Minimum Viable Web: edUi 2012

The
Minimum
Viable
Web
Kristofer
Layon

edUi
—
September
25,
2012
Richmond,
Virginia

©
2012
Capella
Educa@on
Company

Welcome to my presentation about the Minimum Viable Web. “Minimum viable” is a product
management term, used to bring a disciplined focus to increasing the value of a product. So
as the title implies, this presentation focuses on how to improve the web by managing it as a
product that can be continually and iteratively improved.

1. The Victorian Web
2. Modernism
3. Human Modernism
4. Mobile
5. Product Management

The Minimum Viable Web | Kristofer Layon | edUi — September 25, 2012

Here is a preview of what I am going to cover. I’ll begin by looking at how design has
historically been overly elaborate, undemocratic, and not very responsive and
accommodating of change. Then we’ll look at how Modernism altered that, and what we can
learn from this to become better managers of the things that we design and build for online
use.

1. The Victorian Web


To best understand the Minimum Viable Web, we should ﬁrst review how the web has been
designed up until a few years ago. For the ﬁrst 15 years or so, the web was stuck in the
equivalent of the Victorian Age. An age in which designers paid a lot of attention to elaborate
visual presentation, often at the expense of focusing on content quality and responsiveness
to environment.

Part One:
The Victorian Web


I remember when I was pulled into the Victorian Web — it was nine years ago, when the CSS
Zen Garden web site was brand new. Dave Shea created the site to showcase the power of
CSS; two years later, Peachpit published a book that was inspired by the site and written by
Shea and co-author Molly Holzschlag.

Part One:
The Victorian Web


CSS Zen Garden is still pretty cool. The trouble is, it’s also kind of dangerous. As what CSS
does in web standards, CSS Zen Garden separates style from content. So at the time, this felt
liberating because it freed designers from cramming visual design into HTML tables.

Part One:
The Victorian Web


Except I think these examples separate design from content a bit *too* much. As you look
through the CSS Zen Garden designs today, you get pulled into them as pictures. At the
expense of the content, which becomes secondary to the visual examples.

Part One:
The Victorian Web


And when you get to themes like “Under the Sea” that feature a giant squid, you realize that
there’s a complete disconnect between the style and content. It’s fun, beautiful, and
graphically well-designed. But the designs in these examples are superﬂuous. They’re pure
ornamentation.

http://karenswhimsy.com/public-domain-images/victorian-dresses/images/victorian-dresses-2.jpg

We’ve had plenty of other examples of elaborate ornamentation in design. This example of an
illuminated manuscript is not only much older, but it is a bit different: it’s a complete fusion
of style and content. It’s actually the print equivalent of laying out web pages in tables. So the
situation of favoring elaborate ornamentation in design is several centuries old.

http://sf.blueherontours.com/2010/09/victorian-ferndale.html

We see predecessors of the Victorian Web in Victorian architecture too. And I don’t mean to
say that this design is terrible — it isn’t. Nonetheless, the vibrant colors and intricate
ornamentation don’t have much to do with the function of the architecture. Arguably, it’s
another example of excessive design. It’s certainly not a minimum viable design.

http://karenswhimsy.com/public-domain-images/victorian-dresses/images/victorian-dresses-2.jpg

And in fashion: quite a bit like CSS Zen Garden for the web. Only here, apparel is mostly
ornamentation and style. It’s not designed to be lived in, to be accommodating, to be
responsive. This is stiff, formal dress. Excessively so. And it reﬂected values of the era: lack
of freedom, lack of ﬂexibility, lack of self-expression. Again, not at all a minimum viable
approach.

2. Modernism to the Rescue


But I suggest that Modernism can help us — Modernism appears to do a better job at
focusing on what minimum needs are. And this is not about visual style, it’s about being
focused.

(form follows function)


In fact, Modernism was itself a sea change and has been helping to reinvent design for a
century. The central tenet of Modernism is paring back form and ornamentation, and
prioritizing function instead. Sounds like a good way to proceed with a web that is a
minimum viable solution instead of excessively ornamented in ways that won’t always deliver
value.

http://mit81.com/baker/sites/default/files/images/aalto.jpg
Alvar
Aalto
(1898-‐1976)

Alvar Aalto: a pioneer of Modern design from Finland. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that
a pioneer of Modernism was from Finland, as Finns are culturally focused on being
determined about simplicity. This is due to a mix of circumstances where they had large
periods of history deﬁned by being frugal, isolated from the rest of the world, and dominated
by their neighbors.


An iconic example of Modernist design is the Savoy Vase by Alvar Aalto. It demonstrates how
elegant form doesn’t need ornamentation to be effective and even beautiful. This is form,
function, and material in perfect balance. The glass is allowed to express its own beauty and
truth. Just as web material — content — should.

http://www.creativereview.co.uk/images/uploads/2011/04/londonundergroundsign1_0.jpg

Modernist homes follow a similar sensibility. They break down the barriers between form and
function, and even between inside and outside. Modernist architecture also reduces barriers
between nature and human life via its transparent, expansive planes. In many ways, it works
very nicely.


And by allowing materials to be presented in a pure and unadulterated manner, their inner
beauty and inherent structural qualities are allowed to be directly expressed. The design is
minimal — just enough to enhance the material and structure.

3. Human Modernism — Focus on People


Modernism is sometimes criticized for being cold, detached, and mechanical. And some
examples are. I would argue that the best Modernism, however, is intensely focused on
human needs and desires. Human Modernism.

(or the advent of user-centered product design)


Human Modernism is people-centered. And this Modernism introduced us to product design:
using design to advance what people can do, and to help them do things better.


Another example from Aalto: this isn’t just an aesthetic design for a sink. Aalto studied how
water came out of faucets and splashed in and out of sinks. His sink design minimizes
splashing, thereby also making the sink quieter to use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Edward_Johnston.png
Edward
Johnston
(1872-‐1944)


One of my favorite examples of human-centered Modernism is in graphic design. It involved
two contributors, Edward Johnston and Harry Beck. Johnston designed one of the ﬁrst
Modern sans-serif typefaces for the London Underground. Named after him, Johnston is still
used today for all signage and the London Underground’s map.

http://harrybeck.com/
Harry
Beck
(1902-‐1974)

Harry Beck redesigned the map itself, reinventing how mapping could be done.

http://silviakarcheva91.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/img00311.jpg

Prior to Beck’s and Johnston’s involvement, the London Underground’s map was rather
typical: the map was a bit too literal to be very useful, and the typographic design was not
very reﬁned.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/images/general/beckmap1.jpg

The new design is a reﬁned minimalism. The rail lines are much more cleanly depicted, make
it much easier to pick routes from one point to another. Stations are more clearly labeled with
type that is easier to read. And it is all color-coded to help customers quickly distinguish one
line from another.

http://shop.tfl.gov.uk/SiteData/Root/PrintShop/underground_map.gif

The redesign persists today, and even though it has been updated the core design is very
much unchanged. Moreover, the London Underground map has become the template for all
nearly other mass transit maps in production today around the world.

http://markoffaith.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/london_underground_sign.jpg

Beck and Johnston did more than redesign the map: they extended their typography and
graphic standards to station signage and other communications. The result is one of the ﬁrst
corporate branding standards in history, and it remains one of the most recognizable brands
in the world — even to people who have never been to London.


An example of a London Underground station sign, showing how outstanding its readability
is and how easy to spot it is (even in the midst of busy Victorian architecture!).


Analyzing the London Underground further, it is important to consider its advertising. Note
the content: it is not focused on the service itself or its technology. It is instead focused on
people’s needs and interests. Here, the ad makes the case that one can take the train to see
the Wimbledon tennis tournament.

It is always better to be
slightly underdressed.

Coco Chanel


Fashion is another example of design being revolutionized by Modernist thinking. One would
think that clothing has always been human-centered, but remember those elaborate Victorian
dresses? Enter Coco Chanel: she pared fashion back to simple elegance, and made the case
that women’s fashion design could be progressive and liberating, not stiﬂing.

http://www.chanel.com/

Of course, Chanel is also a widely-recognized brand represented by a clean wordmark. The
double-C design has a double-meaning: it is Coco’s initials, and also represents the gold and
silver chains that she adorned her handbags with.

http://www.chanel.com/

Today, the tradition of Chanel is still the same: simple and elegant design, best represented
by the classic “little black dress” and black handbag accessory.

4. Mobile Can Help Us Make the Web Better


So what can we learn from these examples? I think the lessons are: we should learn how to
design better by taking fewer risks, focusing more on human needs, and letting the essence
of our design be the least amount of design necessary to facilitate our product’s content or
service.


Stephanie Rieger, a mobile designer in Scotland, made a similar case about web design in
May of this year..


I like how she is thinking here, because it’s less about making a new mobile site or even an
existing site mobile-optimized. She’s instead posing a different question: shouldn’t all sites
be lightweight? Shouldn’t all sites be minimally designed and with minimal content?

http://extraecclesiam.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/haiti-earthquake-damage-ee602c9091fd9e2b.jpg

Going back to design that isn’t lightweight or able to respond adequately to its environment,
look at where that leads to problems in architecture: here’s the palace in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti, after earthquake there in 2010.

http://media.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/photos/images/2010/aug10/katrina_five_sm/katrina_five_18.jpg

Similarly, if we design beautiful houses but build them in places subject to hurricanes, we
also take risks. Are these risks worth it? What are we really in control of here? This is a way to
see what happens when our minimum viable design does not take environment into account.

http://papers.risingsea.net/images-for-rolling-easements/Photo29.jpg

Hurricane Katrina was the ultimate example of demonstrating human folly: designing an
entire modern city in a place where it can be completely inundated by a hurricane. Our design
is only viable until it is exposed to environmental forces that we cannot control.

The
dike
has
broken
on
our
web
designs.


And so it is with mobile devices and the web: the dike has broken around the designs we
thought were beautiful and safe. We are now designing in a new environment. Will our
designs respond to these changes?

To design is to
communicate clearly by
whatever means you can
control or master.

Milton Glaser
1929-


Milton Glaser puts the hurricane and earthquake devastation slides in a new light. Clear
communications, and successful design, are centered on things that we can control. We
should minimize our investment in design that can be changed by external forces that are
beyond our control. Such design investment in more than is necessary is risky. How much
risk do we want to take?

It is not the strongest of
the species that survives,
nor the most intelligent,
but the one most

http://www.goodreads.com/
responsive to change.

Charles Darwin
1809-1882


Or as Charles Darwin puts it, after studying variation in species that led to his theories on
evolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin's_finches

Darwin believed he found evidence of evolution in the natural variation within species such as
birds. Each of these birds has a different beak shape, which Darwin proposed was due to
constant, iterative changes that happened as the birds who were best-suited for their
environments prevailed and reproduced.

http://chickenoreggblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/800px-wooly_mammoth-rbc.jpg

Whereas the example of the Wooly Mammoth is one of inability to respond enough, or control
enough variables, in its environment through adaptation. It likely died because of
environmental change and being hunted to extinction by humans.

http://www.lukew.com

So here is the changing environment of web browsing: smartphone sales eclipsed sales of
PCs 2 years earlier than originally projected by Wall Street analysts.

How will your design (and organization)
weather the changes to its environment?


Don’t redesign.

Respond and reprioritize.


Part One:
The Victorian Web


Here is an example of investing too much design time into something that does not provide
value. We can spend a lot of time designing the perfect background image for our Twitter
stream when viewed on desktop...


But here’s the mobile experience. The background image is gone. And the majority of Twitter
use is mobile, so a minority of users ever see the design of the background image. Yet here,
the minimum viable design still prevails; what matters is still visible and it works. Only the
additional ornamentation has been lost.

5. Product Management


The discipline of product management helps us focus on user-centered needs and the least
amount of design and product that is necessary to meet them. It also emphasizes a
continuous feedback loop of revalidating design solutions with users, making design
adjustments, delivering new improvements, and repeating for continuous improvement. But
starting with just enough to get going.


In August 2011, Dan Cederholm wrote a great post on his Simplebits blog about mobile
optimization.


Dan has always struck a chord with me: his low-key, sincere, New England sensibility results
in clear, beautiful designs and outstanding presentations. His design has always
encompassed the best of Modernism: it’s spare and simple, yet very warm and human at the
same time.


An August 2011 blog post by Dan made me happy for two reasons: ﬁrst, he validated my
excitement for mobile and responsive design, saying that it ﬁnally felt like web design. Yes!


But more importantly, he also walked through the ﬁrst mobile version of Dribbble.com. He
noted that because it was an existing site with a tiny team, building anew with mobile ﬁrst
wasn’t a great option for them.


So taking baby steps is what they did: doing something, even if it’s not perfect or starting
with mobile ﬁrst. This is exactly what I think everyone should do, too, if they’re not in a
position to jump into mobile ﬁrst. Just take baby steps instead. Small, iterative
improvements. You can always do more later.

Determining
priority:
Maslow’s
Hierarchy
of
Needs


But not going mobile ﬁrst does present other challenges. If you can’t do it all at once with
respect to mobile optimization, where do you begin? How do you decide? I suggest taking a
look at Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Maslow
Abraham
Maslow
(1908-‐1970)


Abraham Maslow was a pioneering developmental psychologist whose research and writing
focused on his theory of a hierarchy needs, motivation, self-actualization, and human
potential.

Abraham Maslow, A Theory of Human Motivation, 1943


This graphic of Maslow’s theory of human motivation illustrates needs in a pyramid, with the
most fundamental needs at the bottom. Each layer needs to be met before you are able to
focus on the next level of needs. The ﬁrst four layers are basic or “deﬁciency needs”; the top
layer is unique and the most advanced, considered “being needs”.

Local
storage Oﬄine

Web
sockets Transi'ons
HTML
5

Performance
Respond Share
Read Pinch+Zoom
See Navigate
Mobile
Kristofer Layon, A Theory of Human Motivation, 2012


I think this hierarchy can be used to systematically analyze features or enhancements to the
web, too. We need to be able to see and navigate above all else. Then we can focus on
reading, and thereafter responding and sharing. After that, how fast or well this happens
(performance) is important. Then there are “extras” like HTML 5.

You can have more than one group of priorities,

yet everything can’t be a priority.

Product management is about identifying needs

and managing priorities to achieve satisfaction.


The discipline of product management is the discipline of analyzing a variety of needs,
putting them in priority, and working with a team to focus on the right priorities, at the right
time, for the right reasons. It requires a blend of market understanding, savvy
communications and diplomacy, and enthusiasm for improving a product. But also patience
for doing smaller amounts at a time.

The Kano Model


Another tool for analyzing product attributes is to use the Kano Model, originally developed
for the Japanese auto industry. It breaks product attributes down into three categories. Note
that the different categories yield different results because of their varying importance.

http://www.van-cafe.com/shop/images/22S.419.091C.jpg

A quick explanation by way of analyzing a car: a basic feature of a car is a steering wheel. In
other words, not having a steering wheel is a fundamental problem. It’s a basic requirement,
so long as cars are actively steered by a human driver (maybe someday they won’t be).

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/973thedawg.com/files/2011/11/fuel-gauge.jpg

A performance attribute of a car is fuel efficiency. The less fuel it needs, the less it costs to
operate the car. This is enhanced performance.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7y-e8Fm1_Ik/T6rYexg6AOI/AAAAAAAADOA/ELLTW_Lc5XQ/s1600/Crazy+Hair+Kelli.jpg


A delightful feature of a car could be a convertible top. Putting it down lets you sit in the sun
and have the wind blow through your hair. It can make a car a lot of fun to drive, but it
doesn’t aid in performance and it is also not a basic function of a car.


In approaching a product, we can see how managing features and priorities with the Kano
model can work. If we are building a car, it has to start with the basics like a frame.


Then it needs other basic attributes: additional body parts and a steering wheel.


And it most certainly needs wheels -- another basic requirement.


A windshield is mostly a basic requirement as well. But it also has performance attributes: it
helps make the car’s shape more streamlined, which aids in energy efficiency.


An add-one feature like a light bar on the roof is mostly a desirable attribute. Some people
might think it looks cool; it’s not a basic or performance feature.


The right balance of basic, performance, and desirable features makes the owner of the car
happy and satisﬁed.


On the other hand, the wrong balance of the three Kano attributes can get you in trouble.
You don’t want to prioritize performance and desirable features until you have all of the
essential basic features delivered. Desirable or performance features cannot make up for
missing basic features.

http://www.dilbert.com
Executives like graphs.


A blend of these tools and visualizations are very helpful. Not just to help a product manager
make decisions, but also to communicate them. Another key element of product
management is making everyone— from your customers and stakeholders to your designers
and developers— understand how you are setting priorities. Charts and graphs can be very
helpful and persuasive.

5
4

http://www.veteranautocsodak.hu/kepek/trabant60126.jpg
3
2
1 Basic Performance Delight
Trabant
Kano attributes

Here’s another example of how Kano analysis can be used to assess a product. This example
begins with the Trabant, an East German car produced until the late 1980s when East and
West Germany were reuniﬁed. As westerners, we would probably assess this product in this
way: all 1s on a 5 point scale.

5
4

3
2
1 Basic Performance Delight
Porsche
Kano attributes

Similarly, we might determine that a Porsche, another German car, would be all 5s. It not
only meets the basic requirements for a car, its performance is high, and it’s beautiful and
delightful to drive.

5
4

3
2
1 Porsche
Basic Performance Delight
Parent of 3 children
Kano attributes

On the other hand, it’s important to know your customers. What if the customer I’m trying to
satisfy is a parent of three children? Then a Porsche would rate lower on basics— not enough
room for those kids. Performance-wise, it’s also an inefficient vehicle for family tasks like
getting groceries. It’s still delightful, but not a solid 5 points for this customer.

5
4

3
2
1 Toyota Minivan
Parent of 3 children
Kano attributes

Whereas a Toyota minivan, which is decidedly unexciting and common, would rate highly in
all categories for a family with several children. It has a lot of room, is fuel efficient, can haul
a lot, and has doors you can open remotely. It’s a great mix of basic, performance, and
delight for that customer.

5
4

3
2
1 Trabant
East German in 1985
Kano attributes

Returning a moment to the Trabant: before the demise of the Iron Curtain and the
introduction of a free market to a reuniﬁed Germany, the Trabant was a good car. Because it
was the only car available. Another example of context for product success: time and place.

5
4

3
2
1 Trabant
East German in 2012
Kano attributes

But after reuniﬁcation and the introduction of a free market and consumer choice, no one
bought Trabants any more so production of it eventually stopped. The larger forces around it
changed its value. The dike had broken. Just like the powerful forces of mobile have reduced
the value of our old Victorian web designs. Are our old web designs just as irrelevant and
outdated as a Trabant?

The Kano Model


So going back to a Kano graph, focus on delivering all basic value to your users ﬁrst. Then
determine how to add performance or delightful features. Leaving a basic feature incomplete
will result in users thinking it is inadequate or even broken.

The Kano Model


But completing all basic requirements, and then adding something that enhances
performance or delight, should make users satisﬁed and even very happy with your product.

Product roadmap


Determining a Minimum Viable Product, and then prioritizing how to continue improving it,
can be done using a variety of tools. The Kano Model is one; a product roadmap is another.
The roadmap helps you plan enhancements over time. The next quarter might be more
certain; after that, you might not be sure yet which priorities will rise to the top. And
sometimes priorities change.

http://www.wengerna.com/

By using market data to inform usefulness, setting priorities, and learning how to say no to
things that users don’t need, you can avoid designing a mobile app or website that ends up
like this: trying to do everything for everyone that, in the process, ending up being too
cumbersome to make anyone happy.

http://www.wengerna.com/

What you want to aim for instead is the most elegant solution for your users’ needs, and that
is often pared down to something more simple. And possibly even smaller, but more than
one solution, to address different types of user personas.


The very best example of a Minimum Viable web product with a Modern design, yet high
performance and even delightful features, is Google search. It essentially does neets nothing
more than a single, well-deﬁned need — except for “I’m Feeling Lucky” and Google doodles
(Star Trek example).

Minimum Viable Design:

• Start with people.
• Design from your content out.
• The least amount of design and
development necessary to meet a need.
• Iterate and add only if more is requested.
• The result: a more simple, lightweight
solution.


Minimum Viable Web design starts with human needs and the content or services people are
seeking. It priorities content in a hierarchy, and then only adds as much visual enhancement
as necessary. The results should aim to work on any device. If they work on a small screen,
they will work on a large screen (and can always be progressively enhanced further for
desktop).

Online Product Management:

• Get away from your desk – talk to people.
• Get market data, then write user stories.
• Road map product enhancements.
• Prioritize, estimate, prototype solutions.
• Be agile: iterate, deliver, evaluate, and repeat.


Web Product management are the tools and processes you can use to develop the right
Minimum Viable Web for your customers. They are also the tools and processes you can use
to develop strong relationships with everyone involved: customers, stakeholders, designers,
and developers. It’s your job to make everyone understand your web product’s direction.


If you are interested in approaching mobile design from a Minimum Viable approach, you
might want to check out a book that I wrote last year entitled “Mobilizing Web Sites”.
Although it predates Dan Cederholm’s approach to Dribbble’s mobile design, it takes the
same idea of prioritizing baby steps of improvement to gradually make a ﬁxed-width site
more responsive to mobile screens.

@klayon
kris.layon@gmail.com
kristoferlayon.com


Minimum Viable Web: edUi 2012

More Related Content

Similar to Minimum Viable Web: edUi 2012

Recently uploaded

Minimum Viable Web: edUi 2012