“As users get more and more savvy on the web …”

This statement is thrown around a lot in web developer circles. And it make me cringe every time. It implies that an entire culture is capable of becoming savvier on the web simply because the web has existed for a longer period of time now than it did a year ago.

Here’s the truth. Users don’t get savvier unless the technology gets easier.

The fact is, most people don’t ever get past an intermediate level of, well, anything. It’s extremely rare that we become experts at using a particular web application, or the web in general. More and more people are able to use the web (at least somewhat) effectively now because web designers continually get better at making things work well, instead of relying on users to magically become “savvier”.

A brick-and-mortar analogy:

No one wants to have to become an expert grocery shopper. Because of this, we’re not becoming expert grocery shoppers. We have better things to do - better things to be experts on.

Instead, grocery stores are being redesigned left and right to make things easier. Signs are redesigned to be clearer. Merchandise is reorganized to make it easier to find. Store maps are redesigned to improve the flow from one type of product to the next. There’s a lot of science behind the design of a grocery store. They’re not getting more complex because we’ve become savvier grocery shoppers. They’re getting easier so that more people are encouraged to buy more and have a more enjoyable experience.

For some reason, when it comes to the web, lots of people seem to think users are getting savvier and can therefore handle more complicated interactions.

Individuals can certainly become savvier, but what’s important is not that they get savvier, it’s how they get savvier. They do this by learning patterns and applying knowledge from one experience to another. And designers enable this by leveraging design patterns, building on them, and making it possible for people to apply knowledge from one experience to the next.

If you want savvier users, give them something that helps them become savvy.

I’m very happy to say I’ll be teaching the sold-out “Improving Interface Design” workshop at Future of Web Design on November 8th, from 9am-12:30pm.

If you already signed up, I’ll see you there!

Having spoken out publicly against the idea of saying “it depends” all the time instead of making decisions, and having a fond appreciation for ironic t-shirts, I’m happy to report that there’s now an “It Depends” t-shirt available on CafePress, in a myriad of colors.

Put together by a member of the IxDA (Interaction Design Association) that goes by “Pauric” (he’s one of those one-name cats), the proceeds from the shirt (which feature a small IxDA logo) go to help out the IxDA, which is run by volunteers and funded by the community.

Go get yours now and maybe we’ll spot each other at one of these upcoming conferences.

I’m working with a client right now that asks me to justify and explain just about every design decision I make. And I’m so glad they do.

As an in-house designer, I used to get questioned about everything. Everything. But since going out on my own, I’ve noticed that the clients who hire me seem to just intrinsically trust me. And this makes sense to some degree. (After all, they wouldn’t have hired me unless they believed I could do what they needed.) But with this intrinsic trust, something else is lost.

The arguments.

It’s too easy to be right all the time if no one questions you. And I don’t want to be right all the time. I want to be wrong so that I can get right. It’s the only way to learn.

Debate is a good thing. Being questioned is healthy. It makes you a better designer. It forces you to make sure you’ve done your best, and that you’ve used sound judgment every step of the way. It enables you to see the holes in your logic, and to see how you can improve your designs, now and later.

Arguments also have a tendency to surface new information. Things you may not have known before and therefore didn’t consider in your designs.

And arguments give you the opportunity to educate your client. To let them know that you don’t just move boxes and arrows around the screen until you decide that something is aesthetically appealing. There’s a lot of science and research behind the design of good web applications, as well as a lot of creativity.

When you design behavior (as we do when designing applications of any kind), there’s a whole lot more to know and examine and think about than whether or not something looks good. Like how people think. And how they think they think. And how they work. And how you can design something that supports what users need despite that it might contradict what they say they need.

And in passing on some of your hard-earned wisdom, you help your clients gain a better understanding of the value of design. And you teach them things they can use and apply on their own in other projects.

I know it’s a hassle to debate everything with your clients. But the benefit of doing it outweighs the hassle.

And to see what else I’ve been up to lately, check out the podcast interview I did with Christoph Weise, for Flashforward 2007.

Hint: There’s an announcement buried in this interview somewhere. Something about mosquitos. Very soon, I’ll be able to talk about it in more depth, but for now, I can at least offer a teaser.