Appeal to Novelty

Some automatically trust and adopt new ideas, technologies, or methods while dismissing traditional approaches as outdated or irrelevant. This may lead us to adopt unproven solutions prematurely.

But first, let's hear from this week's sponsor...

Now, back to an Appeal to Novelty ⏬

Is something bad just because it's old?

"We need to modernize!"

"This looks outdated."

"Everyone else is doing it!"

Sound familiar?

Is something bad just because it’s old? Is it good simply because it’s new?

We've all been there - pushing for change simply because something feels old, not because it's broken.

Let me tell you a quick story...

One of my first projects on a big enterprise team involved updating a pretty old dashboard. It had been built years before, but the users loved it. It was data-dense andn't flashy, but it worked. Power users could spot issues quickly, and users were pretty happy with the layout.

Since it was so outdated, it needed some back-end changes and security updates to make it compliant. While fixing those things, we had the bright idea to update the UI, too.

"It looks outdated."

“It’s too data-dense!”

“It needs more whitespace and room to breathe.”

“It needs to look more like Google Material.”

Four months and countless development hours later, we had a shiny new dashboard with all the bells and whistles: Whitespace, data visualization with animations, and fancy new material components.

Guess what happened?

Tasks that took a few minutes now took longer. Users were furious, and several begged for the old version back. Those fancy animations? They just got in the way during critical incidents.

One veteran said it best: "I don't need it to look pretty. I need it to help do my job."

This bias shows up everywhere in software:

⇢ Switching frameworks because "that's where the industry is heading"
⇢ Rebuilding perfectly good features to appear "innovative"
⇢ Adopting new methodologies before mastering current ones
⇢ Choosing trendy solutions over proven ones

Here's the truth: New isn't always better. Sometimes, it's just... new.

Next time you hear "we need to modernize," ask yourself:

⇢ What problem are we actually solving?
⇢ Are we changing things just to change them?
⇢ What's the real cost of "new"?

Remember: Progress doesn't always mean replacing what works.

​

Would you rather listen? Follow the Cognition Catalog on Spotify!

Avoiding the Appeal to Novel... Mar 12 · Beyond UX Design 9:28   ​

Unlike some of the other biases and fallacies we’ve discussed on the show, Appeal to Novelty does not have a single point of origin. No one person created the idea, and no specific individual coined the term.

Research in organizational psychology has explored how businesses handle technological change and system replacement. Studies indicate that organizations sometimes adopt new technologies without clear evidence of improved outcomes.

The rise of tech-bro culture has further amplified this bias, creating an environment where "disruption" and "innovation" have become almost religious concepts. This has led to what many call "innovation theater," where organizations prioritize the appearance of innovation over actual improvement.

---

In team environments, the Appeal to Novelty bias often fosters a culture of continuous upheaval. Teams might find themselves adopting new collaboration tools or methodologies every few months, creating what's known as "change fatigue" among team members.

Product teams may push to add new features not because users demand them but because the current version seems "outdated." For instance, a team might introduce a chatbot interface not because it benefits users more than a well-designed FAQ page but because it appears more innovative.

Designers may feel pressured to adopt the latest design trends or interaction patterns, even when simpler, established solutions would better serve their users.

All of this can lead to feature bloat and unnecessary complexity, making the team feel like they are operating in a feature factory. Furthermore, it may confuse users and reduce product effectiveness.

The bias also influences hiring and team composition decisions. Organizations may favor candidates with experience in the latest technologies over those with strong expertise in fundamental skills. This can result in teams that pursue trends but struggle with essential problem-solving and system optimization.

All this isn’t to say that innovation is inherently bad, and old ideas aren’t inherently good. However, it’s important to focus on the core problem your team is facing and determine if your current solution is helping you achieve your goals. If it’s working well, it may not need to change. But if it’s broken, it might be time for something new.

---

🎯 Here are some key takeaways

1️⃣ Know your audience: When proposing changes, understand that team members respond differently to new ideas. Some require solid proof before accepting change, while others eagerly embrace anything new without question.

2️⃣ Progress doesn’t always move in a straight line: Sometimes, the best solution to a problem has already been discovered but forgotten or overlooked in favor of newer approaches. Historical solutions often contain valuable insights that can be adapted for modern use.

3️⃣ Innovation isn’t always good: While innovation can drive progress, change for change’s sake often creates more problems than it solves. Every new feature, tool, or process complicates your system and requires maintenance resources.

4️⃣ Maintain a historical perspective: Remember that many “new” ideas are often repackaged versions of older concepts. Understanding the history of your field can help you better evaluate whether a new approach truly offers advantages over existing solutions.

5️⃣ Document decision rationale: When making technology or process choices, clearly document why specific solutions were chosen or rejected, focusing on objective criteria rather than the appeal of newness. This helps teams maintain perspective and makes future decisions more rational.
​

Learn more about An Appeal to Novelty!

---

---

---

---