Principle
Standardize the part users should not have to relearn
Variation is expensive when it carries no useful information.
When it fits
- Similar tools or workflows use different labels, control locations or sequences for no meaningful reason.
When to avoid it
- Do not standardize away domain-specific distinctions merely to make interfaces look uniform.
Why it matters
Standardize recurring control positions, terminology, states and routine sequence where differences do not serve the task. Preserve variation only where context genuinely requires it. Familiar consistency reduces training burden and slip risk when people move between similar processes.
An example
Use the same status names and escalation semantics across several internal support workflows instead of local synonyms for identical states.
Check your result
A person moving between comparable workflows encounters fewer arbitrary differences without losing necessary context.
Keep this limit in mind
- Do not standardize away domain-specific distinctions merely to make interfaces look uniform.
Connected ideas
Useful withUse a checklist for omissions, not for pretending judgment disappeared
Evidence and sources
Supports
Human-factors guidance treats standardization of equipment and processes as a reliability strategy that reduces unnecessary variation and retraining burden.
Standardization can suppress legitimate local adaptation when contexts differ materially.
Human Factors Engineering · Standardization