User backlash has become a predictable reaction to redesigns of Facebook. Polls show that 94% of people disapprove of recent changes to the site layout, rejecting the ‘stream and filter’ system.

It seems, as Robert Scoble puts it, that Facebook has “pissed off its users” with each reinvention it undertakes. Back in 2006, the introduction of a newsfeed sparked  major outcry, with users petitioning and boycotting the changes. Today, people are just as furious: a disgruntled mob – one million strong – has pressured Facebook into bringing back some ‘old’ design and user experience features.

Why are people so upset?

Popular opinion suggests that Facebook isn’t listening to its customers – that it pursues revenue over the needs of its users. The digital community has spent much time listing out the problems with the new layout and scolding Facebook for not delivering on their promise to create a product that helps people learn about and share with others around them. The news feed, for example, has lost a key algorithm that regulates what and how much of your friend’s activity you receive. Now, you get everything and it’s up to you to filter it. This added responsibility and influx of information is, according to feedback, overwhelming.

It’s easy to get caught up in, and agree with, all the criticism thrown at Facebook. You can’t ignore the sheer volume of negative comments and expansive reasoning behind each design flaw. Or can you?

In 2002, Princeton’s Daniel Kahneman won a Nobel prize for discovering that people are impacted more by the loss of familiar product experiences than the benefits presented by new, unfamiliar innovations. Regardless of improvements, people are inclined to stick to what they know. This insight – and it’s not just a theory – readily explains the anxiety that users feel at every announcement of redesign, the roar of disapproval at implementation and the warming to new features as time passes.

The feud between Facebook and its users conforms to a trend of ‘status-quo bias.’ Tech Crunch’s Michael Arrington already touched on the idea, warning that “making users happy is a suckers game” because you won’t be pushing the envelope. The lesson in Arrington’s comment: consumers are generally conservative when it comes to new product innovation. In fact, it’s well documented that the majority – approximately 84% – of the population are slow adopters.

Consider that a change to Facebook affects all users. The 84% of people that would rather go at their own pace, taking their time to adopt – if they adopt at all – are forced into new territory. This majority is not proactive about change and are more receptive to persuasion from trusted peers. Think about the times you’ve had to convince someone that Twitter wasn’t pointless or that Netflix is a good alternative to the video store. Once convinced to change, people will develop a new status quo. A new habit to hang onto.

The success of Facebook redesigns should not be measured solely on user backlash. It’s a necessary and common psychological reaction to change. A reaction worth monitoring but something that shouldn’t hinder innovation – assuming your organization is ‘innovation-led’.