In defense of better software design.
Why shifting the burden to the user is not a smart strategy.
If you use software for daily tasks, build products for clients, or design software for a living, you may think it obvious that users should be at the center of software design. But are they truly? Think of any common software or digital product you have used recently — were you frustrated with it?
Consider a simple example: creating a PDF (Portable Document Format) file from a Word document.
PDFs are the most used portable document type claimed, not just by Adobe, but also by this PDF technical community. They were created to preserve document formats and readability across different devices for easy sharing while safeguarding against unwanted edits.
On Macs, creating a PDF from a Word document requires multiple steps:
- Create or open a Word document.
- Select ‘Save As’ from the File menu.
- Modify default names or folder locations if necessary.
- Choose “PDF” as the file format from a dropdown menu. (You have to scroll to get to it as the 9th choice on the list!)
- Click “Export” and wait for a confirmation message.
Now imagine you are a novice user tasked with creating a PDF file. Your first instinct would be to Google it, right? Luckily, you will find that there are 93.8 million results in Google with the official Microsoft Support page showing as a top result.
You will also find 54.6 M results specifically for blogs explaining how to create a PDF in Word. (Check this example.)
But what if you are a power user who needs to create multiple PDF files frequently?
Yep, that look about sums up how you may feel.
Microsoft released Word in 1983 and the Export feature for Word on Windows in 2013.
However, even after so many years, users still have to deal with the different steps outlined below.
Save As OR Export->Choose Filename->Choose Type -> Choose Quality ->Confirm.
The Microsoft software product support page for creating PDFs makes it clear that the same inefficient design is spread across multiple products.
The simple fix for the above feature? A one-click option for exporting files to PDFs with an advanced option for power users.
This is why it is essential that product managers think of the broader implications of feature usage across products when writing requirements or user stories to minimize impact downstream. The longer a feature is in play, the harder it is to change it.
Multiply inefficient feature design by the number of features in a software product, and you end up with a stack of poorly designed features that create usability issues. Usability is a key attribute for measuring software effectiveness.
The cost of usability issues is typically borne by the user and when switching costs are high or alternative solutions are limited, products tend to have stickiness but only until a superior option is available.
An elegant, user-centric design not only simplifies actions but also reduces training and maintenance costs, offers consistent user experiences and enhances customer satisfaction. Moreover, software creation is an art form in which, if you wish, you can demonstrate the bar for excellence.
Conclusion
In their book on change, Switch, authors Chip and Dan Heath share an example of Microsoft’s tests which revealed that six in ten users did not know how to use a feature. When the developers were shown this test data, their first reaction was, “Where’d you find six dumb people?”
Is it any wonder then that even after forty years of Word’s success and ten years after its Export feature introduction other priorities trump usability and user experiences for many software development teams?
To product managers, software designers, and engineers tempted to overlook effective design for short-term savings: remember that a poorly designed feature may be used trillions of times, and impact your brand down the road.
Like the article? Please consider buying me a ☕! Muchas Gracias!
p.s. The Medium partner program does not support India based writers.
