A quick search on the Web will highlight that there are many titbits and pieces of advice available for Web site developers to enhance Web site usability. These are for various reasons ignored or overlooked. Often it is a case of Web site developers and managers weighing up the pressures of limited time and resources versus taking the time to focus on usability, the advice being seen to be too academic or of not being truly aware of or concerned with user experience.
Web sites that are developed without understanding the importance of good usability lose sight of an individual users needs for clear Web site navigation. Individual user experience is lost and users “work around” the limitations of the Web site. This is a puzzling situation especially as users determine the success or failure of a Web site and, since the Web development money pool has dried up considerably since the heady days of the mid to late 90’s, there has been a renewed emphasis of the importance of limited Web development dollars needing to generate user friendly sites and results.
During the milk and honey period of big money start-ups and Internet hype, the “build it and they will come” approach without concern for usability worked enough of the time to become an entrenched practice. Novelty in the use of the media and speed of change enabled users to initially overlook some Web site usability flaws. As user numbers and experience increased, tolerance for poor Web site usability has drastically decreased, leaving frustrated developers with irritated and exasperated users and many unsuccessful Web site projects.
I have developed educational and university Web sites, managed and setup online course delivery systems and worked on corporate start ups and have to admit that my most valuable lessons came to me from the most un-academic projects ever. In 1999 I took over responsibility for the Web site of platinum selling rock band, Grinspoon. We have been able to develop a highly successful online strategy for this band, selling greater numbers of concert tickets, increasing and activating fanbase for positive action and drastically increasing band profile by improving Web site usability. The bottom line for educators and businesses is that high levels of Web site usability makes good business – improving information and student retention, reducing user fatigue, assisting in efficient user/organisational interaction and achieving Web site goals.
Since developing and refining our approach my firm has worked with ARIA award winning band Powderfinger, major international rock festivals, dance, R&B and pop acts, heavy metal bands as well as major universities and software companies. Initially we were amazed at how demanding the users of band Web sites were but they were representative in essence of many typical educational Web site users but more vocal and unafraid to criticise and offer advice to Web site developers. The outspokenness of users of our music Web site clients was a critical element in improving our approach to usability and eventually formed part of our competitive advantage.
Other types of Web site users (students, potential students, business clients) rarely make contact with developers to share their experiences and feelings except in extreme or highly negative cases. They either suffered in silence or went elsewhere. On one site we managed the statistics showed that 48% of users left after being forced to sit through a long initial homepage download. No one ever told us they hated the first page of the site. Do you know what your users think of your site usability? Your opinion of what they think is not their opinion. Hearing the truth directly from users can be hard to take especially if you developed the site yourself and are personally attached to its current state. Go through the exercise nonetheless. Your project will have a much greater likelihood of success.
Music fans and users of our “headbanger” sites often had a specific purpose, high motivation and interest and low boredom threshold; the perfect troublesome user for the lazy or inexperienced Web site developer and a great catalyst for improving usability.
I am pleased to distil some of the experience we have gained into three key points that make good sense and are easy and relatively cost and time efficient to implement.
1) Make it real and make it snappy!
Music fans want to find the latest news, gig dates and gossip. They want to share secrets and meet and engage with other fans and Web site users. Just like other Web site users they don’t want corporate double speak or marketing gibberish - they want real and meaningful content and they want it now. If you make them wait for it, hide things away in hard to access areas or provide numbing bureaucratic waffle that bores them, you will lose their interest and focus. In some cases you will lose them as fans, students or clients.
Usability expert Jakob Nielson says, when writing content for Web sites, start presenting content conclusion first. Remove the rubbish and enable users to access the core data as soon as possible. They appreciate it and will typically rate their interaction with your Web site as positive. We took this approach with the original Grinspoon Web site with great success. The site design brief was to design the navigation so that a five year old could use it (their fanbase is quite a bit older but we got the point). The original Web site content and band bio was cheesy, very hard sell and all supplied by the record label. We started at the conclusion and users appreciate the efficiency – no one wanted to read screen fulls of waffle.
Another high profile example of this approach is Google. Google’s Web site search it is elegant, fast loading and highly efficient as an effective tool. I believe its success also partially stems from its simple, usable and easy to comprehend interface, features that users accept as positive unconsciously. No wait and no clutter. A significant advantage over competing sites that were slower and cluttered.
2) Tolerance varies with regular use and user priorities
Not every user wants to see the fantastic Flash intro (or message from the chairman, slow loading school logo, corporate graphics or postage stamp sized video of the teacher blandly expanding a point) each time they check the Web site for tour dates (or marks, or assessment tasks etc). These indulgences take time to download and are repetitive, boring, very low priority content for users. Anything that creates a hurdle, extra step or barrier to accessing the site content is a negative. I encourage you to identify the priorities of your users and balance that with the priorities of your project.
In the final analysis however, what you want counts for little if it contradicts or prevents users achieving their priorities. The “cool vs tool” rule applies here. If the Web site is perceived by users to be there for cool purposes – viewing the latest film clip or downloading a new game then users are often tolerant of delays, and poor navigational elements. If however they want to use your Web site as a tool to check their marks, pay a bill, view a gig date or change their enrolment status poor usability will not be tolerated. Know this key difference in user tolerance and find out what their priorities are.
3) Change through user involvement and feedback
If it aint broke don’t fix it is an old axiom. Depends who you ask. How do you know your site is not broken? Have you asked your users? Don’t be afraid to ask users how you could improve your Web site delivery, features and usability. What they tell you may not always be possible, suitable or practical to implement but if it is (and often it will be) you can change to suit them. Market research, test and speak to your clients. Change your content, design and better service your users and watch the results. It’s not that hard to do and users will appreciate the involvement and response and change their behaviour very quickly. We have added many new features and improvements to our clients’ sites which have been lauded by users as a result of this process. The Web site mentioned earlier that lost 48% of its users on the first page of the Web site responded to the issue by reducing their download time considerably.
On a purely financial level and not directly related to Web site usability (but worth including as the approach and principle are similar), one of our music clients had an enormous amount of fan mail coming in via their Web site from under 18 aged fans complaining that the sold out national tour only catered to over 18’s in venues that served alcohol. We told the band that this was something that they should respond to. They promptly added an earlier under 18’s gig to the remaining dates of the tour so that they were playing two gigs a night and promoted this through the Web site. Every additional show was a sell out so they effectively played to twice as many fans, made twice the ticket and merchandise sales and pleased all of their underage fans. The band’s Web site was the catalyst for input from fans, change, and the publication and dissemination of the result.
Several online university subjects (units) I have worked with have been extremely unsuitable in terms of their usability. In one case I proposed to the institution that the sites be adjusted “on the fly” to better cater to the needs of the students but due to a variety of reasons the online course delivery systems were highly structured and this was deemed too difficult. Headbangers would not tolerate this lack of consideration and I warn teachers and institutions in the highly competitive educational sector not to ignore the usability concerns and needs of their Web site users. Just like our headbanging users future students experiencing poor Web site usability will switch to competing sites, institutions and subjects.
About the author:
Karey Patterson is the principal director of NTech Media in Lismore, NSW
