Learning to Love UI Conventions
UX and Creativity
User Experience (or UX for short) is a unique part of the creative advertising landscape these days. UX must check all the marks that good “creative” work does. But unlike a print ad, a video ad, or even a pop-up experiential installation, UX needs to build for more than just a moment in time. And unlike traditional advertising, UX has to balance usability and interaction with the expression of an idea.
Creatives like Art Directors and Copywriters tend to dislike restrictions. They instinctively crave to break the rules, and think outside the box when trying to solve a problem. This, after all, is the idea of creative thinking, choosing the unexpected.
It should be no surprise then, that when it comes to app design, User Experience Designers who see themselves as Creatives sometimes use custom UI conventions instead of standard UI conventions in their mobile app designs and prototypes.
*Before we continue, you may be wondering, what are UI conventions and how are they related to User Experience Design? User Interface (or UI for short) is the primary way a user interacts with a mobile application. User Experience Designers help build User Interfaces. User Interface conventions are the commonly used symbols and layouts that a user would recognize as having meaning when it comes to navigation or action inside of the application. Here is a simple example of a standard UI versus a custom UI.*
As any UX designer will tell you, human-centered design means building for the user. If we fight for the needs of the user, the end product will serve their needs. But what about when we are building for a user on behalf of a brand? As the Experience Design track head at the VCU Brandcenter, Andrew Lavausser asserts, designers “need to embrace empathy in both the process of design and the product of design.”
If we are to truly honor the “human-centered design” philosophy, we have to balance the layers of design for the user in all cases. But if we, as Andrew suggests, embrace empathy in the process of design, then we must have empathy for the brand we are designing for.
UX and Brands
Custom UI tempts the creative side of all creatives, but in most cases using standard UI conventions is the not only the better business decision, it’s also the more sound design decision. When we begin to design for brands then, especially in an agency capacity, does it not behoove us to use standard UI in most cases? If we are truly empathizing with the user, we must expect a desire for an easy to use UI trumping creative executions that are impenetrable or unusuable for most consumers.
This is where UX can learn lessons from great advertising minds. A titan of the ad-world and professor at Brandcenter, Mark Fenske said of all good creative: “It must be instantly understandable the minute you look at it.”
This maxim may not have been intended for UI or UX, but I think it’s as applicable and relevant to an app as it is a print ad. And like any creative endeavor, the rules in UI can be broken for good effect. But breaking the rules requires not only strong ideation, it will demand near perfect execution. Mark Fenske calls this the ‘rule of extra scrutiny.’
“You should really avoid inviting extra scrutiny to your creative,” Mr. Fenske says, “but if you do, you better be able to deliver on it.”
Again, we can infer that while good UX can break the rules, custom conventions must be prepared to overcome the extra scrutiny. This is why the most transformative UX comes from the very companies who build it’s platforms. It’s easy for Google to come up with new paradigm for UX when they can also change the conventions on Android to help deliver on it.
The majority of brands don’t have the ability to completely change the UX of a platform, and even when ‘game-changing UX’ comes from outside the platform makers, it’s just as likely that the platform makers will simply steal it.
Take pull to refresh for example. Most modern UI platforms have adopted pull to refresh as a convention to update an app’s content. A third party app called Tweetie first used the convention, and Twitter later patented it. It’s become so ubiquitous that it’s hated in some circles. But has this incredible UX innovation really benefited Twitter as a comapny? I’d argue it’s really only benefited the platform makers.
Prototyping for Brand
Should UX creatives just give up on expressing themselves in a creative way? No. Constraints inspire creativity, not deflate it. UX is no different. Using standard UI conventions simply means that the creative thinking must come from other places.
This is why the prototyping approach is so powerful, it lets UX designers get rule-breaking out of their system. It exposes the designer to how their idea will be received, and how their UI will impact the user. It allows creative thinking to become tempered by actual user feedback. It’s a way to express ideas in User Interface and User Experience without the risk of baking those ideas into a product that will ultimately fail the user or the brand developing it.
Apple has a great philosophy and framework for thinking about prototyping. The gist is: make fake apps, show people, learn from their feedback. Here are links to the WWDC session where they explain why they prototype and how all organizations should too.
IBM has a similar framework for developing prototypes, which they call the loop. Here is a link to the way they approach prototyping.
But even in the prototyping stage, using standard UI conventions is a great way to elevate your creative idea. People see the standard conventions and see authority in the design. In other words, using standard UI conventions in prototyping lends credibility to your idea. People who see the standard UI conventions in a prototype are comforted by the familiar, and begin to focus on the idea instead of the details of the prototype.
If you are prototyping for Google’s Android, use the Material Guidelines. If you are are prototyping for iOS, follow the HIG (Human Interface Guidelines). If you are prototyping for Windows, may God have mercy upon your soul. Seriously though, even if you aren’t currently prototyping, becoming familiar with the platform conventions will only serve to bolster your ability to communicate your creative ideas.
The UX burden
The choice between custom UI and standard UI isn’t simple. Unlike other marketing considerations like a print ad or a video spot, UI should not be seen as consumable. If an app UI isn’t built to scale with the inevitable changes in platform, it will become a beacon of how your brand is behind and stale. (The iOS 6 keyboard is a great way to see that a brand hasn’t given a shit about it’s app in years, for instance.)
If UX is to keep it’s seat at the big boy’s table in the agency world, it has to deliver and sustain. If brands get custom UI from an agency, it opens the brand to liability of continued development where the app must be completely reworked and rethought when it comes time to update and refine it.
A ‘one and done’ app development strategy not only hurts the brand, but it diminishes the way the whole advertising and marketing world sees the UX role. We have a responsibility to show how ‘human-centered design’ isn’t just about delivering one great user experience, but how it can be a sustainable way to deliver great user experiences over time.
Bryan Mortensen is a Masters candidate at the VCU brandcenter, studying Experience Design. Follow him @bemorte or at bemorte.com.
