Younger children often imitate their older siblings as a source of guidance and would copy certain characteristics and mannerisms in order to fit in.

Companies can often have the same younger sibling mentality of imitating larger ‘big brothers’ in the industry. This is particularly true in design, where ‘older’ doesn’t have to be in terms of age but can also be in terms of design maturity.

Most recent examples of this type of design imitation involved Yahoo! re-designing its branding and email functionality which has many similarities to Google and Gmail.

Another example would be the plethora of logo’s, buttons and banners, which has sprung up copying the flat design of iOS 7.

What’s the big deal?

It could be argued that since many of the imitation is of the back of well know design savvy companies doing what they are good at, so what is the problem?

Surely, it’s a good thing because companies such as Apple and Google have already done much of the research, testing and analysis. These things require time and money and if smaller companies can ‘piggyback’ off research already done and mimic design elements, it’s a good thing, right?

Not so, each product has its own set of users and user community who use the product. Often users will have their own motivations and circumstances for using a product.

Over time, the user community forms a relationship with the product from the multiple interactions they have. Humans are creatures of habit and thus they get used to using and viewing a product in a certain way, so when a product changes it profoundly affect them.

It is therefore paramount that companies verify with its users before making any changes. This can be done through a number of ways including A-B split testing and/or user feedback sessions such as usability testing, focus groups and interviews.

If users feedback is not taken in to consideration when making changes to design and functionality, it can lead to users abandoning the product in question, as the motivation for using the site is no longer there.

A good example of this is when Yahoo redesigned it’s Yahoo mail. Features that were important to its user community had been changed or removed. This lead to many users becoming upset and angry with Yahoo over loosing key functionality such as tabs, sorting according sender and print.*

Yahoo had in essence removed the very unique aspect of its product, which appealed to many users.

Product strategy

Another reason why users shouldn’t simply copy design of other companies is due to its own product strategy.

Every product has its own selling point which makes it unique compared to its competitors. Its brand identity is based on this uniqueness.

For example, Apple’s likes to market its ease of use or Audi cars likes to push quality and reliability of German engineering through slogans such as “Vorsprung durch Technik” (advancement through technology).

When companies’ starts taking design and function from other brands, this will affect the uniqueness of its own brand. As mentioned earlier, Yahoo had in fact missed the element that made its email unique over its competitors. Rather then protecting that, Yahoo had removed this and became more like Google, thus in doing so, affectively removing any competitive advantages it had.

In summary, whether a company is considering a re-design or adding new functionality or amending existing functionality, these changes should never be based on a whim or because a competitor has just gone through a redesign.

Any change, no matter how big or small requires an understanding of the end user and how such changes will impact them.

After all, the customer experience and brand identity are two of the most valuable assets a company has in its possession and changes which impact either should not be taken lightly.

 

* Yahoo has put some functionality back since going live.