Not just a pretty interface

When it comes to the web, have we forgotten the oldest design principle of all?

Create something beautiful.

Impact of user research

We’ve all seen websites which explode in your face and leave you wondering where anything is, in fact why you are there at all. Perhaps as a reaction, and thanks to the steadying influence of repeated cycles of user research, the focus shifted to functional, usable UI, making the user journey work. It was a huge step forward.

The move to ‘flat’ interface design was led in the UK by sites like GOV.UK, and we owe them a lot.

Foul decoration! 

Visually appealing design elements came to be seen as a distraction, to be avoided at all costs. Anything which tried to look good or different was seen as “decoration”. And decoration became a dirty word.

Flat design dominates

This article on flat design highlights a common perception: “If an aspect serves no functional purpose, it’s a distraction from user experience”. 

But I think this view misses out on so much of what good web design can deliver — in terms of impact, tone and emotional resonance. 

Fifty shades of grey

And let’s be honest — a lot of websites which focus solely on flat, usable interface design look a bit dull. And all a bit the same. As a result, they’re not maximising the potential to engage their users.

Design beyond functionality

Take this site, which we created with the Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. Bold photos of young people are integral to the site’s design. They have no ‘functional purpose’ — so are they merely a ‘distraction’?

For me, they emphasise the human dimension to this important and difficult area. They create a thoughtful tone for the site, including some more upbeat imagery, in line with the CSA Centre’s goals. The design tested well with users, without impacting usability.

Aesthetic-Usability Effect

Research by the Nielsen Norman Group highlighted the dangers of the ‘Aesthetic-Usability Effect’:

Users are more tolerant of minor usability issues when they find an interface visually appealing. This aesthetic-usability effect can mask UI problems and can prevent issue discovery.

This research is sometimes misinterpreted to suggest that beautiful UI design is somehow a bad thing.

The real lesson from Nielsen

The Nielsen study does tell us something important. That it’s a very good idea to focus on visual design as well:

Users are more likely to want to try a visually appealing site, and they’re more patient with minor issues. However, this effect is at its strongest when the aesthetics serve to support and enhance the content and functionality of the site.

Accessible

Another common myth is that good-looking websites can’t be accessible. Of course they can, but it is harder to achieve it. Accessibility needs to be ‘designed in’ from the outset, and kept in mind throughout.

For instance, we extensively user researched and iterated the JCi site with older and disabled people, starting with an accessible, coded prototype. We researched and iterated again after the visual design had been worked in.

Model: good looking and friendly (swipe right)

Here then is a model for creating good looking, user-friendly web designs:

• User research before applying the visual design, for instance using clickable wire-frames or a coded prototype
• Iterate
• Apply the look — aim for an engaging, accessible visual design, and subtle UI animations which affirm user actions
• Research again to make sure usability has been enhanced, or at least not diminished. Focus on what users do, not just what they say (an old usability adage).
• Iterate

The web design trinity

It is possible to create beautiful, accessible and usable websites. In fact, you need all three of these to truly deliver for your users.

Next up, making websites smell nice.