Designing Empty States That Actually Help, Instead of Just Filling Space¶
An empty state - a screen with no data in it yet, no items created, nothing to show - is often the last screen anyone designs for a feature, treated as a minor edge case that just needs some placeholder text and maybe an icon. For a genuinely new user, though, the empty state is frequently the very first real screen of that feature they ever see, before they've created or added anything - which makes it one of the most consequential screens in the whole product for the exact audience least equipped to work around a poor one.
A Generic "No Data" Message Answers Nothing a New User Actually Needs¶
The most common, minimal-effort empty state - a plain "No items yet" with no further context - accurately describes the current state and does nothing to help a user understand what to do next. A new user looking at this screen doesn't just need to know the list is empty; they need to know what this feature is for, how to add their first item, and ideally, why they'd want to. A minimal empty state answers only the first of these, leaving the more important questions completely unaddressed.
The Empty State Is a Real Opportunity to Teach the Feature's Purpose¶
Because an empty state is often encountered before a user has any other context for a feature, it's a genuinely good moment to briefly explain what the feature does and why it's useful - not with lengthy explanation, but with a short, clear statement paired with a direct call to action to create the first item. This turns what's often treated as a dead-end placeholder screen into an actual onboarding moment for that specific feature, at exactly the point a new user needs it most.
Different Reasons for Being Empty Deserve Different Messaging¶
A list can be empty for genuinely different reasons - a brand-new user who's never created anything, an existing user whose search or filter simply returned no results, a user who deleted everything that used to be there - and each of these warrants a different message and different next action. A single generic empty state applied to all of these situations misses the chance to give contextually useful guidance: a filtered-empty-result state should suggest adjusting the filter, while a genuinely-never-used-this-feature state should suggest getting started, and treating them identically wastes a real opportunity to help.
A Well-Designed Empty State Can Reduce a Real Onboarding Drop-Off Point¶
For features where a user genuinely needs to take a first action before getting any value from the feature at all, the empty state is functionally the make-or-break moment for whether that user ever engages with the feature further. A clear, encouraging, low-friction empty state that makes the first action feel easy and worthwhile can measurably reduce the drop-off at exactly this point, whereas a bare, unhelpful empty state gives a hesitant new user no reason to push past it.
FAQ¶
How much design effort does an empty state actually warrant relative to other screens?
More than it typically gets by default - for any feature where the empty state is a genuinely common first experience for new users, it deserves deliberate design attention comparable to other onboarding-critical screens, not the leftover effort it often receives as an afterthought.
Should an empty state include a real example or sample data?
Often yes, where feasible - a realistic example of what a filled-in state looks like can communicate the feature's value more effectively than descriptive text alone, giving a hesitant new user a clearer picture of what they're working toward.
Is it worth designing multiple distinct empty states for the same feature?
For features where genuinely different empty scenarios are common (new user vs. filtered-to-zero-results vs. deleted-everything), yes - the additional design effort is usually justified by how much more useful and less confusing the resulting experience is for users in each specific situation.