Complexity makes it difficult to determine how to start, whereas simplicity makes it simple to determine what the next step is.
Imagine an insurance coverage adviser who must generate qualified leads. She results in a Facebook ad having a needs analysis calculator to assist consumers self-educate. Whenever a potential client clicks that calculator, a lead is made, and basic details are automatically captured.
As the prospect moves through the process, pages and forms update dynamically so details are only entered once and also the questionnaire automatically updates according to answers previously provided. This might not sound very magical, but don't you be thankful whenever you do not have to answer the same questions again and again to obtain the information you are looking for?
More serious magic happens because the lead continues to click though the process. More details is captured, charge is self-qualifying, and the adviser can access all things in real-time via a simple dashboard that lets her know exactly what the next thing is perfect for each prospect. Moreover, the carrier is gaining valuable consumer insights and behavioral data they are driving future decision-making. And all sorts of adviser did was place a lure in the water; she didn't have to do other things – all the complexity happens around the tailgate end, behind the curtain from the customer and also the adviser.
Good News | Bad News
The good news for insurers is that decades of prior design and customer-engagement learnings and best practices are for sale to us despite our not in the industry of promoting electronic devices. With regards to moving a person from point A to suggest B, the very best practices are proven, so we don't have to begin with scratch.
The bad news is that most teams posess zero stable of customer-experience experts to attract from as design decisions are made. Actually, often decisions affecting the client experience are created without any idea of design principles, and, with time, this could create a very messy experience… a button added here and there, opening a window here and there and so on.
Not quite a picture.
This problem also extends to consumers of enterprise software and platforms. Within the chronilogical age of Netflix and Amazon, software that comes with a thick instructions is doomed of all time been deployed. Today's business users have high expectations for modern software according to their own consumer experiences, to want to think twice before designing two-days worth of training in your next new system.
Above All Else, Trust
Delivering simplicity and magic may be the holy grail of great design, but there is another, essential design consideration that has to remain in the forefront, particularly when designing for more complex industries: building trust.
Trust is built through consistent experiences, the fastest ways to lose trust would be to offer a confusing flow with new experiences at every stage. We all know this from your own experiences with some e-commerce sites:
You look for a product you need to purchase, and you click the “buy” button, only to find another page that does not look anything like the site you began on. You choose that you want the merchandise enough to overlook the change in experience, until you visit pay and end up on yet another page that does not look anything like the page you were on before that.
Instead of the straightforward acquisition of a product you would like, you are now confronted with careful analysis proceed or not…because an inconsistent experience erased your trust along the way.
As the e-commerce example outlines, first impressions are essential, but consistency builds trust — and trust enables engagement/conversion. It's much harder to get users to maneuver from point A to suggest B when they don't trust you. Moreover, if they don't trust you, they are less likely to buy from you or recommend your product or service and services to other people.
Likewise, with B2B platforms and enterprise software, users tend to be more productive when they understand what to anticipate from a credit card applicatoin and it is UI. For example, office productivity tools for example Google Suites or Microsoft 'office' have numerous elements of design which are consistent between tools. Once you know how you can make a move in Google Docs, you are able to typically also do it in the search engines Sheets, for instance. And when users master these tools, those skills are transferable from employer to employer.
This is another great example of how consistency is often more essential than differentiation. When building new user experiences, the need to distinguish is strong, but consistency is critical. If you know how to search and play video on a single streaming service, you can probably do it on a rival service. Imagine if you had to re-train any time you wanted to make use of a cool product. But we typically expect enterprise users to do this when we introduce new software.
Designing for trust is an essential part of my job: It's top of mind as I make design decisions like a chief product officer developing technology solutions for life insurance. Sometimes, I find it useful to begin with the knowning that my decision may be wrong, flawed in some way I haven't determined yet. It's not which i don't trust my design instincts. I actually do. However the procedure for proving that my decision was the correct one often produces a better understanding of what we're attempting to accomplish.
