I love minimalism, I hate clutter. I love the gov.uk website for example – it really IS the best place to find government services and information. I find the design beautiful. It is so simple but the UX and UI work well together to create the path of least resistance when trying to solve a problem.
When working with design teams and copywriters I’m always a great advocate of brilliant content design. When I see a concisely written piece of copy that clearly directs the user to a next step or provides critical information with the minimum of fuss then I celebrate that. Similarly my love for minimalism extends to my environment in physical products or design.
So less is always more, right? Not necessarily! Whilst users nowadays are attracted to simple, streamlined designs that guide them intuitively they also do crave interactive and engaging elements that make their experience memorable.
Balancing minimalism and engagement is no easy feat, especially for niche products with highly specific audiences and goals. Sometimes you’ll find that minimalism can also backfire – with catastrophic results!
1. Notion: Minimalism with Room for Customisation
In the main I quite like Notion but it certainly has its detractors. The clean, minimalist interface puts the user in control. By default, Notion provides a blank slate with simple tools for organising information. The layout is minimalist, but users have nearly endless customisation options, allowing them to create highly personalised setups.
Pros:
- Flexibility Without Overwhelm: Notion’s design feels minimalist but becomes engaging as users explore customisation options to tailor it to their needs.
- Enhanced Focus: The lack of visual clutter lets users focus on their content rather than the interface, making it suitable for various workflows.
Cons:
- Learning Curve: For new users, Notion can feel too barebones at first. Without onboarding or preset structures, some may feel lost. The blank slate approach has always bugged me – I like the homescreen now as it helps surface what you’ve been working on but the framework of design is a little loose for me still. I spend much of my time finessing templates I thought would work without any editing.
- Limited Initial Engagement: Notion’s minimal approach means users need to invest time in learning its capabilities, which can deter some from fully embracing the app.
Takeaway: Notion’s minimalist design works because it aligns with the app’s goal of offering flexible, user-defined organisation. However, without immediate engaging elements, the app may struggle with user retention among those seeking instant usability. Solution – a Notion for newbies (or oldies!) set up guide that provides a simpler, more fixed layout for specific tasks understood during a new onboarding flow!
2. Superhuman: Engagement for Productivity
Superhuman, a premium email client, combines minimalism with engagement by enhancing email management through shortcuts, reminders, and AI-assisted inbox management. Its interface is clean and distraction-free, but it integrates engaging, productivity-focused features like keyboard shortcuts, gamified “inbox zero” achievements, and a speed-focused onboarding process.
Pros:
- Enhanced Productivity: Superhuman’s interface is intentionally designed to keep users engaged with productivity-enhancing shortcuts and reminders.
- Guided Engagement: The gamified inbox zero celebrations provide a sense of achievement, helping users feel more engaged with their progress.
Cons:
- High Commitment Required: Superhuman’s engagement model demands that users commit to learning the product’s features, which may feel intimidating.
- Exclusive Appeal: Its combination of minimalism and engaging power features appeals to a niche audience of productivity enthusiasts but may alienate casual users.
Takeaway: Superhuman’s minimalist-yet-engaged design is ideal for its target audience of productivity-focused users, but this balance may not appeal to those who prefer a simpler, less intense email experience. One thing to note is that once invested in a product financially you’ll spend more time making it work – a strong suit of the business model of Superhuman which continues to do well.
3. Figma Community: Minimalism Meets Social Engagement
Figma, a design tool, launched its Figma Community as a place for users to share design files, plugins, and insights. While the Figma interface is highly minimalist, focusing on collaborative design tools, the Community feature introduces engagement through a social component, allowing designers to discover and follow each other’s work.
Pros:
- Collaborative Engagement: The Community adds a social layer, inviting users to explore, follow, and learn from peers in a minimal interface.
- Non-Intrusive Engagement: Community elements are subtly integrated into the main product, enhancing engagement without overwhelming the core design tools.
Cons:
- Hidden Discovery Features: New users may overlook the Community tab due to Figma’s minimal interface, missing out on valuable resources. I still think Figma could make this part of the app much more integrated. It always (even years later) seems like I have to jump out to the community, copy ‘as’ to my own workspace and then use the file. Surely there’s an easier way.
- Potentially Distracting: While the Community is useful, it can also draw users away from core design work if they get too absorbed in browsing.
Takeaway: Figma’s approach balances minimalism with community engagement, adding value for users who seek inspiration and collaboration without overwhelming those who prefer a standalone tool. It’s great but could be better.
4. Headspace: Engaging Calm
Headspace, the meditation app, is built around the concept of relaxation and mindfulness, requiring a clean, calming design. The app’s interface is minimalist but uses engaging animations and guided sessions to create a soothing experience. The design avoids clutter while providing enough interaction to keep users invested in their practice.
Pros:
- Calming Engagement: The design includes animations and sounds that engage without overwhelming, enhancing the meditative experience.
- Progressive Disclosure: Headspace gradually introduces users to features, keeping the interface clean while offering deeper engagement over time.
Cons:
- Limited Navigation Control: The app’s minimal interface can sometimes limit navigation, making it hard for users to skip between sessions or quickly find advanced features.
- Dependence on Guided Sessions: While engaging, the reliance on guided content may feel limiting for users looking for more self-directed experiences. I personally couldn’t find the voice style that worked for me or lack of self-help features so gave up early.
Takeaway: Headspace’s design strikes a balance by offering enough engagement to keep users interested in meditation without disrupting the app’s calming aesthetic. This approach works well for meditation, where simplicity is key, but may feel too controlled for users seeking more customisation.
5. Obsidian: Minimalism for Power Users
Obsidian is a niche, markdown-based note-taking app aimed at power users who want flexibility to organise information through networked note-taking. Its interface is highly minimal, providing only the essentials so that users can focus on building their own structure. Engagement is fostered through a system of connected notes, helping users visualise relationships between ideas.
Pros:
- Unobtrusive Structure: Obsidian’s minimal design lets users focus on their content and explore how their notes connect.
- Engaging Visualisations: The “graph view” offers an interactive way to see connections between notes, engaging users without adding complexity to the main interface.
Cons:
- Steep Learning Curve: New users may find the minimalist interface too sparse, lacking guidance on how to get the most out of it.
- Few Engagement Elements: Obsidian’s minimalism leaves engagement primarily to the user, which can be isolating for those who prefer more guidance.
Takeaway: Obsidian’s balance works for users who value control and flexibility. However, the minimalism can feel restrictive or even confusing for beginners, as the product lacks engagement features that guide new users.
Finding the Right Balance for Your Product
These examples from niche products show that finding the right balance between minimalism and engagement isn’t a one-size-fits-all process. It requires a deep understanding of user expectations, product purpose, and brand identity. Here are a few key takeaways:
- Understand Your Users’ Goals: Are they looking for a focused tool like Obsidian or a social experience like Figma Community? This distinction will guide your approach.
- Consider Progressive Engagement: Introducing engagement elements gradually, as Headspace does, helps keep the experience clean and allows users to explore at their own pace.
- Keep Core Actions Uncluttered: Superhuman’s focus on core productivity functions and Figma’s integration of social features without distracting from the main tool show that minimalism can coexist with engagement when the core purpose is respected.
- Test and Iterate: Minimalism and engagement aren’t static design choices; they can and should evolve based on user feedback and behavioural insights.
- Shape the Product: If time allows, build two products. One for those who want the power of the product but have no clue how to get the most out of it. And another for those who can customise the hell out of the product to make sure it aligns with their power user needs!
Minimalism, while often celebrated for its elegance and clarity, can sometimes hinder the user experience, especially when it sacrifices usability or fails to account for the needs of the audience. Here are a few examples where minimalism in product design led to challenges or outright failure:
1. Google Glass Website (2013)
When Google launched Google Glass, the website followed a stark minimalist design approach. It featured little information and focused heavily on high-quality images and stylised visuals to generate intrigue around the product. However, this minimalist approach worked against Google by failing to adequately explain the product’s functionality, use cases, or benefits.
- Why It Failed: The lack of clear information left users confused about what Google Glass could actually do, and why they should want it. The focus on visual aesthetics without substantial content ultimately led to poor public understanding and limited adoption.
- Lesson Learned: When introducing a new or complex product, minimalism should be balanced with clear, informative content to educate potential users and showcase the product’s value.
2. Apple’s Butterfly Keyboard
Apple’s MacBook butterfly keyboard design was a lesson in minimalist hardware aesthetics gone wrong. The butterfly mechanism allowed for a sleeker, more minimalist profile by reducing key travel and enabling a thinner laptop. However, this minimalist keyboard design led to usability problems, as the keys were prone to sticking and failure due to dust and debris.
- Why It Failed: The minimalist keyboard was less durable and less comfortable than traditional designs. Despite the sleek look, Apple had to replace the butterfly keyboard with a more robust design in later MacBook models due to widespread criticism.
- Lesson Learned: Minimalism should never come at the expense of durability and functionality, especially in hardware where usability is paramount.