4 ms·

PACER's UX is pretty bad. Convincing organisations that their UX is pretty bad is...hard.

• JadeNB 6y ago
  > Convincing organisations that their UX is pretty bad is...hard. I think it depends on whom at the organisation you try to convince. I think that it's probably true that a lot of organisations are perfectly aware that their UX is pretty bad, but they (as a collective) have spent so much time learning to deal with the ways that it's bad that they don't see it as that bad. So I think that the real problem is convincing an organisation that their UX is bad enough to justify ripping it out and replacing it with a new UX, that will (statistically speaking) also be bad, but now different and unfamiliar.
  • btilly 6y ago
    The additional problem is that organizations with bad UX frequently have a UX designed around the structure of the organization. When this happens, the UX is convenient for each part of the organization, and if they rebuild it they will naturally be tempted to rebuild it the same way. Everyone may know that the whole is less than the sum of its parts, but doing anything else requires fighting uphill against politics.
• vonmoltke 6y ago
  Especially government organizations who have a monopoly on the access or functionality the interface provides.
  • ChrisSD 6y ago
    UK's Government Digital Service (GDS) team has a different approach. In 2014 they undertook a redesign of all UK government sites with an emphasis on being usable for everyone. At the time it was controversial (see el reg https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9067984 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9067984) but it's been widely lauded since. See also their design principles: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles