In the software development world, it's common to see developers and teams striving to be the “heroes” of technology and architecture, always embracing the latest and most advanced tools, patterns, and techniques. As a Software Engineer, I often found myself deeply immersed in an environment that prioritized technical sophistication and cutting-edge approaches. However, as my career progressed, I began to realize that this pursuit of technical perfection sometimes led to solutions that were overly complicated and, at times, ineffective.

As a UX Design student, I've had (and continue to have) the task of understanding not just how people interact with digital products, but why they do so. It's easy to fall into the misconception that UX design is merely about crafting interfaces and making superficial changes, like “Can we tweak the color of that button?” However, the true essence of UX goes far beyond aesthetics—it’s about deeply understanding user behavior, needs, and motivations to create meaningful and intuitive experiences.

Facing Complexity

In several projects I worked on, the pressure to meet tight deadlines often led to the introduction of complex abstractions and ‘overkill’ solutions. While these approaches were intended to manage the project's scope, they frequently resulted in unnecessary complexity.

Much of what I encountered fell under what Alex Bunardzic would describe as accidental or incidental complexity  - complexity that was not inherent to the problem but rather a byproduct of the solutions we implemented.

For instance, in one project, we added multiple layers of abstraction to handle various functionalities, such as data access and business logic. Although these abstractions were meant to modularize the code, they ended up creating a tangled web of dependencies, making the codebase difficult to understand and maintain. Daler Bovoev talks about this in his article “DRY Code vs. Over-abstraction”.  

Complexity in a project doesn't just stem from the software architecture; it can also be introduced through the UX design. While the backend might be over-engineered with unnecessary abstractions, the frontend can become equally complex through over-complicated interfaces, excessive features, or misaligned user flows. Both aspects, if not carefully managed, can contribute to a product that is difficult to develop, maintain, and use effectively.

Years later, in another project, I encountered an overly intricate user interface, crammed with features designed to meet every possible user need. This approach not only bloated our codebase—resulting in a massive Angular component overloaded with functionality—but also created a confusing and cluttered user experience.

Embracing Simplicity

In both software architecture and UX design, simplicity is key to creating effective, maintainable, and user-friendly systems. By embracing simplicity, you can ensure that your product is not only easy to develop and maintain but also intuitive and satisfying for users.

• Focus on Core Functions: Just as in UX design, where you prioritize the essential features (i.e the minimum viable product) that users need most, in software architecture, you should also concentrate on the core functionalities of the system. Avoid overloading the codebase or the user interface with unnecessary features. This approach reduces complexity and enhances clarity in both the code and the user experience.
• Isolate Complexity: Where complexity is unavoidable, isolate it. In software architecture, this means encapsulating complex logic within well-defined modules or services. In UX, complex features are placed within clearly designated interface areas, where they won’t overwhelm the user but are accessible when needed.
• Prioritize Usability Over Features: Even when complexity is necessary, always prioritize usability. This might mean simplifying user choices or breaking down complex tasks into smaller, more manageable steps. This will unavoidably simplify the development process.
• Iterate and Refine: Embrace an iterative process to continually refine both the architecture and user experience. Complexity can often be managed better through gradual improvements rather than attempting to solve everything at once. Regularly review and refactor the most complex parts of your system to keep them as simple as possible over time.

The Power of Zero

Simplicity is more than just a guiding principle—it’s a key to creating systems that are scalable, maintainable, and resilient. A well-designed architecture should prioritize simplicity, not by reducing functionality, but by organizing complexity in a way that makes the system clear and manageable.

Systems are often fragile. They’re harder to understand, more difficult to maintain, and prone to hidden dependencies that can lead to unpredictable behavior. In contrast, a simple architecture is easier to navigate, making it straightforward to add new features, diagnose issues, and scale the system as needs grow.

The impact of simplicity becomes evident when you consider how it shapes decision-making in architecture. A simple architecture focuses on core components, ensuring each part of the system has a clear purpose. This clarity reduces the risk of over-engineering, where additional layers of complexity are added without providing proportional benefits. By keeping the architecture lean, you avoid unnecessary complications that can slow down development and introduce potential points of failure.

Conclusion

Simplicity is key for building strong, efficient, and reliable systems. We need to break down complex ideas to their basics. This makes systems easier to grasp, fix, and grow. But being simple doesn't mean cutting out important features. It's about finding the right balance: keeping the main functionality clear and simple while still being powerful and flexible.