Ugly Innovation

Some of the most visually unappealing online mega-brands that exist are also the most successful. Brands like eBay, Craigslist, Wikipedia, & Facebook rely on below average design and yet continually have a high volume of traffic with fairly little complaint from users. At one point or another these companies have been innovative with new technology. While these brands have proven to be successful due to their valuable service and technical quality, ultimately they are weaker because they lack strategically driven visual design.

How have these brands been so successful despite a lack in visual design? Should design nay-sayers declare these online mega-brands as evidence that visual design is pure waste?

Of all the previously mentioned online brands, the most visually unappealing is Craigslist. Most designers consider Craigslist the antithesis of modern branding. It is an aggregator of every possible service and commodity; a modern day bulletin board.

An article by Wired magazine delved into the oddities of Craigslist. Craigslist does not have marketers, human resources, or even business development. They lack the most critical components to the modern day business. On average they receive more Web traffic than their two main competitors combined: Amazon & eBay. All of this is accomplished with a small technical staff of about 30 people. Their competitors employ thousands of people.

How does a bare bones Web site aggregator with a small staff of 30 technologists produce more traffic and usage than any other aggregator out there with seemingly minimal effort? Craigslist employees know their brand well. They understand its role in Web users' lives and its limitations. This shows remarkable brand stewardship despite the visual clutter.

Craigslist has resisted offers from advertisers and marketers, and pretty much any innovation or change at all. They continually refuse to charge for their services except for limited postings. They have even resisted creating a more visually appealing interface despite the efforts of some very reputable designers. If there were ever an anti-design brand, Craiglist would be it. The reason for their success: they were the first online aggregator of their kind in the early days of the Web. Craigslist is a simple concept and is easy to use. It has remained so from its conception, despite it wreaking of something straight out of 1996. Craiglists does two things well: they help people find what they want and provide a smooth user experience.

The Web users have spoken and they approve of this online brand. The functionality of Craigslist is seamless enough that design is not a requirement for trust, validity, or brand-building. In fact, redesigning could possibly damage Craigslist if not done extremely carefully. I know there are a lot of designers out there who would love to see this happen, but I would be hesitant to do so. Anyone remember the Arnell debacle with Tropicana and how it backfired? There is an important lesson to be learned here: why fix something that isn't broken? I agree that Craigslist could be improved, but convincing 30 dedicated programmers who don't see aesthetics as a primary function is unlikely.

Other online mega-brands are also able to buck the trend of the normal visuals expected of a quality brand. Google's changing logo came about when the two founders asked one of their programmers to start making holiday illustrations off of their logo. Would Nike, Starbucks, or Apple dare to ask a programmer to create their brand icon or even modify it for that matter? Not a chance, and for good reason.

These online brands reveal the technical gurus at work behind the scenes. This lack of high quality design can enhance the validity of their brand for the time being. The lack of refinement is ignored simply due to the pressure of improving the product rather than the design for shareholder value. Over time this unpolished style has given these online brands credibility in the eyes of Web users. This along with their break-through innovations in technology allows them to ignore the typical expectations of Web users. In this instance, if your innovations are truly innovative and game changing, then high quality design is not necessary (did I just say that?). Let me say it again, if your product is truly innovative and revolutionary, visual design can be set aside (to a certain point).

Now don't get me wrong, I am a true believer that branding and design add value and increase ROI. I've seen it and I know it works. On the other hand, I would be fooling myself if I thought these online brands need amazing visual design. I would be ignoring the evidence that is staring me right in the face. Millions of people have adopted these brands and use them frequently in their everyday interactions despite their lack of refinement. Allow me to give an example of an instance where a lack of refinement added value to the experience.

When I got married, my wife and I honeymooned in the Cayman Islands. One of the highlights of the trip was the amazing food. We actually went to the nicest restaurant on the entire island which was over a 100 years old and ate exotic food. But of all the places we ate, that's not what stood out. Right down the street from our inn was a small jerk chicken hut and a big hand-painted sign that read, "Chesters: Local Tourist Trap & Den". We decided, what the heck, let's try this sketchy food hut. We walked in and a lady with a thick Caribbean accent took our order. When we got our food and drinks, the chicken looked as though it had just been slaughtered out back, bones and all included. Not to mention my local drink was chunky. My wife and I still tell people that Chester's was the best place we ate on the entire island. The building was sketchy looking, the food authentic and amazing. Their lack of ability to create a branded environment due to financial resources is what made it so fantastic. Not to mention the cheapest meal we had the whole trip.

Online technology brands and hole-in-the-wall restaurants share something in common: they are authentic by nature and that is what gives them power. These authentic brand experiences serve their function perfectly in a specific context.

Online technology brands like Wikipedia, eBay, Facebook, & Craigslist may not "need" refinement currently, but they will. These brands have user experience down extremely well, and without that they would fall flat on their faces. However these behemoths do leave a hole in their armor by not truly embracing the value that visual design can bring to online experiences. When someone smart and innovative enough comes along with something ground breaking (which they will), and embraces design along with the perfection of user experience, they will stand a chance at conquering one of these giants. Even better could be one of these giants embracing design to improve the brand experience for millions of users.

It's important to remember that we are still in the dinosaur days of the Web. Web users have not come to fully expect great design online as the Web is still relatively new. Just as design is becoming more and more expected in the analogue world, this will be true of the digital world as well. If these brands don't embrace design, other up and coming competitors will get a leg up. As the Web continues to evolve, users will start to expect quality design. Those who do not embrace their users' online expectations will be viewed as outdated.

When the worlds of art and science collide, the Web will be improved for all of us. I'm simply excited to be a part of the evolution.
 

Posted by Brent Loosli