While thinking through our new app, Groundhog, and trying to finalize the set of functions, it occurred to me that we were asking the questions out of order. We were looking at a list of important functions, and trying to remove the ones that weren’t essential. Each of these items is important and useful, or else they wouldn’t have been on the list in the first place. That makes it difficult to decide.

Many of the best products in the world today have a limited and clear call to action. Some have really only one orienting button to push. For example, Google has the search button (ignore the silly “I’m Feeling Lucky” button). The iPhone has the home button. Twitter has update.

Last night while working through the list in my head, I decided to start from scratch. What if Groundhog could have only one button?

As an exercise, think about all the other web apps that could be re-thought and simplified.

• Jumpchart : “Add Page“  – Every other function comes second to the creation of the basic building block- even the name of the site.

• Flickr: “Upload a Photo” – Ownership, and everything else about a photo is just meta information. Getting it on the server is the beginning.

• Delicious: “Add a Link” -Same as Flickr. Everything else is metadata, including ownership.

• Youtube: “Upload a Video” -Same story: everything else is metadata about the item.

In its simplest form, everything boils down to a nugget of information- the details that give the item context are secondary. We realized that with Staction. The important thing in Staction is the new thought you have to add to the workflow. The project, the time, the person who said it, all just make the new thought more relevant.

We’re trying really hard to realize the same thing about Groundhog. We’re starting with a blank canvas and thinking: “What is the first, and most relevant task to complete in order to make this app useful?”