Skip to content
mc Digital – The blog
mies-van-der-rohe-farnsworth-house-virtual-graphic

In Defense of “Form Follows Function”

A small analysis and critique discussing the merits of the principle of “Form Follows Function” in web design. The first article in a mini-series of two articles, which, hopefully will showcase why the principle is still applicable currently.

Browsing through different blogs and searching for good, inquisitive articles I came up with the article: Does Form Follow Function? written by Steven Bradley and published in Smashing Magazine, although the article was published in 2010, the argument basis and general topic still retains its topicality.

The article itself is exceptionally well written and a great read on the alternative view to modern design approaches, yet, as I see it, the article includes a number of logical errors on its part, which make the whole point of the author void. In this article I will try to point out these errors and maintain the idea, that the phrase “form follows function”, coined by Louis Sullivan in 1896, is not only an exceptionally astute observation by Sullivan, but is also fully applicable in the area of web design.

The article will simply go through the arguments stated by the author from top to bottom:

1) Descriptive interpretation of the phrase and the author’s claim that the opposite (function follows form) is what actually happens in nature.

Although going in deeply in evolutionary biology is a bit out of the scope and context of the question, I will have to note that the phrase is exceptionally misleading and does not hold under factual scrutiny. One simply has to note that form, as in phenotype of the biological specimen is a product of multiple generations of random mutations of its genes over the ages. Genes themselves as compounds of elements encode and resolve themselves as a specific function and are passed through generations with the filter that each such gene procures an evolutionary beneficial trait. The eventual phenotype is, therefore, a product of the most functional and evolutionary beneficial genes. The phenotype is defined by the functions of the phenotypal elements of the specimen and the fact that these elements are positive for the survival of the specimen and his genes.

2) Prescriptive interpretation of the phrase

Here we come to the most interesting part of the article and its biggest flaw. The author claims that the interpretation is such that in a design which follows the “form follows function” paradigm functional considerations are prioritized over aesthetic, ergonomic and usability considerations. The fact is that the interpretation of the phrase itself is incorrect, although yes, functional requirements are the most and basically only ones seriously considered in such a design, the actual underlying cause for this is the fact that functional products are in themselves aesthetically pleasing, ergonomic and highly usable.

3) Designing a clock

The author provides a number of examples dedicated to maintain his original incorrect interpretation of the phrase. An additional error in the example is made at the start, by oversimplifying the application of the rule of form follows function and stating that the only function of a clock is to tell time. In reality, that is but one of the functions of a clock, and one must consider these multiple functions and provide a clock design, which will perform all of them. As an image the author compares a 10-dollar Sony alarm clock and, if I am not mistaken an at least 100+ dollar wrist watch. Not only does the author compare two items which are completely different in their costs and role in everyday use, but additionally definitively concludes that “digital clocks are not particularly beautiful”.

To refute the latter, I will simply show the following image:

74734091-260x260-0-0_Diesel+Diesel+DZ7069+Men+s+Digital+Watch+Black

To refute the former we will have to list the actual functions that are to be considered with the two watches shown by the author.

Watch no. 1 – Sony Alarm Clock Radio – ICF-C218BLACK (this is the closest I could find to the image)

Let us disregard the fact that Sony included a completely unneeded radio in the watch itself and simply have the function list to focus on the clock itself.

  • Tell the time
  • Provide a system for setting the time
  • Provide a system which allows saving and managing alarm time(s)
  • Producing an alarm sound
  • Providing controls for the alarm
  • Be cheap in production
  • Sell profitably

Watch no. 2 – Breguet 5140BA/29/9W6 (the closest one I could find)

  • Tell the time
  • Provide a system to tell the time
  • Improve wearer image and social validation
  • Sell profitably

As we can see, apart from the first two functions the rest differ quite radically, especially with the requirement of the Sony clock of cheap mass production, which, obviously, requires the use of cheap materials and templated production approaches.

The fact is, that the author states these additional functions of the object as success criteria. It is a nice name for the same thing, but to fully separate success criteria from functions is somewhat strange, especially considering the fact that the way the author describes said success criteria is basically the same thing as defining all the functions of an object. Additionally, the principle that “form follows function” includes the requirement that the implementation of said function is successful. Success is always a function of a produced product, otherwise, the purpose of producing an object is lost in a free-market economy. Of course, there is art and artistic values, as well as political motivation for production, which we will not discuss in this article, and which require an additional article to cover them.

4) Applying “Form follows function to web design”

Here the author actually concedes with the point that I have mentioned earlier, stating that most of the requirements gathered for a website can be described as functions. At the same time the author raises a good question. If form follows function, then why don’t all e-commerce websites look exactly the same.

It is true, that e-commerce websites are the most optimised and function-focused website types available, at the same time, the author’s error here is the statement that functional focus in product design always comes to the same results. That statement is erroneous. The reason for that is, as we saw, products always have a large number of functions, more often than not, it is nigh impossible to produce a product which would focus and fulfill all the requirements of the functions listed, compromises have to be made, especially when functions contradict each other, another point is that although a lot of functions are quantifiable some functions, like products who are to raise the social status of the user, aren’t; this results in design variations. An additional point that one must notice is that technology, materials and the tools of production vary and evolve over time, production methods always have a major impact on product design and influence the fulfillment of functional requirements and the nature of compromises that a designer has to make.

To summarise all of the above, the main reason for all the mistakes by the author and the incorrect conclusions that stem from them is the fact that Steven is under the impression that aesthetics and functional-focus contradict each other, which is incorrect.

Let’s first discuss the examples that were provided by the original author:

1) Google – the author states that the success criteria for Google and its homepage was the purely function-driven design. I would say that search, especially in the early days of Google was the one and only function that the website was to focus on. It is still the case, and can one say that the current, evolved design is aesthetically unpleasing?

2) Craigslist – the author states, quoting another article (http://uxdesign.smashingmagazine.com/2009/03/11/redesigning-craigslist-with-focus-on-usability/), that the design of Craigslist is obsolete and bland, and questions, would Craigslist be able to achieve more success if the design of Craigslist was more aesthetically pleasing. The question here is: aesthetically pleasing design is not an exact quantifiable measure. For some, Craigslist has an ideal design, it’s easy to perceive and appropriate information, it is stark and straightforward and the information on the website is presented at your fingertips.

In summary

In retrospect it seems that the author of the article, although claiming the contrary believes that object designed with the principle in questions cannot be aesthetically pleasing, which cannot be farther from the truth. The aesthetics of the object are formed by it’s pure functionality in a broader sense as was defined above, the clean lines of a plane or ship, the beauty of a glass skyscraper, the sense of control and power that comes from a cockpit or a music recording station. All these objects, through their innate functional design epitomise human ingenuity and beauty of modern technological achievement. Such objects, both large and small epitomise the best of what is in humanity, and showcases our ability for adaptation for the requirements of the surroundings and the changing and evolving technological possibilities.

Stay tuned for the next article on implementing form follows function concept in web design and why this makes for good websites!

Nikita Gorshkov

About the Author - Nikita Gorshkov

Nikita would win the geek award certainly in the agency, and possibly the world. His depth of technical knowledge has no bounds, but it's his calm, relaxed and organised manner that makes him a great project manager.