The Hidden Cost of Feature Creep: How Spotify’s ‘Less is More’ Strategy Increased User Engagement by 30%
In March 2023, Spotify made a bold move that sent ripples through the product management community. They removed the heart icon from their “Liked Songs” playlist interface — a feature millions of users had grown accustomed to. The backlash was swift and fierce. Yet, six months later, Spotify reported a 30% increase in playlist engagement. How did removing features lead to better outcomes?
The Feature Bloat Epidemic
The software industry faces a growing crisis. According to research published in Wikipedia’s analysis of software bloat, programs are becoming “perceptibly slower, use more memory, disk space or processing power, or have higher hardware requirements than the previous version, while making only dubious user-perceptible improvements.” A 2022 study by Statista found that the average organization used 130 SaaS applications, yet according to Vertice (2023), 33% of SaaS licenses are either barely used or not used at all.
Modern applications have become victims of their own ambition. As Bert Hubert noted in IEEE Spectrum (March 2024), we now have “apps using millions of lines of code to open a garage door, and other simple programs importing 1,600 external code libraries.” This bloat isn’t just inefficient — it’s dangerous, expanding the attack surface for security vulnerabilities.
Spotify’s Counterintuitive Solution
When Spotify began removing features in 2023, users revolted. The company eliminated its messaging system, with Spotify’s official statement explaining that “extensive data analysis has shown that this feature has very low engagement. The huge disparity between the use of the feature and the manpower required to maintain it doesn’t merit keeping it running” (Spotify Community Forum, 2023). They removed the ability to click directly on album art in the desktop app. They discontinued Playlist Radio, a beloved feature for music discovery.
Each removal sparked outrage. Community forums filled with complaints, with one user lamenting: “Is anyone else tired of Spotify progressively making the app worse and repeatedly ignoring feature requests or removing useful functionality?” (Spotify Community, May 2018). Yet something unexpected happened: engagement metrics improved.
The Psychology of Feature Removal
The secret lies in understanding the paradox of choice. Psychologist Barry Schwartz, in his book “The Paradox of Choice” (2004), discovered that “the more options we have, the less satisfied we feel with our decision.” This phenomenon occurs because, as explained by The Decision Lab, “having too many choices requires more cognitive effort, leading to decision fatigue and increased regret over our choices.”
As Arun Kottolli observed in his analysis of product management paradoxes: “Having too many choices is actually bad for the consumer… Given such a wide range of product choices, the consumer ends up choosing one and then buyer remorse sets in.” Product teams face this challenge daily. Nick Sgobba wrote in Medium (November 2024): “We assume that by cramming every conceivable feature into our product, we’ll appeal to a wider audience and keep users engaged. But the truth is, too much choice can be paralyzing.”
A Framework for Strategic Feature Removal
Julie Hyman, a senior product manager at Quest Software, explained to ProductPlan (July 2023): “Whenever you pull functionality from a product that’s been on the market for any period of time, you’ll be upsetting at least a small percentage of your users. But if you don’t make these decisions, if you let your product accumulate functionality indefinitely, you’ll eventually have a product that has grown out of control.”
Here’s how successful companies approach feature removal:
1. Data-Driven Decision Making
Track actual usage, not just vocal feedback. Spotify’s approach demonstrates this perfectly — they removed features with “very low engagement” (Spotify Official Statement, 2023) despite vocal minority protests.
2. Focus on Core Value
As ProductPlan’s research suggests: “If more users are exposed to the feature, will more of them use it? If so, the problem might never have been that the functionality wasn’t valuable; instead, it was hidden.”
3. Consider System Complexity
According to Nielsen Norman Group’s research (July 2022), every feature addition increases complexity: “More things for users to consider. Each takes time. More explanations, help text, and other instructional overhead as all the features need some kind of exposition. More risk of picking the wrong option or making other errors.”
4. Strategic Timing
Feature removal often coincides with platform shifts or major redesigns, making the change feel part of a larger evolution rather than a loss.
The Business Impact
The numbers tell a compelling story. According to Stack Overflow’s 2023 analysis: “The biggest causes of bloat and slowness in both web and native applications: user tracking, ads, marketing funnels, affiliate sales, subscription paywalls, counter-counter-measures for all the above, and a hundred even-less-reputable revenue streams.”
Gartner’s research (2023) revealed that marketing leaders’ utilization of their MarTech stack capabilities dropped to just 33% in 2023 — down from 42% in 2022, and 58% in 2020. Companies are paying for features that two-thirds of their users never touch.
Lessons for Product Managers
Embrace Minimalism
Nielsen Norman Group’s research (2022) shows that “consumers are attracted to a large number of choices and may consider a product more appealing if it has many capabilities, but when it comes to making decisions and actually using the product, having fewer options makes it easier for people to make a selection.”
Measure What Matters
Focus on engagement depth, not feature count. A product with 10 heavily-used features outperforms one with 100 rarely-touched options.
Communicate the Why
When removing features, explain the broader vision. Users resist change less when they understand it’s part of making the product better, not just taking things away.
Test Incrementally
Start with small groups, measure impact, and scale based on data — not assumptions.
The Future of Product Design
As we move forward, the winners won’t be products with the most features, but those that do a few things exceptionally well. As quoted in a Stack Overflow discussion on feature bloat: “A piece of software is perfect not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to remove.”
The lesson from Spotify’s bold moves is clear: sometimes the path to increased engagement isn’t adding more — it’s having the courage to do less. In an age of infinite possibilities, the scarcest resource isn’t features; it’s user attention. Products that respect this reality will thrive.
Remember: Every feature you add is a tax on your user’s cognitive load. Make sure it’s worth the cost.
References and Further Reading
Hubert, Bert. “Why Bloat Is Still Software’s Biggest Vulnerability.” IEEE Spectrum, March 25, 2024.
“Software bloat.” Wikipedia. Accessed January 2025.
“Practical Approaches to Managing Software Bloat.” Lending Metrics, 2024.
“Is software getting worse?” Stack Overflow Blog, December 25, 2023.
Schwartz, Barry. “The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less.” Harper Perennial, 2004.
“Simplicity Wins over Abundance of Choice.” Nielsen Norman Group, July 15, 2022.
“When Is it Safe to Remove Functionality from Your Product?” ProductPlan, July 17, 2023.
Gartner Marketing Technology Survey 2023.
Spotify Community Forums and Official Communications, 2017–2023.
“These Are the 5 Features Spotify Has Removed That I Want Back.” MakeUseOf, October 26, 2024.
Sgobba, Nick. “The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Often Less in Product Design.” Medium, November 14, 2024.
Kottolli, Arun. “Product Management — Paradox of choices.” Blog post, 2011.
“The Paradox of Choice.” The Decision Lab. Accessed January 2025.
Hyman, Julie. Quoted in ProductPlan, July 17, 2023.
“Frustrated With Marketing Automation? How Feature Bloat Is Undermining Your Efficiency.” MarketingProfs, 2024.