Running a successful web design agency

Mike and Keir from Carsonified interview Marcus and Paul on how they have made Headscape the successful web design agency it is today.

Keir: Okay, hi Paul

Paul: Hello!

Keir: Thanks for joining us.

Paul: That’s alright!

Keir: Thanks for agreeing to let us turn the tables.

Paul: Are we not saying hello to Marcus?

Keir: Oh sorry, hello Marcus!

Paul: He’s refusing to talk now!

Marcus: Hello!

Keir: So we’ll ease you guys in gently, first of all to you Paul, obviously now your company has grown big and strong and you’ve moved on really from being a web designer / builder…

Marcus: I want to see where this is going!

Paul: You’re going to ask me what my job is aren’t you?!

Keir: No! I’m not going to ask that I’m just going to ask do you miss doing that, being hands on, that sort of thing?

Paul: I have moments of it, yeah. Because I’m somebody who has a short attention span, and I like skipping from thing to thing, I felt like I’d reached a point where when I was designing, all my designs were looking the same. Which was an indication that…

Keir: I think Marcus is nodding for some reason Paul..!

Paul: That my designs all look the same?! So that to me was the part where I had to start moving on and doing different things. But no, I dabble still, I do Boagworld, I do Headscape, but yeah, I do miss it sometimes.

Headscape website

Keir: On the same subject, do you find it hard to relinquish that control at all?

Marcus: No!

Paul: (Laughs) No! Not at all!

Marcus: Sorry I was answering for Paul!

Paul: And I think you’re correct! No, I have certain standards that I think we should keep to as a company in terms of quality of code, that kind of thing. But the guys at Headscape are very good. So it’s often semantic arguments that we have rather than anything of value! In terms of design I have to battle against the fact that I have personal preferences in that I have a design style…you have a design style. When you’re working with a designer, not everybody at Headscape produces design that is in line with my personal aesthetic, and it should be that way because you want a broad range of stuff, but sometimes I struggle to recognise that this is a good piece of design, it’s just not what I like.

Keir: Is there not a Headscape aesthetic, a little bit?

Paul: I think there is to some degree, we pretend there isn’t and we tell our clients there isn’t, but I think there probably is, and I think that’s largely come about (a) because of my own personal bias, but (b) because of the type of clients we work with. With the majority of clients we work with we would be laughed out of the room if we did the kind of stuff you do.

Marcus: That’s a bit harsh! Bloody Hell!

Paul: I’m not saying its bad! It’s great design!

Keir: I think a nice big pumping heart on the homepage of Headscape? That would go down a treat Paul!

Paul: And I know that Mike can do that kind of design.

Marcus: We’ve been talking Mike up a lot lately.

Paul: I know!

Marcus: We’ll have to start interviewing you now!

Keir: Right, back to the questions!

Marcus: As an inspiration for the guys at Headscape to maybe go down a different route, and your work is very inspirational from that point of view. They all say ‘Ooo Yeah, we like a bit of that!’

Keir: That’s nice to know!

Paul: They need to have opportunities to break out from the constraints and the boxes that they’re put in because of the type of clients that we work for.

Keir: So that raises an interesting question, how do you deal with that internally when someone comes and the brief maybe doesn’t quite need a new avenue to go down – how do you hold a designer back from experimenting, do you suggest other outlets internally?

Paul: To be entirely frank with you, our problem at the moment is the other way round, that our designers self-censor themselves, because they work on so many of these kinds of sites, and they predict what the client is going to say and so hold back sometimes.

Keir: And are they normally right or is there room for expression?

Paul: Yeah, they are normally right, but that’s not the point. I see it as our job to push the client. I mean there’s a classic example, I won’t name the client but there was one recently that said they wanted something ‘different’ and ‘radical’ and so we said ‘are you sure?’, and then we did all this cool stuff for them and then they said ‘could we tone it back?’ and so I turned round and said ‘you wanted something radical?’ to which they responded ‘Yeah, we didn’t really did we?!’ (Laughs)

Keir: So what do you see as the hot topics, or is there anything in the web world right now that really excites you? Or even you Marcus?

Paul: (Pauses, sighs) No. No!

Marcus: I’m much more business oriented, so things that excite me are…

Paul: Spreadsheets?!

Marcus: No, no… God no! Because we’ve been doing this for a long time, and we were never the sort of people to say ‘in five years time we’d like to be there’ but then suddenly we find ‘Oh, we’re there!’, so then you find yourself saying ‘What now then?’ and so I’m more interested in what the new thing would be. Because I’m not a designer, I’m not a developer, so I don’t really feel it’s my job to get enthused about anything in particular, HTML5 for example. I’m like, ‘great, cool!’ Paul is much better placed to answer that question as it’s not my specialism. My specialism in this world, if I have one, is talking to people who have websites about what their website could do for them, and so to a certain extent I need to be informed, but he does that for me.

Boagworld Podcast Live

Image Source

Keir: So how do you split your work for a new client? I contact Headscape for whatever reason, we agree to meet, I give you a brief outline of what my requirements are, would I speak to you (Marcus) and what sort of stuff would you want to get out of me and then would you hand over to Paul or the Project Managers?

Marcus: It varies. If it was a really big project I’d say to someone on the phone…

Keir: Give it to someone else!

Marcus: (Emphatically) No! No! Rather than have a lengthy chat on the phone I’d say I’ll come and meet you, and it would usually just be me at that point. And for virtually all projects people will come to us with a ‘We want to do something’, not a ‘We’ve heard you guys are quite good, what can you do for us?’ 99% of the time people have a pretty specific idea that they want us to do x, y or z, so I’ll go along and talk about that, and question why they might want to do that – that’s really the big part of it actually. Why do you want to do that? How’s that going to help you? Is it going to make you more money, is it going to make people who come to your site happier?

Keir: So very much from the business angle, the benefits of having a web presence or what expanding it will do for their own business? Bottom line stuff really?

Marcus: Yeah, to a certain extent, but also that’s the kind of nice client who comes to us. Quite often what we’re doing is responding to invitations to tender, and then it’s case of a brief will come through and we will respond usually with a phone call and questions – what do you mean by this and this and this, are you sure you want to be doing that. We’ll respond with a proposal and hopefully we’ll be invited back to talk to these people, at which point I’ll wheel him out (Paul!) and he’ll enthuse at them for half an hour!

Paul: It takes me a while to latch on to the part of the project that excites me, because if you go into a pitch not excited about the project, you ain’t gonna win it.

Keir: Sure.

Paul: But once you’ve indentified that thing in it that really grabs you and you want to do then I’m away and it’s great. So I mean, I tend to go in at the pitch stage and I give the big presentation. Then we normally, if we win it, at the beginning part of the project is where I flesh out that stuff that I was enthusing about, so where we really develop and set the direction of it. I talk the client through the process, help them to focus the vision, and that’s done in conjunction with the development team, the developer, project manager, designer, all the rest of it. Once that process has been done I step back and the project manager runs with the project.

Marcus: That’s the big bit out that I do. Requirements, information architecture, stakeholder interviews, all that stuff, and then I’ll step away from it usually. Then project managers, designers and developers get on and build it.

Paul: Periodically through the project I keep my eye on it to make sure that that vision that was created at the start of the project hasn’t been lost at any stage.

Keir: Just quickly because I’m really keen to know, there’s a lot of talk in the internet about, and I hate the term, spec work. Mark and I have talked about this a lot. I’m of the opinion that doing a tender or response to a proposal could be deemed as doing spec work in some respects because by the definition you’re doing work – how much time or value and what’s the end product of that…

Marcus: Shall I tell you how I define it? I as a sales person, and I do information architecture as well and that is all paid work, but at least 50% of my role is as a sales person and sales people don’t get paid by clients.

Paul: They’re a cost of sale.

Marcus: So if it’s work that I’m doing then it’s fine, if I have to get a designer to do work as part of that document, then I don’t think that’s right

Paul: Because those are chargeable people, I’m a chargeable person.

Keir: We know that Paul!

Paul: The most that Marcus would require of me would be to bounce some ideas around in the proposal stage. The pitch obviously is free; we would go up and do that. But the way that I view it actually is that spec work in my opinion is work that you give to a client that could potentially be used in the actual project. So our proposal documents aren’t spec work….feel free to disagree

Keir: No, it’s interesting because you make it sound like you go to a pitch with nothing?

Marcus: Correct. We don’t pitch any graphics ever.

Paul: No. Never. Never any graphics.

Keir: OK, so how much work would you say goes into a pitch?

Paul: Into the pitch itself?

Keir: Not the actual time of the pitch.

Paul: OK, preparing for the pitch, well the proposal, a lot of work goes into that.

Marcus: At least a day. Usually two.

Paul: Because that, with the type of work that we do, there’s quite a lot of boilerplate in it, ‘We’re Headscape this is what we do’ but with large public sector organisations that we tender for they want to know a lot of detail like financial history, they want to know the name of your third child, but it’s not a document that necessarily contains lots of ideas.

Marcus: A good way to think about the process is – we’ve won the work, and the process usually starts off with him analysing the existing website, the brief they’ve got, talking ideas, he’ll make a bunch of recommendations out of his own mind as it were. I’ll then test that on a load of stakeholders via one to one interviews. Based on that we’ll then put together a report which pulls all that together. Then we’ll do information architecture, then we’ll do mood boards that will kick in to the actual design. And that’s a load of work that I’ve just described. If we value giving designs up front then all of that is pointless.

Paul: It’s the fact that before you make a recommendation to the client, either in terms of visuals or in terms of the direction or vision of the site, you need to understand the client, you need to understand the business and the objectives. You never get all of that from a brief. It doesn’t matter how thorough they think the brief is. So therefore our proposals are very detailed responses to the brief that has been provided. But oftentimes that not what we’ll end up delivering. Often we’ll win the work, do a lot of research work and then turn round to them and say ‘Actually what you asked for out of the gate was this, and that’s not the right thing, we need to be going in this direction.’ So the proposal document only really exists to establish our credibility and to get us to the point of actually winning the work. There’s not loads of stuff in that proposal that they could take and say ‘A-ha’ I really like these ideas I’m going to take these and go with another agency. It’s not that type of document, but with a piece of speculative design they could do that, they could say ‘A-ha’ I really like this bit of design, I’m going to take this and give it someone who is cheaper.

Marcus: To finally nail this point to the table! We see proposals and pitches, the proper response from us is to basically tell our prospective clients that we can do a really good job, and give them lots of reasons why. We think your project might be really similar to the one we did for this client. Look at all the work we did on this and this was the process we went through, with lots of pictures of what we did for that client, but no actual ‘ We might be able to do something that looks a bit like this for you.’

Keir: That’s a historical thing though because you’ve got a canon of work, you’ve got heritage. What would your advice be to young people up and coming, 18, 19 20 years of age when you’ve not got that canon, you’ve not got that history?

Paul: I would encourage them to actually do some voluntary work.

Keir: Build up the portfolio

Paul: Yeah.

Marcus: It’s the same when you’re looking for a job, we want to see your portfolio, what you’ve done before and we think clients are the same.

Paul: My attitude is, let’s take a piece of speculative design work is going to cost two days of a designers time – I’m just plucking random figures out of the air here – but you could spend two days doing speculative design work for some dodgy guy who says ‘If you do some speculative design work you’ll win the business’ – and let’s be honest, these are the kind of guys you are going to be working for when you start out – screw that for a game of soldiers, he’s just trying to get one over on you. I’d prefer to spend to the two days working for a local charity that have got no money but a really worthy cause, give them a great design that they can take away and build or do what they want with, and then I’ve got a good portfolio piece.

Marcus: That said, we used to do designs up front. We were shooting ourselves in the foot doing it.

Keir: Before we move on, I think the one thing that struck me was of your comments, and I think it was in response to a particular blog post was that spec design work was actually bad for the client, more than it is for the designer which is quite a unique perspective

Paul: I was reading some of my stuff over that because I think we have a rock solid argument. I won’t go through the whole argument now because there are other things to talk about but basically it boils down to the fact that as a designer or developer you are not well enough informed at the spec stage to produce anything other than a piece of show-off work – so all you are doing is going ‘Taa Daa!!’ look how talented we are! You are not solving any problems, you are not challenging their brief, you are literally just doing a bit of fancy work. And the reality is that if you are the client you are paying for it anyway, because we have to roll the cost of sale into the project. But here’s the killer. You’re not just paying for the piece of speculative work I’ve done for you, but you’re also paying for the speculative work I did for ‘Mike’ who turned us down., because we still have to recover the cost of time we spent doing Mike’s piece of work. So the reality is your paying for your own speculative piece of work and for other people’s speculative piece of work! Sorry, I’m pointing aggressively!

Paul Boag speaking at Future of Web Design

Keir: I’m retracting quickly!

Marcus: I’m gonna get him a box to stand on!

Paul: But I get really annoyed about it and really passionate about it. I would never hire a company that does speculative design work because I’m paying for other people’s design work! It doesn’t make sense!

Keir: Moving swiftly on! (laughs) Going back to the original question! So there’s nothing exciting going on in the world of web?

Paul: Sorry, I’m very aware we’ve gone off on a tangent! There are two levels of excitement. There’s the Silicon Valley, web app type of excitement that everybody features. The cutting-edge, we’re-some-fancy-agency-startup-with-lots-of-venture-capital. And then you go to a conference and there are large companies that are ‘dealing with scalability with over a million hits!’, and you think to yourself ‘very interesting, but no kind of impact on my life’ – but over time that sort of cool stuff tends to trickle down, and I get excited at the next tier down. I get excited when I start to see some of that really cool stuff that maybe is old hat now, that everybody was talking about a year ago or maybe two years ago, when I start seeing that appearing on average websites. Websites that the vast majority of us are working on.

Keir: Can you give an example of something that has done that for you recently?

Paul: Just this whole web application culture of Javascript driven, application-like / desktop-like, because for such a long time that was only for things like Gmail and Google Maps and stuff like that, but now that’s all trickling down and you’re starting to see rich internet applications in boring everyday sites, whether it be a university site or you know, Sussex Police! Anna was telling me about a Police website where is you hear a police helicopter flying over you at night you can look it up the next day and find out why it was there and what it was doing! And all of those Web 2.0 things about openness and transparency as well as some of the technology stuff like AJAX, all of that stuff is now becoming mainstream. And I get excited when fringe stuff becomes mainstream, and the bigger community of developers outside of ‘The Valley’ all start doing it. That’s why I get excited about the web, and that’s why I get excited about stuff that everybody else was excited about a year or two years ago!

Mike: We wanted to move on to the subject of blogging. As a company I believe you don’t blog?

Paul: Not as a company no.

Mike: So you blog as Boagworld, but recently we’ve been intrigued to see you’ve been blogging more personally on Posterous so really we’re trying to work out, is Boagworld purely on the education side and those on your micro-blog are more personal? We were particularly struck by one article – what was the title? ‘The Idea of Personal Brands Stinks’, you use AudioBoo, you have a lot of outlets, how do you decide what goes where?

Paul: You’re making a fundamental mistake here!

Paul: I make many Paul!

Paul: The fundamental mistake you’re making is that you’re presuming that I have a strategy! Which I really really don’t!

Mike: The question should have been, what do you get out of blogging professionally and personally?

Paul: I’ve never been so professionally interviewed!

Keir: Apparently Anna can cut stuff out! It’s apparent that you might get work out of your blogging, I don’t know, but you obviously get more out of it than just that?

Paul: OK! Let me see if I can find a question in there somewhere!

Keir: We don’t do this for a living you know!

Paul: There’s a few things to comment on. First of all, without a doubt, blogging is a major marketing tool for Headscape. The vast majority of our new business comes in via that. It is definitely and categorically a business tool. But it didn’t start out that way. When I started out blogging, it was a little bit of ego – we went to @media 2005 and they got different bloggers to stand up and I thought ‘I want to be like that!’ so I get very inspired and I started blogging partly because of that. But I quickly realised no-one was interested in what I was writing at the time so the blog for me became this place where I could take what I was learning and picking up and rationalise it in a way that made sense to me. So it became a way of me wrapping me head around everything that was going on. It was also a way for me to be storing and holding the stuff I was learning because my memory is horrendous and to this day I find myself saying ‘I’m sure I’ve written something on that’ and I go onto my blog and it’s a way for me to remember. I know it sounds stupid but I really do this, and so I’ll read through my blog and say ‘OK, so that’s what I’m supposed to think about this!’ But it really helps to clarify my thinking – so that was a big part of it. But Boagworld, the domain was bought and I thought I’d write a bit about web design, it was my personal website, and as I wrote more about web design as my head was buzzing with that at the time as this was the time of Web Standards and we were getting into accessibility. And then other people started to take an interest in it and it grew and grew – and then we started the podcast which really came out of the fact that (a) I’d got an iPod for Christmas that was just about beginning to support podcasts, and so I looked for a web design one and there wasn’t one so I thought ‘I’ll do that’ because it’s easier than writing one and I’m crap at writing.

Marcus: (Shyly) Hello, it’s Paul, this is the first ever podcast!

Paul: (Laughs) Which is pretty much what it sounded like!!! It’s like stepping back in time listening to those early ones.

Keir: How long ago was that Paul?

Paul: 2005/2006? I’ll have to have a look. No, it must have been 2005. It was growing, it was building momentum until it eventually became this thing of it’s own. It was beginning to have marketing benefits and I was beginning to spend some of my work time doing this. So relatively recently I came to this realisation that Headscape had robbed me of my blog! Which I’m quite happy with as it’s turned into this great marketing tool which is fun to do and I love it. But I had nowhere to share, I dunno, a silly video of James or some cool thing that was nothing to do with web design or whatever else. So that’s where Posterous came from. It was just an easy way for me to talk about something that wasn’t web design. Occasionally bits of web design get in there – I’ll tell you my dirty little secret for this one, which is that often, if there’s an idea I’ve had, I’m too lazy to write a blog post about it, I’ll record a video. But I won’t put the video onto Boagworld as there’s an expectation that I’ll have a transcript of it to make it accessible, and so I just put it on Posterous to get around it which is really naughty and I should be ashamed of myself! But I do occasionally do that. But most of the time Posterous is just about me having fun. Then you get into things like AudioBoo – AudioBoo is my idea of micro-podcasting, like Twitter is micro-blogging. So it’s little snippets of tips and advice. So, how do I decide what goes on where?

Keir: You’re interviewing yourself now!

Mike: Let’s go and get some coffee! Marcus?

Paul: So basically, if it’s not good enough and not long enough to be a blog post, it’ll become and AudioBoo, that’s if it’s about web design. If it’s about web design and it’s too long for an AudioBoo, it’ll become a blog post. If it’s not about web design, it’s Posterous.

Keir: So you do have a strategy!?

Paul: But where it falls down is where I’ll do a little AudioBoo about something which is the beginning of a thought, then it ends up as a blog post and then it ends up on the podcast as well. So it kind of ripples through.

Keir: That’s cool – it’s interesting to know all that but what I’d personally like to know is what makes you want to share such personal stuff sometimes? I know you’re a Christian and you talk about God, but you also talk about some other personal stuff sometimes too? What is it in you that makes you want to do that?

Paul: I think it’s two things. It’s two major parts of my personality. One is that I am a massive extravert, I’m a massive show-off – I’m never happier than when I’ve got a massive audience. To be entirely frank, you know!

Keir: Had anyone spotted that?!

Paul: Unlike Marcus I can’t sing or play a musical instrument! The best I can do is jump up and down, wave my hands in the air and say ‘Look at Me!’ So there’s that aspect to it. I think there’s another aspect to it. Somebody said to me right when I was a young kid, they said Paul, the thing about you is that you live with your heart on your sleeve, what you see is what you get. And I still think I’m like that now. I’m a very open person. If I’m grumpy everyone knows I’m grumpy, if I’m happy everybody knows I’m happy. I live my life in the open and always have. So I do that online, because I’m not a different person online than I am offline, and I know a lot of people are, but I don’t choose to be that.

Keir: Thanks Paul, that’s a nice explanation.

Mike: OK, one of the questions we have is about honesty and speaking and blogging. Do you ever…

Paul: I make up stuff all the time!

Mike: But it’s very hard I think to always be honest, in all spheres of life. Do you feel you are always as honest as you are?

Paul: Does this go back to the conversation we were having previously Mike?

Mike: It does yeah.

Paul: Because we had this conversation, me and Mike about when you stand on the stage, and sometimes you get off after a presentation and sometimes you go ‘Why did I say that?’ and you think, ‘I said that because I think that’s what people expected me to say’ rather than what I was actually thinking. I mean you gave the example about where you gave a talk about sketching where you said ‘Get away from your computer and start sketching’ when that’s not actually what he does. (Laughs) Well it was either a case of share an example where I had done that and I would rather humiliate you than me!

Mike: Yeah, I wanna reverse that! Anna can apparently cut things out.

Paul: No, no, no editing. We tell people that but it’s a lie! And I’ve done similar things, I’ll be honest. For me where the line comes with honesty is, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying ‘I think this is the way it should be’ – but where you fall down and it gets a bit shady is where you say ‘I think this is the way it should be’ but fail to mention that you’re actually there yet, we’re heading in that direction. And I’ve made that mistake too. But I do try and be transparently honest – I don’t try and dress up anything that I talk about, and in fact I’m probably a bit self-deprecating actually. Actually I think a lot of people think I’m a bit of a joker and a bit of a moron. But I do like to simplify things and I do like to take the mystery out of things – I think there are a lot of people, and this goes back to our conversation, I think there are a lot of people making out like their job is a lot fancier, a lot harder than it actually is – and we do like to justify our own existence by using lots of clever words., and having ‘processes’ and ‘methodologies’ and ‘systems.’

Mike: Cool, thanks, that’s interesting. So coming on to status, how important do you think status is in the industry?

Paul: OK, well I’m glad you worded that question the way you did, as I was worried that you were going to word it ‘How important is status is to you?’, and you’d purposely put the question of honesty beforehand! (Laughs)

Keir: We were going to ask ‘How big is your ego?’ but then we’ve scribbled that out! But this also comes off the back of your article about personal branding; the idea of web celebrity, a lot of people would refer to you as one of those.

Paul: I’m going to be entirely honest about this right – which I don’t think a lot of people are. Yes, I love it.

All: (Laughs)

Paul: Of course I love it! Of course you’re going to love it when someone comes up to you and says ‘You’re Paul Boag aren’t you, I really love what you do!’ and anyone who pretends that they don’t like being praised is a liar.

Marcus: I’ve got quite a funny story actually. I went to the Comedy Store in Leicester Square last Friday evening, and we got there and sat in our seats, and there was this young couple, both of them in their early twenties came and sat down next to us for the first half. And I kept seeing this guy look at me, and I thought ‘He’s recognised me!’

All: (Laughs)

Marcus: Nothing was said! Interval comes, I get another beer and sit back down. And he said, ‘I think I know who you are’ and I was like…you’ve got it wrong!

Keir: You’re Paul Boag!

Marcus: But supporting what Paul’s saying, I get recognised at conferences. ‘Say something’ that’s what they always say.

Paul: Yeah!

Marcus: Especially Americans!

Marcus: So I said to one guy, ‘You’re a web designer are you?’ and he said ‘No, I think my Mum’s got one of your records!’

All: (Laughs)

Marcus: It’s gone full circle now. If it’s someone young I expect them to recognise me from the podcast.

Mike: Didn’t your daughter’s friend come up and say she knew you from the podcast?

Marcus: Yes, yes, it still amazes me, because I just pitch up once a week and try and make it look stupid!

Keir: What band were you in again?

Marcus: A band called ‘Breathe’

Keir: And now it’s ‘Stroke the Toad?’

Marcus: Now it’s Stroke the Toad.

Paul: Yeah, to say you don’t like that, I mean, I was at Thorpe Park recently with my youth group and we were queuing up and some guy came up to me and said ‘Are you Paul Boag?!’ and my youth group were wetting themselves, they thought it was hilarious! And yeah I like it, course I do! And people are really kind, they’re really nice about it – but you gotta keep it in perspective right? You know, I’m a niche of a niche of a niche of a niche. I might aspire to be Leo Laporte, and Leo Laporte might aspire to be a daytime TV presenter who aspires to be I dunno, a mainstream TV presenter who aspires to be a film thing and so it goes on. And it’s the whole premise – and I reject the premise – but it’s the premise that because you’re well known, and because a lot of people have heard of you, that in some way your life is of more value. And I think that’s the point I was trying to get across in the personal branding thing. There’s this friend of mine I grew up with who got married to this Indian guy, and she works out in India – we actually raised money for her on the podcast over Christmas – and runs an orphanage out there with a couple of hundred kids who have had their lives ruined. She does more good in a single day than I will do in my lifetime. And OK no-one knows about here, and no-one is interested in her, and I get people come up to me on the Tube?? And that’s ridiculous to me! And that’s what made me angry and that’s what made me want to do that post. And then it all gets out of proportion and it all gets silly. Where in our culture – sorry this is all getting a bit heavy! – where in our culture did we get to a point where Kevin Rose can’t stand in a blimmin’ party without being mobbed by people? You know, that’s weird? There’s something screwed up there.

Marcus: That’s not weird? That’s normal?!

Keir: I guess celebrity is changing? When I grew up fame was the pop stars, the rock stars and now you’ve got tech celebrities.

Marcus: If they had a rock star in that room they would get even more mobbed, but it still happens.

Paul: Just because it’s normal doesn’t make it not weird. Just because it’s been going on for a hundred years, doesn’t make it not weird.

Marcus: I’d say it’s human nature.

Paul: Yeah, and I’m saying human nature sucks!

Marcus: Well deal with it!

Keir: OK, so it has some benefits to you, but it is important?

Paul: In the industry?

Marcus: I’ve been thinking about this. Who’s the most famous web celeb? Zeldman maybe? People with big web projects and big budgets go to Happy Cog because of Zeldman’s celebrity. Not only that – he wouldn’t be famous if he didn’t know his stuff and talked well etc etc.

Paul: The sad fact is there are designers and developers and agencies out there that are as good as Happy Cog.

Marcus: Course there are.

Paul: And there are certainly ones that are better than us. But they don’t get the exposure because they are introverted people. It makes me sad but that’s the reality.

Keir: You actually said the other day in your video…

Paul: Oh don’t quote me back! I’m going to have to contradict myself!

Keir: You said the other day that you could be introverted and be just as successful.

Paul: Yeah, I think you can, but in a different way.

Marcus: What, in a non-successful way?! You can be as good a designer, as good a developer without being famous, but if you’re trying to win business using the Zeldman / Happy Cog argument then you’re going to be a lot better off if you’re somebody who’s known.

Paul: Yeah, but you could still be known and be an introvert. It’s indentifying the methods by which you’re known. For example, Rachel Andrew. Until relatively recently she didn’t do a huge amount of public speaking, and even now doesn’t do massive amounts. But she’s written book after book after book after book. She’s known for that writing and that has given her the profile. You could be an introvert and blog, and have one of the best blogs in the world. You could be submitting gorgeous designs to CSS galleries and be winning work that way. So it doesn’t need to be by being mouthy and extrovert.

Keir: The funny thing is there are agencies out there that are as good as each other – some might win work because of their public persona, and then there are those who win work because they constantly put out a really high standard of work.

Marcus: There are others that might win work because they have a really pushy salesman! It’s just another way of marketing yourself or your company.

Paul: To be honest, look at yourself Mike. OK, you’ve done a couple of speaking slots, but you haven’t spoken a huge amount. But your work has been picked up by people, and people have gone ‘Wow, I really like that’ and that’s spread virally without you jumping up and down like I do going ‘Look at Me!’ So it’s perfectly possible, it’s just a different way of doing it.

Keir: Another question that’s worth asking is that a lot of people have become well down for their niche – recently you’ve been talking a lot about educating clients, Mike has talked a lot about creativity and where he gets ideas from., they tend to be offline. Andy Clarke talks a lot about progressive CSS, CSS3 that sort of thing, for someone who is looking to get their face known in the industry is that something they should do? Find something they’re really interested in and just push it out?

Paul: Absolutely. I remember much nearer the beginning I’d built up a popular podcast that a lot of people listened to and were passionate about. But I couldn’t get speaking opportunities. And I think it was Ryan actually, who was honest enough to talk to me about it and it was his response that was ‘I don’t know what it is that you do?’ – a lot of people don’t know what it is I do! But

Keir: That’s a whole other interview Paul!

Paul: He didn’t know what box to put me in. People like putting other people in boxes.

Mike: It makes picking speakers easy to be honest.

Paul: So you can go, ‘We need someone in this slot who’s going to talk about business’ or ‘development’ or whatever else. I packaged myself very specifically for conferences and speaker opportunities, I will talk about this kind of stuff. Once you’ve done it once, that’s it. But, the problem is you can’t do that forever. You need to re-invent yourself. Jeremy Keith is very good at that. He started off as the DOM scripting guy, then he became the microformats guy, now he’s the HTML5 guy. He knows how to move from thing to thing. He would say that his interests change and he moves on, it might be, it might be a totally subconscious thing, but it’s a damn clever thing, however you slice it.

Marcus: I would argue that this applies to life, not just web design. I’ve got quite big kids now, and I’ve been saying to them for years now relating this to subjects that they are studying, do what you like doing, not what you think you ought to be doing. It applies across the board. If you can do something well, you are going to enjoy doing it.

Keir: Yeah, that will come out when you speak about it, in the passion.

Paul: OK?! Finished with us?!

Marcus: You’ve got a whole podcast here! At least 45 minutes!

Paul: OK, well thanks very much for listening to Boagworld, we’ll see you again next week!

Keir: Thanks a lot!

Thanks goes to Andy Wickes for transcribing this interview.

Don't reduce your designers and developers to stereotypes

Rob Borley warns against reducing your designers and developers to stereotypes if you want to get the best work from them.

At Headscape I have the privilege of working with a group of very talented people. Both our development team and our design team are on top of their game and it makes my job of Project Managing a little more straight forward because of it. A big part of my job is getting the most out of both of these teams by facilitating them working together in the most effective way. I’m often asked questions like, “Who do you prefer to work with; designers or developers?” and “how does working with developers differ from working with designers?” So here is my inside track on this age old tussle. Designers or Developers?

Your stereotypical developer is a rather pale individual (as they are afraid of the outdoors) with no social skills. They come in two sizes; 9 stone weakling or 30 stone monster. They spent their childhood playing Dungeons and Dragons and have now matured to a level 70 paladin in World of Warcraft (usually playing as a member of the opposite sex). They were always picked last for any kind of sport and have spent every waking hour since they were twelve in front of a screen, in a room with no natural light, talking to their ‘friends’; online. 99% of all developers die a virgin. 1% are scared of the question, curl up into a ball, and cry.

Illustration of a code monkey

Image credit: JawboneRadio

Your stereotypical designer on the other hand is a charismatic, in your face, individual. Both confident and creative; a dangerous combination. They have lots of real world friends but are secretly hated by most of them. Constantly seeking inspiration they bore easily and become irritable as result. All designers, without exception suffer from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

A recipe for disaster

Putting these two groups together is not a good cocktail. Fortunately, these caricatures, in my experience, are not entirely accurate.

I’m actually loathe to put either designers or developers into boxes. From what I can tell they don’t seem to follow any discernible pattern in character traits. Some developers are quite introverted while others are quite the opposite. Some designers are sporty while others couldn’t catch a cold. Some developers enjoy the great outdoors while some designers find their inspiration in Second Life. In trying to manage the team I need to gather an understanding of them as individuals.

It’s important to understand how your team works. One individual will work most effectively when set a whole stream of tasks with a distant deadline and left to get on with it. While another will be more efficient given bite sized chunks and offered more consistent interaction and faster feedback.One member of your team will thrive on pressure and enjoy short timescales while another will need shielding from the realities of your deadlines and coaxing gentling into delivering on time. You may have an individual that needs to go for a walk regularly to be at peak productivity while another works most effectively if they get their head down and charge for 6 hours straight.

As a PM your goals are always the same. You need to deliver your project on time. However your route to your goal is dependant on the resources that you have available. Your number one resource is your team. Trying to force team members to all work the same way is counter productive and, while you may enjoy some success, is not sustainable.

The best route to goal

Get to know your team. Discover their quirks and eccentricities and use these to get the most out of them. I enjoy my role as a PM because, more than anything else, it’s a job about people. I guess this means that the answer to the question is that I really have no preference over designers or developers. I enjoy getting to know my team and discovering the best way to work with them as individuals.

I believe that this is the most effective way of getting the job done. And hopefully it makes for a better experience for all involved.

What about you?

So what about you? How do you work with designers and developers? What has experience taught you?

Maybe you are a designer or a developer? How have you been treated by clients and project managers? Have you been reduced to a stereotype that you resent?

Bamboo Juice

I was fortunate enough to speak at the first everBamboo Juice conference on the subject of selling web design services. If you were there or are just curious, this page will allow you to access my slides.

My talkwas entitled ‘Winning business in tough times‘ and covered the following…

As the economy slowly collapses like a giant soufflé, where does that leave us as web designers? How do we ensure the work keeps rolling in? Paul shares his experiences of winning new business in the tough times while still nurturing existing clients. He explains how business development is everybody’s concern, not just the sales team.

You can eitherdownload a PDF of my slides(31.1mb – includes speaker notes) or watch here thanks to Slideshare.

160. Education, Education, Education

On this week’s show: We speak to Aarron Walter about teaching web standards. Ryan Carson starts a series on web applications and Paul talks about remote user testing.

Play

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Housekeeping

A couple of quick pieces of housekeeping to kick off with…

  • Huge thanks to Ryan Taylor, Paul Stanton and Sarah Parmenter who did a stellar job standing in for myself and Marcus on last week’s show. They were actually far too good and I have already started receiving requests that they become the permanent hosts! Anyway, if you didn’t hear last week’s show then make a point of downloading it.
  • My second piece of housekeeping is a quick plug for Bamboo Juice, a grass roots conference taking place in Cornwall on the 24th April. Myself and Jeremy Keith are just two of the speakers in what will be a packed day. It’s so good to see smaller conferences like this springing up outside of London and so I would encourage as many of you as possible to attend. Best of all its only £99 (£79 for Boagworld listeners!)

News

To be honest, what with SXSW and my week’s holiday I am feeling completely out of touch with the web design world. Fortunately, Mr Stanton is continually updating our twitter feed with juicy stories. I have therefore picked 4 that caught my eye.

How to create a great web design CV

Poor old Smashing Magazine. People do like to tease them (myself included), but they write some damn useful articles. A recent example that caught my eye was ‘How To Create A Great Web Design CV and Resume?‘.

This post is essentially two articles in one. It starts by asking 10 designers to design a hypothetical CV for a fictional individual. Each designer writes a short paragraph about their chosen approach and you get to look at some nice examples.

The second part of the post provides 10 useful tips for creating a great CV. Suggestions include…

  • Make it printable
  • Have a summary
  • Link to online projects
  • Show your personality
  • Keep it simple and understandable

For the complete list of tips read the whole post.

Its a good post, but I am not sure whether producing a ‘designed CV’ is entirely necessary for web designers. If I was hiring a print designer then I would expect a CV to look impressive. However, if I am recruiting a web designer I think I would be just as happy receiving a cleanly designed CV that links to a stunning portfolio website.

There are a lot of differences between designing for the web and print. It is possible to be good at one and not the other. Therefore, a printed CV doesn’t tell me much about a persons capability as a web designer. That said, a well designed CV isn’t going to hurt your cause!

Design: Make it Memorable

One tip that could have gone in the Smashing Magazine article, is to make your CV ‘memorable’ and not just ‘flashy’. This picks up on the theme of a post over at 37 Signals entitled Designers: Make it Memorable.

The post talks about the difference between making something visually appealing and actually memorable. Too many sites are impressive but fail to leave a lasting impression. At one point in the post the author writes…

I started to recall those amazing Flash Sites of the Day. You know those sites that get passed around via IM in your office on a slow day? Simply amazing design and programming. Problem is: I can’t for the life of me remember what those URLs were much less the company/product that was being featured! Isn’t that the point with those sites? That the impact should be profound so that you remember Product or Company X?

This is a lesson that all those involved in the web design process need to learn. Whether we are designers or website owners, we have a tendency towards thing that provide the wow factor. However, often it is the thing that makes us go wow we remember rather than the message being communicated.

Statistics and website owners

Our next article of the week is an ‘all too brief’ post on web stats entitled How to Sell Statistics to Clients.

The post focuses on a common problem – most website owners know they should be tracking website statistics, but don’t really know what they are looking for. In fact the author writes…

In my experience, the loudness or frequency of a person’s request for web statistics is inversely proportional to their understanding of them.

That has often been my experience too.

He goes on to identify three ways that we as web designers can help rectify this problem. These are:

  • Providing cheat sheets that help the client understand terms like ‘hits’ ‘page views’ and ‘unique users’.
  • Add web metrics training into the budget of your projects.
  • Provide summaries and reports for the client on key metrics such as conversion rates or sales.

To be honest this is a much bigger problem than can be covered in a short blog post. Too many website owners think that having Google Analytics will solve their statistics needs. However, having the data is not the same as understanding it. If this information is misread it can lead to bad decisions about the future development of a site.

Specialist vs. Generalist: Who Wins?

The final post this week is of interest to pretty much everybody who listens to this show. It asks which is better – the Specialist or the Generalist.

This is an important questions for both web designers and website owners. As web designers we need to know whether we should be specialising in a specific area of web design. It is important for our careers and our businesses.

As website owners we want to know whether the pain of dealing with multiple specialist suppliers is worth the increased expertise you would receive over a generalist.

It has to be said the article is written mainly from the web designers perspective. However, I think there are lessons to be learnt for all sides.

The post outlines the pros and cons of both approaches, but ultimately comes down on the fence when it says…

There are advantages to being in both groups, but I think the only way to be truly successful is by being a little of both. You can be a specialist, but in order to be able to develop a profitable business, you may need to be able to supplement your specialty services with some add-on services that may not be exactly in line with your focus.

Personally, I think it depends on how you define specialist. The type and level of specialisation can vary massively and the way you position yourself will define your success. For example, you may specialise in a certain discipline (e.g. Ruby on Rails development) or in a specific market (Higher Education).

Ultimately, whether you are a website owner seeking an agency or a web designer forging a career, it is all about balance.

As a web designer, if you specialise too much you will not find work. If you generalise you cannot differentiate yourself.

As a website owner you want a web designer who is enough of an expert to deliver an outstanding solution, but you do not want so many specialists that your project turns into a nightmare.

Back to top

Interview: Aarron Walter on Interact

Paul: Hello, and so joining me today is Aarron Walter. Good to have you on the show, Aarron.

Aarron: Thanks for having me.

Paul: And the reason we have Aarron on the show is because he is going to talk about a new initiative.. is ‘initiative’ the right word, Aarron?

Aarron: Yeah, yeah.

Paul: Let’s go with that. A new initiative from the web standards project, called Interact. Now, let’s kick off, Aarron, by maybe you telling our listeners a little bit about what Interact is.

Aarron: So, whilst Interact is an open curriculum framework, basically we’ve been recognising that the Web Standards Project has been around for a long time and we’ve done a lot of things to try to get standards into industry. And to a certain degree we’ve made some big triumphs in that respect, but there are still a lot of websites out there that aren’t following standards and people that are sort of behind. And we saw the Achilles heal as to why that’s not happening, as really, education. So, you know, our medium’s really young and it hasn’t really found it’s bearings with how we’re going to marry industry and education, so whilst Interact is a curriculum that has a series of courses that teach not only web standards, but best practices.

So there’s of course the stuff that you would expect from WaSP which is the front-end development courses that teach progressive enhancement and semantic markup and that sort of thing. But we have six learning tracks that include foundations; there’s a course in there that’s like an intro to internet concepts and how people can use the internet to teach themselves and use RSS, that sort of thing.

So there’s front end development, there’s a design track, there’s server side development, there’s user science and then there’s also professional practice. So what we’re trying to do is create a collection of courses that are very modular, to try to get these into schools. And we recognise that not every school is just going to take the entire curriculum and integrate that into their program. You know, if you’re a Computer Science program maybe you’ll take a course or two, if you’re a design program you’ll take a course or two, or even just grab the assignments or look at our competencies.

Each course is based on competencies, which are the things a student has to master before they can pass a course. And then the evaluation methods: So each course has assignments, it has exam questions, it has readings that come from Operas own web standards curriculum – we’ve been collaborating with them. It has textbooks, it has pretty much everything that an educator could need to teach a particular topic.

Paul: Okay, so is this something that is then aimed entirely at educators, or if somebody wanted to get into web design and they were trying to learn it in their spare time, could they just go to this and use it in isolation by themselves?

Aarron: To some degree, I guess they could, but Operas web standards curriculum is really learner-centric, so if you’re trying to teach yourself, that’s probably the place to go. But ours is very much focused on educators, because we feel like there’s a lot of great resources out there on the web if someone wants to teach themselves, but there’s not a lot of great stuff for educators to get stuff into their courses.

Paul: So, when you say ‘educators’, I mean what kind of level are we looking at here? Earlier you mentioned schools. Are we talking about school age, or are we talking about higher education? What are we covering here?

Aarron: I’d say our primary target is higher education, colleges, universities, even training programs to some degree. But we are also seeing some of our content in high schools as well and we’d like to see that more. Especially foundations courses like the web design one course or the internet fundamentals course. If students could go into college with a solid foundation, then they can start to focus more on "What can I do with these techniques?" than theory and concept.

Paul: So is this design to be fairly international or is it quite U.S centric in the way that it’s written.

Aarron: We want it to be very international and the people that have worked together on this are from lots of different places. We’ve got some folks in Europe, Canada and of course some folks in the U.S, so it is in an international group that’s coming together and we’re actually working with WaSPs ILG group – that’s the International Liaison Group. And we’re working on, this year one of our big goals is to try to get a lot of our content translated to different languages.

Paul: Okay, so there will be multiple language versions of all of this as well at some point?

Aarron: That’s the direction we’re heading, yes.

Paul: So, I mean, how did this come about in the sense of, you know, well, how did you get involved in it for a start and what was the motivation behind it?

Aarron: So, I’ve been teaching for the past ten years in different schools in the U.S and colleges and universities, but I’ve also been working in the industry as well. And I got on WaSPs mailing list, I just joined the mailing list and started to talk to some folks and then they invited me to join – it was a year ago, I guess it was at the very beginning of 2008 – and so I joined the education task force who created the Interact project. And basically there were ideas about the curriculum and I’d heard lots of people say "Yeah, what we really need is, you know, education’s way behind" and they’re happy to point fingers and "We need a curriculum", but it just never was really transpiring from anyone coming from the industry and so we kind of just decided we need to do this. And I’ve helped create curricula before as a faculty member at the Art Institute of Atlanta and so I had some ideas and we had a really great group of folks that are in the education task force – people that are educators and people that are experts from the industries. So, yeah.. actually South by South West was where this all started, which is pretty amazing, of course there are lots of great people there. So Glenda Sims, who’s one of the heads of WaSP these days introduced me to Chris Mills from Opera who was working on his project and we kind of had some drinks at the Geeks Club bowling event and we just kind of went crazy talking about these ideas. And Steph Troeth then Leslie Jensen-Inman and we all had these ideas, and then we just set a goal for ourselves in 2008 at South by South West and we said "In a years time, we’re gonna be back and we’re gonna have a curriculum." and that’s what we did. This year we launched our curriculum at South By.

Paul: That’s quite an impressive turnaround for the amount of information that’s in there. How did you draw everything together? Where did it all come from?

Aarron: Well, we met every week online and we talked and we established a course template, which really helped us. The stuff that we really needed to put in these foundation courses, we all know what needs to go in there. It’s just a matter of getting around the pedagogy or the educational part of it. So we developed a template for assignments, a template for a course and a template for learning modules which are basically like, you know, a teacher could teach a concept like let’s say, HTML forms in a weeks time. So we developed those templates and then from there we just assigned courses to different people and we used a wiki and we just met regularly and.. I gotta say, you don’t have to have a huge group to develop a curriculum.You just have to have a few people who really have their heart in it and.. we have some amazing folks, so..

Paul: So, what kind of response are you getting so far from H.E institutions? Are they interested in adopting it? If they are, how are they going to go about that, because, I mean, my impression is that it always takes forever to get a curriculum approved at a university or whatever. So I’m just interested in how that process is going.

Aarron: Yeah, education is.. one of it’s benefits is that it’s slow to move, so once it gets a solid foundation it keeps that solid, but you know, one of it’s drawbacks is that it’s slow to move. And so we’ve got some schools that are really excited about it and generally the folks that.. you know, it’s only been a couple of weeks that this has been live, we’ve got some folks that are really excited about it and those are folks that were kind of headed in the same direction themselves. So we’ve gotten some responses from schools in Europe and some schools in the United States that are interested in pulling some stuff in. And we have a school that’s looking at using a lot of our content right now. So we’re in the early stages of trying to get this out there. I think the easiest part is building the curriculum, because we know what needs to go in there. The hardest part is getting it into schools. So one of our strategies is to get the endorsements of folks in the industry, so we’ve gotten endorsements from Google, from Yahoo, from Adobe, from W3C, from Opera, from Mozilla – they’re all just super excited about what we’re doing and that sort of brand recognition can help us get our foot in the door with schools. And of course going out to conferences, we’ve got folks at the European Accessibility conference right now, talking about it, so we’re just trying to get out there and let people know.

Paul: Excellent. That sounds brilliant. I mean, I know that a lot of people that listen to the Boagworld podcast – there’s a large number of students that we’ve got listening and I often get complaints about this, that what they’re being taught at university bears no resemblance to what they’re hearing on this podcast. And I’m hoping that that’s because the podcast is right and the university is wrong and not the other way around. So if they’re listening to this and they’re getting really excited about it and, you know, they’ve gone to your website and they’re seeing the curriculum – I’ve got it on front of me now and it does look really exciting – how do they make this happen in their institution? What would you encourage them to do?

Aarron: So, this is the interesting thing – that so many of us have complained about a problem, but there aren’t a lot of people that will take that complaint and turn it into action. So if you’re a student or if you’re an educator what we need you to do is, there’s a page that’s called Advocate Standards (http://interact.webstandards.org/advocate/) – you can get to it from the homepage of http://interact.webstandards.org. It kind of just describes what standards are, why they’re relevant to you and we need people to share that information with their teachers, we need people to share just this website with their colleagues and show them the testimonials of the people who believe in this and want students to come out of schools with these skills. So we need people to act in a bottom-up sort of way, you know, grass roots. Take this to your classroom, take this to your teacher, take this department chair and just let him know. That’s the most powerful thing that people can do right now.

Paul: I mean, what I’m quite excited about from looking at this curriculum is that it contains a lot more than "Here’s how you code in X language" or whatever and even has got more in it than just design and user experience stuff. All this stuff about professional practices is very exciting too. Could you perhaps tell us a little bit about that?

Aarron: Yeah, so professional practice, we want people to not only get the concrete skills of "I can code a standard compliant page" or "I can construct a usable website", but we want people to be able to present their about their work and you know, be able to survive in a real career in the web. And so professional practices is going to have a series of courses to do that. We’ve got some pretty exciting ones that are coming up. There’s ‘writing for the web’ – it’s going to be a really cool one, that Alan Hussain from a List Apart is going to be creating. And we have a presentation course that’s coming down the line. So, we’ve got a number of those coming up.

Paul: That’s quite interesting, you just said something that I hadn’t grasped which is that there’s more to come here. That this isn’t the end of the line. It sounds like you’ve got lots more that you’re still developing. Is that right?

Aarron: Yeah. We call it a living curriculum, because you never write a curriculum and then you’re done. Especially in our industry, things change so fast. is what of course we’re going to be working on this year. Our design track is light right now and we want to try and address that ASAP, so we’ve got Dan Rubin and Ethan Marcott, are working together to create a foundation design course, that is specific to what web designers need to understand. And we also have Dan Mall is going to be helping us with a Flash course and Aral Balkan is also going to help us with some flash stuff too. We have a lot of stuff going on this year for new courses, so we hope next year at South By when we see everybody that we’ll have a brand new stack to add to Interact.

Paul: Excellent, so do you kind of envisage, from an institutional point of view that, like we were saying, it takes a long time for a curriculum to get approved and that part of the problem has always been that, by the time it’s approved it’s out of date, when it comes to the web. So is the idea that you’re going to get institutions to buy into the Interact curriculum in its evolving nature so that they always get the most up to date version of it. Is that the kind of plan? They’re not grasping one moment in time from it, if that makes sense?

Aarron: Yeah, exactly and we want to take some of the hard work out of being a teacher. I speak from experience, there’s so many things you have to keep track of and trying to keep pace with a lot of changing technologies and concepts, that’s hard on top of the umpteen other plates you’re spinning. So that’s exactly what’s going to happen, is that our courses, they’re not chiseled in stone, they’re published on the web, they’re in an expression engine and we’ll change those as they need to be changed. But that said, we need to strike a balance, because we can’t be chasing every new technology all the time, we have to evaluate and there has to be foundational concepts that remain steady. Separation of presentation and content, that’s steady foundation concept. But new technologies or techniques, they might change.

Paul: Okay, I mean, the whole area of education and web design is massively exciting and there’s so much going on at the moment in so many different fields. I mean, from your perspective, what else out there is really exciting you at the moment that you’re seeing.

Aarron: There’s so much, I just feel like last year that I just saw so many companies, organisations, individuals that, it seems that everyone just was pissed and they just walked out their house and they were headed in one direction until it was like everyone sort of meets up in one big mob. And so, what Opera’s doing, what Chris Mills has done with the 55 articles that he’s brought together and edited for Opera Web Standards Curriculum, that’s huge. Those are all rolled into WaSP Interact as our recommended reading, so that was fantastic. Yahoos Juku project, if you’ve heard of this it’s quite amazing. Nick Fogler, who’s the running Juku – Yahoo actually has a training program, where they bring students that are not employees, they’re not hiring them. They bring them in and they train them to be front end engineers over the course of a few months. And they’re doing it because they’re trying to solve this problem on their own. So, we’re talking with them about how they’re solving problems and looking to collaborate and discuss what we can learn from them. John Allsopp who runs Web Directions (the conference series), he brought myself and Chris Mills and Steph Troeth together with a number of other experts and we did Ed Directions, which was a day long workshop that taught teachers how to teach these concepts in their classroom. So there’s just so much stuff that’s happening right now and that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Paul: Exciting stuff. It sounds like it’s a really good time and it’s great to have you on the show. How you manage to fit all of this in alongside earning a living too is quite beyond me, but it’s really good that so many people are volunteering and pitching in. That’s great. Okay, let’s get you back on the show, I guess in a years time and sees what’s changed. But thank you very much for coming in now and I will talk to you again soon. Thanks.

Aarron: Thanks for having me.

Thanks goes to Andrew Marquis for transcribing this interview.

Back to top

Listeners feedback:

We have two emails this week dealing with two totally unrelated subjects.

Remote user testing

Our first email is from Steve. He writes…

Catching up on past podcasts, I listened to the episode on User Testing (#150). A method I’ve used that I haven’t heard tossed around much is remote user testing using a screen sharing program like GoToMeeting.

I used this for usability testing of our Intranet and it has several advantages:

  • No need for people to come to central testing facility, or you to go to them.
  • The user is at their own computer, so more comfortable.
  • Ability to record the entire session (screen and audio) so others can look at it later.
  • Tester can conduct testing while in his underwear only (I didn’t do this, but you could.)

What do you think of this method?

Sounds interesting although it would not be my preferred approach.

It’s easy to become a snob when it comes to usability testing and so let me make it entirely clear – any usability testing is better than none.

If you have no budget for user testing, test on friends and family. If time is tight, test on a colleague sitting nearby.

In the same way, if you are having trouble arranging sessions then use Steve’s approach. Something is always better than nothing.

That said, I do have some concerns with remote testing. These include…

  • It sets a minimum bar of technical competency. A user has to be able to connect to the system in order to participate. I know this would have been beyond the capabilities of some test subjects I have worked with.
  • It is less personal. Face to face usability testing puts users much more at their ease and allows you to build a relationship that facilitates honest feedback.
  • It does not allow you to read non-visual signals. Users will often pull a face or shift their positions when they are frustrated. As a facilitator you need to be able to see these signals and ask what they mean.
  • You are not seeing exactly what the user is seeing. You can only see their screen. You cannot see other distractions such as TV in the background. You cannot see the position of their keyboard and mouse. You have a limited field of view.

My preferred approach is to test in people’s homes. Not only are the users more relaxed, you also get a unique glimpse into their world. You see where they access the web, you learn about their home environment and even gain a better understanding of their character.

However, we do not always live in a perfect world and so would definitely use remote testing if better options were not available.

Finding a job

Our second email is a rather despondent one from Andrew…

I have one question, In the past you’ve talked about hiring new for staff, but as far as I can tell you’ve never discussed how to look for a job. I’m currently looking for a career in the industry, but I can’t get a resume to any company or even talk to someone of said company. Almost all the businesses I’ve approached (or at least tried to) either work from home, are no longer at that address, or no longer in business, and actually are just freelancers. And when I find a job posting online its for someone far more experienced then I am. I’m completely demoralized.

You have my sympathy Andrew and I have to say its a tough time to to break into any new sector including web design.

I am also probably not the best person to answer this question. I have been completely unemployable for some time now due to my ill defined skillset and opinionated character :)

So, I am going to try something different with this question. If you have some advice for Andrew, post a comment below. That way we can get the Boagworld community helping each other.

In the meantime here are a few random ideas from me…

  • Give up on the cold calling technique. Randomly contacting agencies is largely a waste of time. You have to get amazingly lucky to contact an agency who happens to be currently recruiting.
  • Try for an internship. Admittedly you will not get paid, but it is a foot in the door. You get a chance to improve your skills and also get to know the people in the industry within your area.
  • Be willing to move. There are jobs out there but they are often further a field.
  • Put yourself in a neat little box. Potential employers need to know what you do. Are you a designer, a coder or a server side developer? Companies don’t know what to do with people who know a bit about everything.
  • Start networking. The best place to find job opportunities is by attending conferences and meetups. Even if you cannot afford the conference itself, turn up at the parties and stand in the halls. Just get yourself out there.
  • Register with recruitment agencies. As an employer I hate recruitment agencies because they cost me money. However, we do still sometimes use them and it doesn’t cost you anything to be listed with them.
  • Ensure your website is perfect. The first thing I do when I look at a potential employee is check out their website. Their site has to be outstanding. It needs to look amazing, be well coded and rich with great content that demonstrates a passion for the web.

Hopefully that helps Andrew and keep an eye on the comments for more advice.

Back to top

Series: Building A Better Web Application by Ryan Carson

Ryan Carson: Hi I am founder of Carsonified a small web company in Bath, England. I am an American as you can probably tell, as for living in England I have been here about nine years. So a little bit of history about us real quick so you know who I am. I have a computer science degree and I have been involved in building four web apps and we are building a fifth truvay.com which will be released later in 2009, and we have sold two of our webapps dropsend.com and heyamigo.net. So the stuff that I am going to share with you today are lessons I have learnt the hard way basically as we have built web apps.

So the first thing I want to talk about is the Admin area that you will build for your web app. What a lot of people don’t know is that the Admin area is really the key to good customer service. If you haven’t enabled really easy customer service then it makes it hard to actually please your customers when they have problems so the first one to make sure you build into your admin for your web app are one click refunds so if someone calls and complains and says hey I am having trouble this month I am really frustrated please help you want to be able to just go into the admin do a search for their email address, their name or their company or anything and bam one click and refund their last invoice and what this does is it gives you, it gives you the ability to just make them happy right away. With a lot of web apps these days on recurring billing you will probably be charging people 5,10,15, $20 a month so losing that amount of revenue in return for really making a customer happy is super important. So make that easy for yourself to refund that money.

The second thing I would make it easy to do is have one click password reset that automatically sends out email with the new password, so with Dropsend it was really hard to reset people’s passwords and that was the number one request people had problems with, they couldn’t remember their password. So if I was to do it again what I would do is I would actually build the admin so I could forward an email from somebody presuming they had sent it from the email address of the account, forward it into Dropsend or the admin and it would automatically know that what it needed to do is reset the password for that email and then it sends out a new one so literally you do not even have to visit the admin area to reset someone’s password you just forward an email that would be amazing, so that’s the way I would do it next time.

The next thing I would do is also doing a one-click resend invoice. So a lot of people they don’t understand they can go into their "My Account" area of a web app to see their past invoices and what they will do is they will just email you and say hey you know I need last month’s invoice. If it is hard for you to find that or send that it is going to make you less likely to help that person so I would do a search on the email address show a list of invoices bam one click and it emails them a pdf version of the invoice. That’s another, that leads me onto another area that I would like to talk about that is invoicing. If you are doing recurring billing sort of every month billing your customers make sure that you are not re-inventing the wheel I would recommend a web app called Spreedly.com and what it is basically it is a web service for recurring billing they have done all the hard work, written all the code, the code for the Dropsend recurring billing was at least I think 1200 lines of PHP and it was good solid code but it was really hard and painful to write. So I would recommend don’t re-invent the wheel use a service like Spreedly because it is making calls to an API if later you decide you don’t want to use a service like Spreedly any more that layer has been abstracted out so you could replace it with your own billing system or another one and it won’t kill you, but I would say hands down don’t rebuild reoccurring billing it is a real pain in the ass.

The last tip I would say about your admin area is make sure that it is easy to give your customers credits. you want to be able to login search for an email address and just give them, hey I want to give them five bucks towards next month, ten bucks just to make them happy and you will have lots of happy customers. So that is my five minutes of tips, thanks Paul for letting me be a part of this. Take care Bye.

Back to top

159. Special Guest

On this week’s show: The northerners are back with special guest host Sarah Parmenter.

Play

On this week’s show: The northerners are back with special guest host Sarah Parmenter. We answer your questions on how to quote for projects and whether using off-the-shelf software is wrong and we have a chat with Sarah on her experiences in the industry and the difference between developing for clients and developing for yourself.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News

Alkaline

Our first story for is a new product by the guys over at Litmus, you may have come across their Browser and Email testing apps before and they’ve just released a new Mac app called Alkaline, this is a Mac front-end to their online browser testing suite and lets you test your website designs across not only 17 different Windows browsers which they mention on the site, but also all of the Mac and Linux browsers that the online Litmus services test against.

Alkaline grabs screenshots of your site rendered in all major browsers, the number of which depends on your chosen pricing plan, It’s free to test against IE7 and FF2 and if you need to test across all browsers, it’s available under the standard Litmus pricing plan which offers both individual and team monthly subscriptions, and a handy day-pass if you only do this kind of testing every now & then. Litmus also stores a history of your screenshots so you can see the evolution of your design and also reports your HTML and CSS errors.

There’s plugins available for Textmate and Coda, and you can preview the sites right inside Coda 1.6’s preview window, however because Alkaline grabs screenshots of your pages it’s not possible to do any live updating of CSS and see the results in all browsers.

Paul at Litmus also informed me that throughout April, they’re offering full access to the Litmus service for free on Weekends, so on Saturday and Sunday you can test across all the browsers (using Alkaline or the Litmus site) and all the email clients, even if you only have a free account.

16 design tools for prototyping and wireframing

It’s no secret that prototyping or wireframing can really help in the overall design process, and there’s now a wide range of tools on the market that aim to help you in this process. A recent Sitepoint article lists 16 of these tools and rates their usefulness.

The list of tools is good, convering favourites such as Omnigraffle, Axure and Balsamiq to other applications which can be used to wireframe such as Powerpoint or Keynote. If you’ve not looked into these kind of apps before then do check it out, they also lists the price of the apps so you’re sure to find something within your budget.

10 Lessons every freelancer should learn

If I remember rightly, I came across this link from one of the people I follow on Twitter and it covers some killer tips on how to be a better freelancer, covering everything from self promotion, organising your workflow, finding time for your own projects, keeping motivated and how to charge appropriately, this is a must-read for anyone considering freelancing, or indeed those already in the freelance world.

Some great tips come in the way of keeping customers happy and generating repeat business and I’d like to squeeze in a forth link here to another Sitepoint article (sorry) which covers how to upsell additional services to clients as a freelancer you should be looking at maximising the amount of money you can make from each project through added services, whether it’s packaged services such as hosting, logo design or business cards.

I don’t really freelance but I do manage a couple of small sites I built on a freelance basis, and I get recurring revenue by hosting them on a small reseller account. I’ve also been able to tempt the customers into paying for a years hosting rather than a monthly cost by rounding the amount down to an even figure, which while it’s only a couple of pounds cheaper, always got chosen.

Back to top

Interview: Sarah Parmenter on the difference between developing for clients and developing for yourself

Ryan: OK, so onto our interview section and what we are going to do today is an off-the-cuff interview with you, Sarah, er, so for people who don’t know who you are, er, do you want to introduce yourself.

Sarah: Sure, my name’s Sarah, I’m based in Leigh On Sea in sunny old Essex and I own a company called ‘You Know Who Design‘ that’s been going for about nearly seven years now, um, and I just do web development and sometimes I dabble in a bit of graphic design. Um, when I started off when I was younger, it was more graphic design than web but now it’s purely web and, er, yeah, it’s what I love doing.

Ryan: Right, OK, and we think a good topic to have a chat with you about would be the difference between developing for clients and developing for yourself.

Sarah: Yup

Ryan: So, er, let’s start off. Do you give yourself time to work on personal projects?

Sarah: I do, but not as much as other people do; whenever I see on Twitter, there’s a lot of people who have a lot of personal projects on the go and it generally tens to be on a Friday as well (all laugh), you see Twitter on a Friday, generally full of people, um, doing their own stuff but I tend to, if I’m doing something I tend to, maybe, give myself a couple of hours if I’ve got a spare, if I’m waiting for a client to get back to me on something and I can’t proceed with anything. I put client work first, and I don’t know if that’s a good thing or a bad thing, but that’s the thing that pays the bills, so, um, they always come first and if I’ve got a bit of downtime, I’ve always got projects that I want to work on, but possibly haven’t got the amount of time to dedicate to them as I’d like. I think it’s probably the case with everyone.

Sarah: Yeah, absolutely. You get some time, don’t you, through work?

Paul: Er, well we did sweet talk our boss into giving us 5% time, which was supposed to be like Google’s 20% time, where they get a whole day to work on personal projects, if it benefits the company.

Sarah: Really?

Paul: Yeah, well we got, like an afternoon on a Friday, which is kind of sidelined at the moment.

Ryan: To spend in the pub (laughs)

Paul: That’s personal projects, I’m sure. No, it’s kind of sidelined at the moment, we’ve got some major projects on which are taking up all our time with some heavy deadlines, so we’ve had to shuffle that. Hopefully we’ll start to get that back over the summer and work on some cool stuff instead of the business stuff.

Sarah: I think it’s rea
lly difficult, because obviously your client stuff does have to come first, and even if you’ve dedicated an afternoon or a couple of hours, if something comes up that morning, or if you’ve got a problem that needs sorting, unfortunately, it’s just the way it is, your client work has got to come first.

Paul: Yeah, pays the bills.

Sarah: I mean, a lot of personal projects, a lot of people’s personal projects, do end up very lucrative for them, and you could argue that it’s just as lucrative to just go along with your own personal projects, but I think in general, most people would find that their client work would, er, would have to come first.

Paul: We’re trying to convince our boss to let us build, er, an iPhone app

Sarah: Really?

Paul: and sell it on the app store. He’s not having none of it, because we’ve told him we all need iPhones to test it on, he just won’t buy them for us.

Ryan: and a mac to develop on

Paul: a Mac to develop on, yeah. For some reason, he’s not warming to the idea.

Ryan: he can’t understand the thirty grand, you know, outlay to…

Paul: We’ll easily make that in a day on the app store (all laugh), I keep telling him this.

Sarah: the app store!

Paul: Yeah, the app’s 50p, you know…

Ryan: Er, completely sidetracked there, erm. What differences do you find, er, between developing for clients and developing for yourself? What major differences do you find?

Sarah: I find, when I’m doing stuff for myself, I’m actually a lot less decisive on stuff. I sort of, because I’m immersed in, maybe my own branding, or sometimes it’s really good to look at it from an outsider’s point of view. If you’re doing stuff for clients, I think sometimes it’s easier to look at stuff and go ‘well, that needs to go there and that needs to be there to catch someone’s attention’ or you need to move that or make that a different colour, and when it’s your own stuff I think you tend to be either really creative and you don’t really care if you get stuff wrong, or if, do you know what I mean? It’s more, sort of… the boundaries aren’t there, you’re not time-constrained, there’s no brief, you just go off on one, doing whatever you want, whereas with client stuff, there tends to be a bit more, erm, what’s the word, consistency across everything, and I find, personally, when I’m doing my personal stuff, I could sit in front of Photoshop pushing something from the left-hand side of the screen to the right-hand side of the screen for two hours, wondering whether it looks right or not, whereas if it’s a client site, I think ‘right, I have to make a decision on this – where would this go, or where would it be best placed, and you make a decision and you move on, because otherwise the more time you, you take going backwards and forwards is, er, less money that you’re earning, so I think I tend to be more decisive with client work and with my own I tend to be a bit more, erm, easy-going and, er, possibly a bit more creative, in the sense of trying things that I haven’t tried before. Erm, yeah, I think it’s just good to be (pause – all laugh).

Paul: I think personal projects give you time to play with the stuff that you wouldn’t normally risk putting into a client’s site, things that might take you a week to figure out.

Sarah: That’s what I, sorry a man just walked past my window in a pair of shorts, as I was answering that question, which completely put me off,

Ryan: Was it an ugly man, or a good-looking man?

Sarah: No, he was an old man.

Ryan: Oh, right. OK

Sarah: I wondered if he had dementia or something, and he thought it was summer.

Paul: Was he in just a pair of shorts?

Sarah: Yeah

Ryan: A pair of shorts and a smile?

Sarah: No, and a newspaper.

Paul: Strategically placed.

Sarah: It just completely sidetracked my thinking pattern, then.

Paul: That’s OK.

Sarah: Oh, sorry.

Ryan: Where were we? So, which do you prefer, developing for clients, because obviously you’re doing that every day, or do you prefer developing for yourself?

Sarah: I actually prefer developing for clients, erm. I prefer getting a brief and thinking ‘right, how can I best interpret this brief, and get the objectives that they want, er, they want to get out of this website, how can I do that in the best possible way?’ Whereas, I think that when you do stuff for yourself, you don’t necessarily write down a brief as strict as you’d get when a client is sending through something. So, I, I actually prefer developing for clients, I really like, I don’t, I really like doing all the end, getting to the end product with a client. I think I get more satisfaction out of that than I do when I’ve done it for myself, because I still look at it in a very critical point of view, I still think, ‘oh well, maybe I could make those buttons a slightly different hint of green and it will look better’; whereas, with client stuff I think it’s just all about decision making, I think you tend to make more decisive decisions with client work than you do with your own. You think of your own as an ever-ongoing project that you can forever tweak and make changes to, whereas with client stuff you, once it’s live, it’s pretty much. You might get to update…

Ryan: Yeah, it’s difficult to come back, isn’t it?

Sarah: Yeah. Exactly. So I much prefer developing for clients, when they’re nice clients!

Ryan: Yes, we only like the nice clients.

Sarah: Yes, we all like nice clients.

Ryan: But do you think personal development time is important, do you think it’s important to develop your own projects?

Sarah: Yeah, I do I think it’s important from the sense of being, when I personally do lots of my own stuff, I find that I tend to be a bit more, erm, creative, in the sense of I’ll try stuff that I might think ‘oh, that’ll look awful, I won’t bother doing that for a client site’, but I might try it and actually surprise myself and think ‘oh no, actually, that’s a really good technique to use’ or do something a bit different because you’re not constrained by time when you’re doing stuff for yourself, necessarily. But I think, I do think it’s really important to do your own, your own thing, because I think it’s also a learning curve, you might try out different systems to use, you might decide to learn something, you might decide to use something like, if you’ve never used WordPress, you might decide to go and bolt WordPress onto your site just to see how you get on with it, you might try different apps. I think it’s important, because it frees the mind to use other things that you might not necessarily get to use when you’re in an office environment or, or perhaps even day to day because you don’t have the time to learn it, so I do think it’s important, but I don’t think it’s the, er, the be all and end all of everything.

Ryan: I think, er, a good tie-in question, not specifically about developing for clients and, er, yourself. Erm, keeping it with blogs and stuff, do you allot yourself a, like, time to read your feeds and, er, things like that, and to keep up with them, because I’ve been so busy in the last two weeks, my feeds have just gone like – you know when Google Reader says ’1000+’ and that’s it, it’s just stopped counting, it’s gone ‘look man, give up on these feeds, you’ve passed a thousand.’

Paul: You need to declare feed bankruptcy, I think.

Sarah: I tend to do this really annoying thing, where if someone posts a good link on Twitter, I’ll open it up in a browser window in a tab, and then if someone else posts, I’ll open that in another browser tab, so I’ve got about 100 tabs open in Firefox that I never get round to, to looking at, which slows the whole thing down and end up having to then bookmark them in a little folder called ‘Interesting Links’, that I never get around to reading.

Ryan: When you look back, they’re four years old and completely out of date.

Sarah: Yeah.

Paul: The shocking thing, because I do the research for the, the Boagworld news and push it all through the links, I probably churn through 150-200 feeds a day (Sarah: gasp), which is so many feeds that I haven’t got time to read them, which is shocking; I get so much information, so many good things that I’m pushing out to other people, that I just don’t have time to read them, there’s too much information.

Sarah: Do you skim-read them?

Paul: I do, I skim-read, I usually read the first few paragraphs, just to see what the article was about, clip out the interesting bits of text for the previews and then send it on it’s merry way out of Twitter and then I’ve written a function that, every time someone clicks a link on Twitter, it kind of lets me know, tracks back and so I can see, right, which… and I watch it, I’ve got live stats and streaming on one of the spare monitors, so as this link goes out onto Twitter, I can see it being read, so I can actually what’s actually what the people are reading, what’s been interesting that way, instead of me thinking ‘that’s genius, we’ll use that on the show’. It’s actually kind of crowd-sourcing information like this.

Sarah: Yeah, that’s a better way of doing it, isn’t it? It’s more productive.

Paul: Yeah, but I do the same, it’s like something I really want to read, I’ll open it in a tab and I’ve got the permatabs thing on Firefox, so I’ll set it so that I can’t delete it until I’ve read through it, but usually it just ends up there for weeks.

Ryan: I tag them in Delicious, so I’ve got like tutorials and stuff that I think ‘oh, that looks fantastic’ and I’ve got a ‘to try’ thing, which is slowly increasing in number and I never sit down and have a go through the tutorials or anything like that.

Paul: Yeah, I think the key is to follow a few key, key things and not try and follow too much information, and then just look at what everyone else around you, the people that you respect, in what they’re sending out and try not to get overwhelmed because there’s a lot of information out there.

Sarah: Dead right, there’s so many, it seems to be a new thing on Twitter to actually post those sort of links, day in, day out, which is really handy because there’s a lot of people who have a lot of good stuff on Twitter.

Paul: Oh twitter.com/boaglinks is the premier source of all this information, of course.

Sarah: Of course! (all laugh)

Ryan: Er, OK, so I think the final question to you, then Sarah, is, erm, what inspires you to pursue your personal projects?

Sarah: Erm, oh, that’s a difficult one. I kind of get inspired in strange places, when I came back from the Future of Web Design and Future of Web Apps, I kind of get inspired by other people, not necessarily the apps that they’re producing, or work that other people are producing, but I sort of feed off other people’s energy, strangely. If other people come away from something really, erm, excited about something, I tend to think ‘oh, yeah, that sounds like a good, like when Adobe Air came out, that was a kind of a buzz around that for a while and it got me thinking ‘um, what can you develop with that that would, you know, might be interesting to other people or that other, that other web designers might want to use?’ but that’s kind of what happened with my own app, Olive, it’s kind of on the backburner at the moment, but there was a problem that came up at work and it was coming up time and time again and I thought ‘there must be something out there that actually addresses this issue of, of erm, client management, so went around, couldn’t find anything and then ended up building it, and it was actually built more for me, rather than other people and when I sent it out to a few people, they really liked, and got into using it and, erm, it’s just kind of handy if you build something that’s, that’s great for you, but equally other people find interesting as well. It’s, erm, it’s a win-win, really. I mean, I use it all the time, and there’s other people who do as well, bu
t at the moment it’s, er, needs a lot of updating, because I’ve been so busy with client stuff, but maybe I should have put that first, but clients pay the bills unfortunately.

Ryan: Absolutely, absolutely. I think I, erm, I think I overthink things, so I think to myself ‘oh, I’d love, love for this to exist’ and then I think to myself ‘I could spend the next three years developing that’ and, and someone would do it better than me, you know and just finding time as well.

Paul: Yeah, I think it’s right what Sarah says, you’ve got to scratch your own itch, you’ve got to find something that you would want to use so much that you would spend that amount of time to build it, and then if it’s for you, it doesn’t really matter that much if no one else wants to use it because it does something that you want it to do.

Sarah: Exactly.

Paul: And it’s a learning process, you can choose any language. If you want to learn a new language, if you want to learn Django or Python or something, you could build it in that, just to learn that language, erm, and then send it out in the world, see if people use it.

Sarah: Exactly, that’s kind of what happened. I was learning quite a bit about Ruby at the time, because Olive, Olive’s built on the Ruby on Rails platform and it was so interesting just to get an insight into how different developing with Ruby is compared to PHP. That was just worth it in it’s own right, really because I find that I learn much better with real world examples rather than looking at a load of code. I find that if, if I ever get something like that, I have to take it apart, almost, and then try and work out how to put it all back together so that it works. I think I learn better by doing that and a lot of people do. If you going on to any of the tutorial sites now, there tends to be a lean towards developing an app or something small; I think on the Nettuts at the moment, website – do you guys know that one?

Ryan: Er, yes.

Paul: Yes, ah the Nettuts, oh yeah.

Sarah: Yeah, there’s a, there’s a sway towards actually building like login systems from scratch and things like that on there, where it’s actually showing you the code and then showing you how it works in real world situations which I think is really good, for me, I don’t know about you two, but I personally prefer picking stuff apart (laughs).

Paul: Yeah, absolutely. I usually start at the very lowest common denominator, like a user access system, and I’m learning CakePHP now which is, kind of a Ruby clone for PHP and instead of using their in-build methods which will do it all for you with build this, just write these classes and it’s like ‘No, it’s like the most basic thing I can do in this language, let me learn how to do it’, and I’ll learn that way.

Sarah: Yeah, yeah, that’s, I think when, erm, when I looked at using Ruby for, er, for Olive, I didn’t build it, it was built by a guy, a brilliant guy, Adam Cooke, but I was still really interested to know how it would work and how Ruby is different and the first thing I did was built a, erm, a basic recipe, sort of database thing with, it was off of a tutorial site and I think it’s great if it gives you just a little bit of insight into something that you might not have already realised or known about building your own stuff, then I think you have that sort of passion to go forward with it, you have that confidence to then think ‘oh, well I’ve done that tiny thing, maybe I can do something else with it. Whereas, if you’re doing it for clients, you don’t, you wouldn’t really venture into using another programming language that you weren’t comfortable with on a client site, unless you were a bit silly.

Ryan: Absolutely, absolutely. Paul told me a really funny thing, in between, er, when he told me he was learning CakePHP. He said, I’m trying to remember what it was that you told me, it was ‘if Ruby’s French, CakePHP is French with an English accent’

Paul: Yeah, its kind of the same, just not quite as elegant.

Ryan: Yeah, I thought that was fantastic, that was so fantastic, I made it into, I have some rotating quotes on my web-site, and that made it into my quotes, that was fantastic.

Much thanks goes to Simon Douglas for transcribing this interview so quickly!

Back to top

Listeners Questions:

Is Using Off-The-Shelf Software Wrong?

Jon Writes:

I guess my question is about the use of off-the-shelf software. I must admit I feel slightly uncomfortable using it at all. As a decent sized agency of 9 people, with our own very capable developers, I can’t escape the nagging feeling that we are “cheating” slightly by using an off-the-shelf platform at all. Although we adhere strictly to licensing requirements, most of our customers do not know that their stores are powered by what is essentially a ready made system, which we then skin, configure and populate.

What are your views about off-the-shelf stuff and the pros and cons of using it on client work?

Thanks and keep up the good work!

I think the main source of your discomfort is the fact that your clients don’t know you are using off-the-shelf software for their projects, which raises the question why not?

Your clients have approached you to provide them with a service they cannot perform themselves. Whether that is building a system from scratch or integrating and customizing an third-party system to meet their needs, you are still the expert.

There are very powerful off-the-shelf e-commerce systems, blog engines and CMS’s that should be thought of as weapons in your arsenal rather than “cheating”. Explaining to your clients why you are going to use a particular system for their project can be hugely beneficial. It shows that you don’t want to waist their time and money re-inventing the wheel.

Therefore, the pro’s are:

  • It meets there project aims
  • You are experienced with the system
  • It’s supported by a third-party team of developers who are dedicated to that one product and includes a vast community of other users who support each other
  • It can be implemented in a shorter period of time than building from scratch (i.e. cheaper for the client all round)
  • It’s a tried and tested system (You could even give your client a list of other successful companies that are using it)
  • It is also more than likely that a third-party product that has been around for several years is a more reliable and robust system than the one you develop in a couple of months.

That said there are always inherent risks in using anything third-party, whether it be API’s, frameworks, libraries or software and I have a general rule of thumb that I try to always adhere
to:

Don’t implement something you don’t understand!

If it breaks, it costs you time and money to fix the problem, and that’s once you’ve diagnosed what that problem is. The longer it takes you to fix the higher the risk that your client is going to lose confidence in your ability to deliver.

So take the time to do some dissecting and learn how to use your tools as fully as you can prior to implementation.

How do you price and quote different projects?

Jamie who’s just started up his own web development company is having trouble working out how to price and quote different projects and wonders if we have any tips that we’ve found helpful when quoting for clients?

One of the hardest things when starting out, and even for established businesses is finding your feet with pricing. I think the biggest lesson I learnt is not to under-quote just to gain the business, even though you are in need of clients. It makes no business sense to work for peanuts, you’re better holding off for a client who respects the work you do and pays honestly for that work rather than being a design machine churning out work just to make ends meet.

The other important thing I learnt in my first year of business is, clients who barter with your prices are generally bad news. We’ve all heard it, “if you can do this one at x-amount we have plenty of other work in the pipeline we want to use you for” – while this sounds tempting, 9 times out of 10 the promise of the further work never comes off, even if it does they would normally expect further work at the “cheap” price they paid you before, as you accepted it so you must be happy to work for that right? Wrong.

I always find it helpful to ask the client for a ballpark figure prior to laying out the full proposal, this negates you wasting time putting together the proposal of cost plus terms and conditions only to find the client wants to build ebay on a budget of £300.

I also find ballpark figures helpful because I find it easier to provide the client with options, even if they have a relatively small budget there is normally still something you can do, even if it is very basic – but it gives you a starting block to explain if their budget was a bigger they could bolt on a CMS system or have a better shopping cart, then explain the benefits of those. You’d be suprised how much the budgets are then increased by.

It’s all about providing the client with the best solution for their project at the end of the day, and if you think the best solution would be bolting on Expression Engine or the like, you need to give the client the choice to do this and expand their budget if necessary rather than cut them out of the equation because of it, it’s all about educating the client.

158. Home

On this week’s show: We share the highlights of SXSW, discuss home working, and interview Rob Borley about project management.

Play

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Housekeeping

Headscape still recruiting!

Headscape is still recruiting. We are looking for an enthusiastic, talented developer to join our team, working from of our offices in Hampshire. For more information see the job advertisement on Boagworld.

Back to top

News and events

The best of SXSW

Well, SXSW is over and I am back in the UK. But what happened at the conference? What was the big news this year?

That is actually a hard question to answer. There is so much at SXSW that it is almost impossible to get a sense of everything that is going on. Even if you could attend every panel that isn’t always where the real action takes place.

The real conference often happens at the parties and in the corridors. In fact, more than one spontaneous panel was started via Twitter, thanks to official panels being full.

Panels this year ranged from the downright dull to all out flame wars! One that I unfortunately missed was "Is Spec Work Evil!". However, Marcus attended and tells me it was particularly fiery. Personally, I am very much against speculative work as I have said before. However, not everybody would agree and the panel seemed to reflect this diverse opinion.

One panel I did make was Paul Annett’s amazingly inspirational talk on Easter Eggs and design twists. The talk focused on the little things you can add to your site to make users go ‘oooo that’s clever’.

Too often I neglect such ‘bells and whistles’ in favour of usability and accessibility. Paul demonstrated how these different priorities can sit side by side without compromising each other. He showed some great examples including the hidden arrow in the FedEx logo and the vines on the Silverback website.

fedex logo

The final panel I want to mention is ‘Being a UX Team of One‘ by Leah Burley of Adaptive Path. To be honest the title of this one was a little misleading (at least from my perspective).

What I took away from this session was that design should not be a solitary activity, solely reliant on the creative inspiration of one individual. Leah seemed to be arguing for a more collaborative approach especially at the wireframe stage. She proposed that all of those involved in the project should sit down together and hammer out the wireframe designs.

This addressed two separate problems we have been having at Headscape

  • The developers concerns at not being involved early enough in the process.
  • The question of who should do wireframing – the designer or the IA person.

Best of all Leah’s presentation was very pragmatic. She provided lots of practical approaches that encourage idea generation and collaboration. I highly recommend listening to the podcast of this when it is released.

Browser testing and IE6

In other news, there seems to have been a lot written about browsers this past week. Three stories in particular caught my eye…

  • .net Magazine seems to have hopped on the ‘dump IE6′ bandwagon – My opinion is the same as that of Jeremy Keith as expressed in last weeks show. It is not a matter of dropping IE6. We should instead being deciding whether we wish to offer it the same level of support as modern browsers. I am entirely in favour of providing IE6 with a basic stylesheet that avoids its shortcomings. However, I dislike the idea of dropping it entirely.
  • Microsoft has released SuperPreview this week that allows Windows users to test different versions of IE simultaneously. I have to say this looks like an impressive tool. It allows you to view IE6 and IE7 side by side. It also has many other tools that may also be useful. Support for IE8 and other browsers will follow and although it is currently in beta, I think it will quickly become an indispensable tool for Windows based web designers. Just a shame there is no mac support!
  • Finally, Sitepoint have written a brief outline of how to create the perfect browser testing suite. Ideally for those starting out it lists various online browser simulators, virtual machines and desktop browser emulators.

Browser testing continues to be a pain in the neck and I for one would be willing to pay for a decent way of streamlining this whole process. This is especially true now that IE8 has been officially released and we have another browser to add into the mix.

Screenshot of Superpreview

A simplicity case study

A few weeks ago I wrote about the importance of simplifying your website. Well, this week Gerry McGovern has written the perfect case study to support the argument I was putting forward.

Removing poor quality content increases customer satisfaction‘ talks about how the Microsoft website consists of a staggering 10 millions pages. Of those pages 3 million have never been viewed!

The post goes on to explain how the Microsoft Office team took a different approach with their site by removing irrelevant pages. According to McGovern…

By weeding the garden, the top task pages became easier to find. But just as importantly it became harder to find a minor task page when you were looking for a top task page.

In short, removing pages reduced noise. Disturbing though it sounds, I think we could all learn something from Microsoft’s example.

An introduction to Microformats

My final post today comes from Richard Rutter’s blog. It is basically an introduction to Microformats aimed at the non-geek. He wrote the post because he recently found himself trying to explain microformats to a client and could not think of a good post that covered the subject from their perspective.

Personally, I am not sure it is necessary to tell a client you are implementing Microformats. The cost of adding them is so small and the benefits so hard to explain, that you maybe better off just doing it.

That said, this is an excellent post and if you are struggling to understand the point of Microformats, this is certainly worth reading.

Back to top

Interview: Rob Borley on Project Management

Paul: So, joining me today is Mr. Rob Borley. Hello Rob.

Rob: Hi Paul, how are you doing?

Paul: Very well indeed. Good to have you on the show. It’s been a little while.

Rob: It has, It has. It’s weird hearing the show above you, um rather than being below.

Paul: Oh yes, because you sit upstairs, don’t you?

Rob: Indeed.

Paul: Do you actually hear it?

Rob: I do. It’s like have a little base bin ?

Paul: Awh. So, um, we have kind of been thinking for a little while that we need to get someone on the show to talk about project management. And the idea was we’d get some high profile web design project manager to come in and talk about web design project management. Then I realised, um, that I can’t actually think of any. You know, I really don’t know of any kind of web design project managers out there, other than obviously the people that work at Headscape.

Rob: Well, maybe there’s a gap in the market.

Paul: I think there is a gap in the market.

Rob: (unintelligible) celebrity project manager.

Paul: Well I think that’s somewhat of an oxymoron, but setting that aside, lets shift around a bit, yeah, so, um, so we thought, lets get you on the show. Um, now, you’re quite and interesting case because you started of as a techie.

Rob: Yes.

Paul: And you became a project manager.

Rob: Yes.

Paul: And, so, um, let’s start by talking about the role of project manager. How would you describe your core role? What is it that you do? I should know this I guess.

Rob: Well, you mean other than manage projects.

Paul: Ok, you just have to make a joke out of it. But you know what I’m getting at.

Rob: Yeah yeah. I mean, I guess, um, the main thing that we do is shovel shit, really. We deal with crap. You know, the main thing project manager would do is a filter between clients and the production team for the project. I mean, there are a couple of stages I guess. So you’ve got the planning part of the job, which is essentially working out what it is you need to do, um, making sure you got the results to do it, plotting a nice time line so they can all fit as far as having deadline. And then you’ve got the people said, because really project management is a people job. You need to know how to get the most out of all the people that are in your project team, um including the client. You need to include the client in your thinking, always. Yah, that’s essentially what we do.

Paul: Yah. It’s a people person thing. I always thought you were so charasmatic. Ok, so, I mean, I guess the question is, if you look at the kind of, if you look at Headscape, and the way that we’re organised, we’ve got four developers, four designers, and three project managers. I mean, that’s a lot of project managers. And, you know the question is, why, why have project mangers at all? Why couldn’t the designers and the developers do the job? Why couldn’t it be spread across multiple people? Justify you exsistance, Rob.

Rob: Yeah, this question kind of makes me nervous here. I feel like I’m re-interviewing for my own job. Not that I interviewed in the first place, but, I guess in one sense, if you were in a small project environment, you could almost get away with one person. If, you know, its a one person job, you could get away with them managing themselves for a limited amount of time. Um, but, as soon as you get beyond jobs which are more than one person, um, and go on for an extended period of time, you start needing to provide some glue to stick things together. You need someone whose got an overview of everything that’s going on. You know, the developers have got a very developer mindset about the way things happen. Designers are the same way, they know about the design stuff. Um, but actually translating what the client wants and feeding that into both areas and bring them together is what’s missing, if you don’t have a project manager.

Paul: So, to some degree, project management becomes necessary with scale. The bigger the projects, and the more complex the projects, then the more a need for a dedicated project manager.

Rob: Yeah, definitely. I mean, I guess the real role of a project manager in these situations is the facilitator. You’ve got all of these tools which are basically your resources, your developers, your designers, um, and you need to be able to enable them to work effectively together to produce what the end product is going to be.

Paul: So here’s a question that I didn’t pre-give you, in advance, which is always the best type. Why, why, why become a project manager? What made you – because you were heading up our technical development team, you were, you know, you were doing very well. Why did you feel the need to get involved in what you call shit shoveling?

Rob: Well, I think my main motivation was, Headscape was growing, and we started employing all of these younger, more dynamic, much more talented, better looking developers, that were basically going to show me up. So I figured that before I got shown in true light that I was going to need to move somewhere else. Um, no, well that’s partly true. Really, I think, its the people’s aspect that I’m really interested in. A good project manager is someone who is able to understand how his resources or how her resources work and how your clients work, and joining the two together. Um, while I quite like writing code really, I’m not passionate about it. So that side of it, you know, I reached as far as I wanted to go, and I really enjoy the people thing.

Paul: Ok. So what other, I mean, what other kind of characteristics do you think make a good project manager, obviously the people skills you talked about, what other, I mean if there are other people out there going well actually I’m not that passionate about coding, or I’m not that passionate about design, but I am passionate about the web, I do like the web design process, perhaps project management is the way I ought to be going. You know, what skills, what characteristics do they need, what personality traits do they need?

Rob: I think well, you need to be able to plan. Um, you know, planning is very very important. If you plan well, then your project will usually go well.

Paul: I like the cornification in that.

Rob: You have to be able to predict the future is helpful.

Paul: Yes.

Rob: A major part of what we de in the planning stages is assessing risk. You know, so, we’ve got what we’re starting with, we’ve got what we want to achieve, and we’ve got a time scale, now we need to work out what things might appear that are unforeseen, which are going to affect us reaching the time scale. So being able to foresee the future is helpful. Um, and so planning, being quite analytical and thorough. The logical background I have from being a programmer, a developer, is really helpful because you have to approach project management in a very analytical way, to make sure you don’t miss things. So there’s that side of it. And then there’s communication skills. You not only need to be able to communicate with a client affectively so they show that you understand what they want, um, and they understand where you are with the project, and they’re happy because a happy client makes everyone happy. But you also then need to communicate that with the various personalities in your team. You know, whether thats the developers locked up in a dark room with no social skills, or the crazy charismatic designers who…

Paul: You’ve just gone with stereotypes that so don’t apply. If I look at our team, no offense to our designers, they’re the ones that sit in the darkened room with their nose right pressed against the screen. And the developers are the ones that are crazy and never do any work.

Rob: (unintelligible) something about reading personalities. No, but you see my point. You’ve got these almost extremes, especially in the web, I guess, in the web world, you’ve got these extremes of personailities which somehow you need to be able to communicate with and put it all together and so, yeah, that’s an important skill. I think the third area, is to be quite relaxed about life. Because things will go wrong and do go wrong, it doesn’t matter how well you plan and how good you are at predicting the future. Stuff will appear that is completely unforeseen and will completely throw (unintelligible). And everyone gets really upset and people will shout at you and it goes a bit nuts. Um, and if you go nuts as well, you project team falls apart, because they look at you as the calm rudder in the storms of life. I can feel my other project manager buddies laughing at me, um, but if you’re calm and you can not get stressed at that but actually see, try and find a clear path through a very stressful situation, then really helps.

Paul: I would so be the worst project manager in the world. I’ve got the attention span of a newt, I’ve got no organisational abilities and I get stressed at everything. So overall, I think I’d fail.

Rob: Yeah, stick to web celeb.

Paul: Yes, I’ll come up with some other title that sounds good. Um, ok, so you talked about this really is, I can honestly say, a foreign area to me. Right? You talk about planning a project upfront. I’m not a planning person. Right? And there seems to be so many variables involved in a project and so much as you say, that can potentially go wrong. How do you plan it? I mean, you know, the kind of thing that you always talk about, when you talk about project management is endless gantt charts that seem to be outdated in about 5 minutes, sort of kicking a project off. How to you effectively plan a project?

Rob: Um, well, we do use a gantt. We always start a project with a gantt. And, um because it seems like thats what project managers are supposed to do, so we justify the time with a gantt. Um, but you do need, um, I think assessing risk is something that is vital in successful project management. Its something that we’ve been doing at Headscape, um, increasingly more over the last year or so otherwise this need to actually spend time highlighting what could actually go wrong here. So, you look at, I’m not going to be able to think of any examples now, but a particular, let’s say you building a shop or something. So potential things which could delay that project would be: the client not getting around to telling you what the products are on the shelf and content population is a big risk on meeting a project deadline, because it is out of your control. So, its like, I need the content by this date, and he needs to put the content in by X date. If the client doesn’t do it, there’s nothing you can do about it.

Paul: I’m guessing integration must always be a big risk. Integrating with third party applications.

Rob: Exactly, so if you’ve got some sort of third party database or a web service you’ve got to pull in, something that you’ve done a bit before, but you don’t know anything about, that’s a risk. Because you can guesstimate what’s going to happen, but its unforeseen. And so, the trick is basically, to find all the tasks that have these risks and then multiply (unintelligible) an hour by some random number. And then make the rest up as you go along.

Paul: So what about once the project gets going, how, what techniques and tools maybe do you use for monitoring and controlling the process and trying to keep on top of everything.

Rob: Yeah, I mean, there are lots of tools out there, obviously, lots of funky web-based ones, um, there is no substitute for talking to you team. Um, trying to (unintelligible) email or basecamp or something is impossibly without talking to you team. So, communicate. It’s a big part of what we do. You have to talk to the people doing the work, you have to talk to the clients, um you have to keep the lines of communication open. Um, but as far as actually keeping track of what’s going on, we do use basecamp, um which is great for managing lists, basically, you manage lists. So from our gantt shell, we’ll break it up into a series of tasks if you like, wide areas, um, and then, (unintelligible) ask people to add comments to them and take them off and then we’ve got kind of an overview of where our project is. Um, and hopefully from there, and when we’ve got the gant shell, we’ve got some dates, some milestones and reminders like you should have done this by then, um and so, you use that to kind of keep track of where you are.

Paul: Cool. What about, so that’s kind of dealing with the internal side of things. What about when it comes to the client, I mean, you talked about, you said earlier, a happy client makes everybody happy kind of thing. So what makes a client happy? What are the things that really, or perhaps turn it around the other way, what are the things that really piss of a client and where can it really go wrong?

Rob: This is really where the people side of it really comes in because every client is different. Some clients want you to talk to them for five hours a day, hold their hand, you know, spoon feed them, and some clients just want to know when it’s finished. So initially, when you’re kind of trying to assess your project team, if you like, your resources and what you’ve got, assessing the personality of your client early on, will really put you in a good place. Um, but, I guess, general principles, if you’re honest, it helps. Um, so, be realistic about what you’re telling your client is going to happen. Don’t promise the Earth by yesterday. Because then you won’t deliver and then they’ll get upset. If there’s going to be a problem, if things have slipped for some unknown reason, then tell them as soon as you know. Tell them as quickly as you possibly can. Um, manage their expectations is kind of the phrase that we use a lot. You gotta manage you clients expectations so that they’re not expecting something that you can’t deliver. And um, and then that limits the amount of upsetness that they get.

Paul: Slippage is a big one, isn’t it? This kinda whole area of things like, you know problems you kinda face, things, like slippage, scope creep, non-delivery, I mean, how do you have any kind of broad techniques for dealing with these kinds of things, or is it just kinda communications thing again.

Rob: It’s mainly I think a communication thing again. Um, part of the planning stage is trying to asses these risks and so you try and build in contingency to cope with those, and if you’re building enough contingency, you deliver the project early and that makes everyone really happy, even if its a long project, you deliver it early, you’ve exceeded their expectation also. Um, so I think, if somethings going to slip, I think you should say you’ve got to be honest. Sometimes things are just out of your control, so you’re two weeks before the end of a project, you in the middle of snagging, your lead developer goes down with appendicitis. There’s nothing you can do about that, and so you just need to communicate with the client and hope they take it well.

Paul: So wishing everything works out, I’m loving that approach. Ok, so, um, let’s finish of with a piece of generic advice. Either people starting out in project management or those that have had project management foisted upon them. You know, whats the kind of one piece of advice that you would leave for people?

Rob: Get to know your team. I think that’s the main thing I would say. Um, its kind of like, when you drive you car, you’re environment is a very organic, dynamic thing, you know what it really what’s going to happen and the only thing you’ve got to get you through it is that you understand you car. You know almost instinctively how it works, how to drive it it, if you get to that situation with your team, then whatever the project throws at you, you kind of, you can deal with it. If you understand how you client is going to react to a certain situtation, you can intincfully deal with it. And it keeps the stress levels low. You need to find ways of managing your stress levels.

Paul: There you go, that’s great advice. Thank you vert much for that, it was wonderful. I really appreciate you coming on the show.

Rob: My pleasure.

Thanks goes to Meredith Marsh for transcibing this interview.

Back to top

Feature: Home Working

I was recently contacted by a friend of mine Marieke Guy about writing a guest post for her blog on remote working.

I have been working at home for over 7 years now and am a great believer in the benefits. However when I actually sat down to write the post, I realised just how long it has taken me to find the right way of working.

As a large number of people who listen to this podcast work from home, I thought I would share my experiences to date and my hopes of where remote working will take me in the future.

The reality of home working

Back to top

10 criteria for selecting a CMS

Choosing a content management system can be tricky. Without a clearly defined set of requirements you will be seduced by fancy functionality that you will never use. What then should you look for in a CMS?

I have written about content management systems before. I have highlighted the hidden costs of a CMS, explained the differentiators behind the feature list and even provided advice for CMS users. However, I have never asked what features you should be looking for in a content management systems. That is what I want to address here.

Illustration of a sales man selling a CMS the client does not need.

When I left home for University my mother taught me a valuable lesson. If you want to save money, never go grocery shopping when you are hungry and always write a list. If you don’t you will be tempted to buy things you do not need.

The same principle is true when it comes to selecting a content management system. Without a clearly defined set of requirements you will be seduced by fancy functionality that you will never use. Before you know it you will be buying an enterprise level system for tens of thousands of dollars when a free blogging tool would have done.

How then do you establish your list of requirements? Although your circumstances will vary there are ten areas that are particularly important.

1. Core functionality

When most people think of content management, they are thinking of the creation, deletion, editing and organizing of pages. They assume all content management systems do this and so take the functionality for granted. However that is not necessarily the case. There is also no guarantee that it is done in an intuitive fashion.

Not all blogging platforms for example allow the owner to manage and organize pages into a tree hierarchy. Instead the individual ‘posts’ are automatically organized by criteria such as date or category. In some situations this is perfectly adequate. In fact this limitation in functionality keeps the interface simple and easy to understand. However, in other circumstances the absence of this functionality can be frustrating.

Blogger Homepage

Consider carefully the basic functionality you need. Even if you do not require the ability to structure and organize pages now, you may in the future. Be wary of any system that does not allow you to complete these core activities.

Also ask yourself how easy it is to complete these tasks. There are literally thousands of content management systems on the market, the majority of which offer the core functionality. However they vary hugely in usability. Alway look to test a system for usability before making a purchase.

The editor is one core feature worth particular attention.

2. The editor

The majority of content management systems have a WYSIWYG editor. Strangely this editor is often ill considered, despite the fact that it is the most used feature within the system.

The editor is the interface through which content is added and amended. Traditionally, it has also allowed the content provider to apply basic formatting such as the selection of fonts and colour. However more recently there has been a move away from this type of editor to something that reflects the principles of best practice.

The danger of traditional WYSIWYG editors is two fold. First, they give the content provider too much design control. They are able to customize the appearance of a page to such an extent that it could undermine the consistence of design and branding. Second, in order to achieve this level of design control the cms mixes design and content.

The new generation of editors take a different approach. The content provider uses the editor to markup headings, lists, links and other elements without dictating how they should appear.

Wordpress WYSIWYG

Ensure your list of requirements include an editor that uses this approach and does not give content providers control over appearance. At the very least look for content management systems that allow the editor to be replaced with a more appropriate solution.

The editor should also be able to handle external assets including images and downloads. That brings us on to the management of these assets.

3. Managing assets

Managing images and files are badly handled by some cms packages. Issues of accessibility and ease of use can cause frustration with badly designed systems. Images in particular can cause problems. Ensure that the content management system you select forces content provider to add alt attributes to imagery. You may also want a cms that provides basic image editing tools such as crop, resize and rotate. However, finding such a cms can be a challenge.

Also consider how the content management system deals with uploading and attaching PDFs, Word documents and other similar files. How are they then displayed to users? What descriptions can be attached to the files and is the search capable of indexing them.

4. Search

Search is an important aspect of any site. Approximately half of users will start with search when looking for content. However, often the search functionality available in content management systems is inadequate.

Here are a few things to look for when assessing search functionality:

  • Freshness – How often does the search engine index your site? This is especially important if your site changes regularly.
  • Completeness – Does it index the entire content of each page? What about attached files such as PDFs, Word documents, Excel and Powerpoint?
  • Speed – Some search engines can take an age to return results. This is especially common on large sites.
  • Scope – Can you limit the scope of search to a particular section of the site or refine search results once returned?
  • Ranking – How does the search engine determine the ranking of results? Can this be customized either by the website owner or by the user?
  • Customization – Can you control how results are returned and customize the design?

The issue of customization is one that goes far beyond search.

5. Customization

I have been unfortunate enough to work with content management systems that are completely inflexible in their presentation.

Illustration demonstrating the inflexibility of some CMS

The presentation of your content should not be dictated by technology. It is simply not necessary now that we have techniques for separating design and content. Unfortunately like web designers, many content management providers have failed to adopt best practice and their systems produce horrendous code. This places unreasonable constraints on design and seriously impacts accessibility.

You need a content management system that allows flexibility in the way content is returned and presented. For example can you return news stories in reverse chronological order? Can you display events on a calendar? Is it possible to extract the latest user comments and display them on the homepage? It is flexibility that makes a cms stand out.

Talking of user comments, it is worth mentioning all forms of user interactions.

6. User interaction

If you intend to gather user feedback, your cms must provide that functionality or allow third party plugins to do so. Equally, if you want a community on your site then you will require functionality such as chat, forums, comments and ratings.

As a minimum you will require the ability to post forms and collect the responses. How easy does the cms make this process? Can you customize the fields or does that require technical expertise? What about the results? Can you specify who they are emailed to? Can they be written to a database or outputted as an excel document? Consider the type of functionality that you will require and look for a cms that supports that.

Also ask what tools exist for communicating with your customers. Can you send email newsletters? Can recipients be organized into groups who are mailed individually? What about news feeds and RSS?

Finally consider how you want users to be managed. Do you need to reset passwords or set permissions? Do you need to be able to export user information into other systems?

But it is not just user permissions that may need managing. You also have to consider permissions for those editing the site.

7. Roles and permissions

As the number of content providers increase, you will want more control over who can edit what. For example, personnel should be able to post job advertisements but not add content to the homepage. This requires a content management system that supports permissions. Although implementation can vary, permissions normally allow you to specify whether users to edit specific pages or even entire sections of the site.

Illustration showing the consequences of not having a permissions system

As the number of contributors grows still further you may require one individual to review the content being posted to ensure accuracy and consistent tone. Alternatively content might be inputed by a junior member of staff who requires the approval of somebody more senior before making that content live.

In both cases this requires a cms that supports multiple roles. This can be as simple as editors and approver, or complex allowing customized roles with different permissions.

Finally, enterprise level content management systems support entire workflows where a page update has to go through a series of checkpoints before being allowed to go live. These complex scenarios require the ability to roll back pages to a pervious version.

8. Versioning

Being able to revert to a previous version of a page allows you to quickly recover if something is posted by accident.

Some content management systems have complex versioning that allow you to rollback to a specific date. However, in most cases this is overkill. The most common use of versioning is simply to return to the last saved state.

Although this sounds like an indispensable feature, in my experience it is rarely used expect in complex workflow situations. That said, although versioning was once a enterprise level tool it is increasingly becoming available in most content management systems. This is also true of multi-site support.

9. Multiple site support

With more content management systems allowing you to run multiple websites from the same installation, I would recommend that this is a must-have feature.

Although you may not currently need to manage more than a single site, that could change. You may decide to launch a new site targeting a different audience.

Alternatively with the growth of the mobile web, you may create a separate site designed for mobile devices. Whatever the reason, having the flexibility to run multiple websites is important.

Movable Type admin system

Another feature that you may not require immediately but could need in the future, is multilingual support.

10. Multilingual support

It is easy to dismiss the need to support multiple languages. Your site may be targeted specifically at the domestic market or you may sell a language specific product. However think twice before dismissing this requirement.

Even if your product is language specific, that could change. It is important that your cms can grow with your business and changing requirements.

Also just because you are targeting the domestic market does not mean you can ignore language. We live in a multicultural society where numerous languages are spoken. Being able to accommodate these differences provides a significant edge on your competition.

That said, do think through the ramifications of this requirement. Just because you have the ability to add multiple languages doesn’t mean you have the content. Too many of my clients have insisted on multilingual support and yet have never used it. They have failed to consider where they are going to get the content translated and how they intend to pay for it.

Conclusions

Features are an important part of the CMS selection process, but they are not everything. It is also important to consider issues like licensing, support, accessibility, security, training and much more.

I leave you with a word of warning – Don’t let your list of requirements become a wish list. Keep your requirements to a minimum, but at the same time keep an eye on the future. Its a fine line to walk. On one hand you don’t want to pay for functionality you never use. On the other, you do not want to be stuck with a content management system that no longer meets your needs.

This has been an extract from the Website Owners Manual - now available as an ebook and for preorder in print.

What's with the attitude?

We face many challenges as designers and developers – IE6, the fast pace or change, meeting the needs of disabled users. However, I am coming to believe that our biggest challenge is our own attitude.

This post started off as a bit of fun. It was going to be another spoof, this time in the form of a top 10 list of harsh truths. However, as I began writing I found myself actually believing many of the points. In the end I was forced to scrap that draft and start from scratch.

I am worried about how people see us as web designers. More than that, I am worried how we behave as web designers, both with our clients and towards one another.

Let me explain what I mean, starting with the more obvious and damaging area – our attitude towards clients.

Our attitude towards clients

I speak to a lot of web designers and in all of those conversations I rarely hear a positive word said about the people who keep us employed.

The overwhelming attitude towards clients is one of disdain. Oh, we hide our feelings reasonably well when dealing with them face to face. However, behind their backs we are often critical and derisive.

We see clients as stupid, awkward, or intent on derailing the project. In short we see them as the enemy.

We have to change this attitude. Not only is it damaging to the relationship, it is also untrue. Just because somebody doesn’t understand the web, does not make them an idiot. Without a doubt they will be far more knowledgeable than you in many, many areas.

You cannot have it both ways. On one hand we set ourselves up as experts who should be listened to. On the other, we are surprised that the client doesn’t instinctively know, understand and except everything we suggest. If they could, we would not be the expert!

We need to recognise the critical role the client brings to the web design process and stop trying to exclude them for fear they might bring something different to the table we might not like.

Stop treating your clients like children and start treating them as peers. That means listening to their contributions even when it does not sit comfortably with your own views. This involves us losing our sense of moral superiority.

You do not have the moral high ground

I do not hide the fact that I am an evangelical christian. That means associating myself with some people who have an enormous sense of smug satisfaction and moral superiority. Some of these people really think they are ‘Gods gift,’ literally! However, they pale in comparison to the moral and intellectual snobbery I encounter in the web design community.

I am fed up with web designers who judge others (and their own clients) with such passion and vigour it borders on the fanatical.

We are not poets, artists or preachers. We do not have the luxury of free thinking theory. We should be pragmatists that work in the real world and solve real world problems.

The problem is that most of our high minded ideals are nothing more than ego. It is about exalting ourselves at the expense of others. Let me give you a few examples of what I mean…

Why doesn’t your site validate?

I can’t believe they code in .net

He is always asking people to retweet his posts.

Oh, they are just link baiting

Comments like that are just about pulling others down. Validation isn’t everything and how can you judge somebody’s decision to code in a certain language without any background information? Hell, what does it matter to you anyway? As for link baiting and retweeting – what is wrong with wanting to drive traffic? There seems to be an attitude that desiring your site to be popular and working towards that end, is in someway wrong! Admittedly new traffic is not the whole story but it is a part of it.

Promoting your sites or services is not desperate or needy. It is good business. If all you offer clients is moral superiority and a well built site, then you are only offering them half a service.

I am not saying there are no lines. I do not condone black hat SEO techniques and I hate SPAM as much as the next person. However, I think we need to drop the attitude and consider the broader picture. We need to consider the business behind the site.

Stop trying to be intellectually superior

Unfortunately we do not just like to feel morally superior, we also like to feel intellectually superior.

We dress our profession up in impenetrable jargon and give ourselves fancy job titles. In many ways we are like teenagers trying to appear more grown up by smoking and drinking.

I guess this is not surprising. Our industry is barely in its teens. We are trying to find our identity and justify our existence. However, in the process we are in danger of becoming elitist and inaccessible to outsiders.

Take for example the recent rash of Top 10 posts. It is something I have started doing myself and have received a massive amount of criticism for it. I have been accused of dumbing down, catering for the lowest common denominator and being desperate for traffic.

Indeed top 10 posts do drive more traffic. That is because people like them. They like them because they are accessible. They are easy to scan and easy to assimilate. In what way is that bad?

Those who criticise do so because they feel that in some way these posts cheapen the industry or devalue what we do. I get the same criticism about my podcast. We joke on the show and have fun. We make the information accessible. Therefore we must be devaluing it.

In my opinion this is a view driven by insecurity. By wrapping up what you say in long words and impenetrable jargon you can hide the truth. You can sound better than you really are.

Unfortunately this just isn’t true. By making it impenetrable you are actually hiding its worth. By explaining what you know in a clear and accessible way you demonstrate its real value.

The desire for exclusivity

All of this is driven by a desire to the ‘cool kid’. Perhaps it is a hang over from our school days when geeks were far from popular. We try to impress and dominate, when we should be empathising and working together.

Another manifestation of this cool kid mentality is our rejection of anything mainstream. As soon as something becomes popular we drop it like a stone. Now our clients are talking about twitter, we accuse them of ruining it and start looking for the next thing. We want to be exclusive, special, different.

The trouble is the mainstream pays the bills. We need to break out of our exclusive little bubble and try to associate more closely with that mainstream. We need to understand what the general populace are embracing and go with that, even if it means still supporting IE6.

Conclusion

This post is aimed as much at myself as anybody else. I catch myself doing many of the things I have written about here.

In many ways the web design community is awesome. There are not many industries where direct competitors talk to one another so openly and freely. However in doing so we have become somewhat insular and very intense. I think sometimes we are under the impression that we are shaping the future and that every choice we make is of crucial importance.

At the end of the day we are just building websites. We need to get some perspective.

Thus ends the rant :p

10 tips for efficient design

Being a good designer is not always enough to survive hard economic times. You need to be efficient too.

I don’t want this to be another ‘recession’ post. Sure, being more efficient in the way we work as web designers, makes us more competitive and keeps us employed. However, that is not the only reason we should endeavour to ‘work smarter’.

Working as efficiently as possible brings other benefits too…

  • More time – The faster you can turn around work, the more time you have for personal projects, family and friends. I don’t know about you but this is a major motivator for me.
  • Better promotion prospects – It takes more than good design skills to be promoted. You need to demonstrate that you are proactive and efficient in the way you work. Management will value you more if you generate a higher return.
  • Increased profit – If you are a freelancer it is all about maximising profit. The smarter you work, the more money you earn. It’s that simple.

So how can you be more efficient and begin to work smarter? Here are 10 tips that will get you started.

1. Use snippets

Coda Clips Palette

Let’s start with the obvious technical stuff. First make sure you have a library of code snippets that can be easily reused. These could include Eric Meyers CSS Reset or your own code for dealing with common HTML content such as news listings or pagination.

These libraries of snippets provide two benefits. First, they save a lot of typing. However more importantly, they ensure consistency across projects. Because you are using the same code for each project, all of the IDs, classes and structure remain consistent. This will save a lot of time when trying to remember why you built something in a certain way or how it works.

2. Use a Javascript library

In a similar vein to snippets I would highly recommend you adopt a Javascript library. Personally, I am a huge fan of jQuery because it is designed for those familiar with CSS. It is also amazingly easy to learn and very lightweight.

Using a library like jQuery has proved a massive time saver for me. It has allowed me to avoid endlessly battling with browser inconsistencies (at least in Javascript!) and avoid reinventing the wheel.

jQuery Homepage

jQuery (like most Javascript libraries) also supports a large number of plug-ins produced by third parties. These too can be a massive time saver. However, a word of warning – be careful using a plug-in you do not fully understand. The quality of plug-ins varies massively and if you discover a problem with one, you can waste many hours trying to fix it, if you do not understand how it works.

3. Configure your tools properly

Often in our haste to ‘get on with a project’ we fail to take the time to prepare properly. One example is in how our software is configured. We settle for working with tools ‘out of the box’ when some minor modifications could improve our efficiency.

Photoshop is a good example of this. It has all kinds of configuration options from keyboard shortcuts to palette layout. Take a few moments to set these up for your workflow, and you could save hours of unnecessary clicking over the long run.

Photoshop Palettes

Look at whatever tools you use to build websites and consider how their interface can be tweaked to your needs.

4. Have one system for tasks

For fear of reinforcing a stereotype, designers tend not to be the most organised people. Not only do we need to organise the structure of our software tools, we also need to do the same for our projects.

Fortunately, not all of us have to manage entire projects. However, we do all have tasks that need completing. How we organise those tasks can dramatically affect our efficiency.

A common mistake with task management is to have tasks spread across multiple places. Some tasks exist as emails, some in a todo list, still more in a notebook or on your mobile phone. The result is that things get overlooked.

In order to efficiently manage your tasks they need to be gathered into a single central location. For me that is a task organiser called Omnifocus, which syncs between my desktop and iPhone.

Omnifocus Screenshot

Tasks are still collected using multiple methods. However, once a day I transfer them to Omnifocus. If I attend a meeting and take physical notes that include tasks, I put the notebook into my in-tray until I can add the tasks to Omnifocus. If I receive an email with a task, I drag that email into Omnifocus. Ultimately everything ends up in Omnifocus.

By being this regimented about the way I organise tasks, I ensure nothing ever gets missed. I also avoid wasting time trying to track down the details of a task I have lost.

5. Embrace and manage admin

Inbox Zero - The original 43 folders series

Part of the problem we face is that answering email and organising tasks feels like a waste of time. Its not ‘proper work’. This is especially true when the pressure is on and deadlines are tight. We arrive at work in the morning and launch into our projects without checking our task list. The result is that we prioritise the wrong work and miss deadlines.

I begin each day by doing two things. I answer and file all my emails (I always achieve inbox zero). I then review all of my tasks and identify the ones that I wish to complete that day.

However, I don’t stop there. I have designated admin time. Once I am done my morning review I close my tasks and email until lunchtime. I focus solely on work and avoid admin entirely. This prevents email and other admin from interrupting the flow of my production work. It keeps me focused.

6. Distractions must die

TweetDeck

Of course it is not just email that distract us from work. There is instant messaging, Twitter, Facebook, RSS and… lets face it… the entire internet!

Don’t misunderstand me, some distraction is good. I have a very short attention span and so if I work on a single thing for more than about 30-40 minutes I start to ‘zone out’. However, there is a difference between ‘having a break from work’ and ‘getting distracted’.

Every 40 minutes or so I will take a 5 minute break and fire up Tweetdeck or Google reader. What I try to avoid is keeping these applications permanently open (although with twitter I have to confess I often fail).

By leaving an application open that can distract you with notifications (‘You have a new tweet’, ‘You have mail’, etc.), you risk it interrupting your flow of work. These constant micro-interruptions make it hard to ‘get into the zone’.

7. Keep a tidy environment

Distractions extend beyond your PC as well. Your work environment can also have an impact on efficiently.

If you work from home, endeavour to keep your personal and work life separate. Ensure you can close the door on the rest of the house and that the rest of the family know not to interrupt. Also if possible, try to keep your working area separate from the rest of the house. A garage or loft are ideal. I used to work in a small room directly between our lounge and kitchen. It was impossible to focus on anything with the constant noise from the two rooms.

My Desk

Pay attention to your desk as well. Keep it clean and uncluttered. This reduces distractions but also creates a better mental state conducive to work. Ensure your physical files and disks are easy to find. Knowing you took some notes that are in a notebook somewhere does not make them easy to find. This is especially true when your desk is three feet deep under paper work!

Personally I scan what notes and physical paper I can. What I have to keep in physical form, I file in a single filing cabinet organised alphabetically.

8. Avoid multi tasking

There is a myth that multi tasking makes you more efficient – it doesn’t! As designers we like to ‘flit’ from one thing to another. However, ultimately this is damaging to productivity. We need to learn to focus on a single task and follow it through to completion.

As I have already said, I find it hard to focus for any length of time. In order to help me focus I break my tasks down into smaller ones. That way I rarely have to do one thing for too long. Take this post for example. To write the whole thing from beginning to end would take a couple of hours. That is longer than I could focus for. So, in order to stop me getting distracted and jumping onto another task, I break it down. This post was made up of three tasks…

Task List: Create an outline, write initial draft, add imagery and edit

Once I complete one task, I switch to another project for a while. Once I have completed a task on that project I may switch back to this post.

Although this is a kind of multi-tasking, it is more structured and ensures I spend as long as my attention allows on each project. I do not simply drift between projects.

Depending on your character this might be too extremely. You may find it easy to concentrate for extended periods. However, if you struggle to concentrate, do not use multi-tasks as an excuse to be distracted.

9. Don’t do excessive hours

Another widely held myth of productivity is that the longer you work, the more you get done. After all, on face value this makes sense. However, I sincerely believe this is not true, especially if your job relies on you generating ideas and being creative.

Obviously we have to put the hours in, if we want to pay the bills. However, do not allow your boss or clients to force you into excessive hours. The occasional all-nighter is one thing, regular 12 hour days is another.

It is incredibly easy to get burnt out as a web designer. You are expected to continually be creative, as well as keeping up with one of the fasting moving sectors on the planet. Things are continually changing and evolving and it is a struggle to stay current.

Twitter post of somebody saying they are burnt out by work

Working long hours damages your capability to take on board new information and cripples creative thinking. Ensure you limit your hours and book regular holidays. Do not push yourself too hard or you will fail to deliver.

Finally, accept your natural cycle. When you are ‘in the zone’ work every hour God gives you. However, you must also accept that sometimes you need to just stop and rest. Don’t feel guilty about the days when you hardly do anything.

10. Communicate better

I would like to end this post with possibly the best efficiency tip of all – If you want to avoid wasting time, learn to communicate better.

So much of our time is wasted because of miscommunication and misunderstanding. How many times have you had to redo a design because you misunderstood the client or showed them work too late in the process.

Take the time to really engage with the client and understand their requirements. Make sure that you include them in the design process and show them work often and early.

Example Mood board

Finally, use tools such as gallery sites, mood boards and sketches to ensure everybody has the same understanding and is working towards the same goal.

By effectively communicating with clients, you can potentially save days on each project that would have been wasted on reworks and amendments.

If you recognise that the mobile web is important and you need help deciding on a strategy, then book a mobile consultancy clinic.

Book a consultancy clinic or contact Rob about a more in-depth review.

152. War?

On this week’s show: Daniel Burka and Joe Stump from Digg discuss the supposed war between designers and developers. Paul talks about using twitter effectively and we ask ‘are you placing too much emphasis on your homepage?’

Play

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

How to film video case studies

Increasingly your web strategy is about more than a website full of pretty pictures and well written copy. Video in particular is playing an increasing role, whether it is embedded in your website or shared via YouTube.

Video can be used in all kinds of ways from product demonstrations to viral marketing. However, a growing use for video is customer case studies.

This week 37 Signals have published a fascinating insight into how they created their customer case studies for Highrise. The article covers everything from…

  • How they chose who to interview
  • The way they shot the videos
  • What questions they asked
  • How they conducted the interviews
  • How they edited the videos
  • The time they spent preparing the whole thing

There is little written about producing quality videos and even less about customer case studies. Without a doubt these kinds of videos are extremely powerful and so it is great to read quality advice about their production.

Effective communication in web design

Smashing Magazine has posted an excellent article that I would highly recommend to all website owners. No, it is not my excellent Twitter article that I will cover later. It is actually an article entitled – Clear And Effective Communication In Web Design.

In essence it talks about how to communicate on the web through both copy and visuals. It is a comprehensive overview (if somewhat superficial) of all the key considerations of communicating effectively through your website.

The article focuses primarily on your website, largely ignoring broader communication issues. However it does tackle…

  • The different methods of communication – Images, text, titles, icons, design styling, colour, audio and visuals.
  • The challenges of clearly communicating – This includes the curse of too much copy, the need for personality and much more.
  • What you should be communicating – Your company vision, the websites offerings, the benefits to your users and calls to action.

It also nicely demonstrates how the design and copy work together to communicate your message. This is something I will be discussing with Jeffrey Zeldman in an upcoming show.

Do we place too much emphasis on the homepage?

Following on nicely from my recent post about where we invest our money, Christian Watson recently wrote about one of his clients who requested a homepage redesign.

In the article he writes…

Sure, I could refresh the colors and move some content around. But is this a good use of my time and her money when the home page represents 20-25% of page views?

It is a good question. Christian goes on to argue that we often place far too much emphasis on the homepage and that in fact it is little more than a gateway page to direct users to more important content.

He uses a nice analogy borrowed from Jared Spool. He compares the homepage with a hotel lobby…

When visitors arrive at your hotel, certainly they should find that the lobby represents the hotel favorably. It should be attractive, spacious, with elegant lighting, welcoming colors, and the odd feature here and there.

The lobby should make it easy for the visitor to orient themselves — to see where the front desk is and where the lifts are. It should make it easy for the guest to find out any important information at a glance — upcoming events or where the conference is being held.

However, hotels are ultimately judged by the quality of their rooms.

It is an excellent post that provides real food for thought.

Back to top

Interview: Joe Stump & Daniel Burka on War Between Designers & Developers?

Paul: So I am really excited to have joining me today Daniel Burka and Joe Stump from Digg. Hello Guys

Daniel: Hello

Joe: Hey hey

Paul: I have had both of you on the show individually and Joe you were on not long ago were you really…

Joe: ermhh yes a couple of months ago maybe

Paul: What can I say, we cannot survive without you. So erm but I though lets bring the two of these wonderful people together and talk about designer,developer relationships and how the two of them get on together working at Digg. I mean I have to say this is just a rip off really isn’t it, it’s a rip of a panel you did. Was that Future of Web Design (FOWD) you did that panel?.

Daniel: Yes it was Future of Web Design in New York. I think we are rehashing the panel at South By South West (SXSW) this year so if anyone is there it would be awesome if you dropped by.

Paul: Excellent, I need to persuade you two to come along to the SXSW live Boagworld as well, but I will hassle of of air so that you can back out if you want to without committing yourself live in a interview.(Paul laughs). OK so lets kick off by talking about the designer and developer relationship and really I think that it strikes me there is a lot of mythology around this that you know designers and developers hate one another and I am not convinced it actually works like that in practice. When you guys did your panel at FOWD you actually were agreeing on a lot of points so I though we would start of by maybe highlighting some of the differences and then look at ways of working together er mm further down the line so lets talk about to begin with what you guys see as the main differences in outlook I guess between designers and developers. How do you look at the world in different ways, do you think? Maybe Joe do you want to kick us off. How do you think developers see the world differently to designers?.

Joe: Sure I think erh developers are definitely, their default kind of response erm is that they would rather, I always make the joke that coders by default are lazy, good coders are extremely lazy people that’s why they’re good coders because they want to automate as much of their lives as possible. Ermm so I think that erm developers tend to get a little complacent when it comes to the actual erm product sometimes because they are so busy and so interested in and so worried about the actual code or the more nerdy side of things you know like are we running the latest greatest versions of different softwares. Developers also tend to be a lot more interested in what the new hip nerdness is as opposed to what’s actually going to make the product better for users, you know so like I have been in product review meetings where people are like “well Why isn’t this new version of some strange bizarre open web specification that nobody has ever heard of ahead of some major forward user feature” . (laughs)

Paul: (laughs)

Joe: So ermm I think that that tends to be like a big difference. The designers you know it is their job to be curators of the website in my opinion and kind of move the user experience forward and often times developers don’t have a whole lot of interest in that. (laughs)

Daniel: On the flip side of that if we are both going to slag our own professions ermm I think designers are often you know pushing unrealistic goals. They are interested in building you know the perfect product and you know aiming straight for that instead of looking pragmatically at doing things in steps and figuring out what is technically possible and I think there is also a gap where designers can only see sometimes what features that they can view and don’t understand, don’t see the vision, of where developers can see you know amazing things they can you know do pro grammatically that designers just aren’t envisioning.

Paul: Yeah

Joe: I think that’s er is another key difference that I know that there is a lot of, there have been struggles and tensions between Daniel and I in the past over this idea of a holistic approach to design where where Daniel designs his vision and his vision is normally version 10.0 and I am looking at you know the technical roadmap and things that I need to do and like I am OK well lets talk about version 1.0 and then we can start talking about 2.0 like, developers are much more focused on an iterative process as far as releasing, you know like small chunks, reducing risk etc. etc. and designers tend to kind of like go well erm you know it is like I wanna build a pyramid it’s like great well how about first we start out by finding some limestone and then we work our way up to building a pyramid.

Daniel: So what you are saying is we have got a fantastic optimism. (laughing)

Joe: Yes

Daniel: But I think that’s partly it. Developers are very interested, as Joe was saying,in mitigating risk and in a lot of ways designers are very adverse to even thinking about risk and want to think about opportunity. So I think this is kind of the crux of the whole thing and what we are trying to talk about on that panel is that both of those views are super valuable and if you manage to find the right mix of those two things then you can develop a fantastic product that is both concerned about risk and pushes the boundaries of what is possible.

Paul: Mmmm I remember one point that came out from the presentation which is one that you made erm Joe which is about the dangers of if that mix is not right. It is always the designer that’s in front of the client or the boss or whatever ermm the kind of realism of the developer is kind of left out of the process and ideally the developer either needs to be involved in those kind of meetings or there needs to be a conversation that happens between the designer and the developer before anything is ever presented. Is that kind of, do you still feel like that is that still a valid point?.

Joe: Yeah, I feel that is a extremely valid point for two reasons erm and this is a discussion that Daniel and I just had yesterday in fact. The thing is as a developer the reason I want to be involved early on in the development or in the design and like development of the product phase you know when requirements are coming together and when you know the first kind of formations come out of the clays so to speak is because two reasons. One ermm and they all kind of come back to this same kind of problem, is that the designers and the product people don’t know the system, the actual bits and bytes that like you know go into making the product, as well as the developer like the data and the code and the actual systems and stuff like that and how they are put together. So Often times two things happen Daniel comes up with a design and there is like one small minute detail on the page that would require you know one of the largest computer farms in the world to calculate in real time. Whereas in lots and just as often as you know that happens where it is like Daniel I can’t calculate that number in any meaningful way on a regular basis so you gotta remove that. But just as often as that happens because of you know as a developer I have such like intrinsic knowledge of the relationships in the data and what data we are storing and stuff like that just as often I am like well why don’t we expose this data or do this and Daniel is like I did not know we could do that actually I totally would have done that if I had known that that was possible or feasible.

Daniel: Yeah and that’s, especially that side of things designers often hear the first part Joe is talking about, the you know well that is just not possible or more difficult than you think. Any designer that has worked with a developer has heard that aspect of it you know and that is of course very valuable but it is the other side of things that I think people fail to leverage most frequently is the ability of developers to see different patterns than you in the data and come up with those suggestions, you know it might still be your call whether or not that is a valuable thing for the user but just hearing these ideas coming out is is amazingly valuable. That has shaped a lot of Digg.

Paul: So would you say that is a kind of you know a common mistake that maybe designers make with developers that they don’t communicate enough with them ermm

Daniel: Absolutely

Paul: yeah

Daniel: Designers often see developers as mules its like I made this thing go build it and that is a bullshit attitude, its terrible.

Paul: mmmm what …

Daniel: Its not just designers either all product people have a tendency to do that. In some ways, as Joe was talking about developers being involved in the process, at Digg we’ve got a pretty good structure where design actually falls under the marketing team and in some ways I see design as a bridge between marketing and business development you know product interests and the development team. Because I am often sitting over here and I hear you know someone from business development or marketing throwing around an idea and I am like “I’m no developer but I have a good sense of what the developer sees as important and you’re talking crazy talk like that is going to be nuts” and they are about to go and pitch that to a potential partner and you know like every week I put the brakes on from that kind of thing I am like listen you need to talk to Joe you need to talk to a developer because that what you are talking about is going to be months of development and you are promising it to a partner in two weeks that’s nuts and so I like that in you in some ways the design team can often be a bridge between product marketing people and the technical teams.

Paul: Joe from your perspective what kind of, you know as your communicating with Daniel and other designers within digg looking back where do you think you’ve made mistakes in your relationship with designers?.

Joe: Ermm I mean the mistakes that I often make ,its a not even a mistake are I don’t wanna say are what we do are like flat out mistakes it’s just more ermm you know being a bit more reserved and not necessarily defaulting your answer to no. Err You know I think that Daniel often talks about how a natural tension between design and product and development is actually good for the product because you have eventually, as long as you can keep that at a good tension and not you know bad or where things are breaking but ermm I think often times developers are quick to say no. You know they will be sitting in a meeting and it is just immediately no I am not going to discuss that when in reality if they sat back and let the idea germinate you know they would, Its kinda weird because I have in a lot of meetings where things were, where the developers were like be oh my god that is an amazing product but we will never be able to build it and so it is like they want to build it but their default is to avoid risk so they say no. So a lot of the times when I talk with Daniel now and this is something I like quit doing I try not to say no unless it is just like blatantly in black and white no way that is possible kind of thing. I might let the idea germinate more I might no say no immediately I might want to go back and spend a couple of hours thinking about it if it is actually feasible because maybe you know. That’s what engineers love doing they love solving difficult problems and if you are saying no to difficult problems then you are failing at what your passion and hobby is. Ermm so I think that ..

Paul: There is also an aspect is there not of not just saying no but explaining why you are saying no so that the other party is kind of educated into the kind of problems you face so as Daniel said earlier that they can be the bridge to you know business development or whoever else.

Joe: Yeah absolutely, I am the king of analogies at this point ermm but the other thing that developers erhh, this is extremely common that they utterly fail at is that they think for some reason that they are like the target demographic of the product so they will come into a meeting and say this product will absolutely fail because it doesn’t have key binding so I can keyboard shortcuts it’s like nobody uses keyboard shortcuts like in the real world, they are all mice people like you know. It is stuff like that that a lot of the time developers are like “this will never work unless you have least 14 completely nerdy niche features in it” you know and I think developers too often you know they do that and that is just silly.

Daniel: Hey guys that’s been a special problem at digg,since we started of as the pure technology side so it was seen as by developers for developers and you know we have obviously branched out from there and now we have got other interests I want to make sure peoples mums can use the website and that’s you know certainly a , you make different choices based on that.

Paul: I mean it is very timely from my point of view to have this interview with you because on Friday we had a internal meeting in Headscape where we talked about all kinds of production things and one of the things that came out of the development team was this desire to be involved in the process more and err to have their say more and just to be included earlier. So I am quite interested in you know because obviously you guys have been working together for a long time what kind of practical advise would you give to a , maybe this is just a question for me and not for anyone else, but what kind of practical advise would you give for designers and developers working together within the organisation. How can that relationship work better?

Daniel: Yeah, absolutely involving your development team earlier in the process but that doesn’t necessarily mean sitting around brainstorming right at the beginning of a feature with them. I mean I try to sit down work out an idea get it 20% of the way there, you know work out some of the basic issues figure out what this thing really means what’s at the core of it you know it might be ten different features together but what are we actually trying to achieve with it right so at least get that far even throw down so basic wire frames or some really basic comps and then present it to the developers its like listen this isn’t just an idea I came up with you know last night I just want to spill my entire brain out in front of you it is something at least I have thought through you know I have put a few things through my brain and now here is this totally unformed, not totally unformed, slightly formed idea but it is not baked you know don’t wait until you have got it baked and then you are so disappointed when the development team says well that’s not possible or have you really though about this and you have got this complete package already made up in your mind but come to them with a least you know the kernel of the thought out idea and get them to poke holes in it. Get them to push it in other directions and show you what else you could be doing and then go back to the drawing board again.

Paul: What about from your point of view Joe?

Joe: Well yeah, So ermm I agree with Daniel in some sense on that I think it is crucial to before you take it to developers to formulate a cohesive problem or hypotheses. Like if you come to the developers with a half baked problem that you are trying to solve you are going to get like, they are just going to run wild with it and it is like you know difficult sometimes to keep developers focused when they get excited about a problem. So have a formulated problem that you know you have a small idea of how you are going to fix but not fully baked. The other thing too and this goes on both sides of the aisle it shouldn’t be get developers plural involved and it shouldn’t be get. like a lot when you are first germinating that idea and you haven’t really moved it forward start small and then continuously expose it to more and more people errmh because I find if you involve too many people early on in a the process whether it is designers, developers, product people things tend to , you tend to loose focus quickly and everyone wants you know it’s kind of like port barrel spending and major bills its like everyone wants to piggy back extra features and stuff and pet projects that they have wanted for so long into like some major new feature.

Daniel: It is just simple death by committee

Joe: Right

Paul: Yeah Yeah OK That’s interesting a little random question I remember going to a talk once where, and I can’t remember who it was who was giving it, where they suggested that errmh designers and developers swapped roles for a while. Where you try and sit in the other persons shoes and I was just interested whether you two had tried anything like that?

Joe: That would be disastrous for me. (laughs)

Daniel: I I mean I appreciate development roles and I am you know somewhat technical for a designer but yeah I know I have never done that but I have always worked so closely with the development team like at silverorange where I worked previously to digg there was only ten of us and I sat in a room with developers all the time. I worked in their code with them and worked on problems as a group so I think I, you know I have never worked in a place like say you worked in a big enterprise and your in this classic where designers are in one office and developers are in the other office and you toss stuff over the wall yes then I think that would hold value at least go and sit in the other office, go work in the other office for a few months just hear the other discussions that are going on because there are a totally different set of concerns a totally different set of values than what you are doing and if you don’t at least appreciate and understand that, and not just understand it so you know what you are fighting against but understand it to know what is important and how you can work with it then you know you would be really missing out.

Joe: I think I am ermhh I think I am kind of spoiled at Digg because you know I work with two of the webs brightest, you know Daniel and Mark Trammell as well so I actually push back on my developers pretty frequently where they you know we will leave a meeting and they are like I really really completely disagree with what Daniel or Mark are doing with the design and you know I tell them all the time like look you are not a designer and you definitely not at the level that those two are at and you sometimes have to defer to them and trust that they are doing their job and they are doing it well you know and ermhh I think developers don’t do that often enough they make these assumptions that you know the arty-farty designers are doing stupid shit again and that’s not the case. I mean they would not be especially where we are at at Digg and what not I mean Digg is able to be very picky with who they bring on and the people Daniel has brought in to design are extremely competent at what they do err so I am probably not qualified to answer that question because I am so spoiled at Digg but that is a common problem I see from developers where ermhh they don’t let the designers do their job and they try and be designers when in reality you know they do not have the experience or the expertise so.

Paul: Lets talk about conflict resolutions, sounds very grandiose but basically you know how do you go around resolving a situation where you know OK you kind of respect each others skills and you respect each others competencies but you know where some feature is suggested by Daniel and you know and you Daniel from your point of view it is absolutely core to what you are trying to achieve you know it is extremely important and then from a technical angle Joe it just seems incredibly complex and very very difficult. How is the eventual decision made as to whether that feature should be implemented and in what way it is implemented? How do you go about resolving that difference?.

Joe: Ermhh Well I mean I think as far as making the decision whether or not the feature makes it in, because there is actually two possibilities when it comes to the conflict resolution. Whether or not a feature actually makes it into the product and in what capacity does that feature make it into the product and I think in the former whether or not the feature actually makes into the product if Daniel comes to me and he’s resolute like this feature has to be in the product the feature is going to be in product. I am always going to defer to Daniel on on, if he feels that strongly and is that passionate about it you know and it is not something completely hare-brained like I want magic ponies to come flying out of the screen I am going to defer to his expertise on the fact that feature needs to be in the product. Where the conflict resolution comes into it is what capacity is that feature going to come into the product like a perfect example of I think of something where there has been we have had a recent discussion at Digg and where this has happened we have, and I talked about this probably in our last talk but, there are these little green badges on the digg buttons and they indicate one of your friends has dugg that story and when you hover over the digg button it shows like a little sample of the people that have dugg it. Ermhh So those were causing significant strain and problems with our systems and our code and on our databases so I came to Daniel and of course again as my risk aversion developer brain was coming to Daniel I was like Can we axe this feature until we can figure out how to like fix it. He was like “No” that feature cannot absolutely be axed and then we came to a resolution which was a short term solution until we can get a better solution in place where operations now have knobs they can dial down so the green badges don’t show up on stories older than 48hrs, they don’t show up on stories that have more than say 5 or 600 diggs and stuff like that. So the conflict resolution came in basically making trade-offs in how that feature is surfaced in works ermhh at our scale more often than not what that means is that Daniel has to give up the notion that everything is in real time. The feature will work it is just that it may take you know thirty seconds to a minute for an action to be distributed across the entire system, that is probably more how things are now at Digg so.

Paul: What about from your point Daniel, when do you back down over something and when do you keep pushing on it? How do you decide you know how serious Joe is about something and whether you should keep pushing or not?

Daniel: Right I mean it kind of comes down to you know when I am looking at the product I am not thinking of any one feature, I am thinking about the whole set and I want it all to work together and so you know I know I want to push out six different features this month and if I push and push Joe to do the one really hard one well that is going to affect the other five I wanted to get done. So any feature is tied to other features and it is also based on a time line if I want something done in a certain time line and that’s just not possible well then I have to start making compromises so you know you have to be realistic and then at the same time you have to realise developers work well with shame and so if you tell a developer well I bet a good developer could do that (All laugh) they will go back to their cube grumbling at you and figure out a more efficient way to do it.

Paul: OK. So now we are getting into the realms of how to manipulate each other.

Daniel: Absolutely.

Joe: That’s definitely err one that I agree does work but is not a trick you want to pull out of your bag too often.

Daniel: No it is the same with designers too, it is like I want to do this really complex thing, no way I can explain that to users in a way they will understand. “I thought you were good” arhh shit I will go back and try that again.

Paul: That is quite interesting what you just said there because so far we have talked very much about you know designers initiating features and that kind of stuff I mean are there situations where the developer is the one initiating features you know just said there a developer wanted to do something really cool and you said you couldn’t explain it. Does it run that way as well? or is it always the designer who drives first?.

Daniel: No Absolutely that happens at Digg, it happens sometimes at Digg so Joe yesterday sent me an email that had two big feature ideas in it. They may not be things we implement this month but maybe later on this year. I was looking at them and you know it is easy to disregard well he is a developer he does not understand what’s going on with the product but you look at the ideas and they are strong and they fit in with what we are doing and now I am trying to figure out you know how they make sense in the big picture I guess. So we have got a brilliant development team a lot of people over there with great ideas and we try to sit down, you know I guess Kevin has been doing those where we do meetings once a month I guess where developers if they have been working on a side project you know something they have always wanted to build into Digg they can present this at the Digg ideas meeting.

Paul: Ah OK

Daniel: A bunch of those products will make it into the full Digg I mean its awesome these brilliant people go and throw around crazy ideas and show you what is possible.

Joe: I think err yeah I mean I agree with that you definitely have, it is a two way street erm largely stuff comes from product at this point the Digg ideas meetings is definitely helping that you know open that up and kind of what I would call level that playing field a bit. But one of the things I think developers are in a in a unique position just like Daniel I work with people across the entire companies so I know initiatives that are going on in marketing I know initiatives that are going on in PR and biz dev etc. and you know if nothing else developers are very good about noticing and pointing out and discovering patterns and err a recent product that made it out that err was a developer initiated product was Digg dialogue because basically I noticed this common pattern where business development and Marketing and PR were setting up interviews and then like reaching out to people to like conduct interviews using the Digg engine kind of thing and I was why don’t we bake this into like a cohesive feature that’s turnkey because you know business development like Daniel was saying earlier lots of times they are just making these one off deals you know and they don’t really recognise when there is a product to be had there erm so that is another one that recently went out. It was like I recognised a pattern and baked this into something cohesive and move it forward.

Daniel: That is a good example of where we are being lazy some people want to do this one off thing over and over again and it is a bunch of work to don it each time well like we will just build a system to do it and we won’t have to do all the work every time. It was great.

Paul: OK that is really good lets leave then with one final question or one thing from each of you. Which is if you could give you know one piece of advice to either designers or developers on how to kind of interact with their counterpart what would that one piece of advice be?. Lets kick of with you Daniel what would be your one piece of advice to designers about dealing with developers?.

Daniel: My one piece of advice would be to see the big picture, you know aim for version 10 like we were talking about earlier and know what you want to build in the future but be realistic enough to back it up and build it in stages. You know waiting and building a feature over six months and eventually launching it is a terrible way to develop and it’s a terrible way to design having an idea of where you want to be in six months but realising in one month increments is so much better you’ll end up in a different place but at least you know where you are heading and you can adjust that goal as you go forward

Paul: Yeah. Brilliant. Joe what about you?

Joe: Ermhh I would say to the developers out there that there is different shades of no ermhh that you know there is the, the default should not always be no and remember what I said about the conflict resolution you should be deferring to the people that are experts in their field by default for the most part and to work on compromise in how the feature operates and make your concessions and have them make their concessions rather than just defaulting to saying no to the entire feature.

Daniel: And as a developer push to be involved early in the process, even at Digg we struggle with that a lot and as a designer I appreciate when developers want to be involved I want to hear their opinions you know it is fun to have them involved I hear all kinds of crazy stuff I never even considered that’s awesome.

Paul: Excellent. Thank you so much guys that was really good I appreciate you coming back on the show yet again. It was really good to get your perspectives together on that relationship because it is one a lot of people struggle with. So it is good to hear that it can work most of the time. Thanks for your time

Daniel: Thanks for having us on Paul

Joe: Bye

Thanks goes to Shaun Hare for transcribing this interview.

Back to top

Listeners feedback:

With everybody from Britney to Obama now on Twitter it is safe to say the social networking platform has gone mainstream. But what does this mean for the service and how can we as website owners use it? Read More

10 harsh truths about corporate websites

We all make mistakes running our websites. However the nature of those mistakes varies. As your site and organisation grow, the mistakes begin to change. This post addresses common mistakes in larger organisations.

Most of the clients I work with at Headscape are larger organisations – Universities, large charities, public sector institutions and large companies.

Over the last 7 years I have noticed certain reassuring misconceptions within these organisations. The idea of this post is to dispel these illusions and encourage people to face the harsh reality.

The problem is that if you are reading this post you are probably already aware of these things. However, hopefully this article will be a useful tool for convincing others within your organisation.

Anyway, here are my 10 harsh truths about larger websites.

1. You need a separate web division

In most organisations I work with the website is managed by either the marketing or IT department. However, this inevitably leads to a turf war and the site becoming the victim of internal politics.

In reality running a web strategy is not particularly suited to either group. IT maybe excellent at rolling out complex systems but they are not suited to developing a friendly users experience or establishing an online brand.

Marketing on the other hand is little better. As Jeffrey Zeldman puts it in his article ‘Let there be web divisions‘:

The web is a conversation. Marketing, by contrast, is a monologue… And then there’s all that messy business with semantic markup, CSS, unobtrusive scripting, card-sorting exercises, HTML run-throughs, involving users in accessibility, and the rest of the skills and experience that don’t fall under Marketing’s purview.

Instead the website should be managed by a single unified team. Again Zeldman sums it up when he writes:

Put them in a division that recognizes that your site is not a bastard of your brochures, nor a natural outgrowth of your group calendar. Let there be web divisions.

Screenshot of Zeldman's website

2. Managing your website is a full time job

Not only is the website often split between marketing and IT, it is also normally under resourced. Instead of having a dedicated web team, those responsible for the website are often expected to run it alongside their ‘day job’.

Where a web team is in place they are often over stretched. The vast majority of their time is spent on day to day maintenance rather than longer term strategic thinking.

This situation is further exaggerated because the people hired to ‘maintain’ the website are junior members of staff. They do not have the experience or authority to push the website forward.

It is time for organisations to seriously investing in their websites by hiring full time senior web managers to move their web strategies forward.

3. Periodic redesign is not enough

Because corporate websites are under resourced they are often neglected for long periods of time. They slowly become out of date both in terms of content, design and technology.

Eventually the site becomes such an embarrassment that management step in and demand it is sorted. This inevitably leads to a complete redesign at considerable expense.

As I point out in the website owners manual this a flawed approach. It is a waste of money because when the old site is replaced the investment put into it is lost. It is also tough on cash flow with a large expenditure happening every few years.

A better way is continual investment in your site, so allowing it to evolve over time. Not only is this less wasteful it is also better for the users as is pointed out in Cameron Moll’s post ‘Good Designers Redesign, Great Designers Realign‘.

Screenshot of Cameron Molls Article

4. Your site cannot appeal to everyone

One of the first questions I ask our clients is ‘who is your target audience?’ I am regularly shocked at the length of the reply. Too often it includes a long and detailed list of diverse people.

Inevitably my next question is which of those many demographic groups are most important. Depressingly the answer is that they are all equally important.

The harsh truth is that if you build a site for everybody it will appeal to nobody. It is important to be extremely focused in your audience and cater your design and content around them.

Does this mean you have to ignore your other users? Not at all. Your site should be accessible by all and should not offend or exclude anybody. However, it does need to have a clearly defined audience that the site is primarily aimed at.

5. Your site is not all about you

Where some website managers want their websites to appeal to everybody, others want it to appeal to themselves and their colleagues.

A surprising number of organisations choose to ignore their users entirely and build their websites entirely around an organisational perspective. This typically manifests itself in inappropriate design that caters to the managing directors personal preferences and content full of internal terminology and jargon.

A website should not be about pandering to the preferences of staff but about meeting the needs of users. Too many designs are rejected because the boss doesn’t like green. Equally too much website copy uses acronyms and terms that are only used internally within an organisation.

6. Design by committee brings death

Illustration showing why design by committee fails

The ultimate expression of a larger organisations approach to website management is the committee. A committee is formed to tackle the website because internal politics demand everybody has their say and all considerations are taken into account.

To say that all committees are a bad idea is naive and to suggest that a large corporate website could be developed without consultation is fanciful. However when it comes to design, committees are often the kiss of death.

Design is subjective. The way we respond to a design can be influenced by culture, gender, age, childhood experience or even physical conditions (such as colour blindness). What one person considers great design another could hate. This is why it is so important that design decisions are informed by user testing rather than personal experience. Unfortunately this approach is rarely followed when a committee is involved in design decisions.

Instead, design by committee becomes about compromise. Because different committee members have different opinions about the design, they looks for ways to find common ground. One person hates the blue colour palette while another loves it. This leads to design on the fly when the committee instructs the designer to ‘try a different blue’ in the hopes of finding a middle ground. Unfortunately this can only leads to bland design which neither appeals to, or excites, anybody.

7. You’re not getting value from your web team

Whether they have an in-house web team or use an external agency many organisations fail to get the most from their web designers.

Web designers are much more than pixel pushers. They have a wealth of knowledge about the web and how users interact with it. They also understand design techniques including grid systems, white space, colour theory and much more.

Post from Twitter complaining about being a pixel pusher

It is therefore wasteful to micro manage them by asking for ‘the logo to be made bigger’ or to ‘move that 3 pixels to the left’. By doing so you are reducing their role to that of software operator and wasting the wealth of experience they have.

If you want to get the maximum return from your web team present them with problems not solutions. For example, if you have a site aimed at teenage girls and the designer goes for corporate blue, suggest that the audience might not respond well to the colour. Do not tell them to change it to pink. That way the designer has the freedom to find a solution which might be even better than your choice of pink. You allow them to solve the problem you have presented.

8. A CMS is not a silver bullet

Many of the clients I work with have amazingly unrealistic expectations about content management systems. Those without one think it will solve all of their content woes, while those who do have one moan about it because it hasn’t!

It is certainly true that a content management system can bring a lot of benefits. They…

  • reduce the technical barriers of adding content,
  • all more people to edit and add content,
  • facilitate faster updates,
  • allow greater control.

However, many content management systems are less flexible than their owners wish. They fail to meet the changing demands of the websites they manage.

Website managers also complain that their CMS is hard to use. However, in many cases this is because those using them have not been given adequate training or are not using it regularly enough.

Finally, a content management system may allow for the easy updating of content, but that does not ensure it will be updated or even that the quality of copy will be maintained. Many content managed websites still have out of date content or are filled with poor quality copy. This is because the internal processes have not been put in place to support the content contributors.

If you are looking to a content management system to solve your site maintenance issues you will be disappointed.

9. You have too much content

Part of the problem with content maintenance on larger corporate websites is that there is too much content in the first place. Most of these sites have ‘evolved’ over years with more and more content being added. At no stage has anybody ever reviewed that content and asked what can be taken away.

Many website managers fill their sites with copy nobody will read. This happens because of:

  • A fear of missing something – By putting everything online they believe users will be able to find whatever they want. Unfortunately, with so much information being made available, it is hard to find anything.
  • A fear users will not understand – Whether it is a lack of confidence in their site or in their audience, many website managers feel the need to provide endless instructions to users. Unfortunately, users never read this copy.
  • A desperate desire to convince - Many website managers are desperate to sell their product or communicate their message. Text becomes bloated with sales copy which actually conveys little valuable information.

Steve Krug in his book ‘Don’t make me think’ encourages website managers to ‘Get rid of half the words on each page, then get rid of half of what’s left’. This will reduce the noise level of each page and make useful content more prominent.

10. You are wasting money on social networking

I have been encouraged that increasingly website managers are recognising that a web strategy is about more than running a website. They are using tools like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube to increase their reach and engage with new audiences.

However, although they are using these tools, too often they are doing so ineffectively. Corporate twitter accounts and posting sales demonstrations to YouTube miss the essence of social networking.

Social networking is about people engaging with people. Individuals do not want to build relationships with brands or corporations. They want to talk with other people. Too many organisations are throwing millions into facebook apps and viral videos when could be spending that money on engaging with people in a transparent and open away.

Instead of having a corporate twitter account or indeed even a corporate blog, encourage your employees to start tweeting and blogging themselves. Provide guildelines on acceptable behaviour and the tools they need to start engaging directly with the community that surrounds your products and services. This not only demonstrates a commitment to your community but also a human side to your business.

Screenshot of Microsoft's Channel 9 website

Conclusions

Large organisations do a lot right in the running of their websites. However, they also face some unique challenges that can lead to painful mistakes. Resolving these problems will involve accepting mistakes have been made, overcoming internal politics, and changing the way you control your brand. However, doing so will give you a significant competitive advantage and allow your web strategy to become more effective over the long term.

For more information on how you can make your site more effective read the Website Owners Manual or discuss your site with Paul personally.

There is a followup to this post entitled ‘10 ways to battle site bureaucracy.’ Check it out!

Why speculative design is wrong

Many web design agencies are refusing to do unpaid design work before a contract is signed. This is not because it is damaging to them. It is because they believe it is damaging to their clients. But why?

On the surface asking a web design agency to produce some design concepts before you sign on the dotted line appears to be a good idea. After all, it allows you to assess the quality of their design work and see whether they have understood your brief.

However, if you scratch the surface of this once common practice, you quickly expose the flaws. Here are just five…

1. It costs everybody money

In order to remain in business every company needs to recover their cost of sale. This includes web designers. As speculative work is part of the sales process, they ultimately have to charge you for it. The web designer is forced to roll the cost of that work into the project if they win.

However, it is worse than that. The web designer also has to recover the cost of speculative design done for jobs he did not win. This means that if you choose to work with an agency that produces speculative design, you are paying for their failed sales pitches! Why should you be paying for other people’s design work?

2. It is about selling not delivering

As somebody who used to produce speculative designs for years, I can tell you that doing this type of design work is not about delivering a solution the client actually needs.

Speculative design is about impressing the client and creating the ‘wow factor’. The target audience is the client and not the end user.

Being a good web designer is about encouraging the client to make tough choices. A good designer will challenge your preconceptions and suggest better ways of meeting your business aims. However, they are not going to take that risk in the sales process. They will play safe, showing you what you want to see, rather than telling you what you need to hear.

The danger is that if you then hire this company the speculative design is adopted for your site. Ultimately you end up with a solution that fails to meet your businesses needs.

3. It is wasteful

Even worse than actually using a piece of speculative design is throwing it away. I have worked on many projects where the design work created as part of the sales process is discarded on project commencement.

What was the point of producing a piece of design only to discard it? Because ultimately you (the client) are paying for the design it is absurd that you would then choose not to use it.

Of course the reason you discard it, is because it is not fit for purpose. Not only was the design was created to sell, it is also largely uninformed.

4. It is uninformed

No matter how good the brief you distribute to agencies, they are still not going to have all the facts.

Good design comes from being well informed. The designer needs to understand business objectives, success criteria, brand personality, competition and numerous other factors in order to provide the right solution.

Most of all the design needs to emerge from an understanding of your users. Until the designer can interact and empathise with your users, he can produce nothing more than a superficial solution.

5. It ignores the collaborative nature of design

Finally speculative design ignores the collaborative nature of the design process. Good design is not just about a designer having a moment of inspiration and producing a master piece. Design is not the same thing as art.

Design is a collaborative process between the designer and the client. The designer may have the expertise in design aesthetics and usability, but the client knows their business and target audience.

If the designer works in isolation he cannot hope to produce a rounded design. Without mood boards, sketches and initial concepts there is no dialogue between client and designer. The design will only tell half the story.

Example Mood board

To request speculative design is to deny your own importance in the process.

The alternatives

So where does that leave you? If you should not ask for speculative design, how then can you assess the design skills of agencies?

The answer obviously lies in their portfolios. However, in my opinion it is about more than just looking at ‘pretty pictures’. In order to know whether a design has been successful you need background information.

I recommend that where a portfolio piece is relevant to your sector or project, you request the contact information of the client. This provides you with the opportunity to speak to that client and find out how well the design fulfils their business objectives.

Speaking to the client also gives you the opportunity to find out more about the designers. Did they understand the brief? Did they provide positive suggestions? Did they deal with criticism well? Were they flexible and understanding of broader objectives?

Ultimately there is far more to be learned by talking to existing clients than requesting speculative design.

5 options when website budgets get slashed

Your site is in desperate need of a redesign, content is out of date and the technology is archaic. Unfortunately times are tight and your budget has been cut. What do you do?

The economic downturn is affecting everybody and even at Headscape we have noticed the budgets of clients shrinking. With less money to spend how can you maximise the return on your investment?

To be honest I think it is a good thing that people have less to spend on their websites. We have had too many clients approach us asking for complete overhauls of their sites when that is not what is really required. Often more subtle changes can have a greater impact over the longer term. They certainly generate a better return on investment.

We have been working closely with our clients to suggest ways they can improve their sites without breaking the bank. Here are just 5 of our suggestions.

1. Realign rather than redesign

Why do you need a redesign anyway? Redesigning your entire website is time consuming and costly. However, more importantly it is often unnecessary. I seem to be quoting Cameron Moll’s excellent article “Good Designers Redesign, Great Designers Realign” a lot recently, but that is because he talks a lot of sense. He writes:

Like a kid in a candy store, we creatives redesign like it’s the new black. Why do we possess such an insatiable desire to refresh and remake? Why do we thrive on renewal? What tempts us to be seduced by the sway of renaissance?

I believe it is because we see a redesign as the solution to a failing, tired site. However that is rarely the case as Cameron goes on to explain:

Too often, look and feel, color scheme, layout, and identity are presented as solutions to problems… long before regard is given to other less-aesthetic issues that may very well be the root of the problem. The old warning against treating symptom rather than cause comes to mind.

What is more redesigns can often cause more harm than good by confusing the loyal users who are familiar with your old site.

When budgets are tight let go of the notion you need to do a complete redesign. You can improve your site many times over with the smallest change. Just take the case of the $300 million button I mentioned in show 150 of my podcast.

My facebook profile

2. Simplify

As website owners we are always looking to expand our websites by adding more features and content. However, that costs money we may not have.

Here is a radical alternative – Instead of adding more to your site, why not take things away.

Typically websites are stuffed with content and features that users simply do not use. A quick look at your analytics package will demonstrate the problem. The vast majority of traffic is to a handful of pages.

The problem is we tend to leave content in because ‘somebody might find it useful’. Although this maybe true, it does not necessarily mean keeping content is a good idea.

The more content and features we make available the harder it is for users to find what they need. It is the proverbial ‘needle in a haystack’.

Fortunately, simplifying your website does not have to be entirely about removing content. According to John Maeda’s book ‘The Laws of Simplicity‘ we can also streamline our sites by shrinking and hiding content too. Consider ways to reduce the prominence of less important content, to place a greater emphasis on what matters.

When budgets are tight take a long hard look at your site and ask whether more can be achieved by simplifying what you have rather than adding complexity.

Apple Homepage

3. Prioritise and phase development

Another technique which can be used when budgets are tight is to phase development. There seems to be a tendency among website owners to store up changes and roll them out in a single large deployment. Unfortunately this means a large single expenditure too and that can be problematic from a cash flow perspective.

A better approach is to roll out incremental changes on an ongoing basis. Not only is this better from a financial perspective, it brings other benefits as I explain in the Website Owners Manual. Phase development also provides:

  • Faster delivery because new features are launched independently. Some features can be launched while others are in development. This prevents a single feature stalling the entire rollout.
  • More accurate estimates. Bigger project are harder to estimate. Breaking them down makes it easier for suppliers to quote accurately.
  • Better PR opportunities. Whenever a new feature is launched there is an opportunity to publicize the site. New features can motivate users into taking another look. A single large project only provides a single opportunity to grab peoples attention.
  • Limited risk of working with a new supplier. Choosing an agency is always a risk. Until you work with somebody, it is hard to gauge how good they are. Reduce this risk by limiting the size of project they are commissioned to build. If the agency fails to perform, you can look elsewhere when commissioning subsequent work.

This is an approach commonly adopted by larger websites with their own in-house teams but much rarer among smaller sites who use external agencies. Nevertheless, it is an approach which works well in tough times.

Digg Technology Homepage

4. Reuse and recycle

Too often we reinvent the wheel. When budgets are plentiful this can make sense. Although there is similar functionality out there, we might choose to develop it ourselves so we have more control or can customise it to our exact requirements. However as budgets begin to get squeezed these are luxuries we cannot afford.

In a world of widgets, APIs and open source it is becoming increasingly hard to argue the case for custom builds. Why build your own mapping application when there is Google Maps? Why build a forum when you could use an open source alternative like Vanilla?

My only word of warning is in regards to integration. It can be hard to get these ‘prebuilt’ tools to work together. Be careful that the savings made are not lost to integration problems. Where possible use tools like WordPress that provides an architecture with a wide range of plugins for quick integration.

opensourceCMS screenshot

5. Move beyond the website

Finally, I think it is important to remember that your web strategy is not all about your website. We spend the majority of our ever decreasing budgets on adding bells and whistles to existing websites when there are large number of potential customers who never reach our sites.

Instead of sinking your budget and efforts solely into your website consider looking further afield. Could your web strategy be better served by putting resources into a Facebook group or a twitter account for example? Would your target audience listen to a podcast? Do they read RSS? What about a mailing list? The possibilities are endless.

Ask yourself where your target audience congregates. Instead of constantly trying to draw users to your site begin to spend time where they already meet. What social sites do they use? What editorial sites do they read? Contribute to these communities and offer to write for the editorial sites they read.

Many of these things can be done at almost no cost and with little technical knowledge. All it takes is some time and enthusiasm.

Conclusions

Whether a site is successful is not dictated by its budget. However many larger organisations have relied on money as a method of driving their web strategy forward. As these budgets are slashed there is an opportunity to gain a competitive advantage by being smarter.

Hopefully this post has demonstrated a few of the possible avenues available and inspired you to discover some more of your own. However if you would like some more personal advice specific to your own website then feel free to drop me an email.