Is your Government thinking of UX?

The other day I was filling out a government form online. Three tabs, two error messages, one expired session, and a PDF I had to print, sign, scan, and upload. By the end of it, I wasn't angry. I was just tired. And I caught myself thinking the same thing I think when an app frustrates me: who designed this, and did they ever actually use it?

That question stuck with me. Because if you really sit with it, choosing a government isn't all that different from choosing a service. The best service provider is the one that understands its users and shapes itself around their needs. In a democracy, we are the users. So maybe the principles I use every day as a UX designer aren't a bad lens for deciding who should run the country.

Here's how I'd think about it.

Does it actually solve real problems?

Good design starts with empathy, not with a clever idea but with a real understanding of the people you're designing for. The best policies work the same way. When I look at what a candidate is promising, I try to ask a simple question: is this solving an actual problem people have, or is it solving a problem that sounds good in a speech? User-centric design means the people in charge have bothered to understand the messy reality of everyday life before deciding what to build for it.

Is it simple, or is it a maze?

The best products are usually the simplest ones. You don't need a manual to use them. Government should aim for the same thing. Every extra form, every unnecessary office visit, every "please come back with one more document" is friction, and friction is a design failure. When services are easy to access, more people actually use them. So when I judge a government, I look at how much effort it takes a normal person to get something done. The harder it is, the worse the design.

Does it work for everyone, not just the lucky few?