Last week I wrote ‘putting users in the driving seat’ and focused on ways you can give users control over your site. I was rightfully picked up on a few points by Natalie Jost responded to my post with ‘Users gain freedom in a designer keeping control’. Whilst, we differ slightly on our opinions and agree on some, there is a bit of clarification needed on my prior post so this is about taking that idea and elaborating.
A chocolate teapot is just that even if it’s pretty
Natalie raises a good point in her comment:
“While to some degree, small changes to layout or font sizes do in fact benefit many users and can be given for the sake of general usability, I don’t believe users should be given actual design decisions simply for the sake of user control. In this way, there is no guaranteed benefit to the user; rather it is merely a gift to stroke his ego and make him feel a part of something which in most cases he has no need to be a part of.”
What it really comes down to which I did cover in my post but feel the need to touch on again – is the need to use the right tools for the job. One area where fuller customisation may be useful is for instance a social network, but the key here is that it’s not right for all sites. Not only should you be open to what user enhancements or control you can give, you should also be open to when it is a frill for the sake or when it is actually useful.
In design it often can lead to the frill side of life. The more and more I work with design, I feel a need to have not just design for the sake – often a mistake people make when they start out in design. Whilst there is something about a pretty picture in the end it is just that. If it does nothing to sell the product, has no use and doesn’t actually work as a website – the point has gone. Design and functionality should never be just for the sake of it. There should be a reason behind it. I more and more grow to believe this.
Filters aren’t just for coffee
Another point Natalie raises is:
“In general, websites should be designed by the designer and left with only minor usability related changes available, changes which should always remain the control of the user from the beginning, as opposed to style or functionally related changes which should be left to those with the appropriate training and expertise on style an function.”
My point of view is that although I would say you have to be careful to use the right functionality, you should also realise that you work in a fluid medium. Control can be done BUT the big but is that it’s a medium where change will occur. From unsolicited text increase through to any number of other factors – websites are not static. Here comes into play my other point that is the flip side of the knowing what tool to use for the job. A designer should also be aware that their design should not be chains for the website or users of that site – it should allow enough freedom for users to be led but not dragged around the site in shackles. As with anything it’s a balance. Web design is a lot about silent design. I’ve used a phrase before that a site should ‘just work’ and ‘do what it says on the tin’. This is of particular relevance to my argument.
Control freak need to apply within
A design above all really should be a filter for the design. The skills you gain over the years allow you to both be creative and a boundary of sense – or at least they should do. If you work on any large scale website you won’t ever be just the single decision maker. A lot of web designers get into freelance thinking a bit too much with their freudian id, whilst some of the time you and the client are the only two in the mix often it can extend beyond that. Marketing departments, investors and even users – the list goes on with regards who can have a ’2 cents’ about what a design should or shouldn’t be.
The role of the design is not just a creative one but it’s part design agony aunt. You filter those requests into something channelled and unified. A bad designer throws a tantrum or creates Frankenstein’s monster. Unlike some this part of design I actually like. Whilst I am still the voice the creates the design, I am always open to untrained opinions and feel a designer who looks down and proclaims ‘you don’t have a design degree so you can’t have a say’ is wrong. Ultimately, you are the one shifting the pixels – but being open to even an untrained opinion could give you an insight you may have not received otherwise. A closed eared designer is a stifled one in my book.
Balancing pixels
What it really all comes down to is with the years as a designer you not only gain the skills to create the designs, you also gain the skills to filter requests and know what is right for that design. This is true of any designer. A print designer knows what works well or not on a bill board, a furniture designer knows what works or not on a chair and even what works for what type of chair. As you know these boundaries you can interpret requirements, pick what elements to use and even push those boundaries at times. The point is you are the filter for things but the point of a filter is it takes input in and outputs. Only by using experience to select the right elements for the design will the design be successful. Remembering that pretty for pretty sake is just that, is also a good thing to keep in mind. You may be able to customise your profile but if it’s a website that has no other purpose for being a member of than ‘keeping up with the web 2.0 Jones”, then it was a bad decision having a profile.
