Introducing inconsistent controls: is it appropriate for the sake of usability?

Question

We're building a web application based on Material UI. Throughout the app there are select components, which behave like shown in the example below: The default label informs about the functionality of the select and when a value is selected, this label shrinks and moves up, so that it is still shown above the selected value.

We use those components mainly for standard "organizational" bulk operations, such as sort, group etc. Therefore, no value is selected by default, the default label is shown and the user should know what the control is there for.

However, we also have a settings page (and forms), where there are already set values, like language. This leaves the select in the state where that informational default label has already shrinked to its smaller size (and would always stay that way, since a language can't be unselected).

Because of this, I'd like to change the select component here, so that the label isn't shown at all and instead introduce another easy-to-read label that is placed above, like shown on the picture below.

I feel like this would be a good approach in terms of usability, making the controls easier to recognize and thus helping the user change their settings. (Imagine a multitude of settings and looking for a specific one to change).

However, it also introduces inconsistencies, since there would be two kinds of select throughout the application.

I'd like to know whether those kinds of incosistencies are acceptable for the sake of better usability. Do the benefits outweigh the possibility of irritating the user? Maybe you could provide any related research or real life examples of similar inconsistencies for the sake of usability. Maybe there's even a way to quantify those "pains vs gains"?

Any input is greatly appreciated!

Answer 1

There are different perspectives to answering this question, and they have been addressed in previous questions separately that you can consider:

Internal Consistency vs. Consistency across the Industry, which is based on balancing what is considered best practice and consistency with your own product and users. If you have a new product and new users this would be different to improving an existing product with a large proportion of existing users.

Design for Application consistency or follow OS convention?, which is based on balancing the range of products that you offer (which may follow different platform conventions) against the internal branding and design guidelines.

Support consistency or primary user journey?, which speaks more to the point that you are making about balancing consistency with user needs and requirements.

But in the end it is about trying to address all of the points above when talking about consistency and what it means for your products/service as well as the users.

Answer 2

To paraphrase, the point is that in the new solution there is an initial variability, while in the previous ones it is not?

In order to make the whole application more consistent, you can add an initial value to all sorts (all option by default) - but this is definitely more work :O

What if the proposed language label is identical to the previous one after the interaction?

---