TLDR; Ill-conceived design is only part of the problem.
——
You are assuming the entry form was put together with the assistance of a UX designer.
In my experience, back office or configuration software rarely is seen as important enough by the Powers-That-Be to justify all the “extra research and design effort” required.
Usually work like that is tossed over to whichever mid-level software engineer has an extra cycle or two during the sprint.
This is not to imply that software engineers are always bad at UX. In fact, most engineers I’ve worked closely with care a lot about the end users’ experiences, however, when push comes to shove, their leaders (or the overseeing Product teams they are accountable to) push for rapid delivery of features to reach market parity, rather than spending the extra few days to formally validate the right design decisions were made and if the implementation of those designs were solidly understandable.
Going back to your original comment: We should, as an industry, hold designers accountable if their decisions lead to detrimental consequences, especially ones which could be anticipated, like this one.
However, we should also recognize this is never the failure of solely the designer, but rather indicators of systematic issues of the extended team.
A poorly designed feature/function which makes it way through...
* pre-dev stakeholder reviews
* development and implementation
* quality assurance
* acceptance testing
...before release has been vetted and signed-off by enough people to ensure everyone is complicit.
It is a failure of culture and leadership if no one along the chain had been comfortable or able to raise a flag if they disagreed or foresaw a problem.
Edit: Fixed formatting and this ended up to be longer than I expected when I stared typing. Also, typos.
