Usable Usability: Simple Steps for Making Stuff Better

Eric Reiss’s “Usable Usability: Simple Steps for Making Stuff Better” offers a refreshing and practical perspective on making products, services, and digital interfaces genuinely easy and satisfying to use. Reiss, a veteran in user-experience design and CEO of The FatDUX Group, cuts through the jargon and “overused” clichés often associated with usability to provide common-sense advice. This book isn’t just for designers; it’s for anyone involved in creating “stuff” – from doorknobs and physical products to websites and complex services. Reiss promises to unpack every important idea, example, and insight from his extensive career, helping readers understand how to identify, address, and prevent usability flaws that hinder business success and user satisfaction. By focusing on fundamental principles and actionable tips, the book empowers readers to make tangible improvements, regardless of their design background or budget constraints.

Quick Orientation

“Usable Usability: Simple Steps for Making Stuff Better” by Eric Reiss serves as a foundational guide for anyone looking to improve the user experience of their products, services, or digital interfaces. Reiss, a seasoned user-experience designer and CEO of The FatDUX Group, argues that true usability transcends industry buzzwords and complex theories, boiling down to simple, common-sense principles. The book’s core premise is that if “stuff” — a term Reiss uses broadly to encompass everything from physical objects like can openers to digital interfaces like mobile apps and even intangible services — works as intended and expected, people will use it and derive satisfaction from it.

Reiss contends that “usability” is often misunderstood and misapplied, leading to flawed products and services that fail to meet user needs. He divides usability into two fundamental sides: ease of use (dealing with physical properties and whether something does what you want it to do) and elegance and clarity (addressing psychological properties and whether something does what you expect it to do). Throughout the book, Reiss uses a blend of personal anecdotes, real-world examples, and practical checklists to illustrate how even seemingly minor design decisions can have a profound impact on user satisfaction and, ultimately, business profitability. This summary will break down every important idea, example, and insight, providing a clear and accessible guide to improving usability in any context.

Chapter One: Functional

This chapter dives into the most fundamental aspect of usability: whether something actually works. If a product or service isn’t functional at its most basic level, all other design considerations become irrelevant. Reiss likens this to expecting a light switch to turn on lights or a car key to start the engine – if these core functions fail, the experience is immediately broken. The discussion acknowledges overlap with other “ease-of-use” concepts but focuses primarily on the “works/doesn’t work” dimension.

The Three Keys to Functionality

Reiss distills basic functional needs into three key areas, using the analogy of a faucet:

• Buttons and links must work: Just as turning a tap should produce water, clicking interactive elements should yield the expected outcome.
• Navigation must be responsive: The system should react appropriately and efficiently to user input, like easily adjusting water temperature.
• Processing speed must be acceptable: Users shouldn’t have to wait excessively for actions, similar to not wanting to run water for a long time to get the desired temperature.
  A startling number of products, websites, and apps fail in these fundamental ways, often due to designers overlooking basic tests or assuming core functionality.

From Click to Conversion: Making Sure the Buttons Work

It might seem obvious that broken buttons need fixing, but Reiss emphasizes that this is a widespread and costly problem. He recounts a personal experience trying to buy earrings from a jewelry store’s website where the “Put in basket” button simply didn’t work. Despite repeated attempts, the basket remained empty, leading him to call the store directly. The store confirmed that online sales were “nonexistent,” unaware that their basic e-commerce functionality was completely broken. This illustrates how businesses with alternative channels (like physical stores) often neglect their online presence, leading to significant lost revenue from simple functional failures. Web analytics programs like Google Analytics can help identify issues like 404 – Page not Found errors, but designers must also manually check for navigational elements that lead to the wrong page or the same page repeatedly.

Browser Wars, Hardware Headaches

Ensuring functionality across different browsers and devices is crucial. Reiss advises testing websites on Internet Explorer, Safari, Firefox, and Opera as a minimum. Beyond browsers, interactive elements like audio/video controls and animations might not work across all platforms. The classic example is Flash technology, which famously doesn’t display on many Apple products like the iPad, rendering websites that rely on it unusable for those users. This highlights the need to test on various smartphones, tablets, laptops, and smart TVs, as interactive elements essential to a site might vanish or become unresponsive depending on the hardware and operating system.

Don’t Sweat the Home Page. Fine-Tune Your Forms.

Reiss argues that while the home page sets the initial impression, it’s often the least important page for conversions. Visitors often land on deeper pages via search engines, and a well-designed home page means users quickly navigate away from it. Instead, Reiss stresses the critical importance of online forms for business success, as they are almost always where conversions happen — whether it’s purchasing a product, signing up for a newsletter, or submitting a comment. Flawed forms are a major reason for conversion failures, often because they work for the original design team’s narrow focus but fail for other user groups.

Four Keys to Creating Functional Forms

When designing forms, Reiss outlines four critical functional considerations:

• People must be able to provide the information demanded: If a field is required, ensure users can legitimately fill it in. For instance, requiring a “State” field for users outside the U.S. (like in Denmark) makes the form impossible to complete, leading to conversion failure. A dropdown with a “None” option or dynamically adjusting fields based on country selection would be better.
• Inflexible input formats greatly increase the chances of form failure: If a form requires a specific format (e.g., credit card numbers without spaces, “dd/mm/yyyy” with slashes) but only accepts another (e.g., “ddmmyyyy” without slashes), it causes frustration. Forms should be forgiving and accept common variations. Reiss recommends testing forms by trying to “break the system” to uncover these hidden validation issues.
• The need for interdependent forms and logins also increases the chances of failure: Requiring user registration (username and password) after a user has already made significant progress (e.g., selected movie seats) interrupts the user’s task flow. This is particularly frustrating if there are time limits for completion, as slow servers or complex registration processes can lead to users losing their progress and starting over.
• Instructions that are misleading are a great way to frustrate your users: Instructions must align perfectly with the actual functionality. Reiss recalls a VCR with “Off/On” and “Auf/Zu” labels where the manual contradicted the button functions. Similarly, a Brazilian Embassy website form explicitly asked for “dd/mm/yyyy” but only accepted “ddmmyyyy.” Such discrepancies between instructions and system behavior are a sure-fire recipe for disaster. When testing, follow instructions to the letter to catch these critical mismatches.

Navigation: Getting Folks Where They Want to Go

Beyond static forms, responsive navigation and processing speed are vital for functionality. Reiss illustrates this with his “crappy new TV” that takes 5-8 seconds to change channels, making it unusable for channel surfing.

Milliseconds Count

This anecdote directly links to website performance: faster response times lead to better conversions. Google and Amazon have documented how even half-second improvements in page load times can significantly increase revenue. Reiss highlights Shopzilla’s experience, where reducing response time from seven to two seconds led to a 25% increase in page views and a 7-12% revenue boost. To improve this, compressing file sizes of photos and graphics is a straightforward starting point. While programmers handle server-side optimizations, understanding the impact of speed empowers users to complain to the right team. This is particularly relevant given slow internet connectivity in many geographic areas and mobile networks.

Understand Your Goals and Keep Them in Focus

Reiss stresses the importance of clearly defining the goals of your “stuff” and the conversions measured to meet those goals. Project development often sees the addition of features that detract from the core purpose. Whether it’s a household thermostat aiming for comfortable temperature (measured by adjustment frequency) or an online CD site aiming to sell CDs (measured by sales), functionality must truly support these objectives. Asking “What are the goals?” and “What conversions are we measuring?” helps ensure that features facilitate user objectives, not hinder them.

A True Story About a Fairy Tale

Reiss presents “Mixed Up Fairy Tales” — a split-page book where children can combine plot bits — as an example of counterproductive functionality. While “cute,” it fails to convey the moral or historical lessons of original fairy tales and makes it difficult to follow the stories. This illustrates how “creative” solutions can sometimes get in the way of worthwhile goals if not aligned with clear design priorities. Reiss advises guarding against such “counterproductive creativity” that prioritizes novelty over actual usability.

Functionality Can Change Over Time

A product’s functionality isn’t static. An overfilled trash can becomes unusable, illustrating how functionality can degrade if not maintained. This highlights that some functional problems might stem from service design issues (e.g., trash cans needing to be emptied more often) rather than just physical design. Reiss also emphasizes the importance of providing warnings if something might “break” or impose limits, such as a first-time customer order limit or market restrictions for online items, informing users before they invest time in an action.

A Complaint Is a Gift

Reiss recounts how Amazon quickly corrected a “product not available in your location” error after he complained, emphasizing that complaints are valuable feedback. Businesses should actively pay attention to user feedback, as it’s a direct route to identifying and fixing functional problems. As his mentor, Claus Møller, used to say, “a complaint is a gift,” implying that users who take the time to complain are offering a free opportunity for improvement.

Chapter Two: Responsive

This chapter delves into responsiveness, explaining how sensory feedback is crucial for effective communication and good usability, whether in conversations or with products. Reiss posits that genuine two-way communication is often an illusion; instead, most effective interactions follow a linear pattern of action, acknowledgment, and new action. The acknowledgement, or “receipt,” is a critical part of this process, providing users with reassurance that their input has been registered. When these response mechanisms are lacking or inappropriate, usability suffers, leading to user frustration and uncertainty.

The Myth of Two-Way Communication

Reiss challenges the notion of true two-way communication, particularly in human-machine interactions. He argues that most effective communications, including those with “stuff,” adhere to a predictable linear pattern: an action taken by the user, followed by an acknowledgement (or “receipt”) from the system, which then enables a new action. This acknowledgement provides vital sensory feedback (visual, auditory, tactile) that reassures users their input has been received. Without these “receipts,” users are left wondering if their actions had any effect, similar to asking “Are you still there?” during a phone call when the other person is silent.

Three Traditional Keys to Responsiveness

Reiss categorizes responsiveness into three broad groups:

• Invitational tricks: These are movements or signals designed to attract the eye and hint at upcoming interactions (e.g., banner ads, “see also” links). Reiss notes these are more about “stimuli” than direct “feedback.”
• Transitional techniques: These are immediate, here-and-now responses to a user’s action, signaling a change in the system’s state. A classic example is a cursor changing from an arrow to a hand when hovering over a clickable element, known as a mouseover or state change.
• Responsive mechanisms: These represent a genuine “receipt” following a conscious user action, confirming that an operation is underway or complete. Examples include a screen going blank before loading a new page, a download progress bar, or an “Your file was successfully downloaded” message. Reiss focuses on transitional and responsive techniques as true forms of feedback.

A Fourth View: “Responsive Design”

Beyond traditional responsiveness, Reiss introduces “responsive design” – a contemporary approach where website layouts and content automatically adjust to fit different screen sizes and devices (tablets, smartphones, car dashboards, smart TVs). This is vital because a design that works on a large PC screen may be unusable on a smaller device, often necessitating changes in navigational needs (e.g., using arrow keys instead of a mouse on a smart TV). This also extends to responsive content, where information is designed to function well across various display environments, often by eliminating references to elements that may or may not be present on a given screen. When testing, it’s critical to check how designs display and function on multiple devices, not just by resizing browser windows. Reiss advises against accepting only static mock-ups; designers should demonstrate how responsiveness is built into the design templates. He also suggests that scaling up content (designing for smaller screens first and then adapting for larger ones) often creates a better user experience than trying to “cut down” from a full-scale design.

“Wake Up, You Stupid Machine!”

A common usability problem is a complete lack of feedback. Reiss illustrates this with a frustrating laptop experience where clicking to install an update yielded “absolutely no response,” leaving him unsure if the action was successful. Similarly, he points out the banality of supermarket cashiers’ “Thank you” — despite being cliché, it’s a necessary “receipt” that acknowledges interaction. This applies online too: simple electronic acknowledgements can prevent users from feeling ignored. The core lesson: if you ask someone to do something and they do it, always provide some sign of acknowledgement.

FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt

Reiss emphasizes that FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) is what makes users “think” negatively, undermining usability. Responsive elements directly combat FUD:

• Fear: Users are scared of breaking the system or triggering unintended, irreversible actions (e.g., “Did I just buy something or confirm a form?”).
• Uncertainty: Users are unsure which choice to make due to ambiguous presentations (e.g., unclear menu options like “Office” vs. “High Performance” for a business laptop).
• Doubt: Users conclude that no action will lead to a successful outcome because choices don’t make sense within the task’s context.
  Receipts and acknowledgements alleviate FUD, even if they don’t solve the underlying problem. While alt attributes (pop-up text on mouseover) provide feedback, more descriptive labels are often better, improving the “scent” of information before a click is even made.

A Closer Look at Transitional Techniques

Transitional techniques, like the cursor changing on mouseover, are incredibly important. Reiss points out that on platforms like WordPress, headlines and clickable items might look like plain text until the cursor hovers over them, forcing users into “mouseploration” – sweeping the mouse around to discover interactive elements. This is problematic for touchscreen devices where mouseovers are impossible, underscoring the need for strong visible signals to indicate interactivity. Reiss advises ensuring clickable areas are larger than just the words and providing appropriate timing for menu expansions and collapses (e.g., a half-second delay before expansion, quick display, and a half-second delay before collapse) to improve usability.

Transitional Techniques and Physical Objects

Physical objects also provide crucial “here-and-now” transitional feedback. Reiss notes how on/off knobs click, physical keyboards provide tactile resistance, and touchscreen keyboards vibrate when touched. These sensory cues are invaluable for confirming user input. He explains that the lack of tactile feedback is a major challenge for virtual reality, making it feel less “real.” Improving these “clicks” and physical affordances on knobs, dials, and switches is vital for good ergonomic design. The Braun alarm clock, with its rocking on/off switch, is cited as an example of excellent cognitive feedback.

Response Mechanisms in the Online Environment

Reiss highlights the value of online response mechanisms that confirm system activity. He praises the original Apple Lisa’s hourglass icon from 1983 as one of the coolest feedback mechanisms ever, signaling, “I got your message and I’m doing what you asked me to do… I’m busy trying to complete the task.” While useful, these don’t always solve underlying slowness (e.g., Apple’s “spinning wait cursor” nicknames). Thus, graphic techniques showing progress (like progress bars) are often better for lengthy operations. Common design patterns for task completion include:

• Brighten and dim: Making active areas brighter or dimming inactive ones.
• Zoom: Zooming in during a process, or zooming out/collapsing a window upon completion.
• Sounds: Distinctive melodies or noises confirming actions (e.g., mobile phone alerts for mail arrival).
  Reiss concludes that any response mechanism the user can see, hear, or feel, and whose meaning is understood, significantly improves usability.

Response Mechanisms in Physical Objects

Similar to online counterparts, physical response mechanisms provide valuable cognitive feedback. Reiss uses the example of locking cars and houses. Central locking systems often provide a chirping sound or the “ka-chunk” of locks as a “receipt.” For houses, people often give the door an “extra tug” after locking because most locks lack clear feedback. This reinforces the idea that sensory feedback helps smooth interactions and eliminate FUD, whether digital or physical. The story of ordering three Rolls-Royces online due to an unresponsive system where impatient clicks weren’t acknowledged perfectly illustrates the real-world consequences of poor feedback.

Chapter Three: Ergonomic

This chapter focuses on ergonomics, or human factors, which is the study of designing devices to match human physical and psychological abilities. While commonly associated with workplace setups like office chairs and desk heights, Reiss emphasizes that ergonomic principles apply equally to onscreen design. He highlights that our cursors act as electronic fingers, and with the advent of touchscreens, our actual fingers often are the cursors, directly linking physical and digital ergonomics.

Henry Dreyfuss: Introducing Ergonomics to Industrial Design

Reiss credits Henry Dreyfuss with bringing ergonomics from academia into industrial design, notably through his work “Designing for People” and his human models, Joe and Josephine, representing typical male and female measurements for mid-20th century North Americans. Dreyfuss’s core principles, though rooted in the physical world, deeply influence onscreen design:

• Work in neutral postures
• Reduce excessive force
• Keep everything in easy reach
• Work at proper heights
• Reduce excessive motions
• Minimize fatigue and static load
• Minimize pressure points
• Provide clearance
• Move, exercise, and stretch
• Maintain a comfortable environment
• Enhance clarity and understanding
• Improve work organization
  These principles are crucial for interactive media designers because the cursor acts as an electronic finger, subject to similar movement constraints. The physical design of a frying pan being too unbalanced to cook illustrates how functional deficiencies can be hidden behind aesthetics if not tested ergonomically.

Buttons: Why Bigger Sometimes Is Better

Reiss introduces Fitts’ Law, a mathematical equation that predicts the time to move to a target is a function of its distance and size. In simple terms: bigger buttons are faster to locate and click. This is a critical ergonomic concept for “keep everything in easy reach” and “enhance clarity and understanding.” He notes the challenge of embedded hyperlinks on small touchscreens, where large fingers struggle with small targets. With smart TVs and varied controllers (trackpads, arrow keys, infrared pointers), hitting small buttons from across a room is difficult. Reiss’s rule of thumb: if a button is hard to poke on a smartphone, it will be hard to navigate on a smart TV. He advises keeping buttons big and easy to access across all platforms. The iPod shuffle is a prime example of ergonomic design evolving — an earlier, longer version considered accidental button presses, a lesson forgotten in a smaller, later model.

Milliseconds Count

Reiss discusses nested navigation menus (drop-down/fly-out menus) and their usability challenges, especially on slower devices or with touch interfaces. While useful for accessing deep content quickly, they can be tricky to navigate. He provides best practices for menu timing to improve usability:

• Delay menu expansion: Let the cursor “hover” for about half a second before a menu expands (to avoid the “blooming flower” problem like the Interflora site).
• Fast menu display: Once triggered, the menu should appear as quickly as possible (under 1/10 second).
• Delay menu collapse: Wait half a second after the cursor moves away before collapsing the menu, allowing for “sloppy” navigation.
• Quick menu collapse: Menus should collapse as quickly as they appeared.
  He emphasizes testing on slow devices and dial-up connections to account for varied internet speeds globally, suggesting that streamlining or eliminating “eye-candy” might be necessary to improve performance.

Bring on the Scientists

Reiss highlights academic research in onscreen ergonomics, specifically eyetracking studies. These studies reveal that people read very differently on screens than in print: they scan quickly for keywords, then skim for cognitive triggers, and only then read in detail. This “F-pattern” of reading means the first words of a list or headline are crucial for attracting attention.

“First Word After the Bullet”

The “F-pattern” discovery is paramount for lists, especially links. Eyetracking heat maps show users scan the first words after bullet points. Therefore, the most important words should always be at the beginning of links and list items, not at the end. Reiss contrasts two lists of subregional offices from the International Labour Organisation: one where “Subregional office for” prefaces every entry (bad) versus one starting with the region name (good). This principle also applies to machine-readable meta-titles in search results: prioritize the most important information, not just the company name, at the start.

Tabs and Other Keyboard Shortcuts

Reiss discusses the persistence and importance of keyboard shortcuts, stemming from early DOS days. Many users prefer to keep their hands on the keyboard for efficiency and to reduce Repetitive Strain Injury (RSI). He cites his company’s bookkeeper who needed a new accounting program but chose one specifically because it offered decent keyboard-based alternatives to mouse movements, allowing her to use one hand for numerical input and the other for tabbing between fields. He advises designers to ensure that online forms and applications support tabbing between fields and offer common shortcuts (like Ctrl+S for save). Testing airline or hotel booking sites by tabbing through them can reveal common shortcomings where users are forced back to the mouse.

Provide Clearance

The ergonomic principle of “providing clearance” in the physical world (e.g., two shopping carts passing) translates to ensuring onscreen elements don’t obstruct each other. Reiss notes the common problem of animated boxes and widgets that pop up on mouseover or float around, sometimes obscuring other information or clickable elements. While “cool tools,” these can do “more harm than good” if they don’t disappear appropriately. Amazon’s pop-ups, which generally work well and disappear as needed, are contrasted with the iPad version of Tastebook.com, where a floating widget consistently obscures measurement data.

“Go to the Back of the Line”

Reiss highlights a frustrating and common usability flaw: forms that discard previously entered information when an error occurs. When a user submits a form and is told to “click the Back button” to correct an error, only to find all their data gone, it’s incredibly annoying. This is a bad design decision and easily fixable: forms should be “forgiving” and retain all valid information, only requiring corrections for specific errors. Making users re-enter the same information repeatedly is a guaranteed way to annoy customers.

Improve Work Organization

This principle from physical ergonomics (e.g., printer paper next to the printer, sensible assembly line flow) applies to digital interfaces. Reiss describes the frustration of multi-part forms that require information not immediately available, then time out, forcing the user to start over. He recounts his experience with the IRS online form for an Employee Identification Number, which had “opening hours”, timed out, and required information he couldn’t easily gather, forcing him to hire an expensive lawyer. Allowing users to save incomplete forms and providing a list of all required information upfront (like ingredients in a recipe) would significantly improve this.

The “Silent Usher”

Reiss introduces the concept of the “silent usher”, inspired by columns at New York’s Radio City Music Hall that passively control crowds. Online, this means designing to eliminate unnecessary or unwanted information early on, ensuring that what remains is more relevant and visible. Prominent elements like The Royal Bank of Scotland’s large buttons for “private” vs. “business” customers act as silent ushers, guiding users to relevant sections faster and with fewer distractions. This helps simplify the user’s journey and make the product or service easier to navigate.

Chapter Four: Convenient

Chapter Four delves into the concept of convenience, defining it as “suited to one’s comfort or ease” and “placed near at hand.” Reiss immediately highlights that convenience is in the eye of the beholder, often differing wildly between the designer/provider and the user. He recounts an absurd example of electrical outlets placed above door frames in an office, “convenient for the electrician” but idiotic for users. This sets the stage for a discussion on how to genuinely make things convenient from the user’s perspective.

Giving Inconvenience a Positive Spin

Reiss warns against the marketing spin of “For your convenience…”, which he says almost always precedes something inconvenient. He shares examples like a locked department store dressing room with a sign directing users to another floor, or a hotel ice machine sign directing guests to other floors because half the machines were removed. These instances illustrate how a business might frame a cost-cutting measure or a design flaw as a benefit to the customer, when it’s anything but. Reiss urges designers to focus on genuine convenience rather than deceptive messaging.

Eric’s Advice for the Lovelorn

Reiss offers a brief digression into human nature: we like someone because of their character traits, but love someone despite their character traits. He applies this to usability, suggesting that if customers “love” a product (like his quirky British car), they might forgive poor usability. However, he advises against relying on this, as customers generally aren’t “in love” with a company or product. Therefore, designers should aim to create experiences that customers like by being genuinely convenient and user-friendly, providing reasons to appreciate the product or service.

Multimodal Experiences

Reiss coins the term “multimodal experiences” to describe situations where users are forced to switch interfaces or routines mid-task. He categorizes these switches into three types:

• Switching routines within the same interface: Staying within the same app or physical space (e.g., navigating different departments in one supermarket).
• Switching routines within related interfaces: Moving between different online platforms or physical stores (e.g., from a computer screen to a smartphone, or from one store in a mall to another).
• Switching routines within unrelated interfaces: Moving between online and offline environments (e.g., getting driving directions online and printing them out).
  All these can be good or bad depending on how seamlessly they are handled.

Switching Routines

Inconvenience often arises when users are forced to switch routines, particularly when dealing with interdependent forms (like the movie ticket booking example in Chapter One) or being transferred between different departments when calling a large company. Reiss recounts his frustrating experience with his bank, where he was put through multiple automated menus, asked to re-enter his account number, and eventually told to call back on a different day, all while being told his call was “very important.” This illustrates how a lack of seamlessness and repeated information entry creates incredibly annoying and frustrating experiences, preventing users from feeling closer to their objectives. The feeling of “having to start over” is a major deterrent.

Switching Interfaces

Security measures often force inconvenient interface switches. Reiss gives the example of an international credit card that redirects him to a completely different site for security questions, sometimes timing him out and losing his progress. This type of forced switch, even if well-intentioned for security, creates friction. He points out that in the European Union, it’s illegal to ask for non-essential information (required fields) from users, as excessive data demands decrease anonymity and conversion rates. With the rise of mobile e-commerce, businesses are learning that less typing means greater convenience and higher conversion rates on smartphones. The key is to allow users to complete tasks with the fewest possible distractions, detours, and derailments.

Switching from On- to Offline

The greatest inconvenience in multimodal experiences often occurs when users are forced to switch from online to offline. Examples include websites requiring users to print out forms and fax them back (when most people no longer own faxes) or online movie ticket purchases requiring users to write down a transaction number to pick up a physical ticket. Reiss notes the irony that while airlines accept barcodes on phones for boarding, some movie theaters still demand physical ticket pickup. He emphasizes that if an online-to-offline switch is unavoidable, businesses should use common sense and leverage modern technologies like QR codes to streamline the process.

Unfamiliar Situations Highlight Convenience

Travel is a prime example of how unfamiliar situations bring convenience issues into sharp focus. Reiss highlights that in new environments, people seek comfort zones – familiar routines that reduce stress. He expects electrical outlets next to hotel beds for his smartphone alarm, a convenience many hotels fail to provide. This shows that designers often cater to their own needs, missing those of diverse users. The iPod’s shuffle function is praised for providing a comfort zone, but its design for pop music (rather than classical works with movements) illustrates how a product can be convenient for one use case but frustrating for another due to overlooked user needs.

Personas and Other Useful Tools

To counteract “designer ego” and ensure genuine convenience, Reiss advocates for creating user personas — fictional archetypes representing user groups, rather than vague stereotypes. He contrasts a general stereotype (“Overweight, middle-aged men”) with a specific archetype (“Jack, a slightly overweight 48-year-old business analyst looking for a gym within 10 minutes”). Personas, ideally 4-8 well-researched ones, help design teams focus on questions like “Would Mary want to use this feature?” If not, that feature might be a bad design decision, validating Alan Cooper’s warning: “When you hear ‘someone might want this’ you know you’re about to hear a really bad design decision.” Personas can then be used to develop task-based scenarios and customer journey maps.

Context Is the Kingdom

While “content is king,” Reiss argues “context must be the kingdom.” This means combining individual content pieces to create greater value. He cites the example of a hotel providing a hair dryer (good content) but placing the only electrical outlet on the opposite wall from the mirror (bad context), rendering the setup inconvenient. On websites, the common layout with content in a middle column and contextual links in a right-hand column (e.g., related products) is valuable. Reiss criticizes websites that fail to populate these sections with useful, related information, instead filling them with “nonsense.” He strongly advocates for grouping obviously related items (like vacuum cleaners and their bags) on the same page or making them easily accessible, as this is essential for convenience and often overlooked in the rush to launch.

Make Everything People Need Available

Reiss emphasizes the importance of making everything people need available “near at hand.” He uses the analogy of a mechanic having all tools and parts ready for a repair, or a cook having all ingredients prepped for a meal. Amazon is praised for its ability to organize related links and information into distinct, color-coded sections on its product pages, making it easy for users to find all purchase, product, and related item details in one place. The takeaway: if users will need certain content, make sure it’s easy to access and logically grouped. This principle extends to providing all necessary information upfront, such as TripAdvisor ideally showing a character limit before a user writes a long review.

“Three Clicks and You’re Dead”

Reiss debunks the outdated “three clicks and you’re dead” rule, stating that people will click many times as long as each click brings them closer to their goal. This shift is due to increased broadband access and faster load times. The problem arises when clicks don’t advance the user towards their objective, leading to a feeling of wasted time. This also applies offline: being transferred between departments by phone is acceptable if it advances the user towards a solution, but frustrating if they have to repeat their story repeatedly. The Sears vacuum-cleaner bags anecdote perfectly illustrates a frustrating offline and online experience where the “three clicks” rule definitely applied, but users were forced into many frustrating, non-advancing steps.

Chapter Five: Foolproof

This chapter addresses the challenge of foolproofing products and services, acknowledging the adage, “It’s impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.” Despite this, Reiss asserts that designers must strive to prevent users from making mistakes and gently guide them in the right direction. The key is to provide subtle yet effective guidance without being “pushy” or “intrusive,” ensuring users don’t get into trouble while interacting with the “stuff.”

How the RAF Can Help Win Your Battle

Reiss introduces his “RAF” acronym (Remind, Alert, Force) as three key techniques to foolproof design:

• Remind: Gently prompting users about forgotten actions (e.g., saving a document before closing). These should be relevant to the immediate task and not interrupt the flow with irrelevant choices (e.g., “remove unused icons”).
• Alert: Flagging and tagging specific, critical actions that must be done (e.g., filling in a password, acknowledging terms of use). Alerts should be meaningful, indicating problems like low battery or low oil pressure in a car.
• Force: Eliminating inappropriate or unavailable options (e.g., graying out menu items that cannot be used at a given time). This prevents users from making errors by design.

People Forget to Do Stuff. So Help Remind Them.

System reminders, like the common “Do you want to save your changes before closing this document?” are often appreciated. However, Reiss critiques inappropriate or overly intrusive reminders that interrupt user flow or ask redundant questions (e.g., “Are you absolutely sure?”). He also points out physical world equivalents, like car navigation systems that force users to dismiss legal warnings while driving, ironically creating a danger. The core principle: if help is not needed, stay out of the way. The Home Depot sign providing a useful checklist for customers is an example of a good, non-intrusive reminder that increases sales.

Alerts and Other Warnings

Alerts are designed to notify users of errors, state changes, or things needing attention. Reiss finds some alerts particularly annoying when they state the obvious, like a computer notifying him that “You’ve just plugged a device into the audio jack.” He emphasizes that alerts should be meaningful and relevant to actually prevent mistakes, not just confirm actions already known by the user. His rule of thumb: the more mission-critical something is, the more a method is needed to let people know if something is amiss (e.g., a refrigerator freezer warning light). LinkedIn’s login alert is a clear, useful example of a helpful alert.

The “Boy Who Cried Wolf” Syndrome

Sending too many irrelevant messages, alarms, or notifications can lead to the “boy who cried wolf” syndrome, where users habitually dismiss important warnings. This is common when installing software, where users mindlessly click “Next,” missing crucial details. Reiss also warns against pop-up screens that confirm actions (like a form submission) but visually resemble computer system error messages, creating unnecessary anxiety for less experienced users. This design inconsistency can cause confusion about whether they are interacting with the application or the operating system.

Forcing the Issue

Forcing, the third part of the RAF acronym, involves designing a system to prevent users from making inappropriate actions. Examples include automatic transmission cars that won’t start unless in Park or Neutral, or computer programs that gray out menu options when they are unavailable. Reiss notes that while graying out is generally better than making options invisible (which confuses users who then click aimlessly), it can still be frustrating if the reason for the unavailability isn’t explained. He suggests that future programs could provide small instructional pop-up boxes on mouseover to explain why a choice is inactive.

The Dangers of Personalization

Reiss distinguishes between personalization (what a system does to satisfy needs, like remembering a password) and customization (what a user does to tailor a device, like changing a ringtone). While customization rarely causes usability problems, personalization can be tricky. He cautions against adaptive menus that change based on perceived user interest, as past interests might not reflect current needs. If a user previously looked at compact cars but now wants a larger model, changing menu choices based on prior behavior could make it harder to find new options. Reiss’s current stance is that main navigation should remain consistent, and personalization should primarily tweak contextual navigation and perhaps primary content, respecting that each user visit is unique.

The Magic of Redundancy

Redundancy means offering multiple similar options that complement each other (e.g., a phone number and an email address). It also means repeating the same link or function in several convenient places, like a light switch at each end of a large room. Reiss notes that users often focus on the main content area of a web page, so important links (like “buy now” or “download PDF”) should be embedded directly in the content, even if they exist elsewhere in the navigation. This also applies to the bottom of long content pages, where repeating relevant links can catch users before they scroll back up or leave. Redundancy is crucial for disaster recovery: if one contact channel fails (e.g., a broken online contact form), alternative channels ensure business continuity and reduce risk.

Write Helpful Error Messages

Helpful error messages are a critical aspect of foolproof design. Reiss stresses that they should be specific (e.g., “This username does not exist,” instead of “Your login information is incorrect”) and provide hints or suggestions for resolution. Messages should be short, to the point, friendly, and use language people understand, avoiding jargon or acronyms (e.g., “ADD certificate to Root Store?”). He advises against leaving error message writing to programmers; 404 – Page Not Found errors are often tell-tale signs that professional writers neglected this crucial area. He recommends checking server query logs for common misspellings or synonyms to optimize for them, creating an “Accidental Thesaurus.”

Helping People Make Better Decisions

Onscreen messages often require users to make decisions. Reiss outlines key questions for evaluating these messages to ensure users can make informed choices:

• Do people know why the message appeared?
• Do they understand it?
• Do they know enough to respond intelligently?
• Is the information helpful or confusing?
• Do people understand the consequences of this decision?
• Is an inexperienced person likely to make the correct decision?
  If any answer is “no,” the message needs fixing. He notes that older generations tend to be more cautious about clicking, while younger users click more freely, suggesting that asking older people for feedback can reveal more cognitive problems.

Not Everyone Can Spll

Reiss highlights the importance of being forgiving of spelling errors and typos, especially with URLs. He suggests using a “subdomain wildcard (*)” to redirect common variations (e.g., “wwww.fatdux.com” to “www.fatdux.com”). Companies with odd names should register common misspellings as domain addresses. For internal site search engines, creating a thesaurus that maps synonyms (e.g., “car,” “auto,” “automobile”) and common misspellings to relevant results is crucial. A quick fix for Google is to include misspellings in a page’s keywords (metadata).

People Don’t Read Instructions

A major design flaw is relying on users to read lengthy instructions. Reiss asserts that people skim instructions at best, usually just looking for critical warnings or information about what could go wrong. He highlights the absurdity of car manuals being “37 times longer than the United States Constitution,” most of which is ignored. Cover-Your-Ass (CYA) legal language often makes instructions unreadable, especially in advertising where fine print is rattled off too fast to comprehend. If instructions are necessary, they should be short, simple, task-relevant, and appear only when needed, without demonstrating due diligence for lawyers.

Don’t Make People Memorize Your Messages

Reiss criticizes pop-up windows that disappear upon clicking, especially if they contain information needed elsewhere. He gives two classic mistakes:

• Forms that don’t retain error messages: Users hit “back” after a submission error, and the message disappears, forcing them to guess what was wrong. Forms should retain error messages and highlight incorrect fields.
• Critical information in temporary pop-ups: Order numbers or registration numbers appearing only in a pop-up and not stored or emailed.
  Information like order numbers should be permanent and supplemented with email confirmations. Avis Rent-A-Car is praised for allowing users to print booking details without legalese and also sending email confirmations. Reiss advocates for using QR codes for reservations and tickets to eliminate paper altogether.

Sometimes You Do Have to State the Obvious

Reiss shares an anecdote about Philips Electronics discovering that many help desk calls were due to users simply forgetting to plug in their TVs or DVD players. This led them to start troubleshooting guides with the obvious question: “Is the device plugged in and the power switched on?” This highlights that seemingly “obvious” steps can be easily overlooked, and stating the obvious can significantly reduce user frustration and support calls.

People Don’t Remember Things from One Time to the Next

Designers often assume users will remember how to use something they’ve figured out once, which is a mistake. Reiss emphasizes that designs need to send strong signals to guide users, rather than relying on memory, especially for “quirky” or “innovative” solutions. He cites the standardized airport signage (gates, numbered corridors) as an example of effective retroductive inference: learning one airport allows navigation of most others. He warns against “creative” web design that invents new interaction patterns, as this breaks predictability and consistency. His personal experience with poorly designed home-grown blogging tools reinforces this: they cost his company time and goodwill because users couldn’t remember how to use them due to a lack of adherence to established best practices. The advice: make your stuff predictable and routines repeatable, aiming for “Don’t make me think!”

Physical Deterrents

Beyond onscreen applications, Reiss discusses physical deterrents as a foolproof method in the physical environment. He categorizes them into five types:

• Reminders of bad actions: “Look left/Look right” street markings in the UK (even for natives).
• Negating value of bad actions: Security tags that explode ink on stolen goods.
• Forcing prevention of bad actions: SIM card cut-off corners preventing incorrect insertion; gates blocking bicyclists from pedestrian paths; hidden controls.
• Causing inconvenience for non-compliance: Slowing down fast food orders for special requests.
• Causing pain for non-compliance: Broken glass on walls, razor wire, tire spikes (historically, zoo spikes for elephants).
  These methods aim to signal danger, make undesirable actions not worth the risk, or physically prevent them, thus improving usability by guiding user behavior.

Chapter Six: Visible

Chapter Six, “Visible,” underscores the critical importance of visibility in achieving elegance and clarity in design. Reiss opens with a philosophical question (“If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”) to drive home the point: if an object, link, or option is not seen or acknowledged, it simply does not exist for the user. This chapter explores how things become invisible and how to ensure critical information and functionality are readily apparent to users.

Four Ways Things Become Invisible

Reiss identifies four main ways needed information becomes “invisible” to the user:

• Not available where people are looking: Information is present but not in the expected location.
• Physically blocked by something else: Other elements on the screen or in the physical environment obstruct the view (e.g., pop-ups, labels covering instructions).
• Not recognized even if it is in plain view: Users fail to identify an element as clickable or important because its visual cues are weak or misleading.
• Simply doesn’t exist: The information or functionality is missing entirely.
  He emphasizes that designers shouldn’t assume users will “play mind-reader” or patiently search for hidden information; the goal is to make things easily discoverable. Examples include the hidden side mirror controls in a Nissan and a Danish curry paste label obscuring cooking instructions.

The Mysterious “Fold”

Reiss discusses the concept of the “fold”, originating from broadsheet newspapers. In web design, “below the fold” refers to content not immediately visible without scrolling. While many designers mistakenly believe people don’t scroll, Reiss asserts this is “nonsense,” citing research showing over 75% of readers scroll before doing anything else and that the average Amazon page is equivalent to 14 printed A4 sheets. The “fold” is tricky because its precise position depends on browser window size, the number of open toolbars, and screen resolution, making it impossible to pinpoint universally.

When the Fold Is Important

Despite its elusive nature, the fold is important for placing mission-critical functions where they are immediately visible, requiring the least user effort. Reiss lists essential items that should be above the fold:

• Branding and main navigation
• Helpdesk contact information
• Internal search box
• Link to shopping carts and checkout
• Link to Contact
• Language change facilities
• Key input/output areas in rapid-fire apps (like currency converters)
  He provides a contrasting list of items that can safely be placed below the fold, such as legal notices, privacy policies, and physical addresses (unless the business relies heavily on physical visits). The Skype website is used as an example of an inconsistent fold issue, where the language option is easily visible on the start page but moves below the fold and changes automatically when navigating to the webshop, causing confusion.

When the Fold Isn’t Important

Reiss suggests that designers shouldn’t be overly bothered by the fold’s precise location because people do scroll. The key is to make pages “scroll-friendly.” He also notes that if a page is scroll-friendly and has compelling content, ads placed lower on the page can perform as well as or better than expensive banners at the top, debunking another myth.

Creating Scroll-Friendly Pages

To make pages “scroll-friendly,” Reiss advises against strict horizontal alignment. Instead, designers should intentionally “knock stuff out of alignment” or “cut through an element” (like a picture) at the bottom of the visible screen. This visual cue signals to the user that there is more content below, encouraging them to scroll. He notes that traditional graphic designers may dislike this aesthetic, but it’s crucial for usability. Reiss’s rule of thumb: “The cleaner the lower edge of your web page looks, the less scroll-friendly it is.”

Unfriendly Scroll-Friendly Pages

While encouraging scrolling is good, Reiss cautions against designs where related information is physically separated by the fold. For instance, in a currency converter, the input and output fields should be on the same visible screen area. If the output appears “off screen” after input, users might not notice the change and become frustrated, repeatedly submitting information. This relates to feedback, where the feedback occurs but isn’t visible where expected. Also, making users scroll “a tiny bit” just to click a submit button that’s barely outside the visible range is highly irritating. As screens get smaller, buttons and input/output boxes may need to be repeated at both the top and bottom of a page.

Scrolling, Menu Length, and Mobile Phones

Scrolling on smartphones is generally straightforward, but on less expensive models, users may rely on physical buttons. Reiss highlights that visibility of scrollbars is often an issue, as they might disappear when the screen is inactive. He contrasts Samsung phones that don’t always show a scrollbar or menu length indication with Nokia phones that used a “More” option with a downward arrow. The rule of thumb: if scrolling is expected, provide a clear visual clue. Also, try to limit the total number of menu items in a category to what can be displayed onscreen without scrolling, ensuring users know how many options exist.

Don’t Make Important Stuff Look Like an Ad

Reiss discusses “banner blindness,” a phenomenon identified by Jan Benway and David Lane (1998), where users ignore elements that visually resemble banner ads, even important links. Brightly colored, blinking elements are often overlooked. The irony is that the harder designers work to make something visible (like a prominent button), the more it might be ignored if it looks like an advertisement. Reiss advises against making content or functional elements look like ads, as users have learned to filter out such visual noise.

USATODAY.com and Banner Blindness

Reiss uses the USATODAY.com redesigns as a case study for banner blindness. In the late 1990s, the site placed popular content (sports, weather, stocks) in attractive, colorful boxes at the top, only for users to ignore them. A 2007 redesign promoting “network journalism” again placed a large banner at the top, pushing the main navigation into a tiny, almost invisible strip on the left, further separated from content by a FedEx ad. This “knee-jerk design” to incorporate buzzwords (like “network journalism”) demonstrates how ignoring basic usability principles can render important features invisible. He notes that USATODAY.com eventually adopted a more functional and visible page header by 2012.

Blocking Out the Sum

Reiss criticizes websites that “block out the sum” of the experience, often by introducing paywalls or mandatory registration pop-ups too early in the user journey. He describes a frustrating experience with Stumblehere.com, a classified-ad site that presented a registration pop-up with every click, preventing him from browsing. This “lose-lose-lose” scenario alienates users, who then fail to find what they’re looking for, don’t register, and develop a negative perception of the service. Reiss emphasizes that businesses must “show folks value” upfront to earn their engagement, advising against hiding content or functionality behind intrusive barriers.

Eric’s Enlightening Elevator Examination

Reiss’s favorite method for assessing visibility is the “Elevator Examination.” He imagines stepping out of an elevator in an unfamiliar building and needing to know where to go. He asks: “Is the information I need visible? Are there signs or other hints?” This applies to physical spaces (like airports, with their “wayfinding” signage) and digital interfaces. If you were the “elevator operator” for your website or app, what would you tell your “passengers” about each “floor” or page? Whatever it is, make sure it’s clearly visible as a headline, a big sign, or any other effective communication element. He contrasts the poorly visible restroom sign at Zurich Airport (hidden next to the elevator and backlit) with the Berlin department store KaDeWe’s clear escalator signage.

Sherlock, Edward, Don, and Ch’i

Reiss concludes the chapter with philosophical references to tie visibility to broader design principles:

• Feng shui and ch’i: Clutter prevents life-giving energy from flowing freely, suggesting that eliminating irrelevant “stuff” makes important “stuff” more visible.
• Sherlock Holmes: “Eliminate the impossible, and whatever is left… must be the truth.” Designers act as detectives, uncovering truth by eliminating the irrelevant.
• Edward Tufte: Warns against reducing “resolution” or “dumbing down” information by eliminating content, seeing it as a sign of poor design.
• Don Norman: Argues that complexity is necessary and that we should not confuse simplicity with usability.
  Reiss concludes that “visibility” isn’t just about hiding or showing; it’s about designing to lead people to the most relevant choices without eliminating relevant information, even if it’s occasionally needed. He cites the Bösendorfer grand piano, which subtly disguises its extra bass keys (making the visible invisible) to improve the pianist’s usability and peripheral vision without reducing complexity.

Chapter Seven: Understandable

This chapter focuses on understandability, which Reiss defines as ensuring everyone involved (users, designers, engineers) shares the same “shared reference” about a product or service. If this shared understanding is lacking, usability suffers, leading to frustration and misinterpretation. The core message is simple yet profoundly important: clear communication is paramount to avoiding usability problems.

What Is “Shared Reference”?

Shared reference means that anyone using a product or service has the same basic understanding of it as its creators. In interactive media, this is achieved through words, images, and sounds. Reiss illustrates this with his “light bulb test,” where he describes an “ordinary 60W light bulb with a standard E27, screw-in base,” then reveals many different types of bulbs that fit the description. The point is that “ordinary” can mean many things, and designers often take for granted what users already know. This leads to crucial missing details in product descriptions, catalogs, or website content.

Eric’s “Light Bulb” Test

Reiss’s “light bulb” test demonstrates how easily ambiguity arises from insufficient detail in descriptions. By describing an “ordinary” light bulb without specifying its color, special features (e.g., “daylight” bulb, darkroom bulb), voltage, or status (burned out), he tricks his audience into assuming a frosted white incandescent bulb. When he then reveals diverse bulbs that technically fit his sparse description, it highlights that “ordinary” lacks a shared reference. This teaches writers to not get so wrapped up in unique features that they forget to include basic descriptive information, which is a common and critical mistake in content creation.

Five Keys to Creating Effective “Shared References”

Reiss provides a list of five principles for creating effective shared references:

• Don’t take anything for granted: Assume users don’t have the same level of knowledge or interest. Flesh out even “obvious” details (e.g., 110V or 220V).
• Anticipate the questions people might have: Conduct an exercise where you read a description aloud and have friends ask questions; any unanswerable questions indicate missing information.
• Answer questions they didn’t think to ask: Proactively provide context and implications.
• Examine content in the context of your visitor’s situation: Understand how users will interact with your product or service in their specific environment.
• The communication environment will affect the information needed: What’s communicated online differs from what’s needed in person.
  He uses the example of a restaurant visit, outlining dozens of touchpoints (reservations, seating, menu clarity, portion size) that demonstrate the presence or absence of shared reference and opportunities to optimize usability. The “automatic” hand dryer needing three extra stickers illustrates a design failing to send clear cognitive signals.

Creating a Comfort Zone

Visitors, especially travelers in unfamiliar surroundings, are often outside their comfort zones. Reiss argues that designers should make users feel welcome and provide the necessary guidance to help them achieve their goals and avoid trouble. McDonald’s is cited as a prime example of successfully creating comfort zones globally: the ordering process, food, and experience are so predictable that users don’t have to think, reducing stress and providing a sense of familiarity regardless of location. The Moscow hotel bathmat signaling its purpose clearly is another example of creating comfort through shared reference in an unexpected place.

Don’t Be Afraid to Tell Your Story

Reiss debunks three dangerous myths in online design:

• “Our customers already know this.”: Leads to missed opportunities for clear shared reference (e.g., sales tax inclusion).
• “Web text should be no longer than 10 lines.”: Outdated advice from the dial-up era; long text can outperform short text.
• “People don’t scroll on the web.”: Disproven by research showing extensive scrolling on sites like Amazon.
  He emphasizes that people scan and skim for keywords before reading in detail. The advice is to “tell your story in a simple, straightforward way. Fill in the blanks. Don’t leave out the details.” L.L. Bean is praised for creating shared references by showing shoe soles (a key feature), and Sears, Roebuck & Co. from over a century ago for its detailed catalog descriptions, both illustrating the importance of comprehensive visual and textual information. A cryptic Copenhagen bus ad for a lightweight safety boot, understandable only years later, highlights the failure to establish a shared reference.

Photos and Other Visual Aids

Reiss argues that “a picture really is worth a thousand words” and can significantly improve the “scent” of words. Images can:

• Flesh out difficult stories: Showing a camcorder held in a hand illustrates its size better than words alone.
• Demonstrate usage: A photo of a vacuum cleaner worn on the back shows its unusual application clearly.
• Convey emotional aspects: Images often convey subtle emotional qualities better than words.
  He emphasizes that pictures alone are often not enough; combining multiple shared-reference techniques (words and images) is best. The GPS data showing bus arrival times in Berlin is an excellent example of a real-time visual aid creating a valuable shared reference.

Icons and Other Troublemakers

Reiss recounts how, in the early days of the web (1997), icon design was a major budget item, driven by the belief that “fewer words, the better.” However, he now states that icons are “pretty poor communicators” on their own. Only a few icons are widely recognized:

• Magnifying glass (search)
• House (home)
• Envelope (contact/mail)
• Printer (print)
  Even these can be misinterpreted. Reiss urges designers not to be “too creative” with icons, suggesting that using similar designs to those from Microsoft, Apple, or Google (which users already understand from other contexts) is preferable. He advises putting resources into meaningful content first, and only then worrying about “eye-candy” like icons, emphasizing that the purpose of online elements is what they can do, not how they look. He cites an old Illy website with a confusing icon as an example of poor icon usage without accompanying text.

“As Big as a Breadbox”

Using a familiar object as a point of reference (e.g., “as big as a breadbox,” “thin as an eggshell,” “tastes like chicken”) only works if the reference itself is universally understood and makes sense. Reiss notes that “chicken” can taste very different depending on its preparation and origin, rendering the comparison meaningless without further context. He advises that as communicators, it’s our responsibility to create a true shared reference, not to introduce FUD. The Mondaine Swiss Railway Watch website, which offers identical-looking watches with no differentiating details, serves as an example of failing to establish a shared reference, leaving users unable to discern differences.

The Sun Never Sets on the World Wide Web

Reiss stresses the importance of international awareness in design, as people from different backgrounds, cultures, and geographies have wildly different expectations and frames of reference. He highlights common international pitfalls:

• First name/Last name fields: In some cultures (e.g., China, Hungary), the family name comes first. “Family name” and “given name(s)” are more universally understandable labels.
• Units of measure: Inches vs. centimeters, Fahrenheit vs. Celsius. Provide both or clearly state which is used (e.g., “BTU”).
• Currency and taxes: Clearly state the currency, and whether sales tax (VAT, MwSt, MOMS, HST) is included, as tax rates and display conventions vary greatly worldwide.
  Amazon’s simple “suggest a better translation” box is highlighted as a great example of building strong shared references and adapting to diverse users. The example of Google’s automatic translation of a French olive oil website turning “Recettes” (recipes) into “Revenues” and “Entrées” (starters) into “Inputs” shows how technically correct translations can be contextually meaningless, creating a wildly inconsistent user experience.

Audio and Video

Reiss advocates for using audio and video as powerful shared-reference tools, especially with modern bandwidth and services like YouTube. While acknowledging accessibility issues (e.g., blind people can’t see video, deaf people can’t hear audio), he warns against reducing all content to the “lowest common denominator,” which can do a disservice to many users. He advises consulting legislation like the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA 508) but noting that W3C recommendations are not always legal requirements. The story of the mobile phone portal that refused to provide detailed phone descriptions or allow user reviews illustrates how reluctance to provide clear information hinders sales, even with a tagline like “We know everything about mobile phones. Just ask us!”

Chapter Eight: Logical

Chapter Eight focuses on the concept of logicalness in design. Reiss likens adopting a logical mindset to the “left-brained” Mr. Spock from Star Trek, emphasizing that while creativity is important, design must ultimately make common sense and reason for the user. The core idea is to eliminate situations where users ask themselves, “I wonder why they did that?” because such questions invariably signal a usability problem and introduce fear, uncertainty, or doubt (FUD).

Three Basic Types of Logical Reasoning

Reiss provides a brief overview of three types of logical reasoning:

• Deductive reasoning: Arriving at a “truth” through sequential logic (e.g., if A=B and B=C, then A=C). This often applies to sequential processes.
• Inductive reasoning: Suggesting the probability of something being true based on past observations (e.g., Joe is a good driver because he rarely has accidents).
• Retroductive inference: Applying knowledge learned in one situation to a new, similar situation (e.g., navigating an unfamiliar airport based on prior airport experiences).
  These three ways of thinking about “stuff” all impact how users perceive usability.

The Magic Word—“Why”

The presence of the question “Why did they do that?” in a user’s mind indicates a usability problem. Reiss reiterates the importance of proactive thinking on behalf of the user to avoid FUD. He then briefly revisits the five ease-of-use considerations from Part One through a logical lens, highlighting how illogical design choices can manifest in each.

Functionality and Logic

Illogical functional decisions are common. Reiss provides examples:

• Why can’t I add my frequent-flyer number online? (Forces offline action).
• Why is my word-processing program bulleting unintended paragraphs? (Software behaving unexpectedly).
• Why is my video projector consuming so much electricity on standby? (Unexpected power usage).
  These questions reveal that the “stuff” isn’t functioning in a way that aligns with user expectations or common sense.

Responsiveness and Logic

Logical responsiveness is about the system reacting as expected. Reiss’s examples focus on “Why didn’t?” questions:

• Why didn’t the elevator button light up? (Lack of visual confirmation).
• Why didn’t the hotel send an email confirmation? (Lack of receipt).
• Why didn’t the receptionist answer the phone? (System failing to provide expected service).
  He highlights a handicap elevator where the “stop” button required pushing the “alarm” button for 10 seconds, an illogical design because users won’t read instructions during emergencies.

Ergonomics and Logic

Good ergonomic solutions are inherently logical. Reiss questions design choices that create physical or cognitive friction:

• Why is the shampoo cap impossible to unscrew with wet hands? (Lack of grip when needed).
• Why are car mirror controls so far away that I can’t adjust them from a normal driving position? (Requires awkward posture).
• Why do I have to scroll down to hit the Submit button after entering login details? (Illogical grouping of related elements).
  These examples demonstrate how illogical ergonomic design leads to frustration and inconvenience.

Convenience and Logic

Illogical convenience problems arise when designers forget that context and task flow are critical. Reiss asks:

• Why are potato chips with snacks, but dip mix with salad dressings? (Illogical product grouping in a store).
• Why aren’t vacuum cleaner bags on the same web page as the vacuums? (Related items separated online).
• Why can’t I change my email password on my smartphone without a full factory reset? (Overly complex process for a simple task).
  He cites the Scandic Hotel buffet where forks were on one side and knives on the other, forcing illogical movement, and an elevator in Havana where the “alarm” button was the only way to reach the ground floor, illustrating a need for clearer, more logical user interaction.

Foolproofing and Logic

Logical foolproofing anticipates user mistakes and provides helpful guardrails. Reiss frames this as “cries for help” from users:

• Why didn’t the app remind me to save my data before shutting down? (Missing a crucial reminder).
• Why aren’t the instructions written so ordinary people can understand them? (Unclear guidance).
• Why did they let me do something this stupid? (Lack of preventative design).
  These questions highlight the need for designers to proactively prevent errors and offer clear, understandable guidance.

Design Dissonance

Design dissonance occurs when a product or interface sends out a cognitive signal that conflicts with its actual function. Reiss’s Balinese food strainer made from an insecticide can is a comical example; more seriously, bath salts with a tea-drinking image requiring a “NOT FOOD!” warning creates a dangerous and illogical user experience. He stresses that designs must support users’ existing mental models to avoid pushing them in the wrong direction from the start. A blue air freshener shaped like a tree but smelling of “new car” is an example where dissonance doesn’t affect usability.

Use Cases

Reiss introduces use cases as schematic diagrams that map out task flows, often stemming from user scenarios/stories. He highlights the Pareto Principle (80% of actions from 20% of causes) and distinguishes between:

• “Sunny day cases” (happy paths): The 20% of cases accounting for 80% of actions (e.g., creating an account, changing a password).
• “Rainy day cases”: The 80% of cases accounting for 20% of actions (e.g., “identifying individual authorship in multi-user corporate accounts”).
  Mapping out the flow of an existing routine (like a shopping cart) can reveal illogical procedures, especially when computer logic (binary, categorical) clashes with human decision-making. He points to a shopping site that resets the cart upon login as a “broken” flow. Even scratching the surface of these flows can reveal significant usability problems.

Linear Processes

Many processes are linear, where steps follow a logical sequence (e.g., making tea: get kettle, fill with water, put on stove). Reiss illustrates failures in linear processes:

• Airline sites asking for seat choice after printing the boarding card.
• Route-finder websites asking for a route before transportation mode.
• E-commerce sites revealing shipping restrictions halfway through checkout.
• Restaurants informing diners a meal is unavailable 20 minutes after ordering.
• Software products asking users to save an activation key after its packaging (where it was printed) has been discarded.
  He recounts a frustrating experience with a Cadillac CTS navigation system, which forced illogical detours, required the radio to be on to activate, and had secret, illogical button combinations, concluding that simple changes to linear flows can easily set things right, aligning with Mr. Spock’s “highly logical” approach.

Chapter Nine: Consistent

Chapter Nine focuses on consistency, which Reiss defines as ensuring “something does the same thing each and every time.” He argues that consistency is a key to achieving elegance and clarity in functional design, as it helps simplify users’ lives by making the world around them easier to understand. He uses the example of Monopoly, where despite different versions, the basic layout and rules remain consistent, allowing players to expect a predictable game experience.

A Caveat

Reiss begins with an important caveat from interface designer Bruce Tognazzini: “Inconsistency: It is just important to be visually inconsistent when things must act differently as it is to be visually consistent when things act the same.” This means that while consistency is generally good, deliberate inconsistency is necessary when functions or behaviors genuinely differ, preventing user confusion.

Seduced by Synonyms

Reiss warns against the use of synonyms in interface design, which can confuse users. While synonyms add variety for writers, using different words for the same action or information at different times (e.g., “Submit” vs. “Send” vs. “Accept” for a button) creates inconsistency. He cites the Copenhagen Airport’s old “Disabled Toilet” and “Handicap Toilet” signs as an amusing example of mixing terms. The rule: once language conventions are established (especially for forms and dialog boxes), stick to them. While redundant links can have slightly different, context-appropriate wording, large conceptual leaps (e.g., “Light Bulbs” linking to “Spare Parts”) are problematic.

Keeping Things Homogeneous

Consistency also applies to lists of choices, which should be homogeneous — meaning each option has clear, non-overlapping distinctions. Reiss contrasts a clear list (“Men,” “Women,” “Children”) with a confusing, non-homogeneous one (“Men,” “Women,” “People who wear glasses”). He uses the Zappos website’s navigation as a case study: while it eventually improved, earlier versions had a “mess” of non-homogeneous categories (e.g., “Flip Video, Eyewear, Handbags, Kids, Watches, Boots…” where “Kids” is incongruous). Clear, consistent choices reduce FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt).

Retroductive Inference Revisited

Retroductive inference is the logical process of applying learned knowledge from one situation to a new, similar one. Reiss emphasizes its huge role in usability: if icons on a website are similar to ones seen elsewhere, users can infer their function. However, if those icons then perform very different actions, it leads to surprise and frustration. Similarly, consistency in wayfinding and building signage is critical for efficient navigation, though architects sometimes prioritize unique design concepts over established conventions, hindering this inference. He highlights the automatic translation on the Nicholas Alziari website, where “Recettes” (recipes) became “Revenues” and “Entrées” (starters) became “Inputs,” creating a wildly inconsistent experience despite technically correct translations.

Standardization Promotes Consistency

Reiss discusses standardization as a powerful driver of consistency and clarity. He uses the example of early car-rental companies pressuring manufacturers like Ford to standardize driving controls (e.g., the gear shift pattern) because they couldn’t afford to teach each customer how to drive a unique car. The Model T’s idiosyncratic controls are contrasted with the 1916 Cadillac, which introduced the modern standard shift pattern, making cars much easier to learn and use. He notes that while the internet is still young, organizations like the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) and the International Standards Organization (ISO) work to define technical and service standards. The purpose of standardization is not to stifle creativity, but to build clarity into the solution. The Royal Air Force’s “Basic Six” blind-flying controls are another example of standardization improving pilot training and safety across different aircraft.

Don’t Take Consistency for Granted

Reiss points out many everyday inconsistencies we often overlook:

• Battery charger indicator lights: Sony (red), Canon (yellow), Leica (green) for charging; Sony/Leica off, Canon green for fully charged. Users adapt but it’s inconsistent.
• Arrows on public signs: Pointing up for “straight ahead,” pointing down for “straight ahead,” or inconsistent usage within the same airport (Charles de Gaulle).
• Door handles and thermostat controls: Vary widely in function and placement.
• Parking signs in Copenhagen: Reiss still gets tickets after 35 years because older signs use a reversed arrow convention from newer ones, leading to confusion.
  These examples show that designers should actively seek out and correct inconsistencies, even in seemingly minor details, as they impact user experience.

One Button, One Function

Reiss advocates for the “one button, one function” principle, contrasting it with his old VCR with 46 buttons, but no multifunctional buttons. He explains that if a single button performs different jobs based on the “mode” of the machine (like his TV remote’s back button also changing aspect ratios), it creates confusion and frustration. Apple is praised for its approach: the iPhone has only one physical button that always returns to the home screen; other functions are handled by “soft” buttons on the touchscreen. Even Apple’s single-button mouse effectively simulates a second button through a “hold down” action, which is easy to learn. The key is to group buttons sensibly and ensure they don’t perform different actions at different times, as consistency and simplicity go hand-in-hand.

One Icon, One Function

Building on the “one button, one function” idea, Reiss argues for “one icon, one function.” He criticizes Google’s Gmail and Google Docs for reusing identical icons for different functionalities, which is frustrating and confusing. The purpose of icons is to provide quick cognitive hints, and this is undermined when an icon’s meaning changes. Despite years of research and consumer complaints, even major players like Google, Microsoft, and Apple have been known to reuse icons, suggesting a lack of widespread adoption for this best practice. Reiss reiterates that icons are “pretty, but they are expensive to design” and that resources should be prioritized for meaningful content, not just “eye-candy.”

One Object, One Behavior

Reiss stresses that objects that look alike should also act alike. His “constant fight with Microsoft Word” stems from inconsistent behavior where some windows can be resized by dragging edges, but others cannot. This principle extends to “invisible” functions like keyboard shortcuts. He notes the inconsistency between English and Danish versions of Microsoft Office (Ctrl+I for “italic” vs. “insert hyperlink”) and between PC and Mac versions. When programs change shortcut functions based on workflow context, it leads to user complaints. Reiss advises designers to make things consistent or expect people to complain, as inconsistencies force users to remember arbitrary rules rather than rely on predictable behavior. The patched Cuban elevator, using a sticker to relabel the “Alarm” button as the “Ground Floor” button, is a prime example of a patch that addresses a functional problem but highlights an underlying design inconsistency.

Chapter Ten: Predictable

Chapter Ten distinguishes between predictability and consistency. While consistency means something always does the same thing, predictability means it does what you expect it to do. Reiss uses the example of light switches: their UL approval (consistency) is separate from the expectation that a switch near a door will control room lights (predictability). This chapter explores how to set clear expectations and create interfaces that allow users to confidently anticipate outcomes, minimizing surprises and frustration. He highlights the role of shared reference (Chapter Seven) and retroductive inference (Chapters Eight and Nine) in establishing predictability.

Six Ways to Enhance Predictability

Reiss outlines six methods to improve predictability in design:

• Let folks know what to expect before they get wherever they’re going: Pre-set expectations (e.g., guidebooks, Yelp reviews, eBay ratings).
• Let folks know what you expect of them: Clearly communicate prerequisites or required information upfront.
• Let folks know how many steps there are in a multistep process: Show progress indicators (e.g., shopping cart steps).
• Make sure folks understand the desired outcome of the process they are actually in: Clarify the purpose of current interactions.
• Put things where folks expect to find them: Leverage common mental models and design patterns (e.g., light switches by doors).
• Create visible signals that warn of invisible conditions: Design to alert users to potential dangers or states (e.g., hot surfaces).

Knowing What to Expect

Predictability begins with setting clear expectations before an interaction. Reiss compares this to buying a guidebook before a vacation or checking Yelp reviews before a restaurant visit. The Danish tax department’s online system that tells taxpayers how many people are in line and their estimated wait time is a good example of setting expectations to reduce frustration.

Branding, Customer Satisfaction, and Expectations

Branding inherently involves setting expectations (e.g., Volvo is safe, Jaguar is sporty, Chevy is utilitarian). Customer satisfaction is directly tied to expectations. Reiss cites a survey where Walmart (low expectations for service) achieved higher customer satisfaction than Nordstrom (high expectations for service) because any positive action from Walmart staff exceeded minimal expectations, while Nordstrom had to work harder to impress. The lesson: if users have no expectations, help them form positive ones; if they have expectations, strive to exceed them, as merely “meeting” expectations is rarely enough for high perceived usability.

Helping Set Expectations

Social media offers a powerful, cost-effective way to shape user expectations and build trust. Reiss emphasizes using discussion forums to engage in dialogue and foster a sense of shared understanding. He lists 10 common social media mistakes that undermine trustworthy expectations:

1. Lying: Creating fake content.
2. Ignoring: Not responding to conversations.
3. Denying: Refusing to acknowledge problems.
4. Arguing: Disrespecting different viewpoints.
5. Hyping: Blatant, inappropriate promotion.
6. Gaming: Padding ratings.
7. Hiding: No clear contact points.
8. Hating: Engaging negatively.
9. Censoring: Removing negative comments.
10. Failing to embrace social media.
    Adopting an appropriate, trustworthy tone in social media is critical, as a tweet like “hello tweepers! Are u ready for an awesome friday?” from a major financial institution can erode confidence and predictability.

Instructions Revisited—But Never Visited

Reiss reiterates that instructions are one of the least effective ways to set expectations because people rarely read them. He stresses that if a product is expected to be “plug-and-play,” it must be. He recounts buying a new camera and memory card that wouldn’t work with his new laptop, eventually discovering an outdated card reader driver after hours of frustrated troubleshooting and no helpful prompts from the laptop. The critical takeaway: don’t hide key information in manuals or “Read Me” files that users will likely ignore. Instead, designs should be intuitive or provide task-relevant messages only when needed.

Telling Folks What You Expect

Predictability involves communicating what you expect of users upfront. This helps them prepare and reduces frustration. Key parameters to address:

• Specific knowledge: “Basic proficiency in written Spanish required.”
• Physical/technical constraints: “For Microsoft Windows XP and later.”
• Geographical constraints: “Cannot be shipped outside the United States.”
• Age limits: “Purchaser must be 21 years of age or older.”
• Prequalification process: “Available by prescription only. Please see your doctor first.”
• Time limits: “Offer valid thru May 30, 2014.”
• Specific information needed: “Please have your account information ready when you call.”
  The more clearly these needs are communicated, the smoother the user experience.

Let Folks Know How Many Steps Are Involved

Reiss reaffirms that the “three clicks and you’re dead” rule is obsolete. Users will click multiple times if they know each click brings them closer to their goal. Therefore, for multistep processes, it’s crucial to communicate the number of steps involved (e.g., using progress indicators in shopping carts). Airlines are cited as good examples, clearly showing passengers where they are in the booking process, which enhances predictability.

Let People Know Which Process They Are Actually In

Users often get frustrated when they believe they are in one process but are actually in another. Providing clarity on which process they are currently in helps them predict what information they’ll need and what actions they’ll be expected to take. Reiss uses Wine.com as a negative example: it forces visitors to select a U.S. shipping state upfront without explanation, confusing them and leading to high “Where does Wine.com ship wine?” FAQ clicks. This indicates a poor initial communication of process intent, hindering user predictability. He suggests that high FAQ views often signal underlying shared-reference issues that could be fixed by better design.

Put Things Where Folks Expect to Find Them

Reiss emphasizes that keeping things visible means placing them where users expect to find them. This applies to physical objects (light switches by doors, pots in the kitchen, salt near pepper) and digital interfaces. This principle directly fosters retroductive inference, allowing users to apply past experiences to new situations. He recommends utilizing design-pattern libraries (like Yahoo!’s) to see how others have solved common problems, as adopting these standardized elements makes onscreen placement and element behavior more predictable even on unfamiliar sites. The lack of consistency in airline salt and pepper packets, despite uniform pepper placement, highlights a missed opportunity for predictability.

Warn of Invisible Conditions

Design should incorporate visible signals to warn of invisible conditions, especially potential dangers. Reiss recalls learning that “hot glass looks just like cold glass” the hard way. Designs can prevent problems by signaling:

• Danger to touch/approach
• Very hot/cold
• Very sharp/bright/loud
  Examples include a paper pot-holder on a hot silver teapot handle at the Adlon Hotel (turning a problem into a memorable service experience) and a desk lamp with a special handle to prevent burns. He notes that international symbols can be confusing without context, reinforcing the need for clear communication.

A Short Introduction to McDonaldization

Reiss applies George Ritzer’s concept of McDonaldization (efficiency, calculability, predictability, control) to illustrate its impact on user experience. McDonald’s success, he argues, largely stems from its extreme predictability: users know the lines, ordering process, food, cost, and time commitment. This predictability reduces user “thinking” and stress. However, Reiss recounts his “horror” at discovering that two McDonald’s franchises no longer served Quarter Pounders with Cheese, violating this core tenet of predictability. He argues that changing a component like predictability, especially when it’s a key value for customers, can alienate them, suggesting McDonald’s should instead focus on changing other components if it seeks innovation.

Chapter Eleven: Next Steps

This concluding chapter returns to Bogo Vatovec’s three-step usability plan: “Nobody talks about usability,” “Everybody talks about usability,” and finally, “Nobody talks about usability.” Reiss assumes the reader is in the first phase and offers practical, actionable advice for a “rogue usability advocate” to initiate change within their organization, even with limited resources and support. The core message is to accept that all “stuff” has usability problems and there are never enough resources to fix them all; therefore, the focus should be on identifying and implementing achievable improvements.

Guerilla-Style Usability

Reiss provides a practical, low-budget approach to improving usability:

1. Identify 10 issues: From the checklists at the end of each chapter, choose one item you can work on independently, without much assistance or money.
2. Make notes for improvement: For each issue, jot down what you’d improve and how. Ask friends, colleagues, and family for their opinions, embracing their “idiotic” and useful suggestions alike.
3. Refine and prioritize: Create a list of 10 specific changes. Prioritize them in two ways:
   • Mission-critical changes: Those that can make or break a conversion.
   • Small wins, easy fixes: Those that require little time or effort but offer incremental improvements.
4. Act on overlap: Start with tasks that appear at the top of both prioritized lists, as they are both easy and important.
5. Set deadlines: Establish realistic deadlines for completion.
6. Repeat: Once done, start again with a new list of 10 things.

Formalized Think-Aloud Tests

For those with no budget, Reiss outlines a simplified version of a “think-aloud” usability test:

• Recruit a test subject: Ideally part of the target group and outside the organization (friends/family can work but be wary of diplomacy over honesty).
• Develop a test protocol: A list of tasks for the subject to complete (e.g., fill a form, find information).
• Facilitate the test: An observer sits with the subject, taking notes and prompting them with questions like “What are you thinking now?” or “What are you looking at?” if they go silent.
  Reiss emphasizes that observing users struggle with designs can be a “shock” for designers but offers truly impartial and constructive criticism, rarely taken the wrong way. Even one hour of these tests per month can provide valuable insights.

Making Usability Part of the Business Case

To convince higher-ups, usability improvements must be framed in terms of potential gains. This requires establishing a baseline before making changes. For online projects, Google Analytics or other marketing suites provide data on conversion funnels and “bounce rates.” If a page (especially one in a conversion funnel) has a high bounce rate despite available links, it indicates a problem. Using this data, a “rogue usability advocate” can project monetary gains achievable by implementing suggested changes.

For physical products, convincing stakeholders requires demonstrating how usability improvements will:

• Reduce costs (e.g., fewer warranty claims).
• Improve sales.
• Address existing warranty issues.
  Small changes, like a sticker on a product or text in packaging, can yield fantastic results.
  For services, the business case can show how suggestions will lead to:
• Fewer customer complaints.
• Easier, less stressful jobs for service providers.
• Increased respect from colleagues and customers.
• Cost reductions.
  Reiss asserts this is not just “spin,” but the real outcome of effective service design, empowering the “front line to care about your bottom line.”

Invention or Innovation?

Reiss distinguishes between invention (the creation of something new, often accidental) and innovation (the planned process of solving a problem with something new). Innovation, he argues, is the only reason to create new “stuff”; if it doesn’t solve a problem, it creates one. He uses the story of Guglielmo Marconi’s wireless transmission (invention) leading to the Titanic’s SOS signal and rescue (innovation). The Titanic disaster also led to new legislation (ships manning wireless stations 24/7), creating a best practice. He explains the cycle: invention leads to innovation, which leads to best practice, which then informs the next round of innovation. Reiss notes that innovations have technological, social, and political consequences (e.g., e-mail enabling collaborative work vs. simple faxing), and designers must be aware of these. The task is to ensure design teams solve problems, rather than just doing “new stuff for the sake of being different.”

Accidents Can Never Be Attributed to a Single Cause

Reiss illustrates this principle with the sinking of the Titanic, showing that “it hit an iceberg” is an oversimplification. He lists numerous contributing factors: the ship’s speed, the iceberg’s unusual location, a critical ice warning not relayed to the captain, the dead calm sea (no wake), a possibly too-small rudder, substandard rivets, and bulkheads that didn’t go high enough. Any one of these factors, if different, might have prevented the catastrophe. This serves as a metaphor for usability problems: a single “quick-fix” might produce “miraculous results” because it addresses one crucial link in a chain of contributing factors.

Don’t Draw a Conclusion Based on an Isolated Incident

Reiss warns against excessive generalization from single observations, especially regarding “best practices.” The Titanic’s sinking, being slow and even-keeled, led to the conclusion that all ships needed lifeboats for everyone. However, this was an isolated incident. Most ships sink quickly and develop heavy lists, making extra lifeboats useless or even dangerous (e.g., making the ship top-heavy). The S.S. Eastland disaster (1915) tragically proved this: having added lifeboats to meet new regulations, it capsized at the dock, drowning over 800 people before a single boat could be launched. This story underscores the danger of applying conclusions from atypical situations to general rules. Therefore, Reiss advises caution when interpreting isolated statistics from customer-satisfaction surveys, web-analytics applications, or the opinions of a single, vocal team member.

Key Takeaways

“Usable Usability” is a rallying cry for common sense and empathy in design. Eric Reiss systematically dismantles the myths surrounding usability, revealing that effective design is less about complex theories and more about anticipating user needs and removing friction. The book emphasizes that usability is situational, and true success hinges on making “stuff” not just functional, but genuinely easy, clear, and predictable to use.

The core lessons for readers include:

• Functionality is non-negotiable: If something doesn’t fundamentally work, nothing else matters. Focus on broken buttons, form validation, and efficient processing speed.
• Responsiveness is key to reassurance: Provide clear, timely feedback for every user action to reduce FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) and confirm the system is working.
• Ergonomics applies everywhere: Design for human physical and cognitive comfort, whether it’s the size of a button, the flow of a process, or the placement of controls. Bigger, easier-to-access interactive elements are almost always better.
• Convenience is in the eye of the beholder: Prioritize the user’s ease, not the designer’s or developer’s. Minimize interface switches, irrelevant information, and forced detours.
• Foolproofing is about subtle guidance: Remind, Alert, and Force user behavior to prevent errors without being intrusive. Provide helpful, specific error messages and make systems forgiving of common mistakes.
• Visibility dictates existence: If users can’t see, recognize, or find important information, it doesn’t exist to them. Make key elements prominent and design pages to encourage natural scanning and scrolling.
• Understandability relies on shared reference: Ensure mutual understanding through clear language, relevant images, and universally understood concepts. Avoid jargon and anticipate user questions.
• Logic ensures seamless interaction: Design processes that make intuitive sense and avoid “design dissonance” where elements conflict with user expectations.
• Consistency builds predictability: Maintain uniform language, visual cues, and behaviors for similar functions. Standardize interactions where possible to leverage retroductive inference.
• Predictability creates trust: Set clear expectations, communicate requirements upfront, and ensure actions lead to anticipated outcomes. Avoid surprising users.

Next actions:

1. Conduct a “guerilla-style” audit: Choose one small, impactful change from each chapter’s checklist.
2. Prioritize for impact and ease: Focus on the low-hanging fruit that offers significant improvement with minimal resources.
3. Start with “think-aloud” tests: Even informal observations can reveal critical usability flaws.
4. Frame usability as a business case: Use analytics and user feedback to show how improvements directly impact conversions, sales, and customer satisfaction.

Reflection prompts:

• What “stuff” in your daily life causes you the most frustration, and how do Reiss’s principles explain why?
• How might your own products or services be inadvertently causing FUD for your users?
• Where can you implement one “small win, easy fix” this week to improve a user experience, and how will you measure its impact?