Loading
Last week Robinhood took unprecedented action and, without warning, temporarily restricted trading on immensely popular stocks like GameStop (GME).
The circumstances of these actions were controversial and upset millions of people.
But this isn’t a hit piece, and my opinion of whether the steps Robinhood took were necessary, fair or illegal are irrelevant.
Instead, this provides a perfect example of why UX matters in a crisis.
In this instance, even the best user experience wouldn’t have stopped people from being upset, but would have acted as damage limitation.
As you’ll see, the total lack of context, explanation or empathy only fuelled the mob.
So what can we learn from Robinhood’s actions / inactions?
🔎
Removing GameStop from search results.
✋
Blocking people from buying GameStop shares.
💰
Made fractional shares unavailable.
💸
Creating sell orders on your behalf.
📋
Failing to get statements.
The first action that Robinhood took was to suddenly stop people from being able to purchase shares of GameStop.
But they also decided to actually remove GameStop from any search results.
This was an awful decision for a few reasons:

A behind the scenes look at how I redesigned the Built for Mars sign-up flow, and iterated from early feedback.
The two "obvious" fixes that did nothing
Why you shouldn't always force an input
Why limiting the user's choices can be beneficial
Hinge built its reputation on a single promise: it's the dating app that wants you to leave. This is a breakdown of how the interface is actually engineered to make sure you don't.
How dating apps keep you engaged (not romantically)
The design equivalent of clickbait headlines
How Hinge leverages social scarcity
The challenge for a navigation app isn't to efficiently show you the best route, it's to make you believe that you've found the best route.
How strategy influences design
Waze is cornered, and slowly shrinking
What Apple's strategy appears to be

From rat mazes to coffee apps: why the motivation to reach a reward increases the closer your users get to their goal.
How to use the Goal Gradient Effect
Spinning the flywheel of purchases
Why your rules need to be clear
Sometimes, the best onboarding is no onboarding, and simple products get bogged down with unnecessary explanations. This case study on Waitrose, Sainsbury's and Asda demonstrates when to just let the user try it for themselves.
Sometimes the best onboarding, is no onboarding
“Show, don’t tell” often beats education
Data can’t always tell you when onboarding is wrong

An analysis of Monzo’s 1p challenge, focusing on the middle slump, where progress slows and motivation quietly fades.
Delight can replace progress, but only temporarily
"The middle" is the real retention problem
Motivation needs contextualised reference points
Last week Robinhood took unprecedented action and, without warning, temporarily restricted trading on immensely popular stocks like GameStop (GME).
The circumstances of these actions were controversial and upset millions of people.
But this isn’t a hit piece, and my opinion of whether the steps Robinhood took were necessary, fair or illegal are irrelevant.
Instead, this provides a perfect example of why UX matters in a crisis.
In this instance, even the best user experience wouldn’t have stopped people from being upset, but would have acted as damage limitation.
As you’ll see, the total lack of context, explanation or empathy only fuelled the mob.
So what can we learn from Robinhood’s actions / inactions?
🔎
Removing GameStop from search results.
✋
Blocking people from buying GameStop shares.
💰
Made fractional shares unavailable.
💸
Creating sell orders on your behalf.
📋
Failing to get statements.
The first action that Robinhood took was to suddenly stop people from being able to purchase shares of GameStop.
But they also decided to actually remove GameStop from any search results.
This was an awful decision for a few reasons:

A behind the scenes look at how I redesigned the Built for Mars sign-up flow, and iterated from early feedback.
The two "obvious" fixes that did nothing
Why you shouldn't always force an input
Why limiting the user's choices can be beneficial
Hinge built its reputation on a single promise: it's the dating app that wants you to leave. This is a breakdown of how the interface is actually engineered to make sure you don't.
How dating apps keep you engaged (not romantically)
The design equivalent of clickbait headlines
How Hinge leverages social scarcity
The challenge for a navigation app isn't to efficiently show you the best route, it's to make you believe that you've found the best route.
How strategy influences design
Waze is cornered, and slowly shrinking
What Apple's strategy appears to be

From rat mazes to coffee apps: why the motivation to reach a reward increases the closer your users get to their goal.
How to use the Goal Gradient Effect
Spinning the flywheel of purchases
Why your rules need to be clear
Sometimes, the best onboarding is no onboarding, and simple products get bogged down with unnecessary explanations. This case study on Waitrose, Sainsbury's and Asda demonstrates when to just let the user try it for themselves.
Sometimes the best onboarding, is no onboarding
“Show, don’t tell” often beats education
Data can’t always tell you when onboarding is wrong

An analysis of Monzo’s 1p challenge, focusing on the middle slump, where progress slows and motivation quietly fades.
Delight can replace progress, but only temporarily
"The middle" is the real retention problem
Motivation needs contextualised reference points