April 14
Simplicity and Complexity – better together
Word for word, I think I just completed reading a book that in my opinion packs a very impactful punch. The book is – The Laws of Simplicity by John Maeda. Many of your are likely familiar with his work, and for those of you who are not – might I recommend an investment of 4 hours in reading this 100 page book. I was personally introduced to it by a designer here at Molecular and how thankful I am that he did. I found that the book put a ‘finer point’ on many of my own thoughts around the utility of technology and helped accelerate their evolution in my mind.
I read the book as I navigate a complex project – from the solution, to the dynamics of the team, and the user experience we were engineering. As I began to internalize the laws of the book I began to very clearly see the fifth law in play – simplicity and complexity need each other. I also realized that it can play a very central role in enhancing a users experience in the rich web experiences we are trying to create for users.
Law 5: Differences. Simplicity and complexity need each other.
The most successful way in which to highlight the complex is to pair it effectively with simplicity. It is human nature to want to be challenged by complexity. If we are not, we become bored and move on. Interestingly however, we do not want to be bothered with complexity if the result is not worth the effort. In the context of my current project, the complex nature of what we are trying empower the user with is enhanced by making certain aspects of the solution simple for the user. Notice that I said certain aspects. Making everything simple will actually reduce the value of the solution itself, while the strategic exposure of complexity will enhance the users overall respect for the solution.
In order to successfully find where to introduce complexity and where to keep things simple, we must understand the key drivers that bring a user to interact with this system. In our case, we are transposing a very human activity (coaching and personal training) into a web application – the application I refer to is miCoach. This decision means that the user is willing and expecting to be introduced to the complexities and knowledge associated with coaching. An activity normally performed by trained professionals. The words – trust, authority, expertise and mentoring come to mind when you think of coaching. We can use complexity to allow the user to identify these values in our solution.
We must then balance this ‘introduced’ complexity with simplicity for all other aspects of the system. This approach creates the necessary contrast to pronounce the very values we are attempting to promote – trust, authority, expertise and mentoring. Peripheral tasks that enable the experience, such as signing-up for a user account, navigating the application, and the use of equipment must be made simple for the user. This allows them to immerse themselves in their key driver for selecting the solution – in this case coaching.
The Simplicity and Complexity – better together by Molecular Voices, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Chet Geschickter said on April 21st, 2008
Interesting post. First, you must be a fast reader – 100 pages in 4 hours – that’s fast ;-)
Second, imho complexity and simplicity are relative things. Personality and life experience have as much to do with perceptions of complexity and simplicity as do the nature of the object or system to which they are applied do.
Third, I think there are two concepts related to complexity and simplicity; they are analysis and synthesis. While analysis is a very heavily used business term and frequently conducted business activity, synthesis is not. I consider synthesis to be the incorporation of common sub-elements into an integrated and logical idea or theme that unifies those sub-elements into a common system or framework (how’s that for a complex definitition?). Conversely, analysis is the process of analyzing the sub-components. When we say that someone “can’t see the forest for the trees” another way to say this could be “too much analysis, not enough synthesis.” When I was in B-school, it seemed like most of the positions available on-campus had the word analyst in the title – clearly an entry-level position. Later, experienced analysts become managers and managers become executives – I would submit if they are skilled at synthesizing all that analysis to deliver valued products and services and get business results.
Fourth, to take the example of miCoach, I venture to say that this is an application that synthesizes the sub-elements of coaching into an overall online experience that delivers the experiential elements of trust, authority, expertise and mentoring.
Fifth, applying the analysis/synthesis example to my own athletic experience as a competitive cyclist, I may train for three months then enter my first race. I “feel” like I’ve followed a solid program and that I am ready. Then, 15 miles into the 56 miles, I get dropped at crunch time on a nasty climb (as an aside, this is exactly what happened to me in the Tour of the Hilltowns 3 years ago – and man, let me tell you, that was one surprisingly nasty climb…). :-( As I rode downtrodden by myself for the last 40 miles, I mentally decomposed and analyzed my training program. I asked myself analytical questions. Did I do enough high intensity interval work? Have I done hill jams? Am I riding too much on flat terrain and not enough hills? Am I overtraining? Am I carrying 5 pounds of “baby fat?”
Three weeks later I rode a revenge hilly race and placed in the top 10 – after taking specific actions based on my analysis: hammering in the hills of Vermont, doing some uphill sprints, dropping a couple of pounds, all actions that my analysis prescribed and re-synthesized into my overall race day preparation. Complex? You betcha, but so is cycling and that’s one of the reasons I love it. The inherent complexity of the sport is like no other (have I mentioned drafting, double-echelons and team tactics yet?).
Which brings me to my sixth and final point, while others might be bothered and bored, to the point of ennui by such complexity, I dig it. One person’s poison is another person’s punch.
Ricardo Salema said on April 24th, 2008
I have followed his work for a few years now, ever since I saw him speak at an AIGA conference on technology and media convergence.
I knew he was gathering his philosophy on Simplicity for some years now, but was very excited when I found out it had been compiled into a “simple” 100 page book.
Its a great and easy read, and I highly recommend it to anyone in and out of our fields. One could even say that it can be applied outside of work as a life philosophy of sorts.
He has also recently been named the new president of RISD. Very exciting to see an innovative and serious thinker/designer take over the administration of a design school. I guess we can look forward to some exciting things coming out of design schools in the very near future, and not just technical organization such as MIT or Stanford.