10 problems your content management system will not solve and how to overcome them

Posted in Development on October 30, 2009 by Paul Boag

Content management systems are often perceived as a silver bullet that will solve all your content problems. In reality having a CMS is not enough. You must also address broader issues associated with the content of your website.

So many website owners hate their content management system. This is often because it has failed to live up to their unrealistic expectations.

Many organisations purchased their CMS hoping to solve a wide range of issues surrounding content production and delivery. In reality, a CMS is only capable of overcoming relatively few. In fact often a content management system will solve one set of problems only to create more. It is these new problems that I wish to address here.

What follows is a list of 10 issues that are either directly created by content management systems or that a CMS will fail to solve.

1. A lack of editorial control

One of the primary reasons organisations purchase a content management system is to de-centralise control of content and therefore remove the bottlenecks that surround posting content to the web.

The consequence of this approach is a lack of central control to ensure the quality and accuracy of copy produced. This can lead to contradictions and varying styles of writing across the site.

Although many content management systems provide the tools for central editorial control, they are not always used and require somebody with the editorial experience.

The Solution: Get an editor

Unfortunately this is one problem that technology cannot solve. What is required is a content editor. Somebody who checks what is being produced and ensures it communicates a consistent message in a consistent tone.

Ideally this should be somebody who has experience in writing and editing online copy. However, the most important thing is that this person feels confident in editing copy, and has the authority to remove inappropriate material.

This person will also require a vision for the site and in particular what personality it should be projecting.

2. A lack of personality

Many websites lack real personality. They either ooze marketing BS or come across as singularly bland. This is largely due to the fact that they have been written by people more interested in communicating facts or selling stuff, than wishing to engage with users.

Websites with great copy that is full of personality, stand out from the crowd. They do more than convey information. They actively seek to make a connection with users in much the same way people do face to face.

Unfortunately the distributed nature of content production through the use of a CMS undermines that.

The solution: Decide on your sites personality

The first step towards overcoming this problem is to define who you are. If your website was a person what type of person would it be? What words best describe your sites character? Is it playful, serious, enthusiastic, or friendly?

Next put together a content style guide. This will include examples of writing styles that should be used on your website. It will also include guidelines in terms of tone and wording. This document should then be distributed to your content providers.

Producing an effective content style guide is not an easy task. You might wish to consider employing a freelance web copy writer if you do not have somebody in house. However once it has been produced, it should provide everything your content providers need to add some
personality into your copy.

Of course that does still require your content providers to be committed to the cause.

3. Uncommitted contributors

One of the great selling points of having a content management system is that they allow anybody to post to your website. Unfortunately, just because your staff can edit the site, does not mean they will.

It is not unusual to find that content management systems go unused except for by a few individuals. The belief that content management can be easily decentralised is false. There are two primary reasons for this.

Firstly, some people do not see it as their responsibility to provide web content. They see the website as a marketing or sales tool and so should be managed by marketeers.

The second reason is that most people do not have the time. Writing web content is often seen as a low priority and constantly gets pushed out by “real work.”

The solution: Recognise the importance of the web

The solution to this problem has to come from senior management.

The website needs to be seen as a critical business tool and job descriptions must reflect this by making site maintenance a key component of people’s job. This should include website duties being apart of employee assessment.

There is however another reason people do not using the CMS – they don’t know how to use it.

4. Poorly trained authors

When an organisation rolls out a new content management system they almost always offer some form of training. However, in many cases it is not enough.

Normally training consists of an intimidating manual and one off training session. For the few people who are updating the website regularly this is probably enough. However for more infrequent content providers, this is inadequate.

The trouble with one off initial training sessions is that by the time the content provider comes to update the website, they have forgotten what they learnt. Admittedly the information they need may well be contained in the manual, but who reads those?

This can easily lead to only a few people capable of making updates to the site, thereby undermining the very reason for having a CMS in the first place.

The solution: Provide video training material

The combination of occasional users and new employees, means that most organisations need a long term strategy for training people in the use of their content management systems.

We have found that a series of short video tutorials covering key functionality works much better than training sessions or intimidating manuals.

We still run training sessions for frequent users. However, the video tutorials allow users to work through the material at their own pace. Also, unlike a training course they can learn only the parts of the system they actually need.

However, training in the technology is only half the battle. Content contributors also need to know how to write compelling copy.

5. Bad copywriting

The harsh truth is that not everybody can write good web copy. Even somebody who writes brilliantly in print, does not necessarily write well for the web.

There is an art and science to writing good web copy that many people are unaware of. Copy written by content providers is often verbose, un-engaging and hard to scan.

The solution: Provide a structure for content production

The solution is three fold:

First, the introduction of an editor means that content providers do not have to worry about writing perfect copy. It should be the job of the editor to take the raw copy they provide and re-write it for the web.
Second, the training provided with a content management system should extend beyond the functionality and also include advice on writing good web copy.
Finally, by producing a basic template for content providers you can help them focus their writing. A content template should ask questions such as who is the audience, what is the key message for this page and what is the call to action?

However, the problem is not just limited to the quality of content but also the quantity.

6. Bloated websites

Much like this post, most websites end up far too bloated. This is a problem that content management systems only serve to exaggerate.

By removing the barriers to putting content online, you encourage people to add more. However, more is not always better.

Content providers often approach the website with entirely the wrong mentality. They look at the content they have or can easily produce, and decide to put it online because “somebody will find it useful.” They are driven by what content is available, rather than user’s need.

The problem is that the more they put online, the harder it is for users to find the content they want. It is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

The solution: Focus on users and remove

The best solution is to prevent this from occurring in the first place. This is done by fixating on user needs. Before putting anything online ask two questions:

Is the content aimed at your primary audience?
Is the content essential for helping those users complete their objectives?

If you cannot answer yes to both questions, then seriously consider whether putting the content on your website will cause more harm than good.

Of course, you may already have a bloated website. If this is the case then you need to review each page of your site and apply the principles above. If a page fails to cater for a specific use case of your primary audience, then it maybe time for it to be removed.

The problem is that most organisations have people responsible for adding content to their websites. However, few have somebody charged with removing it. This is an important role and one your web editor should have the power and time to do.

However, user needs is not the only criteria for judging the worth of content. There are also calls to action.

7. No clear calls to action

As I have already said, most content providers are focusing on conveying information rather than meeting users needs. However, they are also neglecting the business needs too.

With the exception of marketeers and sales people, few content providers are thinking about calls to action. What is it that you want users to do next? How do you wish them to respond?

Even when content providers are thinking about calls to action, they are focusing on the big actions such as “contact us.” Until the user is ready to take those major steps they are left to wander around the website.

The solution: Always guide the user to the next action

It is important to consider the main calls to action for the entire site. Typically they consist of one or two major actions such as buying a product or completing a contact form.

However, there is also a need to think about the calls to action of each page. Avoid leaving your user with no obvious next step.

Take for example this page. Directly below this article you can take three actions:

Leave a comment
Provide feedback – That leads to videos offering a number of next steps
Read a related post

At no stage is the user left without a next action.

A big source of next actions is your information architecture. Unfortunately most navigation is not focused on users needs, let alone business objectives.

8. An organisational focused IA

An unfortunate side effect of running a content management system is that it encourages information architecture built around organisational structure rather than users needs.

If you look at most organisations CMS driven websites, their information architecture closely mirrors their internal structures. This is because it is easier to divide up responsibility for updating various parts of the site if it is structured along departmental lines.

The problem with this approach is that users do not think in terms of organisational structure. They are task focused and so often an organisational IA is entirely inappropriate. It leads to confusion and frustration among users.

The solution: Focus on user tasks

The only solution to this problem is to stop structuring sites around organisations and start focusing them on users.

Although it is easier in most content management systems to allocate permissions based on a per section basis, there is not normally a specific need to do so. It is just as feasible to give access on a per page basis making it unnecessary to organise around internal structure.

Ultimately your site should be about your users and that includes your IA. However, it does not stop there. The community you build around your site is important too.

9. No sense of community

Increasingly content management systems come with some great community tools. They have forums, comments and integrate with everything from Facebook to Twitter. However, great technology does not build great communities.

Many organisations implement these community features on their site and are disappointed when they are not used.

Worst still some organisations launch these features but moderate so heavily that users respond negatively. Eventually the functionality is removed entirely.

The solution: Build relationship not functionality

It is important to realise that online communities are about relationships and not technology. If you want to build a successful community around your website, you need to actively and regularly engage with users.

This involves having people within your organisation who are constantly talk to users, asking and answering questions, and getting to know people through open and honest relationship.

Of course, the problem here is the same as content production. This is not seen as an official role. Instead it often falls to enthusiastic individuals. If you want your community to succeed you are going to require passionate people who have the time and resources to sink into that community.

And it is a lack of resources that leads us to our final problem that content management systems cannot solve – single language content.

10. Single language content

The majority of invitations to tender Headscape receive for content management builds, request multi-lingual support.

In the end few of the sites we build actually make use of that functionality. In effect they are paying money for something they will never actually implement.

There are two many reasons for this.

The first is aspirational. Many organisations request multi-lingual support because they have dreams of expanding in the future and unfortunately those dreams do not come true. I can at least respect this viewpoint. There is nothing wrong with planning for functionality you might need at some point in the future.

However, the second reason is not so admirable. A lot of sites fail to implement their multi-lingual support because they have not fully thought through what that involves.

Implementing a CMS with multi-lingual support is easy. Creating a multi-lingual website is hard. You have to decide what content is going to be translated. You need to find a translator and then you also need to maintain that content over the long term.

The solution: Think twice before requesting multi-lingual support

There has to be a good business case for implementing a multi-lingual website. Unless you are sure that you are going to make money from a foreign market, it is probably not worth investing in language support.

If you aren’t serious about supporting other languages do not add it to your ITT, at least not as a primary requirement. There is no reason to rule out a CMS for not supporting multiple languages unless you are sure you are going to use that functionality.

Conclusions

You could interpret this post as a criticism of content management systems. That is not the case. I believe content management systems are a valuable addition to most websites. However, as I said at the beginning they are not the silver bullet may perceive them to be.

The success of your CMS is largely reliant on you being aware of its limitations and being prepared to deal with these restrictions. If you do then a CMS could be the best investment you ever make.

154. Top Ten

Posted in Classic shows on February 25, 2009 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Relly Annett-Baker talks about good copywriting, Paul learns how to be a more efficient designer and we look at the ultimate website launch checklist.

Podcast: Download (31.8MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Housekeeping

SXSW

Boagworld is doing loads of good stuff surrounding this years SXSW. The full details can be found here. However, the highlights are…

A live Boagworld show on Saturday 14th 6.30PM at the convention centre – With guests: Andy Budd, Daniel Burka, Joe Stump and Jeremy Keith. Please sign up on upcoming or follow via uStream.
The Great British Boozeup on Monday 16th at 7:30PM at Shakespeare’s Pub – An evening of great beer and an all British soundtrack. Again please sign up on upcoming.
Boagworld SXSW coverage – Instead of spamming both twitter and your RSS reader with content from SXSW, we are bring it all together on one handy streaming page.

So whether you are actually attending SXSW or not, hopefully there will be something for everybody.

News and events

The ultimate website launch checklist

Making a website live is a scary process. There is so much that could go wrong. However worse still, there is so much you could forget. When it comes to launching a website, you can’t afford to take chances.

Well, BOX UK has been compiling a website launch checklist that takes some of the risk out of the process. This list includes everything from validating your HTML to announcing the launch on Twitter.

If you are responsible for launching websites, then this post is a good starting point for your own checklist.

Mr Budd is on fire (not literally)

Normally when I write about the news, I focus on specific posts that have appeared over the last week. However, instead I want to draw your attention to Andy Budd.

In case you are one of the three people who haven’t heard of Mr Budd,let me give you a quick summary. Andy is a user experience specialist and founder of ClearLeft – an agency that does a mixture of web design work and training. Andy is also author of CSS Mastery, an excellent book that I highly recommend.

The reason I want to focus on Andy is because he has really started to churn out some superb posts recently. Although an accomplished author and speaker, Andy has written less on his blog over the past year or so. However, in this last week he has released two cracking posts.

The first is entitled "Don’t treat your website like a commodity" and focuses on how we approach the market. It warns against trying to artificially create a need for your site. Instead he suggests shaping your site around user requirements.

The second is entitled "Is your website like a leaky bucket?" and is in many ways a continuation of the previous post. In this one he warns against the mentality of continually driving new users to your site and instead encourages us to focus on retaining the users we already have.

With these kinds of quality post coming from Andy again, now is the time to add him to your RSS reader (if you have not already).

A win for the generalist

I am very much a jack of all trades and master of none. Others have accused me of ‘having enough knowledge to be dangerous’.

In the world of web design, specialists are the order of the day. As a result I am beginning to feel obsolete. However, perhaps that is a false perception.

If like me you are a generalist, then you may draw comfort from ‘Bringing Holistic Awareness to Your Design‘, a post on Boxes and Arrows. In the article they explain that if you want to build websites that score high in user satisfaction, you need a team with a good general understanding. In particular they wrote…

The more each team member understood the business goals, the user needs, and the capabilities and limitations of the IT environment "a holistic view" the more successful the project. In contrast, the more each team member was "siloed" into knowing just their piece of the whole, the less successful the project.

Now, the article does not apply that specialists are wrong. It merely points out that in order to build a successful website you need to see the bigger picture.

It goes on to identify 5 ways that you can ensure your team keeps this broad perspective. They are…

All team members conduct at least some user research
Team members participate in work and task flow workshops
Team members share and discuss information as a team
Team members prioritize information as a team
Team members design together in collaborative workshops

This is certainly something we have begun to take on board at Headscape and we would encourage you to do the same.

Interview: Relly Annett-Baker on Copywriting for the Web

Paul: OK, so joining me today is Relly Annett-Baker who is a copywriter over at poppycopy.co.uk. Hello Relly, how are you?

Relly: Hello, how are you?

Paul: So here we are, on the phone, after a false start.

Relly: I know, it’s good for an internet-based podcasting that we end up using the phone, but there you go. It’s reliable, I like it.

Paul: Yes, all that digital technology, it’s nothing but trouble. Good old analogue.

Relly: Yes, analogue beats everything.

Paul: OK, so we’ve got Relly on the show today to really talk us through some of the kind of fundamentals of copywriting, and copywriting specifically for the web and how we go about doing that. So, Relly, I guess the best thing to do is start with the absolute fundamentals here, and we’ll start by asking you what do you think makes good copy, how do you define good copy?

Relly: Erm, good copy starts with good writing, which sounds, you know, really obvious, but erm, really, unless your spelling and your grammar and your sense is not there, you’re not going to write good copy. So, that’s, you know, the start of it, so if you’re going to write copy, make sure you can write prose well, to begin with. Erm, beyond that, it’s then about… The difference between copy and normal writing is that you’re selling something, essentially, whether it’s a service or, er, an actual product, or, erm, even, you know, just an entire, just an idea. Erm, so, it’s about benefits, rather than specifications. A specification is, you know, what you put into your brochure when someone wants to know whether a dishwasher is going to fit in their kitchen. But, the benefits is much more about the time they’re going to save and be able to spend with their family, using your fantastic, very quick, very efficient dishwasher. Erm, and the other thing that good copy should do, above everything else, is entice a reader to investigate. Especially on the web, your copy has to earn it’s place; it has to earn an extra second of eyeballing, because people just scan on, we get so much information thrown at us, especially on the web, that your copy need to be clear enough that it can be easily understood and also enticing enough that someone wants to stick with you and find out more, rather than flick on to the next thing they can look at.

Paul: Umm. I mean, you talked there about "especially on the web", what do see as being the, kind of, primary differences between writing for the web and any other medium?

Relly: I guess the biggest difference is that print mediums are fixed, that’s why we have different editions of books or magazines that come out, whereas the web is fluid, so, the difference between wikipedia and the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and there are pros and cons for both of those mediums, erm, that they use, but mainly that you can alter things as you go, nothing’s ever sort of set down as "right, that’s what we said and we can never go back and change it". So, erm, the other thing is the web is used primarily for people that skim-read a lot of information and use it to gather information before they decide to go on and request a brochure or find out more about what it is that you’re offering. It’s usually the first point of contact for people looking up, so it needs to make a good first impression, erm, and as such it also needs to communicate what your company is like, what sort of, you know, erm, formalities you have, erm, how big you are, how small you are, and how you like to operate and convey that, er, which print very rarely needs to do, it’s often, by then, erm, when a print brochure comes into someone’s hands, they’re already aware of your brand and they’ve got a better idea of who you are.

Paul: Mmm, I mean, there’s the kind of one issue that often comes up with the differences between the print, er, printed medium and the web, is that, you know, that because people scan, copy on the web should be kept short. I mean, is that something that you would agree with? I know that I’ve seen, you know, some articles written on A List Apart written before, that say "no it’s not about the length of the copy, it’s about how engaging it is". So, I’m quite interested in your opinion on that.

Relly: Yeah, I would very much agree, that it’s much more about, erm, engagement rather than length. Often with print, you get told you have, you know, space for 250 words and that’s how long your copy has to be. With the web, your copy can be as long as it needs to be, but that’s not necessarily as long as you’d like it to be. But as long as you can keep people engaged and keep them with an interest to keep on reading, get more information about you, and then, er, essentially they can read 5000 words about you, but if they don’t press the button at the bottom that says "get in contact" or "ring us" or "do something", then that’s kind of all for naught. What you want is to, erm, your copy to be long enough to persuade someone that they want to take the next step and get in contact with you and make a, you know, make that step towards doing business with you.

Paul: Mmm, I mean you talk, you’ve talked a lot about engagement already, how do you go about engaging people as you write copy? What kind of tricks and techniques are there, or is it probably a lot more complicated than that?

Relly: (laughs) Erm, I wouldn’t say it was the sort of thing where there’s, erm, there’s one way to do it; there are different, different, erm, styles and it really depends on your audience. Erm, often when we think of copy we think directly of advertising, and when we think of advertising we think of billboards. Billboards have, literally, two seconds to engage you and fix a message in your head. So, they have to have a certain amount of shock-value, and that’s usually accompanied by a large image that ties that together. The web is a very different beast in that respect, in that you’re making a one-on-one relationship; you don’t have to talk to everyone in the street, you can concentrate on who you think your best customer is. You do research about you customers and your users, and then you write for them, and you write in a way that’s going to, erm, keep them reading. Erm, so it comes down to a lot of research about who you’re writing for.

Paul: Mmm, that’s really interesting, you talk about writing for a specific person or, er, a specific group of people, because, it sounds then like you guys suffer from the same problem that designers would suffer from, when a client turns around and says ‘our target audience is the general public’, and they won’t narrow it down any. So, er, is it fair to say that you’ve got the same need to prioritize audiences that a designer would have?

Relly: Absolutely, you cannot write something that is going to engage everyone all the time, you have to know who your audience is. Erm, and that often involves doing, you know, research that, erm, the clients themselves don’t necessarily take on as part of the need for copy, but, erm, often the product tells you what sort of copy you need to write. If you’re, erm, writing about a teddy-bear shop, it’s quite obvious that you’re not generally writing for a, sort of, you know, middle-aged, managerial businessman; you’re writing for either, erm, older women who collect them, or younger children and therefore you’re writing for parents. But when you get into services, it gets a bit more complicated and so you have to do more research about the people who make contact currently on the website, if there is an existing website, or, you know, what business they’re going for and who actually makes them, makes that next step, you know, and who predominantly makes up their sales; those are the people you should be writing for. I often say to, erm, to people who are writing, who are starting to write their own copy, to have a style guide and to practice that – try writing a letter to your best customer; obviously, you don’t have to send it, but, you know, as if you were going to address them, face to face, what would you talk about and how would you introduce your product, and what specifically would they be interested in about it. And once you’ve practised writing about your products in that manner, it feels difficult ‘coz it feels like you’re cutting off 50% of your potential audience, but if you can target on, you know, the 10% that make up your actual, erm, sellable audience, then your erm, your returns will be much higher.

Paul: Mmm, very interesting. I like the idea of getting people to practice by writing a letter. I can imagine that works very well. Let’s talk about, umm, some of the common mistakes when it comes to copywriting, ‘coz let’s face it, you know, the majority of websites aren’t, er, produced and written by, you know, er, trained copy-writers, or even (Relly laughs)… they’re either written by, erm, the designer when he gets completely fed up with waiting for content from the client, or it’s written by the website owner. Umm, in either case, you know, they’re not obviously as experienced as you, so I’m interested in some of the really bad mistakes you see coming up again and again.

Relly: Erm, the obvious one is when people take their brochure copy and just move that straight across to their website and say: "that’ll do, that’s perfect, that’s exactly what we want."

Paul: OK, we we always say that, why is that wrong?

Relly: Why is it wrong? Because, erm, your brochure should really be for when people have made contact with you and have an interest in your product. So then you can, you can work on selling them, you can, you can work on, er, getting past any of the objections that they might have, through a longer length of copy when they’re ready to address those issues, when they’ve already seen the positives. So, erm, your website should be… As an example, if you take, erm, say a hotel that’s, erm, setting itself up for events, or weddings, what a bride wants to see when she goes to the website is she obviously wants to see pictures of a lovely wedding, but she wants to know how the day is going to work for her, and why it’s going to be her, you know, perfect day. A bit further along the line, she wants to know how much glass hire is and how much it costs, you know, to have rooms in the hotel and she can be really direct in those. But, initially that first bit of copy needs to be one simple paragraph explaining why your hotel is absolutely perfect for her wedding day, as far as she’s concerned, the biggest day on the planet, and you have to make her feel she’s the most important person. Once she’s, once she feels like she wants to make the contact and book, the brochure can explain in far more detail what the liability insurance is, what the room size is; she needs to have a rough idea of these things, but they don’t need to be laid out for her, then and there.

Paul: Mmm, are there any other mistakes that you see quite a lot?

Relly: Yeah, people don’t revise or keep on top of their copy; so they kind of treat it like it’s been printed, and that’s it, they can’t ever go back and change it, or they feel they can only change it if they also change the design.

Paul: Yeah.

Relly: We’re starting to get past that a little now, erm, companies are getting a bit more used to the idea of blogs, and so they can keep updated in that respect. Erm, other mistakes people often end up writing for their client or their boss, rather than the actual audience, which goes back to, you know, what we were saying before, which is, you know, that’s a difficult one, everyone faces that where, you know, their boss says: "I think it should be like this", and if you know better, that’s, you know, that’s you having to then lay out why I think this works better because. Erm, but don’t, you know, be afraid to make the point that you are writing for the audience, the people that are going to buy and here are their needs and here are their requests, and this is how the copy has addressed that.

Paul: Umm.

Relly: And, I guess the other thing is that, erm, people (laughs), people who, er, don’t write very often, they fall into two categories, erm, especially with designers, this is so true, that designers either did art at school, because they wanted to get out of essay writing (Paul laughs) and therefore they haven’t written anything for a long time, and so they’re a bit rusty and they kind of need to maybe practice a bit before they lay something out and, you know, maybe hand it onto someone else and say: ‘does this make sense to you? Can you, can you read this out of context and understand, you know, where I’m going with it?’ Erm, I often talk about, erm, people using, er, text readers for the same thing; you know, I know they’re used in website design to check, erm, accessibility, that someone, you know is, er, able to have the text read to them and understand what’s going on they should be able to navigate around the website. It goes perfectly well for copy as well, copy is very much part of your navigation: it’s the information you’re imparting to that person. So that’s always a good way that, you know, if someone, if someone can read or be read the copy out of context and they get, you know, 70%, 80% of the idea of what’s going on, then you’re on a, you know, good track that way. Often you find that people, the other thing that happens is that people start writing and they get so excited about the fact that they’re writing, the prose just flows from them, like they were actually Lord Tennyson reincarnate (Paul laughs) and they come to the end and they’ve built up to a massive, dramatic conclusion (Paul laughs) about why their product is the best thing since sliced bread and actually that dramatic conclusion generally needs to be the opening statement, because it’s what catches hold of people and gets them to read onwards.

Paul: I mean is, I’m fascinated by this whole area of kind of trying to create a tone in your copy, er, because I’m not a copywriter, I write quite a lot, but in the sense of blog posts and things like that and so, whenever I’m writing, I’m writing in my own voice, if that makes sense. But, obviously when you’re writing for another site, when you’re trying to reach a very specific audience, when you’re writing within that tone of the website, that’s a very different kettle of fish and I’m interested in how you do that, how you go about setting a tone; how you go about sticking to a tone, you know, how do you do it? (laughs)

Relly: Ah, the creation of a style guide is very, that’s probably most important here. There are two things that I recommend when, umm, coming up with the, sort of the voice, the tone for a site, is to think about the persona of who that person is that’s writing, that’s especially true if you have multiple people who are writing as the same person, erm, often you find this now with companies that have begun to use Twitter streams and so on to communicate stuff and they they need to remain the same person, the, erm, NASA rockets do that very well, Discovery and the rest of them, they they’re able to communicate very well, both scientific facts and just, you know, prosaic information about the fact they’re bored of sitting on landing pads, launching pads and things like that and it’s quite nice because it’s able to communicate a human voice to something that essentially is a very complicated machine, erm, and the way that they’ve done that is to think: "well, if I, you know, it I was going to be a person talking about these experiences, what would I say?" and sometimes, you know, the most complicated, fascinating machine on earth, saying the most mundane things communicates more about their team that it could do than take a very long, scientific specification of what they were doing. So, it’s again going back to understanding your audience. NASA have understood that their audience on Twitter, they’re not space buffs, they’re people who are gererally interested, because most human beings are interested when a rocket goes up to space, it’s, you know, it’s an amazing thing, it doesn’t matter if you’re 6 years old, or 36 years old, it still seems, you know, astounding, that it happens. So, they’ve gone back and they’ve thought about, you know, how can we communicate to people every day and they treat the rockets as if they’re just people hanging around doing their jobs. just like everyone else uses Twitter. So, the first step is to understand your audience, and it takes a certain amount of, erm, it is quite cool to say but dissection, it is cutting out the people that you don’t want to talk to; people often know who their customers aren’t, even if they can’t quite focus on who their customers are and who their customers are becomes clearer with more and more research. Erm, a lot of what a copywriter does as research, right at the beginning, crosses over with information architecture, it’s a lot of looking at, erm, how best can we communicate these points and who really needs to know them and in what order? So you kind of, you go back and you assess, so this company is, erm, is selling er… they might be selling, we used dishwashers and washing machines earlier, so who’s the primary researcher and purchaser? It’s probably going to be, erm, it’s split probably 50-50 between female and male, as for the initial research, but they’re probably going to be above the age of 24, averagely; they’re probably going to own their own home and they might well have children and that gives you the sort of insight to the sort of family life that they have and what they, therefore, want to get out of that product. Erm, so then it’s erm, then it’s a case of looking at, I often go back then to erm, manufacturers, look how manufacturers’ websites work, how they describe their own products; what sort of visual advertising they’ve used to communicate these things and how that can be translated into words, what benefit are they selling with the visuals, often if I’ve been supplied visuals for the website, they can tie in together quite well. And then I create a persona, the person that is writing, you know, being the person who is writing for the website. So sometimes I’m a middle-aged man, sometimes I’m a teenage girl, sometimes, you know, I’m a cool, skating dude, it really, you know, it really depends on what, erm, angle I’m going for

Paul: Sure.

Relly: With the copy. I keep a swipe file, which is basically things that I take from magazines, from newspapers, from other advertising literature, from books, from articles, that I think has been written really well and I take it away and I say, I kind of take it apart and say: "what about that headline functions so well?" and "what about, what is it about this piece that talks so well to the audience that it’s that it’s going for?" that, erm, that’s especially good if, even if you’re not the target audience and you’re still engaged enough to read it; that’s, you know, often quite fascinating. One of my favourite places to, erm, take, er, hints and tips from, of all places, is the Daily Mail and the Sun (Paul laughs), believe it or not, because they are so good at putting across an emotive idea in very few words, there is nothing like a Sun headline for giving you a kick in the pants, for feeling, you know, and often you read it and you find yourself, erm, agreeing with the statement, out of hand, before you pull yourself back and go: "now hang on, no, hang on this is the Sun, I’m going to read this story first before I make up my own mind." (Paul chuckles) But, you know, they’re very good at doing that, and, erm, I mean it’s not ideal for everyone’s website, obviously, but to have the ability to do that, to take just a few words and make an emotive statement is really useful in copy, because what you want people to do, more than anything else, is feel that they must do something about getting hold of your product, they must find out more, they must buy it then and there, they must, you know, whatever is appropriate, you know, you’re not going to find many people who are going to one-click buy a conservatory so that’s not necessarily, you know, going to work so well, but you might well be able to get them to arrange to have someone to come round and measure for a conservatory and that’s the next step to getting them to do what you want them to do. Copy is all about behavioural management, essentially.

Paul: Yeah. I mean, it’s got a lot in common with design, you know. As I hear you talk, there’s so much overlap. I mean, but what’s so fascinating is that, you know, a client will spend a fortune on design and they will spend a lot of time and effort and forever express an opinion over look and feel and design, yet they don’t seem to want to invest money in writing good copy and they’ll say things like, you know: "content is king", yet they, there is this perception, I don’t know, is it a perception that they can do it themselves? Why isn’t it? Why is it so hard?

Relly: I don’t know. We, we poor copywriters, we are the Cinderella’s stepsisters of the web design world. Er, it’s especially true in web design, more than anywhere else that I’ve seen, erm, probably because the medium is that much newer, that, and it sprung out of interactivity, as opposed to, erm, books are about staid reading and advertising sprung from that; television and radio sit somewhere in the middle, but essentially it’s a written script, sometimes with pictures added. The web is a different medium altogether, it’s much more about doing, interacting and as more and more social media stuff springs up, you know, that’s more and more true and don’t get me started on the amount of companies that have got terrible facebook pages and so on. Erm, but again, it is that belief that it can be done by yourself; that’s not necessarily, you know, not true, you know, people can write their own copy, in the same way I can design a website – it might look like a dog’s dinner when I’m done, but I can do it. It depends, I can, I can start off, to turn it around, I know enough, I have enough of a little, you know, little amount of dangerous knowledge, to be able to put a blog up, design my own blog header in Photoshop and upload it and be able to update my blog day to day, but that doesn’t mean to say that I’m necessarily ready to design a site for a, you know, big multinational company that wants to sell direct from its website to multiple places around the world. The same goes with, erm, with copywriters. I think partly the reason that we get so little investment put in at the beginning of projects is that, erm, we’ve come to see creating a website as a visual thing, clients very often ask about how a site looks and they don’t care so much about how it works underneath, providing it works, which is the equivalent of asking a baker to bake an amazing cake and you get it delivered and it’s four tiers and it looks fantastic and it’s got these, you know, subtly crafted sugar-craft dancers on top and flowers trailing all around it and you cut it in half and it’s sawdust. And, you know, the copy very much does come under the sawdust category, we kind of get a bit left behind because everyone can write a bit and it doesn’t take that much, erm, knowledge to at least lay out something that makes sense, erm, I think it does kind of get neglected; erm, I often sort of say to people that, you know, that the copy is as much part of the navigation and the function of the site as anything you do with the menu buttons or whatever else, erm, and what we really need to do is to have designers… there are some designers who have the attitude that whatever happens after sign-off is no longer their concern, so the amount of sales that happen, whatever else, that’s not their problem, they’ve done their bit, they’ve designed a site, it works and it goes out. Whereas, really what we, what you’re then doing is designing for your client, erm, a very pretty picture-book of all their products, but that’s not necessarily a sales tool, so we need to look now much more at, erm, at websites as sales tools for companies and to people, you know.

Paul: So, I mean, where’s the line here, mind, because, umm, you know, I can imagine website owners sitting listening to this now going: "well, I mean she seems to be suggesting that we get a copywriter to write absolutely everything on our site", umm, but, you know, when you get into the realms of, you know, corporate blogs and things like that, I mean it’s going to cost a fortune, is it not, to get a copywriter involved at every stage. Where should a copywriter be involved, where shouldn’t they be involved, how do they fit in to the process?

Relly: Right, that’s a really good question. I don’t believe for one minute that you need to have, unless you have a site that need constant updating, you don’t need to have a content editor on-site all the time; in the same way that you don’t need to have a website designer on-site all the time, unless your website is constantly evolving. If you have a web team and your content changes a lot, then you might well want to think about getting a content editor in.

Paul: OK.

Relly: If you run an online shop and you change a few products a week, and you might introduce a few new products, er, via an email marketing, whatever, you might want to consider how much of that you want to give to a copywriter. If you’re updating a company blog and you’re sending, occasionally send out, erm, emails to old clients and invitations to new clients, you probably don’t need to get a copywriter, unless you feel it’s a better use of your time, and I think that it is the division a lot of the time, is that if you’re, if something really needs to sell, if it needs to make an impact, erm, I guess you wouldn’t find an advertising agency going ahead and taking on a billboard campaign, without getting a copywriter in, or their own in-house copywriter; it’s not going to be the managing director going: "well, we’ve got the artist to do this fantastic picture and we’ve bought all the advertising space, we’ve got a whole campaign rolled out, so I’d better think what we’re going to put on the, er, on the advert then." It just doesn’t work like that and that’s exactly, that should be exactly the same with your website. If you’re looking to launch a new campaign, if you’re selling something specifically, if it’s going to make a big difference to the way your company’s going to go, you want to get professionals in, and in this case it would probably be a copywriter would be the professional that you require. Erm, you know, you probably wouldn’t want to go and fiddle with your own plumbing, unless you have a very deep interest in DIY. It’s the same thing. Erm, but on the flipside of that, is that it’s, copywriting isn’t some arcane art that people can’t learn, in the same way that most people started learning web-design by sitting down in front of a computer, you know, bashing something out in Frontpage and going: "well, that kind of works", and then four years later cringing at what they’ve done. I think it’s very much the same for me, when I started writing copy and content, I was a radio producer and I have been responsible for some the worst chart hits in history (Paul laughs), you know, ascending to the chart because of the copy that I wrote, you know, to persuade people to buy the singles, you know, the competitions that we came up with, you know; it was my job, it paid my bills, buy I can’t say, you know, getting the cheeky girls to number 1 is my proudest achievement.

Paul: Oh dear.

Relly: And I was at least partly responsible for that (Paul laughs). I have to take my part in history on that one. Erm, you know, again it’s that thing, you know, anyone can go back and do it if they want to learn, you know, how to write copy. Just be aware that your first few attempts probably want someone to look through, but don’t be disheartened if you get to the end of it and think: "that’s not really what I wanted." You can always go halfway with a copywriter; I run workshops where I go into companies, talk to them about what their needs are, help them come up with a style guide, so they can say: ‘we’re going to write, it’s going from really simple stuff, like we’re going to have abbreviations and we’re not going to us the Oxford comma (Paul laughs), if that’s of any interest to any of you punctuation geeks out there, erm, right through to these are the sorts of people we’re addressing, these are there interests so we’re going to work these into this piece of copy, and, you know, I can then work with your staff members who will continue to write and then you’ve got, you know, a trained battalion of copywriters in-house ready to write things for you, on your behalf. And that’s often, you know, I often say to people that it’s not impossible to write copy, it just takes time to do it. As with anything else, it takes time to code a website well, properly and so that you can make a job out of it, it’s exactly the same with copywriting, but nothing stops you from building those skills up as you go.

Paul: That’s brilliant. That’s absolutely brilliant. It’s really good to hear a copywriter’s perspective on all of this stuff, because I don’t feel there’s enough really said about that part of the website and it’s been great to have you in on the show, Relly, and I really appreciate you taking the time.

Relly: Thank you very much.

Paul: So, thank you very much.

Relly: Thank you.

Thanks goes to Simon Douglas for transcribing this interview.

Listeners feedback:

Being a more efficient designer

Adam from Wales has written in with an interesting question:

Adam: With the economy tanking and client’s squeezing budget, can you give us any tips about being more efficient so we can turn around projects quicker.

It is a good question and one that got me thinking about creativity and its relationship with productivity. I also thought a lot about myself and how I work. All of this eventually led to…

10 Tips for Efficient Design

150. User Manipulation

Posted in Classic shows on January 28, 2009 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Liz Danzico talks about user research. Paul explains how to create an effective call to action and we discover how one button cost $300 million in sales

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

The $300 Million Button

Our first news story is an incredibly tale from usability expert Jared Spool, which really shows the power of usability testing.

In the post he writes about a client who had a fairly standard checkout process on his website. The process began with a login form:

The form was simple. The fields were Email Address and Password. The buttons were Login and Register. The link was Forgot Password.

It is the kind of form I have seen on many ecommerce websites. This feature, which had been designed to help repeat customers, created two distinct problems:

New users resented the idea of having to register. One user said: "I’m not here to enter into a relationship. I just want to buy something."
Repeat users rarely remembered their username or password. They wasted substantial time guessing, before eventually resorted to creating a new account. In fact after examining the database Jared discovered that 45% of all customers had multiple registrations. Some did go as far as clicking on the forgotten password link but of those only 25% went on to place an order.

In the end the site was redesigned, allowing the user to continue without registering. Within a year this created a $300 million increase in sales.

Of course $300 million is a meaningless figure in itself. It is the percentage increase that matters. In this case is was a 45% increase. That is a staggering number and one that really drives home the importance of testing with real users.

Read the ‘$300 million button’

The UK government and graded browser support

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the importance of graded browser support. In my post I explained how we should not limit our support to the browsers we test and how it is unrealistic to push for identical support across all browsers.

This is an approach which has been adopted by the likes of Yahoo! and the BBC for some time, but which now also extends to public sector website in the UK.

According to The Web Standards Project the rules surrounding browser testing on public sector websites have been changed to better reflect best practice in graded browser support.

Changes include an emphasise on functionality over identical layout across browsers (paragraph 39):

You should check that the content, functionality and display all work as intended. There may be minor differences in the way that the website is displayed. The intent is not that it should be pixel perfect across browsers, but that a user of a particular browser does not notice anything appears wrong.

As well as support for progressive enhancement (paragraphs 17-18):

You should follow a progressive enhancement approach to developing websites to ensure that content is accessible to the widest possible number of browsers.

This is excellent news and certainly provides a great reference for UK designers and website owners looking to convince others of the importance of graded browser support.

Read the UK government guidance on browser testing

50 Illustrator tutorials

From development to design now, and a list of 50 tutorials that help you get your head around Adobe Illustrator.

The list is compiled by UK web designer Chris Spooner. He echoes my own experiences when he writes:

Adobe Illustrator can be a little tricky to get your head around, particularly after getting used to the workflow as applications such as Photoshop. The difference between layer use and creating and editing shapes can be especially strange at first hand.

I am a Photoshop man and I have found it very difficult to make the transition to a vector based world, so this list was particularly appealing to me.

Its a great list that you will definitely want to check out, if like me you have never got to grips with Illustrator before.

Read 50 illustrator tutorials every designer should see

A new approach to PNG Support

Finally today I would like to draw your attention to a new technique that has been developed by Drew Diller for using PNG transparency in IE6.

Unlike previous techniques this one allows you to use PNGs as background images instead of just as IMG tags. This opens up a world of possibilities and overcomes one of the most annoying limitations of IE6.

This minor miracle is achieved not by using AlphaImageLoader as has been done in the past, but with VML.

Implementation seems fairly straightforward and involves adding a Javascript library to your page. Because this is for IE6 only you can embed the code within a conditional comment. This means other browsers will not even download it.

Although I have yet to use this approach myself, I have high hopes that this will finally solve the IE6/PNG barrier.

Download DD_belatedPNG now.

Interview: Liz Danzico on User Research

Paul: So joining me today for our little interview is Liz Danzico. Liz, why don’t you start off by introducing yourself a little bit. Telling us a bit about yourself and your background.

Liz: Sure. Um, I am a user experience consultant, I am here in New York City, I have been developing web sites and user experiences online for about 12 years now. Um, I do a lot of work with Happy Cog Studios here in New York, with Jeffrey Zeldman and Jason Santa Maria. Um, I’m also chair of the new MFA interactions design program.

Paul: Okay.

Liz: At the School of Visual Arts in New York.

Paul: Excellent. I mean, so, to say that you’re an expert in user experience would be a slight understatement then, Liz.

Liz: Well I wouldn’t go that far.

Paul: You’d be too modest, obviously, to say that. Okay, so we got Liz on the show, I met Liz when I went to Future of Web Design and we got talking. Um, she’s got some fascinating insights into the whole area of user research, and usability generally, so I thought let’s get her on the show and let’s maybe, you know, try and cover things from, from the very basic level, a kind of introduction to this concept of user research. Um, so, perhaps a good place to start, if you’re okay Liz, um, would be, how would you go about defining the area of user research? What would you include, what would you exclude from that?

Liz: Right. So … user research, even today, we’ve been doing user research on the web since, uh, the very beginning, so it’s a very old concept but it’s still fairly controversial. So the basic concept is it tells you what really happens when real people interact with your product or service. So, there are no real rules about what it includes and what it doesn’t [inaudible]. You can basically speculate about what your users want, or you can find that out, um, you know? And uh, and the, uh, the latter is probably a more useful approach for you to take than speculation. But with either one, thinking about your audience is useful no matter what. And so, so there are no real rules, now um, when you disconnect thinking about your audience from your business objectives, and you start getting, you know, very excited about behaviors that they’re doing that are sort of disconnected from the real mission that you’re trying to sort of accomplish, then it becomes, um, a bit murky, and confusing. But thinking about your audience is, just in general, is an extremely useful approach.

Paul: Okay. I mean one of the things that, that, um, I’ve heard said before by, particularly cynical clients I have to say, but I’ve heard it said before, you know, ultimately user research, and all of this kind of stuff feels in some ways like, um, just another way for web designers to suck a bit of extra money out of us, you know that fundamentally how, I know my audience already, is the kind of attitude that many web site owners have, so why do you see it as an important part of the process?

Liz: Well uh, you know, as we’ve been seeing design flaws often translate to lost business opportunities, you know, usability is becoming more important than ever as the number of web sites and products is, you know, increasing more and more every day. So, we design these products and services, and we are at the same time users of them, but there’s no way that we can really tell what are users, um, might want. And the best way to, you know, usability research doesn’t cost a lot of money, so, the best way that you can help your clients kind of understand that you need to do usability research in some way is to let them know that usability research is important and it doesn’t need to, um, suck up a lot of time or money in the, in the process. So there’s a great fantastic book by Steve Krug, called Don’t Make Me Think, which I’m sure you’re probably well aware of.

Paul: Uh huh.

Liz: And in one of the chapters towards the end, he has a chapter called "Usability Research on a Shoestring", or it’s probably better titled, which talks of this approach of going out into the hallway and kind of grabbing people, and just sitting them down, and putting them in front of your product or service, and getting some feedback. So getting some feedback from people, no matter who they are, is better than getting none at all. And so, I think starting there with clients, instead of the, you know, $100,000 user research project that’s going to take you across 8 markets, you know, in the United States, the UK, and Asia, then, is going to be a much better approach than kind of intimidating them with the very extensive projects.

Paul: Mmm, I mean, when it, the kind of one scenario that I’ve come across before, um, is where we’ve come across with clients that say "Well we’ve already done user research, we already know our audience ’cause we’ve got somebody in to do this or that." Is there a difference between user research that’s been done primarily with an offline audience, and those with, you know, when you’re interacting with people online? Is there a difference in the kind of results and information that you’re after, and even the techniques, maybe, that you use?

Liz: So, they are probably, when they say that they’ve done user research, they’re probably talking about focus groups. I would venture to guess that when they talk about that they’re probably talking about either focus groups or surveys of some kind and those are not, well, I wouldn’t say that they are, those are bad things to do, but those are not the kinds of user research techniques that are going to give them feedback about their product’s usability. Those kinds of techniques are going to give them good information about, um, certain kinds of things but they are not going to give them information about whether or not people can use the product or service that they’re looking at. So, you want to find out exactly what kinds of user research they’ve conducted. If they say the words "focus group" then you know you want to move them towards something that is a one on one kind of interview. Focus groups tend to be conducted with groups of people, as the name might suggest, um, and when groups of people get together to talk about, you know, they put forth a question for these people, and when they, you know, groups of people get together to talk about the question they might influence one another in their answers, they’re typically aren’t talking about an interface, they’re typically talking about ideas, so you’re not getting good feedback, like in a one on one kind of scenario. So you want to sort of guide them to a more individual, one on one kind of experience. Surveys, on the other hand, are good, but they don’t get that kind of personal experience with a moderator, sitting with an individual, kind of looking at an interface in a kind of task-based scenario.

Paul: Okay, yeah that makes a lot of sense. I mean, let’s then talk about some of the techniques that can be used to better understand individuals, or how those individuals will interact with your product. What different kind of techniques do you use? I mean, there’s the kind of very basic usability session, but do you do, or are there other things above and beyond that, that you do?

Liz: Right. Well, the sort of big secret is that, there are names and there are certainly techniques, but the big secret is there are really no sort of techniques beyond knowing who your users are, kind of documenting what you’re seeing, and then kind of analyzing/prioritizing the results of what you see. So, you can, I’m gonna tell you a number of techniques that we can go through, but if those basic sort of constructs are there, then you’ve done sort of good user research. Now, that being said, the techniques that you can do are usability testing, usability testing traditionally has taken place in a user lab where a moderator is sitting with an individual looking at a screen, or a product, or a sketch of an interface and going through questions in sort of a task-based way, asking people "Show me how you would search for x" or "Show me how you would check out," or, you know, and seeing, measuring the success or failure of that kind of task. The clients are typically sitting behind a one-way, a one-way glass, or mirror, and observing these kinds of things. People have been not so thrilled about this technique recently, saying that it kind of, um, is not, it doesn’t produce natural reactions from users, but that is one kind of technique. There is, uh, kind of creating personas, and using personas, user personas which are an archetype of your site or product’s users, and getting everyone involved in activities around those personas, whether that be using those personas as your talking through features around, you know, a brainstorming session, and getting people to sort of role-play those personas. That’s another user research method. There are, there’s sort of the ethnography kind of take, where a lot of people have been doing kind of in-home interviews and observations recently. Ethnography, cultural anthropologists and people who have been doing traditional ethnography have been watching closely the design research that we’ve been doing recently, and wondering if we’ve been doing it right and so on, but ethnography, in that sort of observing users in their "natural environment", has been I would say a more successful way recently of watching people use products and services, um, so I would say that those three things, usability testing in a lab, sort of using personas and scenarios, and ethnography or kind of going out into the field and watching users, whether they’re in their homes or their offices, are the three kind of key ways to gather user research with users. The fourth way that I’ll mention, and we can talk about this in a little bit, is not with users directly, but it is certainly user research that’s available more and more now, and that is data on sort of analytics, which you can gather from Google Analytics, Shaun Inman’s Mint, these kinds of things. Watching site data and user behavior through site analytics is another form of user research that gives you, you know, some information, and you can watch these traffic patterns on your site. It doesn’t answer the question "Why?" but it does show you some evidence as to how users are behaving on your site.

Paul: It’s quite interesting that you bring up eth, ethnography, whoa I can’t even speak today, because, that’s of interest to me, because that’s an area that we’re beginning to explore a little bit more, and have kind of discovered the same thing, that there’s a real value of going into you know, somebody’s home, seeing the environment that they access the internet on, you know, do they have kids under their feet? You know, where they access their PC, can they sit comfortably at it? All those kinds of things. Um, I guess it’s also an advantage you don’t have to hire an expensive usability lab and all of the rest of it. But I have to confess, I’m a little bit new at it, so talk me through maybe some of the things, you know, how does it differ from a usability test that you would do in a usability lab, other than that you’re in a different environment?

Liz: Well, uh, it depends. It doesn’t have to differ at all — it depends on the goals of the test. I would say that you could construct a test that’s exactly like one that you’d conduct in a lab, it just happens in someone’s home or office, or in a different environment. But as you said, you get the more realistic interruptions, and that kind of thing, and are they going to be able to complete this task given the natural kind of occurrences of their day. And that, depending on what kind of test you are constructing, that’s either going to inform your results or not. If you are doing task-based testing, so I could maybe talk about the different kind of usability testing that you could do.

Paul: Yeah, that’s good.

Liz: Yeah so there are different ways that you could conduct a usability test. Um, traditionally there is task-based testing, where you set up pre-written questions, before you get to the test, that are based on the goals of the testing. So, if we were testing a photo site, we would test whether or not users could upload photos, could they task photos, you know, those kinds of things. So we would write those kinds of questions up beforehand, and then ask those questions during the test. Um, that’s one kind of test. You could do that in a lab, and you can do that same test in someone’s home. In a lab there would not be the children screaming, and the phone ringing, and that kind of thing, or, if someone say were uploading a photo, you would never be able to tell if sort of, timing out, would be an issue, or if anything with time or space or motion would be an issue. If those kinds of things are a goal of your test, then you might want to think about doing it in real time, in someone’s home environment. Another type of testing is something that, I’ll say it was first coined by Mark Hurst, who is a user experience consultant at Good Experience, I think he coined it, it’s called "Listening Labs". Listening labs are, I’ll call them experimental, but they’ve probably been going on long before I was aware of them, where people are designing usability tests in real time. So in other words, you go into the test with absolutely nothing written down, and you sit down with users, and based on your initial interview with them, you hear who they are, and after understanding a little bit about how they use photos in general, say, then you kind of write the questions on the fly, and then sort of develop a test around who that person is and their behavior, with your product, or product type.

Paul: Which I guess, makes people more engaged with the test, because it’s about what they specifically interested in. Is that the idea?

Liz: Exactly. So it’s a more natural way of doing the test. That’s the idea. That kind of thing you could do either way, and probably is even more rewarding if you’re doing it in someone’s natural environment. And then the third type of test is sort of a web, a web wide kind of test, where you have people just surf the internet, as it were, and uh, and just have them think out loud, and that kind of thing is also, I’ve found, more rewarding and fruitful in someone’s home environment, because they have their bookmarks there, and they have their post-it notes. Whereas you put them in a sort of artificial setting and they don’t have those things around them. So, if you, it kind of just depends on the type of testing that you’re doing. If you’re doing just the first kind I talked about, just task analysis and having people go through that kind of task-based testing, doing it in a traditional usability lab is great, you know, I mean you really do get the answers that you’re looking for, and it just depends on your goals.

Paul: I mean, it’s interesting, going back to Steve Krug’s book that you mentioned, I mean he talks about, I guess his agenda in that book is to get people to do testing who perhaps aren’t previously, and so, you know, he really downplays the demographic of who it is that you test, and that it’s more important that you test than that you get the right people, you know and all of that kind of thing. Um, but when you’re going into somebody’s home, and interacting with them, I’m guessing it’s more important to get the right demographic? Is that right?

Liz: Yeah, I mean one of the, um, I think it’s always important to, it’s always important to get the right demographic. Um, but, well I would say that there is a hierarchy of common mistakes around usability testing that kind of has a trickle down effect. You know, the number one mistake is not conducting any research at all, um, and conducting research on the wrong audience is kind of further down the list. So, you know, yeah if you’re doing research on the wrong audience, it’s not going to affect, whether you do it in a lab or you’re doing it at your desk, or at the water cooler, or at home, it’s going to affect your results and your analysis, you know, no matter where it takes place. So, you know, I think that the drawback is you are going to waste more time going out to that person’s time going out to that person’s time, so it’s going to be a drawback for you, but I don’t think that, it doesn’t matter really where it happens, because if you’re testing on the wrong audience, you’re testing on the wrong audience. Um, you’re probably going to get more information out of that experience if you’re in someone’s home, than if you’re not, so if you’re going to test on the wrong audience, do it in someone’s home, because you’re going to, it’s a richer experience, you’re going to get more information out of it than if you’re just testing in a lab.

Paul: No that makes perfect sense, I kind of see that. No, it’s difficult, isn’t it? Because, uh, obviously finding the right demographic of people, and picking the right people to test on is tricky, you know, it’s a more difficult thing and it can be time consuming. So have you got any advice about that? What really matters here? You know, for example, if you’re designing a web site for an over-60s audience, you know, are you, do you want to concentrate on the age aspect of that? Or the technical literacy aspect of that? You know, is it okay to have somebody younger if they’re not as good with the internet, if your audience is, do you, I’m kind of not wording this very well, but you get the idea — what’s important when you’re trying to match demographics?

Liz: Um, well, it’s very specific to your clients. Developing a, so, whenever you are trying to match demographics, you want to work with your clients to develop what’s called a screener, and a screener is a, I would say, whether you’re trying to develop a pretty rigorous recruiting demographic with a professional recruiter, to say, recruit 300 people for an extensive study, or whether you’re going to go out into the hallway and grab some people, or whether you’re going to recruit from something called Craigslist, which a lot of people are familiar with, um, which a lot of people do, I would say developing a screener which kind of outlines your demographic is a really good idea.

Paul: And what kind of things would that include? Sorry I interrupted you.

Liz: Yeah, what a screener is, it kind of goes through, it’s a questionnaire that outlines a number of questions that you would ask a potential recruit, that says, if this person can answer a particular question we should keep them in or out, so it’s actually a really good exercise to go through that allows you to kind of think through the type of demographic that you would have. So that doesn’t answer your question in any way.

Paul: It’s very interesting, though. Can you give me an example? Sorry, I’m interested in this screener thing, cause I haven’t come across it before. Can you give me an example of the type of questions? I mean obviously they’re going to be specific to the individual client, all the rest of it, but what kind of questions?

Liz: Um, what kind of questions? So, let’s see, would this person, so, let’s see, has this person, I mean typical questions could be around financial demographics, age demographics, you know the sort of typical things. But let me think of some more interesting things. So, is this person a full-time student? Has this person been fired from a job in the last 6 months? Has this person participated in usability research in the last 6 months? Those types of things, so if the person answers yes or no, then they’re not a good candidate. But there are other kinds of things you could put into that screener that would be more specific to the project.

Paul: So could it include something like is this person aware of a certain brand, because you want to associate with that brand?

Liz: Absolutely, so does this person drink Coca-Cola on a regular basis, yes or no? That kind of thing. But I’ve found that the screener, because the clients that you work with are often kind of speaking in those terms about their audience, the screener is a really good way to kind of help them understand how you’re recruiting audiences, and a good tool to kind of work together with them to narrow down who you want to be in the target audience for your testing, or your research in general. So, that said, how do you develop a good kind of set of participants for a research study for, say, a product for people over 60? Um, what’s most important, you know it depends on, and I know I hate to say that it depends, but you’re going to develop a goal for the testing, right? And the goal might be about usability, the goal might be about navigation, it might be about design, it might be about, it’s going to have, you have to first identify the goal, and depending on what that goal is, then you can identify the audience. So, the audience, you know the goal might have nothing to do with age, although the product has to do with age. So you can kind of strip away, you can pull apart the product from the goal of the testing a bit, and sort of just focus on the goal of the test. That’s why developing goals for user research is so critical, um, because often times you can separate those and therefore develop a better set of participants for that user research.

Paul: Mmm, that’s really good. I think what we’ve done here, is, a lot of people that listen to this show probably have a basic understanding of user testing. Maybe they’ve done some basic user testing before, or maybe they’ve even written a persona before, but I think what we’ve done, or what you’ve done, is push people a little bit further to kind of consider it in a little bit more detail what they’re doing in order to kind of refine the results that they’re getting back, and that’s really, really great. I mean, if somebody has just kind of done the very basics, you know, they’ve grabbed some people, they’ve done some user testing, maybe in their own office in front of their own PC, and they’ve got a few people in, um maybe they’ve created a couple of personas, what’s the next step for them? What should they be pushing? Is it through this screener? Is that the number one thing they should be doing? Is the goals more important? Is getting a better demographic more important? What’s the kind of next step for them?

Liz: Mmm, that’s a good question. I think that one of the most, well, doing the research is really key. Analyzing the research and connecting the research to the next iteration of a design is also key. We haven’t talked about that at all.

Paul: No, we haven’t, we ought to.

Liz: It’s often a grey area, um, you know there are lots of reports that are produced, you know, diagrams and things, but there’s a lot of kind of intuition that happens between sort of translating the research and putting that research, feeding that research back into the design. There are hunches, leaps of faith, um, you know kind of between that analysis and design. I mean there are clear cut recommendations that one can make, but then there are a lot of more grey areas. So I would say that, I still think, even though I mentioned we’ve been doing this kind of research for at least, you know, more than a decade online, and you know quite a long time offline, I think we still need to get better at the rigor at which we translate those recommendations and findings. So that’s one place I think we need to focus. Um, in terms of the actual research itself, uh, you know, there’s something, I think there are other sorts of techniques. I’m interested in these kinds of emergent, I would say emergent techniques like the listening labs, um, you know where the kinds of things that we’re looking at today with kind of mobile research, where people are, we need to be looking at how people are using our sites not just in the browser on their desktop but, you know, in the browser on their phone, and how their context is changing constantly and how we need to sort of look at that adaptation. So how do we develop tests that are more emergent and can be a bit more flexible, rIght? So I think there’s something interesting about that listening lab, where we kind of understand the person, and then develop the questions around a person and how they use a product, rather than having a pre-written set of questions. So, something that’s more emergent, I think that’s an area that’s interesting to kind of look at. Then, uh, ethnography, really understanding, goes right along with this sort of, emergent, as you said you’ve been getting more excited about ethnography as well, so, thinking more about kind of fine-tuning our approach to people’s own context, whether that be ethnography, going into their homes, their offices, you know, where people are using our products, whether that be on the street, in the hallway, wherever it is, but really understanding how to find people where they’re using our products and test them or do some research around that, I think that’s really exciting and a really interesting opportunity. Um so that, that’s the next step for us, uh, and I think that the way that people are designing tests and doing some usability testing now, is, you know, is good, I don’t think that there’s a big next step that we can all take together, but I think these are three areas that I think as a discipline that we’re going to see people moving forward together in.

Paul: Excellent. Let’s finish off, then, with a kind of where people should go if, you know, they’ve been excited by this interview, they want to learn a little bit more, um, about user research and user testing. You’ve mentioned Steve Krug’s book. What other resources are out there that people should be looking towards?

Liz: Well, let’s see. You know, I was thinking about, I was thinking about that and there are physical places that people can go, but they’re all in San Francisco in the United States, so that’s not going to help anyone. There is, you know, A List Apart has a User Science topic that often publishes user research related methods-like articles, there’s always BoxesandArrows.com which publishes user research related topics, um, Adaptive Path, which is a user research consultancy, or at least one aspect of what they do, they have published a number of articles but they also do events. A lot of events are in the United States right now, but they may have international events as well. But they do kind of give away a lot of their content. Um, and then last but not least, there’s a new-ish publisher called Rosenfeld Media, and the books that Rosenfeld Media publishes are about methods in user experience and, one recently in web form design, was about the usability of web form design by Luke Wroblewski (called Web Form Design: Filling in the Blanks).

Paul: Yeah, I saw that. That looked very good, I have to say.

Liz: Yeah, so that’s something to keep an eye on as well.

Paul: Excellent. Thank you so much, Liz, that was absolutely superb. And I will be fascinated to get you back on the show in the future to talk more depth about some of these issues. Thank you very much for your time, Liz.

Liz: My pleasure.

Thanks goes to Jason Rhodes for transcribing this interview.

Listeners feedback:

Every website should have a call to action, a response you want users to complete. But how do you encourage users to act? How do you create an effective call to action. Read More

Snape and Keith, separated at birth?

148. Recession Cheer

Posted in Classic shows on January 13, 2009 by Paul Boag

On this weeks show: Surviving the recession with Andy Budd, providing effective browser support and free boagworld consultancy.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Housekeeping

Unfortunately we have a bit of housekeeping to get out of the way before we begin:

Boagworld Christmas Appeal – I really want to thank everybody who gave so generously to this year’s Christmas Appeal. You guys have raised over £2000 for Sarah and Simon’s work in India and they are both over the moon. This money will allow them to provide better facilities for the growing number of children they work with, and doubles the amount raised last year.
Transcribers – After such an amazing effort for the Christmas appeal I feel bad asking you for more. However, we really need people to help transcribe the podcast interviews. We believe it is important to make our show as accessible as possible and we need your help to do that. If you feel you could help or have questions about what is involved email Ryan Taylor at [email protected].
.net Magazine offer – Fortunately my next piece of housekeeping allows me to give something back to you guys. I know you love the offers and competitions we run from time to time and this is a particularly good one. .net magazine have been kind enough to offer boagworld listeners some massive discounts on their annual subscription. In case you haven’t heard of .net magazine it is the UKs premier web design magazine and has some truly phenomenal content each month. If you are based in the UK, you can now get the magazine for 50% off. That is only £9.75 every 3 months. In the USA the discount is even bigger at 54%. That means an entire years subscription is only £64.99. In the EU you pay £55 for a year and the rest of the world pays £67. Those are excellent prices for a really good magazine. To take advantage of these offers visit the special boagworld offer page.
Free consultancy – My final piece of housekeeping is a little competition we would like to run. We are always giving away other people’s stuff but never give away anything ourselves. To rectify this problem we are giving away a day of our time to a lucky winner. Myself and Marcus will provide a free days consultancy where we will dispense advice on ways you can take your website forward. If you are interested in entering, email myself by the end of January. Include your name, company (if you have one), URL and why you want our help. We will pick the most deserving case and contact them at the end of the month.

News and events

Obviously a lot has happened in the world of web design while we have been on our Christmas break. To make matters worse, I must confess to not following the news while we were away. I have therefore gone for the first four stories that caught my eye. Apologies for the lack of professionalism!

A roundup of 24 ways

Way back in show 146 I mentioned the return of the 24 Ways website. As I explained on that show 24 ways is an advent calendar for web geeks. Each day throughout December they publish a daily dose of web design and development goodness to bring a little Christmas cheer.

As I said before 24 Ways is without a doubt one of my favourite web design sites. However, it does have one fatal flaw – it releases one article every day throughout December and I just can’t keep up. December is always mad with clients wanting stuff wrapped up before Christmas and people taking holiday felt right and center. I simply do not have time to read everything they publish.

Fortunately their archive of articles are still all waiting for me on my return and make perfect reading as I struggle to return to work.

This year has a truly bumper crop that I cannot wait to get into. The top titles that have grabbed my attention are:

Sitewide Search On A Shoe String by Christian Heilmann
The IE6 Equation by Jeremy Keith (Deciding when to support IE using Algebra!)
The First Tool You Reach For by Kevin Yank (A look at CSS tables)
Making Modular Layout Systems by Jason Santa Maria (Gaining greater flexibility in laying out content)
Shiny Happy Buttons by John Allsopp (Styling HTML buttons without resorting to images)
Recession Tips For Web Designers by Jeffrey Zeldman
Contract Killer by Andy Clarke (Writing the perfect contract)

Most of these I have yet to read but they promise to keep me entertained and informed until next year.

WCAG 2.0. is official

Probably the most significant story while we have been away is the release of WCAG 2.0. WCAG 2 has taken an age to be released but has also come a long way from its controversial beginnings. When I read some of the initial drafts it was horribly complex and anything but accessible. However the final release is extremely well thought through and communicates complex concepts and ideas in an easy to understand manor.

I think what impresses me most about WCAG 2 is the way the guidelines are conveyed. It has four layers of guidance which include:

Principles – These are broad principles of accessibility which need to be understood by everybody. If you had to explain web accessibility to senior management you would probably talk in terms of these top level principles. They include the need for a website to be perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust.
Guidelines – There are a total of 12 guidelines organised into the 4 overarching principles. These are ideal for website owners or project managers that need to understand more detail on how to achieve the broader principles but do not need to understand the technical detail.
Success Criteria – For each guideline, testable success criteria are provided that allow designers and developers to know specifically how to conform to a guideline. These are the equivalent of the WCAG 1 guidelines and are still organised into Priority 1, 2 and 3.
Techniques – Finally, designers and developers can also access techniques that may help them to fulfil the success criteria but are not in themselves mandatory.

It is a very logical approach and makes it easy for anybody to understand how to make their site accessible. With these guidelines now official it is important that you begin to learn about these guidelines now, even if you just start with the 4 broad principles.

Issuu Smart Look

From WCAG 2 to something that encourages website owners to ignore accessibility! I often find myself torn over whether to share something on this show or not. Part of me wants to teach and encourage best practice, but another part is more pragmatic and accepts that sometimes we have to compromise. The next item is an example of the latter.

Website owners love to post PDF, Word files, and Powerpoint presentations on their site. It is quick, easy and gets their content online with minimal fuss. However, it creates accessibility problems requiring users to have appropriate software or plug-ins. It also makes it hard for search engines to index their content and increases demands on bandwidth.

If you are a website owner and you do this – stop it!

That said, if you have no choice or you are a web designer being forced at gunpoint by your client, then there maybe some hope.

Document publishing site Issuu has released a promising Javascript tool called Smart Look that allows users to view PDFs, Word files and Powerpoint presentations in much the same way you would view an image using one of those Javascript overly script.

The best thing about the service is that it involves very few changes to your site. All you have to do is copy and paste some Javascript into each page. Your downloads will then be miraculously presented in the new format.

A List Apart discusses content

Finally, I wanted to mention two articles posted on A List Apart over the Christmas break. Both article tackle the subject of Content Strategy. Without a doubt content is the most ignored aspect of our websites and yet is also the most important. It is great to see the profile of content increasing and seeing sites like A List Apart promoting it.

However, I do have doubts about the way content specialists are promoting their work. This particularly shines through in the two recent List Apart articles. First, there is an obvious sense of frustration that people do not value their profession. This is entirely understandable. However, sometimes it comes across as them ‘justifying their own existence’ rather than emphasising the value of content. Second, and probably more significantly, they seem to be fracturing their profession into more and more specialist areas. Where once there was a content editor there are now content strategists, copywriters, editorial specialists, content analysts and more.

Although this specialisation is not out of line with the way the entire web design sector is moving (after all once upon a time a ‘web designer’ built your entire site) I don’t believe the majority of clients are ready for this complexity.

Everything I read in these two posts was excellent, but both struck me as expensive and complex. I still struggle to convince clients of the value of investing in content and I don’t feel these articles do anything to aid that cause. Of course, that wasn’t really their aim. However, what I need is a simple and coherent argument for investing in people to write good copy before we start breaking the skillset down even further.

That said, these are great articles and certainly worth reading, if for no other reason than to understand the importance and complexity of our content.

Feature: Effective Browser Support

Browser support should focus on usability and accessibility rather than pixel perfect design. Sites should render in all browsers, but provide advanced features and aesthetics to those which can support it. Read More

Interview: Andy Budd on how to recession proof your business

Paul: So here we are a new year and our first interview of the year and who else would we get on the show except Andy Budd? Hello Andy.

Andy: Hi Paul. How are you doing?

Paul: I’m doing very well. It’s been so long since we’ve had you on the show. Probably for good reason.

Andy: Are you running out of guests or something?

Paul: Yeah, we’re just having to repeat now, endlessly. There’s only three people that can string a sentence together, that’s the problem, of which I am not one of them.

Andy: Aww, you do yourself a disservice.

Paul: So we thought we’d pick a nice cheery subject. Me and Andy had a little chat earlier about what subject we would talk about today and we thought, "New year, new opportunities, exciting times, let’s talk about the recession and the economic downturn." So here we are. Everybody’s been going on so much at the moment that it’s all doom and gloom and I have to say, I don’t know about you, but you know I’m seeing with regularity on twitter people saying, "I’ve just been made redundant," and it’s a bit of a scary time, isn’t it really?

Andy: Um yeah I think it is. I think a lot of people at really good companies, really good people at Yahoo! and whatever have been made redundant in the last few weeks. Last.fm have been having redundancies as well and it’s like, "Oh wow, really smart people are being made redundant," so it is a bit of a worry for everybody I think.

Paul: The trouble is, everybody’s a bit cagey, aren’t they about their own situation and what’s going on so I thought, "Let’s talk a little bit, try and clear up some of the mystery around it," and I thought, "Let’s start by talking a little bit about our own experiences," you run a small agency, I run a small agency. I mean from our personal point of view at Headscape we have seen a little bit of a downturn. Not dramatic. You know I keep kind of waiting for the other shoe to drop and everything to dry up but certainly we’ve seen maybe a slight reduction in the value, the budget that people have and they seem to be taking longer to make a decision and thinking more carefully about what they’re doing. Is that similar to what you’re experiencing with Clearleft or is everything lovely with you guys?

Andy: No, I think that’s probably very similar here. I mean I know sort of before Christmas we really hadn’t experienced much of an effect at all, in fact kind of October, November, December, particularly October – November, was the busiest time we’ve ever had as a company. We were kind of really really rushed off our feet, but things have slowed down now. I guess the difficult question though is, "What have they slowed down?" I think in part it’s because of the recession, but partly it’s because people have been on holiday over Christmas and stuff so I think the real what we just need to see is what’s gonna happen over the next few months. Christmas is one big milestone because obviously a lot of companies their financial years end on the calendar year and they will start to get new budgets at the start of the new year. So what normally happens is January is usually quite quiet anyway and it starts to pick up toward the end of January when people have now got their budgets and they’re setting their schedules and their priorities for the coming year. Another kind of key point is March. You know March – April when a lot of other companies’ financial years kick in. So I think we need to kind of give it a couple of months, give it until March and then we’ll have a much better idea about the effect it’s had on clients’ budgets. But yeah, I would agree. I think people are just more cautious. I think all of this discussion about doom and gloom, frankly a lot of the reason why we are in the situation we are at the moment is because of media. The more people worry about this stuff, the more cautious people are going to be and it becomes a bit of a cyclic effect. But yeah, I’d say the same. I’d say clients are being a bit more cautious. We haven’t had too many issues with companies. We had one Icelandic bank that pulled out of a project in November which was quite amusing. They contacted us like a week before Iceland, kind of, you know, blew up. And we were like, "Yeah, we could have seen that coming," but apart from that it’s OK. Slackened off but it’s seeming to be OK at the moment.

Paul: So what about you? You’re talk about clients being cautious. What about you at Clearleft? Are you guys being a bit more cautious in what you’re doing? You know, your outgoings and that kind of thing?

Andy: I think we’ve always been reasonably cautious and I think that hopefully will set us in good stead for the next six to nine months. One of the things that we were really really conscious is running a good stable business and we’ve seen a lot of scare stories from the last .com boom with companies growing really really rapidly. They’d basically expand as much and as fast as they possibly could to fulfill the demand. That’s really great in the good times when people are throwing money and projects at you, but as soon as the projects dry up you’ve suddenly got a lot of mouths to feed, and I don’t think that’s necessarily true of Yahoo! but I think it’s probably true of some of the startups like Last.fm. You know, Last.fm have grown hugely over the course of the ten or twelve or eighteen months, and then all of a sudden when people start reigning in their budgets there’s not the work out there and they have to make people redundant. I think we’ve always tried to grow at a steady rate, you know we’ve been through boom times where we’ve been literally turning work down and we could have hired another couple of developers, couple of designers easily, but we chose not to because we didn’t want to get into that situation of the work drying up and not having any business. So yeah, we’ve been fairly careful how we’ve grown.

Paul: Do you think there’s, I mean, the kind of other side of the coin is to take the approach that perhaps Carsonified have done where they’ve actually been proactive in cutting their overheads by admittedly laying off staff in preparation for what is to come. I mean, you know I don’t kind of want to get personal about the guys at Carsonified but that’s certainly an approach that someone like Jason Calacanis would recommend. That actually before things get too bad you should shrink your business so that you’ve got you know, "a long runway," as he puts it, of money behind you over the long period. Is that and approach that you would consider? Well obviously you’re not going turn around and say, "We’re going to lay off all our staff now," but do you know what I mean?

Andy: Yeah, absolutely understand the question. The answer to that is, "Absolutely not," but it’s actually a two-part question. Um, you should, if you’re running your business well, you should ideally have a certain amount of money in the bank to cover operating costs. Now again, one of the things we were very clear of when we set up Clearleft is we would always have, would always aim to have six months of operating money in the bank. Now it’s not always like that. Sometimes it’s four months, sometimes it’s five or six. But that’s kind of what we try and aim to do. So before taking any money out of the company, before buying a nice car or giving ourselves a bonus we try and make sure that there’s enough money in the company that should we lose a couple of clients or should anything bad happen we can carry on paying people’s wages. I think in this industry, in the web design industry it’s all about people. We can’t build good products, you can’t build good services without having good people. So it’s the people that make the companies, it’s the people that make the industries, and I think as the boss, I think as an employee you have to put the good of your company and the good of your staff ahead of your own personal gain. So I think there are two ways of running a company. I think some people run a company almost like a general that commands their troops from the back of the battle front where they send all these people out ahead of them and they get picked off one by one until eventually you’re the only person left. I actually think as somebody running a company you have to take charge yourself and I would much prefer to lose, I would definitely cut my lifestyle and cut my wages before I would let anybody go in the company because you start slashing staff now and then when times are good you have a hiring problem or you get known as a company that will just sacrifice their staff. And I’m not speaking about any particular companies specifically but I think it’s important to realize that the wealth of your company is in the people that work for you. So yeah, I would always consider that as a last option, not a first option. Might not be good accounting sense. I’m sure if you’re just looking at sort of the figures, it might not be good from an accounting sense but people come and work with you and they stick with you through the good times and the bad and I think you’ve got to afford them every opportunity so that’s kind of my philosophy.

Paul: I think to some degree it could be good from an accounting sense as well. I mean it’s very easy to underestimate the cost of rehiring staff. By the time you take into account finding the people in the first place, that often involves going to the dreaded recruitment agency and the horrible costs and pain of that, you know if you don’t have a big network of people you can draw on. But also the cost in time of interviewing and all of that kind of stuff can really mount up so I guess to some degree it depends on how long this goes on, if it goes on at all. I mean we’re still waiting for something to happen. I can understand the whole philosophy about having a runway if you’re a startup company without regular revenue that’s dependant on venture capital or whatever but if your business is like an agency or if you’re a freelancer or something like that then hopefully you’re going to continue to have revenue coming in from work.

Andy: Well I think if you’re running your business responsibly you need to make sure that there’s always a runway. There’s some proverb or fable about making hay while the sun shines or whatever. You need to try to put a bit of a war chest, for want of a better word, in the bank or you’re getting good money because you know times, you know winter is coming and you need to kind of buckle down, but some people just go and as soon as they’ve got money they go and spend it on nice cars, nice apartment, holidays or whatever and as soon as things start to get tough then you’re in difficulty. But yet like I said I think you should always have a bit of money in the bank. You shouldn’t expand too quickly and I think if you end up hiring a large number of staff and then letting them go sort of shortly afterward it’s probably an indication of you probably shouldn’t have hired that many people so quickly in the first instance so it’s difficult. I don’t think there’s any right or wrong way of doing this. Everyone’s got their own approach.

Paul: I mean of course a lot of the people listening to this show aren’t going to be running their own businesses anyway so that kind of comes on to another question about if you’re working somewhere at the moment what should you do? Are you better off just tucking your head down and hoping that things go well in the company you’re working for or should you look at maybe now is the time to start your own business. I mean there was an interesting article by Drew, isn’t there, about you know the myth of stability and that actually you’re almost more stable being in control of your own destiny as a freelancer cause at least you know what’s happening with your business in preference to being employed. So, what advice would you give for people perhaps worried about their job at the moment?

Andy: That’s a difficult thing. There’s always been this myth that if you go and work for a big company there’s stability but I think recent events have shown that’s not true. If you’re running your own company you obviously have a much better understanding of what’s going on and you’re much more able to control the near future. Obviously you can’t plan too far ahead because most web design companies only book up projects three to six months in advance. So you can only really plan financially up to a certain stage but I think it’s good running your own company to a certain extent because you have a bit of a master in your own domain. You know what’s going on. On the other hand there is a certain level of security of working with a company, at least in the UK, a large company particularly because if you do get made redundant you get a redundancy package. If you’re a good productive member of the community or productive member of the company there’s a good chance they’ll try to rehire you in a different role. So I don’t think there’s any certainties there.

Paul: Do you think it would be a ridiculously stupid time to go freelance?

Andy: I think it’s a difficult time to go freelance. I think the problem at the moment is that there’s a lot of people freelancing in the industry and there’s a lot of people who are just not very good. I hate to say that but I think there’s a lot of people who are getting by at the moment on a subsistent wage who are a bit too much of a jack of all trades and a master of none and are kind of operating in a slightly more bottom end of the market. So I think that one of the first things that’s going to happen with the economic shift is the bottom end of the market is going to get even tighter and you’re going to be finding it really difficult if you do a little bit of PHP and a little bit of HTML, a little bit of design, a little bit of this, and a little bit of CMS stuff. It’s going to be a lot more competitive. However, if you’re really good at one thing, if you’re a really awesome designer, if you’re a really awesome coder, if you’re a really great Rails developer, if you’re a great User Experience person, if you’ve got a real skill that you’re well known for there is always going to be a market for good people. There’ll be more people on the market. There’s people being made redundant from Yahoo! and other companies who are really really good at what they do so it’s gonna get more competitive so I wouldn’t necessarily say that it’s a good opportunity for people to necessarily go freelance unless they’re really really talented and have a good existing stream of revenue and they know a lot of people but I think there’s opportunities in other areas in terms of setting up your own projects and doing startup and doing work outside the office. I think there’s interesting opportunities there.

Paul: So if there are people listening to this show that are going, "Crap! He’s just described me. I’m a freelancer that works on that kind of bottom end of the market." What should these guys be doing? How can they go about improving their position?

Andy: I think again while the industry was going at a rate of not to new, last year there was so much demand for people, companies, clients would hire anybody no matter what your skills were. I think now we’re in a situation where to really stand out you’ve got to be good at what you do. You’ve got to be highly skilled, and I think people need to see training as an investment. I think we’re really bad as an industry of investing in ourselves of investing in our own personal development. We’re all very happy to go spend £500 on an iPhone or £1000 on a new Mac but spending 500 quid on a training course, people go, "Well that’s just a waste of money," but I don’t think it is. I think you need to invest in your personal development and your professional development so I would say figure out what it is you’re really good at, figure out what it is you enjoy and then see if there are training courses go on or conferences you can attend that can help teach you those skills.

Paul: You missed a perfect opportunity there to pimp UX London, didn’t you there?

Andy: I guess so, yeah.

Paul: You’re just too nice. Tell us a bit about UX London, Andy.

Andy: A lot of what we do again, you know me and you know what the company’s like. A lot of what we do isn’t necessarily about our gain as individuals just purely from a financial point of view. We run conferences like dConstruct because we want everybody in industry to benefit. We want people to get better at what they do, to produce better websites and I think by doing that everyone benefits. And again UX London the whole purpose of UX London, it’s a conference we’re organizing in London in June it’s a very targeted conference. It’s much smaller numbers than dConstruct. It’s 160 people and it’s a real education-based event, to teach people how to be really good User Experience designers, User Experience developers, information architects and usability people. So we’ve got some of the best speakers in the industry coming over. We’ve got Don Norman who’s like the Godfather of User Experience, we’ve got Dan Saffer, we’ve got Peter Merholz, Jared Spool, Jeff Veen, we’ve really had an opportunity here to play fantasy league conference and put together the kind of event that we wish that we could have gone to five years ago. Particularly User Experience is a growing field and I think within the recession or within the looming economic crisis, companies are going to be spending less and less or are going to be able to spend less and less on acquiring new customers and where they’re going to need to spend their money is satisfying existing customers and making sure that the customers that they’ve got don’t go to other brands, other companies and are much better at converting and User Experience is one of the ways we can do this. So I definitely think if you’re interested in getting into the User Experience realm going to something like UX London would be a great opportunity. It’s essentially three days of workshops and practical hands-on stuff. I mean it’s not just a standard talking head kind of conference it really is getting in there and learning new skills. Not just UX London, there’s all kinds of conferences and events out there, there’s all kinds of training courses. There’s development training courses, there’s usability training courses, there’s designing courses, but pick something you’re really passionate about and get really really good at it and if you get really good at it people will find you. There is still a massive demand for Rails developers, there is still a massive demand for good visual designers and there’s still a massive demand for really good UX people and I think those three practices are going to get more and more important so yeah that’s what I’d say.

Paul: You said something there about if you get really good at something people will find you. Do you think that that’s actually going to remain true or are we going to have become more active at going out there and finding work? I mean to some extent people like you and me are we not a little bit spoiled because we’ve already built up this reputation, people are aware of us, because in my case because of the podcast, because of your book and the various things that you do. Is that all that you do to win business? Write a book or put on a podcast? There’s got to be more to it than that.

Andy: It doesn’t hurt, I can kind of say that but that’s the situation we’re in now obviously but the reason that we were able to do this, the reason that I was able to write a book and you were able to do the podcast was because five, six, seven years ago we just sat around writing blog posts about what we were passionate about, what we were interested in and the Internet has an amazing capacity for putting like-minded people in touch, whether it’s through your blog, whether it’s through your twitter stream, whether it’s through meeting people at conferences. I mean again, going to a conference is a great opportunity to network and meet people and I think there’s a community in the Web and you need to be a part of it. If you’re not part of it, if you’re just sitting on the fringes then you’re going find it a lot more difficult to pick up work, but if you throw yourself into this community and actively participate it’s not that difficult, if you’ve got a skill, if you’ve got a talent it’s not that difficult to make people aware of it. You do have to do a bit of promotion though, you do have to write some articles or contact a magazine and say, "Hey do you mind if I write something for your magazine?" Or go around to some of your favorite bloggers and leave messages on their blogs and write to them and say, "Hey look, I’m doing this, that and the other." I’m probably going to get inundated with responses now but we’re always on the lookout for really good people. Despite the number of people working in the industry we find it really difficult finding good visual designers we find it really difficult finding good Information Architects and we find it really difficult getting good front end coders. We see a lot of average people. There’s a scary number of really bad people out there, but finding good people is difficult and we’re not just falling over people in the street. I’m spending a lot of my time actively asking around and asking friends and contacts and doing searches on Google for people so if you make yourself available and you go out of your way to put yourself in that situation it can only be of benefit. I was talking to you before we started the podcast about something we’re doing at Clearleft is that we run an internship program and part of the purpose of this internship program is to get people that haven’t had that commercial experience, that maybe have just left University after doing a graduate degree or maybe are in the middle of a Master’s Degree or maybe are just transitioning to a different career area and maybe they were starting off doing more design and they want to get more codey or they were a coder and they want to do more information architecture and actually having the opportunity to go and work for a company for ten weeks is an amazing training opportunity, sorry if I sound like I’m promoting myself a bit too much but we had a really great guy come in over the Summer a guy called Amild who was from Sweden and he was part way through a University course and in the Summer he came over and he worked for us for ten weeks and he got to work on real-life projects he got to sit down and program with Natalie and argue semantics with Jeremy and be involved in every single part of the process and doing that, you get so much knowledge and training out of going and working hands on like ourselves or yourselves, much more so than you’d probably get doing little side projects over the course of a couple of years I mean I know we’ve had a couple of interns now and the amount of stuff that they know when they leave working with us is two or three times the amount they knew when they came in and actually ironically people come to Clearleft quite often a little bit cocky because they’ve heard about us and they know we’re good at CSS and Web Standards and they come in thinking, "Yeah, I do this," but when they sit down with someone like Natalie and she explains all this stuff their eyes and their universe ends up opening and it’s like, "Oh my God I didn’t know this stuff existed. I didn’t know people would go to so much effort to craft a nice, well designed, well put together website." So yeah we’re running an internship for Spring so if anyone listening out there wants to come work down in Brighton in the Clearleft offices for ten weeks and is really interested in good front end code and HTML and CSS then please go to clearleft.com/jobs and there’s some details of the internship there. We’ll be running it again during the Summer maybe May, June July time. At the moment we’re looking for a front end developer to be an intern. The last intern, the last before one intern we had was more of a User Experience person, we might be looking for design intern next we might be looking for a bit more of a generalist so I can’t really tell you what we’ll be looking for in the Summer, but at the moment yeah we’re looking for a front end developer to come and help us out.

Paul: I think as well, if I was in that position to have the guts to just approach random companies and I get people contact me regularly asking whether we do internships which we occasionally do and a lot of time I’m having to say no to people, I don’t mind them writing. Having the guts to approach a company to say, "I really like what you do, I’d love to work with you." I think that’s great. You’ve just got to go for it and put yourself out there whenever possible.

Andy: Absolutely. If you’re trying to get work, send your CVs around, drop people emails saying "Hey, I’m a freelancer. I’m doing this. I’m doing that, " and stay in touch. It’s really difficult for you as a business owner to keep in your head of who’s available, you don’t have a clue who’s available when and the people we end up working with, the freelancers we end up working with, you work with them once and you probably never let them go again because they’re usually really good. They’re usually awesome and once they start working with us, we stick by people. So it’s worth once you send your CV to someone, drop them a line every couple of months, every time you’ve updated a website or you’ve done something you think is particularly interesting and just keep on the radar and the more you keep doing that, the more you promote yourself the better it will be.

Paul: Of course that works very well if you’re a freelancer, this whole thing of getting involved in the community and building relationships and all of that. It’s great if you’re a freelancer where you’re working for someone like Clearleft or Headscape in that kind of relationship but what about people that are working directly for clients who aren’t part of the Web Design Community? They stand outside of that, have you got any advice for engaging with them, how to find out about what jobs are out there, how to get on those tendering lists and that kind of stuff?

Andy: Well you don’t need to be getting on tendering list I’d say because most organizations that have tendering lists have got a lot of hoops that you need to jump though, it’s very time consuming, there’s usually financial constraints about how big you are as a company, how many staff you’ve got, all that kind of malarkey which I’m sure you’re very familiar with. I think it’s really difficult as a freelancer. I think there’s a glass ceiling in the kind of scale and size of work you do. I think it’s tough. I think you end up doing smaller projects but lots of them, usually for not a huge amount of value and so it’s really difficult when somebody big comes along and says, "Show me the last big project you did," and it’s, "We haven’t really done any because I’m a freelancer and I’m working directly with clients," so the way you can get experience and exposure of working with larger clients is to go and be a freelancer with agencies and actually if you’re a freelancer it makes much more sense to try and approach two or three decent agencies that continuously pass you work than it is to constantly try and get small £1000, £2000 projects. Then also if you’re doing that you’ve got a lot of marketing to do, all of the accounting, the bill chasing, it’s a lot harder and like you say I think it’s gonna get a lot tougher at that end of the market so yeah I think being a freelancer you’re probably best off targeting agencies if you want a more stable income.

Paul: Here’s a tough question and I certainly don’t know the answer to this so I forgive you if you don’t either I mean we’re seeing people being made redundant at the moment, we’re also seeing people that have gone through years of University training going, "I’m gonna become a Web Designer," and they’re stepping out into probably the worst economic situation since the .com bust for web design. What are these guys supposed to do? How are they going to go about finding a job? Does this just come back to the networking issue again?

Andy: I think we’re in a really interesting position. We’re in a really tricky position for a lot of recent graduates. When me and you started doing websites, or when I started doing websites the designs I was producing were rubbish. It really was terrible. The markup was terrible, the design was terrible, but luckily every other website out there was also equally bad so we weren’t worse or better than anyone else we were just meh. As we’ve matured and as the web’s matured we’ve got better at what we do, we got better at the stuff we produce. I went to a local agency in Brighton that kind of supports the local digital markets had a portfolio clinic last year where they had people fresh out of University and the quality of the designs they were producing was about the same level of the quality of design I was producing when I came into the market, but the problem is the bar has now been set so much higher so it’s really really tough. If you go into a three year degree where you spend one semester learning Dreamweaver, one semester learning Flash, coming out built a really lovely Flash animation of a monkey riding a bike and thinking, "OK, I’m gonna get loads of work with my great Flash animation skills," you’re gonna be coming into quite a harsh marketplace. What you need to do is you need to train yourself. You need to up skill. You need to do as much work as possible. You need to get your skills up. You need to get your design up. You need to specialize and to be really good at one thing. Be really good at design. Be really good at HTML and then you’ve got a chance of getting a foot in the door. Internships are good, training are good, but you need to have innate skill and actually in a kind of a weird perverse way I think the shake out is possibly good for the industry because like the last industry shake out is a lot of people who probably shouldn’t have been working in this industry, who didn’t have the passion ended up losing their jobs and going on and working in another industry, but people that stuck with it are the people who are good at it and passionate about it, stayed with it and survived through it and so I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing. I think there’s a problem with education that is trying to convince kids that they can go through a three year Bachelor’s Degree and come out and get a job. I think the industries that are going to be hardest hit in this recession are obviously financial industries are kind of stuck, or kind of enterprise level applications that any people working at enterprise apps are going to find it tough. I think people that are working in particular vertical markets, if you’re just a company that just solely focuses on doing startup business, the startup funding is drying up. It’s not gone completely and there’s a big argument to say that actually in times of economic recession that’s the time you want to invest in innovation, you want to invest in startups because once you come out of that recession you’ve got a product that’s ready to go that has been developed for a lot less money because resources are much more prevalent. You can hire developers much cheaper now and if you can start building your ideas up now very very cheaply, come two years time you’ll be two years ahead of the competition and if you’ve got a really really good idea you’ll come out of the market ahead. But I think at the moment if you’re only focusing on developing sites as startups you’re going to have a problem, you need to have a diversified portfolio of clients. I think the other thing is if you’re focusing on getting the majority of your income from just one or two big companies and that is quite common particularly in the entertainment industry. I mean are these Flash games developers or Flash entertainment sites developers that will just work with one or two large media brands. If suddenly they start pulling back on their funding you lose one client that is worth thirty percent or forty percent of your revenue you’re gonna be stuck so I think as a freelancer coming out of the industry it would make sense to focus on where there is growth in the market where the market’s stable. I don’t think it’s in producing Flash games necessarily and I don’t think it is producing multi million dollar blue chip corporate websites I think it is in creating websites that show real return on investment and that is in usability and accessibility, that’s web standards that’s understanding the psychology of human behavior. It’s all those kind of things we’ve been talking about for the last couple of years are becoming even more important.

Paul: You said an interesting thing point though. You talked about innovation and I think that’s quite a good place to end though all of this situation is going to effect innovation and kind of the evolution of the Web, do you think these kinds of slow downs will affect the growth of the Web?

Andy: It’s obviously going to affect the growth of the web because by the very name of recession it means growth of the economy isn’t growing it’s receding so I don’t think it’s going to be a time of growing much I think companies, large companies particularly are going to be taking stock and focusing on what they do well, their core assets. However I think what happens is it provides space for smaller companies to grow so you’ve now got these big companies competing for the same market as you so you can come up with new innovative ideas. You can come into the market much quicker. You can do it much cheaper. You are much more able to spot gaps in the market or gaps in the experience curve you know you’ve got a lot of companies doing this. You’ve got people like TripIt who have seen that there’s a gap between buying tickets and managing your calendar so identifying a gap in the market, "Because the airlines aren’t helping manage your trip, we’ll help you manage it for you," I mean dot was doing exactly the same thing so I think if you’re smart, if you’re clever and good at what you can do and you can see opportunities, there will always be opportunities, big companies going out of business, people cutting back on their R&D, people cutting back on their spending gives you an opportunity because it means less competition in the marketplace, there’s more available talent, there’s more available attention which is a big thing. You can grab people’s attention doing something different. There’s opportunities for making people money, in times of recession people are going to want to save money so if you can come up with an app that helps people save money, helps them, obvious examples are big slew of apps at the moment revolving around either managing your finances or getting better deals on car insurance all this kind of stuff, anything that can actually make people better off or more efficient. Productivity apps I think are gonna thrive.

Paul: Thank you Andy! That was both good and depressing at the same time!

Andy: Oh thank you. I’m glad talking to me you find depressing. Cheers!

Paul: Actually it isn’t depressing. I’m very upbeat about the coming year. I feel that, "OK, we are in an economic slowdown but it does provide lots of opportunities." Even being made redundant has its upside. As somebody that was made redundant and then went in to set up Headscape I really know and understand that these things can be turned to good so I think yeah, I’m positive about the coming year although hopefully I won’t be made redundant from my own company because that would be embarrassing. So there we go. Thank you very much Andy! We’ll get you back on the show soon and Happy New Year!

Andy: Happy New Year to you too and to all the Boagworld listeners out there!

Thanks goes to Todd Dietrich for transcribing this interview.

141. Feedback

Posted in Classic shows on October 29, 2008 by Paul Boag

In this week’s show, Paul Annett joins us to discuss how he pushes the boundaries of CSS and we look at how to improve your website through user feedback.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

Working from home

I suspect the vast majority of people listening to this podcast spend at least some of their time working from home. In today’s world, doing the type of work we do, there is no reason not to.

However, home working is not the utopia some believe. It has its own challenges and problems. For me it is a constant sense of guilt that I am not pulling my weight in the business. For others it is a lack of motivation or fighting the distraction of housework and family.

With some many of us struggling with the relatively new environment of home working it is great to see people sharing their experiences in a new A List Apart article (Working from home: Readers respond).

This article has some great advice and although it contradicts itself in parts (different people deal with home working in different ways) it is full of ideas that I either already implement or will be soon.

While I am talking about A List Apart I want to quickly mention "Progressive Enhancement with CSS". This is a follow up article to "Understanding Progressive Enhancement" an article we mentioned in an earlier show. It is a great article that explains one possible technique for ensuring your CSS squeezes the best out of as many browsers as possible. If you have a chance, give it a read.

Everything you know about CSS is wrong

Talking about CSS, yet another book on the subject has been released this week. However, this one is different. Written by Rachel Andrews and Kevin Yank, "Everything You Know About CSS Is Wrong" is aimed at web designers who already know CSS well. The emphasis is on emerging techniques and future CSS support.

I haven’t read this book yet (although I do have it on order), but it looks very exciting. It has been a while since I have got to experiment with CSS and so this will hopefully point me in the right direction.

It tackles subjects like Internet Explorer 8, CSS tables and CSS3. These are all topical subjects and so the book appears to have a lot of potential.

I will review the book once I have read it and we intend to get Kevin on the show to talk about some of the techniques.

Reduce your business costs with free stuff

With the economy in tatters and a general sense of impending doom, we are beginning to see posts on how to cut cost and tighten belts. One such article is "Reduce Your Business Costs With Free Stuff" on the Think Vitamin website.

The article is a mixture of ideas on how to save money in your business. Some will save you thousands and apply only to larger companies, while others save only a few pounds a month. However whatever type of business you run, from a humble part time freelancer to a multi-national design agency, there is something in here for you.

Ideas include:

Cutting costs on your phone system without reverting to VoIP
Subletting office space
Open source versions of basecamp, Microsoft office, campfire and much more
Moving email and hosting in house

Although I think some of the suggestions are somewhat short term (Managing email internally would quickly become an expensive headache) I generally agree with most of what is suggested.

If you are beginning to feel the squeeze then this one is worth the read.

HTML Email: What mail clients are people using?

Finally this week there has been an interesting evolution in our understanding of HTML email clients. This has been nicely summarised by Alex Walker on the Sitepoint blog. He writes:

There are lots of reasons for hating HTML Email, but perhaps no#1 on most people’s hit list is having to produce HTML Email to deliver to potentially hundreds of different mail clients and configurations.

Now, clearly it’s completely impractical to test your work on hundreds of mail rigs, but the question is, where do you draw the line? Generic browser usage statistics are reasonably common, but mail clients stats?

In the past you could confidently make up whatever numbers you liked on those question without fear of being caught out. But that may be changing.

Litmus, who produce an excellent web-based browser and email testing suite are now publishing email client usage statistics from their new Fingerprint email analysis system. It makes very interesting reading.

Alex goes on to summarise the key findings which include:

60% of people use web based clients
Just over 80% of the HTML email market is dominated by Outlook, Hotmail and Yahoo!
Business still generally stick with Outlook although they seem reluctant to upgrade to 2007

Interesting stuff.

Interview: Paul Annett on Pushing the Boundaries of CSS

Paul Boag: Joining me today is Paul Annett from clear:left, good to have you on the show Paul.

Paul Annett: Thank you very much. Nice of you to have me here.

Paul Boag: So Paul is, with a few others from his company, the people who really make clear:left happen, rather than Andy and Jeremy and Rich, which we know, well Richard does work, but Andy and Jeremy certainly don’t do anything do they?

Paul Annett: Well, you know, they fly around the world a bit you know?

Paul Boag: Yeah that counts. I guess..

Paul Annett: No, we all chip in, obviously. Everyone does their fair share, so we say.

Paul Boag: Very diplomatic of you. I feel like I can insult them over this as I do the equivalent of no work in my role as well.

Paul Annett: I was going to say… Well there’s eight of us at clear:left, yeah we all just chip in. We’re all caught making the tea, that sort of stuff.

Paul Boag: Cool. Well tell us about your role. What is it you do at clear:left?

Paul Annett: Well, I’m a user experience designer. So that means, well it’s more than just making a web site look pretty, which were are accused of sometimes in the trade; to make sure that the sites are easy to use, as well as a pleasure to use really. That’s something that’s often overlooked with some web site design companies, obviously none of your audience.

Paul Boag: Obviously not.

Paul Annett: It’s a vital ingredient in the mix really. My job does overlap with some of the other guys in the office. Basically, we all know each other’s jobs fairly well so we chip in and share some responsibilities. My main focus is UX design. We’ve also got the others guys doing information architecture, they tend to start the project off with handing over wire frames or prototypes to me. Then once I’ve finished my bit I then hand over the designs to our front end developers who then code up the HTML and CSS. As I say we do overlap a bit more than that but that’s basically how it works.

Paul Boag: I’m quite interested in how that works. You are saying you don’t do too much HTML and CSS, or how does it work.

Paul Annett: I don’t do a lot right now, I used to when I was freelance before joining clear:left. I used to do pretty much everything on a project. I don’t do a lot now; I don’t really have time to. The occasions when I do get time to are when we are working on our own projects. I especially seem to have had a bunch of project holding pages or client holding pages in the past where Natalie and Jeremy who do the front end are busy doing other projects and we need to just get something up there while the design is being made. So I will code up that kind of thing. I don’t really get to work on a lot of the big life projects, but then I’m no where near as proficient as Natalie and Jeremy are at those kind of things. I think they would have a fit if they considered my code going live.

Paul Boag: See that’s quite interesting, isn’t it? You’ve begun to build a bit of a reputation as somebody that does-I don’t know-CSS embellishments for want of a better word on some of your designs. You know the kind of thing that other web designers go oh. The most kind of well known example would be the Silverback holding page where you have the clever resizing background How did that come about? Where did that idea come from?

Paul Annett: It comes from… it’s fortune, really, that I happened to be building that page because it was one of the holding pages. I always look for something unusual to do, or something that’s going to catch someone’s eye, that kind of thing. That particular technique was quite appropriate because the site has quite a niche audience, in terms of web designers. People who wouldn’t necessarily pick up on the subtleties and things that I like that are in there, they’re like hidden gems, wouldn’t care. Web designers seem to catch on to that, it’s something they haven’t seen before. The particular technique itself was just a happy accident, really, because I virtually designed the site, it’s a very simple little holding page with the gorilla icon, designed by Arch Nemesis podcaster, John Hicks.

Paul Boag: Well he designed our logo as well so he can’t be that arch nemesis

Paul Annett: That was fantastic drawing on it’s own. But then when I put the vines there, I was just thinking finally give it some kind of depth. I was fiddling around with some of the CSS, and because I don’t know, this is a benefit, because I don’t know CSS like the back of my hand. I do sort of dip in and out. I might make mistakes. Those mistakes might accidentally do something that makes me go oh hang on maybe I can actually use that for something, which is what happened in this case. I happened to position the only layer of vines that I had a percentage off the screen. It moved in relation to the grid. That got me thinking, well maybe I can do this with multiple layers of vines. I didn’t think much of it at the time, but I happened to mention that I had launched the holding page on twitter and a few people.

Paul Boag: All hell broke loose.

Paul Annett: Yeah the few people that follow me thought oh that’s nice and they twittered it, and other people twittered it. Before we knew it, a day later, we had 25,000 views on the web site and we were thinking wow we’ve hit something here. 50% of those people signed up for more information about our product, which it didn’t even exist yet, and the web site didn’t even say what it’s about. So they were just intrigued to find out more based on the what they had seen.

Paul Boag: So that caught you very much by surprise then?

Paul Annett: Oh yeah We were kind of overwhelmed. If it had been, in an anyway, some kind of planned INAUDIBLE machine, then we would have waited until we had actually started building the app probably. We had over 10,000 people signed up for something we were thinking we’ve really got to pull something out of the bag here. Hopefully we did.

Paul Boag: Well you do have very good feedback on it. That really demonstrates well the power of design, that even something that, let’s be honest, is maybe, gimmicky is not the right word but you know, isn’t fundamental to the functionality of the site, yet had a huge marketing impact. So it was very worthwhile.

Paul Annett: Exactly. These things, they are gimmicky. They’re things that people come back to and play with and just want to fiddle around and look at it again. They don’t mean anything. The idea is that they entertain me and maybe some other web designers. It just happened that it entertained 25,000 web designers.

Paul Boag: Is this something that you do regularly? Do you sneak things like this in a lot?

Paul Annett: It is something that I like to do, as I said, to entertainment myself. But I do now look for places where I can sneak these things in. I think I’ve always done it really. I always strive to do something unusual. Back in the days of my freelance site, which is nice-design.co.uk, which is still there but not updated since IE8 so if you are using IE8 it will break. Even then, that was one of the first sites where the header and the sidebar were fixed and it was only the content that scrolled. It’s an unusual thing to see, other than the framesets, obviously, back in the day. I always try to sneak these things in. And when I’ve been working here at clear:left, last year’s de-construct site where we snuck in an Easter egg. There’s a style switch on it, I don’t know if you saw it, but when the site launched it was like a wire frame and along the top there a time line which said the progress of the site as it was being built. It was played as if it was being built live as the event got nearer. The time line at the top was actually a style sheet switcher and we deliberately hid the mouse cursor and made it not look like a bunch of links so that if people found it by chance then they would be pleasantly delighted at the surprise of these extra designs on the site that they’d found. Actually we had a few people email us and say terrible usability, they don’t look like links and the mouse cursor doesn’t look like a hand when you move over them. They kind of missed the point, it wasn’t supposed to look like a link, it was supposed to be a hidden little gem for people to find. That got good feedback as well.

Paul Boag: It’s that creating a sense of satisfaction from a user that they found something special or you know, it’s that little bit of wow factor.

Paul Annett: Yeah. When people are then able to say their friends oh go on look at this, then they feel like part of an exclusive little club of people that are in the know. Definitely.

Paul Boag: You talked a lot of the Silverback example of how basically that came about because you were fiddling with CSS and then something didn’t behave as you expected it to and you saw some potential in there. So that was very much a technology driven way of coming to it. Is it always like that or are sometimes these things planned in from the start. I guess in others words, do you have the ideas and implement them or how does it happen?

Paul Annett: It really varies. Sometimes it’s design driven, like with the de-construct site last year, that was design driven and we wanted to have something which resembled the process that building a web site out there. The silverback one was kind of technology driven but also slightly design driven because I wanted to give it that depth. To take that one step further, I’ve used the same technique on the UX London site. UX London is another conference were running next year in June, uxlondon.com. The technique that I used on silverback is reimplemented there. There’s no three dimensional movement or anything like that, but as you resize the window, the logo changes color. That’s just done by having a transparent window through the logo in the shape of the U and the X, so as you resize the window, the background color behind the whole page slides sideways and changes the color of the logo. This kind of this could be done with Flash, it could be done with Java Script, but I don’t know Flash, and I don’t know Java Script, so it is me trying to find my own little work around and quirky way of doing things really.

Paul Boag: I guess the thing that you know when you start thinking about these things is browser support. Some of these things you are doing are kind of either very advanced CSS or very hackerish CSS so either way you come up with browser support issues. Do you worry about that or is it just that they’re extras and it doesn’t really matter.

Paul Annett: Well fortunately because the audience for the sites that we’ve done in this sort of extreme way are web designers so you know they are going to be using the latest browsers. They’re going to be using firefox and they’re not going to be using IE6. We wouldn’t go to that sort of an extreme on a client web site and everything that we do, everything that leaves our doors is valid CSS, valid HTML. It wouldn’t be allowed not to be if you know what I mean. We’re very standards aware as a company, but I do like to kind of push the boundaries on things a little bit and see what I can get away with. Not in anyway inaccessible, but just not very conventional and if it doesn’t work in IE6 and doesn’t work in other browsers then as long as we implement something that looks the same but without the effects then that’s fine. The silverback site, if you look at it in IE6 is just a gorilla in front of some vines, no movement, nothing lost. Nobody coming to that site will be like there’s something missing here, but they just won’t get that extra little embellishment.

Paul Boag: It’s that graceful degradation.

Paul Annett: Progressive enhancement really. Most people that do have the technology get the extra stuff. This isn’t a company policy, but personally I’m usually in the favor of, I’ve seen quite a couple of sites recently that had a browser upgrade nag bar where if you’ve got IE6 then it says hey just upgrade your damn browser, you’re missing out on stuff. We’d never do that, we wouldn’t put that on a client site here, but I might put that on my own site. I haven’t, but I might.

Paul Boag: Sounds like a good idea to me. What’s the kind of process you go through in getting these extras added in? Are they kind of planned in from day one. When you, say for example, did the UX London web site, did you have it in your head right from the beginning that you wanted to do this with the logo, or something occurred to you further down the design process? When did it happen, is it in the design stage, the build stage?

Paul Annett: With that particular one, that was something that I tried out on a previous site. It didn’t really work 100% and we thought we’ll do something else with the site. But I had it in the back of my mind that I wanted to do it from the start on that project. But in general, again it varies really. If, sorry to be so vague and unspecific.

Paul Boag: No no, that’s the nature of design isn’t it?

Paul Annett: One thing I do advocate is that with all our client’s stuff, as well as our own stuff, I always present mock ups in a browser. I never send out a JPEG of mock ups to clients because for start, they are going to view it at the wrong size, they are going to look at it in preview or some kind of windows equivalent, image viewer, and it’s going to be resized to fit their screen, so they’re not going to see it in the context of the web site anyway. Not only that, but it also gives you the opportunity to actually build part of the site so you might have the header as a flat JPEG and the footer as a flat JPEG and the left hand side as a flat JPEG but the right hand side, where you want some kind of interactivity, you could spend a little bit of time building that so that it kind of explains to the client that this is what I want to happen here, roughly. Obviously it wouldn’t be the final thing because you don’t want to invest that much time up front, to give them that little bit of insight. That’s what I do when I am building holding pages or whenever I do get the opportunity to do something like that in house here is that I’ll code up some bits I think is the unique, gimmicky bit of it, and all the rest will just be a flat JPEG. It’s just to sell the idea internally, if you like, and to have everyone gather around my Mac here and ridicule me and laugh at you.

Paul Boag: It makes sense that more and more web design that we are doing these days has got so many interactive elements with use of Java Script and various other things, that a static JPEG doesn’t always cut it anymore does it?

Paul Annett: No, exactly. Another thing we do to combat that here at clear:left is that we often build prototypes of a site, instead of having like a paper wire frame which we often do as well but if there are interactions that need to be explained to the client we’ll build a flat wire frame of it in HTML just using framework and Java Script libraries and simulate the AJAX side of things just with hard coded Java Scripts. It’s also not production quality code, but the prototype wire frame and the flat JPEG combined will give the client a better idea of exactly how the finished site will be.

Paul Boag: Sounds good. We’ve talked a couple of time about is this gimmicky, is this not you know… I’m quite interested as where you feel the line is drawn between good design here and tipping into that naff gimmick area. Do you know what I mean?

Paul Annett: Yeah. There are a couple of things that haven’t seen the lights of day yet, which maybe they will one day. I guess it depends on how much time it’s going to take and how much value it gives us at the end of the day. Using a similar kind of thing with positioning elements we’ve got these great big letters in the clear:left office and we regularly rearrange the letters that spell clear:left to spell different words on the shelf at the office. To simulate this online I’ve built a little page which has got the word clear:left across the page when it’s at full screen at 1024 pixels wide and as you resize the window all the letters swap places because they’re all positioned at different places at different percentages off the screen, blank bits of image and all this complicated CSS positioning going on. When you reach 800 pixels wide it says elf:cartel. So it doesn’t have any fundamental reason or… it doesn’t do anything, it’s pointless, so it’s not going to be anywhere probably. But that is too, possibly gimmicky. There are some ideas which are not necessarily web based which are gimmicky but do work like when we were planning this year’s de-construct and INAUDIBLE wants to get some silverback promotion in there. I talked to him why don’t we just have a gorilla one day running around dishing out silverback branded bananas. Everyone laughed and thought it would be stupid, and then we did it. And then it was really successful and everyone loved it. Yeah, it was a bit of a gimmick but again it kind of fitted with the brand so it worked.

Paul Boag: It’s a fine line isn’t it, you walk in things like that? Because you know you could have been absolutely ridiculed for something like that. How do you know what is going to go down well and what’s not? I guess you don’t.

Paul Annett: Yeah, luck. I was ridiculed for that here in the office but we went with it and it seemed to work. It was great fun.

Paul Boag: I’ve seen pictures. It looked entertaining if nothing else. Going back to the online stuff, even if you develop something like that, it never sees the light of day, you never know that technique may come in use in a future web site that you develop and it might be appropriate.

Paul Annett: Yeah there’s always like a library of that stuff that we’ve kind of half developed and ideas that we’ve got, notes, that kind of thing. It might well see the light of day in the future

Paul Boag: Let finish off with just a kind of general advice that you like to give designers out there that they look at some of the cool little things that you do and they think I’d really like to do that but I don’t want to just go out and copy him because there’s nothing imaginative in that. I want to kind of get into that mentality of looking for opportunities to do this kind of thing. What advice can you give them? How can you start them off?

Paul Annett: There’s loads of stuff that’s come out as a result of the silverback hype, if you like. There was an article that I did on ThinkVitamincom which kind of explains how to achieve that technique. People have taken that and done all sorts of other things with it. I’ve seen someone creating moving 3d images and that style of a zoetrope(?) toy thing, which uses the same kind of principles but applied in a different way. So by all means, the best advice in all cases of web design is to look at the code, see how someone else has done something and see how you can adapt that to your own stuff. One thing that I really rely a lot on is, especially in these hidden Easter eggie things, is alpha transparency and thinking of how you can create a window through the front layer of a web site so you could have, instead of having a white background on the web site, put a white foreground layer with a window through it, shaped in the shape of whatever, and see how you can make that interact with the background layer so as you perhaps scroll down the page something becomes visible through this previously invisible transparent window. There’s a site called webleeddesign which does this brilliantly. That’s my ultimate, I would have loved to have made something like that, it’s really good. Only that one page, but it’s really nice with that alpha transparency in the front there. Think about what you can do with resizing the text on a browser so-we redesigning the clear:left site at the moment, hopefully it will be online soon-now I’m giving up an Easter egg that’s coming up on it.

Paul Boag: No one listens to this podcast so it’s fine.

Paul Annett: There are certain things hidden on certain pages and if you bump the text size up a couple of points then those things would become visible because of course you can control the position of things based on ems. As you resize things, your font size gets bigger, it perhaps moves in relation to the other things and things begin to peak out from behind something that was previously in front of it. I play around with that kind of thing a lot. That’s the advice I’d give you in terms of this particular way of doing things.

Paul Boag: That’s some great advice there, there’s lots of possibility. I like what your saying that it only takes a small number of techniques, you talked about transparency there, you talked about the background stuff, and you talked about the font resizing, but the possibilities of just those three things are endless really. You could do all kinds of things with them.

Paul Annett: Exactly, combine them in different ways. Again someone take this and do something with it, but imagine a line going diagonally across the screen but in font of that you’ve got a completely white page and across that white page is a very narrow slot of transparency, so if your line starts at the top right hand corner all you see is a dot in the top right hand corner but as soon as you start scrolling down the screen, that dot moves to the left because it’s visible through that hole. That’s a very basic example of how you could use windows of alpha transparency interacting with the background to do something which moves horizontally as you scroll vertically. I haven’t done anything with that yet as I haven’t thought of anything good to do with it but maybe someone can.

Paul Boag: That’s absolutely brilliant Paul, there’s some really good advice in there and thank you for taking the time to come on the show. I hope we can get you back on before too long.

Paul Annett: Thanks. Thanks very much for having me.

Thanks goes to Troy Oltmanns for transcribing this interview.

Feature: Improving your site with user feedback

Users can be invaluable when deciding how to move a website forward. We should always listen to what they say. However, sometimes that is easier said than done. Read more here.

132. Drobo

Posted in Classic shows on August 27, 2008 by Paul Boag

In this weeks show Paul and Marcus return to talk about the abundance of content management systems and ask the question “Are there too many?”, as well as discussing Paul’s new Drobo and backing up.

Podcast: Download (24.5MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Vote Boag

To start with we’d like to ask a favour of all the loving Boagworld listeners, would you vote for our panel at SXSW this year. We’ve called it Clients Are Stupid…? and the official description is as follows:

Why do clients seemingly make idiotic decisions? How come they fail to ‘get it’? Learn how to improve communication with your clients and enhance your working relationship. Be more successful at pitching ideas, getting design sign off and ensuring projects stay on track. Don’t let your projects become a battleground.

Check out the panel page for more information on what we’ll be discussing and we’d appreciate the vote!

Special Discount

On last weeks show Ryan and Stanton talked about FreeAgent, an online accounting and project management tool for freelancers. Ed Molyneux, FreeAgents founder and CEO, has written to us to offer a special discount for Boagworld listeners:

We’d be really pleased to offer Boagworld readers/listeners a discount of 20% on all ongoing subs if they sign up with the referral code boag99 before the 15th September 2008. They get a 30-day free trial before having to subscribe, and monthly subs range from £15 for Sole Trader freelancers to £25 for Limited Companies.

So thanks Ed, and listeners be sure to check out freeagentcentral.com to take advantage of this offer.

News and events

Step away from the keyboard

One of the curses of being a web designer or even a website owner is that we spend too much time in front of a keyboard. Whether we are writing content, coding or planning a site structure, it is normally done in front of a PC.

I have tried to escape the shackles of the keyboard but with only limited success. Sketching can help and I do a lot of information architecture work using pen and paper. However, these approaches don’t allow the flexibility and speed of a PC.

However, this week I have come across two little products that help to escape the PC. The first is called GUIMagnets. They are basically fridge magnets with GUI elements printed on them. These including text fields, radio buttons, dropdown menus and more. Used in conjunction with a whiteboard you can quickly prototype page layouts in a much more tactile way.

The second product is an alternative to whiteboards. The problem with a whiteboard is that you don’t always have one handy when you need it. They are large, static and relatively expensive. What you need is something that provides the benefits of a whiteboard but without the disadvantages. Magic Paper is that alternative. Magic Paper is made from lightweight, flexible plastic that can be rolled up and carried anywhere. When you want the whiteboard you simply smooth it onto a wall and it is held in place with static. You can then use it like a whiteboard and remove it when you are done.

Hopefully these two products will encourage you to leave the PC behind, at least some of the time!

Creating slick CSS

Next we have some tips for you CSS coders. If you have grasped the basics of writing CSS and want to improve, then you should read the ‘7 principles of clean and optimised CSS code‘. As the title suggests this post provides 7 ways that you can improve the quality of your CSS coding. These include:

The use of shorthand
Avoiding hacks
Using whitespace wisely
Pruning any frameworks or reset code you use
Future proofing your CSS
Documenting your work
Making use of compression

Bitter experience has taught me this is excellent advice. Even if it is old news to you it is worth reminding yourself of these points. It is easy to fall into bad habits.

While on the subject of CSS, I also want to quickly mention a site called Conditional-CSS. This site provides a mechanism to deliver specific CSS to specific browsers without relying on hacks. It uses either PHP or C to achieve this and uses a very similar formatting to IE conditional comments.

It would be unwise to become too reliant on this approach because it could cause problems as new browsers emerge. That said, it is potentially useful in certain circumstances and is worth checking out.

Focusing on the wrong thing

Talking of reminding yourself of best practice make sure you read Gerry McGovern’s post on Google and Yahoo! Gerry examines why Google makes 10 times the profit of Yahoo! even thought it has significantly less page impressions.

Gerry argues that Yahoo! focuses too much on its products/website and not enough on the needs of their users. In essence Gerry is emphasising the importance of putting your customers first.

Although as website owners and designers we should all know this, we often forget it in the scramble to add new features, and implement new technologies.

Screencasting beginners guide

Our final post today is an introduction to screencasting by smashing magazine. This is a subject I covered myself in show 122 and for good reason. Screencasts are becoming increasingly popular and it is important that we know how to implement them.

The article looks at why you should make a screencast, tips for creating a good screencast and reviews of the different tools available.

Its a good post that provides all you need to know to get started. It also provides some excellent tips that are worth taking on board. My favourite is…

Editing may be an option, but sometimes its better to simply start over and have a nice flow to the production rather than piecing together snippets.

Editing is for wimps :)

Feature: Too Many Content Management Systems

I know we live in a capitalist society. I know we are supposed to believe in choice. However, there are just too many damn content management systems. Another extract from the Website Owners Manual in this weeks feature.

Review: Drobo And Backing Up

Since posting on twitter about my new Drobo, I have received a number of requests for a review of this backup and storage solution.

126. Scaling

Posted in Classic shows on July 14, 2008 by Paul Boag

In this weeks show we learn lessons from the botched iPhone launch here in the UK. We chat to Jeff Veen about the designer / developer relationship and Marcus talks about adding jingles to your website.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Watch the behind the scenes video (Part 1)

Watch the behind the scenes video (Part 2)

News and Events

The Mobile Internet has reached critical mass

This week saw the release of a new report by Nielsen Mobile entitled “The Worldwide State of the Mobile Web“.

The gist of the report suggests that the mobile web is considerably more popular than many of us would believe. 15.6 percent of mobile subscribers in the US and 12.9 percent in the UK, use the mobile web regularly. In the US this equates to 40 million users. A substantial number.

Interestingly the most common device used for accessing the mobile web is not a smartphone but rather the Motorola RAZR. This reenforces the answer I gave Wayne in last weeks show. I said we cannot design exclusively for devices such as the iPhone.

With people like the VP of Google stating that the future of the internet lies with mobile users, there can now be little doubt as to the direction things are moving. This is especially true now that we are seeing unlimited data plans.

Web Standards Curriculum

A regular complaint I hear from students is that they are concerned about the out of date techniques they are taught at school or college. With many institutions still teaching table based design it is a legitimate concern.

Fortunately they are not alone in this concern. Opera and Yahoo! have teamed up to produce a web standards curriculum. This curriculum teaches best practice in web design and is broken down into modules that can be taught either by themselves or part of existing lesson plans.

If you are a student or educator definitely check this out. Hopefully you can get it adopted at your institution. Even if you cannot, there is nothing to stop you working through the course yourself.

Working with designers

Although our next post reads slightly like a rant (I should know what a rant sounds like!) it nevertheless communicates some excellent advice.

It is a post aimed at clients and provides 12 tips for working with designers. Advice includes leaving preconceived notions at the door, be specific in your requirements and design for your customers and not yourself.

There is no doubt that many clients serious misunderstand the role of the designer. However if I was a client reading this, I might find the tone hard to swallow. Despite that I would encourage those of you who work with designers to read this article. My favourite quote is…

Just as writers are not just people who can type, designers are not just people who can use graphics programs.

Web form design patterns

Our final post this week is a survey Smashing Magazine have done on 100 popular sign up form. The idea of the survey is to give you a better understanding of what makes an effective sign up form.

Of course, just because other sites do things in a certain way, does not make that the best approach. You should never blindly follow the crowd. Nevertheless this is a fascinating read.

The post is split into two parts and contains information such as…

How the link to the sign-up form is titled
The placement of sign-up links
Whether the sign-up form is a single or multiple pages
How labels are aligned
How many fields are mandatory
What help and tooltips are provided
How validation is managed
How error messages are designed
Is it necessary to confirm the email address
Is it necessary to confirm the password

The list goes on.

If you are looking to justify design decisions you have made or need some help designing the perfect signup form, this is a great place to start.

Just a quick reminder that the news we feature on the show is only a fraction of what myself and Paul Stanton post on the website. To get a more comprehensive view on what is happening in the world of web design, make sure you subscribe to our news RSS feed.

Feature: Lessons to be learnt from O2

I am not sure whether you noticed but this last week saw the launch of the iPhone 3G. It would certainly have been hard to miss it.

I don’t want to add anymore to the endless discussion surrounding this launch. However, I would like to focus on a side issue. I want to look at how O2s website handled this momentous event and what we can learn from their mistakes.

Interview: Jeff Veen on working with developers

Paul: So I’m very excited to have Jeff Veen joining me today on the show. Good to talk to you Jeff!

Jeff: Oh, it’s absolutely my pleasure. Thanks for having me!

Paul: Well it’s really good to get you on the show. I’ve wanted you on for ages, but I haven’t had the guts to kind of approach you so I sent Ryan to talk to you instead. I feel vaguely like, you know, you get at school discos where you fancy a girl and you send your best friend over ’cause you don’t have the guts to do it yourself. Or is that just me?

Jeff: Well I’ll tell you, I’m happy to have this dance Paul. It’s great.

Paul: Right, well for those that don’t know you Jeff and don’t know your background can you just tell us a little bit about yourself and how you ended up in a situation where you ended up working for Google. You know, how did that come about happening? ‘Cause that’s what we’re going to talk about a little bit today is your experiences of being at Google.

Jeff: Well, I tell you I’d been working with developers, as kind of more on the design side for quite a long time. Do you remember hotwired.com from Wired Magazine?

Paul: Oh yes, definitely.

Jeff: Way back when, right? Like we launched that back in 1994 and that’s really when I got started on the web, was coming over to Wired, working on their online properties like Hotwired, Webmonkey, and HotBot search engine, you know stuff like that. So I was with them for quite a while, they went through an acquisition and brought us over to Lycos, that big search engine. And then from there I started a company called Adaptive Path. Adaptive Path is a user experience consulting group in San Francisco. It was seven of us, we were all friends from the industry. We really focused on research, design, information architecture, usability, stuff like that. And I did that for a number of years with them and then finally convinced my partners that doing a product would be something interesting for us to try. We had done consulting. We had done some events. So we were kind of looking for the next thing to try. So I put together a small team of developers and some other designers and we made a product called Measure Map. That was a web analytics tool aimed specifically at bloggers. And just as we were about to launch it, we had done a bunch of work on it, Google gave us a call and said, “We love what you’re doing. We want you to come over and bring that to Google.” So we went through an acquisition there and that’s really how I got to Google.

Paul: Ahh, I see. ‘Cause I remember very vividly Measure Map coming along and getting very excited about it and then it kind of disappeared.

Jeff: A little bit, yeah.

Paul: Yeah, ’cause you got swallowed into Google.

Jeff: Well Google was very clear that they had a lot of respect for the work that we had done around designing Measure Map and wanted us to apply that expertise to their big Google Analytics product which had recently, sort of. They had acquired a company called Urchin, which had kind of an enterprise analytics package and they had made it free, and that had brought it to a whole new audience that really, sort of, didn’t quite understand how analytics worked. So we brought some of the best practices of design into Google and redesigned Google Analytics to make it sort of, kind of maintain all the power that it had, but make it much more accessible to a broader audience. So that’s really what we spent our time doing at Google.

Paul: OK, so we saw Google Analytics and those changes that you made to Google Analytics appear a few months back, and you know, were very impressive. But I’m quite interested in what happened. How did that come about, and how did that process work? So you arrive at Google, you walk through the door of Google. Now, one presumes that there was an existing Analytics team already working. Is that right?

Jeff: Yeah, that’s right. There was probably about twenty developers or so that were working on the Analytics application. Almost entirely all, sort of back-end engineers. As you can imagine, something of that size and scope, it’s a pretty impressive technical feat. The amount of data that they’re tracking every day, really just continues to blow my mind how much scale they have over there. So there was really, really talented engineers that had been working with the product for quite some time. That product had been around for a number of years. I think they were in version six of the product. But, to their credit, the Director of Engineering, a guy named Paul Moret, really knew that he had to change that application for this new audience that he had, sort of had started to grow by being at Google. So he was really behind the idea of completely rethinking. “Like lets,” he said, “Let’s start from scratch. Right, we have a lot of users. We have a really powerful product that I want to completely rethink how this happens.” And so, yeah, we really just rolled up our sleeves and sat down with him and his team and really sort of became one team. Got in there and made a lot of change. One of the things I think that really helped us be successful there was that we had a pretty robust methodology for user research that really resonated with a lot of the engineers that we were working with. It was really sort of. It was like I said, pretty mature, had a lot of data behind it so we could really show a lot of the work and helped us really get over a lot of the perceived subjectivity of design. So, you know, you can imagine this team comes in. We are a bunch of relatively technical designers, but still designers. And we sit down with these very, very technical engineers and we kind of showed them a process of how we were going to talk to a lot of the existing audience, a lot of the new segments of the audience, take everything that they told us and kind of boil it down into a lot of actionable next steps. And a way of prioritizing what features and changes we wanted to make. And so rather than us kind of going off, doing a bunch of design work and presenting it to them, we really involved everybody, or as many people as we could, in the process of how to change that application at its very basic level. So I think the results of doing all of that with the technical team was that we built a lot of trust between us. So that we could take some of their fundamental assumptions and really question those, but include them in that process so that there was a lot of give and take.

Paul: I mean yeah, because your initial reaction when you look at a company like Google, that it is a very developer-centric company. So I was kind of half-expecting you to say that you encountered quite a lot of resistance to the kind of design changes that you were introducing, but from the sounds of it, because your methodology is quite scientific, for want of a better word, you know it’s very logical, etcetera that it sounds like it went down quite well.

Jeff: Yeah, it did. It feels like we’re using the scientific method: doing testing and research and analysis and things like that. Ultimately though, so much of design is really, really hard to measure. Especially when it comes to matters of taste and perception and things like that. I mean, we can measure click-throughs and we can measure conversion rates and things like that, but ultimately the changes had to come from just being good designers. So having this relatively, kind of quantitative analysis that we did just allowed us to sort of speak on the same terms with the engineers. Have them trust us, and then let us make the changes we felt in our gut we should be making. So a lot of times I’ll be working with somebody who is very technical and they want to say, “Well if you make that change, can you show us some data that’ll prove that that’s the right change to make?” And almost never can I do that. Right, like we can do little tests and we can do some A/B testing and multivariate testing and stuff like that. And that’s good for little incremental changes but when you’re fundamentally changing an application it’s almost impossible to measure the accuracy of the decisions that you’re making. And that can be hard for somebody who really is a very analytical thinker, very quantitative in the decisions that they make, to sometimes kind of let go and say “No. You’ve go
t to trust us. It’s just going to be better.”

Paul: So were there other techniques that you used beyond providing data to kind of bridge that gap between the way that maybe designers see the world and that of developers?

Jeff: Well I’ll tell you another thing that I really believe in, is prototyping rather than just drawing mockups. One of the benefits I had going into Google is that I had a remarkable team at Measure Map that were quite technical. A very good front-end developer who could do lots of JavaScript, AJAX, CSS markup kind of work. A talented Ruby developer, and then a guy who was great with Flash and ActionScript. So bringing this team together, all of them good designers, but all of them with very technical backgrounds, we could come in and very quickly start to realize what a redesign might look like. Also the thing that really helped us was that Analytics internally had a very well-developed API. So we could say “All right, show us how this API works, then we’re going to immediately start experimenting on top of it using real data. We can bring users in for usability tests and they can see their data in our prototype in a matter of weeks, rather than months and months of development.” So having that separation between design, front-end and back-end, through a robust API allowed us to prototype so quickly that they could immediately say, “Wow! Look at all the work this team is doing!” Rather than us standing in front of the projector pointing at Photoshop comps or something and saying “Imagine what it would be like to click here.” We just had a thing working that people could log into anytime.

Paul: Yeah, I can really understand how that would make an enormous difference. So I’m presuming that you talk about your little team of people that went in there and started doing prototyping and stuff like that, but obviously you’re going to want to engage more with the developers that are there. I mean, the traditional danger has always been that as a developer and a designer you work independently. The designer does his thing. He hands it over the partition to the developer. The developer goes away and does his thing. Now I presume you wanted to avoid that. So how did you establish that working relationship? How did you end up working closely together?

Jeff: I have almost no interest in that sort of “waterfall method” where somebody goes off and does research, hands it off to designers, designers then do some of their magic, hand it off to developers. I’ve never been successful at doing that, primarily I think because I learn so much from the process of building things. So again, it was just, really one of the first things we did was invest a lot in getting the teams to trust one another. And that meant really just spending time with each other. So that meant almost every day just scheduling some time in the conference room for us all to kick around ideas, to look at some of the existing work that they were doing, some of their future plans and just spending a tremendous amount of time with them. We also just had our desks right next to the development team. We were embedded, we were just right there. So we felt like part of the team. We’d all go eat lunch together. I mean simple things like that just make the development process so much more, so much easier because there’s real people working with each other rather than faceless “other people” handing specs over. So putting a lot of time in: absolutely crucial to success in a process like that.

Paul: So obviously you got to work with a great group of people over at Google. Some of the most talented developers in the world I guess. So I’m really interested to know, what was it you learned from them? You spent all this time with them, what was the kind of thing that you took away as a front-end interface designer what did you learn from this amazing group of developers?

Jeff: Well, a couple of things really. I think the thing that struck us the most when we first got there was just the enormous scale of everything. Like Google, as you can imagine, Google has lots and lots of users, but they have a tremendous diversity of users too, literally from around the world. A statistic that we throw out all the time is that seventy percent of Google’s traffic comes from outside the United States. So the audience that we were used to designing for is really the small minority of people, and in fact the rest of the world is where all of the products are being used. So we had to think about that diversity of audience even in the design decisions that we were making every day in that everything that we were designing was going to be translated in up to forty different languages. So that was probably the first thing that really brought our attention. The second thing was the unbelievably high standards that Google had for their products. Like you said, I totally agree, they’re some of the best engineers in the world. They have coding standards. They have testing standards, QA standards that were absolutely remarkable. I just learned so much about how every little detail fits into place to make a product that’s as robust and as really scalable and useable by a global audience that Google has. It was really like I got a crash course in some of the best computer science education I could possibly ever ask for.

Paul: Very cool indeed. So for the designers that are listening to this now, the front-end people that maybe are working with developers day in and day out and secretly behind their backs are having a bit of moan about those developers, they’re finding them quite tricky to work with, what advice would you give them about interacting and working with developers?

Jeff: Well, like I said, you’ve got to spend time in the trenches with them. That I think is just the most obvious thing that I can recommend doing. For both sides. It was hard for me to trust a lot of developers, like “Oh, you’re only concerned about your servers, you don’t care about users at all.” Which of course is completely false, but that’s an inherent bias that I would have. So again, spending that time: incredibly important. I think one of the things that I try to educate the most while I was there was that the level of detail, the care, everything that goes into the coding standards that engineers have, we have that same standard for the interfaces that we build. So I think sometimes, and I hate to generalize across developers, because I’ve worked just the entire spectrum of developers. One of the themes that I hear from time to time is that design is something that kind of happens at the end. Like “We do all the hard engineering. We get all of these systems in place and write all of this code and then we need some designers to come on and put the interface on so that we can actually launch this thing.” That I think cheapens a lot of the work that we do, and it’s a little bit demeaning for the discipline of design, of user experience. So I think we have biases on both sides and that frankly understanding more about what goes into the process both from a front-end and a back-
end point of view is kind of what brings us all together.

Paul: So if you could communicate one thing to the developers, one lesson, the question the other way around I guess. I guess in some ways it’s the same answer, isn’t it? It’s kind of stick with one another.

Jeff: Yeah, a little bit. Also there’s some really simple techniques that I’ve used, for example: even before we started we’d schedule a usability test with the existing product and get the engineers into the room behind that one way mirror and we would just watch. And we would watch people flail around with the interface and struggle and get frustrated and push the keyboard away. I mean that’s just golden. People see that and they’re just like, “Oh man, we’ve got some work to do.” So making it as clear as possible, what our users are trying to do, how we can all collaborate together to help them: incredibly, incredibly important. That said, it wasn’t, you know when I did consulting at Adaptive Path I was inside lots of companies. I worked with some of the biggest companies in America and saw inside of them and, to be honest, Google is truly a user-centered company. I was just so impressed with that. Broadening that idea of user-centered technology development is something that we worked on. Making it more of a balance between front-end and back-end is more some of the things we worked on. But ultimately I think Google really understands that putting users first is the way to be successful. Just look at the search results page with it’s very simple but incredibly effective advertising techniques, and you know, Google never had a front page that was full of the sort of portal design stuff that Yahoo! and other companies have done. So really, it was very fertile ground for the kind of work we wanted to do when we got there.

Paul: Very interesting. I’ve just thought of one other question that I get asked a lot from people looking to get into web design: they say, “So what am I better off doing, you know, where’s the best place to work? Is it in the large company? Or is it doing something in a small company by yourself?” Now you’ve obviously done both of those and there is no definitive answer, but what would you see as the pros and cons of a large company in comparison to working somewhere smaller like Adaptive Path?

Jeff: You’re right, in my career I’ve got swung back and forth between big and small. There are definitely benefits and drawbacks to both of them. In the bigger companies I think just inherently things move slower. Now, I mean Google is renowned for it’s “bottom-up culture” and good ideas are always emerging from people taking their twenty percent time. None of that is a myth. That all really happens. But at the same time, like I said, when millions of users, or hundreds of millions for some of the products. You just have to take a lot more steps, and what that does is it increases the distance between the idea that a designer or developer has, and a user actually seeing that idea. And one of the things that I love about this sort of entrepreneurial startup environment is that you can think of something, you can try it out, you can get it in front of your users. You can do that in an afternoon. And you can’t do that with a product like Gmail or Adwords or something like that because there’s so much inherent infrastructure and risk, things like that. I think it’s incredibly worthwhile for people to have both experiences, and frankly see what they like best. One of the things I really have learned in my career is that there are people that like to start things, and that there are people that like to run things. And there is no inherent judgment between the two, but once you understand “Ooh, I love having a big system and having that system run perfectly, and putting all the things in place to keep that, you know.” And that’s fantastic. I’ve learned, in my career, that I’m kind of on the other side. I love starting with nothing and building up something, and at some point I need to hand it off to somebody who is much better at running and maintaining, right. So those are the kind of things you learn by doing a lot of very different projects and product development and stuff like that as your career kind of goes on, I think.

Paul: So you’ve left Google now? So what’s the next step? What are you up to at the moment? Let’s finish on a looking forward note. Where are you going? What are you doing?

Jeff: I was at Google for just over two years and left about six weeks ago, and to be honest I’m spending a lot of time right now cycling and trying to sleep late, and things like that. I tell you it’s a tremendous luxury and I’m not taking it for granted at all. The immediate next thing is that I’m organizing a little conference with my colleague Bryan Mason, who I have worked with at Adaptive Path. He and I are doing a conference in San Francisco in August about starting companies. Yeah, as I was leaving Google I was thinking, “Well, what should I do next? What would be interesting?” So I talked to a bunch of my friends who have been entrepreneurs, or who are now investors and I just asked them, “Tell me your story. How did you get to where you are?” And I found those stories so interesting that I thought, “Man, we’ve got to share this. This is great.” And I thought, “Well, I could do a podcast or something like that.” But then I thought, “I love getting people together and having sort of a community feel.” So we thought: we’ll get one day, San Francisco in August. We’ll get everybody together and we’ll just have these conversations. So I’m really looking forward to it. It’s called “The Start Conference” and you can find it at thestartconference.com. That’s what we’re doing now.

Paul: Excellent stuff. Thank you so much Jeffrey for coming onto the show and talking about that. The issue of designers and developers working together is something that’s really important and I think there’s a lot of work still to be done, and it’s good to see that there are people out there that have got it right and are going in the right direction.

Jeff: I appreciate that Paul.

Paul: Thanks for your time.

Jeff: Thank you.

Thanks to Todd Dietrich for transcribing this interview.

Listeners feedback:

Adding a jingle to your site

Chris writes: A client of mine wants to incorporate 4 second jingles at various points on their website, triggered on page load, to reinforce their servicing brand. My first reaction is that this could get annoying but was curious as to your thoughts on the use of audio on the web.

I don’t think that there is any set ‘rule’ here but basically I would agree 100% that you shouldn’t do it because it will annoy the hell out of the site’s users.

There is an argument that audio branding can be included if th
e user only has to hear it once. However, I would dispute this as well for the following reasons:

It may well still annoy (and therefore have a negative effect upon) the site’s users
Users aren’t expecting it and it could embarrass them in an office environment
Quite a lot of users will have the sound off. Therefore, if you decide that the audio is only an ‘add on’ for the brand then you may as well conclude that it’s not necessary at all.

I have talked about audio on website before and reached the conclusion that, even though technology and bandwidth makes it more doable, it’s the wrong medium for audio. I think I likened it to having a soundtrack while you’re reading a book – it’s just wrong!

Of course, there are no doubt exceptions to this rule – really well thought out and produced audio indicators on a web app for example – but, generally speaking, audio branding on a website will have a negative effect. If your client is insistent, try and persuade him to include a video download on the site where audio will certainly work.

Fixed or bespoke pricing

Jon writes: We are a small web design and development company (4 people) and have tended to concentrate on higher value bespoke work. We are probably about to merge with another slightly larger company in a neighbouring town. This other company have traditionally aimed at a somewhat lower value market.

My question is about pricing. The other company operate to a very structured price list (£x for a 5 page brochure site, £Y for a basic ecommerce site, £Z for an ecommerce site with knobs on etc). We have always priced each project individually using a mixture of time costing, guesswork, and a “how much can we get away with” approach.

Do you think that a merged company approaching a wider market and value range would be better to adopt one approach or the other, or continue to do both? Would the existence of one approach damage the ability to operate effectively at the other end of the scale?

I guess the big question here is – are you going to remain as two different entities with some shared resources, or are you going to merge more fully and share work between the team no matter where it is sourced from (i.e. will one of their designers work on a future project from one of your existing clients)? If it is the former (which I suspect it isn’t) then I would keep the two pricing models the same as they are. I wouldn’t try and hide the fact that the two companies have ‘merged’ though, just explain that there are two teams delivering different services.

However, if the two companies are merging more fully, then I think this is actually fairly fundamental stuff. It’s almost like you’re all starting again and need to write a business plan. I think you would be opening yourself up for much criticism if you tried to operate both pricing plans.

I suppose other questions to you would be:

Which pricing plan is most effective (who is making the most profit)?
What does each company’s order book look like? I.e. have you just signed a massive contract at your higher rates?

This is interesting stuff and I’d like to know how it works out. I suppose the biggest unknown for me (that may well answer all of my other questions) is that I don’t know the reason for the merger in the first place.

115. sxsw

Posted in Classic shows on March 19, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 115: Lessons learnt at SXSW, Garett Dimon on form design and how to find usability test subjects.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Lessons learnt at SXSW | Garrett Dimon on form design | Listener feedback

News and events

Microsoft launches beta of Internet Explorer 8

The big story over the last couple of weeks has been Microsoft’s release of Internet Explorer 8 as a beta. This has sparked a flurry of posts from various bloggers on the pros and cons of the new release. However the two that caught my attention were Kevin Yank at Sitepoint and Roger Johansson.

In short, IE8 looks like an impressive update with significant improvements in standards support. It would appear we can finally say good by to HasLayout, while at the same time welcoming decent CSS table support. This will open up a lot of possibilities for layout.

There are too many updates to go through here so I would encourage you to check out "what’s new in internet explorer 8" over at the MSDN blog. You might also want to look at the Internet Explorer 8 readiness toolkit that tells you all you need to know about the new browser.

Designers agnst

There seems to be a lot of designer angst flying around the tubes this week including two posts on A List Apart and one at ideas on ideas.

As designers we seem to spend too much time fretting over the creative process, always looking for inspiration and techniques to improve the quality of our work. Andy Rutledge piles on the pressure in a fascinating article about creativity where he redefines the word. A second post on A List Apart twists the knife further by arguing that as designers we need to be superhuman obsessives, willing to work late into the night to produce the truely exceptional.

It maybe the case that to be a truely outstanding designer we need to live in a world of unrealistic personal expectations. However, personally I like the down to earth reality of "Six suggestions that can make you a better designer." In this post Eric writes…

Your project doesn’t have to do everything. It doesn’t have to win awards, make you look good, or have a wry subtext. Getting something simple to work is hard enough. Concentrate on the basics, and see if your idea holds up when shown to the audience.

In my opinion there is too much written about being outstanding and not enough on just being better.

Usability challenges associated with web applications

The final story of the week is a post by Jared Spool. Jared is a truely exceptional usability expert and I can highly recommend his Podcast. He is also an excellent speaker that I had the pleasure to hear again this year at SXSW.

The reason I mention him is because of a post entitled "3 important usability challenges for designing web applications." What I find so refreshing about this post is that it focuses on the web applications we all have on our sites rather than the trendy web 2.0. apps we hear so much about.

Sites like delicious, gmail, of even the up and coming getsignoff (shamless plug!) are somewhat unusal in terms of web apps because the whole site is the app. Most web applications are a part of a greater whole. They are contact databases on corporate intranets or ticket reservation systems on airline sites.

The challenges associated with these types of web apps are different from their trendier cousins and Jared addresses these problems in his post.

It is definately worth reading if you have web applications on your site.

Feature: Lessons learnt SXSW

Marcus shares his impressions of SXSW and the lessons we can all learn.

Interview: Garrett Dimon on form design

Paul: So joining me today is Garrett Dimon. Good to have you on the show. How are you?

Garrett: Pretty good.

Paul: Now I have to say I’m really excited about having you on the show because I have to say I’ve become a bit of a fan. I’m sorry to admit this and I know it’s horribly embarrassing when people say things like this to you. But ever since you’ve released your website which so impressed me I’ve been kinda following your work since then, some of the stuff you’ve been doing. You’re everything I’m not. You’re minimalistic, you’re clean and considered and well thought through while I’m chaotic, over the top and brash. That’s why I’m attracted to your work I think because you’re the
opposite of me.

Garrett: Everything I do from my apartment and everything is just the less I have, the simpler things are, the better things seem to turn out for me.

Paul: If only I could live that way. I’m just not… my brain just doesn’t function in that way. But that’s really cool. So I wanted to get you on the show to talk about forms of all things. It’s something that we’ve touched upon a couple of times in the show but mainly as passing comments in news stories and things like that. In actual fact a couple of the times we have mentioned it, it’s your name that’s come up. It seems to be something that you write a lot about from time to time. You see different articles popping up in different places. Why forms? What is it about forms that seems to attract your attention?

Garret You know it’s hard to give an answer. I really don’t know. But in thinking about it probably my first bet is that I really don’t consider myself to be a designer per say in terms of the more traditional, more artistic design orientated type of visual designer. But with forms it’s more about the interaction design and the more logical aspects of design which are things that definitely work better in my head. So how do you write error messages; how do you label fields; what order do they go in; how should they be grouped; do they go on one page or two pages. Some of the more logical, more interaction issues. Then using what little design knowledge I have to supplement that and make it visually easier to digest the form and see and understand the pieces of it. Basically to me it’s basically the one thing that I feel like I can comfortably design and layout because there’s a lot more to it than just the aesthetics.

Paul: Yeah that kinda makes sense. Why do you think forms are so important in a way? It’s obviously something you consider important but there doesn’t seem to be huge amounts written on the subject. What is it that makes them worth of that kind of attention as far as you’re concerned.

Garrett: I think part of the reason is precisely because they don’t get enough attention. Any real attention you see to forms, I haven’t seen it recently but it’s how do you skin your forms to completely control how they look. Which to me is one of my huge pet peeves. It seems like such a waste of time. To worry about what the forms look like in the browser as opposed to how they actually work, I’m thinking if you’re going to invest the time worrying about how your forms looks it’s probably better to spend that time worrying about how they are going to work. Are you using the right form field for that job and some of the more critical things about forms. Really forms, especially now with web apps being what they are, forms are such a huge part of your everyday interacts. Things like efficiency, learnability, accuracy, all the vasts of usability that matter. It’s not just a matter of “Is this form efficient?”. Well it’s easy to make an efficient form but it’s not necessiarly going to be something that somebody else could learn and use or you might be able to learn it but will you remember how to use it next time you come back. Balancing all the different kind of vasts of usability that Nielsen identifies and really working them out so that you don’t dumb the form down so that it’s so simple that anyone can use it that it’s just a cumbersome process to fill out. Really kind of massaging it with all those things in mind.

Paul: You’re right when you say that in the world of web applications certainly forms are amazingly important but they pretty much appear on every site. It’s hard to thing of a site where they don’t appear.

Garrett: Well you think about a magazine site or anything like that where it’s more content orientated, it’s definitely a lower priority.

Paul: Yeah but you’ve still got contact us forms and things like that.

Garrett: Yeah, comment forms and…

Paul: Ok. So you touch there on the fact that one of your pet peeves was the fact that people worry about the design of their forms rather than how usable they are. What over common mistakes are you seeing from people about how they design and implement forms?

Garrett: I think there’s a whole slew of them and I think a lot of it is just worrying about the wrong things or not giving thought to things that matter. My main reason with the designing the form fields is that people are used to seeing form fields and what they look like in their browser, in their native rendering. Sure as a designer having pixel perfect control would be nice but I would hope that most of us who are now designing on the web would have forgone that state of mind where we have to have complete control over everything, it has to look exactly the way we want. A lot of time not only is it a waste of time but it actually hinders usability when those form fields don’t look like what someone expects a form field to look like or button for that matter. When the design becomes design for design’s sake it actually hinders usability in addition to just wasting time. When I initially started developing things it was all about consistency because consistency is easier to implement. If every form field looks the same, behaved the same, is the same size etc. it’s easier to implement because you use the same CSS and you don’t have to put as much thought into it. So while consistency is valuable there’s definitely an aspect of context that a lot of people don’t necessarily pay attention to. In some situations, I think 37 Signals have done a good job on this, they’ll make some fields larger than others relative to the size. In particular in Backpack, their headings aren’t just a form field they are actually bolder and look a little more like a header. They are a little larger font than the body of the note. It adds a little bit of context so that it’s more intuitive as to what the purpose of that field is. There’s a lot of different ways to do it. That’s just one of the more tangible ones. Basically the mistake being focusing too blindly on making everything consistent when there are appropriate situations to break the rules and use context to make some changes. Another one is just dumping a whole form onto the page without breaking it up into logical sections or groups. A lot of times people are afraid of making a form any longer visually because of scrolling. While you don’t want somebody to scroll 80 screenfuls, scrolling one versus eight screens is neligable.

Paul: So you wouldn’t suggest splitting forms across multiple pages then?

Garrett: Well there’s definitely context for that if it’s appropriate. Amazon is a great example there because you’ve got your payment screen and your address screen. It actually can be a fairly complex process but the time you’ve selected several addresses or updated an address, updated a payment method, changed the items in your cart. As you’re jumping around the different screen’s you definitely wouldn’t want all that interaction to try and be contained on one screen. It depends on the size of the form and the context of the form and how interactive it can be, how many potential branches off of that path are there to take. Another would be poor labelling. A lot of the time people label things. This goes back to just naming conventions in general. Just basic information architecture stuff. Whether it follows a corporate naming convention that may not be the right word for somebody that’s not inside the company wall or just simply flat out the wrong word for international [???]. Really anything. Just not putting enough thought into the label. The first thing that pops into your head isn’t always the right thing. Using the wrong kind of inputs so a lot of times whilst… and I have no idea in the world why people would do this… People who for instance who use checkboxes when they won’t use radio buttons and instead they write Javascript to control the radio button. Checkboxes as if they were radio buttons. Thinks like that where I just have no idea what these people were thinking in some of these situations. Just a lot of things like using a radio button or having a yes/no radio button where a checkbox could work. Multiple select lists which are an absolutely terrible interface element to use because a lot of people don’t know you can control+click. If there are small lines and you accidentally slip off that control key and click on a new one, it’ll select that new one and erase all your other selections in that list. There’s different things that kinda get abused and misused in situations where they really aren’t necessiary. A much simpler solution usually exists.

Paul: Yeah. I’ve seen the radio button, checkbox problem and it’s always very amusing.

Garrett: And vice-versa. Where it’s radio buttons and they try and make them checkboxes just because they think it looks prettier sometimes.

Paul: How bizarre.

Garrett: Which I guess is another great example – over using Javascript in forms. It’s one of those things. I don’t know where I heard it but the best description I ever heard of Javascript, Ajax or any of that stuff is that it’s really a spice. If you’re cooking you wouldn’t just dump a whole bottle into your pot. Or you wouldn’t start with a bottle of curry and dump it into a pot and say “OK, now what are we going to make?” You would decide what you are going to make and then think “You know this could really use a bit of curry here”. A lot of people just don’t use Javascript as a spice. It really starts to define the experience and in a lot of situations actually makes it worse or more confusing.

Paul: I presume you would encourage some use of Javascript for example. Things like doing some client side validation as long as it falls back on a server side validation. That kind of thing.

Garrett: Yeah absolutely.

Paul: OK so let’s turn that question around. We’ve been talking very much about the mistakes that people make, but what advice would you provide people about approaching forms? What are the things that they should be doing rather than shouldn’t be doing? I know that in some ways this is going to overlap but is there a particular approach that you take?

Garrett: One of the biggest things I guess is when ever; doing consulting for custom applications or things like that a lot of times we don’t realize that a lot of the complexity from forms comes from the complexity of the business. Whether it’s somebody doing markup or somebody designing a form, a lot of times you know if a business analyst or whoever creates these form requirements and says “here you go design this form.” It has 100 fields and this is out contact form and 80 of the fields are required. A lot of times people just say “okay, it’s my job to implement this. In my experience a lot of business analysts aren’t really familiar with principles of the web and what makes sense. A lot of times the real effort to creating a good form is in educating everybody else about what would be involved. Pushing back in situations like that. Not in a bad way but in a very professional productive way. “You realize that this is going to be a really bad contact form. Nobody’s acutually going to use it. I’ve even heard response like “That’s the point. If people contact us we have to take time a respond to them.” The problem isn’t with the form there, its with underlying things. Obviously that’s a little bit of an exaggeration. The idea is that the best place to start with forms and any kind of interaction like that is with the principles that are underneath there kind of guiding it. With the issue tracker that I am developing, I started out parring back the process of what’s the lifecycle of an issue. Trimming out parts that I didn’t think would really be necessary. I was just looking at it in the context of the lifecycle. I hadn’t even thought about what are the forms going to look like? How am I going to communicate this lifecycle within the context of the application? When it came down to the point when I had to explain how that actually worked, because I had trimmed the proccess and the lifecycle down so much, and it was only 3 steps really, I was able to translate that concept directly into the interface. If I had never actually gone and trimmed the lifecycle down and it had 6 different states that were very cross dependant and this state only is an option when you are in this state… It gets so complicated that even if I could express it in an interface, the code to build it would have been so absolutely unweildly that I could have never created a natural and intuitive inteface. So, I guess really challenging the underlying things rather than just thinking about the things on the surface. And then really just look at every form on it’s own. In it’s own light. What is the goal of this form? Should it be laid out like a traditional form? With one set of “label” “field” all the way down the page and a submit button. Should there be other buttons? Another thing when, I have a fairly consistent model that I am using when I am designing forms in my new application. The main form is for submitting issues and that one form is probably going to get 80% of the useage in this whole system. That and commenting. In the context of submitting issue alot of times you will be in a meeting capturing things as people are talking, capturing issues cause it’s an issue tracker. You want to be able to capture and issue, save it, and move on and capture another one really in kind of rapid succession. So I added an extra button at the bottom that I wouldn’t put on any other page, cause it doesn’t make sense, to save and add another. So it immediately saves that one and takes you back to the data entry screen. You can just continue in a circle and just keep on adding and adding. So really looking at forms and thinking about how are people going to be interacting with this? What are they doing in the real world while they’re using this form? Are they copying data from another application into here? Are they in the middle of a meeting just capturing items in rapid succession. What are they doing? Are they just quickly jotting it down from their iPhone? Understanding that context helps illustrate ideas and different sublte variations that you can do to forms and make them very very practical without adding a whole bunch of extra overhead on the implementation.

Paul: I remember you wrote an article at one stage redesigning eBay registration form. When you wrote about that you talked about the fact that this is a registration form. It is a one off form, and all of the ways that that then informed the way that you built the form. How it affected the positioning of things, and the layout and things, simply because it wasn’t going to be a form that people were using again and again. That’s the same kind of context that you are talking about.

Garrett: Yeah exactly. There’s always a different context to a form and it matters. It is easy to overlook it but that context, and really any design for that matter, context is so important but it is something that…I think that main reason that people don’t pay as much attention to context is because it requires a lot of extra work. A lot of times it’s easier, and it makes sense for kind of a first pass, to make every form look the same. It takes a lot more work to go through and re-invent the wheel every time you look at a form even though, re-inventing the wheel is probably a little bit extreme, to really give it some custom attention. Some tender loving care, just takes a lot more effort that lot of projects don’t have time for.

Paul: You mentioned earlier 37signals that you liked some of the stuff that they were doing. Are there any other good examples out there of forms that you really think are getting it right and are worth us having a look at?

Garrett: Probably the one thing that always jumps to my mind any time anybody asks me about forms is all of the work that Luke W is doing. I hate trying to butcher his name. The stuff that he is doing and hopefully his upcoming book is just really incredible. In depth. He’s done a lot of eye tracking research about label placement and button placement and he’s talked extensively about primary and secondary action buttons. All of his stuff is really incredible.

Paul: So where can people find out about him?

Garrett: I always just google for Luke W to get to his site. Functioning form is his blog. He’s the first hit for Luke W.

Paul: I’ll add it to the show notes. People can get to it via that. That’s interesting. I must admit I hadn’t hear of him so I’ll definitely check that out.

Garrett: He’s one of the, I don’t know his exact title, but he works at Yahoo and he’s got a plethora of presentations about form design and all of the kind of stuff. Really sharp guy.

Paul: And he’s writing a book you say as well?

Garrett: Yes he is for Rosenfeld Media. It’s due out early 2008.

Paul: Excellent. So just to finish us off. A little bit of bile at the end of the interview. Is there any forms that you want to name and shame? Any site that do things really badly that we can all go and laugh at and sneer at?

Garrett: You know that’s a very tough thing to do.

Paul: (lauging) So many out there.

Garrett: Well there are so many out there. But at the same time too there are a lot that seem like they could use improvement but they’re companies that are investing a lot of money and research to improving their forms. So I’m hesitant as an outsider, somebody who isn’t exposed to some of that data, to try and call them out, when they’re probably acutually right on the money. The top two that come to mind that I know are successful are eBay and Amazon. I think Amazon succeeds on the interaction design of their buttons and the flow of their checkout is natural and intuitive but I feel like a lot of their page designs, and it could be a very intentional thing in order to, although I hate thinking that Amazon would acutually do that, to kind of trap people and confuse them almost. If you look at each page in and of itself I think there is a lot of design things that they could make adjustments to that would make the pages easier to understand and comprehend at a glance. I feel like right now their design of their checkout process, or most of their site in general, is very busy and intense. It’s difficult to focus on one element because there’s so many elements. There is very little very intuitive page hierarchy within each page. And they’ve made leaps and bounds, watching the site evolve over the years. But, it still feels like there’s a lot more room for some design consistency for them to introduce. They’re slowly getting there. eBay is another one who, I know they acutually, I forget their CEO’s name, but she declared 2008 the year of user experience at eBay. They’ve acutually invested a lot in trying to improve their forms and really their user experience period. eBay is one that I’ve only successfully purchased something on there once and everytime I try to swim through there I get lost and just give up. Too me any situation like that is just begging for help. I think any form, even the best of the best, even 37signals, everybody is still learning. This is all so new that even the best forms have so much room for improvement. Even my stuff, I come a month later and say “what was I thinking there?” There’s so much work that needs to be done. I think that Luke’s work that he’s doing is probably some of the best and most important work that we’ll see in forms in the near future. He’s starting to really put down facts about what really is good and bad and why it is good and bad. Up until now most of us have just been pontificating based on “well this form is hard to fill out because of errors.” Or you know, the form breaks, or the error message isn’t helpful. Very obvious things. He’s tracking the much more subconcious things that until now nobody’s really dug into and made claims about. It’s kind of a cop out on your question.

Paul: No No. You gave two example there and you gave constructive reasons why they should be improved or could be improved. No I don’t thinks it’s a cop out. You’re just so much nicer than I am. You didn’t go for the jugular that was the only thing. Garrett it’s been great to have you on the show. I think that you’ve given us some real good hints to get going I guess and make some imrovements. It was good to talk to you.

Garrett: Yeah likewise.

Paul: No doubt we’ll get to talk again soon before too long. Especially when you’re issue tracker comes out. We’ll have to get you on hear all about that.

Garrett: Yeah. I’m hoping it will be sooner rather than later but it’s definitely tough to balance the feelancing and paying the bills and making progress on it.

Paul: I know exactly how you feel, we’re doing the same thing at Headscape at the moment. It’s always difficult. Client work is so tempting because it pays the bills here and now.

Garrett: Yup, exactly.

Paul: Okay good to talk to you and we’ll talk again sooon.

Garrett: Sounds good.

Thanks to Lee Theobald for doing the transcription

Listeners feedback:

Finding usability test subjects

Our audio question comes from Clare who asks…

"Where do you find your test subjects for more formal user testing"

It can be hard to find good test subjects and I am not aware of any agencies out there that source people for you (although I am sure somebody will correct me).

I think it is worth stressing that finding users who match the demographic of your target audience is not a huge concern. As Steve Krug points out in his book "Don’t make me think" most problems are encountered by any user. That said, where possible it is good to find people that roughly match the specification.

To be honest our approach it is very adhoc. It normally consists of both Headscape and the client scrambling around to see who you can find. The client often has "tame" customers they can ask and we fallback on family, friends and other clients for recommendations.

I should also say my local church has been very handy! A church seems to have a good cross section of ages and backgrounds and an advert in the church newsletter often does the trick. Equally advertising in your local newspaper can attract people, but you have to be willing to pay for their time.

Accessible tables

This week’s email is from Daniel and takes the form of a recommendation rather than a question…

"Could you cover the tips discussed in this article [about accessible tables]? I have seen a lot of tables on the web. Almost none of them uses any of these tips."

The article Daniel is refering to can be found on the Opera developers site, which is a great resource covering all aspects of web development (not just stuff relating specifically to Opera). The specific post looks at how to markup data tables in an accessible format. Since designers have stopped using tables for layout they have become largely ignored. However, if not marked up correctly they can prove a real problem for speech readers. A simple table such as this…

Day	AM	PM
Monday	Meeting	Travelling
Tuesday	Free time	Meeting

…can become impossible to understand when read back because it is read in a linear fashion…

Day, AM, PM, Monday, Meeting, Travelling, Tuesday, Free time, Meeting

However, if marked up correctly it suddenly makes sense…

Day Monday AM Meeting
Day Monday PM Travelling
Day Tuesday AM Free time
Day Tuesday PM Meeting

Great find Daniel. These are tips we should all be implementing.

111. Utopia

Posted in Classic shows on February 14, 2008 by Paul Boag

On show 111: Designer and developer work together in utopian harmony. Two great listener reviews and Aral Balkan announces the biggest online web design conference ever.

Podcast: Download (31.2MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Designers and developers in perfect harmony | Aral on Singularity | Listener emails

News and events

Fixing your product pages

I want to kick off this week’s news with an article on Think Vitamin which I missed when it originally come out back in November. It is a post by Amy Hoy providing some basic advice on user experience design, focusing in particular on product pages.

Amy starts by giving some basic tips. These include…

Be nice to your users and customers (and potential customers).
Design as if your main goal is to inform and educate.
Be honest and forthcoming.
Help your users and customers to do what they want, not what you want them to do.
Be consistent with your message and quality of service (and I’m including software design here, folks).
Scientific, measurable “usability” doesn’t necessarily make for a good experience.
Good design makes people feel good.

She then moves on to look at specific examples. She compares the product download pages of Opera and Firefox. This is a fascinating insight into what can go wrong with user experience design.

What I particularly like about this article is Amy’s engaging writing style. She is incredibly personable and her writing really drew me in. It is a long time since I have read a post word for word.

Being inspired by newspaper design

I often talk on boagworld about looking beyond the web for inspiration. Too often as designers we look at other websites, when we should be looking to art, architecture and the world around us for inspiration.

Admittedly this can be somewhat of a stretch at times. It’s not always easy to see how a piece of art or kids toy can inspire a website. Many of us don’t even try as a result.

How about starting with an easier comparison? This week I came across a superb post that looks at award winning newspaper design and it really excited me about the possibilities when I finally get around to redesigning boagworld.

I think we have a lot of learn from newspaper designers and in many ways there are a lot of similarities. Both web design and newspaper design rely heavily on white space and grid layout. Both have to deal with large amounts of written content. Both have to copy with constantly changing content. The list goes on.

Take a few moments to read this post, even if you just look at the designs. It will definitely inspire you.

Using browser history to improve the user experience

My final news story of the day is an interesting idea centred around a users browser history. Niall Kennedy has proposed a technique where you could use CSS and Javascript to display content based on what sites a person has previously visited.

Although I am not sure I like the idea of websites snooping through my browser history, it does provide some ways of improving the user experience. If nothing else it can remove some of the clutter from our websites.

Let me give you an example of how it could be used. A website could check your browser history to see if you regularly used digg.com. If you did then it could post a “digg it” button. If not it could be hidden away. The same principle could be used to show only a RSS subscribe button for the specific news reader you use, rather than showing them all. The possibilities are endless.

Whether you can see an application for this or not, it is still a very impressive and clever idea. Definitely worth investigating further.

Feature: Designer and developer in perfect harmony

In this week’s feature Marcus is looking at the working relationships between web design teams. He brings together a few Headscape employees to discuss how to ensure a good working relationship between all parties.

These are the roles that we look at and who represents them in Headscape:

Requirements analysis, information architecture development (consultancy) – Marcus
Design, templates – Leigh Howells and Paul
Technical development – Rob Borley
Project management – Charlie Allen

These are the issues we covered…

What are the things that really make a project work well for you?
From the other perspective, what are your pet hates?
Designer and developers – should clients be able to talk to you directly?
Most projects have a habit of their scope creeping. How can that best be avoided?
At Headscape we use a number of different tools to manage projects. How do these tools work?
Particularly with designers and developers, we have set up ‘buddy’ systems. How does this work? Is it effective?
Some projects stall or go on hold for a while. Are you able to just pick up where you left off?

Expert interview: Aral Balkan on Singularity

Paul: So, joining me today is Aral Balkan. Hello Aral.

Aral: Hi, Paul. How are you?

Paul: Not too bad. It’s been a while since we’ve had you on the show.

Aral: It has been a while. I’ve missed it.

Paul: Uhm, so yeah, basically, I’ve been keeping a secret from Marcus. Which is I stoically refused to tell him what Singularity is all about.

Aral (laughing): Was he curious?

Paul: He was.

Marcus: It’s something to do with Star Trek, isn’t it?

Aral: Well I am a big fan, but no.

Paul: So why don’t you tell him what Singularity is all about.

Aral: Well, Singularity is going to be the world’s first large scale online web converence.

Marcus: Okay.

Aral: In a nutshell, that’s what it is.

Paul: So, I mean how does this work from a technology point of view, from an organizational point of view. Tell us a little bit about how it’s going to be organized.

Aral: Uh, sure! Well, basically it’s a web conference, so in terms of topics, it’s very eclectic. We’ve got a really cool group of speakers who have confirmed already, about 24 of them, from all parts of the web really. We have web standards people. We have JavaScript developers. We have artists who work on the web and they’re going to be presenting their sessions online. It’s going to be streamed through a custom interface built in Flash, based on the Flash platform, using technologies like Adobe Connect which used to be called “Breeze”. It allows the real time streaming of audio, video, and also sharing of interactions or objects through the web. Beyond that, we’re also going to have a very local character to it with local hubs where people will be able to gather and watch the audience and interact.

Paul: Oh, ok, so it…

Aral: I mean, watch the conference and interact.

Paul: Right, so people will actually get together as well, because that was one of my questions. One of the best thing about conferences is meeting up with people.

Aral: Definitely! The bit that I don’t like is the travelling. It’s being stuck in coach next to someone who’s, you know, not feeling too well or is kind slumping onto your seat or having the hotel from Hell experience that I’m currently having over here. (Paul laughs)

Aral: Don’t even get me started on that. There was techno music until 2 AM from the bar downstairs.

Paul: Nice!

Aral: Well, it was refreshing in the morning, though, because the shower went from boiling from freezing back to boiling and kept doing that. So, yeah, I think this is going to hopefully take the best parts of what attending a conference means, and maybe leave some of the bits that aren’t as great.

Paul: Are you going to leave it for local groups to set up local meetings or is that something that you can organize centrally?

Aral: I want to see it as decentralized as possible. I am talking to a few venue sponsors, potential venue sponsors. We’re talking with Yahoo at the moment. The BBC, I’m talking with Ian there. There are very interested and very excited about it. But, beyond that, I want it to have a grass-roots character. So, we’re already getting people volunteering for regional areas. I’ve called them Ambassadors. We have an ambassador from Bristol and there are people from Singapore, Mexico, all over, that are very interested in volunteering. So, we’re probably going to have regional volunteers and ambassadors who organize local groups, user groups, to have meetings around Singularity, where attendees can go and join and hopefully take it further, you know, add a local character to it.

Paul: OK, let’s cover some of the basics. How many speakers are you looking at, first of all. Let’s start with that.

Aral: Okay. We’re going to have a little over 100 hundred speakers.

Paul: Wow!

Aral: So, yeah, it is actually a large web conference.

Paul: Yeah.

Aral: And the that its online.

Paul: So when… how long is this going to be over? You know, if you’re going to have 100 speakers…

Aral: It’s three days.

Paul: It’s going to be over three days…

Aral: And it’s multiple track.

Paul: Multiple track, okay. That’s what I was going to ask.

Aral: And I think one of the things, just cut you off there, with uh… it is multiple track, but everything is recorded.

Paul: Oh, Okay.

Aral: So, its presented live and we’ve got some really great ideas for making those presentations a little bit more interactive than you can get in the real world. But, it will also be recorded. So, if you do miss something on the day, you’ll be able to watch it later.

Paul: Cool! How are you going to deal with things like time differences? Are you going to have it going 24 hours? Or, how are you dealing with that?

Aral: Well, initially, I was thinking about having it 24 hours. Just because it sounded really cool.

(All Laugh)

Aral: You know? “Three days! Twenty four hours!! One hundred plus speakers!!!” But then I thought about it. Especially the local meet ups. I want those meet ups to have a BarCamp-like character to them, you know? Where people can stay over. And I didn’t want the conference, the somewhat one-way part of it taking up part of the day.

Paul: Right…

Aral: So, I think it would be nice to have the presentations during the day and then after that, leave time for people at local gatherings to create their own sessions to talk about what they’ve been listening to, to add to it, to localize it for themselves in a matter of speaking.

Paul: Sure.

Aral: You know, to have, to do things to tell you the truth, I have no idea what they’ll come up with, which is great.

Paul: So, when is this scheduled for? What are the dates that people should book for it?

Aral: Well, we finally have dates. We’ve been going back and forth internally before we announced, but it’s the end of October. October 24th through the 26th.

Paul: Okay, that sounds good. And do you know a price yet, or are you still working on that?

Aral: Well, the pricing we’re still working on, but I think we’re going to be very positively surprised by the pricing. We’re actually working to get it even lower than we initially thought we wanted it. And we’re working closely with certain sponsors and we’ll definitely be announcing more about the sponsorship that we have as they become official, but some of our sponsors are interested in keeping the ticket price low as well and supporting us.

Paul: So, how many people are you expecting to attend this conference? Have you got any idea of what you’re aiming for?

Aral: Well, my conservative estimate right now is 10,000.

Paul: WOW!

Aral: And that’s based partly on past experience. We did 2 one-day open source flash conferences using similar technologies, for which we got about a thousand attendees at each one. Those were much smaller. One day, three or four speakers. My conservative estimate is that this will be about ten times the size of that.

Paul: That’s amazing. I mean that will be really cool to, you know, if that comes off. Are you trying to get a range of different speakers? Are you covering any particular areas of web design or are you going as eclectic as you can?

Aral: Well, the tagline that I was going with initially was that Singularity would define web 08. And I’m kind of trying to get people away from using version numbers when talking about the web. We’re getting away from using version numbers when talking about software because you know the moment you slap one on its outdated. So, I think maybe using the year would be easier because you’d at least know that you’re talking about a definite stat of time. So, my initial idea is that it would define Web ’08, and as such, I’m trying to get as eclectic a mix of speakers as possible. And also, I see that there is a lot of overlap with which to send applications for example. There’s a lot of overlap over what people using AJAX are doing and then traditionally web standards people are getting interested in applications as well. So, I want to have a real mix. I also don’t want people on the Flash platform to be excluded, as they sometimes are. But, this is definitely not… that’s not the focus of the conference.

Paul: So, where can people find out more about this? I mean obviously, some people are going to want to be signing up. Obviously, you can’t do that yet, until the price has been set. So, is there any kind of way (

Aral: Of course.) they can express their interested or find out more information or whatever?

Aral: They definitely can. The site is “singlularity08.com”. You can also get to it from “singularityconference.com”. And, basically, we have a blog there and you can express your interest. You can email me directly as well. My email address is “[email protected]”. Or just email my private address at “[email protected]”. Yes, so definitely, if you want to be kept in touch when we do release information, but there is also an RSS feed that you can subscribe to on the site.

Paul: Cool! Well thank you very much for coming on the show.

Aral: Thank you for having me, Paul. And of course you’re speaking.

Paul: Well, yes, of course. That goes without saying (Paul laughs).

Aral: Are you excited? Have you decided what you are speaking about?

Paul: I have not a clue yet, no. (Aral laughs)

Aral: Have I just put you on the spot?

Paul: Yes, totally. Thank you very much. (Aral laughs) And its going to be a weird one. It’s going to be a different way of speaking and so you kind of need to tailor what you’re doing to approach. It will be interesting.

Aral: Exactly. And we’re going have dry runs and we’re going to try out the interface as well.

Paul: Cool.

Aral: And maybe tweak it for different types of presentations. We just have so much potential with what we can do.

Paul: Mmmm. Yeah.

Aral: Because, we can actually control the medium. So, it’s really exciting.

Paul: Excellent! Excellent stuff! Really looking forward to it and we’ll get you back on the show closer to the time to see if we can drum up a bit more support for it. Excellent stuff. Thank you for your time.

Aral: Sounds great, Paul. Thank you so much.

Paul: Alright then.

Listeners email:

An alternative wireframing tool

A few weeks back I talked on the show about wireframing tools. Not long afterwards I received an enthusiastic email from Wen talking about a product called OverSite. He was so passionate about the product that I thought we should get him on the show to talk about it. This is what he had to say…

I’ve been catching up on my episodes of BoagWorld, and I just recently listened to your discussion about wireframing. As a UI designer, I completely understand the importance of mocking up a UI, and testing the mockup, before ever launching Photoshop.or Dreamweaver. So I thought I’d provide a review of a wireframing tool that I use, called OverSite. I haven’t seen many other tools out there like it, so I figured you and your listeners might find it useful.

OverSite is a shareware application that runs on Windows as well as Mac OS X; I use the Mac version myself, but am able to exchange OverSite files back and forth with my PC-using colleagues. OverSite lets you create a full or partial representation of your site structure: all of the sections and pages that make up your site. You can do this in one of two ways. The first way is fairly predictable; you add one section or page at a time by clicking a button, entering a name in a popup dialog, and clicking OK. The second way is fairly clever. You open a window that OverSite calls the Rapid Structure Creator. There, you type out your entire site structure in one text area, putting line breaks between sections and pages, and using indentation to indicate nested levels. Then you just click OK and viola! OverSite generates a tree depicting your entire site structure.

At this point, you can dive into your wireframing. Each page contains its own wireframe canvas. You can place the usual widgets on the canvas: buttons, textfields, checkboxes, images, etc. You can also place basic geometric shapes like circles, rectangles, lines and stars on the canvas. Each component can be individually styled; you can also create global styles that apply to all components, or to components of a specific type. OverSite also lets you create what it calls composites, which are complex elements that are made up of individual widgets.

Let’s say that you have a search form that will appear on a few different pages. You can create a composite representing this form. The composite might contain a few labels and text fields, maybe a checkbox or two, and a couple of buttons. If you want, you can tell OverSite to automatically draw a border around the form elements. Once you’ve created that form composite, you can drop it into your wireframes where ever you want it.

OverSite does lack built-in, complex widget types, such as tables. You can create them out of the widgets that OverSite does provide, but it would be nice for OverSite to create them for you.

While each page has its own wireframe canvas, so does each section. The purpose of a section’s wireframe is to create elements that will appear on all of the pages within that section. For those who have used server-side-includes, it’s kind of like that. As an example, say you had a navigation bar that should go on the top of every page in your Products And Services section. You would create that navigation bar once, in the Products And Services wireframe canvas. Then the nav bar will appear in every page within that section. In addition, OverSite provides tools to modify that nav bar in specific pages, for example, to change the color of a specific link in the nav bar when you’re actually on the page that that link refers to.

Static wireframes are fine, but I prefer being able to test the interaction between screens before I actually build the site out. OverSite lets you link any widget or composite to another page. If you don’t want to do the work yourself, you can also tell OverSite to auto-generate a simple navigation bar. Then, you can use OverSite’s built-in web browser to test out your site’s navigation.

Another useful thing I’ve found is OverSite’s notes. The notes functionality lets you provide details about specific widgets. That way, when you print or export your wireframes, you can include more information to whomever you’re handing them off to.

As an added bonus, OverSite will also create a graphical sitemap based on your website structure. You can tweak the appearance of the sitemap… the operative word being “tweak”. Fonts, colors, spacing, and icon sizes are under your control, but not much more. Here’s where I think the application could do better to allow you to fully customize the sitemap. Still, it’s created automatically for you without your having to lift a finger, so that’s something. Plus, the sitemap can be exported into a number of formats: GIF, JPEG, PNG, PDF, Scalable Vector Graphics, and others.

Once you’ve finished your wireframes and want someone else to be able to play around with them, you can export them as web pages for non-OverSite-using people to click-through. You have two options here: export your stuff as pure HTML, or export them as imagemaps. The trade-off between the two is fairly obvious: pure HTML will provide you web pages that looks more “real world”, but won’t look exactly like your wireframes do, and they’ll look different in different browsers. Imagemaps ensure that you know exactly what your pages will look like, but it’s typically not going to look like a real web site.

As a UI designer, OverSite’s become a pretty indispensable tool in my software arsenol. You can get it at the developer’s website.

A vertical rhythm calculator

In the same show we also had Jason Beaird talking about vertical rhythm (among other things) and this promoted an email from James. He wrote…

Hi I’ve been listening to your podcast for about six months now and really enjoy the mixed style of content and witty banter.

With all the talk of CSS vertical rhythm and em based layouts I thought I would point you in the direction of a vertical rhythm calculator that I built in Flex to help people work out all of those nice em values. My own site has been developed using the same principles with all typography and measurements set in em’s for an elastic layout. I am developing an AIR version that has an integrated browser so that you get visual feedback of your calculations, I remember one of the John’s comment on how useful such a tool would be on the fabulous Rissington podcast.

I have checked it out myself and have to say it is very impressive. What is more he has now created that desktop version. Check it out.

Common mistakes of site structure

Posted in User experience on December 21, 2007 by Paul Boag

Getting a sites’ structure right is hugely important and avoiding common mistakes is a good starting point to achieving that.

Although information architecture work is highly skilled and best left to the genius of people like Garrett Dimon the reality is that everybody from designers to website owners find themselves working on it. So what are the most common mistakes and how do we avoid them?

In my opinion there are two pitfalls that many people fall into when structuring the content for their site; confusing naming conventions and overwhelming options.

Confusing naming conventions

The biggest mistake I observe when it comes to information architecture is in the naming of pages and sections. The problem manifests itself in three ways:

Use of jargon: Every industry and company has its jargon. Web design is certainly no exception with more acronyms than you can shake a stick at. The problem is that you can never assume your users will know all the acronyms. They maybe new to the sector or use a slightly different variation of your companies terminology. The names of your sections and pages should be free of jargon and where possible, product names that the users will not have previously encountered. Page and section titles should be descriptive of their content in the plainest language possible.
Long names: Although naming should be descriptive they should also be short. Ideally all menu items should be one or two words long. The idea is that users should be able to quickly scan down the list of pages available and identify the one most likely to have content they need.
Inconsistent naming: Be careful that the way you refer to pages does not change depending on which section you are in. Every link to a page should be referred to in the same way. Where a page title needs to be longer than the wording used in menu items make sure it mirrors it closely. Inconsistent naming can cause confusion and doubt in users making them unsure if they have previously viewed a particular page.

Overwhelming options

The second common pitfall is that of presenting the user with too many options. I commonly come across site structures with more than twelve links in a menu bar at any one time. This goes against conventional wisdom that the optimal number of options to present a user with is between six and eight. Anything more than this and they quickly become overwhelmed and struggle to process the options available.

The desire to present the user many options is an understandable one. As with the homepage there is pressure placed on website managers by different stakeholders to ensure particular content is not &#”;buried&#”; deep within the site. There is also a misconception that the number of clicks in a site should be minimized.

Like many of the misconceptions relating to the web, the belief that users do not like to click is based on out of date thinking. The major problem with clicks was that they meant the loading of a new page and in the pre-broadband days this meant a delay. Of course today that is becoming less of a concern as broadband becomes more pervasive. What is more I think it is safe to say that users do not mind additional clicks if it keeps the process of navigating a site simple and intuitive.

With the myth surrounding clicks dispelled that leaves only the fear of content becoming buried deep within the site structure. How will anybody ever discover a crucial product if it is buried four levels down? Also what do you do with a page that could sit under multiple sections? What if the user looks in the wrong place?

The answer to these concerns are simple. There is more to site navigation than the sites hierarchy. A good website will provide lots of navigational tools to help the user find content and to ensure key content is made clearly visible. These include:

Search: Search results can contain side links to key content or even weight that content more heavily so it appears nearer the top of the results.
Related links: By adding in a related links box into each page you can highlight related content that the user maybe interested in.
Shortcuts: Shortcuts are commonly used on home pages to highlight important content buried deeper in the site structure. However, these links could potentially be used on any page of the site.
Body links: Its easy to forget the humble body link. However they are a powerful way of highlighting a page on the site no matter how deep in the site it is buried. One technique is to automatically transform any occurrence of a defined keyword into a link to content you wish to promote using either Javascript or some server side processing.
Tagging: More and more sites are introducing tagging as a navigational method. By clicking on a tag associated with an individual page you are then taken to a list of other pages including that tag. However, there is no reason why key pages associated with a particular tag could not be highlighted in some way to draw further attention to them in the listing.

With so many options available for highlighting content it quickly becomes apparent that positioning in the site hierarchy should not be an issue of contention.

Getting a sites structure right is hugely important and avoiding these common mistakes is a good starting point to achieving that. But what other tips do you have for creating the perfect information architecture? Post them in the comments.

A better information architecture tool

Posted in Reviews on November 30, 2007 by Paul Boag

I have never managed to find a tool I like for creating site hierarchies and getting them signed off. However, recently I found something that is definitely getting there.

You wouldn’t think it is much to ask for all. All I want is a simple tool for creating site maps that I can show to the client and get him to sign off on the site hierarchy. Okay so I am actually a bit more demanding than that. I guess my actual list of requirements would be as follows…

It has to be easy to use and not have too many unnecessary options that just get in the way
It needs to look nice so I can show it to the client and it looks professional
I need to be able to print it
I need to be to save it in a format that I can easily send to the client
In an ideal world I would like to be able to work on it collaboratively but I accept that might be asking for too much.

Sure there are a lot of site tools around but they all seem to fall down on one of above criteria. For example something like Visio or Omnigraffle are great but are overly complicated. There are simpler products out there but to be honest most of the ones I have used just produce damn ugly site maps. There are a few online tools which are pretty simple and produce nice site maps but they always seem to mess up when it comes to printing.

A while back I received an email from a guy who had developed a site map tool called writemaps which he wanted me to mention on the show. I took a look hopeful it would meet my criteria but unfortunately it did not. I wrote a polite email back explaining that I felt there was more work to be done on it before I was willing to endorse it and that was the last I heard from him until recently.

The site has now had a complete overhaul and I have to say I think it is superb. If you share similar requirements to me when it comes to creating a site hierarchy then this tool is for you.

Easy to use

It has a clean simple interface that requires minimum effort to create a site map.

Screen capture of writemap showing the clean user interface

Visually attractive

It has an attractive design which I would be more than happy to show to any of my clients. The only downside is that currently you cannot differentiate between different page types (all pages look the same). However other than that it looks great.

Screen capture of writemap showing the version of the interface without the edit controls

Great printing

Although the printing isn’t perfect yet it is still extremely good. I did encounter some small rendering issues (which I also encountered when zooming) however overall the result is very satisfactory.

Screen capture of writemap print view

Lots of saving options

It allows you to save online, create a backup or even save as XML. Unfortunately it doesn’t save as an image but I guess you can always do a screen capture.

Sharing

Best of all you can share a site map with somebody else. You can even choose if that the person can edit it or not. Great for showing the client.

Screen capture of writemap's sharing preference window

This is a huge step forward from the version I originally saw and so I suspect things will continue to improve over the coming weeks and months. Also I have only touched on a few of my personal highlights. You can also do many other things like..

Add notes to individual pages
Associate a page with a live webpage
Show or hide branches on complex site maps
View the site map as a hierarchical list instead of a tree

If you find yourself having to produce site hierarchies and if you need to get clients feedback on them then this is definitely the tool for you. Best of all it’s free so sign up for an account at writemaps.com

Bargain basement usability testing

Posted in User experience on November 28, 2007 by Paul Boag

There is a lot written about usability testing both online and off. However, except for “Don’t Make Me Think” by Steve Krug they all seem to make it sound very complicated and expensive. So here is the boagworld guide to bargain basement usability testing.

The boss refuses to pay for usability testing, you have no budget of your own and yet you are determined that the site will be as easy to use as possible. What do you do?

There is a perception that usability testing has to be time consuming and expensive but it really doesn’t need to be that way. The key is to do a little and often therefore catching problems before they become too complex to change.

Start off by doing some testing on initial design concepts or even rough sketches. Test again when you have a more detailed information architecture or a basic wireframe. Test yet again once the majority of content is in place and finally do one round before you go live.

That sounds like a lot of testing doesn’t it? Well it would be if the testing involved large numbers of participants who exactly matched the target audience and if they all were tested in expensive usability suites with cameras and observation areas.

However with bargain basement usability testing you make up for quality with quantity. By doing a lot of rounds you will probably pick up on more problems than just a single round done with all the expensive techniques.

For bargain basement usability testing all you need is 5 or 6 friends (or random strangers), a desk, a chair, a computer and a notepad.

Picking your users

Lets start by looking at the users who you will test with. First of all they don’t need to meet the exact demographics of your user group. It can be very time consuming to find people that match your audience. Instead just grab anybody. It doesn’t matter who. Friends, family, random strangers. The reality is that the majority of usability problems are going to be generic across all audiences. Sure if you have a friend that meets the criteria all the better but don’t get hung up on it. Better to test somebody than nobody at all!

Also don’t bother getting anymore than 5 or 6 people. More than that and you really don’t catch that many more problems. It just isn’t worth the additional time testing. You are better off just testing with a few, fixing the problems and testing again. That will reveal new problems which users never reached in the first round.

Your testing environment

Next lets look at the environment. There is no need to test in a usability lab. In fact I would argue the best place to test is in the location people normally surf the net. If possible go to their home or office and test on their own PC. That way they feel relaxed and are more likely to behave normally. If you cant do that then just sit them down in front of your PC and test them there.

Finally you don’t need a camera or observation area. Simply sit with them and jot things down as you go along. If you can get a colleague to join you and take the notes all the better but that is optional.

How to test

So what do you do in a test session? Well that doesn’t need to be rocket science either.

What you can do is largely dictated by what you have to show. When all you have is a couple of design concepts the best you can do is ask the user what they would click on to complete a specific task. You can also ask them if they can quickly spot certain screen elements using the same flash testing we have spoken about before.

As you have more to show you can ask users to complete more complex tasks. You can ask them to find a specific page within your wireframe or ask them what they would expect to find within a section on the information architecture.

Your job is to watch how they interact with your site and note where they struggle. The key to this process is to encourage them to articulate their thinking as they go along. Users will often sit staring blankly at the screen if they are stuck. You need to ask them what options they are considering and why they are struggling.

Before they click on anything ask them why they made the choice they did and what other options they rejected. The idea is to get them to talk as much as possible about what they are doing.

Fundamentally that is it. Obviously I could write a lot more on the subject but that should be enough to get you started. Get 5 or 6 random people to sit in front of a computer, look at your site and ask them to complete a series of tasks while talking about them. Not difficult is it. Why then are usability experts paid so much? ;)

Show 102: Worktime blues

Posted in Classic shows on November 27, 2007 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Paul looks at why you should have a training budget and how to spend it. Marcus looks at capturing requirements and Roo Reynolds introduces us to the possibilities of virtual worlds and their impact on web design.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Marcus Requirements capture | Paul: Spending the training budget | Roo Reynolds on virtual worlds | Question of the week

News and events

10 Absolute “Nos!” for Freelancers

I know that many of the people that listen to the boagworld podcast are freelancers so I keep an eye out for stories that appeal to this group. I was therefore drawn to an article in my news reader entitled 10 Absolute “Nos!” for freelancers. It’s a great article that lists 10 questions asked by clients to which the answer should always be no.

The questions include classics such as “Can you show me a mock-up to help us choose a designer/developer?”, “Can I pay for my e-commerce site from my website sales?” and “Can I just pay the whole amount when it’s done?”. Almost without exception I agreed with every item on this list. The only exception is “Will you register and host my site?” because I think a lot of clients expect this even if it is a pain in the arse. Of course, the fact that I work for an agency rather than as a freelancer could be colouring my view on this one. However, whether you are a freelancer, an agency employee or just an enthusiastic amateur this is all good advice.

Making the most of working with designers

Adaptive Path are an agency I really admire. Not only do they produce some cutting edge work they are also some of the foremost thinkers in the world of web design. I was therefore understandably interested when one of their clients recently asked them how to make the most of working with a design agency.

The resulting blog post called “Making the Most of a Design Engagement” is a fascinating collection of tips that is definitely worth a read.

The subject of how an agency and client engage is something that I have posted on a number of times [1], [2], [3]. However, reading the perspective of another agency (especially one so well respected) is very enlightening. What I found most encouraging of all is that they obviously struggle with the same kind of client issues we all do.

Whether you are somebody who commissions web designers or whether you are a designer yourself take the time to read this short post.

How Open ID will change your site

Just before I went away on holiday (did I mention I had been away?) there was a new post on the Think Vitamin website about OpenID. I am a big fan of OpenID and have spoken about it before on the show. However, its a tricky concept to explain. At its heart it allows you to login to all the many services you use on the web from one single site so having to deal with only a single username and password.

I sincerely believe that if you are building a new website that has any form of login then you should consider including an OpenID login. The problem at the moment is that you will have to do this in addition to the normal login process. You might wonder if it is worth the effort.

The article on the Think Vitamin site does an excellent job at explaining just how significant OpenID is going to be (even though it exaggerates it in places). It explains the background, the problem and the possibilities. If you haven’t looked at OpenID yet or are sceptical about its worth then the Think Vitamin is a great place to start.

Good practice when working with Tag Clouds

Tagging is everywhere these days. From Flickr to Delicious every site seems to have tags. Even blogs like this one has tags. Tags are a useful alternative form of navigation that allows users to quickly find related content no matter where it is in the sites hierarchy. There is no doubt they are powerful and incredibly useful especially on larger sites with a lot of content.

The problem is that they are relatively new. We are still working out how to successfully integrate them into our websites and what role they play. Fortunately a recent article entitled “Tag Clouds Gallery: Examples And Good Practices” attempts to establish some best practice for tagging and makes some suggestions about their design and integration.

If you are doing some design work with tags or if you are looking to add tags to your own site then you may want to take a look at this post. My only word of caution is that it only tells half the story. It addresses tag clouds but says little about how tags on individual pages should be displayed.

Marcus’ bit: Requirements capture

While Paul has been buddying up with Mickey, Donald and Pluto, I have been working with a UK higher education institution at the very early stages of their website redesign project.

One of the things that we have been discussing in detail is the process we will go through to capture requirements and set objectives for the site. I thought I should share them here.

Existing site review

I have looked in the past at carrying out an expert review relating solely on a site’s information architecture. A site review takes on board some aspects of the existing site’s IA but is more general than that.

I tend to look at the following site features very much from a usability point of view:

Navigability – can I find things?
Consistency of navigation
Visual hierarchy – consistency of the design
Writing style
Processes – search, making a comment, ordering etc
Terminology
Content – grouping, repetition, wide/narrow mix, internal/external mix etc

The main purposes of the review are:

To highlight to all stakeholders what the site issues are
To highlight to all stakeholders positive aspects of the existing site
To suggest possible solutions to issues
To explain the processes involved in achieving goals

Stakeholder interviews

We have found that interviewing key internal staff (i.e. content owners) and sometimes key users, is the most valuable exercise in creating a requirements and objectives document.

Each interview is done on a one-to-one basis to ensure that people say what they really mean! The interviews are semi-structured which means that we will create a script of questions but will happily allow people move off-track.

The interviews aim to gather opinion on the site’s user base, weighting of content, issues and opportunities.

Work together

Though we are usually brought in as experts to consult on this type of process it is imperative that the client is involved at every step of the way. This is because one of the purposes of the exercise is information gathering. For example, creating user personas based just on stakeholders interview input may miss something that discussing/reviewing with the web team would not.

Create the document

What we are trying to do is record all findings in a manner that can be used as a basis for all the work to follow – IA, design, copywriting, build etc. In other words – create a list of requirements for the new site and give them an order of priority.

It needs to get into detail to be useful. A recent review we carried out contained over twenty specific opportunities for the site, which target audience groups each issue related to and how the site could deliver each opportunity.

This was coupled with a detailed list of requirements per audience group – 25 audience groups with over a hundred requirements. The requirements we also graded for importance into ‘must haves’, ‘should haves’ and ‘nice to haves’.

Paul’s corner: Spending your training budget

I recently received a question from Harry asking “what approach do you take to training?”. He has some budget set aside and is wondering how he should spend it. As I am always keen to spend other people’s money this seemed the perfect subject for me to talk about… read keeping your skills sharp.

Training course give away

While I am on the subject of training, the guys over at Clearleft have two training courses coming up on January the 24th and 25th in Brighton. The first is CSS mastery by Andy Budd and the second is Bulletproof AJAX by Jeremy Keith. If you would like to attend but cannot get your company to produce the £345 + VAT for the early bird fee then I might be able to help. I have one free place to give away to either course (your choice) for a lucky random winner. We will announce the winner on our Christmas special so entries need to be in by Friday 14th of December. Just send me an email with your name and contact details with “clearleft competition” in the subject line.

Ask the expert: Roo Reynolds on virtual worlds

Paul: Okay, so joining me today is Roo Reynolds who is a meta verse evangelist for IBM, Its nice to have you on the show Roo

Roo: Hi Paul,

Paul: What on earth is a meta verse evangelist?

Roo: That’s a good question, I guess a meta verse evangelist is someone who helps people understand the very exciting and confusing area of virtual worlds.

Paul: Ah, virtual worlds. Now the people listening to this show might be thinking what has that got to do with web design, why have we got someone one on here talking about virtual worlds and I am quite happy to admit that that’s not our normal fair. Its not what we normally cover on the show but I wanted to get Roo on partly because um, well to be frank we grew up together didn’t we pretty much

Roo: we did we were family friends for many, many years

Paul: yeah, which was very bizarre to then discover the he is a kind of world authority on virtual worlds. so that sounds very dramatic doesn’t it

Roo: A thought leader?

Paul: A thought Leader

Roo: I remember inheriting your old star wars toys Paul

Paul: There we go, So I set you of on a good direction in your career by getting you into Sci-fi early. I am now taking all of the credit for all that you have achieved since then.

Roo: Its all thanks to you (giggle)

Paul: yeah (hahahaha) Well um, but I though it was quite interesting. I was doing a presentation where one of the things I wanted to talk about in this discussion was upcoming and emerging technologies and how they would affect things and I wanted to talk about virtual worlds and realised that I knew absolutely nothing about them so I gave Roo a call and we had a chat on the phone. Then I got educated so I figured I ought to pass on that education to everybody that listens to this show so that’s um, a bit of the background. So lets kick of the with the first questions. So what exactly are virtual worlds and why do you think there is so much hype surrounding them at the moment there has been lots of talk about, you know, things like second life and that kind of thing. Perhaps if you could explain them a bit, and explain why there is so much enthusiasm about it at the moment

Roo: yeah I can try. So I guess I can ask you to think about it. as it a good an example anyway, probably the most popular example of a virtual world. At the moment. So these are things which are kind of digital online environments or as some people would describe the as multi-user virtual environments its that kind of online social space. So to the untrained eye they might look a lot like game but there are no game elements inside virtual worlds or rather there are but they exist within the broader world. So something like second life doesn’t really have any point there is no final point no enemies to kill there is no “x” level to achieve its just a world and if you want to inhabit that world and build a shop or you want to habit that and be an explorer and wonder around finding interesting things and talking to people then that cool as well.

Paul: Hmm, I mean the immediate thing which comes out of that is well, you know, what is the point. Why do people take part in virtual worlds and what kind of ways are people using them

Roo: Yeah, there are a lot of different answers to that, almost as many answers as there are different people really so as in the real world there is not point. people make up their own point they decide that the are going to make a lot of money or they are going to be an artist and be well known or open a sex shop or whatever it might be and people will have different personal goals which they set themselves. So really any goal is a tangible thing that people will almost determine for themselves

Paul: So I guess in many ways its like the web itself it’s a tool and how chose to use that tool is largely up to you

Roo: Yeah exactly. And within that you will get lots of different things, I mentioned some, you will also get games within that so people play chess inside virtual worlds and people do all kinds of crazy things. Yeah I guess the answer to your question is really why is there so much hype about them, its because over the last 12 months or 16 months or so the press has been covering this is quite a bit way. That turned it into a kind of hype feeding frenzy. Garner had a very famous prediction about how 80% of active internet users by 2011 I think it was will be using virtual worlds and will have an avatar. Not necessarily in second life but in a virtual world. And all of this make people realise that this might just be the next “big thing” its gone from being the kind of space where people will, I don’t mean this in any derogatory way, everyday people will would hang out in to becoming a space that a lot of big companies and small companies and advertising and marketing firms are really getting interested in. You know we have all seen “the web” in that ,very early in my career, was the web being picked up by corporation and some people almost missed the boat and had to catch up later on

Paul: So Why do you think this is going to be the next big thing? Why do you think a virtual worlds are going to be you know, you talked about how some companies had to play catch up on the internet you almost imply that this I going to be as big as the internet is. Did I miss interpret that or do you really think its going to be incredibly significant and if so why?

Roo: Well, I think it is always going to be a subset of the internet, you know, this is just another communications media and its probably will remain a subset of the web. There will always be a place for flat 2D content, But once you start getting into 3D social stuff and giving people a real time opportunity to relate to each other and see each other and this sense of presence where you can see what the other is paying attention to. For me joining a circle for the first time, a circle of people talking and I walked up to it, and you know people took a step back to invite me into that circle. That was a really compelling moment to me. It was also a real eye opener that the “real world etiquette” that we see in society all the time actually was playing out for real in this virtual space as well. In terms of why it might be the next big thing a lot of different elements are coming together at the same time here, we finally have, almost complete availability of broadband, certainly in this country and in the west. We have got fairly powerful machines now that have 3D graphics accelerators and sound cards, this is something which is now also happening in corporate environments as well as at home. There is kind of a point in time where the… someone might describe it as a tipping point where there is this lot of interest and we have seen this massive press interest, but also big companies getting involved, you know when you see Sony with their playstation home project which is going to be like a lobbying environment for the playstation 3 its been delayed a little bit, but that is really the kind of mass Market application for virtual worlds and it is things like that which really opened my eyes to where this might take is. This is not going to be a niche thing with a few geeks hanging around and some would argue that it has never been that. Really virtual worlds have been attractive to creative people and to the people who feel like they want to kind of express themselves and share things, Its not full of 16 year old boy with glasses sitting in their bedrooms and really there is a difference between games, traditional online games and Massively multiplayer online role-playing games And a space like virtual worlds that allows them to be attractive to the mass market . So yeah I wouldn’t say it is going to replace the web or even be the largest portion of the internet. But there is certainly a growing space for these virtual worlds

Paul: so what, I mean, I can understand how some people are maybe making money out of being involved in virtual worlds where, I don’t know, where they are creating things which they are selling inside that virtual world, but what about other companies, how are larger organisations using it. For example, how do IBM use it?

Roo: well, we are maybe quite weird in because we do an awful lot in virtual worlds. We do everything from recruitment too employee discussions and meetings. although of course we cannot use a virtual world for confidential discussion, we certainly have the types of meetings we would have in public spaces, like conferences, we also have virtual facets to real world conferences like forties a really big conference we run, and we had that for the first time happening in second life running in parallel to the real world event so people who could not make it to the real world event could at least attend. They could see and hear some of the presentations and they could mingle and network. So like I said we are a bit weird in that in that we do so much, that’s partly because we are such a big company. Now a lot of other people would look at it and say they have a very particular need or desire, something they want to get out of it and for some people historically it has been marketing, or advertising, it has been to reach a wider audience or to reach them in a different way. Which is more playful and allows them to be really participants rather than just eye balls

Paul: yeah, I mean one thing you said was earlier was that you referred to virtual worlds as a subset of the internet and the web. Its another that that going on online. One of the things which strikes me is that if you do something, in something like second life, say if you run a conference that conference is kind of just fenced into the second life world so its not going to get picked up by search engines, its not going to be very accessible and things like that do you think that there are going to be changes in that, do you think there will be more crossover between virtual and maybe the more traditional web

Roo: yeah absolutely this is one of the areas that really excites me at the moment, this whole area of interoperability and that needs to be not just between different virtual worlds but also between the web and virtual worlds so this idea of the virtual universe sort of thing as a virtual world or virtual worlds is something that IBM even throws this term 3D internet around quite a lot. In a kind of evolutionary next step when you look at virtual worlds today they tend to be proprietary walled gardens and actually a lot of people would compare them to AOL in the mid nineties but actully when you start thinking about how they may interconnect, and that inset just moving your avatar from world of war craft to second or habbo or whatever its actually much more interesting than that. Its things like bringing you wallet with you your friends list with you being able to blur the lines between virtual worlds and bring content in from the web and share content back out to the web, these things are beginning to be possible and in some ways one of the reason I think second life is so successful because it does have the ability to make request to web content and bring that in so you have dynamic stuff going on. But that is still very early days and I think that we will probably see a massive focus and in fact the big conference in san hosa very recently where this came out in a very big way but a lot of companies will be wanting to get together and its very, you know the will is definitely there to have a real focus in the next few month on interactivity

Paul: I mean so, I am kind of very aware this for many of the people listening to this show that are kind of a mixture of designers, developers, you know, people that are running websites that a lot of this is very theoretical and it is not something they would be directly involved in at the moment. I mean do you think there is anything that they should be doing, that they should be aware of when it comes to virtual worlds. Is this an area you think they should be keeping an eye on or doing anything actively.

Roo: Yeah, I guess most people I talk to even if they are not going to rush out tomorrow and buy some space in some virtual world and um, you know its not for everyone. But most people who I talk to at least want to stay informed once they have got that hook in their head that this is, you know, I obviously find it very interesting but people tend to come away with the a sensation that this might go somewhere and there is enough evidence already today that its fairly compelling, if you look at it on the “garnet height curve” this idea that things go though a life cycle of interest it haven’t yet peaked the top of that and it is now falling back down into this trough of disillusionment in the long run what might happen it might reach the stable plateau where it will actually become a really useful space that interesting work will happen and kind of follow the same progression as so many technologies before it. Most people come away with the feeling that they want to keep an eye on it. Now I guess if I am going to step back a little bit and look more broadly at what is going on, on the web then for web designers and for almost all of them, this is very big on their radar the whole area of social online collaboration and this whole “web 2.0″ umbrella which you started talking about a year ago if not longer and has been you know really quite large for me, that fits very neatly into this same space. What you are talking about are people sharing content and whether that is a a chat or something they have built themselves you know, you look at a world like second life and most of it is not built but the company that runs it. As with youtube and del.icio.us and as with flickr and so many other popular services and site these days, it is built by its users. So maybe it is something people need to be aware of maybe its something which will gradually fit into a growing mentally of this is how the web works. Yes it happens to be 3D at the moment on the popular ones and yes they are not all currently delivered through websites, mind there are plenty that are, and there probably will be an increasing number that are delivered though the browser. So yeah, if people find this stuff interesting then they should keep an eye on it, maybe read a bit more about it.

Paul: Where is a good place for them to go then to wrap up, as far as if they want to find out more information or want to read up about the potential of it, where would you recommend they start by looking?

Roo: well there are a lot o very good blogs out there, if they have a very academic mind then they and want to read some really good writing on the subject then the best one I can think of is http://terranova.blogs.com/ , its one that I have guest authored for, but not the one I regularly write for, the one I regularly write for is http://eightbar.co.uk/about/roo, which has got a growing profile in the space of virtual worlds, That is written by a bunch of IBMers writing about what they find interesting. I have a personal blog a personal blog at http://rooreynolds.com if anyone wants to follow that although, please don’t all come at once

Paul: (Laughs) its really not that popular out podcast that it would…

Roo: no you are paul, you wouldn’t know how popular you are, but you are.

Paul: That’s okay, Thank you very much for you time , I think it is interesting we spend so much time on it with the immediate here and now problems, but every now and again it is nice to poke out heads above the parapet and see what is going on a bit further afield; so thank you very much for time coming and being on the show

Question of the week

Do you think virtual worlds are going to be a mainstream method of online communication or are they a novelty doomed to failure? Answers in the comments.

Show 101: Delusional

Posted in Classic shows on November 6, 2007 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Paul finally looks at the subject of intranets. Marcus delves deeper into the subject of rates and Andy Budd discusses getting design sign off.

Podcast: Download (28.8MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events | Marcus: Rates (Part 2) | Paul: Intranet delusions | Andy Budd on design sign off | Question of the week

News and events

OpenSocial from Google

The big news this week is the launch of OpenSocial, which is a new way for developers to build widgets/applications for a number of high profile social networks. At the moment the line up includes Google, MySpace, LinkedIn and many more. It really is an impressive list of partners.

This is exciting news for those who wish to deliver content to existing social networks as before OpenSocial it was necessary to re-code your application for each site it was delivered to. In many cases this just wasn’t worth the effort and a lot of developers just focused on the big name that is Facebook.

Now developers can build once and deliver to any number of social networking sites. However what is even more interesting is that you can build these applications using nothing more than HTML and Javascript. Unlike building an application for Facebook, coding for OpenSocial looks like it is going to be extremely easy.

The development community is still trying to get their head around what exactly all of this means but it would appear that OpenSocial does not go as far as some would like. For example (as Jeremy Keith points out) it does not solve the problem of having to re-enter your personal details and friends on every site you sign up for.

Content and presentation

I came across an excellent post by Mark Boulton this week that looks at how designers engage with content. He comes at it from the angle of typography, arguing that it is about a lot more than just typefaces. However, his underlying point is much broader.

How often do we really engage with the content on the websites we design? Does the content inform our designs? Are we just building templates that get populated or are we really working with the content in the same way art directors do?

If you look at traditional ad campaigns the design and content work hand in hand. The design reinforces the message and the message informs the design. Although we see this all the time on TV commercials, billboard ads and marketing campaigns we rarely see it on the web.

In many ways we have cracked a lot of the technical challenges of the web. We have best practice for coding, accessibility and usability. We know how to make our sites available and usable for all. But do we know how to really engage with users? How to interact with them on an emotional level? That is the next big challenge.

Online calendars and date pickers

The final news story for today is another great list from Smashing Magazine. This time they list the top online calendars and date pickers. I don’t know about you but I seem to spend a lot of time working with dates for various reasons. Much of the information we put on the web is date specific, from events to blog posts. It is common to want users to be able to search by date or access a calendar of events.

This post from Smashing Magazine offers a plethora of date related tools from online calendars you can embed into your own website to date pickers that avoid those difference in date formatting.

If you ever need to work with date related information this list is worth a look.

Marcus’ bit: Rates Part 2

This can be a tricky subject and, because of that, I’m not going to go into what Headscape charges. I’m going to look at some survey figures and talk about charging for different services and when and how you should go about raising your rates.

This topic is of interest to both clients looking for an agency as well agencies and freelancers – we all want to know if we’re competitive. To save myself writing about this from both angles, and probably confusing everyone, I’m just going to concentrate on this from an agency standpoint. However, each point is easy to switch round to the client angle.

Enough rambling…

You get what you pay for

So using my favourite car analogy, are you offering a Bentley, a BMW, a Ford or a Lada! I guess the point I’m making is don’t over or under sell yourself. Recognise what you can offer and go hard for that market.

Have you got thousands of happy clients being serviced by a hundred staff in marble clad offices in central London? Or are you and your mate from Uni just kicking off your business in your dad’s garage?

You might not like it but talent, in this case, doesn’t really matter one jot. No big spending client is going to go for our second option above. This is fact of life. Accept it, move on.

If you want to charge top dollar then you need to show the following:

Relevant, high quality portfolio
Reliability and flexibility
Wide range of services
Innovation or at least ‘keeping up’

So, what do people charge

Right here, right now – I don’t know. However, I have got details of a UK survey carried out a couple of years back that, with a bit of an uplift, are I believe still relevant.

These are daily charge out averages across all agencies that submitted to the survey:

Director – £750
Consultant – £650
Creative lead – £670
Designer – £570
Project manager – £600
IA/usability consultant – £610
Developer – £610

Of course, the actual figures varied greatly even within certain disciplines. For example, creative lead rates were as low as £370 and as high as £800.

Pricing roles

At Headscape we used to have one flat rate for all services provided. At the time, this felt fair and was certainly easy to manage.

As we have grown, we have found that the pressures on some staff, particularly the directors, have grown markedly and therefore we have had to charge more for those roles.

Regionality

The survey suggests that regional price differences are, pretty much, London and ‘everywhere else’. Notably with the South West coming a strong second! (We are based, more or less, in the South West).

Large city based agencies will always be able to charge a premium but I expect this is less so now due to ease of communication. We have had a number of clients over the years that we have never met.

Raising prices

This is a balance. We should all raise our prices to keep up with inflation but, we should only do so if we think the market will take it. Also, it’s possible that a particular service that was seen as ‘cutting edge’ and therefore got a high price tag, may later become ‘run of the mill’ so it’s possible that you may need to cut the price for that service.

Paul’s corner: Intranet delusions

I have been asked a number of times to talk about Intranet development and I have always avoided doing so. This is partly because I am not an expert in the field (although that doesn’t normally stop me talking about something!) However, it is also because intranets are a massive area and one in which so many mistakes are made. There seems to be a huge amount of naivety about developing and running Intranets. Against such a backdrop I am somewhat unsure where to begin.

In the end I have decided to take 5 of the most common misconceptions about Intranets and see if we can shed some light on why they are wrong.

Ask the expert: Andy Budd on design sign off

Paul: Joining me today is Andy Budd, hello again Andy.

Andy Budd: Hi Paul, how are you doing?

Paul: Not bad, it’s been a little while since I’ve had you on boagworld, I think?

Andy Budd: It has, I think it’s been a couple of years now, I think it was d.construct 2006 was the last time I remember chatting to you.

Paul: Unbelievable, I’ve spoken to you since then on the .net podcast mind, so, we’re keeping in touch.

Andy Budd: Yeah, and also just hanging out together, and doing, ya know, things.

Paul: I try and obviously avoid you, because whenever I meet you, you seem to be horribly rude to me but I will forgive you.

Andy Budd: What?!?

Paul: (Laughs)

Andy Budd: Oh Paul, you know that’s not true, that’s not true.

Paul: Ye, but I want to paint you in a bad light and get a bit of sympathy for myself.

Andy Budd: Oh okay, that’s your tactic actually isn’t it?

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: I also heard that you try and play dumb, so ya know, everybody else comes across as being smart and you get the sympathy vote.

Paul: You’ve been listening to the Rissington Podcast haven’t you?

Andy Budd: (Laughs) I have indeed.

Paul: (Laughs)

Andy Budd: I’m not sure I’d buy that but, ya know, it sounds good.

Paul: You think I’m just naturally dumb?

Andy Budd: … So what was the first question?

Paul: Okay.

Andy Budd: (Laughs)

Paul: First question, no, what we’re going to talk about today with Andy is just looking at maybe processes, ya know, when you run a website company how do you go about dealing with getting things like design sign off and this was something that came up quite a lot in the 100^th episode that we recorded a little while back and is also some we talked, we vaguely talked about running a web company on the .net podcast recently but I kind of wanted to home in more on design, because design is a hugely subjective area and getting design sign off is quite a challenging process. So Andy lets kick by just, if you could give us a rough sketch about how clear:left go through the design process, what are the steps that you go through?

Andy Budd: Yeah absolutely, it’s kind of interesting because it has changed, ya know, a small amount anyway from when when we started to what we’re doing now. I guess one of the main differences from what we do to what a lot of other agencies do is we generally only present a single design concept. It’s very common, particularly for companies that come more out of a print background to do this whole idea of like, we’ll show three design concepts to a client, I think that partly comes from a desire of print design companies too sort of make a bit more money rather than just showing one design, they do three designs a let the client pick. I’ve always found that this is kind of an odd way of doing things because, well first of all I don’t think you really giving your client good value because what your ending up doing is your doing three times the amount of work and the client only get a third of the value, they get to pick one of those three designs.

Paul: (Agrees)

Andy Budd: The other thing I’ve found is whenever I worked at agencies that have taken that process and I’ve been the designer developing the designs invariably what happens is you, say you’ve got a week to produce the designs, you spend maybe three of four days on one design and it’s working really well and your happy with it and it’s moving in the right direction, you only spend one or two days on another design which you kind of fine with, if the client picks it then your happy because it looks nice and then you’ll do something quickly for the last half a day just to kind of fill up the space.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: And then you have this horrible situation were by, even if the client picks the design that your least convinced with or what more than likely happens is they’ll pick elements from each design and create a bit of a Frankenstein’s monster, and I kind of do think that clients come to professional design consultancies for their design knowledge and their design experience and I think that from my perspective and from my experience the design that the designer feels most happy about is probably the design that fits closest to the clients goals, because that the one they’ve been spending the most time and effort on, thinking about, so really the first thing we tend to do at clear:left is only ever show our client an initial design or one design. That doesn’t necessarily mean that we’ll only create one design, quite often, for instance, Paul one of our designers, our lead designer might create a couple of different versions initially and we’ll have a design review and I’ll look at what’s going on and we’ll chat about various pros and cons of the different designs and he might spin off in another direction but we tend to show the client what we think is the best bet rather than something that is half finished or just something that we don’t think is quite right.

Paul: Yeah, I would agree with that, that the whole principle of if you show a client a multiple designs they inevitably pick a little bit from each of them and that never quite works as well as it sounds. I mean, have you ever tried with multiple designs, having more than one designer work on those designs so you do like one each with three of you or something like that?

Andy Budd: Well again, I think this goes back to giving value to the client and I don’t think it makes sense for the client to pay for two or three designers time and expertise to give them the opportunity to only pick one.

Paul: (Agrees)

Andy Budd: I think what tends to happen in that sense is design stops being about solving problems and starts to become much more subjective and almost a beauty competition.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: So what happens is rather than the client picking a design or understanding the design from a technical point of view, ya know, why you’ve, ya know, what mood your trying to create or what feeling or sensation or how the hierarchy works and how the hierarchy that you’ve created matches the hierarchy of use that you need a user to flow through. Rather than it being more scientific it becomes much more subjective and it becomes much more about, ya know, whether the client liked particular colour, they had a particular colour on their bedroom wall and they hated it or they loved it or it’s their favourite colour, so I think, again, just having that kind of three design approach makes it much for subjective and much less scientific.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: I do agree that if a clients got lots of money, ya know, your talking with a big client and they’ve got months and months of design budget available then it does make sense, the kind of clients that myself and most of my colleagues sort of deal with, they got reasonable budgets but they haven’t got budgets to burn so they want to see as much value as possible and the idea of pitching two designs just kind of, ya know, seems… it just doesn’t in an environmentally sort of, ya know, challenging world that we live in at the moment, where people want to recycle and people want to see usage. Throwing two designs away always seems a bit, kind of wasteful.

Paul: I mean, talking about the thing of making the process more scientific and less subjective, how to do you go about encouraging the client to set aside personal preference and focus on how they should really be judging the design? And, sorry, there’s a spin off question now which is how should they really be judging the design?

Andy Budd: Well, it’s a really difficult question …. I think everybody feels that they have a good understanding of what design is. Everyone’s got their own personal opinion, everyone’s got their own personal tastes, so everyone feels that they’ve got an understanding of design. We’ve all watched changing rooms, we all know that a fancy designer comes along and he’s got big cuffs and ya know paints, crazy colours on the wall, sticks vases all over the place and that’s design, but I think what people actually see is not design but the manifestation of design. The actual design process is much less creative than people like to think, it’s much less throwing bits of colour on the wall and using your creative juices to see what colours and shapes match. It is much more the processes, much more the starting off with a central problem or a central set of problems that you’re trying to solve and using design techniques: hierarchy, colour, weight, positioning, to create a design that solves a solution, and again, and you have to look at design works within constraints. If you are asked to sit down in front of a blank canvas and just create something, that’s much more than an artistic endeavour than a design endeavour. Funny enough, we were having this conversation in the office today, a couple of minutes before we had this conversation and it’s much easier for good designers to have constraints, to have content to design around to have an idea who’s going to be using the site so I think design is much more the scientific process than a number of clients give it credit for. In answer to your first question “how do you get clients to feed back in the right way”, it’s very, very difficult. Ideally, what I’d like to say is, we sit down with every single client and explain the design process in detail, explain how it all works and stuff but unfortunately, design is very subjective and also feed back is very, very difficult to interpret. If a client comes to you and says “I want it more wizzier, more zingy” their using the vocabulary they have at hand to describe something they have an idea of in their mind and our job as designers is to try and understand what it is they are actually trying to say. They are trying to communicate a visual thing or a motional thing with words and quite often it’s not possible, quite often, you will have to try two or three different approaches before you actually figure out what “zingy” means. Does “zingy” mean bright and colourful, does “zingy” mean they want motion and so it’s difficult having design discussions with people who aren’t trained in using ya know, having design discussions and frankly, I find it difficult enough sort of having internal design reviews with our designers and trying to describe what’s right and what’s wrong with the design. So I do, ya know, I do really understand from a clients perspective, how difficult it is to try and deal with their designers and get their designs or get their sense across. I think we always try and take it back to first principals. We try and encourage our clients, no to sort of worry or obsess too much over the details but to kind of think more of the broad picture so not more whether you like this particular colour or whether you like this particular shape but ya know, what kind of sense of feeling you’re trying to have this design communicate ya know, we’re doing some work with an environmental website at the moment and they really wanted to create a sense of a feeling of nature and openness and warmness but really avoid the kind of clich233s ya know, let’s have pictures of trees and ya know, it will all be green and kind of earthy. So they communicated the sense and the emotion they wanted to get across and then we obviously translated that and put it into graphical format and I think in reality, that’s what the designers’ job is. It’s translation, except instead of translating one written language into another, we’re translating a written language or an oral language into a visual language and so it’s interesting but yeah, it’s setting the boundaries and saying to people, this is not, ya know, we’re not asking you at this stage to comment on the details or on the general sense, the layout or the feeling and as you move along, get more and more specific.

Paul: You talk about how sometimes a client uses a different language to describe what they’re seeking from a design so do you ever use things like mood boards or what other sites do you like as a way of kind of getting an idea of their personal tastes? And should you be catering for their personal tastes anyway?

Andy Budd: It’s a fine balance, I mean, yes and no. Ultimately, it’s not the client that will be using the website, it’s the clients’ client, so the clients’ customers so really the ultimate goal is to create something that, ya know, the customers or the visitors are going to use, the visitors are going to love and their going to feel as though it’s their own but obviously, you are also dealing with human emotion and if a clients paying you money to create a design, you want them to be happy with it as well. Again, it’s an interesting challenge. We used to in the past, really encourage our clients to go out and have a look at different websites that are out their and we’ve actually got a, sort of a flicker group of inspiring websites that we can point clients to and say, look, here’s some of our favourite websites. Why don’t you go and have a look at some of these, ya know, use those as a basis because it’s really useful instead of asking people to off cold to describe what they want and to actually show you stuff and say, I like the typography of this site or I like the colour scheme of that site. A lot of designers will actually say, you shouldn’t ever show sites, ya know because then it kind of gets a bit derivative but I think, ya know, as we’re working on the web it is helpful to show clients similar designs in that same medium so I think it is useful for us anyway to show clients sites. And that’s always a good starting point, ya know, we like this site because and we like that site because. Unfortunately is sometimes backfires and sometime, particularly if the client isn’t as, sort of embedded in the design community as we are, they will pick some sites that they use on a daily basis that don’t necessarily show good design as designer might preserve it and then we have to kind of work round the edges and show kind of show them what we think they might be kind of thinking about, but the mood boards is a really good point it’s something that we’ve started using more recently and it’s a really good kind of first step, rather that jumping straight to the design process and possibly missing a translation, we have started showing clients mood boards, and if some of your listeners don’t know what mood boards are, they’re essentially a very quick way of explaining a mood or a sense or a feeling or a colour scheme on a design without actually having to do visual design, so what you do is take elements of design that you might have seen elsewhere, you might take some interesting photos you’ve seen on flickr, and maybe those photos have an interesting colour scheme or they might have a particular theme or sense that your trying to get across, ya know, maybe take some navigation elements from one site or a t-shirt you particular like the colour scheme from, a whole bunch of different things, put them down on a piece of paper, I mean in the old days it was a piece of paper in advertising, they would cut out bits from magazines. These days we tend to do digital mood boards which are more graphic art and photos and present them to the client, and that gives the client a kind of basis in which they can spin off their opinions, so they can look now at this mood board and say well, we said we wanted it clean, we didn’t mean we wanted it sort of white, we meant we wanted it sort of, ya know, some other adjective that works with clean, and it kind of gives them a discussion point, rather than just sitting around words you can now look at something physical and tangible and the good thing is mood boards only need to take an hour or two. And again we’re working with a client at the moment and we initially created some mood boards for them and it sparked a discussion and they weren’t sure about some of the things on the mood board but some of the things on the mood board they really liked so we worked out a second iteration which was even closer to what they wanted and when we finally sort of got to a level that we felt both of us understood what we expected from a design point of view then you can move onto the next stage.

Paul: Yeah, I mean it’s quite interesting, I think design from my personal experience is as much about what you do before you site down in front of photoshop or whatever than it is actually in the actually putting pixels on the page. I’d be interesting in what other things you do before you get to the design stage, you’ve said you use mood boards, what about things like personas what business background information do you tray and get before you start? Do you get people to personify there company and describe what kind of person it would be, ya know all the kind of techniques that people use, what do you guys use?

Andy Budd: Well again, that’s really interesting, I mean your right, a majority of people kind of think design is a visual thing, ya know, so, ya know the first thing they think about or expect when they’re getting designs is to see some kind of photoshop comps or some pretty pictures, clear:left we are a user experience design consultancy and what that essentially means is we kind of do meta design, we don’t just do the visual stuff but we design the systems and so what we do from the outset of dealing with our clients is we have workshops with them we ya know, a big discovery period to find out exactly what it is that they want, ya know, requirements gathering, we’ll do research into their users so quite often we’ll go out and we’ll interview potential users, their potential kind of market, we’ve done work in the education sector we’re we’ve spent a few days in schools and we’ve talked to teachers and pupils and school secretaries to find out how they do their day to day work, what kind of features and functions they would require off a site, using this information research we might create personas, and personas are a great way of capturing a rough demographic I guess of users and it allows you to start thinking in terms of how people will use the site because what tends to happen is people will sit down and think of the stereotypical user but each users got different needs and the nice thing about personas, is if you’ve got your personas fairly accurate it can then help you work out what features and functionality you need by following on the scenarios, a scenario is say your buying shoes or you doing a shoe store, so it might be that I want to buy a pair of dress shoes because I’m going to a formal function so I want to get a pair of smart shoes to match my suit so then what you can do is you can sit down and plan out on this system, how would I get from the homepage through to the purchasing process, how to get from a to b to c and that kind of helps design the system. The problem with personas is quite often you will do personas and they’re sitting in a draw, so personas aren’t right for every single project, and we’ve had a couple of experiences recently were we have done personas and we probably shouldn’t have done because the client already had a fairly good understanding of what they wanted to do but it’s kind of trial and error.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: Most of the time we find personas work really, really well, but they do work best when the client doesn’t really have a set idea of how their website is going to function and ye we do wire frames and wire frames are a big part of what we do, a big part of information architecture and big part of the user experience and design and again if your listening are you aren’t aware of what a wire frame is, it’s kind of somewhat like a story board in movies, so in a movie rather than just going and filming everything because celluloid’s really expensive, they’ll get some artist in to draw out scene by scene, frame by frame almost, how the story is going to progress and that’s a way of planning the shots, planning the locations and you can sit down in front of the story board and get a real sense of how the movie is going to flow and to work before you ever need to set up on set, and so we do something very similar with our websites, we create wire frames, which they can be on paper, they can be in HTML and it’s literally kind of a wire frame a kind of rough representation of how the site is going to fit together, and so when it comes to visual design and it come to the interface design the designer isn’t working from a blank sheet, they’re working from a fairly details blueprint, no so much on layout terms but on content, ya know, we need to have this block of content here, this is what inside this block of content, this is the hierarchy, this is more important, this is less important and so basically once the client has seen the wire frames and understood how the process is supposed to flow, they’re already signed off and they’ve already agreed to lay off the design decisions were as more traditional visual designers would try and do that on a photoshop document and I don’t really think you can capture, ya know, if you doing a fairly flat design or a fairly simple brochure website, you can probably capture that sense in a photoshop document but if you doing a more advanced, if you doing a more complicated site that has more interaction, maybe a, like a sort of social software, web applications site, you can’t show all this stuff in a flat document so you need to have this click through process.

Paul: No that’s cool. Okay to rap up I just wanted to ask about the subject of iterations because it’s something that we’re asked quite a lot and basically what people do or are concerned about is how many iterations do you go through when the client comes back to you and says I want this changing and then you make that change and then they want something else changing and it kind of can go on through this endless cycle, were do you draw the line do you have a contractual arrangement, we’ll do three versions of this or how do you deal with it?

Andy Budd: Again a very interesting question, the way we tend to work a clear:left is we tend to sell our services based on time spent rather than some kind of end point, because design is very subjective and as you say, you can’t sort of keep going on and on and on and keep making changes because not only will the project spiral out of control in terms of time but also in terms of budget and stuff, so what we tend to do with our clients and with our project is we specify a certain amount of time, we’ll spend 20 days on visual design and ye 20 days on a template build or whatever and we are a little bit flexible and this kind of almost goes back to something I was talking about on my blog recently about deadlines and stuff, ya know, if design takes a couple of days more and templates take a couple of days less in the end it all kind of balances it’s self out, but we do tract time to make sure we’re on track, we tend to say to clients that we’ll offer two iteration, again sometimes it requires more sometimes it requires less, but all along we track the time so to make sure we’re not going vastly off. What we try and do is kind of make the iterations increase in size so going back to what we where say before about the mood boards, you can do a mood board really, really quickly and you can get to a point a lot faster, understanding what the clients needs are by giving them a mood board or a couple of mood boards, a couple of quickly little iterations and, ya know you get significantly further down the line. Something we’ve been doing recently which I think is a really interesting idea and seems to be working really well is this concept of a one day design concept.

Paul: Okay.

Andy Budd: And so what we do is, in the olden days we’d spend like maybe a week coming up with an initial design concept and it was really good and it was really high level and it was really detailed and we’d give it to the client and if the client wasn’t sure about various elements, we’d be a little bit, because we’d spend so much time and effort into the design we’d be a little bit more resistant to making changes, were as we realised that if we did just a quick design iteration, that was just one day or one and a half days we’re much less kind of stuck on the design because it will be rough, because it will a bit rough and ready, which means that we’re much more flexible and happy to make changes and go in different directions also it means that if you are only given a day or a day and a half to do a design, you don’t obsess on the details, you work on the more broad brush strokes, you get the feeling and the sense and the layout right, you don’t worry about how the text is aligning or how the icons are place and that give clients first of all some instant feedback and rather than the old days, you’d go away and do a design, magic would happen and two weeks later a completely finished product, it gives clients a bit more of an insight and a bit more input into the process.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: They’ll see after a design they’re getting something that’s already start like a real project and they’re getting really excited, they sort of start inputting and feeding back. The difficulty is managing the right kind of feedback and getting the right kind of feedback at the right time because obviously in the early phase is what we really want is our clients to feedback on is just the overall look and feel. Is the layout right, is it giving the right sense, and not obsess about the details because we haven’t spent any time on the details.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: And then we iterate and once we’ve got an idea we’ll do another iteration which is more finessed and then maybe a third iteration which is more finessed. And then normally by that point because we’ve gone through a bunch of different steps and we’ve kind of had client buy in on the way by the time it gets to the second, third round of iterations, it usually is just dealing with the details.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: The problem is that almost all clients obsess about the details more than they really need too. And it easy too, I understand, if someone puts a design in front of you and they say, give me feedback clients obviously want to be really helpful, and they’ll jump into the design and say well that buttons miss aligned or I don’t like that orange I think it should be a different colour or whatever and really obsess about the details and I think at that point, ya know, that’s our job to obsess about the details I think. As designers we are more obsessive and we’ll sit there and we’ll move things a couple of pixels or ya know, play around in the colour palette and make sure things are exactly right and so what we’ve been tending to do is once we’ve got the initial direction of the project, once we know that the client likes the overall scheme, we kind of go ahead and build it and don’t necessarily go ahead and design it and while we’re not necessarily, not asking for feedback, so we’ll present our designs and if clients look at them and say oh well this is wrong and that’s wrong, that’s fine we’ll go and make the changes, as the client looks at them, I think basically what I’m trying to say is if you ask for detailed feedback you’ll get detailed feedback, if you present something to a client then if there is an issue they’ll feed back and if there isn’t they won’t. I think this has come about from a lot of usability testing, we sit down with test subjects and if we ask them for an opinion they’ll always give us an opinion, trying to be helpful whether that opinion is something they really think or something they’ve thought, well I’ve been asked to say something so I better say something.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: And so we’ve been trying to be a lot more subtle with feedback and rather asking for a definite cut off time, a definite sign off, we now expect a long list of stuff, it’s like here are the design, if you have anything to say that’s fine but if you don’t that’s great we’ll just get on and implement them.

Paul: Yeah, I like that. That’s a really good approach. Thank you very much Andy that was a really interesting conversation. I think every agency does things in a slightly different way and it’s good to hear the clear:left methodology.

Andy Budd: Excellent, well actually, sorry can I just jump in there and say something.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: Because I think this is an interesting point and it is a problematic thing, I don’t think a lot of companies have a process and a lot of companies will, ya know, every single project they will do the same thing time and time again and that’s good because you know at the start of a project exactly what your going to do step 1, step 2, step 3, the problem is not all projects and not all clients want all those step or all of those steps are necessarily valid for the thing they are trying to do.

Paul: Yeah.

Andy Budd: So I think what we’ve learned over time really at clear:left and it’s something we’re still learning and I think everybody’s still learning is rather than having a process have a methodology have a bunch of tools that you can use on a particular project, so if a certain project requires wire framing we do wire framing, if it doesn’t, drop it. Ya know, if a certain project needs a mood board, we do a mood board if a certain project doesn’t, we don’t do it. And so I think a methodology is the right point here rather than a process because a methodology keeps you flexible and a methodology means you don’t get stuck doing the same stuff over and over again.

Paul: Excellent, Okay, thank you very much Andy and I’m sure we will have you back in at least before the next two years are up. (Laughs)

Andy Budd: Yay, well thanks very much Paul delightful.

Question of the week

What tips or techniques do you use to smooth the process of design sign off? Answers in the comments.

Show 86: Boagworld Book

Posted in Classic shows on July 10, 2007 by Paul Boag

On this week’s show: Paul talks about taking a brand online, Marcus gives some advice about reviewing your information architecture and Ian Lloyd introduces us to the challenges of designing for screen readers.

Podcast: Download (44.6MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Paul’s personal news

Just a bit of personal news before I get into the industry related stories. I want to let everybody know I have signed a contract to write a book. The book is going to be primarily for website owners rather than web designers, however to be honest I think it could appeal equally to both. I intend to look at what “client’s need to know about building and running a website” so hopefully it should show by example how best to communicate and work with clients.

The most exciting thing about this book from my point of view, is the fact that I want to write it as a collaborative process with you the boagworld community. I am going to release chapters for you to see in advance of publication and also blog on various aspects of what I am writing. I really want to encourage you to share your thoughts and make suggestions as we go along through comments and the forum. I have already set up a forum thread dedicated to book ideas as well as an initial blog post on the book.

Obviously writing a book is a really slow process, but hopefully it is something that we can all get excited about.

News and events

Building for the iphone

Unsurprisingly there is a lot of information appearing relating to building web applications for the iphone. There is an iphone gallery consisting of hundreds of screenshots of the iphone. This is great if you want to mirror the look and feel of the iphone as closely as possible. There is also the iphone developers guide from Apple which provides loads of great advice. Finally there is iphoney, a piece of software that replicates some of the iphone’s web browsing functionality and lets you see what your application will finally look like.

Of course whether it is worth developing for the iphone at this stage is another matter. I guess if you are trying to reach the tech-savy audience who are iphone owners then maybe. Otherwise it might be better to wait until the iphone becomes more mainstream or other phones start offering the same level of web experience.

@media podcast

I was gutted to miss @media this year. Well, I say gutted, I was actually on a really pleasant family holiday, so I cant complain. However, I did miss a great line up of speakers talking about some amazing subjects. I was particularly depressed to have missed Jesse James Garrett’s keynote on “Beyond AJAX” and “Diabolical Design: The Devil is in the Details” by Jason Santa Maria.

Fortunately the recordings of the @media sessions are beginning to filter out for me to download and listen to. However, note that I don’t call them a podcast. There is no feed that I can find which is extremely frustrating.

Setting that little moan aside, it is great to be able to listen to these speakers even though I did not attend the conference and I would strongly encourage you to download and listen to a few yourselves.

Common mistakes in web copy

Although we would prefer to avoid it, the reality is that as web designers we write far more copy than we would like to admit. As for those of us who are website owners, a substantial part of our responsibility is writing good web copy.

We have talked on the show before about writing good copy but our focus has mainly been on style rather than technical detail. This week, I came across a post about common grammatical mistakes. However what I liked about this post is that it wasn’t focusing on the silly details of grammar that don’t really apply particularly well to the conversational tone of the web. Instead it looked at errors such as when to use “me, myself or I” and the difference between “i.e. and e.g”.

If you ever have to write copy then spend a few minutes to check it out. It only covers the worse offenders so doesn’t take long to read.

A department dedicated to the web

Jeffrey Zeldman has written a post entitled “let there be web divisions“. If you are responsible for deciding who should manage your corporate website then you simply must read this. If you are a mere foot solider then it might not be as relevant but it is still a good read.

Basically Jeffrey proposes that a company website should not sit under IT or marketing (as is traditional) but should be a division in its own right. I am not going to repeat all of Zeldman’s logic, but I have to say I wholeheartedly agree with it.

Websites are simply too multi disciplined to sit comfortably under either department and too important to be caught in an endless tug-of-war.

Paul’s corner: Taking a brand online

About a week ago, I had to give a presentation to a board of directors ,explaining the process we went through to develop a new design for their website. A large proportion of that presentation focused on the issue of brand identity. This organisation had a very well developed style guide and we spent a lot of time and effort getting that guide to work online. My presentation talked about the various steps involved and it occurred to me this might make an interesting podcast section.

I have also put together a blog post on the subject of “taking a brand online” and it is this that I cover on the show.

Marcus’ bit: Information architecture review

I am currently in the process of carrying out an information architecture review for a new Headscape client. I have done a fair amount of IA work over the years but I have found myself particularly enjoying this one so I thought I’d waffle on about what I’ve been doing.

We have covered the various aspects of IA work in previous podcasts – Expert Review, Stakeholder Interviews, Card Sorting and Wire Frame testing. This section is looking at the first of these, expert review, in a bit more detail.

I think it’s worth explaining what I mean by Expert Review. When we carry out an Expert Review we are effectively analysing a client’s existing site content, site structure and naming conventions with a view to creating a new IA based on our experience of using and developing websites. This is a collaborative process with the client – it has to be; we can make logical, usability based decisions but cannot claim to be experts in the client’s particular field.

First things first

I make sure that I have a good grasp of a number of things prior to carrying out an IA review. At the kick off meeting make sure the following are covered:

Target audience – this is crucial for the development of the IA. It may be that the existing site caters for one group well but another poorly.
Site aims – is there a stepped process that the client wants their users to go through.
Design – things like horizontal over vertical navigation can affect the IA.
Homepage requirements – find out what the killer apps and content are as these will need to be linked to from the homepage.
Finally, have a general discussion about content and site structure. See what the client thinks is important and what’s not.

Map out the existing site

The first thing I do is map out the existing site’s IA. This is a fairly slow and laborious task but it is the best way to not only learn about a site’s content and structure but also to understand what they do and what they offer.

Be logical, captain

Usually, the goal of this type of exercise is to streamline content into groups and name those groups so that users will understand what’s inside them.

Site’s that have grown organically over a period of time tend to spread content all over the place. It is usually fairly easy, though time consuming, to group content together. There are various methods for doing this; I tend to print out the existing site IA (that I usually create in Excel unless it’s a particularly small site, then I might use Visio) and scribble all over the printout until I’m getting somewhere. Some people like to use cloud/cluster diagrams (either on paper or using software) or there is always the age old method of creating ‘cards’ where each page name is written onto a scrap of paper. This is a bit like doing card sorting on your own where you group the cards into piles and give names to each pile.

Naming

We come from the ‘it does exactly what it says on the tin’ school of page/section naming. Marketing departments often don’t! A good example of this is the trend to verbs as section names over nouns. I remember one client wanting to call a site section ‘Enjoy’ when the section covered ‘Leisure Activities’. No prizes for guessing what we recommended!

Labels should be as descriptive as possible. Sometimes this can be difficult when:

there isn’t much space, for example, ‘How to register for our newsletter’ won’t fit on the average button, even ‘Newsletter Registration’ would probably be too much for a top level, so I would go for just ‘Newsletter’. It’s fairly obvious that the content underneath will relate to the organisation’s newsletter and should logically include registration, whereas ‘Register’ leaves the user asking ‘register for what?’
Sometimes sites are so big that main sections can include too much differing content to be labelled descriptively. In this case, I would recommend either shortcuts on the homepage replicating the main sections that include descriptive words or create drop down navigation that displays the lower level links.

Section ordering

This should follow some sort of desired path through the site. For example, the client may want users to get a bit of background, followed by an understanding of what the organisation offers, followed by some examples of previous work with a view to finally making contact. This would translate to:

About Us | Services | Case Studies | Contact Us

Conventions

Users don’t want to have to think (that sounds familiar!); they want to look and understand straight away. Following conventions helps with this process. For example, many sites include an About Us section as the first main section. This usually includes some history, annual reports, job vacancies and contact details. Users looking for this type of information don’t want to have guess that this information might be under, for example, ‘Company Background’ which is located at the far right of a horizontal navigation.

Collaborate – to a point

When you have created your first draft it then needs to be reviewed by the client, discussed and iterated until everyone is happy. Take on board any changes that are based on your lack of understanding of what the client does but be prepared to stand your ground on issues relating to web conventions and usability – after all, they’re paying for your expertise.

Ask an expert: Ian Lloyd on screen readers

On this week’s show we have Ian Lloyd giving us an introduction to the world of screen readers. I vividly remember the first time I heard a screen reader being used. I was gob-smacked by how painful an experience it was and I am still amazed that anybody manages to use them effectively.

It struck me that many of you listening to this show might not have heard a screen reader before. Hearing what blind people have to work with really makes you take their needs seriously and so I thought I would get Ian on the show to give you a taster.

In his segment, Ian takes us through some classic problems that screen reader users experience. Unfortunately to best understand what is going on in some of the examples you need to see what he is doing. In order to get around this problem Ian has made a screencast to accompany the audio. There was too much detail to make it available online or via your video pod but you can download the screen reader .mov file here.

What follows is a transcript of Ian’s section of the show…

Hello Paul, Hello Marcus and hello to listeners of Boagworld. This is the ‘Ask the Expert’ section and today I’m going to be talking about screen readers.

Now, I don’t actually qualify [meant to say classify!] myself as an expert screen reader user simply because I don;t use one on a day-to-day basis, because I’m not forced to; I do have good vision. As such, the way that I would use a screen reader would be different from someone who has to use it on a day-to-day basis. That said, I still think it’s useful to demonstrate to people what a screen reader sounds like. And the reason for this is that as far as I am aware on your podcast although you’ve talked about accessibility a lot and mentioned screen readers I don’t believe we’ve ever had a demonstration of what they actually are like for people when pages are built incorrectly.

So, today I’m going to be showing a few problems using a screen reader. I’m also going to be doing this as a video, so this is a screencast. I understand that at the end of this you will be providing a URL for listeners so that they can access this and view what’s happening on screen. Because of course it’s all well and good to listen to this stuff but to get the full context it would be good to actually see the video as well. I will try my best to describe what’s happening on screen throughout this podcast though.

Now the first example we’re going to look at is Amazon dot com. And somewhat cheekily I’ve brought up the page for my own book on Amazon. And, er, just having a look around at what I can find on the screen and there are some issues there. So, let’s have a look at this.

[Screen reader reads out page graphic correctly 'Build your own website the right way using HTML and CSS, Link graphic']

Oh, so that’s not too bad. I’ve just found an image there and it’s announced it correctly because it’s found a suitable alt attribute but underneath there are a couple of thumbnail images which, if I want to access those, it gives me a whole different … well, hear for yourself:

[Screen reader announces: 'See larger image, Link' then moves to next link, the thumbnail image and reads an unintelligible string of characters - numbers letters and underscores - out to the listener].

Mmm, doesn’t make an awful lot of sense does it? Let’s try the next image:

[Screen reader reads out more unintelligible characters and takes almost 8 seconds to read it out]

So, what’s happening there? Well, it’s quite simple: there’s no alt attribute defined for that image and so JAWS tries to fill in the gap and, er … oh I didn’t mention earlier that JAWS is the name of the screen reader that I’m using. So it tries to fill in the gaps because it doesn’t have an alt attribute it uses the file name instead and the filename, as is often the case on Amazon, is a right load of old gobbledegook! So it doesn’t give it any useful information about that image.

Here’s another example of the same thing.

[Screen reader reads out an image gallery as 'thumbs slash zero, thumbs slash one, thumbs slash two' etc]

So this is actually a photo gallery, erm, with a bunch of thumbnail images hence it’s reading ‘thumbs’ because that’s the folder where the thumbnail [image] is actually in and it’s reading them sequentially as well. It doesn’t sound quite as painful as the Amazon example but it still doesn’t tell you any useful information about the images on the page.

[Screen reader announces more examples from the same page]

So let’s listen to a slightly improved version of that:

[Screen reader announces the same images but with appropriate alt attributes, e.g. 'The Mystery Machine, driven by Scooby' for a photo of a camper van that is painted like the Mystery Machine from the cartoon Scooby Doo]

If we were to look at that on the video I’m showing that page with the style sheet disabled and the alt attributes displaying inline next to the image. As you could hear in the second example it was far more usable – you could actually understand what the image was about (as long as you understood some of the VW terminology used in there), whereas in the first example none of the images actually had alt attributes so it was just trying to read out the location of the file.

So let’s look at another example.

[Screen reader announces content of new page 'Page has no links' and then starts reading subsequent page content before I stop it]

What I’m looking at on screen is a page that seems to have a page full of links. But if you were listening carefully to the beginning of that, the screen reader thought otherwise. I’ll just try to find that again for you.

[I scrub back in the video clip to find the part where the screen reader says no links]

According to the screen reader the page doesn’t have any links. And the reason it thinks that is, well, there *aren’t* any links. What’s actually happening … is … we have a whole bunch of text on the page that is styled using CSS and the behaviour for the link is added using JavaScript. So, we have a <span> element that has an onclick event, location.href=’somewhere.html’ and that’s [the span] wrapped around the text that says ‘This is a link – click me’. Um, but of course it’s not a link. The screen reader can’t find it because it’s not an <a href="">, it’s something else that’s been styled to look like a link and behave like a link. But it’s not. Thankfull that’s not too common but you have to just be aware that what may look great on screen for you may not be any use to someone using a screen reader. You have to use the right markup for the job.

So, you could have a page that’s full of links that say ‘click here’ but of course that’s another problem all in itself. Let’s have a listen to that:

[Screen reader reads 'Click here to view' repeatedly as I tab through the links on the page]

Yes, so … the problem there is that it doesn’t give you any information at all. And this is actually still quite common. In fact just yesterday I was looking at Facebook dot com (for my sins) and, er, I was quite shocked to find that they were using a lot of this where the link phrase was ‘click here’ as opposed to the phrase that you would really want to have, so for example instead of saying ‘click here for more information’ and having ‘click here’ as the link phrase you would have ‘for more information about our products’. That would be the link phrase. Erm, but if you just use ‘click here’ and you’ve got a whole page of links that reads ‘click here’ this is what you get:

[Screen reader once again reads 'Click here to view' repeatedly as I tab through the links on the page]

Basically, completely unusable.

Now the next example I have is of a form, and in this example, er, the form has been laid out using a table. Thankfully, these days, tables are being used less for layout and people are using CSS for page layouts. However, for forms it’s still not uncommon to see someone put a table in there. And, er …

[screen reader interrupts as page loads]

OK, so in this example what I’m looking at on screen is what appears to be, um, well … four text inputs, and then there is a radio button and it’s basically asking for some personal information, first name, surname, your age, place of birth and then a question ‘Do you have a nut alergy’, the answers being ‘no’, ‘yes’ or ‘don’t know’. So let’s see what the screen reader makes of this.

[screen reader says 'table with two columns and four rows'. I tab to the first input and it reads 'surname/family name - edit']

Already we’re hitting a problem. Because the first field that I tab to I can see on screen is *actually* [the one for the] the first name . But the screen reader believed that to be the surname.

So I’ve now tabbed to the second field which is the surname and it didn’t announce anything. So let’s tab to the next field:

[screen reader announces field as 'town/city - edit']

Again it’s getting it wrong. I’ve actually tabbed to the field that says ‘Age next birthday’

[tab to the next field, screen reader announces 'tab - edit']

And *now* I’m in the ‘town/city of birth’ field and it hasn’t told me anything.

[screen reader announces 'yes - radio button', then 'don't know', reading the radio button choices]

This is all a bit confusing here. OK, so it’s asking me the question ‘Do I have a nut allergy?’.

[I tab to the next field, screen reader announces 'Yes - radio button - unchecked']

OK, so … that thinks I’m at the yes radio button but I’m looking at it on screen and it says ‘no’. So, what’s going on here? Now this is going to be a difficult one to explain on the podcast; this is one of the sections where you really need to see the video. But what’s actually happening here is we’ve got a table to lay out the page and the text sits above the text input, so for example where we’re asking for first name, the text that says first name is in the first column and the input that relates to that is in a column underneath, sorry, I mean a table cell underneath it in the next table row. Now the reason this is causing a problem is because if you were to actually linearize that table, in other words look at it in the order of the source code you get a very different view of it. And this is what happens with the screen reader. So if I were to look at this form and read it out in a linear fashion, it goes like this:

First Name [text]
Surname [text]
Form input for First name
Form input for Surname
Age [text]
Town/City of birth [text]
Form input for Age
Form input for Town/City of birth

And so on. The problem is that the screen reader expects the text for that input to appear before that input, and because of the way this has been laid out it really really gets things confused. As I said, this is quite a difficult one to explain on the podcast but if you look at the video clip you’ll see why this is causing a problem.

[screen reader blurts a few things out as I try to manipulate it ... poorly]

Sorry about that, that didn’t add anything useful at all. Hopefully Paul can edit that out!

OK, so …. the big problem here is that you may be asking a question as we have here that says ‘Do you have a nut allergy?’ and the answers are ‘no’, ‘yes’ and ‘don’t know’. But if you do put the form elements in the wrong order you’re gonna have a problem. And the reason is obviously that with a nut allergy that could be a life or death situation. You could be filling out a form as a blind user and you select what you think is the ‘yes’ radio button but because the form has been poorly laid out and doesn’t have <label> elements that are actually helping to enforce the accessibility you may actually have been selecting the no checkbox [meant to say radio] and it really could be a life or death situation. It may *not* be as bad as that – it could end up with you booking the wrong hotel location or date. So you have to be very careful with the form layout.

OK, one final example. Now everyone’s talking about AJAX, it;s the buzzword of the moment. Unfortunately it’s also not very good for screen reader users. And the reason for this is that, er, anything that is updated on the page after page load is very very problematic to pass on to the screen readers. now the example I’m going to give here is a fairly simple one, and it’s the Google Suggest page. What Google Suggest does is let you type in your search phrase and as you type it’s calling back to the server, finding suggestions for you which it then populates in a list underneath the search input. So let’s have a listen to that.

[screen reader announces: 'google search - edit, type and text' then reads each letter of search term 'this is a test' as I type]

So I’ve just typed ‘this is a test’ and on screen underneath that is a whole bunch of suggestions that it has found. But if I try and actually access any of those using the keyboard:

[screen reader announces 'Google search - edit, Google search - edit, Google search - edit, Google search - edit' with each keypress on the down arrow]

It’s actually doing nothing. On screen I can actually see that it’s going up and down the options but the screen reader, it’s getting nothing back at all, nothing useful at all.

[more screen reader confusion]

Well thankfully with Google Suggest this is something tat you can opt out of – you don’t have to use Google Suggest, it’s not enforced on you. But it’s a very simple example and it just goes to show that a very simple technique like this can be, basically, completely unusable for someone using a screen reader.

So, that was just a few examples. Hopefully you’ve had an indication of how a poorly built website or web page can affect a user. the bottom line is, keep listening to the podcast, keep doing things right, keep using good markup and, if you can, test your own web pages or web sites using a demo version of JAWS. It really does pay dividends to find out how this works – or doesn’t work. So, thank you very much, I hope this has been useful, and I look forward to the next podcast, Paul. Thanks guys.

No show next week

Unfortunately there will be no show next week as I am away speaking at the Institutional Web Management Workshop. However we will be back the week of the 23rd July.

Show 80: Home sweet home

Posted in Classic shows on May 22, 2007 by Paul Boag

On the show this week: Paul talks about preserving the design of your home page, Marcus takes a look at project management software. and John Oxton shares his experiences of working as a freelancer for web 2.0. companies.

Podcast: Download (24.6MB)

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

d.construct

Without a doubt my favorite conference is d.construct. Admittedly, SXSW has the wow factor and I loved every minute there but I’m a patriotic kind of guy and so d.construct wins because it is home grown. I guess I could have gone for @media which is also UK based but I prefer the more friendly atmosphere of d.construct.

d.construct this year looks particularly exciting to me. They have just launched their new site and I am pleased to see the theme revolves around user interface design. This obviously appeals to me more than last year, which had a technical feel, and so I cannot wait to sign up.

Registration is not open yet but they have already announced the price as being £85 + VAT. This is great value for a day packed with speakers such as Jared Spool, Cameron Moll and many more.

The date is the 7th of September in Brighton, so be sure to keep your eye on the site as tickets will sell out fast.

IA one sheeters

Convincing clients that information architecture work is of value can be tricky sometimes. They simply don’t understand the value of things like wireframes, usability testing and heuristic evaluation. Thankfully, Leah Buley has been kind enough to put together some “mini brochures” on different areas of IA, outlining how they work and what benefits they provide.

Each brochure is a single sheet of A4 which has been well written and nicely laid out. You can download them as PDFs and customize them to your own requirements.

Jakob Nielsen on web 2.0

According to the BBC, Jakob Nielsen is claiming that many web 2.0 companies are neglecting the basics of good design. Apparently, he has warned that the rush to make webpages more dynamic often means users were badly served.

The main focus of Nielsen’s criticism seems to be on personalization tools and social participation software. He argues that 90% of users almost never contribute to sites and so never make use of these features. He suggests that too much time is spent on these secondary tools at the expense of more basic fundamentals.

Although at first glance this looks like more hard line usability dogma from Nielsen, however in reality I don’t believe it is. I am guessing at his intentions, but I don’t believe he is suggesting that sites like digg.com or wikipedia (which are based entirely on social participation) are flawed. I think his criticism is being leveled at existing content based sites which are retrofitting web 2.0 features simply because they are “cool”. If indeed this is what he is saying then I entirely agree. Too many sites are jumping on the bandwagon and adding unnecessary complexity when all users really want to do is get the information they require as quickly and simply as possible.

Left navigation vs. Right navigation

I was sent a link this week to a fascinating study carried out by the University of Southampton. The goal of the study was to compare left hand navigation to navigation on the right in order to establish which approach enabled users to complex tasks the quickest.

The usability of two Web page layouts was directly compared: one with the main site navigation menu on the left of the page, and one with the main site navigation menu on the right. Sixty-four participants were divided equally into two groups and assigned to either the left- or the right-hand navigation test condition. Using a stopwatch, the time to complete each of five tasks was measured.

The general assumption is that left hand navigation is more user friendly but this study seems to prove what I have always suspected, there is little difference. In fact if anything there is a slight leaning towards right hand navigation which could be to do with the majority of the population being right handed.

Client corner: Project Management Software

This week’s client corner is based on a question from William…

What do you use for project management software and how do you implement it within your Distributed Company?

I am asking this question because up until now our company has not been busy enough to need a specific project manager, but as we are growing, we have several projects on the go and we are in need of some organization in this area.

Although we are not a distributed company, we do work from several different locations at times.

I have looked into some different programs, but there are so many it’s hard to know what is good. I could download the trials and try each one out, but I would rather get some expert advice and save myself the reviewing time.

Project management applies to all parties i.e. client and agency so I guess this is not just a ‘Client Corner’.
Our project managers use a number of different software tools, as follows:

Groove

One place for all pm issues.
Suiting Distributed pm
Works offline
File Repository to store Requirements, specifications, PSD’s, client delivered content etc
Loads of differing tools – calendars, document review, links, Tasks Tool for task allocation
Customisation – Create & deploy custom forms & views quickly with out any programming skills.
Manage tasks
Example : Production Management Issues

Forms captures input & feedback on production management Issues
Views used to create different cuts of the same data, can apply filters to the data, e.g instead of show me all, show me just those that are marked Action “Next”.
Differing views

by assignment
By client
By status
By importance
New requests
Unactioned requests etc
Form to capture any kind of work request that needs resource allocation : Purpose is to move all flagged emails, scribblings on notepads, phone call requests from staff into one place.
Summary of current jobs – all chargeable work broken down by Job, Client, Stage and Target Month
Invoice request form – to notify when invoicing milestones are reached.

Harvest Timetracker

Online time management and recording tool.
Excellent for reporting time and materials work

MS Project

We use Project to create Gantt Charts in contracts but rarely use them to track tasks. The main reason being that keeping Project up to date can be fiddly and often more time is spent updating Gantt charts than actually doing work!

Outlook

Don’t underestimate the value of email correspondence
We use email for all sign-off as written forms are a pain
Search in Outlook 07 is superb
All email can be exported to Groove

Content templates

Our project managers also create various templates to aid content delivery from clients.
Software tends to be either Word or Excel, whichever is most appropriate, for example:

For field based content e.g. Events including title, date, description etc we will agree field types with the client (followed by sign-off) then create an Excel template for the client to populate with content.
For general text page content we will create a Word based form including headings such as Page title, body text, body image, main images, related links etc

Ask the expert: John Oxton on web 2.0 product development

After last weeks .net magazine podcast I managed to grab a few minutes with John Oxton to discuss his experiences of developing web 2.0 products. It was a fascinating chat in which he compares two very different approaches. He talked about an American company that planned their product in immense detail and a UK company who are basically “just winging it”. His conclusion; planning is great if you have a lot of cash to burn but “winging it” seems to work better if you want to get something out the door!

John also talks a bit about his experience as a freelancer working for these third party companies. He talks about how it is easy to get sucked into areas which you aren’t really being paid for and how important it is to stay focused on your role.

It was a great little chat and I am definitely keen to talk to him some more in the future.

Agony uncle: Defending the home page

This weeks agony uncle section is based on a question from Andy in the Cotswolds. He writes:

My question is about a home page I am currently working on. The client keeps asking me to add more and more elements and it is slowly destroying the look and feel of the page. He wants so much ‘stuff’ above the fold that I am having to use every available space and drop down font sizes until they are barely readable. What can I do to explain to the client that this is a bad thing?

The question got me thinking about how I deal with this kind of situation. Although I have some techniques I use, I don’t think I am as effective as I could be. I therefore started to formulate some tactics that I have blogged about them over at “Keeping your home page clean“.

Review: Ecto

Like almost everybody else these days, I blog a lot. However despite a plethora of blogging tools out there none of them seem to have a good interface for actually writing the copy. Sure, they have great tools for tagging, categorizing and managing blog posts, but not for actually writing them.

In my experience the windows are too small, they don’t have good support for marking up your HTML, they don’t have very friendly spell checkers (if they have them at all) and you can’t write blog posts offline.

Being the fussy git that I am, I ended up with an incredibly complex process for creating a blog post. I would write it in Word (which has a good spell checker) copy and paste it into Dreamweaver (where I would mark it up as I wanted) and then into movable type (the system behind my blog). It was a stupid system but it kind of worked for me.

However, when I switched to the mac I decided to have a look around to see if I could find anything better. That was when I came across Ecto (which incidentally is available for windows too).

Ecto is a superb desktop blog publishing tool that provides me with all of the features I want:

Its spell checker highlights misspellings as I write
It allows me complete control over the markup
Lets me create my own markup macros so I can add markup with keyboard shortcuts
Posts directly to my blog while still being able to edit offline

However more than that, Ecto gives me a bunch of tools that I never realized I needed until they were there:

The ability to add images directly from my hard drive to the site
The ability to take images straight out of iPhoto and post them on the site
Add my current iTunes song to the blog post
Include links to Amazon (with your affiliate ID)
Add or create your own Ecto scripts

In short this is an extremely powerful, but easy to use desktop blogging tool, that I would highly recommend.

Show 78: POSH?

Posted in Classic shows on May 8, 2007 by Paul Boag

This week on Boagworld: Paul redesigns the way clients and designers interact, Marcus asks if you really need a content management system, and Garrett Dimon sharings his experiences of information architecture.

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

News and events

Breadcrumbs are good, its official

When Jakob Nielsen speaks the world listens. This week he has come out with the shocking revelation that Breadcrumbs are good. Okay, so this doesn’t come as a surprise to most of us, but its still an interesting read. Apparently more and more people have come to rely on this secondary navigation tool and notice if it isn’t there. Jakob believes that breadcrumbs never cause problems in user testing (although sometimes they are not seen) and provide a wealth of benefits to visitors that do use them. Finally, he goes on to talk about the fact that breadcrumbs should always show a sites hierarchy rather than the path a user has taken through a site.

Techcrunch drool over Silverlight

So the guys over at Techcrunch have spent the last week at MIX07 and seem to have been brainwashed by the nice fellows at Microsoft. They are positively drooling over Silverlight, Microsoft’s challenge to Flash. In one post they say:

“It makes Flash/Flex look like an absolute toy… without exaggeration, Ajax looks like a bicycle next to a Ferrari when compared to Silverlight”

Personally, I haven’t had a chance to look at Silverlight yet so cannot express much of an opinion. However, I find it hard to believe that Silverlight will topple Flashes dominance before Adobe responds with something equally impressive.

Although competition can never be a bad thing, it strikes me that this is yet another plugin for people to download and another platform we have to worry about developing for.

RSS in plain english

RSS can be a difficult concept to get your head around the first time you encounter it. Its still a good idea to explain what RSS is on your site for those that don’t know. Obviously you can create a page yourself explaining or sometimes I link to the BBC website which provides an excellent description. Of course if you want something a little more exciting you might want to link to this superb video that explains exactly what RSS is and how it works. Its just a shame they don’t offer the option to embed it directly into your own site.

How POSH are you?

I have to say I was very cynical about this news story when I first encountered it but after hearing Jeremy Keith’s argument on the last .net podcast I have to say I am coming around. POSH is yet another another “catchy” web acronym. It stands for “plain old semantic HTML”. So why do we need yet another acronym? Well the argument goes that nobody is getting excited about semantic HTML these days. Its just not cool. Instead we are obsessed with Microformats or AJAX, things that are perceived as being “in” and “trendy”. The POSH acronym is designed to get us talking about semantic HTML again. The idea is that we start blogging about how we mark stuff up and sharing ideas with one another. The example Jeremy gave on the show was; what is the best way to mark up a conservation in HTML? He suggested that it was simply an ordered list of blockquotes. Do you put that much thought into your code? I can’t say I always do.

So with that in mind I have opened a new section on the Boagworld forum where you can post your examples of good code. You can ask questions like; what is the best way to markup… or simply post how you choose to markup different elements. Whatever the case lets start sharing our good practice in HTML.

Client corner: Do you really need a CMS

Apart from a few ‘design only’ projects we get involved in, every tender that comes through the door includes the words “control over content is a must have”… or words to that effect.

But thinking about all the ‘full’ CMS based projects we have delivered, is that really what the client wanted/needed?

So what types of CMS solutions are there? Here’s a quick summary:

Limited CMS (non-structural) e.g.

News
Events
Popular a few years ago when ‘full’ CMS was a much more expensive.
Pros – simple to understand (and build)
Cons – clients tend to request more and more areas of the site become CMS controlled and you can end up with a bit of a mess and the cost of replacing can be prohibitive.

Blogging tools

Article based
With commenting

Full CMS

Control over structure: move pages, edit pages, create news pages (and sections) and the front end navigation updates automatically
Usually modular: news, events, downloads, forms (dynamic), lists, newsletter, etc
User management: Roles, permissions, preview, workflow
Licensed or bespoke?

You need to ask yourself a couple of fundamental questions:

Even if I have these tools, will I have time to use them? All websites need to have an owner or editor. Someone who’s job it is to manage all content sources and keep the site up to date. We have been asked many times to carry out work content population work on a CMS that we built…

How much of my content needs updating more than monthly and how often do I need to add new pages to my site? It seems that having the ability to extend a site is often seen as a ‘must have’ when in reality new pages are only added, say, quarterly at most. Added to that, the only content that changes regularly is, for example, news, events and case studies. Employing an agency to add new pages and manage site structure/navigation is not a big job (though some seem to charge extortionate rates). Added to that, clients who do not use a CMS very often tend to forget how to use it and then go back to the agency simply because of that.

To summarise, think very carefully about your requirements in this area and talk to prospective agencies about what they recommend. You could end up making a costly mistake.

Ask the expert: Garrett Dimon on Information Architecture

I am a huge fan of Garrett Dimon’s work and so I am really excited to have him on the show this week. Garrett’s job title is “information architect” and so unsuprisingly he joins us to share some of his experiences on working with information architecture. His advice includes:

Embrace constraints
Know when to challenge the constraints
Explore lots of ideas
Work in conjunction with clients
Don’t use your computer
Throw away more than you keep
Don’t worry about the details until later on
Simplify and cut back on details
Communicating is more important than documentation
Make your IA deliverables visual as they are easier to understand

Agony uncle: The wish list brief

This week I am back on Agony Uncle duty with an email from Dan in Swansea:

I am increasingly frustrated by the briefs I am getting through from potential clients. They read more like wishlists than real briefs. They lack focus and often ask for functionality they just don’t need. How do you respond to briefs like that?

Its a great question and set me thinking a lot about the web design process. In fact it was the primary motivation for a recent blog post on the subject which we talk about on the show. I think the key to this question is to not be afraid to go back to the client and challenge them. Perhaps propose a rough costing based on some of the items in their list but suggest that the first step (if you are taken on) would be to define and price a more accurate brief. I think most clients will respect you for suggesting an alternative and more effective strategy. In many ways its like the speculative design argument, it may feel scary to challenge the client before anything is signed but in my experience clients respond positively to a carefully thought through argument.

Review: Spoken Text

A while back I asked people to submit their own reviews. I didn’t specify that people couldn’t review their own product and so I recently received a review from Mark promoting Spoken Text. Now, I don’t want to open the flood gates to shameless self promotion but I like spoken text so much that I want to include it on the show. It is basically a free, text to speech system that allows you to convert multiple file types into audio files.

Mark shares four great reasons why he thinks we might be interested in it as web designers:

Use spoken text to provide alternative audio versions of the content on your website
Allow users to record and save any content from your website they want
Create a podcast of your websites content
Create your own podcast of other people’s content that you want to listen to while on the go

There are two things that excite me most about this service (beyond the fact that it is free). First is the accessibility benefits it could bring for visually impaired users and secondly the ability to make instant podcasts of new stories from your site without the complication of finding somebody to present it.

This isn’t a service that is useful to everyone but I think in certain circumstances this could be a killer app.

A client’s work is never done

Posted in Web strategy on April 26, 2007 by Paul Boag

In my last post I talked in very broad terms about responsibilities, but how does that translate into actual tasks that need to be completed?

I recently wrote a post about the role of the client and how poorly defined it is. This started me thinking in more depth about how clients perceive web projects and how they often fail to grasp the enormity of the undertaking. In this post I want to explore the ongoing commitment that clients have to make to their websites.

Building, owning and running a website is a big commitment if you really want the site to succeed. A lot of people have written in the past about the “build it and they will come” mentality, where website owners are under the impression that people will spontaneously find their site with no work on promotion. Equally I believe there is a “build it and it will run” mentality, where clients fail to grasp the amount of work they will have to undertake to make a website successful.

In my last post I talked in very broad terms about responsibilities, but how does that translate into actual tasks that need to be completed? Even if the client has hired a web design agency to build their site, they will still have to commit a lot of time into making it happen. Here are what I perceive as the main tasks that clients need to invest time in:

Defining the scope

The planning stage of a web development project requires significant time and mental commitment from the client. In many cases they are yet to take on a web design agency and even if they have, they will still need to work through the planning stage with that agency.

Before the web design project even begins the client needs to have established:

the business objectives that underpin the project
the success criteria against which the project will be judged
the pros and cons of the existing site (if it exists)
lessons to be learnt from reviewing the competitions websites
a clear understanding of who the target audience is and what they want from the site

All too often these fundamental building blocks are not put in place either because of lack of time or resources internally. However, skimping on these areas can seriously undermine the success of a website.

Driving the build

However, the clients work doesn’t stop when the site starts to be built. If anything the workload now increases. Sure, the web designer is doing the technical and design stuff but that still leaves all the content to be sourced. The website owner is almost always responsible for:

bringing together content from various parts of the organisation
editing the content received to present a consistent tone
ensuring that existing content is written in a form that is suitable for the web
writing the content from scratch where it does not already exist

In addition to responsibilities for content the client is often involved in:

developing the information architecture for the site alongside the agency
signing off templates and designs throughout the development cycle
managing external suppliers such as hosting agencies or third party content providers

Maintaining the momentum

Even once the build is over there is still much for the client to do. Although I believe that the design agency should be working with a client on a continual basis, the reality is that in many situations the client is now left to fend for themselves. This makes the post launch phase particularly burdensome for the client. Often this is added to because the project is considered “over” and they are expected to attend to other responsibilities beyond the website.

However, the post launch stage of a website project is often the most crucial. It is now that the client should be:

looking at ways to promote the site
building up a community of regular site visitors
keeping content fresh and up-to-date
planning for the future of the site

Without that ongoing attention the site will quickly stagnate and die. As I have said before, too many websites go through a constant redesign cycle where everything is thrown out ever three or four years, when in actual fact a website should be evolving continually over time.

Rinse and repeat

The reality is that a web design project never ends. A website is never finished. Even if a client has done all of the work and fulfilled all of the above points, they are still not finished because they should be starting the process all over again. They should be continually redefining and adjusting the scope and role of the website. They should be adding new content, introducing new functionality and they should always be promoting the site and building relationships with their users.

In short; a client’s work really is never done.

The role of the website owner

Posted in Web strategy on April 23, 2007 by Paul Boag

There is a lot written about the role of web designers but very little written about what part website owners play in the evolution of their sites. It is an area I have been thinking a lot about recently and I wanted to share a few thoughts with you.

Many web designers view the client as almost an inconvenience in the web development process but in reality they are absolutely fundamental to a websites success. However unlike the role of designer or developer, the part web site owners play is much harder to define.

In fact I would argue that the role of web site owner is one of the most multi-facitated jobs within web development and we as designers and developers need to recognise and encourage that role.

Of course to a large extent it is our responsibility as web agencies to lift some of the responsibility from the shoulders of website owners. However I would still suggest that there are a number of areas where the client has to take the lead.

Visionary

A good web design agency should be able to help their clients shape a vision for their organisations website, however it is down to the website owner to “own” that vision and develop it over the long term. The person responsible for a website needs to have a clear picture of what role the site plays within their business and how that role could be expanded over time.

In my mind vision falls into two categories. There is the core vision for the site. In other words, what is the unshakable objective of the site, which doesn’t really change over time. However there is also the site roadmap. This is a vision of how the site is going to develop over the coming months and even in some cases, years. What kind of new functionality maybe added and how is the user base expected to change. Without the website owner having a good handle on these two areas, a site can easily wander off track and loose its sense of purpose and focus.

Advocate

As well as having a clear vision for a site the website owner also needs to be the sites advocate. By that I mean he needs to defend the site against others within the organisation that would seek to undermine its focus. This is especially a problem within larger organisations where people think more on a departmental rather than corporate level. This typically leads to individual departments pushing their agendas on the website and the site becoming the victim of internal politics. It is not unusual to find departments fighting over home page real estate or top level sections in the information architecture.

It is the role of the website owner to make sure the integrity of his or her site is defended and that it does not sink under the weight of internal dispute.

Evangelist

But the job of the website owner is not just defensive. A good website owner should be offensive too, actively promoting the website within his or her organisation. They should enthuse about the potential of the web and actively engage with departments and people within the company, looking for ways that the website can better serve their needs. A website owner needs to be passionate about their site and encouraging others to share that passion.

Content guardian

Probably the most time consuming and demanding of the responsibilities held by the website owner is to oversee the content of the site. Not only is it his or her responsibility to dictate what content appears on the site, but that the content added communicates a consistent message and tone. The website owner needs to encourage and nurture content contributors ensuring that they keep their content up to date and relevant. However the largest workload is in the initial development of a site, when it is down to the client to plan what needs to be communicated on the site and draw together that content from various contributors across the organisation. Time and again I see clients significantly underestimate the amount of work involved here and it is vital that the agency and client agree on content delivery milestones upfront in order to avoid slippage.

Project coordinator

Developing a website involves a lot of people. Designers, developers, usability experts, content contributors, hosting companies… the list goes on. Although in many cases a website owner turns to a web design agency to handle the management of many of these roles it is still inevitable that some management will be required by the client. Website owners often have to get internal sign off on designs, content, budget and many other aspects of the project. As I have already said they also have to manage content contributors and in some cases may have to manage multiple suppliers (design agency, development house, hosting company). In short, even if they outsource the project to an agency it is still going to require some management by the client.

Referee!

The unfortunate truth is that the final role a website owner often has to fulfill is unofficial referee. Web development projects are a series of compromises. Accessibility needs to be traded off against design, design against marketing, marketing against usability and so on. The different contributors to a website have very different perspectives on what is important, so it is down to the website owner to break stalemates and find a middle ground. Ultimately they have to be the decision maker.

The web agencies role

So there you have it, the role of the client. The trouble is that as web designers we often fail to communicate to the client our expectations of what it is we believe they should do. Instead we assume the client will just fulfill their obligations. Because we have worked on so many web design projects we assume the division of responsibilities is obvious. The reality is that they are not and it is down to us to educate the client.

Show 68: Tagtastic

Posted in Classic shows on February 27, 2007 by Paul Boag

This weeks show includes hints on email campaigns, writing Web design contracts and site navigation approaches.

Podcast: Download (23.1MB)

On this week’s show; Matthew Patterson from Campaign monitor shares some handy hints on sending an email campaign, Marcus finishes his series on web design contracts and Paul looks at some interesting alternative approaches to site navigation.

Download this show.

To subscribe directly within itunes click here

News and events

Diversity in web design

This week the web design blogosphere has been dominated by discussions about the lack of women speakers at conferences. Jeffrey Zeldman, Eric Meyer, Jeremy Keith, Tantek… the list goes on and on. Frankly, I find the debate less than helpful. It is interesting to note that all of the women I have seen post on the subject have seemed very defensive almost as if they are under attack for not speaking more!

More on Open ID

Open ID continues to build momentum with both AOL and Digg.com saying they will support the standard. Dan Webb also provides a guide on how to support Open ID in your web applications.

Validation: why it matters

Ethan Marcotte has just published an interesting article on the List Apart website looking at the business benefits of validation and why it continues to polarise the web community.

The sorry state of web accessibility

The subject of web accessibility receives another body blow this week with Mike Davies posting a damning criticism. What is probably most disturbing is that I am yet to find a post disagreeing with him.

Client Corner: The statement of work (final chapter!)

This week sees the end of Marcus’ series on the statement of work (I know, it is distressing for us all!). In this final segment he takes a look a:

Milestones and timescales
Project management
Testing
Deliverables
Pricing

Ask an expert: Matthew Patterson on email campaigns

Matthew Patterson works for campaign monitor one of the best email management sites about. Their site is stuffed with great advice for those thinking of running an email campaign and so it seemed only natural to get him on the show and get his thoughts on how best to run a successful campaign.

Non hierarchical navigation

Headscape was recently approach by a potential client who had literally hundreds of thousands of web pages which were almost impossible to organise into a traditional information architecture. They wanted us to suggest some alternatives and so I thought this sounded like a great issue to cover on the show.

Instead of trying to stuff everything we covered in those show notes, I have instead posted a separate article on non hierarchical navigation which includes everything I said and the links I mentioned. Hope you find it useful.