Most of us interested in the startup world has already seen a chart explaining why most tech startups fail.

“[Nine out of ten startups fail in the EU.](https://stryber.com/insights/truth-about-startup-failure)“

Or, the most common reason behind startup failures:

![Pie chart showing reasons why startups fail](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1662406457/reason_behind_startup_failure_5f4e3ee929.png)
Source: [Hackernoon](https://medium.com/hackernoon/why-do-startups-fail-a-postmortem-of-256-failed-startups-fb157a16d98b) by DreamToIPO

I am a digital product designer, not a finance expert or a business consultant, so I am particularly interested in that 42% - marked as “product-related” factors. As you can see, this is the most significant slice. So my theory is that if startuppers could get better in that part, it would significantly improve their chances. So let’s explore this theory further.

Sadly, looking at such charts - and reading the articles they usually come with - does not prove helpful. Mainly because these articles fail to uncover deeper insights behind those numbers. Or, for that matter, provide some guidance on how to fix that; e.g., what should new startup founders do to avoid failure because of product issues?

I’ve been more involved with startups over the past six years, and I have worked on and with several of their digital products. I saw a couple of hiccups from clients and even more from those who finally didn’t become one. So what does that 42% mean? What are those so-called “product failures?”

I like to turn to UX design tools to get to the bottom of things. They help me better understand and evaluate specific situations. One of my favorites, for example, is the five why’s (or the 5 WHY-s) method. It’s as easy as it sounds: instead of accepting something as it is - in this case, 90% of startups fail - we peel back more and more layers from our problem onion by asking a single question: why?

Here’s the five why’s evaluation of our problem statement:

> Problem statement: nine out of ten startups fail

*Why do they fail?*
For various reasons, but most likely due to an inferior product.

*Why is their product inferior?*
Because they don’t match people’s needs.

*Why can’t they match people’s needs?*
Because they didn’t spend enough time figuring out what people needed.

*Why didn’t they spend more time figuring out what people needed?*
Because they were too focused on building their idea.

*Why were they focused on building their idea?*
Most likely because of confirmation bias.

(“Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one’s prior beliefs or values.”  [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias) .)


The most common reason behind product-related failures is that the team started building too early. In most cases, real-world users don’t even see a project before beta or alpha tests. To me, that is a warning sign. Before gathering feedback, it is impossible to know whether an idea is feasible - but they’ve already made a considerable effort to deliver something.

> Startups are too busy with the how before the what. 

All is that because confirmation bias clouds judgment. Confidence that the product in itself should be successful nurtures useless discussions about whether they should build with React and Tailwind instead of asking questions like: “is this idea genuinely useful for our target users?” or “does the current user interface convey the intended value?”

The thing is, the technology you build with doesn’t matter. As you grow, you’ll have to refactor the whole codebase anyway. It is more vital that you build the right thing, that your user flows make sense, that your user interface is easily understandable, or that your onboarding provides a glimpse of the value you deliver. And that is product design.

> ...the technology you build with doesn’t matter. As you grow, you’ll have to refactor the whole thing anyway.

Cutting-edge technologies don’t build successful products; people do. You need to understand users and have systems in place to make them. That’s product design and product thinking.

## Product design is the foundation, not the next step
In my experience, early-stage product teams see product design as a luxury, something they can afford if they grow big enough. But that’s wrong. This thinking confuses design with expensive pixel-pushing and [“award-winning” eye candies](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/bencehusi_too-many-times-i-found-myself-in-negative-activity-6970719225321512960-O3SJ). But in reality, design is the link between the users and the product. Design is not only about how it looks but how it works. And that’s a confusion I see too often.

A natural next step when you gain some traction might be a rebranding or improving your design system. But that’s only the cherry on top. The base should already have been designed with a product-led mindset.

## Signs that you started building too early
### Your app is a ghost town
So you’ve built this exciting new app. Your “growth-hacking” worked on me; I’m all up for it. I signed up, and I was immediately disappointed. I’m presented with either a completely empty view or irrelevant content that is useless to me.

You can circumvent this with a good onboarding flow where you gather valuable info by telling users to customize their experience and tailor their first impression according to those preferences.

This is what, for example, Spotify does when you sign up. Before seeing any music, you’ll have to follow a couple of artists and find some friends to connect with. This approach ensures that the music recommendation you first see won’t be Jay-Z when you’re into Chopin.

Good onboarding can also help overcome the classic chicken-egg situation, which is also very common.

To design a fluid onboarding experience, you must understand and tap into how your users perceive value. Otherwise, they’ll think your product does not fulfill their needs.

### Fractured experience
The other phenomenon I see often is when you have to navigate across multiple - usually painfully slowly loading - views to unlock the value an app provides.

Imagine, for example, a SaaS product that helps marketers with campaign reporting. To create your first report, you’ll have to connect your data source somehow. Now you have to figure out how developers pieced together all the functionalities by muddling through arbitrarily named menu items.

Had they understood your goal, this could have been a multi-step user flow that starts with a clear “New report” CTA and walks you through all the necessary actions that you need to take before seeing a report in one flow.

## How to avoid that
My best piece of advice: involve a product designer from the beginning. Master the value proposition, validate it, then start looking for developers who can realize it. A CTO can wait until your team complains about how inconsistent coding style holds them back. Then - if you have enough cash - you can hire a CTO. Maybe.

![How to build a digital startup](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1662406913/design_thinking_the_right_way_fe823d16b9.jpg)

The objection I often hear about this design thinking approach is that “this is too slow; I want to move faster.” I always answer with a question: do you want to lose your money faster?



The most common startup killer mistake

I used to design many internal applications for big companies in the past, and that is where you'd expect Excel to be the go-to choice. However, lately, I often stumble upon regular consumers using excel to enhance or supplement the usage of digital services - think of shopping or finances.

About a week ago, I wrote about simplicity and specifically mentioned Office products being a [usability nightmare](https://ollala.studio/blog/your-idea-of-simplicity-is-wrong-a-ux-design-perspective) in that area. On the other hand, I've also said that -general- users prefer general tools that help solve complex problems over specialized tools designed to do one task.

So this is the perfect time to explore from a UX designer's perspective: What makes a tool so good that we use it for everything, even if it's not the right one? Or even better: how can a digital product be so successful while being cursed among usability professionals?

## Principles of UX design
Let's see what checklist any piece of software needs to complete to appeal to users. There are too many classifications of these principles ranging from 3 to 16; I'll settle with these five, inspired by Oryl Sehleff's star model.

![The guiding star of UX principles {caption: The guiding star of UX principles by Oryl Sehleff} {source: https://uxdesign.cc/engagement-as-a-principle-of-user-experience-19af556ad9f1}](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1661182887/ux_principles_star_ac25f8cd40.jpg)

If you're interested, you can read more about each principle via [this link](https://uxdesign.cc/engagement-as-a-principle-of-user-experience-19af556ad9f1); right now, let's focus on how excel masters these.

Let's face it: spreadsheet applications are like a no-code app builder. We can achieve a lot using them, and they satisfy most of these principles quite well. If you have a SaaS product and find your direct substitution is a spreadsheet, you're doomed - unless you provide substantially more value on either branch of the guiding star.

## There's a designer in everyone - the aesthetics
Let's zoom out from the cluttered menu bars and the apparent feature bloat of the Office products - mainly because we also have Google Sheets with a much cleaner and leaner interface.

> The reason why excel is so appealing to everyone is that users can create and frame their own solutions however they like.

Too many times, I've heard design workshop participants saying, "Ohh, I'm not a creative person." Only to discover how exceptionally designed sheets they've created with colors, charts, and explanatory blocks. Most digital products ignore customization, stating you can never appeal to everyone; others try to distinguish themselves by embracing it.

With iOS 16, for example, many new features will arrive that allow us to customize our phones to an extent unimaginable before.

![Customisation option on iOS16 {caption: Personalization in iOS16} {source: https://www.macrumors.com/guide/ios-16-lock-screen/}](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1661183025/ios_16_lock_screen_customization_58c389bce5.jpg)

Google -and Android- did the same not too long ago by introducing the new Material Design.

![Personalisation in the Material Design System {caption: Personalization in the Material Design System} {source: https://m3.material.io/foundations/customization}](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1661183206/material_design_customization_f4778f082f.jpg)

But there's more to it than customization why we insist on our own spreadsheet monsters creatures.

The silver bullet of a delightful UX is involvement - engagement and control
Fact: we like to break down problems and design our own solutions. I found this to be the primary source of friction when transitioning from spreadsheets to ERP systems in companies: they're fixed, limited, and can never satisfy the differences in how people process information.

The main reason we love excel is the level of engagement we feel when creating our own mini-applications and the control -just the right amount- we get. It's similar to when we're allowed to stuff anything into our cubicle; we feel more at home. Our spreadsheets are like a piece of our personality; we're proud of and protect them fiercely.

## Familiarity beats brilliancy - availability and accessibility
Designers often fall for the temptation of inventing the wheel. Sometimes expressing their importance with "clever" and unnecessarily complicated designs - I was no exception.

During usability interviews, we often find that users must rely on their notes or own spreadsheets because the information most relevant to them lies buried under either some shiny UI design or engineer botch. That's why it is crucial to research user expectations and make design decisions based on factual knowledge - instead of how many Dribbble likes the design would gain. If you're unsure, in 90% of the cases, presenting essential data in a table layout will do just fine - because most people are familiar with tables.

Spreadsheet apps are widespread, meaning every computer or smartphone can run a spreadsheet application. So when we have to get something out of our brain quickly, it's the lowest friction choice. Like this wireframe, I once got from a client as the brief.

![Example brief I got from a client {caption: Example brief I got from a client}](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1661183377/example_brief_83fa1d3770.jpg)

Why should anyone bother learning something new and specialized when a spreadsheet just does the job fine?

## Takeaway
There's no surprise why Excel won the hearts and brains of so many people. Letting users create their own solutions makes it so engaging that no specialized tool can match. So if you're looking for ways to eliminate it, you must become a better listener and interview users until you uncover and understand their needs. Simply said: you have to provide more value than an excel sheet would. But that won't be easy!



Involvement is the UX silver bullet - why we use Excel for almost anything

Some time ago, on a warm Friday afternoon, I decided I deserved a little treat after a day packed with client meetings. Right at that moment, a memory of the smell and taste of freshly baked Italian dough, tomato, and cheese hit my nose. I knew what that treat was going to be: pizza!

I immediately opened a new browser window and started looking at pizza menus of nearby restaurants. If you ever tried to order pizza, you might have grumbled about the oversupply of choices on their menus. I don't think I'm the only one who hesitates whether I should have prosciutto with tomato or with olives. Why do most places want us to crawl through 30+ pizzas?

Some might feel better with more choices; I don't argue. But business-wise, it's counterproductive; I'll explain why.

There's no doubt though if you look at the most successful, most popular places, they all have a limited menu. The place I finally ordered from had five kinds of pizzas. The same is true for digital products: the ones that do few things well always end up more successful.

Now, since I'm a UX designer and not a HORECA professional, I can't tell you more about restaurant economics. However, I hope this article gives you a new perspective on the concept of simplicity and how you can use it to build better user experiences in digital products.

## What is simplicity?
Even the UX gurus Don Norman and Jakob Nielsen's [definition of UX design](https://www.nngroup.com/articles/definition-user-experience/) includes simplicity as an essential part of a good user experience. But what is it exactly, though?

After some googling, the most common definition refers to simplicity as something inverse to complexity.

Like this one:
> the quality or state of being simple or plain and not complicated or difficult.

Source [Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simplicity)

But opening the dictionary presents us with the following:
> the quality or condition of being easy to understand or do.

And personally, I love this one because it doesn't define simplicity as the opposite of complexity.

## Is simplicity the opposite of complexity?
As a good UX designer would answer: yes and no. It depends.

Philosophically it might be. But honestly, I don't know. I'm not the right person to make that argument.

However, in a UX context, I think the opposite of simplicity is confusion.

Our world is inherently complex and complicated. Users want to use (digital) products and tools that help navigate this world where everything is intertwined with something else.

If you'd ask me if I prefer a banking app where I can only make money transfers (simple) over a universal banking app where I can also manage my investments (complex), I'd go for the latter.

Does it mean a banking app can't be simple?

You might have come across this - almost - common-sense quote.

> Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add but when there is nothing left to take away.

It's credited to Antoine de Saint-Exupery, but I'm always suspicious about the authenticity of such quotes.

And I understand why so many people like this quote. In many ways, I do as well. But as always, it's not black and white.

So what is it then?

## The opposite of simplicity is confusion.

We have arrived at [Tesler's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_conservation_of_complexity#:~:text=The%20law%20of%20conservation%20of,development%20or%20in%20user%20interaction.), one of the existing [UX laws](https://lawsofux.com/en/).

It says:
> ...for any system, there is a certain amount of complexity that cannot be reduced.

So does it mean we can't design simple user experiences for such systems and applications? Does it mean our grandparents must familiarize themselves with fintech terminology if they want to keep their bank accounts? Not at all.

Let's go back to the original notion of simplicity: being easy to understand or do. Complex systems can't be simple, but they can - and should be - simple to use. As designers, it is our responsibility to design easy-to-understand products. Design has the ability to transform complex ideas into simple solutions.

## The problem with the abundance of choices

Back to pizzas.

Earlier I ranted about how I hate choosing from 30 pizzas. Moreover, science has already proved that as the number of choices increases, it is less likely we can make a decision - more about that later. 

But in reality, It's not the mere number of overall choices that causes friction. It is how they are presented; usually without any grouping or order.

Imagine this: you've spent a day walking around the curly streets of a medieval town in Italy. You're tired, it's way too hot, and the kids are starving. Now choose something from this list:

![A menu with 500 pizzas is a usability nightmare {caption: A menu with 500 pizzas is a usability nightmare. Image by Schnäggli, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons} {source: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0}](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660587904/choice_bloat_on_a_pizza_menu_ea42dbeaea.jpg)

What seemed to be a good idea on paper (give as many choices as possible) became contra-productive and backfired (it takes too much time to decide).

This brings us to the next UX design law: [Hick's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hick%27s_law).

Hick's law says: 
> "...increasing the number of choices will increase the decision time logarithmically."

![Hick's law on a chart, from the UX design principles](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660588241/hicks_law_ux_design_law_f956cb75a6.jpg)

In plain English:
- put more choices on the menu, and people will have difficulty choosing
- add more features to your product, and people will suffer using it

But I just mentioned that our world is messy and complex, and so is your app, webshop, or website because it needs to support various types of users. What can you do to reduce the friction of choice bloat?

## How to tame complexity into simplicity?

Luckily, there's a solution. In fact, a series of actions that you can do to prevent your product become complicated or confusing.

![Microsoft Word 2000 was a usability nightmare](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660588964/microsoft_word_2000_user_interface_3719478fd5.jpg)
Microsoft Word 2000 was a usability nightmare. Credit: [amansinghblog](https://amansinghblog.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/bad-user-experience-week-5/).

### 1) Introduce hierarchy

Going back to the pizza example, if you want to sell 500 types of pizzas, because heck, that's your thing, you should at least categorize them!

Could you decide faster if the menu of 500 pizzas - mentioned above - would have been presented in a well-categorized format?
- Meat
    - Salami
    - Ham
    - Bolognese
- Vegetables
- Seafood
- etc...
I would.

Look at, for example, IKEA's home page. They sell thousands of types of products, yet it isn't overwhelming at all. They put the effort in, did their homework, and researched that users like to browse by room or prefer categories if they know what they want. Complex made simple.

![Ikea's home page is simple to use](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660588485/ikea_home_page_ux_design_example_58f25faece.jpg)

Now, I think we can all agree that IKEA is a very successful retailer. Probably more successful than Sklum - I've heard about first while researching webshops for this article.

![Sklum's webshop provides too many choices](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660588664/sklum_too_many_choices_6d4593b84b.jpg)

Comparing the two stands out: IKEA removed every unnecessary choice and made it simple to navigate their massive stock. Also, notice the enormous search field, which is the primary action they want to draw your attention to.

Is IKEA's business simpler than Sklum's? Not at all. Yet they managed to convert their complexity into a pleasant user experience.

### 2) Lead users toward the right features

When dealing with a complex product, you don't need to give up on simplicity.

I like, for example, how Jira's mobile app made it easily accessible the issue list. I know Jira is bloated, but with the iPhone app, they managed to pull off something usable; it does exactly and only what I need - the 4.5-stars rating confirms that.

![Pre-defined filter options in Jira's mobile app](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660588826/jira_issue_list_filters_364ae386ef.jpg)

They could have just let users configure some universal filters, but they understood that might be more complicated, especially on the go - which is the point why Jira's mobile app exists.

So they decided to take a side, did their research, and provided us with pre-defined filter options - for which I'm very grateful. Again, complex made simple.

### 3) Evaluate your decisions and say no
Do not feel liberated by the above-mentioned Tesler's law: "...for any system, there is a certain amount of complexity which cannot be reduced."

It doesn't mean you can lean back, bloat your product, and shout, "but it's complex."

I like to use the impact-effort matrix with my clients to evaluate feature decisions. It helps understand the potential value a particular feature might introduce into an app and weeds out the nice-to-have ideas.

![Impact-effort matrix helps to prioritise functions](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660588890/impact_effort_matrix_72e125d496.jpg)

It maps features against two dimensions: how much effort it'd take to deliver it and how much value (e.g., revenue, conversions, etc.) it'd bring.

You want to focus on things that generate the most value with the least effort, and ditch those wasting your time.

### 4) Establish the Iterate-test-build-measure cycle

Not a single human is capable of predicting the future when it comes to user behavior. People make assumptions - "I think users might like this feature."

But there's a saying: AssUMe stands for making an Ass out of U and Me. And I agree with that. We have to measure whether our assumptions are valid or not before adding new features or changing old ones.

Make a low-fidelity prototype, sit down with 4-5 users to talk about them, and you'll see whether you need that extra five things or not - usually, you don't.

![iterate-test-build-measure.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660589066/iterate_test_build_measure_02cc3b11d5.jpg)

## Simplicity is scary
It always means that you need to take a side, leaving you with the feeling that someone might hate your solution - and some will. So you'll face friction with developers and stakeholders who think software should be agnostic and general purpose.

That is wrong. The best products, digital or not, have vision. They're very particular about who they want to help and how. Learn from them and put your fears aside.

Compared to Microsoft Word 2000, Google Docs says content editing should be easy. They took a side and said no to feature bloat.

![Google Docs' user interface provides a much better user experience](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1660589203/google_docs_user_interface_b87587959f.jpg)

## Takeaway
When it comes to feature decisions, managers tend to freak out because usually, they don't have sufficient information - or authority - to make that decision. This fear leads to complexity in digital products and leaves us users confused.

Based on the assumption that an abundance of choices will bring more business, our products end up overloaded with features and information we don't need. Hick's law proves this assumption wrong.

Simplicity does not oppose complexity. Complexity is not the enemy; confusion is.

To make a digital product simple, you should not necessarily force reducing complexity but rather manage it by clever design decisions.



Your idea of simplicity is wrong - a UX design perspective

While the goals and users' tolerance towards this intrusive messiness may have changed, most websites continue to ignore the delicate balance between driving us insane and nudging us towards their goal.

![Mobile popups disturb user experience on today's web](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1659787122/ux_design_banners_d22e696f90.jpg)

With the help of UX design concepts, we attempt to guide those concerned with their users' digital well-being and, more broadly, their bottom line.

## The anatomy of attention seeker UI elements

When we categorize our attention-seeking options, we can measure the "intrusiveness" of a solution on the attention and interaction axes.

Attention refers to how much cognitive load is imposed on our brain, whereas interaction refers to whether or not the website/app's content is accessible.

![The anatomy of attention seekers in UX design](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1659787168/anatomy_of_attention_seeking_eb7b7fdb86.jpg)

Let's see what our options are purely from a user interface design perspective.

### Modals
A modal "pops up" on the parent screen and disables its content, so you can't interact with the main application or website until you give some input. These are the most disturbing UI elements since they prevent you from doing anything. They are essential in our UX design toolbox, but improper use might wreak havoc on usability.

Examples of modals - in the context of web applications - are paywalls or cookie consent walls. And in my opinion, those two cases should exhaust all the reasons you should have a modal.

If you ever need to design a modal, here are some tips to ensure you don't violate UX laws and ruin the usability of your website or web app.

![Modals on Android and iOs](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1659788389/ux_design_modals_640da82d0b.jpg)
Source: [Material Design Guidelines](https://material.io/components/dialogs#usage)

### Popups
Popups are very similar to modals, except they don't block interaction, only overlay the screen. Although, the usability is highly reduced because large areas become inaccessible.

### Sheets
![Example of a side sheet UI element from Google Material Design](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1659788707/side_sheet_google_tagmanager_9a1dae514b.jpg)
(A side sheet as appears in Google's Tag Manager app)

The UI elements that fly in from any side of the viewport are called sheets. The most common are the bottom and the right sheets, but top or left sheets also exist. Their function is to provide supplementary content or actions for the current view.

Sheets can have a normal and modal form as well based on whether we can interact with the rest of the view or not.

### Banners
![A banner UI element from Viapan.hu - designed by Studio Ollala](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1659788870/a_banner_cookie_consent_ui_element_a36ea9fd06.jpg)
(An example for banner from [Viapan's](https://viapan.hu/en) site that was designed by us)

Banners provide space for prominent messages and allow the users to give input when necessary. They are the most subtle attention seekers, blocking only a small area and visually less obstructive.

I think a banner would suffice in most cases instead of an annoying modal for that promo code or newsletter signup form. Marketers would argue with A/B test results and conversion numbers but can't we find the middle ground here? You might get more subscribers, but how do you know your business won't do better overall with a better user experience? I think it would.

## The danger lies in the details.
Overusing attention seekers imposes another negative effect: we'll become clicking zombies without actually caring what we're doing.

This term first occurred when Windows introduced its more sand-grained privacy settings. After a few clicks, we learned that hitting that "Allow" button would give us access to whatever we wanted to achieve.

It is dangerous because, in most cases, we'll fall back on this motoric reaction even when we should have paid attention.

The same applies to cookie consent. Do I actually care when the 26th site asks for permission? I don't. 

### The Law of Prägnanz

There's a phenomenon in UX design called [The Law of Prägnanz](https://lawsofux.com/en/law-of-pr%C3%A4gnanz/). It says we'll interpret ambiguous or complex images in the simplest form possible.

In our attention-seeker context, that means we'll mindlessly search for the lowest hanging fruit: first a close control, then - in the absence of an easy escape - the most colorful "Ok," "Allow," etc.. buttons.

And that is problematic because the users might miss on actually important things, or they'd close your promo poup even before realizing that they could have gotten a whopping 50% off of their order - not to mention the case of the human centipede [episode](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK56JNnC2IE) from South Park.

## How to design attention seekers the right way?
It doesn't matter whether you design a modal for legal reasons or a popup for your promotion; you can't ignore the fundamental laws of UX design. Doing that will result in long-term setbacks despite the tempting short-term wins. 

The best way, of course, is always to question whether we need a modal or not and be frugal with space on our website or app.

But if we decide to go for it, here are some closing thoughts on how websites or web applications can design better experiences.

### Have a way to dismiss or escape

A close button in the top right corner is the best way. But if - for legal reasons - user input is unavoidable, provide a primary and secondary action in the bottom right part of the popup.

The most common mistake I see is that these buttons are not in the viewport and require scrolling which is very disorienting.

### Do we need modals for cookies?

In the EU, we have to deal with the GDPR that requires user consent before placing any cookies or initiating tracking activity. Some sites prevent us from interacting entirely simply because of overcautiousness - or because their business model is built on user tracking. In most cases, a modal is unnecessary and exists only to trick users into submission using gray UX patterns - and thus should also be included in GDPR, in my opinion.

### Give some visual hints

Don't block what's behind the modal. Make it somewhat transparent so users can at least approximate whether they are at the right place and have a chance to decide whether what they were looking for is behind the modal before taking action.

### Pay attention to the technical details

There's much more to UI elements than their content or appearance. Whether they're implemented in code the right way is equally important. Developers must properly set up focus management, semantics, and accessibility; otherwise, even regular users can get disoriented - not to mention our fellow users with disabilities. Modern front-end frameworks usually take care of that, but you might want to read [Scott O'Hara's article](https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2014/09/making-modal-windows-better-for-everyone/) from Smashingmagazine.

May we all have your attention? The popup hell we still live in.

With a number that enormous and overwhelming, you might ask: is there a single idea that hasn’t already popped out of someone’s mind? Does it make any sense to create a new app in 2022? Does actually a mortal man, like me stand a chance to build a sustainable digital business?

And the reasonable answers always seem to be no, none, and no.

Yet every day, new companies are growing out of thin air like mushrooms and there has never flown more investment to startups than last year. And all that during a global pandemic.

What that signals is that despite the devastating odds you perceive, it might actually pay out to take the risk and embark on a journey to build your digital product.

So how can you leverage this startup-positive environment and mitigate the risk of failure while also cutting through the noise generated by tough competition?

It’s been a decade now since I’m involved in the design business and I’ve seen success and failure alike among my startup founder clients. From that experience, I can tell you: there’s no magic pill for success. But the good news is that you can definitely cook your own wicked potion out of some very simple ingredients that are innate to everyone.

## How did the most successful tech startups’ journey begin?
There are plenty of blog posts, videos, podcasts, books out there about this topic. I’m not going into unnecessary details here, I just want to brush up on the general truths and then I’ll attempt to translate those vague concepts into real-life actions.

So let’s see that useless list of “success factors”:
* Validate your idea
* Start small
* Grow fast

And here’s another one that is way too overlooked in my opinion:
* Be lucky

(Now, you might be that Gary Vee, can-do-it-all-if-you-want-type and you might disagree with that, so I’ll just live a link to this video from the scientific channel, Veritasium’s video “[Is Success Luck or Hard Work](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I)”. Watch it - or don’t.)

And no matter if they’re summed up in an Instagram carousel or in The Lean Startup bible, at the end of the day this is what you get as advice on how to get started. The common in all these startupper advice is that they are way too general to take action on for someone completely noob on the subject.

## This is how you start building a digital product
So let’s turn vague into actionable. At this point, I have to add that the entrepreneurial journey is way too entwined to compress into a to-do list. In this article, we are only focusing on the aspects that are related to designing and developing a digital product, which most of the time will be some kind of SaaS (software as a service) solution.

One of the main misconceptions I see welcomes us right at the beginning of the journey: at the validation point. As a preface to this list, I want to debunk a myth and also I want to free you from the pressure of building something right away. Designing and developing an app or software and seeing if people are coming is the worst thing you can do to start a business.

So here’s how I’d start building a SaaS company in 2022:

### 0) Don’t start building your idea
That might seem a piece of very controversial advice from someone who makes his living by building digital products for clients. So what do I actually mean?

The internet is flooded with the concept of an MVP (minimum viable product) and everyone is talking about that is where you need to start. And while they’re right, they’re also wrong. Let me explain.

Building an MVP assumes that you’re certain that your idea actually would fly and people would get excited about it and all you need is to fine-tune your value delivery. While your friends, infected by your personal passion - or just out of politeness - might endorse your pitch, it doesn’t mean that the idea would actually stand a chance out there in the wild. Yet too many times this is the case ([Why Startups Fail - Harward Business Review](https://hbr.org/2021/05/why-start-ups-fail)). 

Everyone is so focused on creating an MVP that they often forget to clarify what problem they are actually solving or more importantly whether that problem is a problem at all. By using a framework to summarize what you actually want to communicate it is very easy to spot the weak points in your messaging or in the idea itself.

This becomes exponentially more important when you are building a complicated technology.

My advice: before commencing any design or development efforts investigate whether it is worth putting time and money into building that MVP. All this should fit in a day - or two if there are more co-founders, or someone is a more chatty type.

Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to start with your digital product in 2022:

### 1) Convey the key points of your idea
Use a framework, like the Story Brand to structure the key points into a concise and easy-to-communicate form. The reason I like Story Brand is that it results in a super clear messaging toolkit that I can use across websites, campaigns, presentations, etc. while remaining exempt from any complicated theories.

By the time you finish your Story Brand, you will have a crystal clear overview of who your customers are and how you’ll help them to achieve success. You are required to think deeply about the success of your future customers instead of your own - that, in turn, should eventually lead you to success as well.

Whether you take my advice on a framework or not, you should have these points written in a concise and easy to understand way:
* What are you doing: it has to fit 3 words or one short sentence maximum. If it doesn’t, get back to the table. A bad example: “We help companies to succeed in the digital age”. And a good one: “Our solution helps sport and health coaches to launch their own merchandise webshop”.
* Who are your customers: as a startup venture you’ll have to appeal to a very specific group of people with a very specific problem. Otherwise, you are risking being the small fish in the large pond.
* What are your customers’ pain points: an idea is just a nice idea until it solves real-life problems. Take some time to think about how your future customers would want to see a better version of themselves. Make sure to research as much as possible in advance whether it is a real problem or just a nice-to-have type of one.
* How you’ll solve your customers’ problems: describe the transformation your customers would go through after using your solution. E.g., if you’re building a coaching app for startup founders, think how users will get from doubtful to confident.

I advise that you closely monitor your thoughts and feelings during this process. If you start having second thoughts about whether people will easily understand your product, you better listen to that little devil in your head. Reality checks on ourselves are tough and painful but so is when we fail and lose all of our money - and the family savings of some of our foolish friends’ too.

### 2) Build a simple landing page and get feedback
Learn from the smart guys, like the ex-googler founders of [Neeva](https://neeva.com), a new privacy-first search platform. They didn’t rush to build the final product, instead, they set up this landing page with a single email subscription field - saying to “join the waiting list”.

![neeva-landing-page.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/studio-ollala/image/upload/v1642280094/neeva_landing_page_dbfb2298a8.png)
Source: Wayback Machine, [webarchive.org](http://web.archive.org/)

Beginning with something simple allows you to explore how much traction you’d get. If people are signing up, they are excited, so your chances of success increase.

Don’t give up if you’re not flooded with subscribers immediately! Try to speak to more folks and figure out how you can clarify your value proposition and adjust your landing page accordingly.

My advice:

#### Use a no-code tool with a free tier to build the landing page

[Webflow](https://webflow.com/), [Duda](https://duda.co/), or [Wix](https://wix.com/) are great choices. Don’t waste your budget on fancy branding or web design. It is not important yet - and people care less about it than you’d think.

####  Assing about $500 to advertise on Social media for a week.

This amount of course is an indication, if your main target group is more likely to engage on LinkedIn, you are looking at a potentially higher ad budget.

Make sure your ad creatives are visually engaging! This is the time where you might want to get some designer help if you feel uncomfortable using tools like [Canva](https://www.canva.com/) - they have great templates.

#### See how many people are signing up

The right number depends of course on your business, see point 5) on how to evaluate your results.

### 3) Interview at least 5-10 random people
Now that you have a subscriber base who expressed their interest in your digital product idea by giving their email address, it’s time to tap into their minds.

Arrange at least 5 but a maximum of 10 semi-structured user interviews with these people. Now, user research is a discipline in itself. How to conclude a user interview is beyond the scope of this article but unbiased, open-ended questions like “What particularly made you excited about our idea?” or “What problem do you expect our product to solve?”.

Be careful with your wording though! Questions like “Would you use X feature?” are dangerous grounds since they already suggest an answer (”sure”) - one that is very likely not what the user would do in a real-life scenario.

Tools, like [User Interviews](https://www.userinterviews.com/) are excellent to handle all the fusses around organizing user interviews, but you are completely fine by doing it via email or phone calls as well.

Do not forget about the sole purpose of this interview: listen and observe. This session should yield some deeper insights into how your potential users see your digital product. It is not your job yet to act on all of this feedback!

And don’t forget: your users are not product designers, nor developers. They probably won’t be very clear about articulating what their main concerns are. It is your job to read between the lines.

### 4) Iterate on your idea or messaging
However, if you find that people are confused or have too many questions about your product, it is time to get back to the table. If you’re lucky you just need to refine how you explain the main value proposition, if not, well you may have to let go of your concept in its current form.

The main thing is that you adopt these changes on your landing page quickly. You can iterate even multiple times and check which version sticks better.

### 5) Decide and commit
Evaluate the cost of getting a subscriber and multiply it by about 100x (which is a good starting point if you have B2C - business to consumer - offering).

Would your business model be viable if that’d be your Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC)? Proceed. If not, iterate on your idea or ditch it.

Whatever your reading is on the results if you decide to pursue founding a startup from that moment clear all doubt from your mind and focus on making it happen. Unavoidably, you’ll find yourself back at your desk iterating over and over again.

The cherry on top of the cake at this point is that now you have some hard data to show to potential investors - which is a must for a new digital product seeking seed or pre-seed investment. Being able to show social proof early puts investors' minds at ease and gives you a solid base for building relationships with potential clients - or investors.

### Summary
While the teaching of the famous lean-startup methodology is valid today, it is important not to miss the homework that you need to do before actually building a digital product. You must reality check your idea so you don’t waste time and money on designing and engineering a solution no one wants to use.

My best recommendation is that you:
1. Clarify your messaging using the Story Brand method
2. Build a simple landing page and gather email addresses
3. Iterate on your messaging if necessary
4. Interview at least 5 subscribers (who don’t know you personally)
5. Evaluate your results and commit or move on

These 5 steps are easily achievable under a little more than a week and will cost you very little compared to building a failed product. Remember to always validate the ideas before pulling yourself and others into something that was set up for failure from the very beginning.

If you are ready to build your digital product, I suggest reading our next article: How to Build your first MVP.

Thanks for reading, I’d love to hear your thoughts and personal experiences.

Digital Product Design Blog.

The most common startup killer mistake

Involvement is the UX silver bullet - why we use Excel for almost anything

Your idea of simplicity is wrong - a UX design perspective

May we all have your attention? The popup hell we still live in.

How to start up a digital product in 2022