Website design: where do you stand on form vs. function?

[WebAward]

Website design usually gets classified into two categories: functional
(read: user-friendly) or innovative ('artistic,' lots of interactive,
etc.). I've noticed that a lot of times sites that are noted as having
great design are a little difficult for the average user to navigate.
Do you think form and function are mutually exclusive, or can a site
be incredibly innovative AND incredibly functional?

[alvo]

Usually "innovative" means breaking convention, and doing that reduces the usability of a site. There are times and places for doing that, depending on the nature and purpose of the website. If it's an official fan site for a new pop star, people will tak the time to figure out how the site works and how to get around and find what they want. But if it's an eCommerce site for a product that there are dozens of alternatives for, then people will just give up and go to a competitor that's easier to use. The idea at work here is the harder something is to use, the less people will tend to use it.

We use convention a lot. We know, without thinking, that the gas pedal is to the right of the brake no matter what make of car we might have. That flipping a light switch up turns the lights on. Turning a volume control clockwise increases the volume on a radio. Pick up a magazine and there will be page numbers throughout it, usually at the bottom of the page, but sometimes on the outer edge and occasionally at the top of the page, but we know they will be there and in the same spot on every page. We can look in the contents, find an article we want to read, and then flip through the magazine to fine it. Now if the magazine has a lot of advertising and they don't put page numbers on the ad pages it might become hard to find the page we want. If they insert a special supplement with a different page numbering scheme in the middle the task is compounded. It's the same with websites.

For instance, web convention has it that links are a color and are underlined. Remove the underline and it may take a moment for people to realize that the colored words are links. Make the links the same color as the rest of the words on the site, without the underline, and it's much more difficult still to use the site. People expect the main navigation to be at the top of on the left (right for countries that read right-to-left); for the site logo to be at the top and to link back to the home page.

If the site is commercial, and as such it's important that people be able to quickly and easily find things and buy them, then it's important to follow conventions as much as possible. This doesn't mean that the site has to be boring, but it does mean the site should be easy to use without having to pause and think about how to do something. Even a brief, momentary pause that the user might not be actively aware of can be enough to make using a site seem less friendly and useful, and that can translate into lost sales.

A lot of the business my company does is to fix existing websites that aren't usable to visitors. These are often poorly designed sites rater than "innovative" ones, but we get our share of those as well. The most successful sites are those that are visually appealing while maintaining a user interface that doesn't require rethinking or relearning to use. I like to think of it as designing within the limitations of the medium, some technical and others imposed by the way people have learned to use the web. If you want to do things in unconventional ways, then you need to understand what you are doing and take the time to do usability testing so that you're aware of and understand the problems that you're imposing on your visitors and then be able to make adjustments as necessary to have a successful end product.