
Ask HN: Do quality web graphics, design and layout actually help businesses? - piotr_krzyzek
This is a question that has been plaguing me since I started web development and consulting. The more I reach out into the world, the more I see companies with absolutely horrid website designs and yet the companies are doing extremely well. Maybe I'm missing something? So: while I understand a company isn't it's website, but I believe a website helps define a companies image. So why do companies stick with, pardon my language, P.O.S. websites?
======
patio11
There are many roads to the cheese. Cold calling, for example, works. I've
never done it and if I suggested it to my (very successful) clients they'd
laugh in my face, but it is an _enormous_ business.

A lot of businesses can get away with terrible websites for the same reason I
can get away with terrible business cards: 99.8% of the business is elsewhere.
If you're Nobu your website could be done by a 4th grader in Flash and you'd
still sell sushi at $100 a plate.

That's the part of the answer you won't mind hearing. The other part is
designers vastly overestimate the importance of design and that what designers
like about designs is in many cases orthogonal to their effectiveness in
convincing customers to enter business relationships. (I'd say a variant of
that regarding programmers, too.)

~~~
adrianhoward
_what designers like about designs is in many cases orthogonal to their
effectiveness in convincing customers to enter business relationships_

You have there, in a nutshell, the difference between the outlook of good and
bad designers.

Bad designers care about whether they like the design.

Good designers care about whether the end-user likes the design.

~~~
derefr
I think, more often, the dichotomy is between _idealistic_ designers and
_pragmatic_ designers.

Idealistic designers care about whether the end-users (meaning the people who
will, say, visit the website) like the design.

Pragmatic designers care about whether the _client_ likes the design.

It's quite a bit harder to make money as an idealistic designer, unless you
can wield conversion rate data at the client. If you're just one designer on a
team working for an agency, who's been given a "brand policy" document by the
client? No chance.

~~~
autonoms
I disagree with the your dichotomy. It isn't whether the end-user likes the
design, it is whether the design is _useful_. So useful that they don't even
realize "design" is taking place.

------
DanielBMarkham
If you were dying of thirst in a desert would the style of the canteen matter
when you were offered water?

Businesses concentrate on providing water to thirsty people, i.e., find
something that people want and provide it to them. If they want it enough,
nothing much else matters. This is the goal.

Artists concentrate on providing visual joy and passion in the world. Make
people enjoy things they normally might not.

For the vast majority of us, we'd do much better focusing on finding something
people want. A lot. Society and culture will tell us otherwise. There are a
lot of nice canteen builders in the world who will take you down a nice rosy
path. You'll be building wonderfully decorated canteens that are empty. And
you'll never ever figure out what you are missing (Which is kind of what your
question sounds like)

That's not to say there's anything wrong with art and things of beauty and
drama. It's just not directly applicable to your question. Perhaps your
question would be better phrased: to what degree should I apply aesthetics to
prevent _losing_ potential customers. Much better question :)

~~~
adrianhoward
_Businesses concentrate on providing water to thirsty people, i.e., find
something that people want and provide it to them. If they want it enough,
nothing much else matters. This is the goal. Artists concentrate on providing
visual joy and passion in the world. Make people enjoy things they normally
might not._

You seem to think design is purely about art and aesthetics. This is a very
narrow slice of a good design/ux practitioners skill set. Good design/ux folk
are much more about the process of finding the thirsty people, understanding
why they've missed the water fountain that's right in front of them, and
fixing the problem.

------
melvinram
Disclaimer: _I am a web designer._

Design is more than just pretty pictures. Organization of information and
communicating the right messages are more important than presentation.
Craigslist looks like POS but it's organized to be useful.

"So why do companies stick with, pardon my language, P.O.S. websites?"

The answer to that question has a few different roots. The three most common
that I've seen are:

a) As patio11 said, the website isn't a critical ingredient in the sales
cycle.

b) The competition is doing a terrible job with info organization and
communication. If competition communicates horribly but has pretty pictures
and you have ugly site but it communicates in a way that connects with their
pains, fears and desires, you're probably going to win the sale _unless design
is important to what they are going to deliver for you._

c) If a website is working well (even though it's hideous), making drastic
changes may result in killing the formula that was working. This happens
because a lot of times when designers redesign a site, they don't
think/experiment through what is already working and what isn't. Business
owner gets new design, launches, sees sales go down and reverts back to old
hideous design. Eventually they get to a "if it ain't broken, why fix it"
mentality.

Now we've done tests where we took terribly designed sites that were working
well, revamped the design while keeping the same layout, content & flow, and
it increased overall conversions.

The key with improving anything that is making one change at a time and
letting the numbers guide you with the decision making.

With all that said, I have launched substantial redesigns of my own site
countless times and reverted back to the current version. This is because
incremental changes give you less and less increases over time. Sometimes a
drastic redesign can give you a relatively gigantic boost. That's how we
discovered our current design. But you want to be making singular changes to
test impact most of time.

~~~
adrianhoward
_The competition is doing a terrible job with info organization and
communication_

This is an often overlooked one. I once talked my way out of some work after
doing some usability testing on a bunch of recruiting sites. The client chose
not to fix some of the issues that we discovered not because they didn't
consider them important - but because the competition was _so_ much worse
(e.g. in one case only 1/5 people could register!).

------
brokentone
I've worked with companies with terrible websites in the past, either to give
them a new website or to fix existing components while keeping my eyes
closed... I think there are a few reasons here. However, your actual question?
No idea, I would love to see some stats, but I doubt it can be quantified that
well (see point 3).

1\. Someone in the executives actually likes the site the way it is. These are
business people, not designers. I'm surprised time and again, how if you give
a business person a logo drawn in crayon, they'll chose it, because it show
synergy or whatever (slight exaggeration). Maybe a family member made the
existing website for them. Even if they recognize there are other websites out
there that look better, they cannot imagine that website with their logo and
content. One company I worked with saw our wireframe and love it. It was so
much better than what they had, even unfinished, and because it had their logo
in the top corner, they were able to get it.

2\. Costs are unknown. How much does it cost to make a new website for me?
This guy says $500, this guy says $5000, what is the difference? These people
are in the top of other fields. They know if their electrical contractor
pushes them for 2 months and doubles the price whether its reasonable or not.
They have no idea for web stuff.

3\. Success cannot be easily quantified. Was the uptick in business as a
result of a new design or the full marketing campaign you launched at the same
time? (and I anticipate functionality far outweighs design, I mean, look at
DrudgeReport, still extremely popular with a very basic design) And certainly
depends industry to industry. A good design means far more to a web design
company than it does to a electrical contractor.

(edit, added a little spacing)

~~~
MehdiEG
"1. Someone in the executives actually likes the site the way it is."

That one is probably the main reason why companies stick with awful-looking
websites. I'll never cease to be amazed at how many people have no design
sense or eye whatsoever and genuinely cannot see the difference between an
absolutely horrendous-looking logo or page and a well designed one.

In fact, not only can they not see the difference but I often see them
preferring the godawful version over the well designed one. There's a reason
why every home-made flyer uses Word's multi-colored 3D fonts and wordart - a
lot of people genuinely think that they look absolutely amazing :)

~~~
paolomaffei
if they also sell to people that think those flyers are amazing then is it
really a problem for them?

~~~
piotr_krzyzek
100% agree with this statement, though my followup question to that is: do we
have to stick with mediocrity? Or can/should better design/quality outpace and
outperform the current drivel?

------
phleet
There's another lesser factor here that can determine the success of business:
are your employees proud to work on it?

If people are proud of the product - both functionally and visually - they're
more likely to be happy and want to stay. As a potential employee joining your
company, if your website looks crummy, it would definitely not cast you in
good light, even if it's a financially justifiable ugly design.

------
kitcar
This is one of those questions where human psychology is the predominant
factor driving decisions.

Many managers look at the cost differential of hiring a high-end designer
versus getting their back end dev to mock something up, and ask themselves
"Will I get another $X,XXX amount of business in return for this investment?"
Depending on their personality, they will then answer "yes" or "no", and act
accordingly.

The reality is the manager is a very bad person to make that call - as they
are intimately familiar with the business, and therefore generally very bad at
judging how a person who is encountering the business for a first time will
respond to a design.

Testing the new design is expensive though, as it requires an outlay of $X,XXX
without any guarantee return of results; therefore the manager takes the
conservative approach and hires the cheaper designer, as at least that way
she/he won't have the issue of having spent money and not being able to show
any results from the investment.

~~~
piotr_krzyzek
This is the core of my question and puzzle. As a consultant, I can see the
'image' value for the company. Let's say Company X is currently making 1M in
clean profit, and their overall image is low-end (business cards are cheap,
website is cheap, their trucks are dirty and cheap); then I'm of the opinion
that they are a cheap, low end company. I'm guessing most businesses do NOT
want to be seen the low end type. My assumption is that many companies want to
be see as equals or better than their competitors ... So wouldn't it stand to
reason that a better brand image would equate to dollars in the bank further
down the line?

~~~
adrianhoward
_I'm guessing most businesses do NOT want to be seen the low end type._

That totally depends on the market the business wants. If you're selling low-
price office supplies then you want to _look_ like you're selling low end
office supplies. If you have a classy expensive brand to your site, then your
customers will be more likely to think you're selling a classy and expensive
product. If you're money is in supporting the low-end then this is a very bad
move.

You brand yourself for your market. Burger King don't want to look like a
four-star steak restaurant. And vice versa.

------
corkill
People make decisions based on whats in it for them.

Not oh this website looks great so I will buy from that company. Sames thing
with logos, people think oh I need a great logo, no you don't you need a great
product (offer).

Most businesses can just grab a $30 template from themeforest, that more than
covers the design part of their website needs.

I used to custom design websites, I know it definitely was not adding any
value to my customers businesses.

Of course for some audiences design is super important and of course usability
for web apps etc. I think it can help build trust and get people to stay for a
few more seconds to check out your site if they are browsing.

But your average small business, two people care about the design, the
business owner and the web designer.

------
CookWithMe
I think that an over-polished website for a small business can seem
suspicious. E.g. when looking for small restaurants or family owned hotels, an
average website with average photos is fine and they are obviously not trying
to hide something, it shows the real thing. However, a super-professional
website with high-quality, photoshop-retouched photos... I know it won't be as
good as it looks in the photos.

Then again, a web / mobile startup with bad graphics or design will suffer a
lot from it because that should be one of their core competencies.

------
laurihy
The magnitude of the help of course depends on the type of business, but
generally the answer is yes.

Usually, when people make decisions without full information, they fall back
on simple heuristics. One of the most common one is to derive hidden features
of the product or brand from the visible ones. As an example, I don't know if
service X is reliable (as I don't have prior experience or other knowledge),
but since the price is high, I assume that price and quality (reliability) are
connected and the same goes for looks. If the business looks (as in graphic
design) nice, then I assume that the business is also nice.

At least in the context of eCommerce, the perceived quality of the information
is among the biggest factors affecting the perceived trust and risk. It has
been researched, that both trust and risk affect consumers intention (in
addition to the potential benefit) and thus when consumer trusts the service
and perceives low risk, she's more likely to make a purchase.

This comment is more focused on the web graphics -point of the question and
visual parts of the design. I'm aware that design is much more than just
deciding the right shade of blue.

------
underwater
As a counterpoint to commenters who are going with their gut instinct, see the
blog post by patio11 about redesigning Bingo Card Creator
[http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/04/19/ab-testing-is-
frustratin...](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/04/19/ab-testing-is-
frustrating/). He found that a new design did increase trial sign ups but did
not increase sales.

~~~
piotr_krzyzek
I remember this one. The problem is the statement and his design is that it
also changed his sales funnel. There was too much of a change to tell exactly
where things fell apart or why specifically sales did not increase. Was it the
initial offer? The middle? The actual offering? ect ect ...

I agree with this assessment that new/better designs don't always increase
sales, though I believe (should he ever choose to pursue it more, though I
don't think he will) he'll need to do a lot of split testing on the new design
to optimize it like he did on his old design.

Plus, with the new design comes an increased brand image/presence which will
help him in the long run.

~~~
tptacek
You think the "brand image" of a bingo card generator is going to make a
difference in the long run? I challenge this because "brand image" is one of
those indirect value propositions designers tend to tack on to every pitch.

------
oemera
Really good question. I have I asked this question to myself a lot of times
when I actually buy things or when I'm looking for a service I could use.

From my experience I can definitely say that I never bought something because
it looked good. But when I had two alternatives and one looked better than the
other I catched myself tending to the better looking service which was not
always the best service provider. A company which has what I need and has also
a great design / UX gets a big plus point.

But what I also learned is that a good structured site with intuitive
navigation is really good makes really solid impression. By intuitive I mean
guessing where you could find informations you are looking for. For example
documentation of the API they are providing.

------
jessedhillon
How many times have you not done business with a company because of the
quality of its website? If its an online transaction I will generally try (not
very hard) to find another vendor, but in person, I doubt anyone has losty
business for this reason.

~~~
DanBC
Quite a few times!

Normally I'm looking for items which are pretty much the same cost among
different sellers, with the same delivery costs.

I don't yet know the quality of customer service.

All I can go on at the moment is ease of use of the site. That's often tied to
good design.

------
xur17
It definitely does, but the magnitude of the affect varies based on the
clientele. For example, the affect on a web-based business would probably be
much greater.

For example - I ran a file hosting site a number of years ago using a pre-
built php script, and the default template with a few modifications. I ran it
with this template for a few years, until I was making enough profit to
warrant hiring someone to make a new site template for me. I hired someone off
of rent-a-coder for less than $100, and within a week of installing the new
theme my pageviews increased about 20% overnight, and stayed there.

~~~
cocoflunchy
Were there any HTML changes that might have helped you with SEO ? Because that
could be a big factor too.

------
wushupork
It depends on what business you are in. If yours is primarily a B2B - design
may or may not be that important. If you can solve a pain point - it doesn't
matter what the solution looks like. You can see the result of that in any SMB
software product - they look horrible.

However if you are trying to do a B2C people have wildly different
expectations. They've seen better online products. Consumer internet products
these days set a pretty high bar in design and user experience and if you
don't have that, it will be difficult to get them to use your product.

------
hippich
As usual - depends.

I had few sites from era when I had very bad design taste... But surprisingly
ads do very well on these sites.

I believe, that as long as users _needs_ (vs. _might_ need) what your business
offers through this site, design does not matter as long as it is readable and
usable.

But for new businesses design might be crucial. Usually you have only few
seconds of visitor's attention and you have to fully utilize it. Design is one
of the tool to get a bit more attention nad may be convert new user. But it do
nothing for existing users IMHO.

------
Ahmedb
Like everything : it depends ! If you are let's say a paper company, you can
afford to have a shitty website. Your business depends on sales people and the
website is just a note out there that you exist.

But if you are an Ecommerce company your website is your business.

Now people, me included, will most likely trust a well designed website over a
crappy one. Why ? because it shows that you care about it.

Look at the scams we get by email. The more well designed they are, the more
likely we are to trust them. Thank god they're mainly plain text.

------
jbkring
Look at all these people debating this topic. In the time it took me to read
the 20 comments, 9 more were added. Wow. That's user engagement! Now look at
the design...

------
adrianhoward
First define what you mean by "quality" and "design" :-)

For many people outside the design/ux field "design" is something that happens
_after_ the product is defined and created. It's just about the visuals -
"making something pretty". For people inside the design/ux field design it's
as much about understanding the users, figuring out the problem, defining the
product, figuring out the behaviour, etc. Not that the visual design aspect is
unimportant - but it's only a part of what "design" is all about.

For many people outside the design/ux field a "quality" design is something
that looks like something Apple would produce. For people inside the design/UX
field a quality design is one that _works_. You don't design the
advertisements for a MacDonald's burger the same way you design the adverts
for the latest iPhone. Their aimed at different audiences with different
goals. One isn't "good" and the other "bad".

So - does quality design help business? It depends (the favourite designer
answer :-)

If you have a rubbish product then getting in a visual designer at the last
minute to make it pretty probably isn't going to help much. "Putting lipstick
on a pig" is the phrase you'll often hear designers use about this sort of
project.

If you have an okay product with a truly terrible visual design - you may find
a purely visual revamp can help. I've seen a _purely visual_ revamp of a
terrible web app admin system cause users to praise all the wonderful new
functionality - which was always there before they just couldn't find it :-)

On the other hand - unless the UI is awful - you may find that a purely visual
revamp does relatively little beyond make the designer not want to vomit (in
the same way that having a big-ball-of-mud codebase doesn't really effect the
users experience either, just makes the developers feel ill).

You may find that a pure visual redesign can help you reposition your product
so that it better attracts the right audience. I worked on a project once
where we very deliberately moved to a "less pretty" visual look since the
"nice" design was putting off the low-budget end of the market.

The real value from design, and folk in the design/UX profession, is when you
get them in from the start. All that "get out of the building" stuff that
Steve Blank goes on about, all the product/market fit stuff that Eric Reis
emphasises. That's what good UX/design folk _do_ \- and the good ones are
very, very good at it (and have a stack of tools and techniques to help).

------
paolomaffei
It's just a part of the "will the company survive" question.

How they behave is another part, competition is another, product quality is
yet another... is you're doing great on these 3 and have much more sales than
you can manage, why bother with a new website?

------
Sapemeg
Most of the bisnesmem out there dont have a clue about webdesign and if their
company is not tech-related i think its quite natural for some very awful
websites to exist!

------
j45
When you buy something do you look at how it looks, presents and is put
together? How much does that factor in for you when you're buying something
for the first time?

~~~
piotr_krzyzek
Let's take the case of my soon to be car purchase. I'm picking a certain car
company because of the cars looks. Since it's at a level where pretty much
price, performance and features are equal throughout other companies ... I'm
going with this one because to me it looks significantly better.

------
seoriaz
with good quality web Designing with good executive planning results <a
href="[http://tutorsin.blogspot.in/>in</a>](http://tutorsin.blogspot.in/>in</a>);
company development

------
sirwanqutbi
Ask yourself, has Jon Ive (DESIGNER!!) helped Apple in business at all ? Of
course it does !

