Category Archives: User experience

Adaptation

by Dan Woychick

Over 170 years ago on the Galapagos Islands, Charles Darwin made an interesting observation. The animals he saw on this remote outpost were not quite like the ones he had seen throughout South America during the survey expedition of the HMS Beagle. In fact, and more importantly, he noticed a tortoise or finch on one island was not quite like a tortoise or a finch on another island. They had adapted to their environment.

We all have seminal moments in our lives – events that prove to be major influences and shift our perspective or open our minds to new ways of thinking. Some moments become shared touchstones. Where were you when Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon? What were you doing when you heard about the airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center? Others – like the teenager who hears Nirvana playing on the radio and ditches his trombone in favor of an electric guitar – are more personal.

Everything is relative
Seemingly everyone I talk to these days is in transition, trying to reconcile past experiences and skills with current and future market needs. Few planned on careers where it seems the most important skill is the ability to acquire new skills.

In a networked, cloud-based world where nothing is fixed or permanent, how do communicators and marketers determine what will endure? How do our skills apply? Perhaps we should be asking: How will we adapt?

Everything is measured in terms of individual perception. To me, that little puppy is cute and cuddly; to you, it’s smelly and sheds all over the furniture; to another, it may look like dinner. If we accept that premise, then our real value is an ability to make ideas and information accessible to each individual in our audience. Fortunately, we have more and better tools to do this than ever before.

Theory meets possibility
The theory of evolution was not new when Darwin published The Origin of Species. He was recognized for synthesizing his experiences and insights with existing thought and making the principle of natural selection accessible to the public.

Similarly, the concept of creating adaptive or fluid websites is not new. With the explosion of mobile devices, web designers and developers debated the merits of various screen resolutions and wrestled with the lack of standards across multiple web browsers. The response has ranged from building a dizzying array of mobile apps to creating and maintaining separate mobile-friendly websites to doing nothing at all.

In the article Responsive Web Design, and subsequent book, Ethan Marcotte gives name to a better way forward. Responsive designs automatically deliver the best site for your users based on what you know about them – one site serving all audiences better.

Responsive web design
The prevalent model for displaying web content concedes that the user experience will suffer on some devices. Simply put, most websites are not user-friendly on mobile devices, and most non-profit organizations can’t afford to create and maintain multiple sites and apps. Responsive web design is a more flexible approach. As Marcotte writes:

Rather than quarantining our content into disparate, device-specific experiences, we can use [technology] to progressively enhance our work within different viewing contexts.

Responsive websites use new technologies and better browser support to rearrange, resize, add or subtract content to fit the device. Additionally, it forces the web team – designers, writers and developers – to rethink how that content is edited, organized and delivered.

Some early adopters of this approach include (drag your browser window larger and smaller to see how the page responds):

Serving the audience
Successful marketers have always aimed to serve an audience’s needs – to quickly respond with interest and enthusiasm. Responsive web designs not only meet your users’ need for relevant information any time, anywhere, on any device, but essentially eliminate the need to create and maintain separate apps and sites.

I believe this represents a seminal moment. If simplicity is the ultimate sophistication, as Leonardo da Vinci once wrote, then the tools we use are finally getting sophisticated enough to make our lives simpler – and that’s an adaptation we can all embrace.

Related content:
Responsive Web Design

Generation Flux

When Design Leaves the Box

Favorite Links: July 2011

We’re always in search of fresh thinking on issues that affect nonprofit marketing. Here’s some recent favorites:

Ten Things You Need to Know to Raise Capital for Your Nonprofit
Fast Company

The Case Against Designing Mobile Apps
Imprint

Why Bosses Need to Show Their Soft Side
Daniel Pink, The Telegraph

The Right Tool For The Job

by Dan Woychick

Last weekend, I agreed to help a friend install his new home theater. First, we needed to remove the baseboard so we could keep all the new wires hidden from view. Lacking a crowbar, my friend grabbed the nearest screwdriver and proceeded to gouge the wooden baseboard and scratch the painted wall. As any do-it-yourselfer knows, using the wrong tool can make a small project a lot bigger.

Smart communications professionals recognize the importance of gathering consumer insights. Unfortunately, sometimes, they also reach for the wrong tool.

Lack of focus
When seeking audience opinion, the tried-and-true focus group is often the research tool of choice. Get a moderator, some pizza or doughnuts, and 8-10 people in a room, then watch the insights fly. But qualitative research from a group of strangers gathered around a table may not yield the insights you need.

Focus groups are best used when you have little knowledge about how your product, service or organization is perceived. They can give you a good starting point for further, targeted research. More often, you need specific information.

Simulating behavior
If, like me, you’re lacking a degree in cultural anthropology, interviewing a representative sample of your users about their needs is the next best thing. Interacting with and observing individuals one-to-one often reveals truths that remain hidden in a group setting.

It’s common practice to conduct this kind of research when embarking on a website redesign. Individual test subjects answer questions and complete a series of tasks, giving designers insight into how the site can be made more functional.

A similar approach can be useful whenever “navigation” is involved, such as with magazines, forms, and environmental signage. With as few as 4–5 people, we’ve gathered useful feedback simply by watching and asking a few questions. For example:

  • How often do you currently read (or use) this [publication, form, building]?
  • What is your overall impression?
  • Do you find this valuable, relevant, informative, etc.?
  • Is it easy to find the information you’re looking for?
  • Are there other sources you rely on to get similar information? Where?
  • How does this make you feel about the organization?

By keeping things simple, it’s easier to commit to an iterative process, conducting tests early and often.

Quality, not quantity
Quantitative research is useful when an organization wants to benchmark results over time. Many people place their trust in cold, hard data – the more of it the better. Seeking statistically valid numbers, however, presents two big hurdles – time and budget.

Depending on what is being measured – and for what reason – the importance of sample size is often overestimated. If I’ve interviewed five people who have difficulty navigating your website, surveying 500 or 5,000 more provides very little benefit. There are diminishing returns with each additional data point.

Watch, listen and refine
Many decisions are better served by more frequent questioning of fewer people, refining as you go. Making a habit of interviewing your customers will make your organization more responsive and serve as a tool for continual improvement.

Related Content:
Don’t Make Me Think
To Focus Group, Or Not To Focus Group
Conducting a Needs Analysis

Day Traders

by Dan Woychick

Be fearful when others are greedy. Be greedy when others are fearful. – Warren Buffett

At the turn of the century, as technology granted ambitious individuals opportunity to compete with institutional investors, we witnessed the growth of day trading in the stock market. Day traders obsessively buy and sell positions, attempting to profit from market volatility. Unfortunately, around 80% of all day traders lose money.

Flash forward to 2010, a year in which Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was recognized as TIME magazine’s “Person of the Year.” In his commentary on the social network’s influence, Facebook Puts All Brands on Notice, branding consultant Simon Mainwaring writes:

The power of Facebook is the relationships it fosters and how that gives individuals and brands influence over their fans and friends. Variously called social capital or influence, this ability to exercise influence means that brands become day traders in social emotion and continually manage their reputations.

Facebook’s unmatched ability to instantly connect millions of people has changed the way we do business – of that there is no question. Where I take issue with Mr. Mainwaring is in his assessment of what that means for marketers. Do we really want or need to influence our customer’s “social emotions” on a daily basis?

Affirming this as a goal seems a bit self-serving for the social marketer, as it gives license to remain ever busy providing up-to-the-minute (or second) brand management. There’s another emotion at play here as well – fear. What if I’m not doing enough? What if my competition is tweeting while I’m sleeping? How come no one “liked” our latest Facebook post? To me, this behavior seems unhealthy.

The question should really be: Do our customers want to have “relationships” with us? Based on consumer trends toward self-service, evidence seems to be mounting that customers aren’t seeking a dialogue. Here’s a sobering thought: Is it possible your customers are “just not that in to you?”

Being responsive to your customers is always good business, whether face-to-face or online. Investing in social media will keep you plenty busy, but removing daily obstacles to self-service may do more for your customer relationships than all the tweets in China.

Related Content:
Why Your Customers Don’t Want to Talk to You
Ads in the Age of Hysteria

Favorite Links: August 2010

We’re always in search of fresh thinking on issues that affect nonprofit marketing. Here’s some recent favorites:

Learning to Say No to Bad Ideas
A List Apart

FrogMob: An Experimental Method of Crowd-sourced Research
Frog Design

Why Online Education Needs to Get Social
Mashable

How Will You Measure Your Life?
Harvard Business Review

Favorite Links: July 2010

We’re always in search of fresh thinking on issues that affect nonprofit marketing. Here’s some recent favorites:

The Art of Non-Conformity
by Chris Guillebeau

@Issue: The Online Journal of Business and Design
by Corporate Design Foundation

Web Teams Need Constant Feedback
by Gerry McGovern

Churn Baby Churn

by Dan Woychick

A communications specialist at a Midwest university told me recently, “We’re putting out fires on a daily basis. Our department has six people to serve 15,000 students and we have no time to think strategically.” Sound familiar?

While too many organizations chase after the latest communications trends, adding ever more tasks to overworked staff, precious few seem inclined to ask: Why are we doing this? Or, better yet, should we be doing this?

Plan to make choices

Marketing should not be viewed as an all-you-can-eat buffet. If some is good, more must be better. It takes considerable discipline to take a step back and evaluate what is working and which activities are just distractions.

Practicing restraint requires having a plan – a communications strategy that defines objectives and target audiences, and sets priorities for the key messages and media channels used to reach them.

Economy of time

If time is currency, you don’t want to spend yours – or worse, your audience’s – foolishly.

In Kristina Halvorson’s excellent essay on The Discipline of Content Strategy, she writes: “Until we commit to treating content as a critical asset worthy of strategic planning and meaningful investment, we’ll continue to churn out worthless content in reaction to unmeasured requests.”

Do fewer things well

The benefit of taking time for strategy is that it encourages action with a purpose. It also allows staffers to shed activities that have been less effective, freeing up time to handle more promising ventures. The only downside to business as usual? Occasionally having to say “no” to colleagues. Or bosses.

By measuring your marketing efforts through a communications strategy, you’re more likely to provide valuable content that your audience cares about. And you can let the fire department handle the fires.

Related Content:

3 ways in which low quality content can damage your business