thirtyonethree

I liked this post from Jason Santa Maria. He adds his voice to a debate I have seen many talking about. The issue is that there are some websites that are successful but not very attractive as far as design. Some have argued that this shows that sites do not need good visual design - a more minimalist approach. I like what Jason has to say because he brings up that good Web design is more than visual design. In the end, you cannot make everyone happy. Some prefer sites just to get things done. Others want more visual appeal. The reality is that if a beautifully designed site does not work well, it is going to be a failure. And if a very functional site is too ugly, it will probably also fail. Jason makes the point that design is communication and that means there are many factors to consider in what makes good design.

I have been challenged recently to think backwards to consider “what problem is a website trying to solve?” Or what ministry problem is the site or Web app trying to solve? I think these are good questions to consider and to go back to as you consider if your site is staying on course or is it effectively solving the problem it was created to solve.

I thought about this again this morning when I read Josh Porter’s latest post, 7 Reasons Why Web Apps Fail. One of the reasons is that the apps are sold the wrong way. He suggests talking about “how your app empowers users to improve their life.” It reminded me of some of the things I have been reading on Kathy Sierra’s Creating Passionate Users blog. This leads me back to the need to answer the question, “what problem is a website trying to solve?” so I can understand how the solution should improve user’s lives or their ministry.