Why established software can lose impact despite its powerful features—and how rigorous analysis reveals the improvements that matter most.
A product demo. Twenty minutes. Sales has explained every important feature. The prospect is politely impressed. Then they choose the competitor. The better software probably did not win. The more understandable product did.
Successful software grows. New customers bring new requirements. Sales calls for additional features—often on the assumption that many customers want them. Developers accommodate special cases, while existing processes are extended, supplemented, and secured. Each decision may make sense on its own. Together, however, they create a problem: the product becomes more powerful but harder to understand.
Typical consequences include:
The technical quality is still there. But users no longer experience it.
When a product feels complicated, the solution seems obvious: a more modern design, a new dashboard, or revised navigation. That may help. But it may also be an expensive solution to the wrong problem. Perhaps the difficulty lies not in the design but in the content structure. Perhaps users do not understand a key term. Perhaps a process does not reflect how they actually work.
That is why we do not start by asking: What should we change?
We first ask: Why is the product not having the intended impact?
Skip this question and you may start designing sooner—but not necessarily better.
The product team knows its software. It understands why a feature exists, what a term means, and which step comes next. New users and customers do not. They see only what the product communicates at that moment. If the next action is unclear, they have to think, experiment, or ask for help. This costs time and erodes trust.
This is the blind spot of many established products: knowledge within the company has grown, but the product’s clarity has not kept pace. An independent perspective helps—but only if it provides more than a personal opinion.
Whether people like an interface is subjective. Whether users understand their tasks and can complete them successfully can be tested and evaluated.
We combine three perspectives:
We draw on UX research, usability, interaction design, UX writing, and behavioral economics.
We do not pull ready-made solutions from a drawer. We think with you, ask questions, dig deeper, and answer your questions. An expert review identifies established usability problems. Usability testing in a usability lab or at the workplace reveals what real users actually do. Interviews explain the context of use. Quantitative data shows how frequently a problem occurs. Prototypes test new solutions before they become expensive to build.
The method follows the question—a scientific approach, in other words. We also distinguish clearly between findings, interpretations, and assumptions. That, too, is part of expert practice.
A list of 50 problems does not help a product team. It mainly creates a 51st problem: where to start?
We therefore prioritize by impact, frequency, effort, and risk. The outcome must make five things clear:
Our task is not to change as much as possible. We identify the few levers that will make the greatest difference. The result may include concrete processes—or “workflows”—clear language, logical information structures, prototypes, or implementation-ready requirements. Product management, design, and development can act on them directly.
A better user interface does more than look better. It improves the business. Prospects understand the value faster. Demos require less explanation. New users find their way around more quickly. Customers use more of the features they are paying for. Support requests decline. Product teams invest with greater focus.
In short:
The product does not necessarily have to become simpler. But it must become easier to understand.
For more than 17 years, Die Ergonomen have analyzed and improved digital products and complex processes. This experience helps us recognize patterns quickly. But we do not rely on experience alone. Every product has its own logic, users, and history. We therefore combine expert judgment with focused user research and concrete data.
Our clients rate their experience of working with us with a Net Promoter Score of 78. They particularly value our rigorous analysis, structured approach, and the quality and immediate applicability of our recommendations. That is how we measure our work.
Product improvement does not have to begin with a redesign. In our one-day Product Check, we examine the critical areas of your product together with your team. We incorporate knowledge from sales, support, product management, and development, then assess the product from an expert perspective.
The result:
The Product Check costs CHF 3,000 excluding VAT. It is not a comprehensive study. It is a focused starting point that provides direction and can prevent costly mistakes.
Once the key levers have been identified, we develop concrete solutions in a Product Workshop. Where product development becomes an ongoing task, we support the company as a Product Partner.
Established software does not have to reinvent itself simply because a competitor looks more modern. Often, the product already contains a great deal of quality. It is simply too well hidden. We make that quality visible, understandable, and usable again. Because ultimately, the product with the most features does not win. The product whose value users recognize does.
Owner, Expert Consultant
Dr. Christopher H. Müller, founder and owner of Ergonomen Usability AG, earned his PhD from the Institute for Hygiene and Applied Physiology at ETH Zurich. With over 22 years of experience, he is an expert in usability and user experience. His strong sense of empathy allows him to quickly understand the needs and perspectives of his clients. With creativity and courage, he supports his clients in their digitalization projects and the optimization of products, services, and processes. He takes a practical approach, developing tailored solutions that can be effectively implemented. Dr. Christopher H. Müller is a columnist for Netzwoche. He also serves as a board member for the Zugang für alle Foundation, and is a member of two Swico advisory boards and co-president of the Regional Conference Nördlich Lägern.
