In product design, the biggest enemy isn’t complex code, but the arrogant conviction that “users aren’t stupid”

Today, I want to talk about a line that’s been rattling around in my head for a while. It’s from the Apple TV series, “Murderbot,” where the main character, a security cyborg, says:

“I am a Security Unit. Or SEC Unit. I was built to protect and obey humans. And humans… are idiots.”

And you know why it stuck with me? Because as UX designers, we are a bit like that cyborg. Our mission is to create good experiences for people, to protect them from making mistakes while using the products we’ve created, and to ensure that journey is pleasant, intuitive, and successful for everyone. And sometimes, while we’re working, we think… well, I won’t say what we think, but let’s be honest — we’ve all been in situations where we wish we could think it out loud and feel scared we thought something “wrong.”

I can think of three main “sins” that can happen in almost every project and that I want to discuss today. Because, as I always say — problems aren’t part of the path, they are the path.

The “I” Sin

This is the moment when a colleague — be it a designer, manager, marketing specialist, or even c-level — sees the design and enters the room with the words: “When I use it…”, “For me, it would be better if…”, “I don’t like this.”

Why is this a problem? Because none of us are the user. Please, leave your personal preferences aside. UX design is not art meant to please you personally. It is the science of solving problems. And the problems we solve belong to the people who will use the product. Not to us. And especially not to us because we are involved in some way with this product. We know something more about it than the user does.

What can we do? Instead of getting into a debate about who is right, steer the conversation toward the facts.

Show the data

Use heatmaps, Google Analytics, user interviews, A/B testing results. Here’s an example: “I understand your opinion, but before we decide, let’s look at the data. 85% of users who used this menu made a successful payment, while the previous solution led to a 40% drop-off.”

Conduct user testing

Demand to hear what the user says, not the interpretation of your colleagues. Organize a quick “guerrilla testing” — grab five random people (who aren’t on the project) and ask them to complete a task. Record their reactions. This is invaluable evidence.

Check the competition

“I don’t think this is a good idea.” “OK, but let’s see what the best in this sector are doing. Spotify, Netflix, and Amazon all use a similar approach. Maybe there’s a reason for that?”

The “They’re not stupid!” Sin

This is the phrase we most often hear from developers, QAs, or copywriters when we try to make something clearer. For example: “Why do we need this extra text? Users will figure it out, they’re not idiots,” or “We don’t need to add another confirmation step, it’s obvious what’s happening,” or “You’re just overcomplicating things, you always say less is more.”

Why is this a problem? Because what’s intuitive for you is not intuitive for everyone. Users engage with a product with a thousand other thoughts in their heads. They’re in a hurry, they’re distracted, they’re angry, they’re tired. We have to make the interface so simple that they don’t have to think.

Use cognitive laws

UX laws, like Fitts’s Law, Hick’s Law, or Jakob’s Law, aren’t just academic theories — they are proven principles. Point to them as an argument: “According to Hick’s Law, the more options we have, the longer it takes to make a decision. The additional text we propose or highlighting a recommended option reduces cognitive load and facilitates choice.” You can download Jon Yablonski’s laws and hang them on your office wall.

Create simulations

Use storyboarding or a “customer journey map” with your colleagues. Show them a user’s path step by step. “Imagine you are Peter, 65, buying something online for the first time. How would you react to this screen if there was no explanation?”

The “It’s Easy” Sin

This is the most insidious sin. It’s when we, as designers, are so deep inside the project that we become blind to its shortcomings. We know it inside and out. And it seems so obvious to us. And when a user gets confused, we think: “Well, how can they be so stupid?”

Why is this a problem? Because it makes us arrogant and distances us from the user. We didn’t create the product for ourselves, but for people with different levels of technical literacy, different mental models, and different goals.

Do remote usability testing

Give a task to 5–10 people and watch them complete it. Don’t help them. Don’t explain anything. Just watch. It doesn’t have to be expensive. You can use free tools or simply ask them to share their screen. Use the results to show the team where the barriers are.

Calculate the ROI

Prove the importance of investing in a better solution. “Currently, 30% of users drop off at this step. If we improve the design and reduce that number by just 10%, it will lead to X new purchases per month, which equals Y more revenue.” Show the business that UX is not an expense, but an investment with a high return.

In conclusion…

We, UX designers, are like the Murderbot. A big part of our job is to “protect and obey humans.” That’s why we must remain empathetic, to listen to them, not our own assumptions. We need to prove our points with data, test with real people, and show the business that investing in a good experience pays off many times over.

Now we just have to sit down and ask ourselves: “Do I love this enough to fight to implement these practices every day?”

Or will you open the Jira ticket and just do what’s written without thinking?

What’s the biggest UX sin you’ve seen in your practice? Share in the comments! 👇

The UX Murderbot: Humans are idiots was originally published in UX Planet on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.