Trust Erosion in UX

With 61% of consumers saying that businesses actually make their lives harder, consumer skepticism directly hits your bottom line. To weather the storm, companies like Patagonia and Southwest use authenticity checkpoints to screen growth initiatives against core values. Rather than check-the-box exercises, these filters preserve the reasons that your customers choose you. The payoff? Organizations maintaining trust during growth can turn a 5% increase in retention into a 25-95% revenue boost. I recently worked with a client facing the classic warning signs: rising CAC, slipping conversion rates, and increasing pricing pressure. Despite this, they were hitting growth targets. So what was wrong? Their customers were losing faith in them. My client was not alone. Qualtrics research shows only 50% of consumers have confidence in the brands they do business with—a metric that hasn't improved since 2020 despite massive CX investments. My client realized it was a P&L emergency. Trust erosion is a vicious cycle that directly impacts unit economics through higher acquisition costs, shorter customer lifecycles, and vanishing price premiums. A small number of aggressive tactics had tarnished the credibility that made my client's growth trajectory possible. So they decided to create authenticity checkpoints—systematic filters that evaluate growth initiatives against core values. With hard work, their ACVs are rising, their clients advocate for them, and their CAC has stabilized. What makes effective authenticity checkpoints? Five critical elements: - Decision filters to evaluate initiatives against founding principles - Product validation processes that preserve core differentiation - Regular operational reviews to ensure a consistent customer experience - Values reinforcement for team members, beyond onboard - Structured forums to identify and address emerging vulnerabilities Implementing these checkpoints starts with three simple steps: audit your recent growth initiatives for authenticity impact, map your specific vulnerability points, and create accountability with dedicated resources and metrics. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/eJbTcVMa __________ For more on growth and building trust, check out my previous posts. Join me on my journey, and let's build a more trustworthy world together. Christine Alemany #Fintech #Strategy #Growth

I get irrationally frustrated when I spend ages researching a product - bouncing between websites, reviews, and platforms - only to finally commit… and then discover it’s out of stock. It feels like all that intent, time, and energy just evaporates. The reality is that there is a large gap in online capabilities across the industry. As a consumer, instances of things like "stockouts" don't just cost a sale, they erode trust, halt customer acquisition and destroy momentum. And in a world where convenience wins, even good intentions can be undone by a single friction point. It turns out I’m not alone. Our research with Microsoft Advertising shows that 28% of shoppers often experience this, among a range of other points of friction that are damaging retailers’ sales. Every misaligned landing page, every broken promotion, every out-of-stock item that shows up in search… it's just bad UX. Our research uncovered a staggering insight: 1 in 5 shopping journeys are abandoned due to friction. And it’s high-value shoppers, digitally engaged customers, who are the least forgiving. 1️⃣ Friction isn’t random. It’s predictable. We saw six recurring issues: ➡️ Misaligned landing pages ➡️ Stock inaccuracies ➡️ Unexpected shipping costs ➡️ Price discrepancies ➡️ Failed promotions ➡️ Inconsistent loyalty rewards Each one chips away at trust and encourages shoppers to look elsewhere. 2️⃣ Frequent online shoppers experience the most friction. These are the customers who shop regularly, spend more, and are more digitally engaged. And they’re the ones facing the most pain: ➡️ 41% say the product page didn’t match the ad ➡️ 40% had discount codes fail at checkout ➡️ 39% encountered stock-outs at the last step ➡️ 38% saw price changes post-click ➡️ 37% said loyalty rewards didn’t carry over The most valuable customers with the highest LTV are being let down the most. 3️⃣ Friction hurts conversion and loyalty. Our research shows that over 50% of consumers spend less with brands when they encounter friction. And 40% will look elsewhere entirely if there’s inconsistency between your app, website or store. The bottom line is that poor UX has a direct impact on profitability. And the six areas of friction signal deeper-rooted issues across teams, tech stacks, and channels. And that misalignment is directly costing conversion, customer lifetime value, and brand trust. 💥 Inventory not syncing with front-end search. 💥 Promotions set centrally but broken at the point of checkout. 💥 Loyalty schemes behaving differently across touchpoints. Fixing this means aligning merch, tech, marketing and supply chain around the same journey, the one customers are actually taking. There is also an irony about how much it costs to acquire customers, when many retailers are then just disappointing them. Consistency in pricing, promotions, availability and experience is a strategic differentiator. 🔗 Download the report now https://lnkd.in/e9abZQQW

Are Dark Patterns Killing Your Product’s Trust? You have seen them. You might have even used them. ↳ A free trial that quietly turns into a paid subscription. ↳ A sneaky extra item in your shopping cart. ↳ A cancel button that feels like it’s playing hide and seek. These dark patterns may boost short-term metrics, but they erode user trust, brand reputation, and long-term growth. As product managers and designers, we face constant pressure to drive engagement and conversions. But at what cost? In our latest newsletter, we break down: ↳The most common dark patterns (and why they backfire) ↳Real-world examples of deceptive UX tactics ↳How product teams can design for trust, not tricks If you care about ethical UX, user trust, and sustainable product growth, this article is for you. ----- Join 7040+ readers who receive such insights regularly by subscribing to the newsletter. Follow Lokesh Gupta and ProductHood School for more such resources.

This is Not a Peeved Customer Post. This is About #Design. Two years ago, I discovered an app that changed my mornings. A simple, no-fuss way to order milk and essentials before bedtime, and wake up to them magically appearing at my doorstep. A small joy, but a meaningful one. It wasn’t just the convenience—I fell for the design. The app was intuitive, effortless. No friction, no confusion. It had me at… well, maybe not hello (this wasn’t Tom Cruise), but I was a fan. I even converted my friends into users. I was in deep. So deep that I didn’t question the autopay deductions. And then one day, I noticed something odd. A half-litre of milk that once cost ₹36 was now ₹49. A slow, sneaky ₹13 climb over two years. And not once did I receive a single notification about the price hike. Meanwhile, my phone buzzed regularly with WhatsApp messages, SMS updates, and calls from the app—all for offers and “exciting” new schemes I didn’t care about. And then things got weirder. The app’s interface started to feel… hostile. Subscriptions happened without my knowledge. One week, my fridge overflowed with eggs I never meant to order. Items labeled free magically appeared in my cart—except they weren’t free, and I couldn’t remove them. The unsubscribe button? A labyrinth. This isn’t bad UI/UX. This is deception by design. In UX language, these are called deceptive patterns (or dark patterns)—design tricks that nudge users into actions that aren’t in their best interest. They prey on trust, confusion, or simple inattention. And here’s the thing: most people don’t even notice. So, how do we navigate a digital world increasingly filled with these dark patterns? And more importantly, what is the role of #designers in shaping ethical digital experiences? Any guesses which app I’m talking about? Drop your thoughts below—I’ll reveal it in the comments. 👇🏽 #DesignMatters #UX #DarkPatterns #EthicalDesign #SocialChange #SoundofChange

Try unsubscribing from a newsletter. Suddenly, the button disappears. The font shrinks. The page asks: “Are you sure you want to miss out on amazing deals?” ⚠️ That’s Dark UX — design meant to trick, not help. Dark UX patterns are manipulative design tricks meant to: 🕸️ Make you click things you don’t want 🕸️ Confuse you into signing up or staying longer 🕸️ Hide options you should have Common examples: ❌ Hidden unsubscribe buttons ❌ Pre-checked add-ons ❌ Confusing button labels like “Maybe later” instead of “No” It’s intentional friction — prioritizing conversions over users. Dark UX might boost short-term metrics. But long-term? It erodes trust. ⚡ Designers have power — let’s use it to build trust, not traps. #uxdesign #darkpatterns #ethicaldesign

UX has a dark side: Deceptive patterns—UI patterns intentionally designed to deceive or confuse users for the purpose of helping the company achieve its own goal, without delivering value to the user or respecting their trust. Here, we see a simple on-off switch for a cookie consent dialog. But what is on, and what is off? In the Apple HIG, and Google’s Material Design, the switch is on when it’s flipped to the right. And the user gets further confirmation that the switch is on, by adding a color to the switch’s track. But this switch does the opposite of industry leaders—and it does so in a way that can conceivably deceive users into consenting to the use of trackers collecting their information, when they think they’re opting out. Companies believe decisions like this are beneficial to the business, but this actually increases the risk of the company getting sued—and lawsuits about this kind of thing happen often. Having clear, easy to understand design isn’t just beneficial to the users, it protects the business, as well.

"Can you add a couple confirmations to the cancellation flow?" "Make sure the premium option is selected by default..." "Is the close button too obvious? Reduce the size." 76% of companies are disregarding UX principles and crushing the souls of their designers with requests like these. And I refuse to pretend like it's okay. Here's the uncomfortable truth:  Growth teams call the shots now, leaving UXers to sacrifice our principles for conversion metrics. I've been in those rooms—watching accessibility get axed, confusion get weaponized, and friction get optimized. All because the numbers demand it. But here's what the growth-at-all-costs crowd doesn't tell you: → Dark patterns destroy 60% of customer return rates  → Trust erosion costs 3x more to rebuild than to maintain  → Companies using ethical design see 200-400% higher lifetime value  → Epic Games just paid $520M for their manipulation tactics The tension isn't between business success and user needs. It's between short-term exploitation and sustainable growth. 📵 Amazon's "Project Iliad" cancellation maze.  📵 Meta's hidden opt-out forms.  Elements built by UX designers, but they aren't UX decisions— They're ethical failures that treat users as revenue sources instead of humans. Meanwhile, Basecamp has had 25 consecutive profitable years *without a single dark pattern*. And Duolingo hit 40M daily users through *ethical gamification*.  They prove you don't need manipulation to build a business. The real framework isn't complicated:  → Ask "would users choose this if they understood it?"  → Measure retention over conversion  → Build trust like it's your only asset (because it is)  → Choose transparency even when it's harder Swipe for a full breakdown… Save this if you're ready to design with integrity. What's the most egregious dark pattern you've been asked to implement? #uxdesign #designethics #darkpatterns #uxstrategy ——— 👋 Hi, I’m Dane—your source for UX and career tips. ❤️ Found this helpful? Dropping a like would be 🔥. 🔄 Share to help others (or for easy access later). ➕ Follow for more like this delivered to your feed every day.