An interesting question popped up yesterday...
When should we design something innovative vs. just use traditional conventions for familiarity and use?
We talk all the time about being cutting edge, and making experiences that will blow the users mind.
But there's also a responsibility we have as creators, founders, and designers, to give users a sense of comfort so when they go through an experience it's easy to understand.
Jazmine Cable-Whitehurst and I talked about how this affects the way we approach product design.
I'd say big picture concepts should be more innovative, and the smaller interactions should stick to be conventional.
For example, if we were designing a new way for users to engage with news stories - it would make sense to make more dynamic experiences beyond reading an article.
I've always been a fan of how NYTimes does that, among a handful of others that I'll put in the comments.
What should not be remade?
Basic functions like the share button, shopping cart, account menu placement, cancel and submit buttons.
Building blocks and atoms we need to be wary of changing too much or else we'll make friction for our user.
Users may not know why they feel more confused on your experience, but everytime you force the user to think harder to do basic actions, it will push them away.
Imagine if some reinvented the "dropdown" field and in order to open it, you had to hover over it for 3 seconds to trigger it. And then it opened up and all the options say on top.
When do you think it's appropriate to deviate?
#UX #productdesign
