Users may export records, rename fields or maintain side notes outside the application. These actions can look inefficient from the product team’s perspective while supporting a task the product never considered.
Ask what the workaround achieves
Watch the complete sequence and identify the result. Do not begin by asking why the user ignores the intended workflow; that assumes the product team’s version is sufficient.
GOV.UK’s moderated usability guidance focuses on people attempting realistic tasks. Include the tools and handovers users actually rely on where the research scope permits.
An illustrative Thai service business may export records to add a customer-specific identifier. Removing export access without replacing that capability would make the product less useful, even if the dashboard becomes more consistent.
Distinguish a local need from a general opportunity
Compare similar accounts and ask whether the same constraint appears. A one-off workaround may justify configuration or documentation rather than a new standard feature.
Consider whether the workaround introduces unacceptable risk, including uncontrolled access or data loss. Resolve those concerns with the appropriate reviewers while preserving the underlying user need.
Do not assume automation is the answer. A clearer field, role or export format may remove the extra work more simply.
Test the replacement in the actual task
Ask participants to complete the same outcome using the proposed change. Track effort, mistakes and any new workaround. A cleaner interface is not progress if users must recreate the missing step elsewhere.
Keep an explanation of why the old behaviour existed. Otherwise a later simplification can recreate the same problem.
Keep an example of the original workaround in the design record, with permission and appropriate redaction. Future teams can then see the outcome it supported. Without that context, a later redesign may remove the replacement feature as apparently unnecessary and recreate the problem the first investigation resolved.
GAT’s analysis of growth-related execution friction provides context: complexity often accumulates at the boundaries between teams and tools. Workarounds can reveal those boundaries before the startup designs away the evidence.
Published by the Global Apex Tech Editorial Desk. Partner involvement, when applicable, is disclosed above the headline. For editorial questions or source material, contact editor@globalapextech.org.