Component Request Process

Component request processes handle submissions for new design system components from consumers. These processes channel component needs through structured evaluation, ensuring requests are assessed consistently and good ideas reach implementation. Clear request processes reduce confusion and improve component library evolution.

What Is a Component Request Process

A request process defines how consumers submit, how teams evaluate, and how decisions are made about new component proposals. The process typically includes submission mechanism, evaluation criteria, decision authority, and communication of outcomes. Well-designed processes balance accessibility with rigor.

Request processes serve multiple purposes. They surface legitimate component needs from across the organization. They prevent fragmented custom development when centralized components would better serve needs. They channel community input into design system roadmaps.

How Component Request Processes Work

Submission mechanisms provide channels for requests. Issue templates on repositories, dedicated forms, or Slack channels accept requests. Submission should be easy enough to encourage participation while structured enough to capture needed information.

Request information requirements specify what submissions should include. Requirements might include use case description, affected teams, urgency, similarity to existing components, and proposed specifications. Complete information enables evaluation without excessive back-and-forth.

Evaluation criteria guide assessment. Criteria might include how many teams would benefit, whether the need could be met by existing components, alignment with design system direction, and implementation feasibility. Clear criteria enable consistent evaluation.

Decision authority determines who makes decisions. Design system teams might decide autonomously. Governance committees might review significant requests. Clear authority prevents confusion about who can approve or deny.

Outcome communication informs requesters of decisions. Approvals explain expected timelines. Denials explain reasoning and suggest alternatives. Communication respects the effort requesters invested.

Tracking maintains visibility into request status. Requesters should be able to check where their requests stand. Aggregated tracking shows request patterns that inform roadmap planning.

Key Considerations

• Request friction should be low enough to encourage participation
• Evaluation should be timely; long waits discourage future requests
• Denials should be constructive, not dismissive
• Request patterns inform strategic planning
• Request processes should evolve based on experience

Common Questions

How should design system teams prioritize component requests?

Prioritization considers several factors. Demand breadth matters: requests affecting many teams warrant higher priority. Strategic alignment considers whether requests support organizational direction. Feasibility assesses whether requests can be implemented with available resources. Urgency factors in time-sensitive needs. Contribution potential considers whether requesters might help implement. Prioritization should be transparent so requesters understand why some requests advance faster than others.

What alternatives exist when requests cannot be accommodated?

When requests cannot be implemented centrally, alternatives help requesters. Extension patterns may enable local customization of existing components. Composition approaches might achieve needs through combining existing components. Contribution paths allow requesters to implement and contribute components themselves. Documented patterns provide guidance for local implementation while maintaining design system alignment. Alternatives acknowledge legitimate needs even when central implementation is not feasible.

Summary

Component request processes handle submissions through defined submission mechanisms, required request information, evaluation criteria, decision authority, outcome communication, and status tracking. Prioritization considers demand breadth, strategic alignment, feasibility, urgency, and contribution potential. When requests cannot be accommodated, alternatives including extension patterns, composition approaches, and contribution paths help requesters address needs while maintaining design system alignment.