164. Case Study

On this week’s show: Paul shares his experiences of working on the Wiltshire Farm Foods website, we examine the role of Twitter and Ryan Carson shares some more advice on building web applications.

Play

Download this show.

Launch our podcast player

Housekeeping

Write for Boagworld

I am constantly amazed by the intelligence of those who listen to this show. The talent and knowledge of the Boagworld community is truly staggering. If you don’t believe me spend a bit of time in the boagworld forum.

I am therefore looking to get more people involved in publishing to the Boagworld website. If you have an idea for a post that you think others will be interested in, write an outline and post it to this thread. If the idea is appropriate I will get in touch and arrange for your post to be published.

Obviously, the post will be fully credited to you and will link to your site. Hopefully that will make it a worthwhile marketing opportunity!

Back to top

News

The importance of sketchbooks

Talk to any designer and they will tell you about the importance of keeping a sketchbook. Ask that same designer whether they actually do it and the answer will probably be no.

The most common reason for not doing so is a belief that you need to be able to draw to have a sketchbook. Believe it or not most designers cannot draw. According to Jason Santa Maria’s latest post “Pretty Sketchy” that is not the case.

He argues that…

Sketchbook’s are not about being a good artist, they’re about being a good thinker.

I have to agree. However, sketchbooks have always filled me with some trepidation. Although I know they don’t need to be a work of art, I still want them to be.

That said, this post has inspired me to start keeping a sketchbook again. I know I am no longer what you would consider a designer, but Jason has made me realise that having an easily accessible place to keep ideas is worthwhile, whatever your role.

I encourage you to read Jason’s post and do the same.

Supporting old browsers

Jonathan Snook has written an interesting post about support for old browsers this week. He begins the post by establishing the importance of supporting older browsers. He writes…

When it comes to market support, I’ve often looked at it as one big pie. You may say that Opera is too small to really care about. It’s only 2%. You don’t care about Firefox 2 users. It’s only 2%. You may not care about accessibility issues. It’s only 2%. Soon enough, you’ve whittled down your potential market to 90% of what it could have been.

This is certainly a slippery slope and one that I personally take very seriously, hence my posts on Graded Browser Support.

However, as Jonathan goes on to point out, graded browser support is not without its problems. Although it is relatively easy to provide alternative basic styling to IE6 and below (thanks to conditional comments), it is much harder with earlier versions of Firefox, Opera and Safari.

Personally, I am not happy to resort to browser sniffing and I am not sure this is a massive issue. Based on stats from sites we are involved in, most users of minority browsers (Safari, Firefox and Opera) upgrade to the latest version.

In the end you can only test on so many browsers.

Approaching content on the web differently

The two articles that have most excited me this week both relate to website copy.

As we have said many times before on this show, all too often website owners are willing to invest considerable time and money in getting design right, but largely ignore their content. If you are willing to pay a designer to work on your site, you should also be willing to invest in a content strategist.

Tiffani Jones from Blue Flavour outlines the role of a content strategist in here post “Learning About Content Strategy“. When describing this emerging discipline she writes…

We kind of know that it lives somewhere between web writing, web editing, information architecture, SEO stuff, web analytics, and production.

She goes on to demonstrate that websites need somebody capable of writing good copy but also understanding SEO, wireframing, marketing and much more.

Of course, many people think they can write good copy themselves. They may infact be able to do so. However as Gerry McGovern points out in our second post about copy, good web copy writing is different from traditional writing.

Gerry argues that some of the rules of traditional writing do not apply to the web. He compares writing online copy to giving an elevator pitch…

Your customer has walked into the elevator, the doors have closed, they turn to you and say: “Convince me before the next stop to buy your product.” Design your website from the ‘I badly need to go to the toilet’ perspective. Your customer needs to act and act quickly. That’s the Web.

Setting aside the dubious toilet analogy, this is an excellent post that really makes you think about whether your copy is meeting users needs or massaging your own ego.

Improve usability through help elements

Smashing Magazine have released a helpful article on help this week.

It looks at the context sensitive help that is becoming increasingly prominent in web applications, ecommerce systems and forms. It outlines the obvious usability benefits and gives loads of examples of how context sensitive help can be implemented.

There are no major revelations in this post but it is useful to see how others have tackled this issue and to be reminded just how important help is.

It is too easy to address help as an after thought and so not properly integrate it into the design. As designers it is often not until a developer asks about error handling that we begin to start thinking about help messaging. We need to ensure it is apart of our design process and that the wording of these messages as well as their design is carefully considered.

Audible recommendation

Download a free audiobook today

This week I would like to recommend Nudge on Audible.com, a book about influencing the decisions people make. Although not directly about web design it has had a profound influence on how I build sites. If you want to influence the behaviour of users then I would highly recommend this book.

Best of all if you sign up with Audible you can get this book totally free. Simply go to www.audiblepodcast.com/boagworld and claim your free credit.

If you want to listen to it, Audible has it! With over 60,000 titles and virtually every genre, you’ll find what you’re looking for. Get a free audiobook and 14-day trial today by signing up at www.audiblepodcast.com/boagworld.

Back to top

Feature: Case Study: Wiltshire Farm Foods

One of the biggest challenges of running a successful website is balancing the needs of users with those of the business. This is especially true when an existing business model conflicts with user needs.

Read the full article

Back to top

Ryan Carson: Advice on building web apps part 2

Ryan Carson:Hey Everybody, this is Ryan Carson one of the founders of Carsonified.com today we are doing are second instalment of five minute Web App tips for Boagworld. So let’s get started, the first thing I’d say is do not build your billing system from scratch. Now, if you have a Web App that does recurring billing, so you are charging someone’s credit card every month there is quite a bit of code to write for that. When we built dropsend.com there was at least 1200 lines of php code in order to do that, and it’s a very difficult problem to solve. You have to do things like charge someone’s card if their card has been cancelled, send notifications, try to bill them again and in seven days bill them again, another seven days keep track of invoices, cancel them if they cancel their account. It is just a real headache and there is a lot of stuff that can go wrong with that. So, I would say you should outsource something like that to spreedly.com. Basically it’s an API web service that does recurring billing for you, so give it a try. I don’t work for them; I’m not being paid to say that, I just think it’s a good idea. And y’know if you ever decide to switch out of Spreedly the nice thing is that you’ll make a series of API calls out to the service and all that you’ve got to do is bill those services internally if you decide to do so later. So it’s definitely important not to waste time doing that from the beginning. Also, some people may say “Well, what about the fact they are going to take a part of your revenue?”. Well, the truth is, your bank is going to take that cut anyway, so you might as well have Spreely take that cut, there really is no loss there.

The second tip I’d like to talk about today is that you should plan on doing AB testing from the very beginning. When you do all of your site designs, especially your Home Page and your Sign Up/Payment Page, those really need to be tested with AB testing from the very beginning. Have a series of phrases or different graphics you plan on switching back and forth and make sure you measure which ones are working and increasing your paid sign ups. There is a great post on “Signal Vs Noise” about that, if you go to bit.ly/ab-test they talk about their pricing page and how they made some basic changes and they saw huge increases, 30% in sales for instance, it’s really important. On the subject of AB pricing I spoke to Jason Fried over coffee at the Future of Web Apps in Miami. I said “Can you tell me anymore about what you learned during AB testing?” and he told something really fascinating which was, When they changed the words ‘Free Trial’ (or Sign Up for free) on their Home Page to ‘See plans and pricing’, they saw an increase of 200%, so that was a real shocker. What he said was happening was that, people were afraid of signing up. Y’know they thought if they clicked on the ‘Free Sign Up’ button, then somehow they would automatically get an account that they could not get out of. Whereas if you say “Hey, Check out plans and pricing”, y’know no commitment, people are much more willing to click through and then probably
sign-up. So that was really interesting.

Okay, another tip for you is, I would suggest creating a new company for your Web App. The temptation would be to launch it as a service of your current company. So for us, when we launched Dropsend.com it was owned by Carsonified. But when we sold Dropsend it was really hard to extract out that company from Carsonified. So if we had started Dropsend Ltd. or Dropsend LLC it would have been a lot easier to do that. So I would just set up a fresh company from the beginning, it can be owned 100% by your current company which will make selling it, if you ever sell, a lot easier.

The final tip I’d like to talk about today is source control and I would highly recommend you use http://github.com it’s free, it’s a wonderful way to keep track of your repository for code and I’d highly recommend it. So, that’s it, thanks for your time today, and thanks for listening. Goodbye

Thanks goes to Ben Hardcastle for transcribing this portion of the show.

Back to top

Listeners Questions

Twitter

This week I received two excellent and related questions about the use of Twitter as a marketing tool. The first comes from Teifion who asks…

My question concerns morality and twitter, an odd combination I know. I have several bots on twitter, all day long they download RSS feeds and then tweet links to new articles. A good example would be @design_agg which reads design websites such as Boagworld, it then tweets the relevant links to the post and the post title. There are other bots like them, for example I know that @stanton maintains the @boaglinks bot.

Of course, none of these bots create content, they simply link to it. The question is, is this wrong professionally and is it wrong on a social level? For a list of the bots, just look at who @design_agg follows.

The second questions refers to another automated Twitter account…

Hello Mr Paul Boag, this is Jimmy Nightly from the Swedish online auction site jiiro.com. I’ve recently been following Amazon on Twitter and they’re using several feeds to draw traffic to current campaigns. Their feed Amazon Deals has only 8000 followers and to me it just doesn’t seem that much compaired to how big Amazon really is over here. My point is, if they only have 8000 followers do you then think Twitter is a marketing tool for the future?

Both questions revolve around the subject of automated twitter accounts. These are accounts where the posts are automatically generated rather than the thoughts of a particular individual. Our first question is concerned with their morality and the second is concerned with their effectiveness. Both valid concerns.

Let’s take each issue in turn…

The morality of automated twitter accounts

The fact that Boagworld runs an automated twitter account posting web design related links shows that I do not have a problem with their morality. However, I understand that others do. Let’s look at two potential criticisms.

  • They are not in the spirit of Twitter – Some argue that Twitter was not created as a broadcast tool and should not be used in that way. Twitter is about community not news/announcements. Although I do agree with this point to some extent (as you will hear later) I don’t think the argument ultimately stands up. Strictly speaking Twitter was created for people to post ‘what they are doing’. In reality it is rarely used in that way. Twitter has grown to be much more than originally intended and a broadcast mechanism is a part of that.
  • They steal content from others – The second concern is that they are regurgitating content created by others. They are not in themselves creating value. Again I would disagree. Their value comes in the time saved for the reader. Instead of having to manually check sources, they are presented with all they need to know in a convenient form. In my mind it is no different from an RSS feed on Delicious or the news section of this show.
  • In the end, if people do not like these ‘bots’ they can unsubscribe. However, some do find them useful and there is no reason why they should be denied their services.

    Of course, they may provide value to the subscriber, but do they provide value for the owner. Are automated twitter accounts an effective marketing tool?

    The effectiveness of automated twitter accounts

    Jimi’s question calls into doubt the effectiveness of Twitter as a marketing tool, citing the Amazon Twitter account as proof. It is remarkable that Amazon only have 8000 followers on this account but it is worth noting that their Amazon MP3 account has over 300,000.

    However, it is not the specifics of Jimi’s question that I would challenge. It is the entire premise. To me, if Twitter is used well, it can be a lot more than a marketing tool. Companies like Amazon are failing to grasp the full potential of Twitter because they are using it as a broadcast tool, rather than a way to engage with its users.

    Twitter provides a lot more than an opportunity to broadcast your latest deals. Twitter also allows…

    • An opportunity for great customer service
    • A chance to inform your new products and services
    • A way of creating passionate evangelistic users
    • Real engagement with your users

    Unfortunately using Twitter to publish automated ‘feeds’ fails to reap these benefits. It in no way engages with followers. It only broadcasts.

    Only by engaging with their followers will organisations really reap the benefits of Twitter. Companies like Zappos or Omnigroup are leading the way in this by using Twitter to provide support, inform their future products and engaging with their community.

    Back to top

    Case Study: Wiltshire Farm Foods

    One of the biggest challenges of running a successful website is balancing the needs of users with those of the business. This is especially true when an existing business model conflicts with user needs.

    Although not always the case, one situation where this conflict can arise is with franchise based businesses. For the last few years I have been working with a franchise business called Wiltshire Farm Foods. Although, their business model has been phenomenally successful it caused significant problems for their online customers.

    When business models and user needs conflict

    When hired to redevelop the Wiltshire Farm Foods website I saw an opportunity for a quick win. Before a user could enter the website, they were required to provide a postcode. This was a massive barrier to entry as users do not like handing over personal information (such as a postcode) without being given a reason. From looking at the website statistics it was obvious many users were abandoning the site because of this requirement. I couldn’t understand why the company had created such a huge usability hurdle.

    The Old WFF homepage

    The answer was simple – Wiltshire Farm Foods had chosen to give their franchisees control over pricing. Without knowing where the user was located it was impossible to provide a price.

    The decision to give franchisee variable pricing was a good one in the pre e-commerce era. However, as the importance of the web grew, it created a significant problem when competing against large supermarket chains with a national distribution network and standardised prices.

    Although this was a problem for online users, the model worked for the business as a whole. Wiltshire Farm Foods had an incredibly successful relationship with its franchisees. Some had been with the company since day one. The business was driven by the entrepreneurial spirit of its franchisees and independent pricing was a key component of that success.

    Working within constraints

    With the variable pricing constraint remaining unmovable it became a case of managing the impact. Our first step was to move the point at which users were asked for a postcode. Instead of requesting it up front, we only asked for it when users asked for a price. This allowed users to view products and clearly linked the request for a postcode with pricing. We also explained why this step was necessary to reassure users this was not a ploy to send them unsolicited mail. However, ultimately we could not get around the extra step required to see prices.

    It would have been counter productive to dig our heels in and refuse to compromise the user experience. Instead we took a pragmatic approach and worked within the business constraints. Ultimately this worked in our favour. When Wiltshire Farm Foods saw the increase in sales that came from moving where users entered their postcode, it encouraged them to consider changes in their business model.

    Users now get a web price for each product when they arrive on the site for the first time. This price is then ‘adjusted’ once they login or provide a postcode. The user is notified of the change and because the price normally decreases they are generally happy. It is not ideal but it is a dramatic improvement that has greatly increased sales.

    Turning a negative into a positive

    Although the introduction of web prices is significant, it has not been the biggest change in the site. The real change has happened in my own thinking. In the beginning I saw the franchise model as a hurdle to overcome. However, I have since come to realise the benefit it has to the overall user experience, especially for the site’s target audience.

    The Wiltshire Farm Foods audience is elderly with the average purchaser being in their eighties. Not only does this audience have certain accessibility requirements, they also have a number of concerns that need addressing.

    One of their biggest concerns is security, both when purchasing online but also when meals are delivered. They are nervous about letting strangers in their house and yet need help unpacking and storing their meals.

    The Wiltshire Farm Foods franchise system accommodates this perfectly. Customers always get the same driver and feel they are dealing with a local supplier rather than a national brand. They can even pay with cash on delivery and place new orders directly with the driver.

    The problem was that the website did not reflect this local caring service. I was so preoccupied with the negatives of the franchise system, that I failed to identify it as a major selling point.

    Franchises can offer personal service

    Fortunately as I grew to understand the business model, I was able to grasp what Wiltshire Farm Foods had known since the beginning – that service was what set them apart. Wiltshire Farm Foods did not need to be overly concerned about universal pricing because they offered things no national supermarket could. They offered a friendly, caring service from police checked uniformed drivers. These drivers would even unpack meals and take next orders. However, most importantly they were a local supplier who customers came to know personally.

    Once I understood this important selling point it fundamentally altered my approach to the site. The homepage shifted away from merely showing products to promoting the service that was supplied alongside the meals.

    WFF homepage

    The homepage now focuses on promoting these ‘value added’ services through the use of animation. However, more importantly we made a feature of postcode entry. Entering your postcode no longer just revealed your region specific pricing, it introduced you to your local franchisee. Gone was the faceless national brand and instead you were given the names and phone number of your local supplier. Soon you will even see a photograph of your local franchisee and details about their delivery schedules.

    Screenshot of the local outlet information

    All of this helps to reassure the user and personalise the experience. Computers are seen by many (especially the elderly) as impersonal and cold. Techniques like this humanise the experience and connect with users.

    Lessons learnt

    There is a lot that can be learned from the development of the Wiltshire Farm Foods website. We can learn about the importance of understanding your target audience and their motivations. We can learn how a perceived limitation in a business model can be turned into a strength. However, what excites me most is the opportunities provided by the Franchise model to engage with users in a more personal way that is lacking in many websites. With the growth of online social interaction there is the potential for an unprecedented level of customer care.

    160. Education, Education, Education

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

    Play

    Download this show.

    Launch our podcast player

    Housekeeping

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

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

    News

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

    How to create a great web design CV

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

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

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

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

    For the complete list of tips read the whole post.

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

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

    Design: Make it Memorable

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

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

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

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

    Statistics and website owners

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

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

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

    That has often been my experience too.

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

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

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

    Specialist vs. Generalist: Who Wins?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Back to top

    Interview: Aarron Walter on Interact

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

    Aarron: Thanks for having me.

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

    Aarron: Yeah, yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Aarron: Thanks for having me.

    Thanks goes to Andrew Marquis for transcribing this interview.

    Back to top

    Listeners feedback:

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

    Remote user testing

    Our first email is from Steve. He writes…

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

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

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

    What do you think of this method?

    Sounds interesting although it would not be my preferred approach.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Finding a job

    Our second email is a rather despondent one from Andrew…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Back to top

    Series: Building A Better Web Application by Ryan Carson

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

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

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

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

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

    Back to top

    158. Home

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

    Play

    Download this show.

    Launch our podcast player

    Housekeeping

    Headscape still recruiting!

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

    Back to top

    News and events

    The best of SXSW

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

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

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

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

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

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

    fedex logo

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

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

    This addressed two separate problems we have been having at Headscape

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

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

    Browser testing and IE6

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

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

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

    Screenshot of Superpreview

    A simplicity case study

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

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

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

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

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

    An introduction to Microformats

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

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

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

    Back to top

    Interview: Rob Borley on Project Management

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

    Rob: Hi Paul, how are you doing?

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

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

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

    Rob: Indeed.

    Paul: Do you actually hear it?

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

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

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

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

    Rob: (unintelligible) celebrity project manager.

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

    Rob: Yes.

    Paul: And you became a project manager.

    Rob: Yes.

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

    Rob: Well, you mean other than manage projects.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Paul: I like the cornification in that.

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

    Paul: Yes.

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

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

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

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

    Rob: Yeah, stick to web celeb.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Rob: My pleasure.

    Thanks goes to Meredith Marsh for transcibing this interview.

    Back to top

    Feature: Home Working

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

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

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

    The reality of home working

    Back to top

    Sneak Geek

    Marcus shares some thoughts about our upcoming trip to SXSW.

    I’ve really been looking forward to SXSW this year. I think it has something to do with familiarity with the whole event and also that Paul and I will be doing a little more than sitting in the audience (and bars).

    So, it’s my third year. Does that mean I can say ‘southby’ now instead of the interminable south-by-south-west? I hope so.

    Does it mean I can call myself a geek? No chance.

    Other than making me feel old (which I honestly don’t care about), being at SXSW does give me a sense that I’m out of place.

    In some ways I am a geek, but none of them to do with webs and internets. Following my career as a musician, and the advent of ‘proper’ jobs, I have, and let’s make no bones about it, been a salesman. Salesman is such a dirty word. It’s the complete opposite of ‘cool’ and in no way geeky at all.

    I’m not suggesting I don’t have a role within the agency I work for, far from it. I like to think of myself as the person that interfaces (oh god, did I say ‘interface’) with people who are even less web-savvy than I am. This undoubtedly works. I have been blessed with enough intelligence to listen to people like Mr Boag and relay his words of wisdom, often making recommendations based on business objectives, in ways that potential (and existing) clients understand.

    I’m likely to get shot down here but, usability is largely common sense and I’ve got bags of that too. But can I do design? No. Can I do any coding of any kind? No. Therefore, I am not a geek.

    Ah yes, but geeks aren’t cool. Not like musicians are cool.

    So, the SXSW music conference has got to be the real place to be right? I never attended it during my pop days, but, way back in early 90s I did go to MIDEM in Cannes which is the European equivalent. This event was frequented mostly by music business tossers (apologies) who were about as far away from ‘cool’ as you can get and I have a sneaking suspicion that the SXSW music conference is similar.

    Conclusion: geeks are cool. Rock stars? No, probably not but the vast majority of the geeks I have met are conscientious, innovative people that really want to make some kind of difference. And, for the most part, very entertaining speakers.
    Like I said, I’m really looking forward to southby this year.

    10 criteria for selecting a CMS

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

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

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

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

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

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

    1. Core functionality

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

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

    Blogger Homepage

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

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

    The editor is one core feature worth particular attention.

    2. The editor

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

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

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

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

    Wordpress WYSIWYG

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

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

    3. Managing assets

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

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

    4. Search

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

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

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

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

    5. Customization

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

    Illustration demonstrating the inflexibility of some CMS

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

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

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

    6. User interaction

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

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

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

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

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

    7. Roles and permissions

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

    Illustration showing the consequences of not having a permissions system

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

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

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

    8. Versioning

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

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

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

    9. Multiple site support

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

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

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

    Movable Type admin system

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

    10. Multilingual support

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

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

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

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

    Conclusions

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

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

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

    Three secrets to simplicity

    Many website owners damage their sites by continually adding features and content when they should be simplifying. In this post I reveal why that happens and how to simplify your website.

    In my post ‘5 options when website budgets get slashed‘ I explained that many organisations waste money adding ever more functionality and content to their sites when they should be simplifying. Unfortunately it is much easier to add content than take it away. But why is that?

    The 3 lures of complexity

    In ‘10 harsh truths about corporate websites‘ I outlined 3 reasons why website owners shy away from removing content…

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

    However, I think there is more to it than that. First, there is a general laziness. It is easy to leave content online. It takes effort to remove it. Second (and more importantly) there is a desire to please users. If a user asks for a feature or piece of content, we feel obliged to provide it.

    3 questions that encourage simplicity

    Adding functionality requested by users is not always a good idea. You need to ask 3 questions…

    • How many people are asking for it? – If only a few people request a piece of functionality, there may not be the demand to justify the time and money.
    • Who is asking for it? – If it is not being requested by your primary audience then you should probably not be building it.
    • How will it affect others? – With new functionality comes complexity. Will that functionality confuse some users? Will it distract from your main call to action?

    What then do you do if your site has become overly complex? How do you achieve simplicity?

    3 steps to achieving simplicity

    According to ‘The Laws of Simplicity‘ there are three practical ways you can simplify anything, including your site. These are:

    • Remove elements
    • Hide elements
    • Shrink elements

    Let’s look at how these steps work in practice.

    1. Remove

    Headscape Website

    The first step to simplifying your site is removing unnecessary content. This is by far the hardest step for the reasons I have outlined above. However, it is necessary as Steve Krug explains in his book ‘Don’t Make Me Think.’ He identifies two benefits of removing content…

    • It reduces the noise level of your site
    • It makes the useful content more prominent

    Removing content really does make a difference. We applied these principles to our own website at headscape.co.uk and saw a significant increase in conversions (those visitors who request a quotation for our web design services) and some amazingly positive feedback on the site itself.

    In fact we took the principle so much to heart that we went from a 40+ page site down to a single page! Of course, that kind of radical approach is not for every site. However, even removing some content can make a huge difference.

    2. Hide

    Unfortunately, it is not always possible to remove as much as you wish. Sometimes you need to keep content to serve secondary audiences. That is where hiding content comes in.

    It is important to cater for secondary users, but you do not want their content to distract or confuse your main target audience. Instead of removing their content, you can hide it deeper within your site or within the interface itself.

    Menu on the Wiltshire Farm Foods website

    An example of this is a recent homepage redesign we completed for Wiltshire Farm Foods. Most of their sales come from 6 categories of meals. However, they also offer a number of other categories. On their old homepage the 6 main categories were lost among the other categories. Users felt overwhelmed by choice and sales were lost.

    One option would have been to reduce the number of categories to focus on the 6 big sellers. However, this would upset a sizeable secondary audience. So instead, we hid some of the categories under a show more link. This meant that their secondary users could still be served, without overwhelming the primary audience.

    3. Shrink

    Finally, there are occasions when content can be neither removed or hidden. This is often because the content is of critical importance to a secondary audience and needs to accessed quickly. In such cases the content can be shrunk.

    Take for example University websites. Their primary audience is almost always prospective students. However, they also cater for staff and existing students. These people need quick access to intranet tools such as the institutions address book. The solution is to add a small inconspicuous link on the homepage that takes them quickly to this content. By keeping the link small (shrunk) the site serves their needs without distracting or confusing the primary audience.

    A similar approach was used on the Wiltshire Farm Foods new homepage. However in this case the content was actually shrunk.

    Because of the elderly demographic it was important that we provided lots of help to new users. We therefore wanted to dedicate a substantial amount of homepage real estate to meet their needs as they arrived. Our solution was this…

    WFF get started guide

    Unfortunately this became distracting once the users were familiar with the site. It became a usability hurdle. One solution was to remove it. However, this would make it impossible for users to refer back to if they became stuck. The next option was to hide the content elsewhere (for example in the help section). However, previous usability studies of this demographic showed they develop ‘habits’ in the way they navigate. If we moved these links that they relied upon, it could prove confusing.

    Our final solution was to shrink the content. So instead of moving or removing it we simply collapsed it…

    WFF get started guide, collapsed

    This meant the content continued to be accessible but did not become a distraction or take up too much real estate.

    Conclusion

    Although the ideal scenario is to remove content, it is also possible to simplify in other ways.

    This should not be mistaken as an excuse to avoid removing content. However, you could use hiding and shrinking as the first step towards removing. If these techniques do not alienate your users, then it maybe appropriate to remove that content entirely.

    Whatever the case, we should all be looking for ways to improve our sites by simplifying rather than adding more and more content.

    10 ways to Battle Site Bureaucracy

    Running a large institutional website is frustrating. Your site is often held back by internal politics and bureaucracy. Let me show you 10 ways to cut through the crap and get results.

    My recent post ‘10 harsh truths about corporate websites‘ generated a huge number of comments both on my own blog and on Smashing Magazine. I seemed to tap into an undercurrent of frustration that exists within the industry.

    However, although there was a lot of agreement about the points I raised, there was also resignation. There was a feeling that little could be done to overcome these problems because institutional websites are too entrenched in bureaucracy and politics.

    Although I can sympathise with this position and have myself suffered from the problem, I am not one to give up! Over the last decade of working on these sites, I have developed a number of techniques which (sometimes) help to smooth their evolution. Hopefully they will help you too.

    1. Educate and inform

    At the heart of any technique for dealing with politics and bureaucracy has to be education.

    Although there are occasions when people are just ‘trying to be difficult’, in most cases their objections are based on ignorance.

    You cannot expect people to be as knowledgeable as you about the web. If you want people to make informed, sensible decisions you must educate them.

    Education is also not just about giving them the background to a specific decision so they understand ‘why you are right’. It is about increasing your organisations general understanding of the web.

    Run workshops, publish email newsletters, do anything that informs people about the latest web innovations. Increasingly I am invited into organisations to run short seminars on everything from accessibility to facebook! This kind of ongoing education means people are better informed when tough decisions need to be made.

    2. Hold stakeholder interviews

    One technique that we find very effective at Headscape are stakeholder interviews.

    Stakeholder interviews involves meeting individually with anybody who has a ‘stake’ (interest) in the website. This is typically members of the marketing and IT teams, as well as departmental heads and senior management. However it should also include suppliers, customers and users of your website.

    These one-to-one meetings provide two opportunities…

    • Requirements gathering – It is easy for website owners to live in isolated bubbles, separate from the rest of the organisation. These meetings provide an opportunity to understand the real needs and objectives of others within the business. It will highlight ways that your website can help, which you might not have previously considered.
    • To be inclusive – Stakeholder interviews offer a ‘political benefit’ as well. By meeting with people individually they feel included in the process. They feel their opinions are valued and listened to (which they should be!). People are much less likely to object if they have been consulted before a decision is reached.

    People often complain about the website in stakeholder interviews. Allow them to do this and avoid becoming defensive. They will feel more favourably towards you and your website, if you listen to their concerns. We all like to be heard.

    3. Avoid group committee meetings

    The key to stakeholder interviews is their one-to-one nature. Group meetings can be very destructive. This is for a number of reasons…

    • The need to defend – In large organisations that have internal politics, everybody feels the need to defend their own ‘turf’. If somebody criticise the website, you are forced to defend it to ‘save face’ in front of others. Equally others feel the need to defend their own positions for the same reason.
    • A tendency to compromise - When two individuals in a group reach an impasse, the others try to find a compromise. This kind of ‘design on the fly’ inevitably leads to a bland solution. It will neither offend or inspire anybody. Unfortunately, to create a successful website you need to make tough choices that some will not like. A group approach does not lend itself to this.
    • A loss of control – It is easy for you to loss control in a group meeting. One-to-one meetings work better because you can divide and conquer. Only you know what the other stakeholders said. This puts you in charge and allows you to ‘cheery pick’ the feedback you receive. In a group meeting things can easily get out of hand and decisions are made without your buy-in.
    • The dominant individual - Every group has one or two dominant individuals. These are the people who bounce the rest of the group into agreeing with them, forcing their agenda through. A dominant individual drowns out quieter members, who become resentful later that nobody listened to them. Meeting with people individually prevents this because the dominant individuals cannot force their point of view on others or overwhelm quieter ones.

    One cannot expect a larger organisation to run its website without some form of committee. However, there is no reason why that committee needs to meet as a group.

    4. Target your influencers

    Talking of dominant individuals, another successful tactic is to target influencers.

    An influencer is somebody that others respect and follow. Their opinion is incredibly valuable and if you can sway them to your cause, others will fall into line. However, be careful not to confuse dominant people with influencers. A dominant person will ‘bully’ others into publicly agreeing with them. An influencer will fundamentally alter somebody’s attitude.

    Identify who influences your decision makers and speak to them personally. This person might not even be a decision maker themselves, but they carry enough clout to make them worth your time.

    When you meet with your influencers, really listen to what they have to say. They often have valuable insights which may change your strategy significantly. Do not go into a meeting with an influencer simply intent on pushing your own agenda. Instead try and shape your approach around their perspective.

    If you get an influencer enthusiastic about your project it can make a huge difference.

    5. Use third party experts

    A variation on the influencers technique is to back up your ideas with third party expert opinion. This can be done in two ways…

    • Reference the work of a third party expert – For example, if you wish to discourage internal stakeholders from overwhelming users with options on the homepage, you might refer them to Steve Krug or Jakob Nielsen who have both written on the subject.
    • Hire a third party expert - I often find myself brought into companies simply to confirm what in-house staff have already been saying. Unfortunately, decision makers often doubt the opinion of their web team because they either undervalue them or feel they are pushing a hidden agenda. An independent expert can add creditability to your opinions.

    Of course, for this approach to work the stakeholders need to respect the expert. There is no point referencing Steve Krug or hiring Jakob Nielsen, if the decision makers have never heard of them. It is often necessary to sell the credibility of your expert first.

    6. Rely on evidence, not opinion

    Sometimes it is better to avoid personal opinion entirely (even if that is the opinion of an expert). In such cases statistics can be your friend.

    Nothing is more powerful for driving home a point than referring decision makers to Google Analytics. However web stats are not the only evidence you can draw upon. Others include…

    • Surveys and polls are an excellent way of getting feedback from your users that can then be presented to decision makers.
    • Twitter search and Google Alerts can be used to gauge how people view your site and brand. These can be powerful testimonials to present decision makers.
    • Heat maps can be used to take some of the subjectivity out of design.

    Of course one of the most powerful evidence you can present is the results of usability testing.

    7. Focus on the user

    As website owners we know that a successful website is user focused. However, not all our decision makers will understand this and even those who do may get ‘distracted’ sometimes.

    It is therefore important to constantly move our decision makers away from their own personal preferences and back on the needs of users.

    User testing is one way of doing this. Being able to show decision makers how real users interact with your website is incredibly powerful. It helps them empathise with the needs of users rather than thinking only about their own agenda. Play them video clips of users interacting with your site or at the very least quote them the feedback of users.

    However, even if you involve decision makers in user testing, they can still get caught up in their own agendas. One gentle way of preventing this is to word your questions carefully. When you need a decision makers response to something don’t ask…

    What do you think?

    Instead ask them…

    How do you think users will respond to this?

    This will keep them focused on the needs of users.

    8. Control the feedback

    As well as wording questions carefully there is also a need to control the feedback you receive. This is important if you want the decision makers to make considered decisions.

    Take for example design sign off – never ask a decision marker if they like a design. It is too broad a question that will lead to a plethora of uninformed and ill considered responses. Instead ask them more specific questions such as…

    • Does the design conform to the brand guidelines?
    • Does the design meet the needs of our users?
    • Does the design emphasis the right content?
    • Does the design have a clear call to action?
    • Does the design fulfil our business objectives?

    This prevents the decision maker from falling back on their gut reaction (i like it / I dislike it). It forces them to focus on the issues that define whether the design is successful or not and ignore personal preference for specific colours or layout.

    Of course, sometimes you will not like the answer to these specific questions. When that happens you need to ask why.

    9. Ask why

    This is probably the most powerful of all the techniques I have listed here and yet by far the simplest.

    When you face opposition to your plans, always ask why. Too often we switch to defensive mode and focus on better communicating our own position rather than understanding the opinion of the person opposing us. This is a mistake.

    The question why is powerful for three reasons…

  • It informs – Often the objection raised initially is not the true underlying issue. By asking why you get to the root of the problem and that allows you to offer alternative solutions. Asking why ensures you have all the information required to deal with the issue.
  • It can confound – Most of us make decisions based on an intuitive leap. We do not always think through our decisions and so find it hard to articulate the underlying reason. By asking why you force people to stop and consider their logic. When they struggle to express the underlying reasons, they weaken their position.
  • It shows interest – By asking why you allow them to have their say. You demonstrate an interest in their opinion and establish empathy with their point of view.
  • Ultimately asking why avoids the disagreement from turning into an argument with entrenched position.

    10. Avoid confrontation

    I avoid confrontation at all costs. Going head-to-head with somebody especially in front of their colleagues achieves nothing. You can rarely get somebody to shift their position through confrontation.

    Once a disagreement escalates into a confrontation, nobody can afford to ‘lose face’ by backing down. It becomes a matter of ego, where pride dictates the outcome. Your website will almost certainly be caught in the cross fire.

    A better approach is to agree. The word yes can be immensely powerful. Whenever somebody suggests something to me, no matter how stupid, I will do the following…

    • Acknowledge and thank them for their input.
    • Say yes we could do that.
    • Go on to explain the consequences if we did.
    • Offer an alternative which could achieve the same aims.

    In short I tend to go around problems rather than bashing my head against them. I always look to work with others rather than against them.

    Conclusions

    So there you go, 10 techniques for battling site bureaucracy. I do not claim these techniques are foolproof. Neither do I suggest they are always appropriate. However, they are useful techniques in your arsenal which you may want to call upon from time to time.

    Finally, this is not a definitive list. I could have written more but then it wouldn’t have been a ‘top ten list!’ However, I would be interested to hear what works for you. Post your techniques in the comments.

    A demonstration of graded browser support

    In my post ‘Effective Browser Support‘ I explained how we should not be looking to make sites identical in all browsers, but rather focusing on usability and accessibility. In this post I demonstrate how that works in practice.

    I recently launched a new Headscape service called the Consultancy Clinic. As part of this launch I created a small single page website. Let me use this site to demonstrate how graded browser support can work.

    Remember – the idea of graded browser support is to support all browsers so that your site is usable, accessible and at least reasonably attractive. With that in mind lets start with the lowest common denominator.

    Starting with the basics – HTML

    All web browsers can support HTML. So as a bare minimum I needed to ensure my new website was usable and accessible in raw HTML format. To test this I used the free Lynx Viewer and it returned this…

    Consultancy Clinic site viewed in Lynx

    So far so good. But what about those browsers who think they understand CSS but don’t render it properly?

    The pretenders

    Unfortunately when it comes to CSS support things are not black and white. Although some browsers support styling flawlessly, others think they know what they are doing when they do not.

    Poor implementation of CSS is the curse of older browsers. Browsers like Netscape 4 and IE 5 offer very limited CSS support and badly implementing what it does provide.

    Instead of ignoring these browsers I create a basic CSS file which does some simple formatting. Instead of compromising the design to accommodate the limitations of these browsers, I deliver a simplified version which is usable and accessible.

    Consultancy Clinic Website viewed in IE 5

    As you can see the design focuses on some simple layout and typography. That way it avoids anything IE 5 may have trouble displaying correctly.

    Dealing with IE6 and above

    The next step was to create a more sophisticated design for browsers such as IE 6,7 and 8. These browsers understand CSS well but lack some of the more modern enhancements.

    It was necessary to hide this enchanced stylesheet from ‘the pretenders’ who would render it badly. To do this I had to use a CSS hack, which was unfortunate. However, older browsers now completely ignore it.

    How I did that is outside of the scope of this article. However if you want to know, view the source on the site and look for default.css.

    This new design now renders perfectly well in the more modern versions of IE.

    Consultancy Clinic website in IE 7

    A watermark image is highlighted in this screenshot

    There are however, subtle differences between the versions of IE. For example IE6 does not support transparent PNGs and so in IE 6 the watermark on the form does not appear. Although it would have been possible to force IE6 to display this image, it was more sensible to simply not show it. After all the watermark is an embellishment to the design, not a fundamental part of it.

    The bells and whistles

    Finally I have added some further embellishments to the design for more advanced browsers. For example both Firefox and Safari support border-radius. This allowed me to add curved corners, which are simply ignored by browsers who do not support that style.

    Consultancy Clinic Website in Firefox

    I was even able to go a step further in Safari because it supports dynamic shadows.

    Consultancy Clinic website in Safari

    Conclusions

    Design enhancements like drop shadows and rounded corners are important, but not to the same degree as usability and accessibility. With finite time and budget, we are better spending our time making sure the site is usable on all browsers rather than getting it looking identical in a few.

    With the time I saved not trying to force IE6 to display a rounded corner correctly, I was able to ensure the site looked good in older browsers with a limited understanding of CSS.

    Once you accept that your site will not look identical in all browsers, you will be able to build sites faster, cheaper and ensure a broader range of devices can access them. Surely that is worthwhile?

    152. War?

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

    Play

    Download this show.

    Launch our podcast player

    News and events

    How to film video case studies

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

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

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

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

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

    Effective communication in web design

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

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

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

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

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

    Do we place too much emphasis on the homepage?

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

    In the article he writes…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Back to top

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

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

    Daniel: Hello

    Joe: Hey hey

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

    Joe: ermhh yes a couple of months ago maybe

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

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

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

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

    Paul: (laughs)

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

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

    Paul: Yeah

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

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

    Joe: Yes

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

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

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

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

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

    Daniel: Absolutely

    Paul: yeah

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

    Paul: mmmm what …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Paul: What about from your point of view Joe?

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

    Daniel: It is just simple death by committee

    Joe: Right

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Daniel: Absolutely.

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

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

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

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

    Paul: Ah OK

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

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

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

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

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

    Paul: Yeah. Brilliant. Joe what about you?

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

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

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

    Daniel: Thanks for having us on Paul

    Joe: Bye

    Thanks goes to Shaun Hare for transcribing this interview.

    Back to top

    Listeners feedback:

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

    Why speculative design is wrong

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

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

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

    1. It costs everybody money

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

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

    2. It is about selling not delivering

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

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

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

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

    3. It is wasteful

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

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

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

    4. It is uninformed

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

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

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

    5. It ignores the collaborative nature of design

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

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

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

    Example Mood board

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

    The alternatives

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

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

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

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

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

    150. User Manipulation

    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.

    BBC Graded Browser Support Table

    Read the UK government guidance on browser testing

    50 Illustrator tutorials

    List of 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.

    Back to top

    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.

    Back to top

    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

    Back to top

    Snape and Keith, separated at birth?

    Video: Introduction to WCAG 2

    I recently gave an internal presentation at Headscape about WCAG 2. A number of people expressed an interest in seeing it so I made a point to record it.

    At the end the presentation I references a stripped down version of the guidelines found here.

    I also refer to a quick reference guide to WCAG 2 that can be found here.

    Apologises

    Apologises for the poor audio quality of this video. Unfortunately the decision to record the presentation was made at the last minute and so we didn’t have a proper mic setup arranged. You can also tell it is not quite as slick as my normal presentations :)

    I would also like to apologise for the lack of transcript of this video. Again, it was not my initial intention to put this video online as this was an internal presentation containing my initial thoughts on WCAG 2. I am still learning a lot about the new guidelines and will publish a more considered article when I have a better understanding of the subject.

    Feedback

    On that subject, I would be interested to hear your feedback on the thoughts I present. Do you agree with my interpretation of the new guidelines? Have I misunderstood anything? Are there other elements I should have addressed? Your thoughts would be appreciated in the comments.

    Update: We now have a transcript!

    Thanks go to Anna Debenham who braved the horrendous audio to transcribe the presentation. If you cannot face the video we do at least now have a written version!

    Paul: Ok, this has worked out a little bit weird because the idea initially with this presentation was that it was really about bringing us up to speed with WCAG2 now that WCAG2 has been released. But I made the mistake of mentioning it online and several people said "ooh, can you record that?" so now it’s a little bit of both, a little bit of a presentation to you guys and a little bit of a presentation that will go on the web.

    Paul: So as you guys probably know, WCAG2 has now been released, and as accessibility is a big part of what we deliver and we talk a lot about accessibility, we need to be up to speed on it and we need to know what we’re doing. Obviously accessibility has become such a part of what we do day in and day out that we don’t necessarily think too much about it, it’s almost an intrinsic part of what we do, but with changes to WCAG2, or with the arrival of WCAG2, there have been differences, changes, things that have altered, so I want to make sure that everybody is up to speed with it. Feel free to butt in with questions, that’s absolutely fine.

    Audience: Will the video be able to see the screen?

    Paul: The video will be able to see the screen. Ok, so, WCAG2. Basically, WCAG1 came out in 1999 which is a good old time ago, in Internet terms that’s like forever, and there was a real need to make some changes and improve WCAG1. Let me just pop back and just explain.

    The Journey to WCAG2

    Paul: So, yeah, like I said, WCAG1 came out in 1999, it quickly dated as technology evolved, and some of the guidelines actually became harmful in a way. So you guys know that for example, we don’t always take note of what they say about Access Keys, we don’t always take note of what they say about "make sure you put text in an empty form field" and things like that. And WCAG1 was very much built with HTML in mind, and obviously the web is a lot broader than that and there are a lot more formats about. But unfortunately development of WCAG2 was very slow, and also fraught with controversy. I mean, famously with Joe Clarke who is an accessibility expert wrote on A List Apart "to hell with WCAG2" because it basically had become a bit of a joke, because it was very generic; they were trying to write a set of guidelines that really made no effort to mention specific technology because they didn’t want it to date like WCAG1, but the result is it became unreadable and nobody could understand it.

    WCAG2 Reborn

    Paul: But, things did change. Major changes were made to the WCAG2 draft and things did improve dramatically. They really listened to the community, and the language in it now is much clearer. So what I want to do now is talk a little bit through what WCAG2 includes and what it doesn’t, and how we’re then going to go about implementing it and how it affects us.

    Principles

    Paul: Ok, so let’s look at the structure of WCAG2. Basically WCAG2 has 3 tiers to it that you need to know about. Tier number 1 is the idea of Principles. So this is kind of the most generic of the tiers, you know, it’s really kind of aimed at the kind of things you would tell a board of directors that doesn’t really understand anything technical, that doesn’t really understand accessibility at all. And there are 4 principles which are the foundations of web accessibility and these principles I’ll come onto a little bit later.

    Guidelines

    Paul: Underneath each of those principles are Guidelines. So, within each principle there are 3 or 4 guidelines or a number of guidelines that is different for each principle. But there are a total of 12 guidelines, and these are goals that you should be working towards in order to make your content more accessible to users.

    Success Criteria

    Paul: Under each guideline, there are Success Criteria. So now we’ve really hit the nitty-gritty, these are kind of specific, measurable goals that you’ve got to achieve. And this is how you judge whether your site is WCAG2 compliant, if you like. So, this is the really important level if that makes sense, but it’s organised within this hierarchy of guidelines and principles.

    Techniques

    Paul: Now, actually, there is kind of a 4th tier as well which is techniques. So you’re trying to, maybe as designers, you’re trying to conform to the Success Criteria, well there’s a whole load of different ways and different techniques that you can do that and you could read about those, and you could make up your own techniques if you wanted to, but there are some laid down that can help you get going.

    Working with WCAG2

    Paul: So those are the 3 levels that WCAG2 is built around. Now let’s dive into those a little bit. I had to think about how much detail I want to go into in this room. Obviously we don’t want to go into every technique that you could possibly apply and we don’t even want to go into necessarily every success criteria. That’s really for you guys to look through afterwards. What we are going to do is look at those guidelines and those principles, and hopefully help you to understand where WCAG2 stands over stuff.

    Perceivable

    Paul: Ok, so, the first… heh, totally illegible text, isn’t that great. Very accessible!

    Audience: (laughter)

    Paul: So the number 1 principle is Perceivable, and that’s 1 of your 4 principles that you’ve got here. And perceivable is basically talking about "information and user interface components must be presentable to users in ways that they can perceive"

    Audience: (laughter)

    Paul: Unlike that! (points to presentation)

    Audience: (laughter) Is the rest of the presentation like this?

    Paul: Yes.

    Audience: (more laughter)

    Paul: You actually don’t need to read this anyway which is very useful. So, Perceivable is basically about "can you see it?", that is it as far as the principle is concerned, and the answer is "no you can’t". But perceivable then breaks down into a series of guidelines. So, let’s have a look at what these guidelines are. So basically, perceivable is broken down into 4 guidelines. And if we talk through each of those it should give you an idea.

    Text Alternatives

    Paul: The first one is text alternatives. So this is stuff we already know. "Provide text alternatives for any non-text content so that it can be changed into other forms people need, such as large print, braille, speech, symbols or simpler language." So this really applies to things like video, audio, forms that you create, and interestingly CAPTCHA is particularly mentioned here. And that is a particular accessibility problem that hasn’t been particularly well solved I don’t think.

    Time Based Media

    Paul: The next way that Perceivable works itself out is in time-based media. What we’re talking about here is that you need to provide an alternative for anything that is time-based. So here we’re talking about captions for video, sign-language maybe, media alternatives, but it also applies to live and pre-recorded video. So if you’re streaming stuff, then you need to think about this as well as with stuff that’s pre-recorded. Now, it does take into account the difference between "crap, how are we going to make streaming video accessible?". If you read into the guidelines it does give some good advice there. So that’s not quite as scary as it first sounds.

    Adaptable

    Paul: Anything that we produce needs to be adaptable. In other words, content can be presented in different ways. For example, a simpler layout maybe for people with cognitive disabilities for example. Really, this boils down to things like using semantic markup, meaningful order in your HTML so that if the CSS is stripped away it still makes sense in the order that it is presented, and not relying on colour and other sensory elements to convey information.

    Distinguishable

    Paul: And then finally it’s got to be distinguishable. So it’s about making it easier for users to see and hear content including separating foreground from background and that kind of stuff. So we’re talking here about contrast, colour, and control over things like audio and video, that kind of stuff. So that’s where we’re at with perceivable.

    Operable

    Paul: Let’s move onto the next principle which is Operable. So, Operable is about user interface components and navigation, and making them easy to use so that somebody can use them whatever disability they may have. So this again breaks down into 4 different guidelines, the most obvious of which is Keyboard Access. So everything that we produce has to be accessible via a keyboard. So, for example, the Flash video that we’re currently creating for the Wiltshire Farm Foods home page needs to be keyboard operated, alright? Which I bet it isn’t at the moment! And to be fair, it’s part of production, I’m sure they’d put that in at the end if I hadn’t reminded them. That existed under WCAG1, so there’s nothing different there. So everything needs to be keyboard accessible.

    Enough Time

    Paul: You also need to provide enough time for people to take in the information that they’re being presented with. So giving the ability to pause, stop and control time based material is really important as well.

    Seizures

    Paul: You’ve got to take into account seizures, some people can have seizures triggered by animation and that kind of thing, so there are various limits that the guidelines lay down about flashing objects and stuff like that.

    Navigable

    Paul: And then finally it’s got to be navigable. So this includes things like skipping content, having descriptive page titles, tab order, links that make sense out of context, lot’s of headings, that kind of stuff. Is this all making sense?

    Audience: Yes, apart from time-based media, I don’t understand that.

    Paul: Time-based media, we’re talking about video and audio. So let’s say you had… one of our podcasts. So, there are certain things we need to ensure. One is that it is operable, in other words, a user can pause the podcast if we get annoying, or they want time to take in the information that we’ve said, but the other thing is that we also need to provide an alternative way of them getting it which is why we provide the show notes that we do and the transcripts and stuff like that.

    Audience: Ok, well that kind of fits under Text Alternatives and giving it control so it’s under Operable… I just don’t get where it is under perceivable, as a perceivable thing, it has to be perceivable?

    Paul: Yeah, basically.

    Audience: Video, audio… all has to be perceivable then?

    Paul: Yes. Some of these principles and certainly some of the guidelines do overlap to some degree. But when you draw down to the Success Criteria level, of how you actually apply these things, then there are more specific techniques. I think what they did is create a load of success criteria, and then kind of chunked them together in meaningful groups, but sometimes they’re not so meaningful. But it is a vast improvement on WCAG1 as far as being able to understand it.

    Understandable

    Paul: Ok, talking of understanding it, our next one is Understandable. So this is the next one of our 4 top-level principles, so everything you produce has to be understandable. So what does that mean? Well that results in 3 guidelines. It has to be Readable, Predictable and has to be able to provide Input Assistance. So how does that work itself out in practice?

    Readable

    Paul: With Readable, we’re talking about making content readable, text content mainly. So this works out in things like setting the language in your HTML, you know, setting what the language is in the header, avoiding using jargon, finally we’ve got a decent reason to go back to clients and say, you know, "you can’t use that kind of language, nobody understands it!". Also things like abbreviations need to be explained, and also reading level as well, and that’s something I really want to get through to a lot of our clients because a lot of our clients, especially the public sector clients that we have, have this attitude of "well of course, people that look at our site are of post-graduate degree people, and they have excellent reading level", but that doesn’t take into account things like people that speak English as a 2nd language, who can be very intelligent but not particularly good at reading, also people with Dyslexia can be incredibly intelligent but not particularly good at reading. So reading level is an important aspect of it.

    Predictable

    Paul: For it to be understandable it also needs to be predictable. So with this we’re talking about things like consistent navigation, and no uninitiated changes. And this is a particularly important one in our world of AJAX and JavaScript and all this cool stuff that we’re doing where we can often trigger events without asking the user’s permission first. When I say "asking for permission" I mean they haven’t clicked on link or they’ve not initiated it in any way. Users need to initiate these actions… and no pop-up windows without them clicking first to trigger a pop-up and being aware of what’s going to happen. It’s all about making it understandable and making them aware of what’s going on.

    Input Assistance

    Paul: The last guideline under Understandable is Input Assistance. So this is going into the realms of when we do forms, how do we handle errors, what kind of feedback do we give to the user, what labels – are things clearly marked up as labels, are they descriptive of the fields and the forms and that kind of stuff. We’re also talking about help, what additional help are you provided in terms of tool tip and contextual help and anything else that you care to mention. So that’s Understandable, that’s what that principle is driving at.

    Robust

    Paul: The final principle is Robust. "Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies." In other words, what we build has to work on everything.

    Audience: What about AJAX?

    Paul: I think that’s where we get into the realm of progressive enhancement, that it’s fine to use something like AJAX as long as, if the AJAX is taken away, it still operates. Or, you provide an alternative version, the guidelines do actually accept that you can do alternative versions of something. So Gmail is a good example of that, Gmail, it actually doesn’t work if AJAX is turned off but they do provide an HTML only version of it which does the same thing. I’m not a great fan of that because it’s twice as much stuff to maintain, and one version become out of date and all the rest of it. My preferred technique is to build it so it works normally, and then to layer on the JavaScript and AJAX on top of it to provide enhanced functionality, which is what we guys have been doing pretty much all along and we need to continue in doing that.

    Compatibility

    Paul: So that Robust principle actually only comes down to one guideline which is Compatible, so that’s about maximising compatibility with current… listen to the wording of this… Maximise compatibility with current and future user agents, so we also need to be looking forward as well and predicting the future which is always good. But that’s where it comes back to using solid, good code that is’nt reliant on lots of hacks in order to get it to work, and it goes back to the conversation that we’ve been having recently about browser testing, upgraded browser support and that kind of stuff as well. So Compatibility and Robustness is the last principle. The other thing I should have mentioned with Compatibility is this also includes things like validation, making sure that your code validates, and just generally other markup type stuff.

    What, no AAA, AA, A?

    Paul: Ok, another thing that might have occurred to you is AAA, AA, A.. Priority 1, 2 and 3. Priority 1, 2 and 3 are still there, there are still those levels of conformance, but I get a real sense from the tome of this document, and this is just my personal opinion, people watching this video who know a lot more about accessibility might jump all over me on this, but my sense is that they were playing down those 3 levels of conformance. To be honest, I think I’m pretty keen on that. I don’t think those levels of conformance have done a lot of good generally speaking, because I think it’s kind of developed a checkbox mentality amongst some of our clients "We must be AA compliant" or "We must be A compliant" and they’re not actually thinking about the needs of the users, they’re just ticking the boxes so they meet some quota that has been established somewhere. One of the things that’s quite interesting, and I’m not sure if it’s a change from WCAG1 or not, I couldn’t find the reference in WCAG1 but again someone will correct me no doubt, but conformance in WCAG2 seems to be on a page-by-page basis. So you’re no longer in a situation where you want to claim conformance so you’re claiming conformance for an entire site, but you’re rather conforming on a page-by-page basis. And this allows you to basically pick-and-mix the level of conformance you want to reach on any particular page which is much, much more sensible because there are some elements where you might be building a particularly complex application that really isn’t going to manage being AAA compliant, whereas the rest of the site is AAA, and this one page isn’t. So it’s giving you the ability to mix and match. In fact, in the guidelines it says "It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA Success Criteria for some content. In other words they’re saying it’s just not possible to be AAA in some situations, so don’t even try.

    Start With Basics

    Paul: So how does this relate to what we do on a day-to-day basis? Well, I think the language we use with our clients pretty much will remain consistent with how it was with WCAG1 which is that we need to start of by encouraging all our clients to start with the absolute basics. A lot of people are put off of accessibility because of the enormity of it, of all the things they’ve got to do. And even to be single A compliant there is quite a lot to do if you’ve got a site that has never been built to be single A compliant before. So I think our attitude has got to be that you work towards this over time, it is an ongoing process, you don’t need to do it all in one big go and that you need to start with the absolute basics, the quick wins, the stuff… you know, it’s the 80/20 rule, 80% of the problems that people are going to encounter from an accessibility point of view is caused by 20% of the accessibility issues if that makes sense. So we can solve a small number of issues but have a big impact on the site. So we’ll start off with some real basic stuff. Things like putting in "alt" and "title" attributes, providing alternatives to media, things like video and audio, being aware of JavaScript and the problems that JavaScript can create if it’s not implemented correctly, providing resizable text so that the user has the ability to either increase or decrease the text size on sites, to build everything to be standards based because that makes it so much easier in future.

    Audience: Aren’t we moving away from resizable text?

    Paul: We’re moving away from the resizable interface where the whole thing scales up and down, but there’s no reason why we can’t keep the text itself rescaleable. The layers should be able to push up and down. It has to be said with resizeable text, it is becoming less of an issue. The reason it’s becoming less of an issue is because browsers now have this zoom functionality built into them. But I don’t think we’re quite there yet to be able to drop resizable text entirely is my current feeling… I’ve got mixed feelings about it. But the obvious aim we’re going for here is to be single A compliant.

    Build Over Time

    Paul: So all of this is about building accessibility over time. Taking the guidelines by themselves is not going to be enough, and taking this checkbox mentality that I talked about earlier is not going to be enough. Once you’ve done these quick fixes, the next step on from that is to start consulting with your community. We need to encourage our clients to start talking to their users and find out what accessibility concerns they have. I also think, which I think we’re quite poor at, that we need to start testing with real users some of the accessibility stuff that we do, and the big problem there is persuading clients to pay for that. It’s really hard to get clients to pay for that kind of testing but I do think that it’s a really useful thing to do, and there are organisations out there that provide people you can get in to do testing, or that you can send sites out and they test with them. So, testing with real disabled users is really worthwhile. I think it’s about identifying major issues and dealing with those first, just pragmatic kind of prioritisation of issues, something you do with usability. With usability you look for the quick wins and the showstoppers and those you deal with first, exactly the same with accessibility. Now, what the major showstoppers are for those navigating the site need to be dealt with. And over time you build towards AA and AAA compliance if you can. But you only do that maybe on some pages. The big concern clients have and the reason they get into this check-box mentality of saying "we’ve got to be double A or we’ve got to conform to the WCAG guidelines" is fear, a fear of litigation. Especially our bigger clients, they’re really worried they’re going to get serious issues. But I think it’s important to stress with clients that litigation doesn’t happen overnight. You don’t suddenly have come through the post a writ saying "you need to come into court about this accessibility issue on your site". It doesn’t happen like that. What happens in reality is the user complains. And if the user is repeatedly not heard and not listened to, and not responded to and not cared about and rejected, they get angry enough to maybe approach someone like the RNIB who then take it on into litigation for them. That’s the reality of what happens.

    Quick Response

    Paul: So as a result, you can diffuse that by responding to complaints quickly. So as you’re building up over time with the accessibility policy, if someone does complain, you need to write back to them and you need to deal with that issue straight up. Ok, so that’s how the client should be dealing with all this and there’s loads more I could say on this but I don’t want it to go on forever.

    Headscape’s Approach

    Paul: Let’s briefly talk about Headscape and our approach and how we should be approaching the subject of accessibility.

    Establish Approach With Client

    Paul: Well first of all I think everything that we do in our approach should be in conjunction with the client. I don’t think necessarily we talk enough to the client about accessibility. Some clients are just so bamboozled by it that they want us to take control, others want a say in it and what to be reassured that we’re doing something about it. So I think there’s a dialogue that we need to make sure happens. And if a client just wants us to take control of it, that’s great. If they want to be involved in the process, then that’s great to but we need to engage with the client and talk to the client more about it.

    Remain Pragmatic

    Paul: The second thing and I think this is really important is that we need to remain pragmatic in our approach to accessibility. Everything I’ve been talking about before like building up accessibility gradually, about doing the quick wins first and the show stoppers and that kind of stuff, that’s all pragmatic. I don’t want us on one hand to ignore accessibility, and it needs to be an integral part of everything we do, but on the other hand you can become extremist about it. We could spend hours and hours trying to get something to work in every conceivable user agent in the world and we can worry about every type of disability to the point where it becomes like a paralysis that stops us actually doing anything. So there’s a real balance that we need to strike here. And we need to strike that with our clients and working with our clients.

    Have a rationale

    Paul: Now I think it’s worth saying that if we decide not to comply with a guideline for whatever reason, we need to have a rationale for that. So we might not conform even to single A compliance in certain situations, although to be honest I can’t think of any off the top of my head, but if we do decide not to conform, we need a damned good reason why not. In other words, we need to have thought about it. And the other thing about accessibility is that we always think about it at the end of the project. It’s too late by then, we’ve built everything. So it really needs to become an intrinsic part of everything that we do.

    Responsibilities.

    Paul: Let’s talk about the idea of responsibility here and whose responsibility accessibility is within Headscape. Basically I’m going to say, everybody. One of the absolute great things about WCAG2 is because it’s got this 3 tiered approach, it is "accessible" to everybody. It’s understandable by everybody. So therefore it can be everybody’s responsibility to keep an eye on accessibility. And so this is how I think it should split down.

    Sales/Client – Principles

    Paul: Marcus and Chris and the Client should be worried about principles. The Operable, the Perceivable, those basic top-level principles. And you should be looking at anything that goes out from the company and going "well is that really operable?" So you can take a very top-level approach to it. And I think as you talk to clients as well you take this very top-level approach to it. That’s the level you guys should be working at.

    Guidelines – Project Managers

    Paul: Project managers, I think you need to be looking and understanding from the guidelines point of view. So you need to go in and read what those guidelines are, and you need to be sure that you understand them. And as you look at any work that goes out from the company, you need to be thinking "does it conform to those guidelines?" You don’t necessarily care about the nitty-gritty of how those are measured, or the nitty-gritty of how they’re achieved, but has that guideline been met? That’s the level you need to be working at.

    Success Criteria – Designers and Developers

    Paul: Then when it comes to the designers and developers, you need to get right into these guidelines. And you need to understand the success criteria and how to apply the guideline and how to make them work in practice.

    Check Everything

    Paul: So basically, we need to be checking everything that goes out the company for accessibility. And I have to say I’m making the mistake of saying this on camera, but I think we’ve got a bit lax recently when it comes to accessibility. We reached a point where it was becoming quite intuitive to us, and we were doing it quite naturally, and then as a result of that, we stopped checking because it was the natural process of what we were doing, and then bad habits start to seep in again. So WCAG2 is a great opportunity for us to say "ok, we need to start reviewing everything we’re doing as it goes out again". So I’d really, really encourage you to check everything.

    Needs to be second nature

    Paul: basically we need to get to the point where this is second nature to us, so that we’re doing this intuitively again, but not to the point where we’re no longer checking.

    Audience: Clients often say "what’s the difference? If I just got for single A compliancy, what won’t my site be reaching?"

    Paul: I have to say that I think I would stop talking about double A, triple A and single A compliancy. I don’t think there’s really any value any more in talking about that to the clients.

    Audience: I think there is because having the page by page conformance is a really good thing and that we can now argue that yes, we can now make the majority of your site triple A compliant, but for a page full of videos, we can make it single A compliant.

    Paul: Ok

    Audience: Clients will continue to reference it in briefs. You can’t not talk about it.

    Audience: I think it’s actually quite a strong thing.

    Audience: is it a page by page compliance, or template by template compliance?

    Paul: I think it has to be page by page because the content that goes into the page, into the template, could invalidate it. This is why I think it’s something that should be downplayed. I accept the clients will still talk to us about it, but clients still talk to us about doing speculative design, it doesn’t mean we do it. I think there’s an education thing there whereby we need to move clients away from being obsessed by double A, single A compliance, and to start thinking about accessibility policies. What is there accessibility policy and what is it that they are trying to achieve on their site? Our base mark is going to be single A, it’s always single A, and I think it should continue to be single A.

    Audience: but if you don’t talk to them about it, you could argue that less caring clients would just say "well why would I do anything about it, bottom line?"

    Paul: Yeah, I said you shouldn’t talk about single A, double A, triple A, but that doesn’t mean you can’t talk to them about accessibility and the improvements that accessibility brings because for people that have got that sort of attitude you don’t want to talk about the disabled if they don’t care about the disabled, you talk about search engines, and that’s the best way to sell accessibility, by talking about search engine placement. That’s the reason you want to be accessible for people who have that kind of attitude. For those that care, and are talking about single A, double A and triple A, you need to say to them "well actually, conforming with any level, it’s great that you want to do accessibility, and certainly single A should be an absolute minimum, but we’d encourage you to start working up an accessibility policy and looking at your site as a whole and say could this area do more in your site, your accessibility policy should do real world testing with real users…" all kinds of things.

    Audience: So you think that we should be encouraging large organisations that have accessibility policies themselves that refer to double A, triple A, to try and persuade them to kind of move away from that?

    Paul: No, not necessarily, I wouldn’t go that far. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that they’re a bad thing, I’m saying they’re not the be-all and end-all. And at the moment I feel like the vast majority of clients think they are the be-all and end-all. They’re obsessed with putting that little badge on the bottom of the page. And it’s not about putting badges on the page. The trouble with institutions that have these policies of single A, double A and triple A is that these policies are in place for the institution, not for the user. And that’s my problem with them. That’s why I think we should try to break that mentality with clients. And I accept that sometimes we’re going to lose, and that’s fine. Exactly the same goes when we were talking about browser support. I accept sometimes we’re going to lose that battle as well. But it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try and fight it.

    Audience: I just wondered why WCAG2 still does it, because yes, you’re right basically, and accessibility requirements should be based on user requirements and not ticking boxes, so why is it still in there?

    Paul: I think it’s in there because… my impression… I hate talking about accessibility on camera! You remember what happened last time in the podcast? It was just a nightmare! I think the reason it’s still in is because some of those success criteria are hard to meet. Some of them are damn difficult. When you start talking about streaming video, you’ve got some difficult challenges there that need to be met. So I think as a result, what the W3C is saying there is that we accept that some of these things are difficult to do. And we accept that you’re not always going to be able to do them, so we’re going to make them triple A. But come on guys, some of this stuff is dead simple and we should be doing it, that’s single A. That’s my impression of the mentality behind it, and that’s a great mentality, but it’s when someone changes that to being guidelines, which is what they are, to being rules, really instilled by Moses and presented to the people. You know it’s not that and I think that’s an important differentiation to make.

    Where to Start

    Paul: I know what you guys are like, especially designers. Ok I’m making sweeping generalisations here. But, if you guys go along to the WCAG website and you look at the WCAG2 guidelines, it’s horrible! It’s intimidating and it’s scary and it goes on for pages. And there’s a lot of text around it.

    Audience: There’s no pictures? (laughter)

    Paul: There’s no pictures! The design isn’t even very good. So what I’ve done is I’ve taken that page, I’ve literally all I’ve done is I’ve stripped out the explanation text in front of it, and the waffle at the end of it, and I’ve left you with just the set of guidelines so it looks like a slightly less intimidating list. Not much but slightly. So that’s up at http://www.headscape.co.uk/WCAG2 so if you go to that, you can get just the actual list of criteria. There’s also, on the WCAG2 website, there’s a thing where you can go and you can say my site uses tables, my site uses video, my site has this and that, and you untick the ones that it doesn’t have and it narrows down the list of success criteria to only show you the ones that you need to care about. So you might want to check that one out as well. Ok, so that’s basically all I have to say, are there any other questions before we wrap up?

    Questions

    Audience: Clients are going to ask us the 1 minute elevator pitch. What’s the difference between WCAG2 and WCAG1? What would you highlight as differences?

    Paul: I think there’s a bigger acceptance of things in the world other than HTML, so things like Flash, PDFs, all that kind of stuff, there’s much more reference to that kind of thing. It’s much better written, much better organised. I think it’s more pragmatic. It’s a little bit more… I think it will last the test of time more. It’s hard to pin down exactly what I mean by that. There is actually a document out that talks about the specific differences between WCAG1 and WCAG2 if you wanted to get into that level of detail. And to be honest, I couldn’t tell you what that is yet because I haven’t looked at it in that much depth myself.

    Audience: I think you and I do need a couple of the more detailed stuff, to get the guidelines, just one or two examples basically. Something that’s new between WCAG1 and WCAG2, and also some of the differences between single A, double A and triple A. The streaming video is an excellent example.

    Paul: Just go along to http://www.headscape.co.uk/WCAG2 and you’ll be able to see those different levels.

    Audience: It seems like, an almost unwritten principle, or unwritten in your list of principles. It’s technology agnostic.

    Paul: WCAG2 started off as so technologically agnostic that it wasn’t understandable.

    Audience: WCAG1, the first line is all about "it must be W3C technologies".

    Paul: Yeah, it will pretty much accommodate anything. You know, it talks in terms of audio and video. It doesn’t mention Flash for example specifically, at least I don’t think it does, but it refers to those kinds of things. It refers to documents that are not HTML. I’m saying this as much for the video as anything else, I’m still learning about it as well. So I think it’s going to be a learning process for a while for us to really get to grips with this, and truth be told we probably should have started a little sooner than this, but it’s not radically different from WCAG1. This is as much getting us back into the habit of thinking about accessibility as anything else really. Ok?

    Audience: 1 more question. Are they new Keynote animations?

    Paul: Yeah, they are new Keynote animations.

    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.

    Most web design contracts address browser support. Many agencies still treat support as a black or white decision – a browser is either supported or it is not. If the browser is not supported the site is often unusable. However, this approach fails to acknowledge the diverse and evolving nature of the web. We should be supporting all browsers.

    What does ‘support’ mean?

    Although we support all browsers, that does not mean every user will have the same experience. For example, it is unrealistic to expect a user accessing the web through a text only browser to have the same experience as somebody using the latest version of Firefox.

    As Yahoo states in their own browser support documentation:

    Requiring the same experience for all users creates a barrier to participation. Availability and accessibility of content should be our key priority.

    Supporting a browser should provide the best experience possible within the constraints of that browser, and should exclude none.

    Expecting pixel perfect accuracy across browsers is unrealistic and not cost effective.

    The problem with pixel perfect design

    With browser technology improving all of the time it is unsurprising that modern websites do not always render the same in older browsers such as Internet Explorer 6 (released 2001) as they do in more contemporary counterparts. In fact even modern browsers differ in the way they display HTML.

    Many web designers go to extreme lengths to ensure consistency across their ‘supported browsers’. However although this is achievable if the number of supported browsers is limited, it comes at a cost. This includes:

    • Significant overhead in the time required to overcome limitations in older browsers.
    • Increased likelihood that unsupported browsers cannot access the site. This is because of hacks and excessive code employed to ensure consistency.
    • A tendency to design for the lowest common denominator.

    A better approach is to ensure that the site works well and looks reasonable on the lowest common denominator browser, and then ‘enhance it’ for more capable browsers.

    For example, modern browsers support design enhancements such as:

    • rounded corners
    • drop shadows
    • Improved typography

    and various other styling not supported by older browsers without additional code and effort. However as Andy Clarke explains – because these design elements are not intrinsic to the usability or functionality of the site they can be safely dropped.

    If this approach is adopted, it is less likely browsers will render sites incorrectly and so the level of testing can be reduced.

    Testing

    When a black and white approach to browser support is employed, testing can become expensive and time consuming. While website owners want to support as many browsers as possible, web designers want to limit the number supported to make testing manageable.

    However, if a modern approach is adopted the burden of testing is reduced. This is because instead of testing focusing on pixel perfect precision across all browsers, the focus is on usability and accessibility.

    Obviously, when claiming support for all browsers it becomes impossible to test in every browser combination. Instead it is necessary to prioritize browsers based on website statistics and ensure accessibility by testing in these.

    The number of browsers and versions that a site is tested on will vary depending on the budget available for testing. However, even testing on a handful of browsers will normally cover the majority of users experiences (as a relatively low number of browsers dominate the market). In addition, those browsers that are not tested should reliably render the page because no unnecessary code or hacks are used to build the site.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, building websites that are enhanced for more capable browsers – improves accessibility, reduce costs and ensure every user gets the best experience possible within the limitation of their choice of browser.