Is it a good idea to have the same feature available from two different menus ?

Question

It happens sometimes that one feature seems to belong to more than one place.

Trivial example, let's say I've got the following menus :

• File
• Pending orders
• Accepted orders
• Tools
• Help

I've got a search feature, and the same search window work for both pending and accepted orders (it's just an 'order status' combo you can change)

Where does this search feature belongs?

• The Tools menu seems to be a good choice, but I'm afraid the users may expect the search accepted orders to be in the accepted orders menu, which would make sense

• Duplicating the menu entry in both pending and accepted order seems wrong to me.

What would you do? (And let's pretend we cannot merge the two orders menu into one single menu)

Answer 1

I would try the search in both the Accepted Orders and Pending Orders menus. However, user testing will show if this is a good idea or not. But it also depends on your user base.

You are doing user testing right?

Answer 2

Having a feature in multiple locations is not a bad thing. Consider the overall workflow for viewing both pending orders and accepted orders, and think of your new feature as a component, rather than a one-off entity.

After you map out exactly what tasks a user completes in the pending and accepted order viewing process, see where having the ability to search would provide value (by shortening the workflow or otherwise). This is where your search component belongs.

Answer 3

I think the problem you've run into is that you're thinking like a programmer. (code duplication bad). I'm not faulting you for it, I do the same thing. Multiple paths to the same screen, or multiple ways to handle the same process can actually be extremely beneficial. I would guess that more than one person is going to use your program and each probably have slightly different job functions. In essence, they have different needs for the application and will approach using it different ways. If you stick to the all items have one way of being accessed, some people will find the application beneficial and others won't. Sure all people can learn to do a task a certain way, but it won't make sense to some users. It's not intuitive (read familiar) to they way they are used to processing information, which means the application will ultimately be less beneficial to them. When people find a process (program etc.) frustrating, they won't adopt it. They find reasons why the process will need to be changed or abandoned.

An excellent example of the multiple approaches to a problem is with Adobe Photoshop. Normally there are at least 2 different ways to access a function. Most users only know of one, because that's all they are concerned with, but most users are really comfortable with using one, because it makes the most sense to them. With a little extra work, Adobe scored a huge win, because more people find their product intuitive.

Answer 4

The main thing to remember about UI is that all that really matters in the end is whether your design makes using your application or site a better experience for your users.

In the search example you list above you'll commonly see apps take two approaches:

1. Put the search feature in a single location and allow the user to filter the search by selecting pending or accepted, or
2. Put the search feature in both menus, already configured for the type of search to be done based on the menu it was launched from.

If you repeat the above choice for a number of factors you'll see a much more advanced (aka 'complicated') search interface for number one, and a much simpler (aka 'restrictive') search interface for number two.

Which one is best completely depends on your users. This is why many general applications have a simple search by default and a link to a more advanced search for those that want or need the additional capabilities; they're attempting to make everyone happy. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that if you're writing for a wide variety of people with different needs. If you're writing for a set of users with a restricted set of needs however, you can make some better choices.

In my experience your best bet is to work with one or two of your primary users and map out all of the steps they need to take to get each of the tasks the application will be helping them with accomplished. If there aren't a lot of branching points in that sequence of steps there shouldn't be a lot of choices or settings to make in the application; otherwise the users may feel that the app is harder to work with than it needs to be.

For the search example above, if the user has already navigated into the Pending Orders menu, the likelihood that they'll want to launch a search for Accepted Orders is very small and having to make that choice, or go elsewhere to do the search, will be an extra decision or action they'll need to take. Basic principle is if your user has already made a decision, use it; don't make them tell you again.

Use the UI you come up with as a first cut. Let your users, or a subset of them, try it out and make suggestions. If you have the option, watch them use it. You'll learn far more about how to improve the interface by seeing how they work with it than you will from what they tell you.

Answer 5

...you may already know this, but this is a good place to use the command\action pattern IMHO.

So to answer your question: IMO, yes, it is ok :) This situation is definitely warranted.

Answer 6

Generally you do not want the same menu item appearing in different menus. It adds complexity and clutter to the menu, and users will wonder if the two menu items are really the same or not. When it appears that a menu item belongs in two places, then you may have a more basic problem with your menu organization.

For instance, your example shows a menu bar that is organized by the class or attribute of the object the commands within act on. In general, the menu bar should be organized by category of action not type of object. For example, you could have a Retrieval menu for commands like Search and other means of displaying orders, and a Modify menu for processing the orders (e.g., updating, accepting, forwarding). Both menus would have menu items that apply to both types of objects, although some commands may apply to only one.

Organizing commands by object type is actually a good idea but it is better accomplished with a context menu (right click) than the menu bar.

Answer 7

Just put it under both menus and have it open your search window, pre-configured for the order type who's menu it was launched from. Name them accordingly and voila they're actually two different actions - even though they use the same code/component.

Keep the user-selectable "status combo you can change" in the search window active though so the user still can adjust the settings without relaunching it from the other menu... and then perhaps rethink the structure, see some of the great answers in here for ideas ^^