Good food, great Web experience

Recently I ordered Domino's Pizza for the first time in years and discovered that the new sauce isn't their only innovation. Their new Web site includes the Domino's Tracker, an application that gives you the real-time status of your order (the Tracker activates after an order is placed, so I'm including a screencap from a recent order). A glowing status bar tells you exactly where your pizza is from the moment you place the order, to when Terrence puts it in the oven, to when Dmitri the delivery driver is en route to your house. It's a great example of online customer service.
One of the drawbacks to delivery service is the open-ended nature of the delivery time. A quoted delivery time of 45 minutes could mean anywhere from 30 to 60 minutes before that pie hits my counter. As the timer ticks down I often end up perched on the edge of my couch, eagerly jumping up each time the outside gate creaks only to be disappointed by my neighbor's face. As a customer, I love the transparency offered by this app. No more guessing about if I have time to take a shower or run to the bank.

That simple addition to their Web site made for such a great brand experience that, a week later, I ordered another pie just so I could get screen caps of the Tracker in action. Now my only question is how long will it take other brands to do something similar?

Babysitting the interface: The myth of self-service

As we prepared for another road trip and the attendant joy of air travel in America in 2010, I was musing about the common sight of a human being helping passengers use the so-called "self-service" kiosk. It was in that frame of mind that I went to Facebook; I had to laugh when I saw this screen with the instruction: DO NOT CLICK THE "Go to Application" BUTTON ON LEFT!

Human intervention with software, Web pages, and kiosks is a regular occurrence across corporate America. You see it first-hand at airport counters, supermarkets, a co-worker's desk. We see it inside call centers and controlled environments. How much does this cost business, education, and nonprofits every day?

Well into the year 2010, we are still seeing an utter failure to budget - or even account for - the design of information structure, meaning: Where will this digital media experience begin and end? How does the user know where he is in the morass of content? How do you know whether you've seen and experienced all the content? How does he get to related content? Did anyone design or plan this experience? What are the opportunity costs related to this basic failure of planning?

In 2000, seven years into the commercial Web, a failure to plan and structure digital media interaction was understandable. Skeptics were still expecting (or hoping) that the Web would die. In 2010, the failure to plan and structure digital media is unforgivable.

If your digital media project lacks a budget item for information design (information architecture, task sequence design, user interface design), it is destined to under-perform and disappoint. Web sites and applications, software applications, kiosks, intranets, instrumentation interfaces - any digital implementation must include planning and architecture beyond simple functionality and appearance.

The Self-Service and Kiosk Association begins to address the usability issue in a blog post by Stephen Kendig, but the industry is just beginning to scratch the surface. If we use the Web as an object lesson, bad information design proliferates more quickly than good design. We will be living in a dystopian reality if the same problem propagates across self-service in a world that seems determined to eliminate human-powered customer service. The current economic woes will only exacerbate the problem.

If we're going to eliminate the human from the equation at all the transaction points of daily life, the digital interface must be bulletproof. Else we are destined for the worst of both worlds - unhappy customers, unhappy workers. Babysitting an interface is no one's career goal.

User Experience: What's Your Fail?

I've been excited to see that user experience (UX) has been a big topic and in demand at SXSW Interactive this year. We've built Interface Guru around user experience design principles over the last 10 years, and frankly it sometimes feels like we're alone in the jungle.

The first session track ever devoted entirely to user experience design at the conference was held on Saturday, and its opening workshop ("The Ten Commandments of User Experience") packed a large ballroom and left a line of people standing outside. It had tough competition, too: the keynote address was going on at the same time.

Judging from the Twitter feed for the session (at #uxsxsw - thank you to presenters Nick Finck and Raina Van Cleave for hacking the 18-character official hashtag and shortening it), many participants were disappointed in the introductory nature of some of the sessions.

Comments:

"(Has) the UX community stopped thinking about new ways of doing things or am I at the wrong conference? Mostly old news so far."

"The last UX session of the day is the first where I've seen people actually walk out to move to another session."

"I agree with your twitter stream. #uxsxsw has been underwhelming - what about what's next?"

I have to admit I shared the sentiment - until I took a closer look at the program. Specifically, the ubiquitous pocket schedule everyone relies on to keep track of what's going on at SXSW.

If you look closely at the events on the schedule, each session has a small circle, square, or diamond next to it - indicating the session is either beginning, intermediate, or advanced. The two sessions people complained the most about had circles next to them, indicating they were basic introductions to the subject matter.



I only discovered this because I happened to open my pocket guide to the front for the first time during the conference, and stumbled across the key to the symbols, which only appears on the first page.

It's a classic fail: Assuming your users are going to look at your information in a linear fashion and understand that icons have meaning, without labels to guide them.

I've conducted an informal survey since, asking my fellow conference attendees (especially those who complain about a lack of relevance or depth in sessions) if they knew that the symbols in the schedule meant something. I've yet to find someone who noticed this helpful bit of information.

Once they realized the importance of the iconography, people I've spoken to have said they would have been able to use this information to narrow their selection of sessions to something more relevant, creating a more positive user experience.

Think about all the thousands and millions of dollars it takes to put the hard stuff together for one of the biggest conferences in the country: assembling panels, printing conference materials, advertising - the list goes on and on. Only to have many of your customers' satisfaction with your product come down to a few inexpensive labels and icons on a piece of paper.

What's YOUR fail?

Error message of the day from Tweaker Speakers Grandmax

I loved my Tweaker Speakers until one inexplicably died. So I go to Grandmax for tech support. After clicking the support link, here's the error message:

"We're sorry, we're temporarily undergoing maintenance!
[Saeven|CRM cannot operate with register_globals set to 'On'. Set this to 'Off' using php.ini or a .htaccess directive, and restart your webserver thereafter.]

If you would like to contact us in the interim, please do so at admin_at_toqen_dot_com"

Grrrrr.

Surviving SXSW Interactive

In four years of attending South by Southwest Interactive, I've learned one thing above all else: If you don't arrive with a plan, you're screwed.

Whether it's how you're going to get from your hotel to the convention center (if you're not already downtown, it's a nightmare), to how you're going to eat (A hotel circle with almost no restaurants. Really?), to which after-session parties to network at, it isn't a conference as much as it is a tactical military operation.

And that's not even factoring in the conference itself.

My long-time friend and Internet colleague Ward Andrews drove this point home Tuesday on the phone, as we were conferring on strategy.

"Do you know what sessions you're attending?"

I've tried to schedule. Really, I have. I can't get past the first session, which starts today at 2 p.m. There are 19 sessions going on concurrently, eight of which I want to attend. These eight aren't sessions I'm kind of interested in - they're all "must-sees."

If I go to any one of these eight, I'll miss easily the most popular session every year: "How to Rawk SXSW." Fittingly enough, it's a session devoted entirely to surviving South by Southwest. In fact, going on at the same time is a session addressing "SXSW SARS" - the name given to exhaustion that brings on sickness from trying to do too much in this pure chaos.

It's a great test bed for using technology to make life easier because it mimics the information overload we experience in our everyday lives ... to an extreme. Kind of like putting cars through the roughest conditions to ensure their safety (maybe this isn't the best example right now).

Ward turned me on to the latest weapon in managing the chaos: It's a mobile site called SitBy.Us (www.sitby.us) created by Weightshift (www.weightshift.com). Not only does it have the complete SXSW schedule and descriptions in an optimized layout for all mobile devices, but it also allows you to create a personalized schedule.

The kicker: Log in with your Twitter account and you can see what sessions your Twitter friends are attending. Once you show up for the session, you can let your friends know where you are sitting by selecting your location on a map of the room. How cool is that? The app also will tweet your session with a link to the description.

Ward, my brother Greg, and I are brewing a plan to use this app and Twitter to mount a guerrilla attack on providing simultaneous coverage of the conference. Stay tuned!

There's no replacement for a good research plan

Yes, you should test your Web properties, especially the transactional ones (e-commerce, subscriptions, digital libraries); we routinely recommend usability testing combined with other techniques such as multivariate testing or A/B testing. Anchor Wave's Anthony Rivera (@ant1832) asked us about The Ultimate Comparison of Multivariate Testing, originally tweeted by always-on-top-of-it Smashing Mag - which solution do we recommend? Good question, since startup costs range from free (Google Website Optimizer) to $33,000+ (Accenture). Where to begin?

Here's the short answer: We recommend selecting the best fit for your company. (You need to decide whether you need both multivariate and A/B testing; check out Avinash Kaushik's simple explanation of the difference. Or check out the handy glossary from Web Analytics Blog.) Essentially, multivariate testing swaps out components of a Web page, while A/B testing swaps out two (or more) versions of a Web page. Both are valuable and merit consideration.

Basic criteria to consider when choosing a solution:
- Scale: How extensive is your digital product?
- Flexibility: Can you modify your test targets?
- Self-service: Do you need or want hand-holding?
- Return on investment: If your digital product is a major source of revenue, shouldn't you invest in testing it with something more than a free solution?

There are two basic fallacies to avoid in considering multivariate testing or A/B testing:

The first fallacy is the idea that testing one page is enough. User experience consists of multiple steps (or screen views) through a Web site, Web application, or kiosk. Whether you select multivariate or A/B testing, the tool you choose must account for task sequences - the steps that users take through your digital product.

This is not to say that one page can't make a huge difference. Our usability testing shows that common, simple missteps - such as an interface change at a critical transaction point - will discourage users from completing a purchase. But the larger point is that measurement must be designed to span the entire process - especially because conventional metrics may fall off the map when the user proceeds to a different URL.

The second fallacy is the idea that ANY product replaces a considered research plan. In our practice, we rarely encounter well-planned research, where the organization routinely measures success against defined goals. (A notable exception: Playboy, where measurement is a regular activity conducted by research professionals.) As with usability testing results, well-planned research is most valuable when shared within the organization. The purpose of conducting research, after all, is to inform your business activities.

If you have not established a research plan - even at a back-of-the-napkin level, with definition of user profiles at a minimum - it's probably too soon to engage in multivariate or A/B testing. Because you really don't know what you need yet.

Are you an enterprise, a medium-sized business, or a small business? Your research initiatives should map to the size of the business. The enterprise MUST invest in professional research (and if it does not, it will eventually fail or under-perform, which amounts to the same thing). The small business can take advantage of free or almost-free tools. The medium-sized business can find solutions somewhere in the middle. Regardless of budget, a basic research plan must be in place before solutions are selected. It's a basic part of your Web strategy.

Social media and culture fit: You can't fake it

While listening to my colleague Mike Schmidt's podcast on "social marketing," (a good primer for newbies, featuring Jerry Harkins of MacTutorTucson.com) I considered my setup experience with Google Buzz this morning, and my Mayorship of the Hotel Congress on Foursquare, and the status updates I posted to Facebook and LinkedIn on the way. Another day in the roiling surf of social media. Which service gets your allegiance and time?

As with all digital media, it depends on your users and your business. Some truisms are helpful; we know that bands prosper on MySpace, and charitable causes flourish on Facebook. But in our view, the key to social media is culture. Are you willing to be what Schmidt calls a "good social media citizen"? Are you willing to help people solve problems even when the dollar is not immediately attached? Or are you only willing to invest time in exchange for dollars?

The greatest challenge for conventionally structured organizations is to become those "good social media citizens" when lack of transparency and buyer-beware have been the standard marching orders - until the emperor-has-no-clothes power of the Web came along.

The selection of social media most valuable to your business is a tactic. The strategy: Support a corporate culture whose values are revealed by social media. Successful strategic values include collaboration, humility, helpfulness, expertise, hard work. Going the extra mile. You can't fake these values in social media. At least, not for long.

You should never ignore a technology because you don't know what it is. In our practice, we frequently encounter Web teams that don't use the very technologies about which they are expected to make decisions. "You have to try it to understand it," says Schmidt, the principal of Anchor Wave, and there we agree wholeheartedly. Kudos to managers who understand they may have to rock the boat by introducing - dare we say it - meritocracy. Who are willing to experiment. Who understand that workers must demonstrate interest AND capability. In some organizations, where seniority and longevity rule, this is a tough battle. But it must be fought, and it must be won.

Those who hold back until someone else figures it out (a philosophy proudly stated to me by the principal of a New York "digital design agency" a couple of years ago) are simply walking into the theatre in the middle of the metaphorical movie. You'll never catch up with the story, much less the subtleties. How can you make good decisions about digital media that way? The answer is, you can't.

But where do we find the time to filter out the valuable social media endeavors from the less productive ones? Find that time - because as co-podcaster Jerry Harkins points out, people filter out conventional marketing messages without even realizing the are doing so. People are likelier to trust peers over authority - a finding Interface Guru first realized during a usability test for Clickability in San Francisco in 2001 - and your conventional marketing message may be pointless in 2010. Harkins directs listeners to The Purple Goldfish Project - a great resource on how businesses (and people) can - literally - blow people away with a gesture of respect and service. When you see the examples, you realize the winning companies' strategies are less about what they spend, and more about the core values they hold dear. What can you learn about your own brand that's worth sharing with the world via social media?

You can't have a robber-baron culture and a collaborative social media strategy. One of the two will lose.