Balancing innovation with consistency is one of the trickiest challenges UX designers face — how do you create fresh, exciting solutions without leaving users behind? In this article, we explore practical strategies to find that perfect middle ground and design experiences that truly resonate.
Sometimes change is necessary, but it's important to remember change takes time to adopt.
Designers often look for innovative ways of approaching problems, using creativity to find more efficient solutions than traditional options. As technology and society change, there is a constant need for UX designers looking for these new opportunities.
However, sometimes these solutions conflict with what users expect based on existing systems. These scenarios involve inconsistencies between what the user knows and what the designer is proposing.
Despite what may appear as simply failing to meet user expectations, these solutions are almost always designed to make the user's life easier by introducing new, beneficial concepts.
Take for example, transit users may be used to visiting a ticket vendor location in order to buy tickets — only to learn that tickets will be moving to a digital-only model in the future. This poses numerous questions to users, such as "how do I buy my tickets?", "do I need to use a desktop?" and "do I need to create a transit account?". The transition to a digital model is intended to make taking transit easier than before, but tensions begin to mount as user uncertainty leads to significant support calls & inquiries.
When situations, such as the previous example, call for significant innovation — UX designers must balance consistency with innovation. This task is inherently complex due to the polar differences between both directions.
Designers must consider how they will approach these situations, and how they will best serve their users with minimal uncertainty between what is provided and what is expected.
To help understand the techniques that can be used to solve these challenges, designers can work to better understand the value of both consistency and innovation in their design decisions.
Users will notice changes to processes their familiar with, and will be on the lookout for more changes—potentially slowing down their task speed after changes are implemented.
Both consistency and innovation are directional factors that guide designers towards solving existing user problems. Where consistency represents more traditional methods, innovation features new & unique methods. Since both directions solve user issues there is often some level of uncertainty in which should be used.
To highlight the differences, UX designers should consider several important design variables that should influence their design choices: change, practicality, and risk.
Each of these variables represents a set of design considerations that help determine where to innovate and keep consistent. They serve as a tool to UX designers, simplifying this decision making process.
Whether a UX designer proposes a more consistent or innovative choice, that decision should be supported by an assessment of these considerations.
It is also important to understand that inconsistent choices are not necessarily innovative and vice versa. With both design directions, UX designers should always strive to ensure some level of consistency across their design systems.
With these considerations in mind, UX designers should be equipped to best evaluate if they should take a more consistent or innovative approach to the issue, activity, or product they are designing for.
Some user experiences are safer to experiment with than others, such as a self-checkout in a grocery store.
A common UX designer assignment is creating solutions for user issues as they arise. These could be frustrations, obstacles, or even barriers-of-entry within an overarching user journey. By solving the issue, the UX designer hopes to help the user achieve their goals.
In many of these situations, issues arise as a result of a more traditional solution failing to meet user needs due to changes made along the journey or in a connected system.
For example, a real estate platform implements changes that allow their realtors to upload more types of visual media as part of the listings. Users are then able to view images, 3D models, videos, and more within a gallery originally designed for just images. However, users voice frustration as the layout of the gallery makes it difficult to view these new types of media, many of whom get frustrated with using the default gallery controls and the added loading times. For the design team working on the platform, they are tasked with determining how to best display these new types of media for their users to minimize these frustrations.
Regardless of the solution used, the presentation of it should be consistent with other design choices within the journey. This level of consistency is implied, and should exist to ensure the overall experience appears logical for users.
However, there may be ways of incorporating some form of innovation within the solution, which adds additional benefits to the user beyond simply solving the issue.
Continuing the previous example, the design team believes that the best solution for the gallery usability issue is to develop a new, unique gallery with additional functionality for mixed media. This gallery will feature a variety of controls that help with displaying video, interacting with 3D models, and browsing through images. In keeping with the consistency of the visual design system used on the platform, all of the UI for the new gallery will adhere to preset standards. This solution was selected over the more traditional approach of splitting the media up across a webpage in multiple sections that have their own media-specific controls.
When considering the solution proposed in this example, the variables discussed earlier can be applied to the approach taken.
Resolving issues requires UX designers to consider the frustrations and obstacles facing users. This user-centric mindset makes it possible to evaluate where some level of innovation might be required beyond implementing a more traditional solution.
Turn and talk to your colleagues when considering the impacts a change might have on users. It's a great first step in keeping the user's needs in focus.
Successful user journeys are largely composed of well-thought and implemented flows that users complete as activities. Whether users are uploading a file or navigating a physical space, activities require time & awareness by the user in order to complete properly.
Even when there aren't any apparent issues affecting users, there can be opportunities to improve upon existing activities to improve the overall user experience.
These types of opportunities involve modifying how activities are structured for users, identifying steps that could be refined, combined, or even removed. Knowing how to improve steps requires the consideration of consistency and innovation variables.
As an example, a design team for an airport believes that travelers are taking longer than expected to read & comprehend the wayfinding signage setup through the airport. Despite there being no indication that travelers are frustrated or are late for their trips, the designers believe there is room for improvement. They are motivated to continually improve wayfinding experiences, as even marginal reductions in comprehension times can significantly reduce congestion throughout the airport. One idea involves a significant change in how signage is positioned, which involves moving overhead signage to digital vertical-displays that are placed along walking paths.
In this example, there is no clear indication that an issue is present or immediate action is needed. However, the design team strives to act proactively, and uses this opportunity to improve upon a part of the user journey for their airport travelers.
The proposed idea involves significantly revisiting the wayfinding approach, as a way of innovating the more traditional, consistent signage into a new experience. To help make sense of the possible effects in pursuing this direction, the design team considers the following variables:
Continuing this example, the design team deliberates on whether to pursue this new, innovative approach or look for ways of modifying their existing approach. They decide that although the aspects of change and practicality seem to allow for innovation, the amount of risk is too substantial. The design team determines that there may be room for adding upon their wayfinding with new types of digital displays, but moves to implement changes more consistent with traditional airport wayfinding approaches.
When striving to improve upon an activity for users, UX designers should be aware that the primary focus should be on preserving the lack of issues for users. Even when there is room for improvement, the potential of causing new issues should incentivize designers to act very carefully.
This carefulness should not always be associated with finding safe solutions that focus on consistent methodologies. In many situations, incorporating innovative changes can actually create new opportunities to improve other, related activities by using a similar approach. In these scenarios, the innovative approach gradually shifts to becoming the traditional approach.
Airport wayfinding is a classic UX challenge, requiring the balance of new digital technologies and a fast-paced, stressful environment.
Products solve issues for their users, and the value they provide is largely influenced by how usable they are by the intended users. The direct relationship between value and usability incentivizes UX designers to make the products as usable as possible, which then improves the value it provides.
Naturally, many UX designers will start with finding ways of creating products that are consistent with similar, existing products. The notion being that users will have an easier time using a product if they can draw upon experience of using something similar.
Although this approach works in the majority of scenarios, there are often opportunities to implement an innovative product that solves more issues than was originally needed.
For example, a design team is tasked with creating a USB charging port as part of a larger campaign to develop an ecosystem of workspace equipment. The designers are well aware that these devices exist across nearly every modern office environment, and their users are more than familiar with how to set them up. However, the design team considers introducing a more innovative approach that involves using modular parts that can be swapped interchangeably. The proposed idea would open up new opportunities to users, allowing them to create any type of charging port needed without having to purchase preset port designs.
The proposed design in this example is intended to empower users by enabling them to find & solve a variety of issues. Users could create more elaborate charging stations, take individual parts on business trips, and make more efficient purchases by buying individual components.
Despite these interesting opportunities for users, this approach introduces new complexities for users as they must now learn how they should best use this product. The fundamental application may not have changed, but users are now expected to think differently about how they should set up their charging stations.
Considering this added complexity, the design team discusses several variables:
Continuing this example, the design determines that the best approach will be to use a combination of consistency and innovation. A modular approach will be used, but the products will be largely packaged in preset layouts. This would allow users to easily begin using the product without needing to use the modular features, while offering more freedom to those who benefit from those features.
In many product design situations, a hybrid approach represents the best of both consistency and innovation. Allowing users to quickly embrace a new product then makes it more likely that they will try the innovative qualities added into the product.
Regardless of if a product design follows a more traditional design or not, UX designers are primarily focused with creating products that provide the most value to their users.
Creating something new? Take some extra time at the start to really consider how users may react to certain design decisions.
All great UX design decisions incorporate some level of consistency. Meaning that users are able to recognize patterns and similarities to other similar designs, making it easier to engage with the design than with designs that are entirely unique.
As changes emerge in the lives of users, the need for revisiting traditional approaches will require UX designers to find innovative solutions.
Understandably, innovation takes away from some of the consistency users expect by providing them with a new way of thinking. This change can be complex, requiring users to learn new skills & knowledge with the ideal potential of being more successful in their goals.
This relationship between consistency and innovation is a constant challenge of balancing both approaches with each design solution. Too much of either, and users may not get the full benefit of what could be available to them.
To gain a starting point in determining where to consider innovating, UX designers are encouraged to consider change, practicality, and risk.
Each of these variables can identify problems that might arise from pursuing too much innovation. Simultaneously, these variables can highlight opportunities to provide more value to users than was previously thought to be possible.
Regardless of the final solution used by the UX designer, it should reflect a careful consideration of how their decisions will affect the user. This mindfulness of user needs will naturally lead to creating better design solutions, helping users become more successful.
The best UX solutions are the ones that seem most intuitive. Getting to that point is the real challenge.
Many businesses and organizations will champion innovative thinking, often to an excessive degree. Innovation is an appealing concept, because it alludes to unknown benefits that could make significant improvements in user experiences.
However, innovation is also commonly associated with failure. Many unique ideas are proposed each day by designers that will ultimately fail, because they feature overly innovative features that don't contribute value to the user.
This is where the consideration of variables between consistency and innovation becomes paramount.
Understanding how an innovative approach might affect users is how UX designers can predict the success of their creative thinking. Without these considerations, UX designers rely on assumptions to guide their decisions — which might not be correct.
The fundamental challenge then becomes a matter of dealing with the pressure to be innovative, even when it might not be necessary. For UX designers, this pressure complicates the design decision process of knowing what users need to be successful.
An organization may incentivize creating something new each time, making designers tread carefully about how consistent their designs are over time. Alternatively, a business may demand frequent innovation to remain competitive — instead of pursuing increased value to users over time.
Balancing consistency and innovation is a challenge without these contexts. For UX designers, accounting for these pressures is enormously helpful when recommending & asserting the most effective design decisions.
