Google Maps
Exploring clarity and accessibility in a data-rich navigation interface
Project Type
Heuristic Evaluation
Tools
Figma, Photoshop, Miro
Timeline
February 2025
Skills
UI/UX, Usability Testing
This heuristic evaluation of Google Maps (Desktop) identifies key usability challenges that impact navigation, accessibility, and efficiency. Using Jakob Nielsen’s Ten Usability Heuristics, the analysis uncovered areas where the platform could better support users, particularly in transit route planning and location management.
The evaluation highlights three major areas for improvement:
01
Streamlining the Process for Saving Locations
Users experience confusion due to redundant options when saving locations, such as "Save" and "Add a Label." Consolidating these functions and introducing predefined categories (e.g., "Home" and "Work") would simplify the process and reduce cognitive load.
Google Maps does not clearly indicate when transit stations are undergoing renovations or have accessibility limitations. Adding warning icons and detailed notices in the route overview would help users—especially those with mobility needs—plan their trips more effectively.
03
Enhancing Clarity of Route Selection Labels
The current “Best Route” label is misleading, as it suggests an optimized route beyond just the fastest travel time. Renaming it to “Fastest Route” would provide more accurate expectations, reducing confusion. This change ensures clearer communication, helping users make more informed navigation choices.
By addressing these issues, Google Maps can improve user experience, enhance accessibility, and streamline trip planning. These recommendations align with usability best practices and will help create a more intuitive and efficient navigation experience for all users.
Introduction
Google Maps is one of the most widely used navigation platforms, offering real-time traffic updates, turn-by-turn directions, Street View, and location-based recommendations. Its intuitive interface, predictive search, and interactive elements make it a powerful tool for everyday navigation and trip planning. While Google prioritizes usability with features like multimodal transit options and offline maps, there are certain design choices, information overload, and navigation inconsistencies that can impact the user experience. In this evaluation report, I will outline the methodology used to assess the platform’s interface, the tasks and procedures conducted during the analysis, and key recommendations for improving usability, efficiency, and accessibility.
Methodology
This user research is based on a heuristic evaluation, a usability assessment method in which experts systematically analyze a digital interface against established usability principles. According to Jakob Nielsen, heuristic evaluation involves independent walkthroughs where experts identify and document usability issues based on a set of guiding principles or "heuristics" (Nielsen, 1994). The heuristic evaluation process involves usability experts interacting with a digital product—in this case, the desktop version of the platform—to identify potential usability concerns. Evaluators are assigned a series of tasks to complete, during which they document any interface issues that may hinder the user experience. Their documentation will note the heuristics violated as well as the severity rating.
Severity Rating
The severity rating of the heuristics violated was measured using a four-point scale, ranging from minor cosmetic inconsistencies to critical failures that prevent users from completing tasks. The severity is determined by three key factors:
Frequency
Persistence
A higher severity rating indicates a more urgent need for improvement while a lower severity rating indicates that the issue has minimal impact on the user experience. The details of the severity rating can be found below.
THE TASK
As a newly relocated resident of Long Island City, you need to efficiently navigate public transit for your hybrid job. Your primary objective is to find the fastest commute from your new home at 5-11 47th Avenue, Long Island City, NY to your office at PENN 11, 11 Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, while also ensuring accessibility. Additionally, you will explore key features such as bookmarking locations, verifying transit details, and customizing saved locations. To complete this task, you will be using Google Maps (Desktop) in the following order:
Search for your home address, 5-11 47th Avenue, Long Island City, NY, in Google Maps and save it under the “Home” category.
Search for your office address, PENN 11, 11 Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, in Google Maps and save it under the “Work” category.
Identify the quickest public transportation route from your home to your office.
Compare different transit options, such as subway and bus, and note the estimated travel time.
Check for real-time service updates or delays affecting your commute and determine if the transit stations included in your trip are accessible.
Check if your office address is accessible.
Key Findings & Recommendation
Expert evaluations of Google Maps (Desktop) uncovered several usability challenges that impact navigation, accessibility, and overall trip planning efficiency. Key findings include:
Lack of Visibility & Accessibility Changes
Limited Customization for Transit Preferences
Ambiguous Route Selection Labels
Inconsistent Accessibility Details
Inconsistent Display of Real-Time Transit Delays
Inability to Modify Saved Locations
Additionally, after each expert completed their usability evaluation, I, as the lead evaluator, synthesized the findings and compiled a final severity rating table to prioritize the identified issues based on their impact on user experience. I have outlined three targeted recommendations that improve accessibility, streamline user interactions, and enhance the overall efficiency of Google Maps. These recommendations focus on refining the process for saving locations, improving the visibility of station closures and accessibility changes, and ensuring greater clarity in transit route selection.
Recommendation 1: Streamline the Process for Saving Locations
When saving a location as a home or work address, users face complexity due to two separate sidebar options: "Save" and "Add a Label." The "Save" option adds locations to lists, while "Add a Label" requires manual entry without predefined choices. Although suggestions like "Home" and "Work" appear after typing, the lack of upfront options creates an inconsistent experience. This issue was noted in all three expert evaluations, leading me to assign a severity rating of 3 due to its impact on usability.
The redundancy between "Save" and "Add a Label" creates cognitive friction, and the absence of predefined choices increases user frustration. To improve clarity and usability, I recommend consolidating the saving process by removing the "Add a Label" option entirely and relying solely on the "Save" button. Keeping a single, dedicated option simplifies the interface and reduces confusion, as users no longer have to decide between two similar functions. Additionally, instead of requiring users to manually type in a label, the interface should present predefined choices such as "Home," "Work," "Gym," and "School," making the process faster and more intuitive. Users should still have the flexibility to create custom labels if needed, but providing visible, commonly used options upfront minimizes effort and enhances efficiency.
In addition, I adjusted the navigation bar for when saving locations to better align with Google Maps' existing design language. Previously, this element did not follow the rounded system used across other components in Google’s design system, making it feel visually inconsistent. By referencing the button styling that the nearby feature provides, I modified the design to ensure greater cohesion, creating a more seamless and unified interface.
By consolidating these functions and improving the label selection process, users will experience a more seamless and intuitive method for saving locations, reducing confusion and unnecessary steps. This change aligns with usability heuristics by enhancing recognition over recall, reducing friction in the user journey, and increasing overall efficiency.
Recommendation 2: Improve Visibility of Station Closures and Accessibility Changes
When viewing route details, stations undergoing renovations may be temporarily closed or have limited accessibility without this being clearly illustrated in the route overview. In some cases, stations remain operational but no longer provide accessibility features, which is critical information for users with mobility needs. The lack of clear communication can lead to unexpected disruptions for all travelers, particularly those who rely on accessibility accommodations.
To address this issue, I recommend indicating station renovations directly in the route overview by placing a visible warning icon next to affected stations. This icon would be consistent with the one used for potential delays or cancellations, with only the wording changed to reflect the specific issue. Additionally, providing details on the extent of the maintenance would help users better plan their routes, including information on which services remain operational and whether passengers need to use an alternative entrance or exit when entering or leaving the station. These improvements would help ensure users are well-informed and can adjust their plans accordingly.
By improving how station renovations and accessibility limitations are communicated, users can make better-informed travel decisions. These enhancements will increase the reliability of Google Maps for all users while ensuring that those with accessibility needs can plan their routes with confidence.
Recommendation 3: Enhance Clarity of Route Selection Labels
Google Maps currently labels the default transit option as “Best Route,” but this term can be misleading since the selection is based on travel time rather than user-specific preferences. What qualifies as the “best” route is subjective—some commuters may prioritize fewer transfers to avoid unnecessary train changes, while others might require accessible stations with elevators. Because “Best Route” is ambiguous, users may mistakenly assume that factors beyond speed, such as convenience or accessibility, are taken into account.
To improve clarity, I recommend changing “Best Route” to “Fastest Route.” Since Google Maps already defaults to the shortest travel time, this label would more accurately describe what is being prioritized. Users looking for other route preferences, such as fewer transfers or step-free stations, are still able to adjust their options within the “Route Options” menu. This small yet meaningful change would provide a clearer expectation of the selected route, reducing confusion and improving the overall navigation experience.
Conclusion
This heuristic evaluation of Google Maps highlights key usability challenges that impact navigation, accessibility, and efficiency. Through expert evaluations, it became evident that certain design inconsistencies—such as redundant location-saving options, unclear station closure visibility, and ambiguous route labels—create friction in the user experience. These issues not only hinder seamless trip planning but also pose significant accessibility barriers for users who rely on clear and accurate transit information.
By implementing the proposed recommendations, Google Maps can enhance its usability by simplifying location-saving features, improving visibility of station closures and accessibility changes, and clarifying route selection labels. These changes will reduce cognitive friction, increase efficiency, and ensure that users—particularly those with mobility concerns—can plan their trips with confidence.
The goal of our study is to prioritize recommendations that address usability issues with minimal effort while maximizing impact. To achieve this, we based our suggestions on Google Maps’ existing interface patterns to ensure that the proposed improvements are easy to implement and maintain consistency within the platform. This approach ensures a seamless navigation experience, allowing users to efficiently search for locations, plan routes, and access key information without unnecessary friction. As a team of usability experts, we are confident that our recommendations will enhance the overall usability of Google Maps, making it more intuitive and accessible for users navigating their daily commutes, trips, and local explorations.