Tag Archives: ecommerce

d.Construct and Web 2.0

Posted in Reviews on by Paul Boag

Some random thoughts on the subject of the next generation of websites and my questions about how it will influence the mainstream.

So here I sit, at the d.Construct conference on Web 2.0, waiting for it to start. This seems like the perfect opportunity to jot down some random thoughts on the subject of the next generation of websites and my questions about how it will influence the mainstream.

What is Web 2.0? Hell if I know!

To be honest I do not want to be drawn into the debate about what makes something Web 2.0 and what does not. That kind of abstract discussion does not interest me. However, what is clear is that something is happening on the web and a new generation of slicker, user focused, and application like, websites are emerging.

How does Web 2.0 become mainstream?

What is of interest to me is how the innovations on these sites are going to filter down to your average rank-and-file website. Let’s face it, most of us aren’t involved in developing cutting edge websites that push the envelope of what is possible. We develop websites for businesses or organisations who have much more mundane objectives like making money, rather than spearheading technological development.

I am really looking forward to tomorrow as I am hoping this will help me to clarify how Web 2.0 can move to the mainstream. I have some initial ideas but I am not sure how commercially viable they will prove for my clients. For example, one of the driving forces behind Web 2.0 is AJAX and DOM scripting. These technologies provide the more “application like” experience we have come to expect from sites like Google Maps and Gmail. On these sites, you do not constantly have to wait for the page to reload. Instead, the whole user experience seems a lot “slicker”. However, when I sat down and thought about it I could not think of an easy way to “sell” this to my clients. What does it give them in real terms? In a few cases, I could see the value where you were dealing with ecommerce sites in a highly competitive marketplace. Small changes that improve the user experience can distinguish you from the competition. However, beyond that I could not imagine my clients paying more for this enhanced user experience.

Selling Web 2.0

I guess the latest time I went through this process was with the move to web standards. However, there I had a clear list of benefits I could take to my clients. With Web 2.0, AJAX, DOM scripting and the numerous other buzzwords currently flying about I cannot see as clearly defined benefits. I guess that at the end of the day it just might be a question of the herd mentality. You might be forced into making your site more application like because that is what everybody else is doing and it will look dated by comparison. However, this seems like a bit of a lame reason to upgrade.

Come on, help me out here. What cold hard business reasons are there for adding that slick, application like feel to your run-of-the-mill website?

Getting online forms right

Posted in Design on by Paul Boag

At the end of last week, I was integrating an online survey into a client’s site. It started me thinking about how difficult it can be to get online forms right. In this post, I outline just some of the many things you should take into consideration.

With the exception of the home page, online forms are probably the biggest challenge to us as web interface designers. This is largely because online forms require a higher degree of interaction than any other part of a site and so there is more room for error.

Web Forms Checklist

With that in mind, here is my checklist for designing an effective web form:

Make a form look like a form

Too many designers mess with form fields so that it is nearly impossible to identify them as editable. Sure, form fields can look ugly but there visual appearance helps people identify them as a form. Some styling is fine but don’t make them unrecognisable.

Stay focused

Everybody hates getting spam. We are suspicious of giving out personal information online for fear that the information will be used to send us junk. Do not ask users for information that you do not absolutely require. They will tend to see anything extra as an invasion of their privacy and an attempt to spam them.

Keep it short

Marketing departments have a habit of wanting to know everything about their visitors. The result is that forms become overwhelmingly long and users just don’t bother completing them.

Turn long forms into applications

Once an online form goes beyond two screens, it’s often a sign that the underlying functionality is better supported by an application, which offers a more interactive user experience.

Provide timescales

If the user cannot see how long the form is, they will assume it takes a long time to complete. In many cases, they give up before they begin. Reassure the user that the form will take only a few minutes of their time.

Inform of progress

If a form is split over multiple pages, the user can be left wondering how many more screens there are to go. I have seen people give up only one click away from finishing! By telling them how much of the form is left, you encourage them to persevere.

Only show relevant fields

Some fields in your form maybe conditional on other answers given. For example, you may have a question "Do you have children?" and a second question "How many children do you have?" Obviously if they answer no to the first question then the second becomes irrelevant. Make your form appear shorter by either combining these questions or only revealing the second one if they answer yes to the first.

Use the mandatory fields sparingly

Forms failing to submit properly because mandatory fields were not completed can be an annoying experience. It is therefore advisable to use required fields only when entirely necessary and to mark clearly, which fields are required.

Avoid re-entry

There is nothing more annoying than constantly inputting the same information. Store users details so that reoccurring fields are pre populated. Also make sure that information is not lost if the user accidentally navigates away from the page.

Clear validation

It can often be hard to spot which fields you failed to complete correctly. By clearly marking the problem fields, you dramatically improve the user’s experience.

Avoid reset buttons

Personally, I don’t think it is worth having a reset button on a form anyway, but when you do ensure you don’t put it near the submit button. It is very easy for users to click the wrong one and find themselves back at square one.

Highlight the current field

On long complex forms, it can sometimes be hard to spot which field contains your cursor. Use CSS or JavaScript to highlight visually the current field.

Ensure a logical tab order

Many visitors use the tab key to move between fields in a form. Make sure the fields tab through in a logical order and where possible remove tabs from elements such as labels or links where that interrupts the flow of the tab order.

Use fieldsets and labels

Usability for speech and text browsers is dramatically improved by marking up your form with the relevant fieldsets and labels.

Place labels before fields

Because visually impaired users cannot see a form field, they are reliant on the label associated with the field to describe it. However, if the label appears after the field they are not told what the field is for until they have moved past the field itself.

Offer an incentive

Because forms often require users to part with personal details, they are naturally reluctant to complete them. Users need a clear incentive to part with their information. What that incentive is depends on your site. For some it could be as simple as access to site features such as a forum, for others it might be an entry into a price draw or a free reward of some kind.

Explain the need for information

When you are requesting personal information, explain why you require it. For example, if you request an email address for an ecommerce purchase, explain that it is required for informing the user of their orders status and nothing more. If you don’t explain, they will presume the worst.

Clear help

For more complex fields make sure you provide clear instructions. For example if you require the security number from a credit card, explain where this can be found and what part of the number you require.

Saving forms

It is generally good practice to allow users to save forms and return to them later. This is particularly true of longer forms where the user might have to look up some of the information required.

Your opinion

So, that is my checklist for designing forms. Did I miss anything? Do you disagree with anything I have said? Let me know what you think.

Web 2.0 – Where's the money?

Posted in Web strategy on by Paul Boag

With just two weeks until the d.construct conference on web 2.0, I find myself spending an increasing amount wondering how this whole web 2.0 craze is going to work itself out.

My problem is that I see many scary similarities between web 2.0 and the dot com boom. Take for example digg.com. I love digg.com. It’s a great site. I love the concept of a social news website. I love its use of AJAX, web standards and all those other buzzwords. I was stoked to hear yesterday that Kevin Rose (the founder of digg.com) has raised $2.8 million to expand the site. All good news, but I am left wondering how the site will pay for itself. Kevin on the TWIT podcast explained that the additional funding was required because advertising didn’t even cover their server costs. If advertising isn’t going to pay for the site, what is?

I am worried that once again we are seeing an explosion of sites that use cool technology and have cool ideas but lack a sound business plan.

And it’s not just the web 2.0 flagships

I am very conscious that recently I have been banging on a lot about return on investment but I can’t help but bring it up again. Not only does this apply to sites like digg.com, which epitomise web 2.0, but also new bits of web 2.0 functionality you are considering adding to your own site. For example, ask yourself, is it worth adding a drag-and-drop shopping cart to your ecommerce site? Will that generate more sales? Will it increase customer satisfaction?

Jumping on the bandwagon

Why do we always do this? Every time a cool new technique or technology emerges, we all jump on the bandwagon and start applying it randomly to our projects. Take flash. Remember those days when we would slap a flash animation on the front of our sites just because it looked cool. Are we not in danger of doing the same thing again with web 2.0 and AJAX? Not every site needs to be AJAXed up to the hilt.

Profit isn’t a dirty word

As with all new trends we need to carefully consider when and how to use web 2.0. We need to understand how they ultimately will make us money, because believe it or not that is why the majority of websites exist!

Sample site review

Posted in Web strategy on by Paul Boag

A part of my job at Headscape is to provide site reviews for clients. These range from short overview reports to detailed studies on particular aspects of a site. I recently completed a review for a small ecommerce site called TrapAWasp and felt that it neatly tidied together a number of different issues I had been discussing in this blog. The client has been kind enough to allow me to publish it here so hopefully it will be of some use to others. Please bear in mind that this is only a condensed site overview and doesn’t tackle issues in much depth.

Summary

As with all ecommerce sites there are two key factors that dictate its success or failure. These are the number of visitors that are driven to the site and the number of those visitors who are then converted into customers. It is these two factors that Headscape uses to assess the effectiveness of an ecommerce site.

Without looking at the web logs of a site it is hard to tell just how successful the site is at converting users. However, the initial indications for TrapAWasp are good. The site is generally well designed, has few significant usability problems, and addresses most of the major questions raised by users considering purchasing online.

A more important problem exists with regard to driving traffic to the site in the first place. Although good use is being made of Google Adwords the organic listing on search engines (in particular Google) is very poor. We believe there is significant opportunity here as a cursory analysis of the competition makes us believe it would not take much to push TrapAWasp to the top of Google’s ranking.

Visitor conversion

In many ways TrapAWasp is an example of good design. It is clean, simple and focused on enabling users to complete a purchase in the minimum number of steps. However, as with all sites there is always room for improvement and so below we outline several issues which should be addressed.

Design

The site has a strong visual identity. It is well branded: the site name, use of imagery and introduction leaves the user in no doubt as to what the site is about. However, two issues are of concern and should be addressed.

Screen resolution

28% of users are still viewing their computers at 800×600. Unfortunately TrapAWasp has not been optimised for this resolution and therefore requires limited horizontal scrolling in order to be able to read the product descriptions. This also creates problems with the number of products the user initially sees on page load. At 800×600 it appears TrapAWasp only offers 2 products while at 1024×768 the site offers only 4 products. Although users will scroll they tend to make judgements on whether a site has what they want without scrolling down a page. Jakob Neilsen a leading usability expert suggests that key content and products should be visible without the need for the user to scroll. One possibility would be to move the "view details" link to below the description so compressing the amount of space required for each product. Although this wouldn’t make all of the products visible it would help the situation as well as correcting the visual imbalance of white space next to the last two products.

Click here for more on scrolling and screen resolution

Browser compatibility

Although well over 80% of users’ access the World Wide Web using Internet explorer it is a mistake to ignore other browsers. Due to numerous security scares more and more users are turning to alternative browsers such as Firefox. Firefox has now captured well over 8% of the marketplace and is continuing to grow rapidly. Although not serious, http://www.trapawasp.co.uk/ does have some problems displaying in non-IE browsers. Some examples of the problems encountered include text being rendered with the wrong font and images being incorrectly positioned. Although it could be argued these problems do not affect the usability of the site it can knock consumer confidence leading to the belief that the site is in some way unprofessional.

Usability

Usability is an extremely important area of ecommerce design. If a user finds a site hard to use they will often choose to turn to the competition rather than struggle to overcome the obstacles they are facing. Generally the usability on this site is excellent. However, three issues should be addressed.

Delivery address

One minor but very frustrating issue with the checkout form is the need to enter address information twice. Even if you do not check the box marked "Check if you require goods dispatched to an alternative address" you are still required to enter the delivery address. Small problems like this can prove incredibly frustrating and should be avoided if possible.

Deteracat

Another potential cause of confusion is the sudden appearance of a link back to Deteracat on both the checkout and credit card pages. We have no problem in principle to the advert for Deteracat on the right hand side of these pages as cross selling is a good idea and one that should be encouraged. Our concern rather, revolves around the "continue shopping at Deteracat" button in the main body of the page. This immediately generates doubt in the minds of users at a critical stage in the buying process. The user is left wondering if they have selected the right products or whether they have been transferred to another site. We understand the motivation for this approach and the ability it gives the user to purchase products from both sites at the same time however we believe that the confusion this causes outweighs the benefits.

Addressing user concerns

One final issue with regard to usability is the "how to buy" section. It is good practice to have a section that addresses many of the frequently asked questions users have regarding online purchases, but we feel that there is still room for improvement. More information needs to be provided within this section with regard to security. Users are hesitant to give credit card and personal details unless they know it is secure. Although you do provide this information on the credit card page this is late on in the process and after the user has already given you significant amounts of information. On a similar vein it would also be wise to provide some form of privacy statement here. Again we are aware that this information is available from the footer but we do not believe this gives the information the prominence it deserves. Finally we believe that the how to buy section should include information on delivery times as this is another common question and a significant number of users will be unable to view the flash animation on the homepage. In short there needs to be greater emphasis placed on answering users queries and that this section may need a name change to accommodate this kind of information.

Accessibility

It is easy to dismiss accessibility as being an issue solely about the disabled however the truth is that it is a much broader issue than that. Accessibility refers to ensuring a web site is accessible to the widest possible audience including disabled users, those with poor vision or motor skills such as the elderly, and those working within various technological constraints.

Disabled users

Disabled users in the UK have a spending power of £50 billion annually according to the Disability Rights Commission. What is more this figure does not include the elderly who have poor vision or motor skills. Catering to this audience provides a unique way to separate you from your competition. That is not to say that you ignore your abled-bodied users. Rather, we recommend that you make some modifications to your site to make it more disabled-user friendly. There is not time in this report to catalogue every problem disabled users might encounter with this site, but we can say that the site fails to meet even the most basic level of international standards on
accessibility (WAI Level A or Priority 1).

Click here for more on accessibility and business

Technological barriers

As well as creating barriers to the disabled a site can also create technological barriers which force users to turn to the competition. One example of this is in the use of JavaScript. JavaScript has been used in order to carry out the validation of the checkout form. These scripts check that each field has been correctly completed and informs the user of any potential errors. The problem is that 5% of users do not have JavaScript available so these users simply cannot purchase from the site. This is the equivalent of turning away one in twenty customers who try to enter a shop.

Another technological barrier is download time. Although broadband has exploded over the last year still over 50% of users still access using dial up. http://www.trapawasp.co.uk/ takes approximately 17 seconds to download on a 56k modem compared with say http://www.waspbane.com/ which takes only 7 seconds to download over the same connection. With a 10-second difference per page and a 6-page purchase process that is a minute of unnecessary waiting. It may not sound like a lot but website users are incredibly fickle.

Driving traffic

You can have the best website in the world but if nobody is aware of its existence then it means nothing. Unfortunately TrapAWasp does not have the online profile it should have and this will be having a direct impact on the number of sales being made. The problem is the most pronounced on Google where TrapAWasp does not feature within the top 100 results on valuable keywords such as "wasp traps" (results on google.co.uk were slightly more positive but not by much).

Not that things are entirely doom and gloom. TrapAWasp does appear to be supported by a very effective Google Adwords campaign that goes a long way to redressing the balance of poor organic listings. It also has better ratings on sites such as MSN search (listed 7 th) and Yahoo (listed 8 th). However with Google owning 69% of the British search market it is vital that TrapAWasp receives a good listing there. Pay per click campaigns can prove very effective but they also dramatically reduce profit margins and so should only be seen as a stopgap or compliment to organic listings.

After comparing TrapAWasp against other sites listed under rated keywords it became obvious that the problem laid in the sites link popularity.

Google uses a complex algorithm to calculate your position in the ranking. However, two factors dominate that placement. One is keyword density and the other is link popularity.

Keyword density refers to the number of times a particular keyword/key phrase appears in the content of the site. For example the phrase wasp traps appears 17 times in your homepage giving it a keyword density of about 11%. After comparing this to other web sites we discovered that TrapAWasp is on a par with the competition. It is therefore fair to say that this is not the factor that is limiting your rating. That leaves the factor of link popularity.

Link popularity refers to the number of sites who link to TrapAWasp and the perceived popularity of those sites. The more sites that link to you and that you in turn link back to, the higher your ranking. However, it is not just about numbers. It is also about the perceived quality of the site that links to you as well. For example a link from the BBC website would be worth a lot more than a link from an unknown name. Another important factor is the words used in the link to you. The words "wasp trap specialist" will rank you better on the words "wasp trap" than a link using the words "The Jones family business". Currently not a single site listed on Google link to you and this explains your poor ranking.

There is, however, good news. Even the sites ranked in the top positions on Google have very little in the way of sites linking to them. It would not take many good quality links to move TrapAWasp to the top of Google’s organic listing.

Click here for more on link popularity

Below I outline a few techniques that would significantly help your placement on Google:

Look for link partners

Firstly look for as many sites that will link to you as possible and get them to add your site. One way of doing this is to search on Google for the words "add url" and a related keyword phrase such as "wasp traps". Doing so led me to this site: http://www.backyardgardener.com/ph/gardenproblem/gardenproblem.htm which actually has listed a wasp trap that is no long available! There is an add url link at the bottom of the left hand navigation that will allow you to add your site.

Copy the competition

Go to Google and search on a key phrase that is related to your site. Copy the url of the site listed number one in the list and then search again using the following search phrase "links: <url of competition>". This will show you all of the sites that link to that url. Contact each of those sites in turn and ask them if they will also link to you. Once you have done this return to Google and repeat the process all over again but this time with the next site down on the list.

Message Board seeding

Another very effective approach is to take part in message boards on related subjects such as gardening. When posting on these boards you can add a link back to your site and so improve your link popularity. However, a word of warning on this approach. If you just post adverts on peoples forums they will remove them and probably ban you for good. A more successful approach is to contribute to the forum providing useful advice and insights. Almost all forums allow you to add a signature to your post and it is in this signature that you include a link to your site.

Increasing keywords

Although this approach is not related to link popularity it is a vital component of increasing the traffic levels to your site.

One of the problems with securing high ranking is that short keyword phrases such as "wasp traps" are highly competitive. However, users often use much long search terms and it is sometimes easier to target these. The best way of targeting them is to include a lot of copy on your site that is related to the subject matter. This is normally achieved by adding an articles section on your site. This can prove very effective
. Take for example the Headscape site. Web design is a highly competitive sector and competition for the keyword "web design" is immense. However because we have an extensive archive of articles we gain a lot of traffic through longer phrases. Search on "how do I become number one on search engines" and you will see what we mean.

We would recommend that an article section relating to wasps is added to the site. This could build on the existing content which talks about how to find a wasps nest and general information about wasps.

Conclusions

This review has outlined a number of areas in which TrapAWasp could be improved. However, our recommendation is that increasing the levels of traffic should be the number one priority. Poor ranking on Google is significantly damaging the levels of traffic and with a minimum amount of work we are confident that the site’s ranking could be dramatically improved.

Are we in danger of over engineering?

Posted in Development on by Paul Boag

Web standards, CSS, XHTML, Microformats, WAI, semantic code, code validation, XML, eGIF, DOM, AJAX… is it just me or is web design getting a lot more complicated these days? Admittedly all of the above are very exciting developments and crucial for the future evolution of the web but I have to ask myself, are we in danger of over engineering things?

Web design is like car design

Cars can come with lots of cool stuff these days. From anti lock breaks, GPS, and power steering, to iPod player, on board computer and air bags. However, you don’t find all of these features in every car. Why not? The answer is obvious, they all cost money. Sure, if you are building a luxury top of the range Audi then you might include all these features. On the other hand, many people just want a car to get them from A to B and do not care about these kinds of bells and whistles. I believe the same is true for web design.

The Wild West of web design

There is a lot of talk about web design coming of age. We are moving past those Wild West days of web design where men were men and web sites were built by a bunch of cowboys. Now we are all grown up and behaving like responsible software engineers. However, like a spotty teenage boy growing his first sad excuse of a moustache, we are trying too hard. We seem to be under the impression that we have to cram all of these new features into every web site we build irrespective of whether it is appropriate or not.

Understand your audience. Understand your constraints

My wife is an engineer and it was her that first pointed out this danger of over engineering when I was telling her about all the latest web developments (admittedly I had to poke her a few times to keep her awake). She said that the golden rules of design are to understand your audience and understand your constraints.

Understanding your audience

I know this is heresy, but if less than 1% of your users are viewing your site on a Mac, is it necessary to test the site on that platform. Equally, if you are designing a site for a paintball company is it necessary to make that site accessible for blind people. Admittedly, a blind person could be booking paintballing for a friend who does not have a disability that would exclude them from the activity, but how likely is that really and is it worth the extra expense of testing for it?

Understand your constraints

In many cases, this comes down to money. Testing on multiple browsers and complying with various standards takes time and time in most cases costs money. Often clients come to us with a set budget and they want the most they can get for that money. It is up to me to make sure they get the biggest return on investment. If its a choice between making sure the site works with JavaScript disabled or giving them a user tested ecommerce system I will probably choose the latter.

My concerns

Many designers in the past have been more concerned with making nice pieces of "art" for their portfolio rather than producing a design that works well for the client and his users. In these more enlightened days of user centric design, we do not take that approach. However, it is probably true to say that we do in our code. Are we more concerned with adding those little links in the footers of our sites telling our peers that this site validates or that it uses web standards and is accessible than we are making sure our clients get the best return.

When good shopping sites go bad

Posted in User experience, Web strategy on by Paul Boag

I have just finished reading a fascinating article on the BBC web site about the growth of ecommerce. This comes on the sameday that I have watched one of my clients fail to grasp some of the basics of ecommerce.

Today the BBC posted an article saying that since February there has been a 4.2% decline in high street sales while in the same period e-retail has tripled. Apparently 22 million consumers bought goods online in April, spending £1.4bn between them.

Although this is hugely encouraging news for web designers like myself and goes someway to explaining the massive surge we have seen in our sector over the last few months, it doesnt necessarily mean you are on to a sure thing when it comes to selling online.

The reality of ecommerce

Even if you manage to overcome all of the classic problems of ecommerce such as fufillment it is still all too easy to undermine a successful ecommerce site.

Take for example a client we are currently working with. We have had an excellent working relationship with this client and have developed them a hugely successful ecommerce site that has become a major contributor in the success of their business. However today I received a list of changes they are proposing that threaten to undermine the success of their site.

Here are just two of the suggestions they have proposed for the site:

Marketing over functionality

They have proposed removing the search box, telephone number and shopping basket link from the header of the site and replacing it with their corporate strapline. This is a classic example of the kinds of mistakes a marketing manager would make. So often they see a site as a brochure promoting their company rather than a shop front that actively sells their products. By removing key functionality they are simply making it harder for their customers to buy. Why?

The four biggest concerns in ecommerce

Another proposal they are making is to remove some of the clutter from the page. What is wrong with that I hear you ask? Well they propose doing this by removing help on issues like returns policy, privacy and security. This is invaluable information that addresses the 4 biggest concerns users have when purchasing from an ecommerce site:

  • Can I return my purchase if I am unhappy with it?
  • Are there any hidden delivery charges?
  • If I provide you with my credit card details how do I know they are safe?
  • How do I know you aren’t going to use my email address to send me SPAM?

I am sure you can think of more but in my opinion these are the big four.

It is so important to carefully consider what changes you make to your site. Even if you believe you are improving things you can easily undermine what success you are currently having. So what will I be saying to my client? The answer is simple, try it and test it. Before making these kinds of major design changes to your web site create a prototype and test it on a sample audience. See what response you get. This is by far the best way to ensure any changes you make are the right ones.

Does customer loyalty exist online?

Posted in Site content on by Paul Boag

I stumbled across an old article by Jakob Nielsen today and wanted to share with you a small example he used when trying to explain the competition we all face on the web and how superficial customer loyalty can be.

If Soft Drink Sales Worked Like the Internet

When somebody tried a new soft drink and liked it, they would not simply tell five other people at their lunch table; instead, they would shout the news to a crowd of millions of people with an interest in soft drinks. Any of them who felt intrigued by the new drink could say "sure, let me try one" and would receive a sample can by FedEx twenty seconds later. If they liked the sample, they would be assured of finding ample supplies of the new drink on the shelves of every supermarket and convenience store in the world the next day.

If soft drink sales worked like the Internet, there is no doubt that new brands would be launched much more frequently and that consumers would change brand loyalties more than they currently do.

An interesting point

Neilsen raises an interesting point here that is just as relevant today as it was in 1997 when he wrote it. Infact in many ways the trends he identified then have become even more pronounced.

It is still so important to hang on to your users especially on ecommerce sites. Existing users are much more likely to buy again and to spend more than first time visitors. The problem is that with so much competition coming online all the time and existing sites constantly being upgraded it can often become hard to keep up. That is why it is so important to have an ongoing web strategy instead of simply building a site and walking away.

Ecommerce 101

Posted in Web strategy on by Paul Boag

I am currently working on an ecommerce site and so as normal I have been doing my homework into what improves sales on a web site. Here is a quick summary of the key ingredients:

Watch some real users

Before changing anything on your ecommerce web site make sure you run some usability testing. It doesn’t need to be anything fancy. Just get some real shoppers, sit them in front of your web site and watch how they buy from the site. If you have time grab as many people as possible and repeat the process making notes on any trends that develop. But remember always test users one at a time and not in groups. The idea is to simulate how they would shop online while at home.

Organise your site

Be sure to organise the products on your site in ways that users will find intuitive. So often web sites are focused more around the companies structure than the users needs. Also be careful not to offer the user too many choices. This can be overwhelming and leads to users leaving the site before purchasing.

Get the product descriptions right

At one extreme product descriptions can contain far too much technical detail that the user simply doesn’t understand. At the other end of the spectrum product descriptions can be full of marketing speak and little in the way of real content. The best solution is somewhere in between. Describe your product in an accessible, easy to understand way but allow users to delve deeper if they want more information.

Ensure you are credible

Shoppers are inherently suspicious of ecommerce web sites. The idea of handing over your money to somebody that you can’t see or touch is disturbing. It is therefore vital that you are considered trustworthy. Add an about us section to your site that shows photos of your staff and premises. Answer concerns about delivery, returns and security. Most of all make sure your web site is professional in appearance and has recently updated content.

Just take their money!

A shopkeeper would never stop a person handing over money at the counter in order to make them fill in a questionnaire. Why then does that happen online. Make the purchase process as easy as possible and ask for only the minimum information up front. Marketteers want the additional information in order to target users with future promotions and encourage repeat sales. However experience has shown us that it is much easier to make additional sales once the customer has already purchased from you in the past. Make the sale first and then ask if you want more information.

Don’t always follow the crowd

Its easy to look at successful ecommerce web sites like Amazon and think all you have to do is copy them. However remember to focus on your target audience. What might be right for one large ecommerce web site might not necessarily be right for your audience.

Cross sell whenever possible

Take the opportunity to recommend other products to visitors which they might not have considered before. But be careful. Don’t make your recommendations look too much like advertisements. Web users have become very adapt at blocking out banner ads.

Charity fundraising online

Posted in Web strategy on by Paul Boag

A large proportion of the work I do at Headscape is with charitable organisations. I try and keep up to date with developments in the charity sector and I am constantly suprised how many opportunities are being missed to utlise the web.

Fundraising

The importance of the web for fundraising cannot be understated and there are examples of good practice out there. The Disaster Emergency Committee web site raised over &pound;1 million in a week for the Sudan appeal. Web donations were 20% higher than those made by phone.

There are also a suprising number of resources out there dedicated to raising funds on the web and making it easier for people to give to charity.

However there are still many charities that have failed to embrass the concept and even fewer that have got it working well.

One problem is that although charities have donation facilities on their web sites they are not driving traffic to the site in an effective way. The charitable sector needs to learn to market and promote their donation facilities in the same way a company would promote its ecommerce site.

New Media Age reported that ‘poorly optimised’ charity websites – i.e. those that aren’t set up well enough to enable search engines to identify and rank them – were causing humanitarian charities to miss out on press coverage, as almost half of journalists find organisations working at a crisis scene by using search engines. This in turn can hit their fund raising efforts as publicity is their life blood.

When combined with poor site accessibility and usability these promotional problems leave charity web sites sadly lacking when compared to their commercial conterparts.

Conclusions

I guess I am just frustrated by the opportunities that are passing many charity web sites by on a daily basis. Charitable web sites are finding themselves competing with commercial sites for good search engine positions. They are attracting users who have high expectations about a web sites professionalism and usability. They need to make the same kind of investment a non chartible web site would if they intend to get their voice heard online.

I understand that charities have a morale obligation to spend the money they have been donated wisely but I think the Sudan Apeal proves that the web has the potential to generate a significant return on investment if done properly.

For a list of web design companies that work for the charitable sector click here.

The value of personalisation

Posted in Site content on by Paul Boag

I have always been vaguely suspicious of the value of personalising content on a web site however a recent survey has thrown up some interesting figures.

Disclaimer

I feel like I should point out at the outset that this survey was conducted on behalf of ChoiceStream, who are themselves a supplier of personalisation capabilities for web sites. This makes you question the reliability of the information it contains. Nevertheless I found it fascinating reading

Background

The survey was completed by 673 respondents in May 2004. In order to track changes in consumer attitudes over time, the survey is continually repeated at regular intervals.

A major contradiction

Overall, the survey found that more than 80% of consumers were interested in receiving personalised content. I found this figure much higher than I expected. What did not surprise me is that the percentage of people willing to provide information on their preferences and interests in exchange for this personalisation was much lower at 64%. Users continue to be reluctant to hand over personal information of any description however good the reason.

With a significant proportion of users unwilling to provide information to help personalisation the options are extremely limited. The only feasible way forward would be to monitor users behaviour and provide personalisation based on this. However when asked if they would be willing for this type of monitoring to take place only 40% of the sample group agreed. Seemingly people are even less happy to be monitored than they are to answer questions.

Conclusions

All in all this makes frustrating reading for those running web sites. On one hand users are saying they want personalisation especially in the area of ecommerce and yet on the other they are unwilling to provide information or allow monitoring to make this happen. However what a user says they are willing to allow is very different to what they except on a day to day basis. I suspect that if the question had been "are you happy for Amazon to recommend books?" the response would have been very different. The fact that Amazon monitor user behaviour to achieve this would not worry or even occur to users.

This survey has made me think again about personalisation. I am still far from convinced of its value in many situations. Just because technology allows us to do something doesn’t always been it is worth doing. However in certain circumstances it has real benefit. The problem still remains of how to present this functionality in a way that doesn’t require too much user interaction or give the perception of being too invasive of privacy.