So Google redesigned their icons and it didn't get a warm welcome at all. I, just as many others, felt like the icons are hardly distinguishable between one another and are pretty hard to find on a smaller screen at a glance.
And even though I still feel the same way, a UX designer Felix Lee presents an interesting take on why Google's redesign actually makes sense.
In his article he talks about the importance of context, value and goals of design and highlights that Usability is just one of the factors and not a rule set in stone.
Read the article here https://uxdesign.cc/the-ux-fallacy-the-fallacy-that-everything-needs-to-be-usable-to-be-valuable-2b1c626bdb7d
How do you feel about the redesign?
“Become smarter in 15 minutes a day”, “Learn a new language in a week” or “Get fit in 14 days” - some of the value propositions of today’s apps.
In product design & development we strive to build experiences that are easy to use and simple to understand, and that’s great! But is there a danger in oversimplifying? What kind of lasting effect can simplified, “everything’s under the hood” type of experiences have?
A designer & writer Ralph Ammer explores these questions in his nicely illustrated piece bellow
Why are original Post-its yellow? Is it for visual ergonomics, usability maybe? Is it part of 3M brand style? There must be well thought through reasons behind it, right?
Well, here’s what Dr Geoff Nicholson (now retired VP of research & development at 3M) said when asked to explain his and his team decision - “We had some scrap yellow paper!”
That’s it. It is an accident, a coincidence that post-its came out yellow. It wasn’t designed, it just happened and people at 3M rolled with it.
Read a full interview with Dr Geoff Nicholson and see how nonchalant and funny he is about one of the most iconic accidents in product development.
As product development continues to shift more and more towards business-centered rather than human-centered design, removing “friction” becomes one of the key aspects of product optimization.
Reducing “friction” pretty much means minimizing the cognitive load and number of steps a user has to take to reach the goal. However when you look at that goal from a business perspective it’s usually a conversion (most often some sort of transaction) and to get their users to that goal as quick as possible businesses are inclined to remove all friction blindly. The problem with that is that not all friction is bad for the user.
Let me quote AirBnb’s design manager Steve Selzer - “...when we remove friction, we also remove moments for serendipity and self-reflection. At scale, this can erode our social values and increase our tendency toward intolerance and impatience, leaving us with a lack of resilience and an inability to navigate change.”
Also one of the best examples of increasing instead of reducing friction comes from the same AirBnb - one of the last steps before you book a place is to send a personal message to the owner of that place. From a business perspective it’s absolutely not necessary and creates friction in the most important user flow of the product. But would they have decided to remove it or put it somewhere else they wouldn’t have built such a trusting community and wouldn’t have such a successful product.
So be thoughtful with reducing friction and keep in mind that if used correctly and with the right intent it can actually benefit both your users and your business.