Design Principles
Satisficing (Good Enough Is Good Enough)
Users don't look for the best option — they grab the first one that seems good enough and move on.
Where it comes from
The word 'satisfice' comes from the economist Herbert Simon — a blend of 'satisfy' and 'suffice' — and Steve Krug applied it to web behaviour in Don't Make Me Think: people don't seek the best option, they grab the first one that seems good enough.
Why it matters for your website
People don't browse — they satisfice. Krug's term for the habit of grabbing the first reasonable option and running with it describes how real visitors actually navigate: not by reading everything and making an optimal choice, but by scanning until something looks approximately right and clicking it. Design that relies on users evaluating all options before choosing is design that works against how people actually behave. The first reasonable-looking option wins.
Satisficing is rational under uncertainty. Weighing every option costs time and effort; grabbing the first that looks good enough usually works out, and if it doesn't, hitting 'back' is cheap — so that's exactly what people do.
The design consequence is that you can't count on visitors comparing carefully. If a path looks approximately right, it gets clicked — which means the first reasonable-looking option, not necessarily the best one, captures the visitor. Labels and scent matter more than completeness, because people commit before they've seen everything.
Wrong vs right
A design that assumes visitors will read all the options and pick the optimal one before acting.
A design where the first reasonable-looking option is also a good one, because that's what people will grab.
Burying the best choice below several plausible-but-worse ones, expecting users to evaluate them all.
Putting the strongest option where it'll be found early, since people stop at the first that seems good enough.
Relying on subtle distinctions users would only notice through careful comparison.
Making the right path obviously and quickly 'good enough', so satisficing leads to the intended choice.
Understanding Satisficing (Good Enough Is Good Enough)
Satisficing is the habit of choosing the first option that seems good enough rather than searching for the best one. The term, coined by Herbert Simon, blends 'satisfy' and 'suffice'; Steve Krug brought it to the web, observing that real visitors don't methodically evaluate all their options — they scan until something looks approximately right and click it.
This behaviour is rational, not lazy. Carefully weighing every choice is costly, the first plausible option is usually fine, and the cost of being wrong is low — a quick tap of the back button. Given that calculus, grabbing the first reasonable-looking path is the sensible strategy, and it's what people overwhelmingly do.
The implication for design is significant: you cannot rely on visitors comparing options before choosing. Whatever looks good enough first will be clicked, so the first reasonable-looking option — not necessarily the best — tends to win. This puts a premium on clear labels and strong information scent over completeness. It connects to self-evident design, information scent, and the cost of clicks.
How Kweri checks it
Satisficing is a behavioural reality more than a checkable property, and Kweri treats it as guidance. It can flag designs that appear to depend on careful comparison — subtle distinctions, the best option buried among plausible alternatives — and prompt you to make the right path 'good enough' early and obvious. But whether your visitors actually satisfice in a given flow, and where they stop scanning, is something only observation of real users reveals. So Kweri surfaces designs that may assume more deliberation than people give, while the real behaviour comes from testing.
FAQ
What is satisficing?
Satisficing is choosing the first option that seems good enough rather than evaluating everything to find the best. The term, coined by Herbert Simon, combines 'satisfy' and 'suffice'. Steve Krug applied it to how people navigate the web.
Why do users satisfice instead of optimising?
Because it's rational: weighing every option is costly, the first plausible choice is usually fine, and being wrong costs little — just a tap of the back button. So people scan until something looks approximately right and click it.
How does satisficing affect web design?
It means you can't rely on visitors comparing all options. The first reasonable-looking path gets clicked, so the strongest option needs to be found early and look obviously good enough. Clear labels and scent matter more than exhaustive completeness.
Does satisficing mean users are lazy?
No — it's an efficient strategy under uncertainty. Carefully evaluating everything would waste effort when the first good-enough option usually works and mistakes are cheap to undo. Satisficing is sensible behaviour, and design should work with it.
Who came up with the idea of satisficing?
The economist Herbert Simon coined 'satisfice'; Steve Krug applied it to web usability in Don't Make Me Think, describing how visitors grab the first reasonable option rather than seeking the optimal one.
Related principles
The more choices you show, the longer people take to decide — and the likelier they pick nothing.
Users follow the strongest-smelling trail toward their goal — they click links whose labels and context suggest the destination will be relevant, and abandon paths that go cold.
People scan web pages rather than read them — structure content so scanners still get the point.
Attribution & sources
Identified by Steve Krug (term from Herbert Simon). Catalogued from Don't Make Me Think (Steve Krug).
Krug's application of Herbert Simon's 'satisficing' to web behaviour; there's no single canonical web source.
See Satisficing (Good Enough Is Good Enough) on your own site
Run a free Kweri audit — a plain-English review of your site’s speed, accessibility, SEO and design, ranked by what to fix first. No login, no jargon.
Run a free audit →