Last word: Usable

Before you release anything, hand it to someone outside the project and ask, ‘What does this tell you to do?’ Their instinctive reaction will tell you whether it is useless or usable.”

— ALVITTA OTTLEY

Most of us have lived with the consequences of unusable systems: a failed tornado warning system, a weather alert that arrives too late to matter, a water advisory so unclear you’re not sure whether to boil the tap water or trust it, and a local health notice that assumes you already speak the language of experts. The details differ, but the feeling is the same: you’re on your own to figure it out.

The uncomfortable truth is that many public-facing systems are built around technical performance rather than human understanding. Precision gets prioritized over clarity; completeness over usability. But public health doesn’t succeed because something is detailed or accurate; it succeeds because people can follow it, trust it and act on it.

Usable for whom? People differ in literacy, access, background and trust. Engineering public health means designing with those differences and meeting communities where they are, not where we assume they are.

In my lab, we study how visual and informational design can close this gap. We examine how small shifts in  presentation can change what people notice, understand and ultimately do. Here is a simple practice that is remarkably powerful: before you release anything, hand it to someone outside the project and ask, “What does this tell you to do?” Their instinctive reaction will tell you whether it is useless or usable.