{"id":1249,"date":"2024-08-05T19:12:23","date_gmt":"2024-08-05T19:12:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.simon-li.com\/design-and-code\/?p=1249"},"modified":"2024-08-06T03:55:13","modified_gmt":"2024-08-06T03:55:13","slug":"5-principles-that-stuck-with-me-after-reading-universal-principles-of-design","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.simon-li.com\/design-and-code\/5-principles-that-stuck-with-me-after-reading-universal-principles-of-design\/","title":{"rendered":"5 Principles That Stuck with Me After Reading Universal Principles of Design"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Universal Principles of Design<\/em> is a book that I should\u2019ve read earlier as a product designer. It gave me new perspectives in thinking about the tricky design problems or situations I encountered in the past, and new ideas on how to approach a design project in the future. Below are 5 principles that stuck with me after I read this book.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"\/
https:\/\/amzn.to\/4daxHZ1<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Performance \u2260 Preference<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The best performing design is not necessarily the most preferred design. The Dovrak keyboard layout is such an example. What leads to a preferred design is often a combination of factors rather than just performance: Is it pleasing to look at? Does it follow or go against existing standard-of-use?\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/
Source: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/QWERTY<\/a>, https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Dvorak_keyboard_layout<\/a>, https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Colemak<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

So if we created a well performing product but it fails to gain momentum or market share, perhaps it\u2019s time to drop our attachment and exam the reality. To obtain reliable information on preference versus performance, we can observe how users interact with different designs in context<\/em>, as the book suggests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This principle also tells us that we should never ask users directly whether they\u2019d like to have a product with better performance, because such reports from the users can be unreliable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reality is complex and to me this principle goes beyond design: A job candidate that gets hired is not necessarily the most qualified. A highest-educated person in life is not always the most successful one\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Design by Committee Isn\u2019t No Good<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

I used to think that design by committee is bad and should be avoided. However, this book tells me that it\u2019s actually often needed and desired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When a project is complex, the consequences of error or failure are severe, and stakeholder buy-in is important, design by committee is necessary and preferred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When a project is urgent and straightforward, the impact of errors is relatively small and tolerable, and stakeholder buy-in is not needed, design by dictator is okay.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s inevitable that in the process of design by committee, the edges and idiosyncrasies in a design are softened or evened out as consensus is built among stakeholders. However, the resulting design also tends to be more balanced and stable. The book illustrates this with the design process of the one world trade center tower.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"\/
The design of One World Trade Center is an example of design by committee. Source: https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:One_World_Trade_Center_Building.jpg<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Complex projects inevitably involve some degree of design by committee. So as designers, we\u2019d better get used to this phenomenon and learn how to better collaborate with and manage stakeholders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pay Attention to Propositional Density<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Propositional density is a new concept I learned from this book. It\u2019s refers to the number of ideas or meanings that can be derived per element in a design. It\u2019s this magical thing that separates an interesting design that has depth from a boring one. The higher the propositional density, the better. Good examples with high propositional density according to the book include the Apple logo and the Obama campaign logo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/
The Apple logo and the Obama campaign logo have high propositional density according to the book. Source: https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Apple_logo_black.svg<\/a>, https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/File:Obama_logomark.svg<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

As you may know, I\u2019ve been practicing illustrations for quite some time. I notice that the illustrations that are interesting are those that tend to have some sort of a story in them. With this concept, I can understand why this is the case in a more scientific way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Contrast generates visual interest, and propositional density creates depth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nudge Is Subtle<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Nudge is a design strategy that leverages subtle psychology to prompt the user to behave in a desired way. Two examples from this book really helped me better understand this idea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first one was the beeping sound that won\u2019t stop in cars until seatbelts are fastened. It\u2019s about trying to get passengers to act through mild annoyance and punishment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second one was the design of the urinal bowls in male toilets at Schiphol airport that have a fly image etched into them<\/a> to improve the cleanliness of the bathroom. This brilliant strategy is leveraging what the book calls a visible goal<\/em> to nudge the users towards a wanted behavior.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Progressive Disclosure Can Be Interesting<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Progressive disclosure has become a cliche to me because I\u2019ve heard it so many times when studying HCI and it\u2019s simple to understand: you don\u2019t overwhelm the user by showing everything at once but rather show only the most likely needed features and hide the less often used. A often cited example of this is the search dialog and the advanced options within it, but the theme park line example given by the book is much more interesting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because the line for an theme park game can be quite long and scare away visitors, theme parks nowadays design the entrance point in such a way that only a small segment of the line can be seen while visitors are waiting. Also, video content of the game is displayed to engage the visitors so that they won\u2019t get bored while in the line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Applying progressive disclosure this way was something I\u2019ve never thought of and it really opens my eyes. It\u2019s brilliant because it takes care of the psychology of those in the line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The other day, I stumbled upon another interesting example related to waiting in line. In some busy restaurants in China, if customers ends up waiting for a table for more than a certain amount of time, the restaurants offer additional foods for free as compensation. Though this is not directly related to progressive disclosure, it apparently also takes into account the customer psychology: It offers customers the incentive to wait, helps the restaurants retain customers and makes the them happy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Final Thoughts<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Besides these 5 principles that I found particularly useful, I also learned how fuses leverage the weakest link principle to ensure safety and how we can tap into visuospatial resonance to combine two images. I like the fact that many of the principles discussed in the book don\u2019t just apply to the digital world. In fact, many examples inside the book come from service design or interior design. Underlying these design principles is our human cognition and psychology. By learning how to use them, we not only broaden our horizon but also add more tools to our product designer toolkit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recommendation: \u2b50\ufe0f \u2b50\ufe0f \u2b50\ufe0f \u2b50\ufe0f \u2b50\ufe0f<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

My Learnings from Other UX Books<\/h3>\n\n\n\n