The eye lands somewhere whether you planned it or not. These are the four ways it gets sent to the wrong place.
Hierarchy is where attention actually goes — and attention is zero-sum. A logo that wins, five buttons that tie, a zoo of mismatched icons, a mood board with no mood: each one spends the eye’s single glance on the wrong thing. The fix is never ‘more’; it’s deciding what wins and making everything else step back.
Concept 03 · Hierarchy
“Make the Logo Bigger”
The intent: the logo’s job is to be there, not to win. The eye lands on what the user came to do; the logo sits quietly in the corner doing brand work.
How it dies — in three acts
L
How you claw it back — the method
Name the goal. What is the user here to do? That element wins, full stop.
Rank the rest. Everything else, the logo included, is support. Size accordingly.
Shrink the brand. Logo to header/corner size. Recognised, not stared at.
Show the data. If pushback comes, the bounce rate and heatmap settle it, not opinions.
Step 1 · what’s competing for first look
Why this works — hierarchy is zero-sum: every pixel of attention the logo takes, the action loses. Brands aren’t built by being the biggest thing on a screen — they’re built by the product working. Let the user succeed and they’ll remember the logo just fine.
Concept 03 · Hierarchy
The Call to Action
The intent: one primary action per screen, unmistakable. Everything else is quieter. The point of hierarchy is that the eye knows where to click without reading.
How it dies — in three acts
How you claw it back — the method
Pick the one. What single action does this screen exist for? That’s your primary.
Restyle. One primary style, used once. The eye locks onto it instantly.
Lock the components. Primary/secondary/link as components so ‘one more button’ has to pick a tier.
Step 1 · the buttons on screen
Why this works — more choices feel generous and convert worse — every equal option splits attention and adds a decision. One clear primary isn’t bossy; it’s a kindness. You’ve already decided what’s best, so show them.
Concept 03 · Consistency
Iconography
The intent: one icon set, one style — same weight, same corners, same metaphor logic. Icons are a language; mixing sets is mixing accents mid-sentence.
How it dies — in three acts
How you claw it back — the method
Inventory. Screenshot every icon in the product. The mismatches jump out.
Pick one set. Choose a single family with the coverage you need.
Replace or draw. Swap the strays; for gaps, draw new ones in the set’s exact style.
Lock the library. Put them in the component library so the next ‘quick grab’ isn’t an option.
Step 1 · the mismatched icons
Why this works — icons are read as a set; consistency makes them a language instead of clip-art. A single off-style icon is a typo in that language — small, but it quietly tells the user ‘nobody’s minding the details here.’
Concept 03 · Direction
The Mood Board
The intent: a mood board is a decision, not a collection. Five images that share one feeling beat two hundred that share nothing but your browser history.
How it dies — in three acts
How you claw it back — the method
Name the feeling. Three words for how it should feel. Everything serves those words.
Cull hard. Remove anything that doesn’t obviously support the three words. Most of it goes.
Get to five. Five images, one direction. If two fight, one leaves.
Caption it. One line on why each made the cut, so the board argues for itself in the meeting.
Step 1 · what’s on the board
Why this works — a mood board’s job is to remove options, not collect them. Two hundred pins is procrastination that looks like progress. Five images that genuinely agree do the one thing a board is for: end the argument about direction before the work starts.
The Crime Scene
One landing page. Four crimes in plain sight — tap the one stealing the most attention.
logo
LOGO
buttons
icons
mood board
Spot the crime — Where the Eye Goes
11 quick ones. You’ve made at least half of these. No judgement.
Confession booth · Where does the eye get lost?
The confession booth — deal yourself a sin
“
—
— anonymous designer (probably you)
You’ve learned the tells
You can steer the eye now — one focal point, one primary action, one icon family, one feeling. The logo sits in the corner, the CTA is unmissable, and the page stops asking the user to choose where to look.
The Hall of Shame
The usual suspects in the fight for attention. Tap to read the rap sheet.
The Billboard Logo
‘Can we make the logo pop?’
tap to flip →
The Billboard Logo
the crime
The logo grown until it eclipses the one thing the user actually came to do.
the fix
Name the goal, shrink the brand to corner size, let the action win. Brands are built by the product working.
The Wall of CTAs
‘Let’s offer every option.’
tap to flip →
The Wall of CTAs
the crime
Five equally-loud buttons — the eye bounces, the user stalls and often just leaves.
the fix
One primary, used once; secondaries ghosted, tertiaries as links. One clear choice is a kindness.
The Icon Zoo
‘I just grabbed one quickly.’
tap to flip →
The Icon Zoo
the crime
Icons from three sets — mismatched weights and corners that quietly say nobody’s minding the details.
the fix
One family. Swap the strays, draw gaps in the set’s exact style, lock the library.
The 200-Pin Fog
‘Let me gather a few more.’
tap to flip →
The 200-Pin Fog
the crime
Two hundred pins that share nothing but browser history — procrastination dressed as progress.
the fix
Name the feeling in three words, cull hard, get to five images that agree. A board removes options.
The Pushback Playbook
The questions you actually get about hierarchy and direction — the calm way to defend the work.
How do I actually say no to ‘make the logo bigger’?
Don’t argue taste — argue the goal. ‘The user is here to do X; every pixel the logo takes, that action loses.’ If they push, show the bounce rate or a quick heatmap. Hierarchy is zero-sum, and a number ends the debate a feeling can’t.
My mood board has 200 pins and no direction. How do I get to one?
A board’s job is to remove options, not collect them. Name the feeling in three words, cull anything that doesn’t obviously serve them (most of it goes), and get to five images that genuinely agree. Caption each so the board argues for itself in the meeting.
Why is one clear button better than offering five choices?
Five equal buttons feel generous and convert worse — every option splits attention and adds a decision. Pick the one action the screen exists for, make it the only loud thing, demote the rest to ghosts or links. You’ve already decided what’s best; show them.
My icons come from three different sets. Does anyone actually notice?
Not consciously — they just feel that ‘nobody’s minding the details.’ Icons are a language; a mismatched weight or corner is a typo in it. Pick one family, swap the strays, and for gaps draw new ones in that exact style.
🧩
Up next · Part 4
One Source of Truth
Systems, real content, and the states nobody designs — the unglamorous half that decides whether it holds together.