Usability Does Not Always Offer Absolute Positive Change
There is a false assumption that when usability is applied the improvements seen are absolute. The assumption goes like this. If you make something better for your users, you are making it better for all users. Like it or not, both designers and usability specialists tend to think this way. The issue is that it is nearly impossible to make a positive change that is universally positive for all users.
Example: You increase the size of the font for the body text on all web pages. The idea is that you want to make it easier for people to read material on the web pages. The assumption is that all users will benefit from this change, and that all users will equally benefit. But, there is a trade off. What if screen real estate is limited causing important material to disappear below the fold? What if the larger text ruins important page layout or formatting? These kind of unintended consequences are often overlooked. How many people have the wherewithal to do yet another round of follow up testing to make sure that the installed changes are effective? Further, who adds this to the budget?
The false assumption of positive change has other meanings too. For example, there is an assumption that the improvements you make only apply to the actual thing being improved. That is, positive changes happen in isolation from the rest of the system. However, the reality is that if you change one thing in a system you are probably making something else in the system more difficult.
What do you think?
July 21st, 2004 at 1:30 pm
One size never fits all. This an obvious, yet often overlooked fact.
However, it’s extreme to say “it is nearly impossible to make a positive change that is universally positive for all users.” Basic web accessibility comes to mind immediately. It’s absolutely possible to apply basic accessibility guidelines and not inhibit the experience for anyone else.