Low-fidelity or high-fidelity prototypes?

Fidelity, which determines the level of functionality and detail in product prototypes, is a hot topic in enterprise design. On the one hand, there are designers pushing for high-fidelity prototypes. But developing low-fidelity prototypes can also be very useful.

On a recent project, one of the key stakeholders joked that my wireframes looked like they had been drawn with crayons. I didn't mind, as we had just spent the last 45 minutes talking about the different ways users would move through our designs, and how we could anticipate their needs.

The life of a designer is not one filled with aesthetic admiration, with clients gawking at the beauty of it all (it happens, but not often). Indeed, our approach to design must be pragmatic, logical and empirical, among other things - a thorough understanding of the space and the users.

Aesthetics have their time and place. In fact, it is one of the most recognized usability heuristics, but early in the process, when things are coming together, whiteboards, napkins, markers, scribbled lines, ugly fonts, and yes, even colored pencils, are our tools for producing low fidelity prototypes.

A great UX thinker once said,
"Fidelity of presentation must match fidelity of thought".

I have carried this quote throughout my career and plan to continue to do so as it has saved me countless hours. Thank you, Bill Buxton.

The idea here is to resist the temptation to start your designs with pixel perfection in mind, i.e. to avoid developing a high-fidelity prototype from the start. While some may consider the creation of a high-fidelity prototype to be a kind of higher art, this is actually skipping essential steps in the process - steps that are built on top of low-fidelity prototypes.

There are layers and layers of meaning and strategic intent that end up being embedded in any design. Trying to deal with them all at once - which is what happens when you design a high-fidelity prototype without any iteration - is a tragedy and a sure way to limit your designs. Developing low-fidelity prototypes mitigates this tragic end.

Fidelity informs the goal

Starting in low fidelity, the focus is on the interactions and behavior of the interface. You ask yourself:

What happens when the user selects this option, and what other actions are available to them during this time?

Will this selection be a distraction to the user while they are in the process of integration?

What if we remove this feature until the user is more familiar with the platform and is actually ready to use it?

Looking at a no-frills interface makes it easier to focus on the big picture. Only when these issues are well understood and established, and finally satisfied, can we move on to greater fidelity.

Conversely, looking at a fully polished design, we may be more inclined to argue about colors or the use of space. In fact, there are cases where a brilliant visual design may actually mask larger problems.


Changing fidelity encourages iteration

Every time we increase the fidelity of a design, it's another opportunity to rethink the whole canvas. If I could count the number of times I've gone to redesign a set of components in higher fidelity (because they were approved) and realized there was a better way, I'd sigh. Each iteration cycle allows us to see something in a new light, especially when it comes to fit and finish, as we approach the final look and feel.

In fact, separating the visual design from all previous activities allows the aesthetic layer to occupy its own space and time in the process. This is the power of iteration, and it has the potential to take your designs from good to great.


Fidelity drives conversations

By following a solid iteration sequence, your team will have more effective and insightful conversations around designs - and more importantly - at the right time.

Teammates and stakeholders (and even users in your tests) will naturally understand that what you've presented to them is a work in progress and that the focus is on the scaffolding, or framework, of the interface. Even more powerful than that is the notion that they still have the potential to influence your design with their ideas.

There is something inherently inviting about a low-fidelity design, as if the audience is literally being asked to join in the fun and suggest a way to make it better, even if it's only a small change.

At this point, your audience's idea or suggestion (which should always be welcome) is less likely to be related to aesthetics and more likely to be related to the user and how they might actually use the object you are creating.


That said, there are some limited scenarios where it may make sense to keep designs at a relatively high fidelity, but in most cases it is only to do justice to your final product that you need to go through all the steps and give your ideas the space they need to become the basis for something exceptional.