The Uncomfortable Truth About Interactive Digital Wayfinders
March 31, 2025 by guest author, Jordan Feil
Guest Post: Jordan Feil, Digital Signage Consultant
After 17 years in the digital signage software industry, I’ve picked up a funny habit: I can’t walk through a mall, airport, or office building without checking out every screen I see. I notice how good the content looks, where they put it, if it works well, and how easy it is to use. My friends joke that our family trips turn into screen-spotting adventures.
There’s a good reason for this. I love digital signage. I’ve spent my career helping businesses set up and get the most from their digital signs. Nothing makes me happier than seeing screens that really work well – whether they’re boosting sales, sharing information, or making customers’ lives easier.
But there’s one type of digital signage that always makes me cringe: interactive wayfinders.
The Promise vs. The Reality
In theory, interactive wayfinders should be everything that’s great about digital signage. They’re supposed to be dynamic, personalized, and more helpful than static maps. The sales pitch sounds great: “Why use a fixed map when people can search for exactly where they want to go, get custom directions, and learn about other things nearby?”
The problem? They rarely work that well in real life.
Time and again, I’ve watched shoppers walk up to these fancy touchscreens only to walk away confused or annoyed. I’ve seen worried hospital visitors trying to find a patient’s room, tapping repeatedly at screens that don’t respond. I’ve watched travelers in airports give up on wayfinders mid-search, choosing instead to ask a real person for help.
And despite spending years working with and supporting these very systems, I too find myself muttering under my breath when trying to use them.
The Uncomfortable Confession
Here’s my guilty admission as a digital signage professional: sometimes, a well-designed paper map with a simple “You Are Here” dot works better than an interactive touchscreen.
I know that statement might get my digital signage fan card taken away, but I’ve seen too much evidence to ignore it. When I’m in a shopping mall I’ve never been to before and need to find a store quickly, I’m often better off using an old-school directory than its touchscreen replacement.
What’s Going Wrong?
Several things make many interactive wayfinders disappointing:
- Overly complicated screens: Too many options, confusing navigation, and cluttered layouts overwhelm people who just want to get from one place to another.
- Slow response times: Nothing frustrates users faster than a laggy touchscreen that makes them wonder if their tap registered or not.
- Confusing directions: Routes that send people on unnecessarily complicated paths or don’t consider practical things like where the escalators are.
- Poor upkeep: Touchscreens that haven’t been adjusted properly, outdated software, or information that’s no longer correct.
- Not enough real-world testing: Many systems seem to skip the important step of testing with actual people in realistic situations.
Real-World Failures I’ve Witnessed
Last year, I visited a newly updated shopping mall that had installed fancy wayfinders at every main entrance and intersection. They looked impressive: big 55″ 4K touchscreens in stylish cases with the mall’s branding. But watching people try to use them was painful.
An older couple spent nearly five minutes trying to find a restaurant, repeatedly touching the wrong parts of the screen because it wasn’t calibrated well. After many tries, they gave up and asked a security guard for directions.
Another time, I saw a group of teenagers laughing at a wayfinder that kept freezing up while they were using it. Their solution? Pull out their phones and use Google Maps instead – even though they were indoors where GPS doesn’t work well.
When Wayfinders Actually Work
To be fair, I have come across some excellent interactive wayfinders. What made them different?
At an international airport, I used a wayfinder that got the basics right: big, clearly labeled buttons for common destinations (gates, baggage claim, restaurants, bathrooms), instant response to touch, and simple, clear directions with realistic walking times. It didn’t try to do too much – it just helped me find my gate quickly.
Another standout was at a recently modernized hospital. Their wayfinder had a brilliantly simple interface that asked just one question: “Where do you want to go?” You could type your destination or pick from popular locations. The directions were clear, with actual photos of landmarks along the way.
The common thread? These successful systems put simplicity and user experience ahead of fancy features.
The Right Tool for the Right Job
My criticism doesn’t mean we should get rid of interactive wayfinders entirely. When done right, they can provide better experiences for certain situations:
- Complex places with frequently changing stores or exhibits
- Buildings where people need to find very specific locations
- Places where multiple languages need to be supported
- Areas where accessibility features like text-to-speech are needed
But we need to be honest about when a simpler solution might work better. Digital signage professionals (myself included) can sometimes be too quick to suggest the most high-tech solution when a simpler one would actually serve people better.
The Path Forward
If we want to make interactive wayfinders better, we need to focus on the basics:
- Keep it simple: Start with the most straightforward user journey and only add complexity where it actually improves the experience. Remember the three-click rule – users should find their destination in three taps or fewer.
- Use responsive hardware: Invest in touch technology that responds instantly and reliably. This means commercial-grade touchscreens with proper setup and regular maintenance. If your budget doesn’t allow for quality hardware, consider whether a non-interactive solution might be better.
- Design intuitively: Use design patterns that people already understand from their phones and tablets. Don’t reinvent navigation just to be different.
- Make important things stand out: Make the most important functions the most visually prominent. If 90% of users want to find a specific location, make that feature front and center.
- Test with real people: Test with diverse groups in real-world conditions, not just in controlled settings. Include children, elderly users, and people with different abilities in your testing.
- Keep it updated: Regularly update software, recalibrate hardware, and refresh content. An outdated wayfinder is worse than no wayfinder at all.
- Measure success: Define what success looks like beyond “we installed it” and track those measurements. How quickly do users find what they’re looking for? How many give up? How often do they need to ask for human help anyway?
Emerging Technologies: Help or Hype?
There’s no shortage of new tech being applied to wayfinding – from AI chatbots to augmented reality navigation. While these innovations seem promising, they often add layers of complexity without fixing the basic usability problems.
Before jumping on the latest tech trend, ask whether it truly solves a user problem. Voice control might be great for accessibility, but does it work well in noisy places? Augmented reality wayfinding might be cutting-edge, but does it require users to download yet another app they’ll use only once?
Sometimes, the most innovative approach is to remove complexity rather than add it. The best tech solution is one that users don’t even notice – they’re focused on finding their way, not on figuring out how to use your fancy system.
Making the Case for Simplicity
As someone who loves digital signage, I believe we hurt our industry when we oversell technology that underdelivers. By acknowledging the current problems with interactive wayfinders and committing to fixing them, we actually strengthen rather than weaken the case for digital signage overall.
The next time you’re designing a wayfinding solution, start by asking: “What’s the simplest way to help someone get where they need to go?” If the answer is an interactive solution, great – but design it with the user’s needs at the center, not the technology.
And if the answer is a well-designed static map with a “You Are Here” dot? That’s okay too. Sometimes the old ways are still around for a good reason.
About The Writer
Jordan Feil has spent 17 years in the digital signage software industry (X2O Media, Navori Labs, JAF Digital Consulting) helping businesses implement effective digital signage systems and strategies.
Nice write-up! Especially live the party about testing with real people.
Absolutely love this and could not agree more! I always remind my team that the best solutions are usually the simplest solutions, and that if we are doing our jobs well, the outcome should be so easy and obvious and effortless that it just looks like “of course”! Tech for tech’s sake or digital for digital’s sake is usually bad. For anything that is made for the general public, I use the “my dad” test – which is, if my dad tried to use something I built, would he be really frustrated by it or like it. If the answer is frustrated, we need to go back to the drawing board.
Thank you for this article! For years, we have seen companies deploy “tech-forward wayfinding” with gigantic ugly maps, painfully slow loading times, un-needed complexity, and no regard to the user experience. When you actually put a screen up on a wall or in a kiosk, you have to think about the user population that will use it and that requires more design thinking and understanding of the users.
For example, for hospitals, we think about a population that is over 75 and are non-native English speakers and how do we support their care journey easily. For retail centers, we think about how to help the shopper that is looking for a specific store, while also meeting the needs of the browser who is looking for a nice gift but doesn’t know where to start. And in higher education, wayfinding kiosks are primarily for prospective students and alumni (donors) and their experience is totally different than the student who is late to class. The scenarios can keep on going but they always start with understanding the user journey.
None of these solutions are about technology or about having big giant maps or “polygon based designs” or A/R enhanced routing. It always starts with the user experience and ends with simplicity. The KISS principal always wins in the end. At least that’s how we think about it at TouchSource.