
3. Defined request board with SLAs and weekly rituals: To manage the evolution of the design system, we established a dedicated request board (e.g., in Linear). This board outlines clear Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for new component requests, bug fixes, and feature enhancements. Weekly rituals, such as design system stand-ups and review meetings, ensure that requests are prioritized, processed efficiently, and communicated transparently.
4. Automated Storybook releases with semantic tags: Storybook serves as our living documentation and component library. We automated its release process using semantic versioning and Git tags. This ensures that every new version of the design system is clearly identified, and developers can easily access and integrate the latest components with confidence.
5. Documented anti-patterns to avoid rogue components: Beyond documenting how to use components, we proactively identified and documented "anti-patterns"—common mistakes or scenarios where custom components might be created unnecessarily. This guidance helps prevent the proliferation of "rogue components" outside the design system, maintaining consistency and reducing technical debt.

Key Principles of Modular Design Systems

• Single source of truth: Establish a centralized repository for design decisions, tokens, and components to ensure consistency across all platforms and products.
• Layered architecture: Design the system with distinct layers (e.g., core, brand, context) to allow for flexibility, scalability, and multi-brand support without duplication.
• Design tokens as the foundation: Utilize design tokens to abstract design decisions, enabling easy updates and synchronization between design tools and codebases.
• Component-driven development: Build UI components in isolation, making them reusable, testable, and easier to maintain across different projects.
• Automated visual QA: Implement automated visual regression testing to catch unintended UI changes and maintain visual consistency across releases.
• Comprehensive documentation and governance: Provide clear guidelines, usage examples, and release notes to facilitate adoption and ensure proper use of the design system.
• Continuous integration and delivery: Integrate the design system into CI/CD pipelines to automate testing, deployment, and versioning, ensuring a smooth update process.

Common Failure Modes (and Fixes)

1. Lack of adoption by design and development teams:
   • Problem: If teams don't see the value or find the design system cumbersome, they will revert to one-off solutions, undermining consistency.
   • Fix: Involve teams early in the design system's development. Provide extensive training, clear documentation, and showcase tangible benefits (e.g., faster delivery, fewer bugs). Treat the design system as a product with dedicated support.
2. Stale or outdated components:
   • Problem: A design system quickly loses its value if components are not regularly updated to reflect new brand guidelines, product features, or technological advancements.
   • Fix: Establish a clear governance model with dedicated ownership for the design system. Implement a regular release cadence with clear communication of updates. Automate component updates and testing where possible.
3. Over-engineering or under-engineering:
   • Problem: Building too many components too early (over-engineering) can lead to unused assets, while too few (under-engineering) forces teams to create custom solutions.
   • Fix: Adopt an iterative approach. Start with core components and expand based on actual product needs and usage patterns. Prioritize components that offer the highest reuse value.
4. Poor documentation and accessibility:
   • Problem: Without clear, accessible documentation, designers and developers will struggle to understand how to use components correctly, leading to inconsistencies and errors.
   • Fix: Invest in comprehensive, user-friendly documentation (e.g., Storybook). Include usage guidelines, code examples, accessibility considerations, and design principles. Make it easy to search and navigate.
5. Ignoring brand-specific needs in multi-brand systems:
   • Problem: A "one-size-fits-all" approach in a multi-brand context can stifle brand identity and lead to resistance from individual brand teams.
   • Fix: Implement a layered architecture (core, brand, context) that allows for brand-specific customizations while maintaining a shared foundation. Involve brand stakeholders in the design system's development and governance.

Metrics & Telemetry

• Reduced landing page launch time: The time required to launch new landing pages has been drastically cut from 8 days to just 2.5 days.
• Increased component reuse: Achieved a high component reuse rate of 78%, significantly reducing development effort and ensuring consistency.
• Decreased visual QA tickets: Visual Quality Assurance (QA) tickets have decreased by 63%, indicating fewer visual bugs and a more robust design system.

What stuck with me

• Design systems need storytelling; otherwise teams think it's a blocker: A critical realization was that a design system is not just a collection of components and guidelines; it's a product in itself, and like any product, it needs compelling storytelling. Without clearly articulating the "why"—the benefits it brings to designers (speed, consistency), developers (reusability, reduced tech debt), and the business (brand cohesion, faster time-to-market)—teams can perceive it as an additional layer of bureaucracy or a blocker to their creativity. Effective communication and showcasing tangible wins are essential for fostering adoption and advocacy.
• Document when NOT to use a component—it avoids endless debates: While comprehensive documentation on how to use components is vital, equally important, and often overlooked, is documenting when not to use a component. Providing clear examples of anti-patterns or scenarios where a custom solution might be more appropriate helps prevent misuse, reduces endless debates between designers and developers, and ensures the design system remains flexible enough to accommodate unique requirements without being undermined. This proactive guidance fosters a deeper understanding of the system's boundaries and promotes more thoughtful application.

What I'm building next

I'm currently preparing a comprehensive starter kit specifically designed for teams looking to adopt or implement multi-brand design systems. This kit will include templated Figma files, pre-configured Style Dictionary setups, Storybook examples, and detailed documentation on establishing governance and release cadences. The goal is to significantly lower the barrier to entry for organizations facing similar challenges in managing multiple brands or product lines. If your team is grappling with multi-brand consistency and you're interested in getting early access to this starter kit, please send me a note. Your feedback will be invaluable in shaping this resource.

Want me to help you replicate this module? Drop me a note and we’ll build it together.