Hi! I’m Mel, EMDD’s project manager and Ball State University’s instructor. I’ve taught usability design and design thinking over the last 12 months at Ball State University. Each semester, I ask students to write about a poorly designed product they’ve experienced. And each semester, I am impressed by the passionate responses I receive to this question. Listed below are a few of my favorite and most relatable instances of product failure from the perspective of Ball State undergraduates. Enjoy!
People joke about it all the time, but we all know it’s true. Single ply toilet paper is the worst. Ideally, a thinner ply means more paper per roll, and more paper per roll means less rolls needed overall to maintain a public bathroom or similar space. It’s a cost saving strategy, but what’s the real cost? Single ply toilet paper is infamous, nay infamously legendary for its abysmal quality. What’s the point of single ply anyway? If the paper is thinner, then you have to use nearly twice as much to accomplish what a two ply could. Doesn’t that mean you’re using the same amount of paper either way? Single ply is miserable, nobody is happy to sit down and see a roll of single ply nestled in those commercial use toilet paper rolls. Sometimes you can’t even drag any of it out, because it’s so thin, so flimsy, so unbelievably ineffective that it tears at the slightest application of pressure. Its absorbency is practically nonexistent. You would be better off taking a piece of copy paper and laying it over a puddle than an entire swath of single ply toilet paper. I really can’t think of any action more apathetic than knowingly stocking a bathroom with singly ply toilet paper. 1 out of 5 stars for the 1 ply this sorry excuse of a hygiene product has to its name.
The public toilet partition, often replicated but never perfected. We have all sat down at a bathroom on campus or in public and locked the door just to see a 1/4 inch gap around all the walls, exposing yourself to anyone looking hard enough. Everyone who has ever used one of these stalls knows the anxiety created by that small gap. This is one of the key things that people hate about using the bathroom in public, that and the single ply paper of course. After doing some more research, I found that this is just an American issue. European stalls typically have privacy protectors on the cracks. Most of these American partitions are designed to produce few parts that apply to many different partition setups. This allows the companies to operate cheaper and make more money for shareholders. It would certainly be possible for these stalls to be made with more privacy, but it would cost manufactures a fortune. The only way American stalls will change is with a change in the law that requires more privacy to public stalls, or if the customer demands it and is willing to pay the higher price. The disconnect though lies between the developers installing the partitions though, and the customer actually using them. Overall, if I had to rate public partitions, I would give it 2/5 stars because it does its job, just not very well.
Two-piece swimsuits sold as a pair are the worst! We’re all aware that people come in every shape and size. Personally, I know I have super narrow hips. If I’m wearing a particular size for the top, the bottom usually should be a smaller size. Broad marketing research should not be done to get an average size of people. This leads to the production of a very standard size, a “one fits all” type of thing. It’s disheartening to find a swimsuit you like, only to find out that it just won’t work for you. In today’s climate of body positivity and awareness of body image as a whole, people can take offense to such outdated practices. It shows a real disconnect between a company and its users, which makes no one happy. The current trend of selling swim pieces separately has worked well as a solution (so long as your size is in stock). However, one draw back from this solution is that it’s often more expensive to buy the pieces separately. Super frustrating! But I digress… I give two-piece swimsuits sold as a pair a 2 out of 5 stars.
A product example of poor empathy research that personally effects my life would be pet collars. More specifically, I strongly dislike collars that do not include a list of materials used to make the product. Before becoming a cat parent, I did not know how common it is for cats to have fabric/elastic allergies. For my cat, Cuddles, it’s been nearly impossible to find an affordable collar that doesn’t cause an allergic reaction. Collars sold without a material listing make it a guessing game when make such a necessary purchase. Like typical cats, Cuddles is a playful feline. She enjoys chewing on her cat collar as if it were a toy. This constant chewing means constantly on the market for new cat collars. I am only made aware of her allergies when a reaction occurs — scabs and bumps all over her neck. They appear quickly but take a long time to heal even with medication. With a simple list of materials used to create cat collars, it would be much easier to narrow down what exact she is allergic too to be able to keep her safe and healthy. I would rate my experience with this collar 1 out of 5 stars.
One example of product design that I feel lacks empathetic experience are car visors. I think this product is a great invention to shield passengers and drivers from the sun while driving, but I think it could definitely be more accommodating. Being 5’3″, it’s always been annoying to have the sun shine in your eyes while sitting in the car, and the car visor doesn’t pull down far enough to shade your eyes unless you scoot your seat all the way forward. It may vary from car to car, but from my own experience, it seems like most of the car visors are designed with a lack of empathy. A lot of times, the visors can pull outward/side to side, but they don’t pull downwards to block the light for short people like myself (at least with all the cars I’ve been in). If an accommodation could be made for people of different heights (such as an additional/mini visor that pulls out from underneath it) or a new design is made, this product could benefit more people than just the average and tall people it was designed for. My rating would be 3 out of 5 stars since the intent of the design is there, but the actual outcome isn’t as successful as it could be.
Melodie Griffin is the project manager for the Center for Emerging Media Design & Development. Her research focuses on virtual reality enhancement and UX in video game design. She also teaches usability, design thinking, and UX.
