I used to think improving a user flow meant reducing the number of screens. 7 steps → 5 steps → 3...I used to think improving a user flow meant reducing the number of screens. 7 steps → 5 steps → 3...
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
I used to think improving a user flow meant reducing the number of screens.
7 steps → 5 steps → 3 steps. Done. Better UX.
Except that’s not always true.
A 3-step flow can feel harder than a 7-step one if every screen asks the user to make a complicated decision.
Now, when I review a flow, I’m less interested in the number of screens and more interested in the decisions we’re asking the user to make.
I look for things like:
→ Are we asking for information we already have? → Can two related decisions happen together? → Are we making users choose something they don’t understand yet? → Can the system provide a sensible default? → Did we add a confirmation because the user needs it—or because we were afraid to remove it?
Sometimes the answer is to remove a screen.
Sometimes it’s to add one so a complicated decision becomes easier.
That’s why I’ve stopped asking:
“How can I make this flow shorter?”
And started asking:
“How can I make this flow require less thinking?”
Fewer screens can look efficient.
Fewer unnecessary decisions feel efficient.
How do you decide when a step in a flow is actually necessary?
Post image
Back to feed
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started