At Coherence Digital, we rely on Acquia Site Studio as our go-to tool for building and managing design systems in Drupal. This low-code solution integrates seamlessly with the Acquia stack, empowering us to create scalable, reusable solutions for our global clients. But designing an effective system in Site Studio requires a careful balance between flexibility and control.
When it comes to designing for Site Studio, there are two main tasks designers must tackle:
1. Design the front-end solution – creating the user experience.
2. Design the CMS editing experience – ensuring content editors can’t accidentally break the system’s rules.
The second task adds a unique layer of complexity, requiring designers to think early about how the system’s components (atoms, molecules, organisms, templates) will be used by content editors. For those unfamiliar with these terms, I recommend exploring Brad Frost’s Atomic Design Methodology.
As designers, we need to define the boundaries for content editors. For example, should a heading always be an H2? Can the image position be swapped, or should it stay fixed? How will the components adapt across multiple brands?
Because Site Studio is a low-code solution, these decisions impact how content editors interact with the UI, not developers. So, when defining the flexibility of the user interface, there are typically two schools of thought:
- Lock it down (strict control over what can be edited)
- Give us power (maximum flexibility for content editors)
The challenge is finding the right balance. Every project is different, depending on its scale, the teams involved, and the technical knowledge at hand. So where do you begin? For me, it starts with these 5 UX laws in mind.
1. Hick’s Law: Keep It Simple
The time it takes to make a decision increases with the number and complexity of choices.
When deciding what options to expose to the content editor, simplicity is key. What starts as a small request can quickly snowball into an overly flexible UI, overloaded with options. More settings mean less clarity, more training for content editors, and longer time to market. Stick to essential choices that align with the design’s core objectives.
2. Jakob’s Law: Familiarity Wins
Users spend most of their time on other sites, so they prefer your site to function in familiar ways.
Not everything needs to be custom-built. For example, does your branded date picker really add value, or is the native browser date picker enough? When designing, consider whether the effort required to create a custom element is justified by the value it delivers. Often, simplicity and familiarity are more valuable than reinventing the wheel.
3. Pareto Principle: Focus on the 20%
80% of effects come from 20% of causes.
To maintain usability and consistency, some elements of the design system will need to be standardised, especially in multi-brand environments. Focus your efforts on the core components that will deliver the most value. Trying to cater to every edge case or unique request often leads to an over-complicated system that’s harder to manage.
4. Postel’s Law: Be Thoughtful in What You Build
Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send.
As a designer, you’re the guardian of the system. You understand the bigger picture when others might not. As requests for new features or changes come in, it’s important to challenge them if they threaten usability or scalability. Remember, your role is to maintain the integrity of the design system, even if that means pushing back on requests that could overcomplicate it.
5. Tesler’s Law: Embrace Some Complexity
For any system, there is a certain amount of complexity that cannot be reduced.
There will always be elements of the system that are more complex than you’d like, especially when dealing with third-party integrations. Accept that some clunky parts are unavoidable, but keep the rest of the system as streamlined as possible. If you maintain simplicity elsewhere, one or two complicated areas will be easier for users to handle.
What Do These UX Laws Have in Common?
The common thread across these laws is consistency and usability. In my experience, it’s not the scale of the design system that defines its complexity but how well it adheres to these principles. Strive for consistency in your design choices, and always prioritise usability. If you can achieve that balance, you’re well on your way to building a successful design system.
Sources: lawsofux.com
Get in touch
