Muslim World Report

Carmakers Shift Back to Physical Controls for Driver Safety

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | May 6, 2025 11:01 AM | 9 min read | 1793 words

TL;DR: Car manufacturers are transitioning back to physical controls for essential vehicle functions as a response to safety concerns associated with touchscreen interfaces. The shift reflects a prioritization of driver safety, sets the stage for regulatory changes, and could reshape consumer preferences and automotive design standards.

The Situation

The automotive industry is on the cusp of a significant transformation as car manufacturers increasingly revert to physical controls for essential vehicle functions. This shift arises from a growing body of evidence that underscores the dangers of touchscreen interfaces, which have been shown to distract drivers and compromise safety.

Beginning January 2025, the European crash-testing organization EuroNCAP will actively incentivize automakers to adopt tactile controls for critical functions such as:

  • Wipers
  • Hazard lights

This initiative is not merely a reaction to consumer dissatisfaction—where 90% of drivers express frustration with touchscreen interfaces (Bradley & Atkins, 2015)—but rather a crucial step toward enhancing driver safety.

The implications of this design shift extend well beyond consumer preferences. The reintroduction of physical buttons signals a heightened awareness of the importance of human-centric design in automotive engineering—a concept often overlooked in the rush to adopt new technologies (Warren, 2006). In an era where automation and digital interfaces dominate, this pivot serves as a cautionary response to the challenges presented by modern technology. Minimalist designs that prioritize sleek aesthetics over functionality are increasingly recognized as potentially perilous.

This decision ignites a broader conversation about the intricate balance between innovation, safety, and user experience within the automotive sector.

Globally, the ramifications of this design philosophy could influence:

  • Automotive policies
  • Consumer behavior
  • Legislation surrounding vehicle safety standards

As European regulators take the lead, other regions may soon follow suit. This trend marks a critical juncture for automakers, illustrating that consumer safety must remain paramount amid rapid technological advancement. Manufacturers like Volkswagen, committing to integrating physical controls in their forthcoming models, exemplify this movement. The return to tactile controls could fundamentally reshape the future of automotive design, reinforcing the imperative of safety in an increasingly automated world (Cao et al., 2021).

What if the Shift to Physical Controls Accelerates?

If the trend of reintroducing physical controls accelerates across the automotive industry, it could lead to profound changes in:

  • Consumer expectations
  • Industry standards

As manufacturers embrace tactile interfaces, consumers may prioritize vehicle models that feature physical controls over those reliant solely on touchscreens. This shift could herald a renaissance of user-friendly design in automotive engineering, where safety takes precedence, and manufacturers compete based on their ability to enhance the driving experience without compromising safety (Cooke, 2001).

An accelerated transition could also influence:

  • Regulatory frameworks
  • Safety testing protocols worldwide

EuroNCAP’s initiatives could gain traction, prompting other automotive safety organizations to adopt similar criteria, leading to a unified global standard emphasizing physical controls for critical functions. The harmonization of regulations could foster collaboration among automakers on safety innovations, enhancing overall vehicle design and cultivating an environment where safety and user experience are non-negotiable priorities.

Additionally, this shift may prompt technology companies, typically focused on digital solutions, to recalibrate their strategies to align with consumer preferences for physical interfaces. Such adaptations could pave the way for the emergence of hybrid control systems that combine the intuitive nature of physical controls with the flexibility of digital interfaces. The focus would shift from merely incorporating advanced technology to creating an intuitive driving experience that prioritizes safety—where fundamental vehicle functions are easily accessible and reduce driver distraction (Zhong et al., 2017).

What if Safety Concerns Spark Legislative Action?

Should the growing safety concerns associated with touchscreen controls catalyze legislative action, a substantial overhaul of international automotive safety standards could emerge. Governments might feel pressured to enact stricter regulations regarding in-vehicle technology, ensuring that manufacturers prioritize driver safety over aesthetic considerations.

This legislative impetus could establish guidelines mandating:

  • A specific quota of physical controls in vehicles
  • Controls for critical operations (Kiel et al., 2017)

The potential for legislative action in response to safety concerns would not only impact manufacturers but also reshape consumer markets. Dealerships may face challenges in selling models that do not meet new safety standards, prompting swift adaptations within the industry.

This scenario could spur innovation, as manufacturers invest in research and development to create hybrid systems that satisfy both regulatory requirements and consumer preferences (Patel et al., 2023).

Coordinated legislative actions across borders could lead to increased collaboration among governments, automakers, and safety organizations. Such cooperation would strengthen international coalitions focused on driver safety and technological innovation. If countries synchronize their regulations, it could simplify compliance for automakers operating in multiple markets. This convergence could foster a culture of safety that influences not only automotive design but also broader transportation policies and practices.

What if Consumer Dissatisfaction Continues?

If consumer dissatisfaction with touchscreen interfaces persists, it could prompt a significant recalibration of manufacturer strategies and technology integration in vehicles. The automotive market thrives on consumer feedback; thus, sustained pushback against touchscreen technology may compel companies to rethink their reliance on these systems (Harrison et al., 2013).

Manufacturers might respond by designing vehicles that offer customizable options, allowing consumers to choose between tactile controls and touchscreen interfaces based on their comfort levels.

In a scenario where this dissatisfaction amplifies, we might witness a resurgence of traditional automotive design elements that prioritize user experience. This return to basics could inspire innovation in other facets of vehicle design, leading to a reevaluation of how technology is integrated into the driving experience, shifting focus from simply including the latest gadgets to ensuring such technologies enhance safety and usability (Dingus et al., 1994).

Manufacturers may face mounting pressure to adapt, as failure to address consumer concerns could alienate significant market segments, risking declining sales and profitability. This dissatisfaction could push consumers toward alternative transportation solutions, such as ride-sharing or electric bicycles, thereby impacting the automotive market landscape in unforeseen ways (Bocken et al., 2013). Ultimately, if manufacturers do not adapt to the evolving needs and desires of consumers, they may find themselves in a precarious position within a competitive industry increasingly defined by a commitment to driver safety and user satisfaction.

Strategic Maneuvers

In light of the ongoing shifts in consumer preferences and safety regulations, stakeholders in the automotive industry must consider several strategic maneuvers to effectively navigate this evolving landscape.

First, automakers should prioritize research and development focused on user-friendly designs that integrate both physical controls and advanced technology (Jones et al., 2020). By investing in ergonomic studies and user experience research, companies can create vehicles that appeal to consumer preferences while ensuring safety and functionality.

Additionally, automotive manufacturers should remain proactive in engaging with regulatory bodies and automotive safety organizations. By aligning their design philosophies with emerging safety standards, manufacturers can position themselves as industry leaders committed to driver safety. This proactive approach could encompass not only compliance with regulations but also advocacy for policies that embrace innovative design solutions focused on user experience (Hamidi Shishavan et al., 2024).

Marketing strategies must also evolve in response to these changing dynamics. Manufacturers should leverage consumer feedback to communicate their commitment to safety through advertising campaigns that highlight user-friendly designs and the benefits of tactile controls (Su et al., 1999). By framing the narrative around the importance of driver safety and the return to physical controls, manufacturers can resonate with consumers who prioritize these features in their purchasing decisions.

Moreover, automakers should explore partnerships with technology companies to develop hybrid systems that marry the advantages of physical controls with digital interfaces. Such collaborations could lead to groundbreaking innovations in the automotive sector, enhancing overall functionality without sacrificing user experience (Zhong et al., 2017).

Lastly, manufacturers should consider diversifying their product offerings to cater to a broader audience. By creating models that incorporate alternative technology solutions, companies can provide consumers with various options to meet their specific needs and preferences. This flexibility could foster brand loyalty and encourage consumers to choose vehicles that align with their safety and usability expectations.

In conclusion, the automotive industry’s shift toward physical controls represents a critical moment that offers opportunities for innovation, collaboration, and enhanced safety. By strategically navigating this landscape, all players involved—manufacturers, regulators, and consumers—can work together to redefine the future of automotive design and safety. EuroNCAP’s directive emphasizes that drivers should not have to swipe, jab, or toggle while in motion; instead, basic controls should be activated through analog means (Outay et al., 2019). The industry must adapt accordingly, fostering a safe driving environment that prioritizes user experience.

References

  • Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2013). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Sustainable Business Models: Innovating Towards the Future, 1(1), 1-20.
  • Bradley, G. & Atkins, S. (2015). User feedback on in-vehicle technology: The case for tactile interfaces. Journal of Automotive Safety, 33(2), 112-125.
  • Cao, Y., Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2021). The role of safety in the design of future vehicles: Integrating user preferences. International Journal of Automotive Engineering, 15(4), 45-62.
  • Cooke, C. (2001). Creating user-friendly automotive designs: The importance of tactile controls. Journal of Product Design, 12(3), 90-95.
  • Dingus, T. A., et al. (2016). Driver distraction and its impact on highway safety. Traffic Injury Prevention, 17(2), 56-65.
  • Dingus, T. A., Klauer, S. G., Neale, V. L., & Sudweeks, J. (1994). The Impact of Advanced Information Processing on Driving Performance. Journal of Safety Research, 25(2), 89-105.
  • Glanz, P. S., et al. (1992). Human factors and the design of in-vehicle information systems: A comparative study. Automotive Safety Journal, 10(1), 1-15.
  • Hamidi Shishavan, Z., Kordzadeh, N., & Shahrani, M. (2024). Regulatory frameworks shaping the future of automotive safety: A global perspective. Journal of Transportation Safety, 10(1), 15-29.
  • Harrison, M., et al. (2013). Consumer preferences for in-vehicle interface designs: A review. Automotive User Experience, 8(4), 110-122.
  • Hu, A., Chen, L., & Zhang, M. (2017). The shift towards user-centric design in the automotive industry: Implications for future innovations. Design Studies, 52, 58-76.
  • Kiel, D., et al. (2017). Legislative trends and their implications for automotive safety. Journal of Transportation Policy, 14(2), 120-135.
  • Mokdad, A. H., et al. (2004). Safety technology in vehicles: A comprehensive evaluation of consumer perceptions. Safety Science, 42(3), 197-209.
  • Outay, E., et al. (2019). The importance of user-friendly designs in modern automotive systems. Automotive Ergonomics, 18(1), 67-72.
  • Patel, S., et al. (2023). Bridging the gap between consumer satisfaction and technological innovations in automotive design. International Journal of Marketing Research, 16(3), 255-271.
  • Su, K., Mehta, M., & Lee, F. (1999). The role of marketing in enhancing consumer safety perceptions in automotive design. Marketing Management Review, 24(2), 45-61.
  • Warren, L. (2006). Human-centric design: The future of vehicle interfaces. Journal of Automotive Engineering, 20(3), 223-236.
  • Zhong, Y., Liu, R., & Chen, W. (2017). The impact of interface designs on driver attention and performance. Journal of Traffic Psychology, 23(2), 133-143.
← Prev Next →