|
![]() |
![]() |
|
Web design and development involves three levels:
Some classic mistakes in managing the design of a website are :
Granted, these days, you need a website simply to be considered a
professionally run organization (not being on the Web is like not having a
fax machine: people think you are a fly-by-night). Thus, it is OK
to make a "business-card site" with a small amount of corporate image
building, directions to your various facilities, and the annual report and
other investor information. However, doing so is not the most effective
use of the Web, and a site along these lines should only be built as a
result of an explicit decision not to invest in active use of the Web for
business.
Most companies should start their web design project by finding out ways
in which they can provide true customer value on their site. Give users
benefits from spending time on your site, allow them to do business with
you, and their money will follow.
The site structure should be determined by the tasks users want to perform
on your site, even if that means having a single page for information from
two very different departments. It is often necessary to distribute
information from a single department across two or more parts of the site,
and many subsites will have to be managed in collaboration between
multiple departments.
A classic sign of a mismanaged website is when the homepage has a button
for each of the Senior Vice Presidents in the company. Remember, you don't
design for your VPs, so it will be quite common that you can't tell them
what "their" button is on the homepage.
Users get very annoyed when they move between pages on a site and find
drastically varying designs at every turn. Consistency is the key
to usable interaction design: when all interface elements look
and function the same, users feel more confident using the site because
they can transfer their learning from one subsite to the next rather than
having to learn everything over again for each new page.
The best way to ensure consistency is to have a single department that is
responsible for the design of the entire site. If this cannot be done, at
least have a central group that oversees all design work and that is
chartered to enforce a single styleguide. Even if the central group does
not actually design any pages themselves, considerable consistency can be
achieved if the various departments can turn to a single source of design
advice. Even better: have the central design group maintain the templates
and deliver updated and revised graphics as needed.
The Web currently changes so rapidly that a major redesign is needed at
least once per year simply to avoid a completely outdated look and to
accommodate changing user expectations. Additional maintenance is needed
throughout the year to bring fresh content online, reorganize and revise
old pages, and avoid linkrot.
If you have established a design styleguide and a set of page templates in
order to avoid the inconsistencies mentioned under Mistake 4, you also
have to budget for maintenance of these design resources. If the
styleguide and templates do not evolve with changing needs, you will
rapidly see design entropy set in and the site will fall apart. The most
common example is the need for new stock graphics, new headerbars, new
navigation buttons, or new icons. If you don't have an art director on
standby for this type of requests, then the page developer who needed the
new graphic will outsource it and the site's look-and-feel will start to
diverge.
The only way to get great Web content is to have your staff
develop the content for the Web first. Then, if you still
have a need for printed collateral, transfer the text and images to a
desktop publishing application and massage it into a form that is suited
for print. Of course, your print materials will suffer from this
procedure, so if you want great Web content and great brochures,
you will have to have two teams develop two sets of content.
Content creators have been trained to develop linear content for
traditional media: they have spent their entire careers doing so. They
have to consciously push themselves to work differently than their natural
approach to content, so unless you force your content developers to
produce their material specifically for the Web, you will end up with
substandard Web content
If you are running a campaign with a certain theme, have it include a URL
to a page that follows up on that theme. The payoff page should not be a
copy of the ad (the customer presumably already read the ad before going
to the Web), though a link to an online version of the ad might be
appropriate to help users who go to the page without having seen the ad.
Instead, use each medium for what it's good at. For example, a game
company could use TV commercials to make people think that a game
looks good and use the Web to allow them to play a simplified
version of the game.
Users are not designers: no matter how many focus groups you run, they
cannot tell you how to design your navigation. Focus groups are great for
getting information about users' current concerns and areas where they
would like help, but they will rarely teach you how to reinvent the
fundamental way you do business. Listening carefully to customers will
often reveal frustrations that can turn into opportunities for
improvement, but once you have an idea for an improvement, you must create
a prototype design and try it out with users in a usability test to see
whether it really works for them.
There are endless stories of customers who say in focus groups that they
would love a certain feature, but who never use it once it is launched
because it is too cumbersome, too expensive, or doesn't really meet their
needs in real use. The point is that market research forms the starting
point but has to be supplemented with usability engineering if you want a
design that works when people try to use it.
You may commission a traditional market research firm to question
thousands of customers to measure whether they like your website more or
less than your competition. Once you know that your site scores, say, 5.6
and your worst competitor scores 5.9, you may know that you need to
improve, but you will not know how to improve. Specific insights
into the detailed design of your site and the parts that must change
because they are confusing, slow users down, or do not match the way users
want to work can be derived from watching four or five users as
they actually use your site to perform real tasks. A day or two
in the usability lab and you will have a long list of changes that will
improve your design.
It is less common to find sites that only do user testing and never
conduct any market research, but that would be a mistake too.
Ask your CTO and head of marketing what strategic thoughts they
have relating to terms like "disintermediation", "virtual project teams",
and "microtransactions." If they don't have any thoughts, they
had better start thinking now - before it's too late.
The Web enables completely new ways of doing business such as true
globalization (for example, " work-around-the-clock", where
projects are passed on to teams as the globe turns). If you don't grasp
these new business opportunities you will be toast in a few years.
The two classic errors in predicting the future of a technology shift are
to over-estimate its short-term impact and under-estimate its long-term
impact. The Web has been hyped to such an extent that people overestimate
what it can do the next year or two: most websites are not going to turn a
profit any time soon. But please don't underestimate what will happen once
we reach the goal of everyone, everywhere; connected. The
impact of networks grows by at least the square of the number of
connections, and the true value of the Web will be only be seen after
extensive business process reengineering.
|
Copyrights © 1995-1999 Maji Systems
All rights Reserved