4

In reference to 'Designing Interfaces' it's stated that it's silly to have a 2-step wizard. What are the reasons for this and is it really all that bad to have a 2-step wizard process?

In either case, the hard part of designing this kind of UI is striking a balance between the sizes of the chunks and the number of them. It’s silly to have a 2-step wizard, and a 15-step wizard is tedious. On the other hand, each chunk shouldn’t be overwhelmingly large, or you’ve lost some benefits of this pattern.

For my interface there is a 2 step process and I feel that in order to visualize that in a recognizable manner it would be best to use a wizard-like interface.

Would this really be silly?

2
  • 1
    Maybe the way we think about wizards changed over the years. Today it's even getting quite common to create login pages like some sort of 2-step wizard.
    – jazZRo
    Commented Jan 7, 2020 at 16:43
  • 1
    Wizards are silly. Fixing the process so a wizard isn’t necessary is a greater design goal. Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 1:02

4 Answers 4

2

I would have worded it as follows:

In either case, the hard part of designing this kind of UI is striking a balance between the sizes of the chunks and the number of them. For example, having a 2-step wizard usually loses the benefits of this pattern, and a 15-step wizard is tedious.

The concepts expressed are still valid, but of course there are exceptions to every rule. The important part is striking a balance between the sizes of the chunks and the number of them.

Have you considered progressive disclosure for your situation?

1

The page have 2011 year in footer - now we have 2020.

Today, processes are often divided into the maximum number of steps (however, of course - reasonably - 15 steps is far too much)

Maybe this suggestion is more about having> 2 steps in the process (minimum 3)

but let's consider personality tests - e.g. 16 personalities

enter image description here

Tests are divided into 10 stages - modern processes to reduce information overload also divide larger parts into a reasonable number of steps.

1

There is not a limit on wizard's steps but common sense, task length, user testing, etc.

Try some A/B testing.
Do users go through the flow easier with the wizard or without it?
Is it shorter / faster, or prevents errors, or it aids the user to gain better focus on the wizard version?

0

One thing to consider here is consistency. In isolation, from scratch, designing a system to use a two step wizard might lose some of the benefits of the pattern, but if the rest of your product uses a one page per action pattern, a two step wizard may be the best approach to ensure it feels coherent with the rest of the product.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.