Organizations have much to gain from a design system—efficiency, consistency, improved collaboration, and more. Even so, not all design systems are created equal. Without proper governance, a design system can quickly lose value, becoming outdated and ineffective. This is especially true for design systems not actively maintained by a dedicated team but instead left to gather digital dust on some server. The longer a design system goes without updates, the more likely the organization’s projects will start to diverge from the design system’s standards. 

This causes inconsistencies across products and can result in wasted resources as teams reinvent the wheel, working to resolve differences between the design system and their own products. If this scenario sounds all too familiar, you’re not alone. Many organizations struggle to strike the right balance between creativity and consistency in product design. A well-governed design system can help restore this balance, paving the way for innovation while maintaining a solid foundation to build. 

In this article, we’ll cover the ins and outs of design system governance, including what it is, why it matters, and how you can get started. 

Design System Governance: What is it?

Design system governance is the rules and procedures defining how a design system will be updated over time. 

This includes:

• Who the stakeholders are
• What their roles are
• How updates will be made.

Some design systems even include automated processes for governance right out of the box, making it easier to keep design systems current over time. 

Why does Design System Governance matter? 

The primary goal of design system governance is to ensure design system longevity. A design system with solid governance will be able to adapt to change over time to continue to serve its purpose, even as the:

• Organization
• Its products
• Its design preferences evolve. 

Without governance, a design system is likely to become outdated quickly, which can cause more issues than it solves. A design system left to gather “digital dust” can hurt an organization’s product development process by introducing inconsistencies and confusing teams. 

Strong governance helps to ensure that a design system remains helpful in a product team, even as the look and feel of the system evolve. This will allow teams to maintain consistency across their products while innovating on the user interface (UI) and user experience (UX) to meet changing customer needs.  

Who needs to Govern Design Systems?

The short answer? Everyone. Design system governance is a collaborative effort involving everyone contributing to product development. This includes:

• Designers
• Developers
• Product managers
• Chief Executive Officers (CEOs)

Each of these roles will have different responsibilities for maintaining a design system, and it’s essential to document these in the governance plan. For example, designers usually lead the updating of design systems as they change the visual interface. Even so, it’s also crucial to have input from developers to ensure that the updates are feasible from a coding perspective. 

Product managers will help to oversee the process and communicate any changes to the broader product team. Finally, it’s not uncommon for CEOs to get involved with design system governance as part of an organization’s efforts to improve overall efficiency and reduce wasted resources. 

How do you get started with Design System Governance?

Before you can govern a design system, you need one. If you don’t have a design system, start by building one. Next, consider the current state of your design system:

• Is it being used? 
• How can you tell? 
• Who is using it.
• What for?

Document this information before you start to establish a governance plan. This will give you a baseline from which to work and help you identify any existing issues with your design system before you implement governance. Finally, involve stakeholders to help you create a robust design system governance plan to ensure longevity and usability over time.

Why do you need a Design System Governance?

Think of design system governance as the rulebook and process for keeping a product’s design system running smoothly and consistently. The following are all about having a clear framework to decide:

• How updates are made
• Who approves them
• How they’re rolled out to avoid chaos and inconsistency.

Let’s take a simple example: imagine changing an app’s close icon from an "X" to a dash ("—"). It sounds small, right? But even this tiny tweak needs to go through an approval process. Why? Because every design decision, no matter how small, affects the product's usability, branding, and user experience. Good governance ensures that these changes don’t happen randomly or disruptively. Instead, it fulfills some key purposes.

Consistency Is Key

It keeps the design and branding uniform across all platforms, so your product looks and feels cohesive.

Protecting Usability 

Avoiding impulsive design choices prevents issues that confuse or frustrate users.

Encouraging Problem-Solving

It inspires teams to creatively solve challenges with existing components before reinventing the wheel.

Prioritizing Accessibility

Any updates are evaluated to ensure they’re inclusive and accessible to all users.

Keeping Everyone on the Same Page

It keeps the whole team—designers, developers, and stakeholders—aware of changes.

Updating Documentation 

Every tweak to the design system is recorded, so the documentation is always current. Without governance, making changes to a design system can become a free-for-all. Components might get edited or added without much thought, leading to inconsistent designs, usability issues, and even damage to the product’s reputation. 

Ultimately, design system governance isn’t about stifling creativity—it’s about creating structure so your team can innovate while keeping the product polished and reliable.

Challenges Of Design System Governance

Poor Communication and Inadequate Documentation

Effective governance of a design system hinges on seamless communication and thorough documentation, yet these are often lacking. Misalignment between teams or unclear expectations can create bottlenecks in the workflow. Before building or refining a design system, it’s critical to identify organizational pain points and establish how the system can address them. 

For instance, engaging stakeholders to understand their needs and goals ensures the design system serves its intended purpose. Without robust meeting notes and documentation of precise design principles, crucial details may be overlooked, leading to inconsistent implementation across teams.

Design Systems as an Afterthought or Side Project

In many organizations, especially startups, design systems are deprioritized and treated as side projects rather than integral components of the product development process. This approach leaves the system vulnerable to neglect and misuse. UX designers may struggle to maintain consistency amidst rapid growth demands, leading to poor governance and usability issues. 

These challenges can snowball into significant inefficiencies as teams spend additional effort undoing poorly governed decisions. Elevating the design system’s importance within the organization ensures it receives the attention and resources necessary for proper governance.

Diverging Mindsets Among Team Members

A design system’s success often depends on adherence to shared principles, yet internal disagreements can derail its potential. The product's consistency suffers when individuals create their own versions of:

• Tokens
• Components
• Design guidelines. 

This behavior causes disputes and undermines the design system’s purpose. 

Establishing and enforcing a clear governance plan is crucial to align team members around a unified vision. By fostering collaboration and adherence to organizational standards, teams can maximize the design system’s long-term value and maintain consistency across projects.

Scattered Toolkits and Lack of a Single Source of Truth

For a design system to be effective, it must serve as a single source of truth for all stakeholders—designers, developers, and product managers alike. Even so, maintaining this centralized source can be a significant challenge. Scattered toolkits and overly complex components complicate collaboration and scalability. 

A well-governed design system should be intuitive, allowing team members to quickly build complex blocks from simpler components. Additionally, it should act as a bridge for communication among:

• Design
• Engineering
• Product teams

Resistance to Change

Design systems should be dynamic, evolving to meet the changing needs of an organization. Even so, some managers or team members resist updates, believing the system is "good enough" as is. This reluctance stifles growth and prevents the system from adapting to new challenges or technological advancements. 

A design system is never truly finished; it requires ongoing iterations and improvements. Encouraging a culture of adaptability and innovation ensures that the design system remains a valuable asset over time rather than becoming outdated and inflexible. 

Streamline Development with Ion’s Figma-to-Code Solution

Ion transforms your Figma designs into production-ready code perfectly aligned with your existing codebase and business needs. Our platform bridges the gap between design and development by automatically generating functional code that matches your specific components, styles, and design system. We've created a unique solution that empowers non-technical team members to implement visual changes without engineering intervention.

Our tool understands your CI/CD pipelines, testing requirements, and component architecture, ensuring that generated code fits seamlessly into your workflow. Whether you're updating design elements or creating new features, Ion helps unlock engineering resources by letting designers and product teams contribute directly to the codebase in a safe, controlled way. Start building your application for free today with our design-to-code tool. 

Related Reading

• Design System Documentation
• Design System vs Style Guide
• Design Handoff

Different Design System Governance Models

A federated governance model brings representatives from various product teams to contribute to and maintain the design system. Each team member brings insights from their specific product, ensuring the system reflects real-world needs and use cases. This collaborative model often evolves organically as designers and engineers recognize the need for a unified system and gradually form a team to address it.

Strengths of the Federated Governance Model

• Practical insights: Components and patterns are driven by actual use cases, reducing unnecessary complexity.
• Inclusive Contributions: Product teams feel ownership over the design system, leading to broader adoption.
• Adaptability: Particularly beneficial for organizations with diverse or evolving product portfolios.

Challenges of the Federated Governance Model

• Decision-making complexity: With multiple voices at the table, reaching a consensus can be slow. A team charter outlining decision-making processes (e.g., majority vote or consensus) can mitigate this.
• Time management: Federated team members often split their time between product work and design system contributions, which can delay progress. Setting realistic expectations with leadership is essential.
• Fragmented aesthetics: Without clear design direction, inconsistencies may arise. Aligning stakeholders early and establishing a shared vision helps.
• Engineering resources: Federated engineers might face difficulties balancing product work with design system tasks, leading to misalignment between design and code.

This model works best for organizations with an extensive product portfolio, varying levels of product maturity, or limited resources for a centralized team.

The Centralized Governance Model of Design Systems

A centralized governance model relies on a dedicated core team responsible for creating, maintaining, and distributing the design system. This team often includes designers, engineers, and sometimes contractors or agency support. All decisions and updates stem from this central group, making the process more streamlined.

Strengths of the Centralized Governance Model

• Consistency: A single team ensures alignment across UI kits, components, and documentation.
• Efficiency: Centralized focus allows quicker updates and a unified vision for the design system.
• Clear accountability: The core team is solely responsible for the system, simplifying communication and oversight.

Challenges of the Centralized Governance Model

• Limited real-world context: The centralized team might overlook how components behave in diverse product environments. Partnering with product teams for usability feedback helps bridge this gap.
• Adoption barriers: A top-down approach can lead to resistance from product teams. Building relationships through design critiques and collaboration fosters trust and buy-in.
• Contractor pitfalls: When using agencies or contractors, missing product context can result in subpar components. Embedding contractors within the organization can mitigate this issue.

This model is ideal for smaller organizations, newer companies, or those with a limited product portfolio where alignment is easier to achieve.

The Hybrid Governance Model for Design Systems

The hybrid governance model combines the strengths of both federated and centralized approaches. It typically involves a centralized core team that builds and maintains the system, guided by feedback and direction from a federated group of product representatives.

Strengths of the Hybrid Governance Model

• Balanced collaboration: Centralized execution is informed by federated feedback, ensuring components are both practical and consistent.
• Community-driven: Federated contributors become advocates for the design system, encouraging adoption across teams.
• Flexibility: This model accommodates diverse organizational structures and product needs.

Challenges of the Hybrid Governance Model

• Coordination complexity: Managing federated and centralized contributors requires careful planning to avoid inefficiencies. Starting lean and scaling up as needed can help.
• Protective managers: Design managers may hesitate to allocate team members to federated roles, prioritizing product work. Clear communication about the value of contributions is crucial.
• Design direction: Like the federated model, multiple stakeholders can muddy aesthetic decisions. Defining roles and expectations early can streamline this.
• Engineering bandwidth: Federated engineers face the same balancing act as in the federated model. Strategies like sprint rotations for design system tasks can help.

The hybrid model suits organizations seeking centralized consistency and federated inclusivity, particularly those with a medium-to-large product portfolio.

Choosing the Right Model for Your Design System

Selecting the right governance model depends on your:

• Organization’s size
• Resources
• Product Complexity
• Goals

While federated models foster inclusivity and practical insights, centralized models shine in consistency and efficiency. The hybrid model offers a balance, enabling organizations to adapt to changing needs while maintaining alignment. Ultimately, the success of any governance model lies in

• Clear communication
• Realistic expectations
• Fostering a culture of collaboration

When Do Design System Governance Need Updates Or Changes

Design systems evolve over time. This evolution means that when a new element is added to a design system, governance needs a checkup to see if any existing rules need to change. For example, imagine your team decides to introduce a brand-new component, like a tooltip or a progress bar. 

A structured workflow should be in place to keep the design system clean and cohesive. This workflow ensures every team member can suggest additions while maintaining the system's integrity. Without this, your design system could spiral into inconsistency.

When Promoting Patterns, Design System Governance Needs Attention

Patterns are reusable design solutions, and they generally fall into two categories: 

• One-offs: Specific solutions that address a unique problem. 
• Best Practices: Patterns so effective that they become part of the standard toolkit.

Before promoting a pattern to "best practice" status, teams must test it against existing patterns to ensure it’s truly an improvement.

When Reviewing and Adapting Patterns, Design System Governance Needs Attention

Every design system should have at least a small team (think two or more members) dedicated to reviewing new or updated patterns. This step ensures that additions or tweaks align with the system’s standards and practices. Essentially, it’s quality control for your design system, like proofreading for design.

When Releasing Updates, Design System Governance Needs Attention

Rather than releasing updates whenever they’re ready, it’s best to stick to a scheduled release cycle. Why? A release schedule keeps things orderly and ensures updates go through proper quality assurance and documentation. It also helps teams anticipate changes and prepare accordingly. 

Managing the Process of Design System Governance Changes

A clear and straightforward submission process is key to handling these changes effectively. Decision trees are an excellent tool for this—they map out every step a proposed change must follow, from idea to implementation. 

For example, Inayaili de León shared a decision tree used by Canonical’s team. It shows precisely how new patterns are introduced, tested, and released. This structure makes the whole process smoother and ensures the design system evolves thoughtfully. 

Related Reading

• What is a Design System
• Design System vs Component Library

4 Practical Tips For Good Governance

1. Collaborate Across Teams to Build a Better Design System

Design system governance doesn’t happen in a vacuum. You need input from stakeholders across teams to build an effective governance model. Don’t work in silos! Establish a culture of collaboration and continuously engage with diverse teams throughout the design system lifecycle. 

Regularly seek feedback from product managers, developers, and other stakeholders to align design system governance with evolving organizational goals and user needs.

2. Iterate on Design System Governance Like You Would a Component

When it comes to design system governance, take an iterative approach. Continuously assess and iterate on your governance model based on user feedback, changing requirements, and emerging design trends. Regularly evaluate the effectiveness and relevance of your design system governance to ensure it continues to provide value.  

3. Establish a Clear Change Management Process

Updates and changes to design systems are inevitable. Establish a transparent change management process to effectively manage revisions to your design system documentation and underlying components as part of your governance model. 

This process should include evaluating proposed changes, assessing their impact on existing components and user experiences, and implementing them to minimize disruptions and maintain system stability.  

4. Be User-Centric

Design systems are ultimately created for users, so it’s crucial to prioritize their needs and experiences in all aspects of design system governance. This includes

• Conducting user research
• Gathering feedback
• Incorporating user insights to ensure your design system meets user expectations.

Regular usability testing and user feedback sessions help identify areas for improvement and inform future iterations of the design system.  

Related Reading

• Benefits of a Design System
• Best Design Systems
• How to Create a Design System

Start Building Your Application for Free Today

Designing for the web is only half the battle. The other half is turning your designs into production-ready code. Ion helps you with this by transforming your Figma designs into functional code. It doesn’t just stop there. The code Ion generates is aligned with your existing codebase and business needs. 

By bridging the gap between design and development, our platform automatically generates functional code that matches your specific components, styles, and design system. With Ion, non-technical team members can implement visual changes without engineering intervention. 

Our tool understands your:

• CI/CD pipelines
• Testing requirements
• Component architecture. 

The generated code fits seamlessly into your workflow. Whether you're updating design elements or creating new features, Ion helps unlock engineering resources by letting designers and product teams contribute directly to the codebase in a safe, controlled way.

‍