Too many hands = bad website designs

I am sure that every designer works with hope that the eventual audience of his/her work will gasp with awe-filled appreciation. However, the fact of the matter is that no designer is ever able to ‘wow’ all those standing in the way of a sign-off. The long walk to a sign- off is further hampered by the fact that a designer’s critics most often are people who don’t spend most of their day analysing aesthetics, scrutinising colour compositions, skewing their eye at effective textures and a page’s general Gestaltian balance, while making sure at the same time that it works as a dynamic web page and passes usability testing. Non-designers (and even designers in many cases) let their personal preferences rule supreme, and it is for this very reason that it is impossible to impress all. Such is the nightmare of getting a sign-off from a typical corporate conveyor belt approval system.

Although I am of course biased in this opinion, I strongly feel that web design is far trickier than print aesthetics with regard to dealing with the uninformed critics. This is because web design needs to take into account much greater functional requirements. As we all know, a web page doesn’t simply turn from one page to the next in a linear format. It is multidimensional, and, more importantly, multi-spatial. By multi-spatial, I mean a web page needs to be designed and conceptualised as a spatially flexible template. This latter requirement is becoming even more important with the growth of AJAX interfaces, which extend, swell, slide, fade, and jumble data dynamically, not only in a meaningful way, but also in a way that highlights its asynchronous, ‘instant noodle’ reactivity and ‘soft’ user prompting.

I am constantly amused by print designers who strut around with egos the size of newly discovered artistic protégés, while dismissing web design as merely being a miniaturised version of their exploits. If only they knew that DTP/CYMK issues are a mere paint splatter in comparison to the bucket loads of canvas planning needed to design dynamic web pages. A contemporary web page is an evolving beast that is able to feed itself with multiple forms of data. What makes keeping this beast happy even harder, is that big ol’ fatty file sizes are an extreme ‘no-no’ on the web, in the same way as sending 300kg women down narrow bandwidth catwalks would undoubtedly be met with snobbish rage. Optimising download times are part and parcel of what makes a ‘good’ web design ‘great’. If even print designers (who mostly hail from partnered agencies) fail to acknowledge these challenges, one can’t really blame the corporate decision makers for their less than informed criticisms.

Having now worked on a number of corporate projects, I have come to realise why many big-clout companies have sub-standardly designed websites. There are too many people consulted in the approval process. The final design often resembles one of those childish dessert concoctions, stewed together by many grubby and over enthusiastic hands. So, perhaps the next time you ask yourself, “why is a company with so much financial backing unable to create a better looking site?”, try and remember that, although one of the possible answers is that they used a crappy designer, it is probably more often the result of a pressurised timing plan and a broken telephone distillation of feedback, which comprised too many critics with contradictory requirements and suggestions.

Contradictory requirements and suggestions make it almost impossible for a designer to create a site that caresses the user’s eyes with balance and elegant intuitiveness. Designs need consistency to work and the slightest change request regarding a certain design element or layout choice can throw the entire aesthetic gestalt into disarray.

Having said this, however, a good designer should be able to come out of this difficult scenario with a ‘good’ design nonetheless. (I, however, have regularly struggled to be happy with the final result of my work, even if others are much more positive about it.) Sometimes you are lucky as a designer, and you have direct contact with a single decision maker (or a very small number of decision makers — two being the limit in my experience), who may, on top of this, trust in the designer’s professional ability. Emphasis on ‘professional’ is important. Professional web designers are saturated by their profession (mentally and emotionally) from one day to the next. As such I firmly believe they will almost always know better than someone who is not (with very few exceptions).

Therefore, my point is this: cut down the number of people a designer needs to impress for sign off, and his/her design will impress the majority of users so much more in the long run. If you disagree with me, I urge you to look at any design showcase site — a great number of the sites featured are almost always designer portfolios, as the designer had one, and only one, person to impress: himself/herself.