Analyzing the best restaurant kiosk design practices by comparing two industry giants—and extracting lessons for your own implementation.
---
Ask anyone who uses QSR kiosks regularly, and you'll hear a clear consensus: some brands get it right, some get it wrong.
Among major chains, two names come up constantly in UX discussions. McDonald's kiosks are frequently criticized for cluttered layouts, confusing navigation, and aggressive pop-ups. Taco Bell's interface, in contrast, is often praised for intuitive customization and streamlined flow.
This article isn't about brand preference—it's about extracting UX lessons from real-world implementations. What can operators learn from the industry's largest experiments in self-order design?
---
| 📊 Calculate Your ROI → See the value of better UX |
🎯 Menu Board Audit → Get a UX assessment |
McDonald's and Taco Bell represent different approaches to the same problem: enabling customer self-service for complex, customizable orders.
McDonald's:
Taco Bell:
Both have substantial resources and experienced design teams. Their differences reflect deliberate choices, not capability gaps.
---
Let's examine the McDonald's kiosk experience based on consistent customer feedback themes.
Brand Recognition
Menu Comprehensiveness
Frequent Updates
Navigation Complexity Customer feedback consistently mentions difficulty finding items:
Pop-Up Overload The upselling approach is frequently criticized:
Visual Clutter Screens contain too much competing information:
Customization Friction Modifying an order is harder than it should be:
Payment Flow Confusion The path from order complete to payment completed isn't always clear:
---
The Taco Bell interface takes a different approach.
Linear Customization Flow Building an item feels logical:
Clear Pricing Price visibility is consistent:
Intuitive Modifiers Adding or removing items is straightforward:
Memory Features The system remembers customer preferences:
Speed to Checkout Fewer steps from decision to payment:
Dietary Filtering While customization is easy, filtering is limited:
Wait Time Estimation Expectations for order completion could be clearer:
Loyalty Integration Rewards program flow has some friction:
---
Abstracting from both examples, here are principles that drive effective kiosk design.
Each screen should focus on one decision:
Why it works: Reduces cognitive load, speeds decision-making, minimizes errors.
Show only what's needed now; reveal more on demand:
Why it works: Respects both browsing and goal-oriented customers.
At any point, users should know how to:
Why it works: Reduces anxiety, encourages exploration without fear of getting stuck.
Navigation elements should never move:
Why it works: Builds muscle memory, reduces scanning time, creates confidence.
Batch suggestions rather than interrupting:
Why it works: Respects customer flow, reduces abandonment, maintains trust.
---
How can operators apply these insights?
Conduct the "first-time customer test":
Compare your kiosk time to counter time with a skilled cashier. If the kiosk is significantly slower, UX improvements will increase adoption.
Not all UX issues are equal. Prioritize by:
1. Blocking issues: Customers can't complete basic tasks 2. High-friction points: Customers can complete but with significant effort 3. Annoyance factors: Experience is suboptimal but functional 4. Polish opportunities: Good could be great
Fix blocking issues first, even if expensive. They prevent all value from the kiosk investment.
Before major changes:
After changes:
Kiosk UX isn't "done" after launch:
---
Some menus are inherently harder to present than others.
A burger with 3 bun options, 4 patty sizes, 8 toppings, and 6 sauces has: 3 × 4 × 2^8 × 2^6 = over 3 million possible combinations
Presenting this complexity clearly requires:
How your menu is structured in database affects what's possible in interface:
Operators considering kiosk UX improvements should evaluate whether current database structure limits interface options.
Plan for menu evolution:
---
Kiosk interface design is vendor-specific software. SeenLabs contributes through:
Industry Analysis Benchmarking UX patterns across major QSR brands to identify what works and what doesn't.
Vendor Selection Guidance Helping operators evaluate kiosk solutions with informed questions about UX practices.
Integration Expertise Ensuring menu board content complements kiosk experience—consistent design language across touchpoints.
Best Practice Documentation Translating UX lessons into actionable guidelines for operators evaluating or implementing kiosk technology.
---
No QSR chain has perfected the kiosk experience. But the best implementations share common characteristics:
1. Single-task screens reduce cognitive load 2. Progressive disclosure respects different customer needs 3. Clear exit paths encourage exploration 4. Consistent placement builds confidence 5. Minimal interruptions maintain flow 6. Test with real customers, not assumptions 7. Iterate continuously—UX is never finished
Your kiosk doesn't need to match Taco Bell's exact approach. But it should reflect the principles that make any interface easy to use.
---
| 📊 Calculate Your ROI → See the value of better UX |
🎯 Menu Board Audit → Get a UX assessment |
---
About SeenLabs
SeenLabs builds digital signage that complements ordering experiences. We help operators create consistent, high-quality digital touchpoints across menu boards, kiosks, and mobile.