We'd rather sell you fewer products because a routine you'll actually finish beats a routine that looks impressive on a shelf. Most skin concerns respond to a small number of consistently used products more reliably than to a long stack of them, and every extra step is another point where the routine can fall apart or where two actives can conflict with each other.
This isn't a pricing strategy dressed up as philosophy. It shapes what we build and what we don't.
The 10-step routine problem
The multi-step routine format, popularized well beyond its country of origin, works on an assumption: that skin benefits from layering many products, each targeting a different concern. In practice, for a lot of people, it creates two problems instead of solving one.
First, more products means more chances for ingredient conflicts, like an exfoliating acid under a retinoid, or multiple actives stacked without enough buffer. That's a common cause of the redness and sensitivity people then try to solve with yet another product. Second, longer routines are harder to sustain. A 10-step morning-and-night routine that gets skipped three days a week does less for skin than a 3-step routine done daily. Consistency, not step count, is what actually drives results over months.
We wrote about this tension already in How to Simplify Your Skincare Routine Without Losing Results. The short version: "simple" and "effective" aren't opposites, they're usually the same routine.
Why more products can work against you, not just cost more
Beyond conflicts and consistency, there's a subtler issue: it gets harder to know what's actually working. If a routine has eight products and skin improves, there's no way to tell which two or three did the work and which were along for the ride. If skin reacts badly, isolating the cause becomes a process of elimination across eight variables instead of two or three. A smaller routine is also a more legible one, for you and, if it ever comes up, for a dermatologist trying to help you troubleshoot.
This is part of why we wrote Why We Stopped Chasing "Stronger" Actives (And What We Do Instead) as a companion piece to this one. The two problems are related: brands push toward more potency and more product count for the same reason, because both look like "more value" on a shelf or a product page, even when neither reliably produces better skin.
A specific, honest example
We don't have a sourced customer case study to cite here yet, so we'll describe the mechanism instead, because it's the more useful and honest thing to hand you.
Take a basic concern like dullness. A common response is to add: a separate brightening serum, an exfoliating toner, a vitamin C product, and a mask, on top of an existing cleanser and moisturiser. Several of those ingredients compete for the same job (brightening) through different mechanisms, at different pH levels, some of which cancel each other out or increase irritation without adding benefit. A cleanser, a well-formulated moisturiser with a brightening active like niacinamide, and daily sunscreen will often do more for visible dullness over 4-6 weeks than the five-product version, because sun exposure alone can undo a lot of pigmentation work, and because the skin isn't being pulled in four directions by four separate formulas.
Where fewer products still means genuinely effective ones
"Fewer products" only works as a philosophy if the products that remain are formulated to actually do their job. That's a different discipline than adding more steps: each product has to carry real weight. Our Rice Brightening Serum, for example, is built to combine a brightening active with hydration support (vitamin E and sodium hyaluronate) in one step, rather than asking someone to layer a separate hydrating serum underneath a separate brightening one. If you're deciding between simplifying a crowded routine and adding yet another product to an already long one, that's the kind of substitution worth considering first.
We're not against a multi-step routine for someone who enjoys it and whose skin tolerates it well. Some people find the ritual of it genuinely calming, and that has real value too. What we're against is the assumption that more steps is the default correct answer, or that skipping products means skipping care.
FAQ
Is a longer skincare routine automatically more effective?
No. More steps increase the chance of ingredient conflicts and make the routine harder to sustain consistently, which often matters more for results than product count.
How many products does a basic skincare routine actually need?
A cleanser, a moisturiser, and daily sunscreen cover the fundamentals for most people. A targeted active (like a brightening or hydrating serum) can be added as a fourth step once those basics are consistent.
Can using too many products at once damage skin?
It can contribute to irritation, barrier disruption, and breakouts, particularly when multiple exfoliating or active ingredients are layered without enough buffer between them or enough recovery time.
If I already have a long routine, should I cut it all down at once?
Gradual is usually safer. Removing products one at a time makes it easier to notice what your skin actually needs and what was unnecessary, rather than reacting to multiple changes at once.
Does selling fewer products mean Lush Rituals makes less revenue per customer?
Per order, potentially yes. We'd rather have customers who trust the brand and keep coming back to a routine that works than customers who buy a lot once and then feel let down.
Related reading: Why We Stopped Chasing "Stronger" Actives (And What We Do Instead), How to Simplify Your Skincare Routine Without Losing Results, 10-Step Korean Routine vs a Minimal 3-Step Routine: Which Wins Long-Term?, Can Too Much Skincare Actually Damage Your Skin? Yes, Here's How