“Consistency in Design is the Wrong Approach”
I love posts like this: it is helpful, short, and explains why.
I have a feeling I’ll be referring to this post quite often.
@baldur this reminds me a lot of the architect Christopher Alexander's philosophy (who accidentally inspired OOP) that a design inherently needs to be adapted to its "local" environment in order to be alive.
He argues that a series of different looking buildings with different specific architectural solutions actually share far more in common than a series of identical buildings in vastly different environments. In the former case, the same philosophy was taken to adapt each building to fit its environment in the same way where as in the latter case each identical building is unfit for its unique environment in its own confusing way.
@Alonealastalovedalongthe That's an interesting point. I hadn't thought to draw a line between this and Christopher Alexander's ideas.
”(This has the interesting side effect of reinforcing the wrong thing. When you run into a site that feels consistent, you’re not likely to say, “Hey, those designers did a good job because they obviously researched what my current knowledge would be.” Instead, you say, “Hey they made things consistent. We should do that.” Thus, the cycle of poor practice is reinforced…)
Reminds me of decision management principles ...
If I drive drunk and get home without an accident, was it a good decision?
Of course not ... it was a good outcome .. a terrible decision.
Yet in business we ignore this obvious lesson and constantly measure outcomes and attempt to repeat ACTIONS TAKEN that got us to that great outcome ... like the article says... wrong thinking.
I find Simon Wardley and his maps to be a good, constant reminder of this problem - and how it might be fixed.
@JohnPhilpin Yes. Exactly. Constant outcome measurement often leads to what are effectively nothing more than superstitions.