Consistency: The Unspoken Rule

As product designers, we’re often faced with feedback like “this isn’t consistent with that component in our Design System” or “there’s a component that can be reused despite not being the exact solution for the hurdle you’re facing.” But what does consistency really mean?

In my opinion, consistency is crucial for creating a seamless user experience. It can be broadly categorized into four main types: visual consistency, functional consistency, internal consistency, and external consistency.

Visual Consistency

Visual consistency refers to the uniformity of aesthetic elements across a digital product. This includes colors, fonts, layout structures, and button styles. For example, if a button that submits forms is always colored green, users will automatically associate this color with the action, speeding up interaction time and reducing errors.

Functional Consistency

Functional consistency involves ensuring that interactive elements behave in the same way across different parts of the application. If a swipe gesture deletes an item in one part of the app, the same gesture should not archive an item in another. This type of consistency is crucial for accessibility as well, as it supports users with different abilities in understanding and interacting with the product.

Internal Consistency

Internal consistency refers to the harmony within a single system. This means that all components of the product should consistently follow the same rules set within the specific environment of the product. For instance, if a mobile app and its web version are designed from the same set of internal rules, users can switch between the two platforms effortlessly.

External Consistency

External consistency refers to the consistency of a product with other products in the market or within a single company’s range of products. It ensures that users feel at home with a new product based on their previous experiences with other similar products. Apple is a prime example of a company that excels at external consistency, with their software and hardware products all having a similar look and feel.

Steve Krug's book "Don't Make Me Think" emphasizes the importance of recognition over recall, highlighting how well-structured design can ease user navigation and understanding. However, he also notes that consistency is not always an absolute good. "You often hear consistency cited as an absolute good... But there will be cases where things will be clearer if you make them slightly inconsistent."

When is it Okay to Break Consistency?

Through my experiences, I’ve learned that deviating from established patterns can sometimes be justified or even necessary. Here are a few instances:

• User Feedback: If users report that competitor designs offer a more efficient experience, this is a critical signal that our current designs may be falling short. Adapting to incorporate successful patterns from competitors can significantly enhance user satisfaction and usability (Jakob’s Law).
• Innovation: The rapid pace of technological advancement necessitates innovation. Sticking strictly to existing designs can stifle creativity and hinder progress. Introducing new design solutions can be a game-changer, especially when catching up or surpassing competitors.
• Experimentation: Experimentation is a cornerstone of improvement in UX design. When experiments reveal new patterns that resolve multiple user issues, it’s a clear indication that these innovations should be adopted. In these cases, breaking consistency isn’t just acceptable; it’s imperative for growth and user satisfaction. As product designers, we must balance the comfort of familiarity with the necessity of innovation, ensuring our designs remain both intuitive and forward-thinking.