When Mobile-First Isn’t the Right Answer
“A better answer to my question about multi-device design is a context-first approach: designing for the context under which users actually perform their tasks.”
When interviewing UX Design candidates, I ask about their approach to multi-device design. More often than not, designers tell me they use a mobile-first approach. Depending on the project, this might be a great answer, but usually I’m looking for something deeper.
The fact is that considering the needs of a user interacting with your software on a mobile device FIRST, and secondarily considering the design on other devices, only makes sense if your users are actually engaging with mobile devices more often! In the banking industry, for example, financial institution employees work on desktop computers with fairly sizable monitors far more often than they use their mobile devices to perform their jobs, and what’s more, they express little interest in conducting certain tasks on their phones or even tablets. Does this mean UX Designers in the banking industry shouldn’t innovate by creating tablet-friendly experiences? Absolutely not, but it requires a certain degree of strategy. Mobile-first design makes sense only where it makes sense.
The risks associated with a mobile-first approach to software used by desktop users are wasted (and expensive) design and development efforts, as well as a corresponding desktop interface that makes poor use of space. A better answer to my question about multi-device design is a context-first approach: designing for the context under which users actually perform their tasks.
Designing for context applies to both mobile and desktop design, and in any industry. To truly design the best experience, you should be asking the following questions:
What tasks are users performing most often? Those tasks should be front and center in the UI, while others are downplayed.
On what devices are users performing which tasks? In the case of tax preparation, users might check the statuses of their tax returns on their phones, but but prefer to prepare and file their taxes on a tablet or desktop, where larger screen sizes easily accommodate more complex workflows. It makes sense to prioritize features heavily used on mobile devices in the mobile UI, while prioritizing features used on desktop in the desktop UI.
Where are users performing these tasks? At their desks? While commuting on the bus? While in the car? Consider NNG’s article in which Page Laubheimer doesn’t excuse distracted driving, but suggests UX Designers have a responsibility to “consider the principle of harm reduction when creating a design that has a reasonable likelihood of being used by drivers.” That’s an extreme example, but each of the scenarios I listed involves a different level of distraction, and the interface’s level of simplicity should correspond to the attention the user can give it.
How do users feel while they perform these tasks? If users are commuting while using their phones to check their account balances, they might be hurried. If they’re shopping for shoes on their tablets at home, they might feel relaxed. If they’re logging into their doctor’s portal to see recent medical test results, they may be worried. User research can help you uncover how users feel when they’re using your software under different circumstances, and you can use that information to turn their experience into a more positive one.
Is the device on which the software is used private or shared? Tablets and TVs are often shared among household members, while phones typically have a single user. This has ramifications for Netflix, who might intentionally choose to make switching between user profiles easier on shared devices.
How can the software optimize capabilities of specific devices? The ability to deposit a check by taking a photo of it makes sense on mobile phones, for example, since they’re equipped with cameras that users are often familiar with. But not every mobile feature makes sense on a desktop and vice versa.
What interactions are expected on specific devices? Too often we focus on screen size as the differentiating factor between devices. Of course that’s one of the main differences, but others include the way users interact with their devices. Users click to see the next photo in a gallery on their desktops, and expect to swipe on their phones. Similarly, navigation may be expected at the bottom of a mobile app, where users’ thumbs are ready to engage, but the bottom of the screen would be the last place users might expect to find navigation on desktop devices.
How can you support consistency and continuity across devices? Chapter 5 in Designing for the Internet of Things outlines this well. To put it simply, users expect a relatively consistent experience between devices, although for the reasons I’ve laid out above, there should be some differences that make the best of each device’s capabilities and the way in which those devices are used. Similarly, users expect a continuous experience from device to device. Hulu does a great job of allowing users to pause shows on their phones and resume watching at the same spot on other devices.
Can the devices complement each other? Google’s Senior User Experience Designer Michal Levin wrote about it in Designing Multi-Device Experiences in 2014, and now we’re seeing it everywhere. Smartphones can be used as remote controls for TVs. Apple Watches control Apple TVs and Macs. Multi-device design is being treated as an ecosystem in which each device can enhance the experiences of the others. Does this make sense for your software?
Clearly, we’re swiftly surpassing the age of mobile-first design and must now consider multi-device design in a more holistic, contextual, and interconnected way. The next time I ask a UX Design candidate about their approach to multi-device design, I hope I get the answer “it’s complicated.”