Why We Designed the UX Before Writing Any Code (And What We Learned from 100 L&D Professionals)

Before setting out on this journey, we surveyed 100 L&D / HR professionals in the UK about their current Learning Management Systems and the results were pretty sobering: only 27% were satisfied with their platform. Nearly three in ten cited poor user experience as one of their top three frustrations but bizarrely when we asked what mattered most when evaluating an LMS, 89% rated user-friendly interface as very important - in fact, their number one priority!

This gap between what L&D teams need and what they're getting isn't an accident. It's a symptom of how most LMS platforms (probably most software systems to be fair!) are built: features first, user experience as an afterthought. Vendors create what looks good in sales demos, not what works well in daily use.

With Learnient, we had the opportunity to do something different and, being transparent, learn from previous mistakes. Before writing a single line of code, we talked to L&D professionals about how they actually work. What we learned fundamentally shaped how we designed the platform - and revealed why so many teams are frustrated with their current systems.

The "Lipstick on a Pig" Reality

There's an open secret in the LMS industry: most platforms are little more than "lipstick on a pig." or lipstick on a SCORM wrapper! Vendors invest heavily in polished learner portals because that's what gets showcased in demos - that’s what gets shown on their websites and in their video reels. That is how they wow the buyers. Modern design, sleek interface, impressive first impression. The learner experience looks great. Ker-ching!

But the admin interface - where L&D teams actually spend the most of their time every day - is often a completely different story. Complex menus, inconsistent workflows, features buried three or four clicks deep, interfaces that clearly haven't been redesigned in years (if they have ever even been designed!)

This sort of makes business sense from a vendor perspective: learners interact with the platform occasionally for training. Admins live in it all day but the buyer evaluates based on 30-minute demos that showcase the learner experience. By the time L&D teams realise the admin interface is painful to use, they're already locked into a contract.

Our survey confirmed this pattern. Despite many respondents using "modern" LMS platforms with polished marketing, 28% still cited poor user experience as a top frustration. The pretty learner portal wasn't compensating for the clunky admin experience they dealt with daily.

How User Expectations Changed (And LMS Platforms Didn't)

The world has fundamentally changed since most LMS platforms were originally designed. Even 5 years ago, people tolerated complex enterprise software because they had no choice. Learning curve was an expectation. Multi-page manuals were normal. The need for long training sessions (usually paid for!) were (are!) the norm. Users adapted to the software - they had no choice! Is it any wonder that the dreaded annual compliance training feels like such a chore - the content is, shall we say, less than engaging and the experience makes it even worse (yes, I have been there - haven't we all?)

Today, everyone uses Netflix, Spotify, YouTube, and dozens of mobile apps daily. They expect software to be intuitive, familiar, and require zero training. This consumerisation of software changed user expectations permanently. L&D teams and learners don't want to "learn the LMS" - they want it to work like the apps they already use. No one would tolerate a video streaming platform at home that they need to be trained on so why accept it in the workplace?

Yet many LMS platforms are still designed with 2010 assumptions. Complex navigation that requires training. Technical jargon in labels. Workflows that make sense to developers but confuse users. Features designed around the vendor's technical architecture rather than the user's actual tasks.

When we analysed our survey results, this disconnect became obvious. L&D professionals weren't asking for more features - they were asking for the existing features to actually be easy to use. The gap wasn't capability; it was usability.

What We Learned From 100 L&D Professionals

Before designing Learnient's interface, we surveyed 100 UK L&D professionals from UK companies with 50-500 employees - our exact target market. We wanted to understand their daily reality, not our assumptions about it.

What emerged were clear patterns about their actual work:

81% rated progress tracking and reporting as very important. These aren't occasional tasks - they're daily responsibilities. Pulling compliance reports, tracking learner progress, identifying who's falling behind. This is where L&D teams spend their time. This is what they get asked about most often - usually at short notice, usually under pressure for a board meeting!

74% rated automated notifications as critical. They're tired of manual follow-ups, chasing learners individually, remembering to send reminders. They want the system to handle routine communication automatically.

79% rated course completion tracking as very important. Not "nice to have" - essential. They need to know at a glance who's completed required training and who hasn't, especially for compliance-critical roles.

But here's what surprised us most: the gap between what vendors market and what L&D teams actually need.

Gamification - badges, points, leaderboards - dominates LMS marketing. Yet only 42% of respondents rated it as very important. Social learning features? Just 38%. Virtual classroom capabilities? 45%.

Meanwhile, 89% - nearly everyone - rated user-friendly interface as very important. More than twice the priority of gamification. More than twice the priority of social learning.

L&D teams weren't asking for more features. They were asking for simple, intuitive interfaces that let them do their core job efficiently - not flashy add-ons that look impressive in demos but gather dust in production.

How This Shaped Learnient's Design

Armed with this research, we made specific design decisions that put user experience first.

Speaking the User's Language

Most LMS platforms were built by developers, and it shows in the terminology. Course builders use labels like "H1" and "H2" for headings, or "paragraph" for text blocks - technical jargon that makes sense to web developers but confuses L&D professionals who aren't designers. That is, of course, if the course builder can actually build a course - sounds simple but many rely on SCORM content and are basically nothing more than a SCORM wrapper!

We used labels our users actually use. "Heading" and "Subheading," not H1 and H2. "Text," not paragraph. Drag-and-drop interfaces that feel familiar even to first-time users. If someone has ever created a PowerPoint slide, they understand how to build a course in Learnient.

This might seem like a small detail, but it's not. Every technical term is a moment of confusion. Every unfamiliar label requires interpretation. Small friction compounds across hundreds of daily interactions. Speaking the user's language eliminates that friction entirely.

Familiar Patterns Over Clever Design

For course navigation, we could have created something visually striking with floating buttons or gesture-based controls. Yes, I have seen slick marketing and training presentations where sometimes you click right, sometimes down, sometimes it’s a button, sometimes an arrow! Instead, we placed simple "Next" and "Previous" buttons at the bottom left and right of the screen - exactly where users expect them from every video streaming platform they use.

It might look basic but that's kind of the point. Basic = familiar. Familiar means you don't need to think about it. When learners are focused on absorbing compliance training or technical content, the last thing they should be doing is figuring out how to advance to the next module. We followed this principle throughout: if users already know how to do something from the consumer apps they use daily, don't reinvent it. Make enterprise software work like their familiar apps, not force people to learn new patterns.

Surfacing What Actually Matters

Many LMS dashboards show vanity metrics: total users, total courses created, system uptime. Impressive numbers that look good in screenshots, but not what L&D managers actually need when they log in each morning.

Our research revealed what keeps L&D teams focused (and I suspect up at night!): overdue training, expired certifications, inactive learners, low engagement (i.e. poor content!). These are the issues that require immediate attention. These are the metrics that matter for compliance, for effectiveness, for proving ROI to leadership.

So Learnient's dashboard surfaces these critical items top and centre. Not buried in reports. Not three clicks deep. The dashboard answers the question every L&D manager asks first thing: "What needs my attention right now?". And not only so they tell you you have a problem, but they also show you WHO has the problem without having to go and run another different report.

Prioritising Action for Learners

The typical learner portal shows a list of all available courses - overwhelming and unhelpful if you have even 20 courses in the system. Learners don't just want to browse a library - they want to know: "What do I need to do now?"

We designed the learner dashboard to prioritise action. Expired training appears first - this is urgent, this needs done NOW. Then training expiring soon - this is next. Then courses already in progress. Then newly assigned training. Everything organised by urgency and relevance, not alphabetically or by arbitrary categories.

When we do recommend additional courses, it's based on actual analysis - comparing the learner's current skills against their job role requirements, then suggesting courses that fill specific gaps. Not just "most popular" or "highest rated" courses that might be completely irrelevant to their role.

We also borrowed features from consumer apps that users already understand: bookmark courses to save for later (using a simple bookmark icon on every course), subscribe to content categories for automatic notifications (using a simple bell icon on every category) when new training becomes available. These patterns feel natural because people already use them on YouTube, Medium, or other consumer platforms. You don’t have to think - how do I save this course? The bookmark button is familiar!

Designing for BOTH User Journeys

Perhaps most importantly, we designed with equal focus on both user journeys: the admin experience and the learner experience.

Most platforms optimise for one - usually the learner side, because that's what gets demoed. But L&D administrators are the ones who live in the platform daily. They're creating courses, managing enrolments, tracking progress, pulling reports, updating content, responding to issues. If the admin experience is terrible, it doesn't matter how beautiful the learner portal looks.

We kept admin workflows simple. No features buried four clicks deep. Consistent design patterns across every section so admins don't have to relearn the interface when switching between course creation and user management. Common tasks accessible within one or two clicks, not five.

TIP - If you are evaluating another LMS vendor, MAKE SURE they show you the admin interface. And not just a 10 second peek! Get them to show you how to add a user, how to create a course, how to run a report. It will often surprise you JUST how different it looks and feels to the learner experience. Then think, this is where you will be spending your time for the next 3 years...

About Gamification: Implementation Matters

Our survey showed that only 42% of L&D professionals rated gamification as very important - less than half the priority of user-friendly interface.

This doesn't mean gamification is wrong; it means implementation matters. Gamification works when it's thoughtfully integrated to support learning objectives - recognising real achievement, encouraging course completion, making progress visible. It fails when it's used as a band-aid for poor content or clunky interfaces, or when it's just decoration with no connection to actual learning outcomes.

Learnient includes gamification features - points, badges, progress tracking - but they're purposeful, not performative. They support the learning experience; they don't try to compensate for design shortcomings elsewhere in the platform.

The Principle Behind Everything

All of these decisions stem from one core principle: design for daily use, not for demos.

Sales demos last 30 minutes and showcase carefully chosen workflows. Daily use is eight hours a day, five days a week, dealing with every edge case and mundane task. If your platform only looks good in demos, it's going to frustrate the people who actually use it.

We learned this lesson over 15 years building enterprise software: "good enough" UX compounds into significant problems. Every confusing label, every extra click, every inconsistent pattern adds friction. Multiply that friction by hundreds of interactions daily, across dozens of users, for years - and you understand why 28% of L&D professionals cite poor UX as a top frustration.

Starting with UX research isn't slower. It's smarter. The cost of building the wrong thing far exceeds the cost of research upfront.

What Buyers Should Look For

If you're evaluating LMS platforms, here's what to watch for to separate user-centred design from demo polish:

Ask to see the admin interface, not just the learner portal. Many vendors will try to focus demos on the learner experience because it's prettier. Insist on seeing course creation, user management, reporting workflows - the features admins use daily. Count how many clicks it takes to complete common tasks. Imagine yourself using it. Does it feel like using a consumer app on your phone?

Check the terminology. Are labels written in technical jargon or plain language? If you need to refer to documentation to understand what a button does, that's a red flag. The interface should speak the language everyone actually uses.

Test consistency. Does the navigation change between sections? Do buttons appear in different locations depending on which feature you're using? Inconsistent design patterns mean users have to relearn the interface constantly - a sign the platform was built by different teams at different times without cohesive design principles.

Ask about the design research process. How many L&D professionals did the vendor interview before building features? What user research informed their UX decisions? If they can't point to specific examples of how user feedback shaped the design, the interface was probably built based on developer assumptions, not actual user needs.

Watch for features buried deep. If common tasks require four or five clicks through multiple menus, the platform wasn't designed with daily workflows in mind. Core functionality should be one or two clicks away maximum.

Questions to ask vendors:-

"Show me how an admin creates a course from scratch."

"Show me how to pull a compliance report for a specific department.

"Show me how to enrol 50 new users and assign them required training."

"What changed in your design based on user research?"

Pay attention not just to whether they can complete these tasks, but how smoothly. How many clicks? How much searching through menus? How much explanation is required?

The Market Is Ready

Our survey revealed an LMS market ripe for disruption. Only 27% of L&D professionals are satisfied with their current platform. The market is fragmented across 25+ different platforms - suggesting no vendor has truly solved the core problems that frustrate users daily.

The gap isn't features. Most platforms have comparable functionality. The gap is user experience (and pricing but that’s for another day!) - making those features actually pleasant to use.

When 89% of your target market rates user-friendly interface as their top priority, and 28% cite poor UX as a major frustration with current platforms, the message is clear: build something that's actually easy to use, and you're already ahead of most competitors.

That's why we started with UX research. Not because we're perfectionists, but because we listened to what the market was telling us. L&D teams are tired of fighting their tools. They want platforms that help them do their jobs, not create additional work through poor design.

Starting with user experience, using familiar design patterns, speaking user language, surfacing what matters, and designing for daily use rather than demos - these aren't revolutionary concepts. They're basic user-centred design principles.

The revolution is actually following them.