I have very little direct experience with the UX specialization, although one could argue that everyone is somehow involved in it, I never worked directly with

I have very little direct experience with the UX specialization, although one could argue that everyone is somehow involved in it, I never worked directly with a UX Designer[0]. If you squint, you can recognize this approach as an iterative specification for a product or a set of related products. Some interesting take-aways for me: - UX seems to put a lot of value on visualizing data, thought and processes in different forms. They range from simple, ad-hoc, to quite involved. - A huge part of this work revolves around communication and testing: getting the right feedback and then analyzing it. - In software, they should probably be directly talking to engineers and UI designers, to provide the right set of problems to solve. This is maybe a good way to cut off management hierarchies that understand neither (users and implementation). [0] I've also seen the term "Engineer", "Architect" and others associated with it, but from talking to a UX "Architect" from a large company, I found that the best description would be "Designer" or "Director", because even though there are sometimes data-driven inputs their bread and butter seem to be very design, and communication focused. Maybe "Analyst" is a good term too.