If you define yourself by your opinions, questioning them is a threat to your integrity. (Adam Grant)

Boy, do I run into a lot of defensiveness. Usability feedback almost always seem to generate some personal sensitivity. Heck, if this was my quote, I'd probably substitute "self" for "integrity."

But that’s understood. The design I might have been testing is usually at least somebody’s baby. And nobody likes it when their baby gets called ugly.

Now, I do try to mitigate that by including positive results as well; by being diplomatic with feedback overall; and by making sure that any feedback is backed up by numbers, quotes, and clips (and triangulation with other findings, and 3rd party research, and whatever else I can muster …).

There are some team members, though, who seem to always take user feedback as a personal affront. Over the years, though, I have sensed an inverse correlation between a designer or content person’s skill/experience/maturity and their likelihood of being offended. In fact, I’ve often joked that the best of these folks can’t wait to get something in front of users, while the worst will do everything in their power to make sure testing doesn’t happen (or that the results get ignored).

I guess my advice for the latter would be two-fold. First, have some basis for your design or content. Don’t just dash off and come up with something “kewl.” Have some reason why you’re using a new layout, or why you’re fore-fronting that particular bit of content or, really, any decision that you’ve had to make. Show that you’ve actually thought about this, that you’ve considered things from multiple sides, that you’ve done your homework. 

And as Grant points out, one of the best things you can do in this regard is to question your own opinions yourself. Don’t just wait for others to weigh in. 

Now, be sure to be open to others’ feedback as well. But, if you’ve already anticipated some of that, you’ll probably find yourself a lot less defensive, as well as a lot more confident in your opinions (and with good reason, this time!). And remember, it’s not about justification! It’s about being well-informed, and being able to engage in a good give-and-take.

Second, nothing is set in stone. Sure, you’ve probably come up with something pretty decent. Others, though, might be able to catch something you overlooked. And though peers, management, clients, and SMEs are important here (crits can be great), definitely don’t ignore the user.  

In fact, try to simply start thinking of them first. I’ve found that if you get that part right, it’s a lot easier to convince the other stakeholders as well. In general, all the other pieces just seem to fall into place.

Finally, just remember that your opinion is not you. Actually, another way to think about that is a little counter-intuitive … Your opinion should be a lot like you, an ideal you – open-minded, dynamic, open to change, ever evolving.

Adam is a prof at Wharton Biz School, where he specializes in organizational psychology

Don’t make me read. (William Hudson)

I think we’re all familiar with Steve Krug’s, “Don’t make me think.” I think a necessary corollary to that, though, is this gem. 

It’s kinda funny … I actually thought I had come up with this on my own. A quick search of the Interwebs, though, showed me that a lot of people liked to share this one (and maybe even thought they had come up with it themselves as well).

As far as I could ascertain, though, it seemed like Horton might have been the first. And he has indeed been around for quite awhile. 

I’ve probably got a half a dozen posts on here that treat on this very topic. I won’t repeat those here. To be honest, I’m mainly including think this quote because it sums them all up so well.

It also, though, brings up an interesting thing about Horton (and me as well). Though he was one of the founding fathers when it came to usability and usability-centered design, he quickly moved to instructional design, especially e-learning. I was also formerly an instructional designer, read his books way back when, and still remember him fondly.

And what that really goes to show is that reading is a not-so-popular activity in many situations. In training, though, this is particularly the case, and instructional designers have come up with many ways to address this. This is, in fact, behind what are called “multiple modalities.” And that’s just a fancy way of saying some people like to read (like in a textbook), some like to listen (say, in a classroom), others to view it (e,g,, in a video), and some to actually try it themselves.

And that is something that I’d like to see more of in online content in general, whether on a public site or an authenticated one. But that idea is something that instructional design anticipated as well.

It actually ties back to an idea called “Employee Performance Support Solutions.” Introduced back in the early 90s by Gloria Gery, it simply posits that anything that can support the user – text, video, exercises, sand boxes, knowledge management systems, Slack channels, whatever – should be right there, at the user’s fingertips. 

So, what means is that making content usable is a lot more than just simply editing text for length, or scannability, or hiding less important info behind links, or using a pyramid structure … What it really means is thinking about the user, and fulfilling their needs wherever they are, and whoever they might be. One thing it’s definitely not about is any kind of silos.

Horton actually moved from text altogether, switching from e-learning to making a living as a photographer