Design Theory: Reflections on Redundant Design
What is “redundant design thinking”?
You can think of it this way: “The system anticipates that users will inevitably make mistakes, so it proactively steps in to catch those errors for them.” Or: “Design isn’t about considering only the ideal path; it’s about accounting for exceptional scenarios as well.” This is the biggest difference between many young designers and seasoned ones.
Systematic design typically requires consideration of more factors:
Designing “Failure Paths”
Design “Mistakes”
Design “Hesitation”
Design “Regret”
Design “Network Exception”
The design “users don’t understand”
Design for “Future Expansion”
Therefore:
Redundancy does not equal verbosity.
Redundancy = Resilience
In the world of design, many people adhere to the belief that good product design is about “eliminating all that is superfluous.” However, through my design practice and observation, I have come to increasingly realize that truly sophisticated design often carries a degree of “redundancy.”
The redundancy here is by no means a meaningless accumulation; rather, it constitutes a forward-looking consideration of “uncertainty.” We all know that when users interact with a product, all sorts of issues can arise: they might accidentally tap the wrong button, regret their previous action, act impulsively out of anxiety, struggle to understand complex instructions, encounter poor network connectivity, or even make decisions in the heat of the moment. A mature product never pretends to “ensure users will never make mistakes”; instead, it ensures that even when mistakes do occur, the situation remains under control. This, in essence, provides users with a sense of security and represents a detail in product design that is all too often overlooked.
We have observed that many great products feature extensive “redundant design.” Just like WeChat’s “recall” feature, it’s a safeguard designed to accommodate users’ feelings of regret. Apple’s “Recently Deleted” feature gives users a second chance to recover files they’ve accidentally deleted, which can be seen as emotional redundancy. Automatic saving and cloud synchronization ensure data security and provide system redundancy. ICONs paired with copy and color help users quickly grasp the message; this is cognitive redundancy. A multi‑entry, multi‑path design allows users to interact in the way that suits them best, representing cognitive redundancy. At first glance, these designs may not appear minimalist, but in reality, the designer is quietly shouldering the complexity for the user.
Today, many internet products are heavily influenced by “minimalism,” with the belief that the emptier a page looks, the more sophisticated it appears; the fewer steps there are, the better; and the more restrained the features, the more premium they seem. But often, this merely shifts the complexity onto the user. True, sophisticated simplicity doesn’t eliminate complexity; rather, it involves the designer internalizing that complexity so that users perceive only ease and clarity.
We believe that designing for system resilience is equally crucial in the development of large-scale digital products. Going a step further, it is, in essence, about designing the trust relationship between humans and systems. Redundancy is, at its core, a trust buffer. Users trust a product not because it never makes mistakes, but because even when errors do occur, it still allows them to feel in control.
Design should not merely pursue superficial minimalism; it must also delve deeply into the essence of the user experience. Redundancy design is both a testament to designers’ respect for and understanding of human needs, and a crucial step in elevating their work from the ordinary to the exceptional. It ensures that products are not only easy to use but also forge a deep emotional connection with users.