UX Strategy & Management - User Experience Design
Browse: Home / UX is not UI

UX is not UI

By on December 15, 2012

“UX is the intangible design of a strategy that brings us to a solution.”

UX has become a neologism. When something has “good UX” it is an implied meaning of having the core components of UX (research, maybe a persona, IA, interaction, interface, etc etc…). It’s not really necessary or desirable to tack the word design onto the end anymore. It’s a distraction and leads people down a parallel but misguided path… the path to thinking that UX = User Interface Design.

I was inspired to write this post after viewing Elisabeth Hubert’s (@lishubert) presentation at the Future of Web Design 2012 conference in Prague. She says in the presentation quite clearly:

The interface is not the solution.

That’s the true heart of the battle between UX and those who only want UI – or don’t know the difference.

How UX people see UX

UX is an acronym for “user experience.” It is almost always followed by the word “design.” By the nature of the term, people who perform the work become “UX designers.” But these designers aren’t designing things in the same sense as a visual or interface designer. UX is the intangible design of a strategy that brings us to a solution.

Many UX designers have started to re-label themselves as UX Architects, UX Engineers, or UX Strategists. Some have even dropped the word “user” altogether and just go by Experience Architect/Engineer/Strategist. I think this is partially to help keep them from being marginalized as only interface designers, and partially as a result of the broadening nature of UX. You could be a researcher and persona writer in a senior UX role and never touch an interface design (or even have the skills to).

So what does UX actually mean? The various UX roles that a person can fulfill are plentiful. Some are whole jobs, some whole careers, and others are tactical roles we all dip in and out of.

What we want them to see

  • Field research
  • Face to face interviewing
  • Creation and administering of tests
  • Gathering, organizing, and presenting statistics
  • Documentation of personas and findings
  • Product design
  • Feature writing
  • Requirement writing
  • Graphic arts
  • Interaction design
  • Information Architecture
  • Usability
  • Prototyping
  • Interface layout
  • Interface design
  • Visual design
  • Taxonomy creation
  • Terminology creation
  • Copy writing
  • Presentation and speaking
  • Working tightly with programmers
  • Brainstorm coordination
  • Company culture evangelism
  • Communication to stakeholders

What they typically see

  • Field research
  • Face to face interviewing
  • Creation and administering of tests
  • Gathering, organizing, and presenting statistics
  • Documentation of personas and findings
  • Product design
  • Feature writing
  • Requirement writing
  • Graphic arts
  • Interaction design
  • Information Architecture
  • Usability
  • Prototyping
  • Interface layout
  • Interface design
  • Visual design
  • Taxonomy creation
  • Terminology creation
  • Copy writing
  • Presentation and speaking
  • Working tightly with programmers
  • Brainstorm coordination
  • Company culture evangelism
  • Communication to stakeholders

(Download this comparison list at UX is not UI – www.uxisnotui.com right now!)

UI design is a huge part of UX. I would say that in a good majority of cases the UX designer does in fact design the interface. But UX is not UI. This is where the education of others comes in. Helping people understand just what UX is and the invaluable role it plays is illustrated beautifully with the UX Umbrella.

The UX Umbrella

In a presentation that Dan Willis (@uxcrank) did for the DC Startup Weekend in 2011, he had a phenomenal image that really shows what UX encompasses:

ux-umbrella

The items that are sheltered by the umbrella have two purposeful omissions – user experience design and interface design.

User experience design is omitted because it is the loose term that encompasses all of the various disciplines. You’re never really doing any “user experience design” that isn’t just a combination of one or more of the things under the umbrella.

User interface design is omitted because it is the crossover between visual design (look and feel) and the interaction design (how the look and feel work). Combine those two and you have an interface. The interface is the result of the “solution design” that came before it.

A skillful interface designer understands the importance of providing the user with a solution to a defined problem.

How you get to an effective UI

UI implementation in production code is typically carried out by a front-end developer. There are people like me who are HTML/CSS slingers, I am often happy to build working prototypes. But when there is complex interaction with real backend code and frontend javascript, that is best left to professionals.

So how do we get to implementing a killer UI? Let’s take a journey through an ideal hypothetical:

  1. We presume the problem has been identified through the user/market/persona research.
  2. User flows and stories are made, then trashed, then made again, then iterated on until the problem flow is clear.
  3. With an idea of ways to solve the problem, some rapid experiments are carried out to validate the assumptions with the personas.
  4. Some IA work is done to break out the product/site into the logical areas and hierarchies.
  5. Various wireframes and sketches are drawn to start to organize where things could go on the screen.
  6. With all the preceding research material and UX work, now mockups with UI included can be made with confidence.
  7. With mockups and a UI designed, they are user tested and iterated on through some prototypes or experiments.
  8. After the mockups have been vetted, it’s now time to code up the interface – UI Design!
  9. Once the usability of the UI has been honed, you can move it on to production – the place that people usually think of as the singular UI.

That’s quite an idealized journey. Not every step has to be taken depending on time and resources. There’s also nothing to stop it from going pretty fast; a matter of days even. I’ve designed countless UIs straight from my head to the screen without following those steps, but that’s not UX. I believe they call it “design malpractice.” Good UI is not trivial or simple – solid UX, killer visuals, and effective interaction are all part of the formula.

Keep on educating!

This is how I’d like people to see UX and understand what is meant by “user experience design.” It takes a lot of behind the scenes work to end up at a capable, elegant, and delightful interface. But the interface is not the solution. This is what the school of UX needs to combat, and then educate about what UX really can do. It’s a huge strategic process that aims to create a product or website that customers/users/visitors are drawn to, find easy to use, and quickly understand. Through the UX work we’ll arrive at the right interface conclusion.

Credit to Dan Willis (@uxcrank) for the UX Umbrella and Elisabeth Hubert (@lishubert) for Interaction Design Beyond the Interface.

Update: Download the comparison poster/graphic

I’ve had a lot of people email about the 2-column “what we want them to see, what they typically see” comparison lists, so I’ve put them up in PDF and PNG format at UX is not UI – www.uxisnotui.com!

This page has been translated into Spanish language by Maria Ramos from Webhostinghub.com/support/edu.

Posted December 15, 2012
If you liked this, you should read the latest post "The Message Gets the Medium it Deserves"
Give it a tweet!
Give it a follow!

Posted in | 74 Responses

  • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

    As an aside, I think I left out the fundamental importance and scope of what user interface design actually does consist of on its own merit. UI isn’t easy, and it’s not just visual design or aesthetic or style. Clarity and affordance are crucial and that’s not something that is just a visual job.

    Then, that leaves out the fundamental importance and scope of what visual design actually does… I am seeing a pattern here.

  • http://twitter.com/mntgmry Andy Montgomery

    Great piece Erik. This is one of those areas that feels like common sense to those of us doing UX, but creates regular challenges when interacting with people outside the discipline. The “What we want them to see” chart is painfully accurate. Sometimes when the average-guy-on-the-street asks what I do, I punt and say “user interface design” since he’ll know what that means, but I appreciate your desire to keep educating. A good reminder to all of us doing the work every day.

  • Pingback: sokohl.com » Blog Archive » Keep Repeating

  • DonMann

    Hi Eric, I also enjoyed your piece and when asked what I do, I tell them that I design computer software, the interaction between the Human and Computer / UX Designer. I’ve found on many job post that when the term UI Architect / UI Engineer is used, it’s usually used in conjunction with someone that codes, which I do not.. I use tools like iRise, Visio, In-Design etc.. Keep up the good work and appreciate your time and efforts..

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      Yeah it’s a strange thing to describe. I usually start with “Ever used something that is really a pleasant experience. Something that made your task easy, or fun, or useful? A piece of software, a UI on your DVR, anything like that? I do the work that makes that stuff possible.”

      Or if I want to deflect, I go with “I work on the software design and usabilty of the things that protect the encryption that protects all your online shopping and banking and the world’s sensitive information.” You say ‘encryption’ and people glaze over and walk away. :)

      • DonMann

        LOL!!! I usually never use our lingo with them, as you’re right, they just kind of glaze over.. I usually ask mention them going into a bank and opening a new account, or when they sign up for online banking and mention the interface that they use to input their information.. Then the light goes on and they understand..

      • stormka

        “I usually start with..”

        Bingo. Love hearing that others do this, too.

    • misentoscossa

      Same here! I think I will send this article to all the recruiters that continuously contact me for interview as ‘UX *something*’ but in reality they look for Apache, database- and whatever deeply technical- people.

  • Pingback: Kommunikation ohne Content Strategie schafft ein schlechtes Nutzererlebnis (Video) - Daniel Joerg | Daniel Joerg

  • jorma

    Fantastic comparison between what we want them to see and reality :D

  • http://twitter.com/andy__marshall Andy Marshall

    Love this article – so many people in the web industry have started appending UX to their job title, but they really don’t get the bigger picture.

    The UX Umbrella is helpful in explaining what’s really involved, though for me there should be some mention of psychology in there – understanding how humans think, learn, remember, and understand is so crucial to designing the experience.

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      Totally. I believe that anyone who wants to have “UX” in their title needs to have deep knowledge in each item under the umbrella, and plentiful experience in *doing* it. Even for UX managers, principals, directors and CXO’s, I really believe you need to be a top-shelf practitioner so when the UX problems get hard, you know exactly HOW to fix things and WHY.

      I have a draft of another post about Psychology coming up. I have a undergraduate degree in Psychology where I had a deep interest in learning, memory, behavior modification and shaping, and the neuropsychology of cognition. I also did like 2000 hours as an intern with a clinical psychologist. This was all in the midst of a web development career, so it was like I was pursuing 2 careers at once.

      • http://twitter.com/andy__marshall Andy Marshall

        Looking forward to that post, Erik.

        I’m imminently starting my own blog, and I think many of the articles will touch on this critical aspect of UX.

  • http://mikemai.net/ Mike Mai

    well said, man

  • http://www.mobileinc.co.uk/ Murat Mutlu

    Great post – I work in a industry where UX = Wireframes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ijmorgado Ivan Morgado

    It’s a very good article…is so important to realize what is each one…I would like read something like that but with differences between a software engineer and developer….

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      Sounds like a great topic. I’ll add it to my list. I am a UX practitioner that is probably on the high-end of average for how close I work with engineers and developers, I will tap some of their opinions. I am a true believer that UX should be coupled with the implementation of the code.

  • http://twitter.com/karolus Karl Kaufmann

    Excellent article. Too often, the process gets confused in the client’s eye, and makes the process ever more challenging. It’s great to see the process spelled out as it is here…

  • http://www.facebook.com/terry.fitzgerald.925 Terry Fitzgerald

    Thank goodness some people get this. I’m a UX/Usability specialist and I’m finding it harder and harder to get projects because I don’t know HTML, CSS or Photoshop. But I’ve seen many of the sites and apps that are based solely on these skills and they are lacking. It’s a hard sell – everyone thinks they understand the user

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      Yeah this is a real shame. There is a real need for skilled practitioners who don’t come from web design or graphic arts. Dedicated researchers and user testers are a great asset to have in a company who is willing to bring them on. I presume you do user flows, wireframes, personas, narrative journeys, etc etc?

      It’s the unicorn syndrome. Partially I think it’s because people just don’t get or know what a UX lifecycle should be, and also I think it’s just a scale issue.

      It’s like the personnel chain for an engineering effort, it could have an architect, a strict api engineer, a build manager, several backend only devs, several front end devs, system/load/performance QA, interface and blackbox QA, and then a product manager a project manager. That’s a pretty universally accepted chain for a large-scale software endeavor.

      But dividing a UX team up into 6 people, I just don’t think the bottom 90% of the world is ready for that. Various research and IA roles exist in a lot of places, but not really in a UX team or a focused UX chain.

      It will happen though, and sooner than we think.

  • http://twitter.com/saschamt Sascha M. Trinkaus

    Fantastic write-up Eric. Thank you and merry Christmas

  • http://twitter.com/ramongervais Ramon Gervais

    It all sounds like A big ego problem for a small buzz-term that people now a days use to make a lot of money. And don’t get me wrong there are some good roll-models and conferences. But if I look at the web where still standing still… So to all you UX’ers go and create, do your thing and surprise us ;-)

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      I’m not quite sure what this post means.

      • http://www.facebook.com/martina.kettner.5 Martina Kettner

        I guess it means there’s a lot of talk about good UX, but not a lot of action. I agree and disagree. Looking back 10 years from now one can definitely see the development in the digital user experience. But you also need to consider the conditions now and then, as we have a lot more to work with today both technically and content wise (and that is not anything we can thank UX people for), which should create more opportunities and also greater challenges.

        And I agree when saying “go and create, do your thing and surprise us” because I believe most disruptive design ideas and solutions that really changed people’s experience didn’t come from a so called UX person who consciously applied the UX umbrella. No, they came from people in the need of solving a problem, or from people with a driving force to take advantage of an opportunity. Take the wheel as an example.

        I definitely think “UX people” are needed in every business, but then I don’t mean people with certain titles, tasks, tools or work processes, but people who solve problems for the customer/the user but think beyond them when coming up with solutions. Looking at users in retroperspective is limited by nature, and basing a design by understanding such will limit any solution. But combining tomorrow users with todays possibilities can open up for innovation and potentially great design.

  • nixa espinola

    I remember this being an issue since…ever! Five years ago I read some articles and heard a bunch of discussions about how the “experience” cannot be designed because, strictly speaking, the elements which shape that experience are actually the ones designed. Here is a short and honest related article: http://tinyurl.com/6pupr6

    Anyway it is amazing to see people in the industry who still think UI=UX (and there are plenty!). I will now do exactly what @misentoscossa suggests :) as an attempt to educate not only clients but also stakeholders.

    Thanks for the article Eric! It is always good to check how things are.

  • Himanshu Vyas

    Really Lovable Article, It’s making clear my head about UI & UX…….

  • http://www.facebook.com/mehmet.akif.tunc Mehmet Akif Tunç

    Nice and Clear. Thank you and merry Christmas to all..

  • http://www.facebook.com/gmaletic Greg Maletic

    What’s the point of considering UX without UI, or vice-versa? And if there is no point, what’s the purpose in making a distinction?

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      UI is a key component of UX. For anything that has to be interacted with, eventually someone uses a UI, even if they had various experience along the way to get to a UI. If the article portrayed UI as something that isn’t a component of UX, then that’s an omission. In the 2 long side-by-side bullet lists, interface design, visual design, and interaction design are all a part of UX.

      The purpose of making a distinction is so that people who use the 2 interchangeably or more often with a one way interpretation of “UX = UI” see that you can’t just jump to building or fixing UI to solve user or business problems/goals.

      The problem is when people who want to have a broad-spectrum UX career run into employers, bosses, clients, and general people who want their product to have “better UX.” They know that UX is an important buzzword, and their product is usually “ugly” or “hard to use.” So the assumption is that you bring on a UX designer… who then fixes the UI “look and feel” of your site/product. That may fix 10% of the usability/experience problems if they are a good interface designer. If they aren’t, then it’s just rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.

      I think I need to write on article on the definition, nuance, and merits of *User Interface Design* as a few people have misconstrued this as a knock or dismissal of the art of UI. That’s the furthest from the truth.

      Here’s the pont of this article, in story form: You’re a company with a pretty powerful windows app that first built for Windows 98, and you’ve kept it updated through XP, Vista, and 7. Now that Windows 8 is out, your product manager says “Man, we really need to modernize our app. It’s hard to use, though powerful, and frankly uglier than sin.”

      So someone on the team says “Well, let’s hire a UX designer to come and change the look and feel. It’s got all the function we need, we just need some lipstick on this pig.”

      So they find a UX designer and bring him on, and say “Hey, spruce this baby up so that it really just looks great and works in the Windows 8 ecosystem!” and the designer replies “Okay, lets get started nailing down the personas, get some interviews scheduled, and walk through flows of the major problems your product solves.”

      *crickets*

      “Wait, I thought you were going to just change the look and feel?” Says the team.

      “I am. But how can I change the look and feel before addressing the core usability, intuitiveness, and experience of the whole product first?”

      At this point, this is when half the room usually has a lightbulb go off and see that a UI can’t be fixed in good conscious without at least some UX work. Look and feel never saved anything from being a fundamentally poor experience.

      So I guess, the distinction is that a top-shelf UI designer would take the work that UX has provided, the user stories, flows, information architecture, personas… and they’d start to create the perfect wireframes/mockups and layouts for the visible interface. They are a part of the UX process. But a UI designer who is asked to just start with wireframes, or worse full color mockups, that’s design malpractice.

  • http://twitter.com/adi_the_boss Adi |the boss|

    Article is informative highlighting a very important issue, but it would be better with the examples showing the difference between UX & UI.

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      I actually do want to do this. Probably in January.

  • Pingback: UX is not UI | Hello Erik – User Experience @Erik_UX

  • Pingback: Tweet Parade (no. 52 Dec 2012) | gonzoblog

  • http://www.facebook.com/sara.o.khoury Sara Ortloff Khoury

    While this is a UX forum, and some have stated many here are the choir, I
    very much appreciate the articulation of the difference. The more help
    we get in educating the better. When it comes time rationalize the budget for the resources you need to do UX it really helps to be able to delineate what is needed to build great UIs.

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      Yes, the constant resource constraint is part of the need for education. When it comes down to the choice to apply “veneer” UI, or invest in solid UX, the veneer often wins because the UX can always be done later.

      I find articles like Aral Balkans “Design is not veneer” particularly poignant when imploring people to listen! http://aralbalkan.com/notes/design-is-not-veneer/

  • Haresh Karkar

    Very well drafted article! We often face issues in explaining difference between various skill sets. I work in IT services industry where majority of projects are managed by people with development background. For them, world is flat! They ask IAs to do visual design, visual designers to write html, and etc. etc. They often define ‘good UX’ as ‘development friendly’ solution which takes minimum efforts and require less pain.

  • Pingback: User Experience is not User Interface

  • http://twitter.com/lajlev Michael Lajlev

    Why people believe that they can design a user experience is still a mystery to me? I think all designers try to optimize their design to delieve the best possible user experience, but that doesn’t make them a UX designer. A while ago I posted this short thought http://blog.laj.lv/why-ux-designer-is-a-terrible-job-title/

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      I don’t think anyone actually believes they “design an experience.” I’ve never encountered that. Most of the people who actually practice UX typically understand that it’s a development/design strategy that primes a site or product for a solution. Part of why I think UX is a neologism. It just encompasses the umbrella disciplines.

      With regards to the perfect holiday car that you mention in your blog post. That’s something where you would strategize, research, and design your car with the intent of being an optimized holiday car. I realize that they still might not make it to wally-world. But there’s a whoooole lot of design and strategy engineering that could go into a holiday car. And then marketing. If you woo and delight the user, it is possible to really shape and influence their experience. Psychologists of the mid 20th century have proven this over and over. Skinner, Zimbardo, Bandura, Watson, etc etc…

      I think it’s time to do a post on real behaviorists and behavior shaping :)

      • http://twitter.com/lajlev Michael Lajlev

        Seriously I would love a post on behavior shaping! That is so much more clear than “user experience design”.

  • Iza Bartosiewicz

    And let’s not forget older users and users with disabilities. Accessibility also belongs under the UX Umbrella…

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      Critical point. Thanks for bringing that up.

  • Pingback: Great UX Explanation

  • Pingback: The difference between UX and UI | Wireframing Tool - ProtoShare

  • http://twitter.com/jlinowski Jakub Linowski

    I’m going to post a short tweet I sent out a few days ago and see what the reaction will be. :)

    “The UX Umbrella is filled with lot’s of hot air and waiting to burst as its just claiming credit for good design”

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      My jimmies ain’t even rustled.

  • http://apfeltube.de/ Finn Gaida

    Speaking of UX, would you mind horizontally mirroring your header image, cause I find it somewhat irritating, that, along the standard time graph line from left to right the thought is converted by the brain into light that comes out of the eye? Would be clearer if the light fell into the eye and produced a thought. Great article by the way!

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      I thought it was like, the wave and vision were both heading towards the center! I get what you’re saying though ;) I’ll test it out. I always imagined the face should face to the right.

      • http://apfeltube.de/ Finn Gaida

        Oh, that’s a point. :D

  • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

    To anyone following this thread – A lot of people have emailed me asking if they can use the 2-column comparison list of what UX is vs. what people think it is, so I made a little website for http://www.UXisnotUI.com where a poster can be downloaded in various sizes and formats.

  • Pingback: Linkness. What we’ve been reading | January 18, 2013 | NEXTNESS

  • heyitsjayy

    There are differences. The two could overlap in a role though.

  • Pingback: UX is not UINathanael Rouillard | Nathanael Rouillard

  • Pingback: UX is not UI | Waverley

  • Pingback: UX är inte UI

  • Pingback: Week of 1/25/13 – TDAS Creative Wiki

  • NotPaidToSayThis

    I think it helps to stop thinking of UX as an aspect of interactive software and of that alone. As Wikipedia says: “ISO 9241-210 defines user experience as ‘a person’s perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service’”. The definition is focused on the person experiencing the artifact, not the artifact itself–and definitely not the people who designed it. The definition would include a product like a snowboard or a chair that may or may not have input devices, screens, speakers or even electronics. It would include a system like the Paris Metro. Or a service like shirt pressing or turn-down in a hotel. Or the experience of filling out and handing in a paper form at the post office. Or the experience of opening a box containing a new iPod or a pair of shoes. Or the experience of finding someone to help you when your computer or software application has crashed or your neighbor is playing loud music at 3AM. And of course the experience of using a software product or service through its carefully researched, designed and usability-tested user interface. Or through its brilliantly inspired but totally unvalidated UI. They are all UX.

  • Pankaj

    Good article with nice explanation. Really very helpful. Right now many designers are not follow these rules. But if they read this then it will be helpful to them.

  • Pingback: UX is not UI | Hello Erik – User Experience @Erik_UX | Erik's Links

  • Pingback: UX: what it is, what it isn’t | life is [User cUstomer hUman] eXperience

  • Pingback: UX Artifacts and Adventure | Hello Erik - User Experience @Erik_UX

  • Pingback: 3 Ways Technology is Becoming More Human from @engageQ

  • Pingback: The Importance of a well-designed user interface Figure | SMARTIES

  • http://www.svk-nyc.com/ Sveta

    Great article! What about comparing UX and marketing? Sometimes people ask me for marketing advice and I tell them marketing and UX are not same. Thanks!

    • http://www.helloerik.com/ Erik Flowers

      I think that marketing is a part of overall customer/user experience. Service Experience Architecture is the next phase of end-to-end touchpoint experience planning.

      Here’s a great video from the MX Conference 2013. Patrick Quattlebaum talks about the future of SEA and what it means to UX architects in the present: http://vimeo.com/62888010

  • Pingback: What UX (User Experience) Is Not … | Portfolio of Svetlana Kouznetsova

  • Pingback: FILive: The Future of UX: Killing the Wireframe Machine | A grain of salt

  • Pandurangappa P

    I am doing Designing & development…then what i’m? UX Developer….

  • Pingback: monday apps !!! | Mobile Media

  • Pingback: UX is not UI (in poche parole) | Giomino's Blog

  • Pingback: To Hell with the Slash! | Elisabeth Hubert