Insights
Known failures
(and how we help you avoid them)
Many projects fail not because the people behind them lacked skill or resources, but because clarity was assumed instead of designed. Campaigns, websites, manuals, and chatbots can all look polished and complete, yet still fall short of their purpose.
Or worse, backfire.
These scenarios are not pure fiction
They combine patterns we’ve repeatedly seen across sectors into recognisable traps to be avoided. If you’ve worked on complex projects, you may have lived through something similar or seen it unfold nearby. Each example shows what happens when cognitive principles are missing from content and design. And each one points to the same lesson: these failures are avoidable if cognitive content design principles are applied and if clarity comes first.
The chatbot that nobody liked (nor used)
Read more
The scenario
A municipality invests in a new chatbot to handle citizen queries. The promise: faster, more efficient service. The reality: a few months later, the chatbot is reported in social media and the local press to be “grumpier and more inflexible than a municipal clerk on a bad day”. It fails to recognise common phrasing, gets stuck in loops, and cannot escalate complex issues. Citizens stop using it, and worse, the mayor is criticised for creating the “AI version of an unhelpful municipality”.
The cause
The chatbot was based on the municipality’s internal structure, not the citizen’s point of view. Menu options reflected departmental names rather than plain-language topics, language was rigid, error handling was poor, and no trust-building features were in place. The tool became a barrier rather than a bridge.
The process manual everyone ignored.
Until it backfired.
Read more
The scenario
A large organisation invests months in creating a new corporate process manual to standardise workflows. It’s thorough, compliant, and distributed to every employee. Three months later, not only are processes still inconsistent, but morale is lower. Frustrated by low adoption, management starts talking about compulsory usage and hints at sanctions for non-compliance. The manual, intended to create alignment, is now seen as a symbol of mistrust and heavy-handed control.
The cause
The manual was designed for completeness, not usability. Key steps were buried in dense paragraphs, with no quick reference tools or visual workflows. It assumed employees would study it end-to-end, ignoring the fact that most people consult manuals under time pressure. When adoption lagged, management’s response created resentment, making employees less likely to use the resource at all.
The campaign that reached everyone
but changed nothing
Read more
The scenario
A national health agency launches a campaign to reduce sugary drink consumption. It’s everywhere — TV spots, social ads, posters in schools. The creative is catchy, and the visuals are sharp. Six months later, national surveys show awareness is high, but actual consumption hasn’t changed significantly. Worse, some people are mocking the campaign on social media, buying more sugary drinks in defiance, and accusing it of being patronising.
The cause
The campaign assumed awareness would be enough to shift behaviour. It ignored daily decision points, failed to provide alternatives, and overlooked cultural perceptions of “treat” foods. The simplified tone triggered resistance rather than action.
The training module that made things worse
Read more
The scenario
A company rolls out a mandatory module to improve customer service skills, promoted as “essential for our service culture”. Completion rates are high, but customer satisfaction drops. Employees mock the unrealistic examples, dismiss the outdated advice, and resist applying the service guidelines altogether: “we tried it your way; it doesn’t work”.
The cause
The module was designed to tick a compliance box, not to reflect real challenges nor to build practical skills. Scenarios were generic, feedback minimal, and content irrelevant to daily work. Instead of building skills, it undermined credibility. The staff disengaged not only from training but also from the behaviours it was supposed to reinforce.
The website that won the design award
but lost its visitors
Read more
The scenario
A major organisation launches a sleek new website after months of development. The visuals are striking, the animations smooth, and the colour palette on trend. But engagement drops: fewer enquiries, shorter visits to key pages, and more calls to the call centre for basic information. On social media, users complain it’s “impossible to find anything.” Internally, marketing blames IT, IT blames design, and management questions why so much was spent on something that is damaging performance.
The cause
The redesign prioritised aesthetics over function and volume over clarity. In trying to please every stakeholder, the homepage said everything at once — which meant users took away nothing. Navigation buried essentials, and content was written for style at the cost of findability. The site looked impressive to the project team. But to real users it was confusing, overwhelming, and unhelpful.
The social media campaign that grabbed everyone's attention within 3 seconds, but lost their interest forever
Read more
The scenario
A company launches a bold social media campaign: they generously pay to hire a well-known influencer to ‘hook’ viewers instantly, using an urgent call to “act now”. The posts explode in reach and attract thousands of quick clicks. But engagement crashes right after. People scroll past, bounce off the landing page, and barely anyone remembers what the campaign was about—let alone why it mattered. The sales report shows no observable conversion rates, and soon after, unfollow rates spike. The marketing manager responsible for the campaign is accused of reporting misleading analytics.
The cause
The campaign was built for tempting and easy-to-create short-term attention instead of relevant, mindful engagement. Reporting focused on headline numbers, while the real indicators like conversion and long-term loyalty were left out. The clarity and cognitive effort that could have inspired action were ignored, and the campaign became digital noise.
