Whilst there is no shortage of breathless hype surrounding blockchain and crypto innovation, current UI/UX in this space is about as useful as rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
The world of blockchain, understandably, is a code-driven endeavour. From the initial point of inception, the space was dominated by mathematical proofs, cryptography and incentive structures. Proposals nearly 10 years later are outlined as research projects, a barrage of complex terminology, rather than genuine attempts to inform and outline user-centric innovation. Everything from marketing to design, functionality to onboarding, reeks of attempts to prove the superiority of the underlying technology.
Mainstream audiences, by and large, do not understand or trust blockchain innovation. A 2017 study, “Trust in Technology” found that 80% of people had not heard of blockchain. For those that have, using a blockchain product with shambolic UI/UX feels a little bit like discovering you have gone to an unlicensed doctor or filled in a job application for a closed position… a waste of time. With absolute trust as the holy grail for the blockchain community, the societal impact we envision will only be realised when blockchain is widely adopted.
The design goals for blockchain do not significantly deviate from mainstream products, with the exception that blockchain solutions should be designed for trust. Human-centric design, based on empathy, user research and feedback loops, arguably, is more important than focusing on business outcomes in the context of blockchain.
Providing a sleek design and enjoyable user experience may go a long way in educating the public and endearing them to blockchain powered products.
Or more simply….
Connie Yang, Garry Tan
One could argue that blockchain is only the backend infrastructure but, in reality, users still need to use several services (wallets, exchanges, dApps) in order to access payments, money transfers, loans, insurance, internet of value etc. Andreas Antonopolous postulated: if a user had the choice between reading a manual for 30 minutes to use Bitcoin and losing their savings, then they would obviously choose to educate themselves. This is a completely valid point, but functionality and enjoyment are not trade-offs.
Users don’t care about your tech stack, they selfishly care about having neat solutions to everyday problems. The role of good design should be to abstract away the blockchain as much as possible. No friction, no confusion and something that looks familiar would be sufficient to reduce the cognitive load of a lazy person. Persistent, non-essential and complex features will scare away even the hardiest of blockchain evangelists.
The average technophile is notoriously fickle with sky-high expectations. Do you have a fast loading time? Are you easy to use? Am I wowed by the experience? Touché, you’ve passed the first test and I may use your app once or twice before deleting.
Entire disciplines have been built around capturing the attention of the user, loading the odds in favour of a viral product and avoiding the unenviable flop. The renowned “Hook Model” amalgamated the research of product managers, designers, marketers and founders into actionable insights to create user habits. These behavioural techniques, used by Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest and Facebook, among others, evolved based on the necessity of outrunning the competition, luring in users and maintaining high adoption rates.
Crypto innovation has built it’s behavioural techniques around token economics, relying on incentive models at a protocol level to build value and grow communities. Ultimately, most current projects were created in the terminal and their users will remain there, thus the need for strong design is negated. However, if we start to see incentive models taking precedence in consumer-facing products, over intuitive design and viral hooks, the expected flurry of products based on enjoyment of usage may never manifest.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not advocating against token economic incentive models, for the first time we appear to have found the native business model of the internet — one that is not based purely on cognitive manipulation. However, relying on financial inducements, without coupling it to a great experience, is rather like bribing your friends to hang around with you — they will use you for your money, but they won’t enjoy the arrangement enough to tell other people about it!
If the future of blockchain products is primarily based on financial incentives and secondarily on great user experience, then we risk converging on a utilitarian, functional and vapid online existence. The argument that we are still pushing the boundaries of what is technologically possible with blockchain and cryptocurrencies is perfectly valid… but not a justification for overlooking usability and disregarding the pleasure users feel when interacting with the product.
