Some of the work I am proudest of has no screenshot.

I came into design because I loved making things visible. An idea became an advertisement. A problem became a journey. A confusing screen slowly became simpler. There was always something at the end that I could point towards and say, “I made this.”

Leadership changed that.

The work became less visible and, in many ways, more difficult to explain.

It was clarifying an unfinished brief before it reached the team. It was protecting a young designer from unnecessary noise while still helping them learn from difficult feedback. It was convincing the organisation to invest in an internal design capability instead of depending entirely on external partners.

Sometimes it was recognising an ability in someone before they could see it themselves.

Sometimes it was telling a designer, “This is not there yet,” without making them feel that they were not good enough.

There is no case-study thumbnail for these moments.

Nobody adds “prevented three poor decisions before lunch” to a portfolio.

When I started leading people, I believed I had to be involved in everything. I thought leadership meant having the strongest opinion in the room and being able to answer every question. Perhaps part of me was also afraid that if I stopped designing everything myself, people might stop seeing me as a designer.

Over time, I understood that leadership is not about becoming the most important person in the process. It is about making the process and the people stronger.

That meant allowing someone else to present the work, even when I had helped shape it. It meant watching designers develop their own judgment instead of waiting for my approval. It meant building standards, templates, systems and capabilities that could continue working without my constant presence.

The strange reward of good leadership is that the team gradually needs less intervention from you.

But I have also learnt that there is a difference between empowering a leader’s team and making the leader invisible.

People should be able to make decisions independently, but leadership still needs context, accountability and respect. A leader does not have to attend every meeting, but they cannot be expected to own outcomes while being disconnected from the decisions that create those outcomes.

I can be proud when my team succeeds without me in the room. I can also recognise when the absence of communication is not empowerment but a structural problem that needs to be discussed.

This distinction took me time to understand.

For many years, I believed that good work would naturally speak for itself. In organisations, it often needs some help. Invisible leadership has to be translated into visible evidence: stronger people, better decisions, reduced dependency, faster delivery, improved quality and a team capable of taking on larger problems.

Otherwise, quiet contribution can easily be mistaken for no contribution.

Today, I try to document the decisions behind the designs, not only the final screens. I speak about the capabilities created, not just the projects delivered. I look at whether people have grown, whether the organisation has become more self-sufficient and whether the quality bar remains even when I am not watching it.

I am still learning how to balance these two sides: doing the quiet work and making its impact visible.

Leadership may not always leave behind a beautiful interface.

Sometimes it leaves behind a more confident designer, a stronger team, a difficult conversation handled with dignity or a system that continues working long after the leader has stepped away.

That work may not be immediately visible.

But it is never insignificant.