Saturday, December 31, 2011

Johnny’s Top 10 UX Articles of 2011

The end of the year is approaching and especially for you we created this list with our most popular articles of 2011. Enjoy and see you next year.

No related posts.

10. “Checklist Thinking” for UX Professionals: Retaining Your Sanity in a Complex Project

Author: Greg Laugero
It’s common knowledge (or it should be) that discovering requirements during page design is a recipe for madness. But no matter how much we believe this and strive to avoid this, it still happens. In this article Greg let’s us take control again.

9. Experience Design Models: Minding the Gap Between Ideas & Interfaces

Author: Marc Sasinski
What can we do to better communicate experience design vision during that window of opportunity between raw ideas and design deliverables? How can we use our abilities to visualize for the greater good? Enter experience modeling.

8. Designing a Reason to Come Back

Author: Stephen Anderson
In this article Stephen shares some of his ideas on how to get people back to your website. He explains the significance of rituals and even gives us a design challenge.

7. The Theory Behind Social Interaction Design

Author: Adrian Chan
Via this article I would like to give you the big picture introduction to the theory behind social interaction design. Many of my articles on this topic are anchored in social theory but don’t make explicit reference to it, so I thought an overview might be in order.

6. Aristotle’s Storytelling Framework for Interactive Products

Author: Jeroen van Geel
Throughout the centuries people have told stories to share knowledge between generations. Storytelling is an important skill each interaction designer should have. It helps create engaging products and services. But how should we start doing this? I came up with a framework.

5. Where Innovation Belongs in User Centered Design

Author: Jake Truemper
User Experience designers have a unique opportunity to become the facilitators of holistic design and the advocates of innovation. By combining traditional user-centered activities with a greater emphasis on creating engaging designs we can bring usability into alignment with innovation in the design process.

4. Design Research and Innovation: an Interview with Don Norman

Author: Jeroen van Geel
I got the chance to interview one of my heroes: Don Norman. This May he was one of the keynote speakers at UX Lisbon in Portugal. I spoke to him about innovation, design research, and emotional design.

3. User Experience and the design of news at BBC World Service

Author: Tammy Gur
Designing a setting for the torrent of content that passes daily through a news website is a challenge unlike any other. the BBC World Service has got a user experience and design team which designs and develops news sites for the web and mobile devices in 27 languages, catering for audiences across world. In this article Tammy shares some of their experiences with you.

2. The ‘IxD Bauhaus’: What Happens Next?

Author: Rahul Sen

Occasionally, amidst the rapid rise and fall of trends, fashion and fancy, we are faced with true revolution: paradigm shifts that throw out excess baggage of some kind and usher in new ways of thinking and seeing altogether. The catch is that you need to have the benefit of hindsight to truly measure their effectiveness. With this in mind, Rahuk believes that the interaction design community is witnessing an important revolution — an ‘IxD Bauhaus’ of sorts.

1. How Your Coffee Mug Controls Your Feelings

Author: Seth Snyder
What would you say if Seth told you that objects you use every day are now believed to be practicing a form of mind control on you? Sounds crazy, right? Well, although cognitive scientists probably wouldn’t use the term “mind control”, they wouldn’t disagree that while we interact with physical elements of our environment, our brains are performing what’s known as embodied cognition, a sneaky sort of intuition that drives how we feel and behave and is breaking down century-old mind/body link claims with a vengeance.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Behavioral Blips

Go to article

Elizabeth S. Bennett   December 21, 2011
 
Your trompe l’oeil is ringing (image via A Look Askance)
The Breakdown: As digital becomes a more constant part of our everyday lives, Elizabeth Bennett observes that sometimes our brains get confused about what mode we’re operating in.

Last week, I was awakened by a sound I thought was a forcefully vibrating cell phone. It was in fact a fog horn in New York Harbor. I frequently find myself trying to swipe the pages of a physical book if I have recently been reading on my tablet and, as hard as I try, the ATM screen still won’t respond to my unconscious finger swipes.

Most of us have experienced some version of this kind of disjointedness which has emerged from the liminal space we’re living in.  We hop back and forth between machines and the physical world, constantly dividing our attentions between three dimensional and digital interfaces. Computers and TVs have converged. Phones and computers have converged. The avenues for information and content consumption seem to multiply 10-fold on a monthly basis. (See my colleague Jake Keyes’s post on how businesses are trying to bridge the gap between the physical and digital world.)

We are also deeply influenced by all the new tools and tech that we encounter, to the point where we experience the world in ways we wouldn’t have imagined just a few years ago.

I polled some colleagues and friends to find out about the quirks that they’ve observed as their brains and bodies can’t always catch up to the demands and realities of the moment.  These anecdotes don’t all fall into the same category but they represent a nice sampling of the goofy ways we respond and react to our technology, even when it’s not in the room.

Any of these sound familiar?

“I feel my phone vibrating in my pocket – even when it isn’t even in my pocket.”

“I often get frustrated with my in-car navigation. I am so used to the pinch to zoom interaction on my phone and iPad, I often grab the screen getting frustrated that it doesn’t zoom.”

“My daughters think that everything digital is touch interactive. TV’s, Screens in cars, anything. They are shocked when nothing happens when they touch “non-touch” devices.”

“When I’m on a computer keyboard, I tap the spacebar twice to make a period because that’s how I do it on my phone.”

“After listening to a lengthy voice mail from a friend, I momentarily forgot it was a recording and responded out loud.”

“It’s so annoying when I’m about to take a great photo and somebody calls my camera.” – @JordanRubin

We’d love to hear about your liminal behavioral blips. Please add them to this post so we have a record of this zany modern moment.

How Do You Deal With Overstressed, Irrational Clients? An Entrepreneur’s View



Go to article


As an entrepreneur who has been on the client’s side of the design and development process, I’d like to discuss the thought process of the client, as well as some effective ways to interact with them. For example, why do they ask for Shakira music on the home page? And how do you respond to that?

I was recently referred to Sam Barnes’ piece on Smashing Magazine “How to Explain to Clients That They Are Wrong (http://smashingmagazine.com/2009/12/10/how-to-explain-to-clients-that-they-are-wrong/).” The article was well written and made a lot of sense to me, but there are two sides to every story, and I’d like to add value to the argument by responding from the client’s point of view.
For the most part, Sam did a great job of discussing how to evaluate and act on poor decisions made by clients. What he missed, however, was the impact that the nature of the relationship between clients and creatives has on how decisions are made by both sides. By “creatives,” I mean anyone involved in the design or development of a website or application. Understanding this relationship will enable you, and your clients, to make better decisions about the product.

[Editor's note: A must-have for professional Web designers and developers: The Printed Smashing Books Bundle is full of practical insight for your daily work. Get the bundle right away!]

What’s On the Line For Us

Before getting into the decisions that entrepreneurs make, let’s look at some of the factors that motivate these decisions. Setting the scene will shine a light on the thought process of entrepreneurs and give you a better idea of how to deal with them.

You’ll notice I use the terms “entrepreneur” and “client” interchangeably. Even if your client works within the confines of a corporation, as opposed to at the top of a new venture, it would not be unusual for them to act in an entrepreneurial capacity. And even if they aren’t entrepreneurs, but middle men who were assigned the project, chances are they will still behave accordingly.

Formal design reviews
How do you deal with clients who often come up with weird, irrational requests? Image source (http://www.flickr.com/photos/adamcnelson/2090704218/)

First, let’s think about the person you’re working with. They believe in an idea. They believe in it so much that they’ve left a paying job for it. They’ve worked nights and weekends for it, alienated their spouse, friends and family for it. They’ve begged, borrowed and stolen for the opportunity to pursue it. They’ve put everything on the line for their idea, their vision. And you know what the most important part of their vision is?

You.

It’s not them. And to be honest, it never really was. The first question investors ask after hearing someone’s idea is, “OK, who’s building it?” Your client knows that their creative team is the only thing that can make their idea a reality.

You’re the most important piece of their puzzle, and, despite what they tell themselves, what they know about you before starting the project is often limited.
So, how did they find you?

Clients turn over every stone in search of a designer or developer, because, by that time, the necessity of a good creative team has settled in. Entrepreneurs might look harder than others because of the pressure of their particular situation, but the importance of a good creative team is lost on no one. And this isn’t like finding a lawyer, a doctor or even a girlfriend.
It’s way harder.

The Leap of Faith

There are three gigantic problems with the process of finding a creative team. First, the client has probably never done this before. Secondly, finding a creative team is tough. Products such as Elegant.ly will help, but because clients generally don’t speak your language, assessing the strengths of a firm and how it would mesh with their product is difficult. When the team I picked told me they were experts in Ruby on Rails, my first thought was, “Is that a train or a restaurant?” Thirdly, and by far the most important point, for those of us not in the Web design or development community, feeling comfortable with our evaluation of creatives is impossible.

This is a relatively young industry, one with very low barriers to entry. Heck, my designer took his first client when he was 13. There are very few, if any, metrics we can use to evaluate a creative team. We can look at its past work, speak with the head of the team and maybe get some sort of sample or mock-up, but for the most part, we are flying blind. There are no requisite degrees, certifications or guarantees. If you go to a physician who hasn’t finished college, you probably wouldn’t be willing to let them operate on you. A developer who hasn’t gone to college could build you the next Foursquare.

The Search

In our search for a creative team, we come upon cousins and uncles of acquaintances, people who have designed investor-relations websites for Fortune 500 companies, people who wait tables but build iPhone apps on weekends. We have absolutely no idea what to think of all this.

First-time clients especially don’t understand how hard their product is to create, or how long creative design takes, or even if you’ve done this sort of work before. It’s all Japanese to them, and it’s an enormous leap of faith. All we can do is look at some of your prior work and decide whether we like it. In what other sphere of life would you make a decision this important on a gut reaction? (Wait, don’t answer that. (http://3degreesnation.tumblr.com/post/11030883436/why-im-betting-it-all-on-a-gut-reaction)) It’d be like grabbing someone at the grocery store and asking them to marry you because you both have Fruit Loops in your carts.

Even when we look at successful companies in our fields, their success is not always commensurate with the development or design of their products. Take Craigslist (http://www.craigslist.org/): great business idea, poor design; but it doesn’t matter because the content is great. On the other hand, Flipboard (http://flipboard.com/)’s design is fantastic, and that’s enough to make the product successful, even although its functionality isn’t really revolutionary.

Grasping For Control

With reservations and doubts lingering in the back of the client’s mind, in steps the creative team. You start pumping stories into Basecamp (http://basecamphq.com/), PivotalTracker (https://www.pivotaltracker.com/) or some other product-management system that the client’s never heard of, and suddenly they are on your turf. Now the client works when you work, and often sits quietly on their hands when you don’t. The product goes when you say it goes, and their input is limited. Worst of all, we flat out don’t understand what you’re doing.

This is extremely hard for people who are used to complete control. Your client has gained so much momentum to get to this point that, when the creative team takes charge, the ground drops from under them like they’re some unfortunate cartoon character. This reversal of control is jarring.

This would be fine if the entrepreneur was working with a lawyer, an accountant or even a bank. But early on in the life cycle of a company that depends on a creative team for its success, nothing, and I mean nothing, is as important as the creative team. And our control over the success of this phase is so limited. That’s why we make uninformed suggestions like, “Let’s make that @ symbol spin,” and “I think users would like some Shakira playing when they land on the home page. I know I would.” Because we’re grasping at straws.

We are trying to hold onto our vision, because suddenly it’s in your hands. We may know what we want, but we often don’t know how to do it, and we have trouble expressing it. I’ve often found myself telling my developer things like, “I want a magic search box that pulls information from the Facebook API [I learned that term a few months ago, no big deal], Twitter and Foursquare and spits out relevant people based on our compatibility algorithm,” only to have him respond, “… Yeah. Let’s start by allowing users to log in with their Facebook account.”

I know how I want the product to feel to the user, but I have no idea how to get there without my team’s help. Saying, “I want it really simple, easy to use and elegant” is not helpful. Grasping at some visual element that we comprehend is sometimes the only bullet in our gun.

So, How Do You Deal With Overstressed, Irrational Clients?

Now you have an idea of the sometimes fragile psyche of the client. The question is, how do you handle us when we say we want Shakira?

Sam’s points are all well taken and, for the most part, right on. But they are directed at a rational, faceless client. The overview is good, but implementing it in real life would be difficult. So, here is the perspective of a client with a face. The following five actionable tips should drastically help your client relationships.
  1. Show us.
    This one is the most important. It’s very hard for us to visualize our idea. We know how we want the product to feel, but we don’t know how to get there. We would certainly recognize that Shakira isn’t the answer if you showed us this on our website — or on a comparable website if building our mistake would be too time-consuming. Usually, if the client was savvy enough to get to this step in the process, they would know what works and what doesn’t. And if they don’t, their idea is hopeless anyway.
  2. Tell us.
    This one wasn’t in Sam’s points. Good entrepreneurs are flexible and can adjust their vision to meet the reality of the situation. If we want something, but you think it would take too long and not be worthwhile, tell us. Suggest a workaround if you want, or just ask us if there’s another way. Entrepreneurs are usually great at creative solutions; we make our living by avoiding barriers. But we can only avoid barriers if we know what they are.
  3.  
  4. Explain the rules of the game.
    If you’re building a basketball, you know what you can and can’t do. You could probably make one that’s bouncier or more durable than competing products. But you couldn’t make one that goes in the basket every time. You know your limitations, but sometimes we don’t, and creativity is only able to flourish inside the box of reality. Because we don’t know the rules of the design and development game, we often don’t know what’s possible. More often than not, we’ll assume that something isn’t possible when it actually is. The head of my creative team had a good solution for this: he created a folder of ridiculous ideas that I wished could be part of the website, and I dumped stuff in there from time to time. More often than not, he’d ping me saying, “Hey Brian, that’s possible. Let’s try it out.” Being creative is difficult when the canvas is blank. If you can give us a line to start with, some sense of what you are capable of, it’ll help us enormously on the creative side.
  5.  
  6. Be confident and enthusiastic.
    Everyone appreciates an expert. Sam touches on this, and it’s extremely important. When I told my designer that I was considering profile pages that end users could design, he said something like, “Well, it certainly worked for MySpace.” Point taken. Demonstrating your expertise puts clients at ease and instills trust in your decision-making abilities. Also, don’t be afraid to occasionally ask for forgiveness rather than permission (as long as the change is not customer-facing). It will reaffirm that we made the right decision. Nothing is more invigorating than someone who believes in your vision.
  7.  
  8. We can’t act like locals.
    Clients aren’t completely oblivious to their mistakes, either. They know that some of their suggestions are absurd. They know that they don’t understand this stuff one-tenth as well as you do. They know they’ve stepped into a subculture that they couldn’t possibly fit into. It’s like when you go on a ski vacation and try to act like the locals. No matter what you do, you won’t be one. And we hate that we are an outsider in your world. That manifests itself in a number of ways: weird suggestions, holding firm on an irrelevant point, demanding certain color schemes that probably don’t matter (but sometimes do). This will still happen, but now that you know where they’re coming from and how to assuage them, you should hopefully have a more effective connection with clients. On the flip side, expect to be treated with the same level of suspicion and hesitation when you step into our world. Sam urges you to speak the client’s language, to set goals in business terms. Be very careful with that one. Misusing one business buzzword can waste your credibility, just as one suggestion for a spinning @ symbol will make you wary of any other design ideas. Discussing markets that you have exposure to but aren’t immersed in can have adverse effects. Know that we are all tourists. Which leads to the final point.

The Odd Couple

In writing this article, I realized how odd the relationship is between creatives and clients. Without my creative team, I would have no shot at getting my company off the ground. I rely on them 100%, but I have no clue what they do, how they do it or if the work they do is reasonably priced. This forces me to try to speak their language, to attempt to enter their world by learning quickly, and to try to maintain control of a vision that they are responsible for bringing to life.

Creatives, on the other hand, rely on clients only somewhat. They don’t live and die by each project, as clients do. Their work is in great demand; many of the firms I considered are growing quickly in this recession.

However, bits and pieces of Web design and development work are slowly being fragmented and commoditized, and for the same reasons that evaluating designers and developers is difficult: the barriers to entry are low. This opens the door for 99Designs to pick off clients, especially vulnerable entrepreneurs. These services leverage the crowdsourced model by matching designers who have little or no experience with clients who don’t understand the nuances of the craft well enough to be able to tell. This pushes creative firms to differentiate themselves through means that clients can understand. Business acumen is an incredibly helpful skill for creatives to have, and something 99Designs can’t offer.

Summary

So, we’re left with two groups, each possibly operating in unknown waters, working to create a product that requires both of them to be firing on all cylinders in order to succeed. That being said, do business-savvy creatives exist? Heck, yeah. I’ve got them helping me build my company, and it makes all the difference in the world. Do design- or development-savvy entrepreneurs exist? Probably. I’ve got a Mac — does that count?

The goal is to establish a working relationship between the two parties that leverages the strengths of each to quickly and effectively create a product and bring it to market. The tips above should help those working on the creative side. I’d be interested to hear a designer or developer’s take on what I should be doing to get the best out of my creative team. After all, we’ve got to have more in common than liking Fruit Loops for this thing to work.

Go easy on us poor entrepreneurs. I realize we make dumb suggestions sometimes, but it’s just an attempt to maintain some control over a process that we occasionally feel we’ve lost control over. And consider the business decisions that clients make from both sides. We’ve had a lot of practice with this stuff.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Decision Architecture: Designing for Decision-Making

Go to article


A prospective customer is perusing your website, comparing the products and services you offer. You designed the site to make it easy for him to buy. But did you design the site to make it easy for him to choose?

UX designers have become highly proficient at designing for user action. They design with the assumption that users will take action. But it’s important to understand that every action is preceded by a decision. Every action to buy is preceded by a decision about what to choose.

Research shows that decision-making is a highly malleable process, and that people’s preferences are not nearly as firm as we might believe. Decision outcomes are actually largely contingent on the environment or context in which those decisions are made.

From a website design perspective, this is huge. It means that the design of the website has a critical impact not only on usability (which is what designers typically pay attention to), but also on how people decide. Decisions lead to actions, and user actions drive the bottom line.

The Goal of Decision-Making

So how do we design for effective decision-making? The first step is to understand the goal of decision-making. In a nutshell, the goal is to get the best decision outcome with the least amount of effort. Notice that there’s an inherent conflict or tradeoff baked right into the goal itself. Typically, better decision outcomes result from greater effort.

It’s important to be aware of this goal and its built-in conflict because the design ultimately either exacerbates the conflict, or it eases it. That is, the design plays a critical role in either helping or hindering people in making a decision. When people can’t decide, they don’t decide. And this often has serious implications for achieving website objectives.

Designing for Decision-Making

Many aspects of the design affect decision-making, including the visual layout, the number of options available, the type of information provided and how it’s worded, and many others. The effect of the design on decision-making is often subtle, yet powerful because it is so subtle.

One of the most effective ways to design for decision-making is to find ways to leverage people’s natural behavior and existing decision-making strategies.
Assessing value through comparison
A key question to consider when designing for decision-making is: how do people determine or assess value? How do people figure out the worth of things?

Since people do not have an innate ability to objectively determine the absolute value of things, they instead use a process of comparison. People are constantly comparing things: products, services, places, ideas, other people, etc. This process of comparison is an integral aspect of people’s natural behavior, and so it’s something that designers should leverage when designing for decision-making.
To demonstrate the power of comparison in people’s decision-making behavior, let’s turn to a study where researchers split people into two different groups, and then asked everyone to individually determine how much they would be willing to pay for a dictionary.

Individuals from one group were shown a dictionary with 20,000 entries that had a torn cover. Individuals from the other group were shown a dictionary with 10,000 entries, in perfect condition. The results showed that on average, people shown the dictionary with more entries but having a torn cover were willing to pay $20, while the group shown the dictionary with less entries but in perfect condition were willing to pay $24.

Researchers then asked a third group of individuals to compare the two dictionaries side-by-side and indicate how much they would be willing to pay for each one. The results showed that when people were able to compare the dictionaries, they were willing to pay more for the one with more entries, regardless of the torn cover. On average, they were willing to pay $27 for the dictionary with more entries and a torn cover, and $19 for the dictionary with fewer entries that was in perfect condition. This was a direct preference reversal from when people were evaluating each dictionary by itself.
This may seem like a rather simple study, but there are a couple of important takeaways that are especially pertinent for UX and web design. First, people’s assessment of the value of each dictionary was directly impacted by whether they were evaluating the dictionary in isolation or by comparing one against the other. As I said earlier, people do not have an innate ability to determine absolute value. Value is determined through a process of comparing and contrasting.

In order to assess the value of each dictionary, people needed a standard against which to compare. How many entries does a good dictionary have? Most people don’t know. So, when evaluating the dictionary with no defects, they had to come up with their own standard. Those who evaluated the dictionary with a torn cover didn’t know the answer to that question either. But, they knew that the torn cover was clearly suboptimal, an attribute they could readily evaluate as "bad."

When people had a chance to compare the dictionaries directly, they were able to judge them on the characteristic that really mattered: the number of entries. The cosmetic defect paled within the context of what’s most important in a dictionary. When people can’t evaluate the most important aspect of something in a meaningful way, that aspect gets discounted for another aspect that’s easier to evaluate. This is how the decision-making environment can sway decision outcomes.

The comparison process itself, then, and the way in which it is designed, can help or hinder people’s ability to focus on the right attributes and to assign value effectively. In the dictionary example, people’s assessments were swayed by whether they were asked to evaluate each dictionary separately or by comparing them side-by-side. They were also swayed by the type of information made available or not made available. Consider, for example, how people’s assessment may have differed if just one piece of data had been provided: the average number of entries found in a typical dictionary.
Consider also the impact of people’s goal in decision-making, to get the best possible result with the least amount of effort. In the dictionary example, some people’s assessment was swayed by the attribute that was easiest to evaluate: the torn cover.

These are the kinds of things that deserve consideration when architecting the environment in which people make decisions.
Designing the comparison space
Since the process of comparison is the means by which people assign value to something, it’s important to design or architect the environment (or webpage) to accommodate this innate behavior. An effective design enables people to easily focus on the right things and make meaningful evaluations. Probably the best way to learn about designing for comparison is to look at both good and bad examples, and examine what makes them that way.
Example 1: Setting context
Which of the two examples below is most effective? Note how the reference point (the regular price) in the first version sets the context, thereby enabling people to more effectively evaluate whether the price is "good" or not. Even though the price is lower in the second version, the first version appears more compelling because of the comparison against the regular price.
Price Comparison
Example 2: Facilitating easy comparison
The example below is designed as if no comparison across plans is required. The design assumes that users will be able to make a decision simply by viewing the individual plan details. It is likely, however, that the first thing users will want to do is compare plans so they can understand the differences between them. This UI does not make it easy to do that.

Monthly Plan Comparison
Example 3: Providing points of reference
The example below respects people’s natural need to compare. Many people wonder whether they’re saving enough. To display a single number is not enough, as people cannot glean meaning from a single number (is $50,000 of retirement savings good or bad?). The designer of the site understands that people need a reference point against which to compare. Here, the reference point is "people like you," but it could be any number of different values—a recommended amount or industry standard, the amount of your savings at this time a year ago, etc.

ING Savings Tool
Example 4: Showing contrasting values
The example below does an excellent job of leveraging the power of comparison and contrast. Note the extreme contrast between the five-star rating and all lesser ratings. The data tells a compelling story.
USAA Ratings Page
Example 5: Enabling easy visual scannability
This page also has a convincing story to tell: that the PC and Mac are essentially the same, yet very different in price! This story would be conveyed more effectively if the user wasn’t forced to read the jagged (center justified) text in each column in order to get the message. The design would support the story in a more compelling way if the page were easier to scan and the size of the images, which currently dominate the design, was reduced.

PC vs Mac
Example 6: Designing for salience
The design below is effective because the table layout makes visual scanning easy. It takes only a second (or less, pre-attentively) to see that TD Bank beats its competitors—at least on the criteria it has chosen. Note how the visual design supports the overall message of the page. TD appears in the first column (the only bank listed with its logo), which is the column we encounter first as we read left to right. Unlike the other columns, that column also contains a subtle background color, and displays big green checkmarks straight down the line. Its competitors take a back seat visually, almost appearing grayed out compared to TD.

TD Bank Features Comparison
In Summary
One of the most effective ways to design for decision-making is to leverage people’s natural behaviors and decision-making strategies. With this, there are two fundamental things to keep in mind:
  1. the goal of decision making (with its inherent built-in conflict).
  2. that people assess value through a process of comparing and contrasting, something they are constantly doing.
A key aspect of designing for decision-making, then, is to design an environment in which comparisons can easily be made. This involves easing the inherent conflict within the goal of decision-making by:
  • Providing a reference point so people can assess value and glean meaning
  • Helping people determine the right things to focus on by making those salient
  • Leveraging the visual design and page layout to eliminate clutter and enable easy scanning
  • Providing the right information at the right time, while eliminating all unnecessary information

Decision Architecture

Historically, the UX design toolbox has not included a focus on the science of decision-making. This needs to change. We need to recognize the important role that user decision-making plays in the achievement of website objectives. Just because designers may not design for decision-making doesn’t mean that the design isn’t having an effect.

There is no such thing as a neutral design. Every design has an effect on user decision-making, whether designers proactively design for effective decision-making or not. It’s no different from designing for usability. Every design is more or less usable, regardless of whether the designer designed for good usability or not.

Architecting for decision-making results in a win/win/win outcome for designers, for business partners, and for users. This is why decision architecture deserves a prominent place in the UX toolkit.

Usability Testing Includes Users as Stakeholders

Go to article


There has been a lot of debate and confusion about how many participants should be included in usability testing. Sometimes business teams think sample size in usability testing is just a matter of personal preference, and may request dozens of participants for “a good sample set.” Other times, they want to include participants who meet specific demographic requirements, which may satisfy internal politics more than they meet research requirements. There are also debates in the user research field about whether it’s better to conduct one big test with many participants and find all usability issues, or to conduct a series of smaller tests with fewer participants, identifying fewer issues but allowing for iterative design. And there is always the question of funding and the best use of money. It makes you wonder, “Where do I begin to get a good answer?”

Some say five participants are enough (e.g., Jakob Neilsen), and some say 15 are necessary. There are also mathematical formulas that determine the “right” number to test to find all of the issues. In some ways, each of these approaches is correct, which is why I think the question of how many users are needed for the ideal usability test needs to be reframed.

One of the reasons for having a larger set of test subjects is to discover all of the nuances of an application that may cause usability issues. This is great for one-shot testing; you get it all done at once and implement all the feedback. But in most development teams, all of the feedback can’t be implemented; feedback from tests is prioritized in a general queue for future releases. If a lot of the user feedback isn’t implemented, it makes you wonder, “Why did we test in the first place, and how much input do users really have into the design of the applications they are using?” In this case, the answer is very little, which doesn’t make much sense.

The determination of the right number of users to test is based less on a "golden number," and more on the goals for testing, what is being tested, and if you want to consider your users as stakeholders.

Single, All-Encompassing Tests Do Not Include Users as Stakeholders

Usability testing is sometimes seen as an independent activity, something that’s done once or twice during a project lifecycle to ensure users “get it,” and done separately and in isolation from the team. It’s not part of development or design; it’s done to prove that a concept may be used. This results in the perception that users are "them" and ironically doesn't include them in the development process, although users are really the major stakeholder. With one-shot testing, your key audience—users—spends a few hours with a product that developers have worked on full-time for weeks. How can you get a decent opinion in such an aggressive timeframe? You need to include users throughout the development process.

Fix What Matters Most for Your Stakeholders

When you find 95% of the problems with a sample set of 15 users, you get a long list of potential enhancements. From my experience, most of the items on such lists never get fixed. Some of these issues get deprioritized to the bottom of the list while other more critical fixes, such as database optimization enhancements, take precedence. How can a graphic adjustment compete with a database optimization if the product manager has a limited number of hours available to improve the application? Which is more important to usability, a faster system or a better-looking interface? In most cases, users and product managers will pick system optimizations because, honestly, users will make do with a poorly designed application if they get the results they expect.

Since oftentimes the long list of usability problems unearthed in large-sample testing never gets fixed, does this type of testing provide good value? Isn’t it better to discover the few key issues that matter most to the users, fix those issues, and test again to validate that those issues are truly fixed?

Confirm You Solved Your Stakeholders’ Problems

Another challenge with usability testing is being able to confirm that your changes are truly solutions. Let’s say you have budget to support testing with 15 people and you decide to have a single test session. After the test you create a list of issues that you recommend be fixed. You find solutions for some of the issues and get them implemented. But how do you determine if your “solutions” actually fixed the problem unless you have a second test? And what if one solution adversely affects another solution or, worse yet, negatively affects something that had already worked well? You need another test to evaluate the successfulness and overall effect of your implemented solutions.

Often with the larger tests there isn't a follow-up test, just an assumption that what the designers changed will work. But sometimes with larger issues that come out of testing, there are a number of implications that need to be considered in the design and may affect the usability in other areas. But you won't know the full impact unless you complete a second test.

If you can't afford a second test, then you can't confirm that all identified issues from the first test have been fixed. You did one usability test and hope that things are working better, but this is making business decisions on hope—not a great way to run a successful business. And your major stakeholder wasn’t included in reviewing the changes—is that really a good way to treat a stakeholder?

Identify Your Users/Stakeholders Based on Activity Rather Than Demographic

Most people use applications in the same way. People may have different opinions and insights, but the general usage pattern is the same. For example, on a shopping website, people visit the site to “window shop” or with the intent of making a purchase. The user could be a high spender or a low spender; it really doesn’t matter. What matters most is the type of activity the user is doing—in this case, online shopping. Both user types will require similar shopping features to complete their tasks. The visitors who come less often may actually be better test participants; they know how shopping sites typically work and are looking for the familiar steps to shop, but may not be so savvy that they can easily overlook usability issues. Either way, the key point here is that the users are shoppers.
Do demographics matter? Not really. Sure, it’s nice to have participants who are engaged customers, but at the end of the day you are testing functionality and use patterns. It’s not a focus group, and the only profile requirement is really just “people who shop.”

How Do I Use These Ideas in My Own Tests?

Before determining who should be included in your test, you may want to determine how many tests you can afford. I suggest you have at least two tests, and there are many ways to get your budget to accommodate two tests. You will need at least five people per session but plan on at least two not showing up, so invite about eight people for good measure. You could also use an online testing tool such as Userlytics, which includes a definite five users, and that’s a great option as well.
Get a solid definition of what the product does
Knowing the main goals of the product will help you find participants based on usage patterns. Traditionally, the best test subjects are those who would be engaged customers if they found the test product on their own because they can suggest ways to improve the product for that market. For example, if you are testing a sheet music site, contact test subjects who are musicians who regularly buy sheet music. They could give advice on how they like to research and select sheet music.
However, if finding the engaged customer type is difficult for your test, remember that you are testing general usability. If you can’t find musicians, then at a minimum find users who like to do online shopping in general. For testing a shopping site, it’s about the process of shopping; the general shopping process is the same whether it’s for video games or for designer dresses. An engaged customer will offer more tips and suggestions to make the site better for their specific segment, but if you are testing the shopping process you are mainly testing the shopping cart, indicating shipment to multiple locations, purchasing, and whether information is easy to find. Whether you are a Halo or Hermes fan, you should be able to find the product you want and the specs you need to make a decision, and be able to easily purchase the item on the site.

As a different example, let’s say you are testing a system for administering corporate health insurance. You will need to find test subjects who do these administration tasks. What may be surprising is that although the participants may be in large or small companies, the general needs for an administrator are the same no matter what the size of the company because this is about how administrators communicate with an insurance company. The tasks that are part of the role may be divided among several people, but the administrator(s) still have to enter new applications, change information, and track statuses. You may get some interesting data depending on the industry the people are from (e.g., in construction where computers are less accessible, or banking where everyone is on multiple terminals). But at the end of the day, HR administrators and office managers from any industry and company size are able to provide valuable feedback on a system based on what they need to accomplish.

Let’s say you are requested to test the usability of Product B as well as how users of Product A will accept Product B. Your instinct may be to have two groups represented in the usability test: the usability test group (those who meets the general user profile) and a second group of existing Product A users to confirm acceptance. But is this the right approach? In the end, usability is usability. If a product isn’t generally usable, it won’t be accepted or adopted anyway. It’s more important to confirm Product B’s general usability because if it’s usable, it will be accepted. If you still need to prove more specifically if users of Product A will accept Product B, recommend a usability test for Product B and complete a heuristic evaluation for the two products. With this approach, you confirm that Product B is generally usable, and can use that data in the evaluation to support why users of Product A will adopt Product B.

There’s no question that using engaged customers as participants will provide great results to any study. However, in a pinch, participant selection criteria based on tasks and activities will meet your needs as well. Keep in mind the goals of your test, remember you are testing usability, and that you are looking for the significant usability issues for the current project for the next iteration. And your users should be treated as stakeholders and be just as involved as any other major stakeholder on your team.

Conclusion

Approaching usability testing with iterations of smaller groups who are targeted based on usage patterns isn't just better for the development team, it's better for the users and better for the business. User feedback is heard, ideas incorporated, and problems fixed; it’s a better use of resources; there is more direct user dialog; and the business will have a higher quality, shippable product. And, consistent with agile methodologies, users are included in the development process as a stakeholder. Everyone benefits. The product manager now has a clear understanding of the users’ perceptions of the product, the designers are able to focus on addressing well-defined and verified usability problems instead of trying to resolve issues that may not exist except in a team member’s perception, and the developers understand why certain issues are so important for the final product. Through iterative testing, the issues that are raised are always timely and relevant. Conducting larger tests to find all the issues is a concept that only works when there is a generous budget and an unlimited schedule, which exists only in engineering fantasies. And it isolates users from the process, when in fact they are major stakeholders.

ComScore’s 2011 Social Report: Facebook Leading, Microblogging Growing, World Connecting

Go to article

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011

Eric Eldon is a writer at TechCrunch. He was previously the cofounder and editor of Inside Network, where he managed publications including Inside Facebook, Inside Social Games and Inside Mobile Apps. Before that, he spent a couple years covering technology and finance at VentureBeat, a leading Silicon Valley publication where he was the first employee. While Inside Network sold... → Learn More
 
Screen Shot 2011-12-21 at 1.32.58 PM
Screen Shot 2011-12-21 at 1.32.58 PM
You already know that social networking sites have been getting huge around the world, but an annual report out today from comScore shows what exactly is going at a wonderful new level of detail, with surprises for even long-time industry watchers like me.

1 in every 5 minutes of time online is now being spent on social networking sites, up from a mere 6% in early 2007. The sites, led by Facebook, now reach 82% of the world’s internet-using population — about 1.2 billion people in total. This growth is happening across countries, with 41 of the 43 countries that the web measurement firm tracks showing penetration of 85% or more.



Within these big numbers, though, all sorts of differences emerge. People in Latin America spend an especially large portion of their time online on sites like Facebook and Twitter — 28%, or 7.6 hours per month. That’s much less the case in Asia, where it’s 11% and less than 3 hours per month. Those are broad averages, and full of anomalies. The Philippines, for example, is actually the most socially networked country in the world, with 43% of users time going to these services, and above 8.7 hours.
Facebook itself is making up the largest portion of all this usage — even as all sorts of rivals and alternatives are surging. The service reached 55% of the worlds’ online population in October, with incredibly high engagement: 3 out of every 4 minutes on these types of sites, and every seventh online minute. For the most part, it has surged into first places across countries that had previously been on rival sites, like Orkut in Brazil.

But Facebook is running out of new users in North America and Western Europe simply because it has so much of these markets already (even though it’s not running out of users’ attention). In the meantime, a whole other crop of social sites are booming everywhere, led by Twitter.

The microblogging service has grown by 59% in the past year to reach 160 million monthly unique users worldwide. Professional social network LinkedIn has grown by 55% to nearly 100 million. Easy-blogging site Tumblr is up 172% to nearly 40 million; Chinese Twitter-style site Sina Weibo shows almost identical growth (albeit mostly in China).



Report co-author Andrew Lipsman says this is one of the trends that was most surprising to him about the report. There’s more and more people who want to share around interests, not just the close social relationships.

All in all, many of these market leaders are also showing just how global they are these days, with Twitter and Facebook each now having 80% of their users outside of the US.

The report has all sorts of other data gems, too. Here’s a few that jumped out at me:
- Google+ now has 65 million users worldwide. That thing has some legs, even if we don’t always see them here at TechCrunch.

- Women continue to lead men in engagement across the world — by 2 hours or 30% per month in North America and Europe. This is a long-term trend that comScore has seen across older services like instant messaging. But, men have shown a 10% bump since July of 2010, and they gradually appear to be catching up. A lot of this has to do with age. Usage is about at equilibrium among younger age groups, Lipsman notes.

- Mobile is crucial to usage in many markets and growing, but continues to account for a minority of overall usage. Between a quarter and a third of users in Western markets reported accessing social networking sites at least once a month from mobile devices.

- Ads are still playing catch-up to spending levels per traffic that you’d expect to see in other areas.

- Email usage has been declining in usage among younger age groups, a trend that’s not likely to change.

This is by no means all of the interesting data in the report. You can download the full thing on comScore’s site, here. I should note that it deserves credit for doing an especially good job providing easy-to-read data visualizations — something that you don’t see often enough amidst all the awful infographics out there.

ComScore’s methodology, considered by many to be the best in the measurement business, includes large-scale opt-in user sampling around the world and across desktop and mobile devices.

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Getting Started with Content Strategy

Go to article

“A prospect went to our website prior to our meeting. Worst thing he could have done,” said the sales executive. “What we have on the site contradicts what we are telling prospects in meetings. I had to spend the meeting convincing him we are a player in this industry, not talking about how we can solve his problems. The website is a problem.”

header-content-strategy-article

Content strategy

This series of articles explores content strategy and interaction design. Curated by Colleen Jones of Content Science, each bimonthly article will highlight a new voice, a new way of doing content strategy, or applying tried-and-true content principles to new situations.

See all posts

Indeed it is. Every interaction people have with your website is an opportunity for your organization to improve, hurt or confirm your credibility with them. When your content doesn’t support your business/organizational goals and provides zero value to your customers, you will end up with more unpleasant conversations and missed opportunities. You need a content strategy.

So where to start? At the beginning, of course. But what is the beginning? You are in the day-to-day grind of maintaining your current site, fixing the most “urgent” issues rather than addressing the underlying problems that led to today’s real and perceived crises. The process of creating a content strategy was very rewarding, both for the Web team and the people we worked with internally. We discovered insights about how the website could support the goals of individual business units and the corporation. Stakeholders realized that there was value in creating content that people wanted to read, view or respond to. But you can’t to results without starting.

1. Realistically Assess Your Situation

Can you finish what you start?

At Cerner, we knew that there were problems with our content in the spring of 2010. We “knew” it in the sense that we got complaints about it, we noticed inconsistencies and inaccuracies in how we talked about our solutions and services, and our analytics told us visitors didn’t care to read, consume or react to what was on the site. But we really didn’t know what it would take to fix everything, or even what “everything” was.

Before anything could be done to fix our site, there had to be a commitment to do so. This sounds simple, but it’s not. Is your company/organization willing to let someone (or several someones) spend the time necessary to dig into the underlying problems with the current content? Will your company let that person or persons create a plan for fixing it and then go do it? If not, is the company/organization willing to be influenced on the importance of content? If the answer is still no, then your default content strategy will be to have no strategy at all.

For us, fortunately, the answer was yes. In 2010, we started a redesign of our entire site. The redesign was not limited to just the visual design and a new technical platform, although those were important considerations. We wanted to create an entirely new user experience, which would not be possible without completely re-thinking how users found our content, and what we actually chose to say (and not say) with our content. The content portion of the project was not just added on as an afterthought, but was included from the very beginning of the discussion of what we wanted the website to be.

2. Build Internal Support

Who cares about content—and can do something about it?

So great, you have permission to create a content strategy, whatever you decide that means. It’s one thing to have approval from your manager to do so, but what about the other areas of your company or organization? If people outside your team are involved in the content process (most likely creation or review/approval), you need them to support your efforts.

To get their support, this group needs to care, or why they should care. We had about 30 people across the company responsible for providing or overseeing the content for their group of solutions and services. These people were not/are not writers or Web content experts, but implementing a content strategy would be impossible without their support. We targeted a small sub-set (three) of these people (we’ll call them content contributors) who we deemed as influential among their peer group.

In individual meetings, we discussed the idea of putting a strategy behind our content. We didn’t use the phrase “content strategy” in the meetings; instead, we talked about their business goals, and shared ideas for how content could help them meet those goals. These people were not executives within their given organization, but rather those who would most care about content in that organization and who would be in a position to take action on it. What we discovered:
  • Content contributors were desperate for guidance on how content could support their business goals;
  • Governance had to be included in our content strategy. Governance by itself is not a strategy, but our content contributors needed a clearer process for governance of our content;
  • This group would start to really care about their content when we gave them a reason to.
This sub-set of content owners served as advocates down the road when we shared our plan for content creation, maintenance and updating during the redesign process. By introducing the idea that content was important to an influential sub-set of this group, we faced no opposition to changing “how things had always been done” when meeting with the full group. With the internal support in place, then it’s possible to get the subsequent work done.

3. Define and Prioritize

How will you get the work done?

I listed this after building internal support, but in reality this step can and should occur in conjunction with creating internal support. While we were meeting with the sub-set of content contributors, we identified the key problems areas (both quantitative and qualitative) with our existing content. We took the time to catalog and inventory ALL of our content, which at the time numbered about 7,500 pages, including our nine global sites. Taking inventory of your content is time-consuming and hard work.

But you have to do it in order to define the problems with your content and prioritize how to fix them. There are numerous examples on the Web of what your audit should include, from a spreadsheet to more sophisticated software tools. Devote some time looking at them (hint, a spreadsheet will probably work for you). Ask yourself how that approach would work for your website. Ask people who work on content strategy how they handled a content audit. We decided to capture the following information in our audit:
  • Page Title;
  • URL;
  • Metadata keywords;
  • Last date page was updated;
  • Who updated it?
  • Did the page include an image? Video? Downloadable PDF?
  • Was it any good?
    • Is it written in appropriate tone and voice?
    • Does it contradict content in other locations on our site?
    • Is it just a regurgitation of a flyer or product spec sheet?
    • Is it written to inform a visitor, or to please a product manager?
The last item (was it any good?) took the most time to complete on our audit. But you aren’t doing an audit without answering that question. Otherwise, you are just filling out a spreadsheet. Yes, quantitative data was essential to understanding our overall content issues, but ultimately you need to make judgments about your content. Our content issues immediately surfaced once we completed the audit. And we now knew exactly how bad the problem was (or wasn’t). For us, these issues were are biggest challenges:
  • Lack of tone and voice – For example, we might talk about our radiology solutions in an informal, conversational way, with the content focused on how it might benefit the end-user or health care organization. But on our page for our pharmacy solutions, we would list 15 bullets of feature functionality, with no consideration of how this solution benefits the end-user or organization. So are we a company that wants to talk only about how great we are, or are we a company that is focused on helping our clients improve how they care for patients? Can visitors to our site believe what we say about our solutions? Are we credible? It was hard to tell;
  • Bad metadata and information architecture – Incorrect metadata of course has the consequence of making your content harder to find by search engines. Beyond that, if you are sloppy with your metadata, page titles and naming of sections on your site, it can give the user (even subconsciously) the idea that you don’t take content seriously. If you won’t take the time to make sure that pages are named consistently, then should visitors to your site take seriously what you have to say? For many of you, this might be stating the obvious, but don’t farm out the metadata and naming conventions to your technical team (unless they are content champions). Take the time to understand how your content management system works and how to fix metadata issues;
  • No standards – A user would have no reasonable expectation of what they would encounter on types of pages within our site. It became obvious that we needed a standard for what type of information a user should expect to see on a solution page vs. an event page vs. an executive biography. This includes the words, images and video, as well as the font types, sizes and color used on each of these sections. These things matter. Take the time to consider them and stick to them;
  • Governance confusion – Some groups were allowed (more or less) to publish content on the site with little oversight, while others went through a semi-review process before publication. This issue was an underlying reason for all of the previous three issues.
There were other issues, of course, but these – if corrected – would most improve our content, support the website and business goals. Now it was time to find out if our plan would work.

4. Demonstrate Success

What results did you get?

To make content strategy an integral part of your company/organization, you’ll need to show it’s worth the time and effort. Here are a few examples of success we attribute to the content strategy work.
  • Users more easily find our content – Prior to the redesign of our website (including a strategy for content), less than 20 percent of our visitors came to the site via search engines. Within a few months of redesigning the site, that number increased to 30 percent of our visitors, and today we are approaching 40 percent of visitors to the site from search engines. This represents new groups of people finding our content and interacting with us;
  • We increased Cerner’s credibility online – Our content strategy included the creation of a corporate blog. We wanted to use the blog for our own industry experts, as well as selected clients, to talk about key issues in health care. The blog does not overtly tout our solutions, but focuses on sharing our perspective on key health care issues. Recently, Investors.com (part of Investor’s Business Daily) referenced a Cerner blog post in a story on ICD-10, a change to how diseases are classified by health care organizations. Providing credible, relevant content resulted in a third-party recognizing us as a source for information;
  •  
Figure 1: Investor’s Business Daily cites a Cerner blog post

Figure 2: The quality content of this Cerner blog post by Lisa Franz led to its citation by Investor’s Business Daily

  • Our content resonates with users – Six months after we redesigned our website and implemented our content strategy, we provided feedback to our content contributors on what types of content resonated with people. Product pages with video (and especially those with client testimonial videos) received more visitors than those that didn’t. And visitors – on average – spent significantly more time on the product pages with videos than those without videos. (See Figure 3) For us, more traffic + more time spent consuming content = win. For those of you who rely on other groups in your organization to supply content, you must give them guidance on what works. At the time I shared the video results with our content contributors, we had just 13 product pages with video. Today, that number is more than 30.
Figure 3: Adding quality video to our product pages led to more visits and to users spending more time on those pages (image credits: John O’Nelio)

Get to Work

I came across a quote from Thomas Edison during this project.
The first requisite for success is to develop the ability to focus and apply your mental and physical energies to the problem at hand – without growing weary. Because such thinking is often difficult, there seems to be no limit to which some people will go to avoid the effort and labor that is associated with it.
Applying a content strategy to your website requires work. As you begin the process by building internal support and evaluating your content, the path toward a content strategy that will work for your organization will become clear. It’s likely you’ll realize additional benefits, too. In our case, the relationship between the Web team and content contributors – and the business units they represent – is much stronger due to the successes achieved. Discussions about content occur (more often, not always) during the planning stages of projects rather than the middle or end. This approach is one that worked for us. But none of it would have been possible without getting started.

A Few Resources That Helped…

Lance Yoder

Lance Yoder

Lance Yoder is a Program Manager with Cerner Corporation in Kansas City, Mo. He is responsible for the content strategy and editorial management of cerner.com (including nine non-U.S. sites), as well as additional public-facing applications. Prior to Cerner, Yoder spent 10 years as a newspaper reporter and magazine editor in Indiana, Iowa and Missouri. He holds a bachelor’s degree in History from Goshen (Ind.) College.

Top Trends of 2011: Content Shifting

Go to article

TopTrends2011.png

We wind down the top trends of 2011 with one that's perfect for the holidays. Just as the frantic, real-time nature of the social Web hit fever pitch, the market trends this year made way for "content shifting." It's the simple idea of saving your articles, videos and podcasts for later.
With the rise of the smartphone and tablet, all kinds of content can be saved until after work or school. Content shifting helps us concentrate on the tasks at hand. It also reformats it for more enjoyable experiences. Now that the Web is no longer limited to our desks, content shifting allows new media to take their rightful place on the couch.

The Rise of Leisure Devices
Podcasting has been the content-shifted future of radio since the early days of the iPod. But its growth was limited by the barriers of regularly syncing via USB. The era of the smartphone and tablet has freed users from that constraint.

The tablet in particular has made leisure reading and viewing of Web content a reality. Sales of the iPad have smashed expectations. Amazon's Kindle Fire, which is specialized for leisure content, has found mass appeal as well.

We've seen some great studies from Google and BBC.com this year showing that consumers love the tactile, personal tablet experience. They use tablets as leisure devices, allowing them to separate the fun stuff from the work stuff they do on their PCs.

googtabletchart2.jpg

Apple & Amazon's End-to-End Content
ipad_reader_vertical.jpgThe big end-to-end consumer tech companies have tried to keep this all under their umbrellas. With iOS 5, Lion and iCloud, Apple proposes a vision of content shifting that happens unconsciously. Music, videos, documents and bookmarks are all just there when users look for them, no matter which device they're on.

Apple added a feature called Reading List to its Safari browser, which lets users create temporary bookmarks for Web articles. It also expanded Safari's Reader mode to the mobile versions. Safari Reader pops up a clean version of an article, without navigation or ads, to make reading on the Web more sane. The combination of Reading List and Reader mode makes for a basic but pleasant content-shifted reading experience.

None of it works perfectly, of course, but Apple would like it to.

iPad Is A Product, Kindle Is A Service
For Apple, content is more like a feature. Apple's in the device business, and it offers content to support users of its devices. The iPhone, the iPad, the iPod and the Mac are the products. Amazon does things the other way around. Amazon's new Kindle Fire tablet rounds out its line of inexpensive, less powerful devices that give users access to Kindle content, which is where Amazon makes its money.

Kindle is a service, not a product. The devices are just windows into Amazon's store of content, which is streamed or whisper-synced down to them. Amazon uses its powerful cloud to keep the latest content on each Kindle device, and even on iOS and Android devices running the Kindle app. For Kindle books and magazines, content shifting is as simple as syncing your page number.
kindlefamily.jpg

Content Shifting In the Consumer Cloud
There's still plenty of room for content shifting solutions from Web companies that aren't tied to particular platforms.

Evernote, a company working on many different problems in the consumer cloud, has built Clearly, an article-saving service. It's a browser extension for Chrome and Firefox that creates a cleaned-up article view, similar to Safari Reader mode, but it also allows saving of the clean version to one's Evernote account with one click. The article can then be read later via the Evernote app on a tablet or smartphone, as well as on the desktop.

evernoteclearly1.jpg

Instapaper has an established presence in the iTunes App Store as a dedicated read-later service. Using a browser bookmarklet or connecting to the many RSS readers and Twitter clients that allow fast link saving to Instapaper, readers can save clean versions of Web articles they want to read with just one click.

instapaper-4-wikipedia.jpgWhen you launch the Instapaper app, it caches the articles, so you can even read offline. This is a solution to the attention problems posed by the real-time Web. If you see an article you want to read, you don't have to be distracted. Just send to Instapaper and get back to work. Check out our interview with Instapaper creator Marco Arment for his perspective on how content shifting is changing reading.

There's also Read It Later, an Instapaper competitor that's going for cross-platform presence rather than focus on two devices. Its creator used Read It Later data to publish a fascinating blog post at the beginning of the year demonstrating the content shifting trend. It compared desktop, smartphone and tablet users' reading habits, and the iPad users are clearly shifting their content to the evening, with a little bit of reading over breakfast.

readitlater_chart.jpg
Content shifting of articles is happening, and it's getting started with Web-based video, too. The Internet TV service Boxee offers an iPad app and bookmarklet that allows saving of Web videos for later, whether on your TV or your iPad (if you've got the gadgets). It takes a bit of work to get it going, but Richard MacManus wrote a how-to guide for content-shifting video with Boxee.

Some of the sharpest minds in the industry are thinking about content shifting, and we had some great interviews about it from this year. Tech investor extraordinaire Fred Wilson talked about content shifting at our 2Way Summit this year. We discussed the iPad and the future of reading with Instapaper's Marco Arment. And we talked to Jori Lallo, creator of a link-saving service called Kippt, about the practice of saving Web links on your digital bookshelf.

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

When Mobile, Location and Content Converge - I'll Have a Guinness

Go to article

Underkoffler 150.jpgIt's almost a decade ago now that the 2002 film Minority Report showed the moral majority what the future will look like in 2054 when mobility, geo-location and targeted content technologies merge. While the movie looks at various elements of the digital future, the biggest 'ah ha' moment for both privacy advocates and marketers alike happens when John Anderton (Tom Cruise) has his retinas scanned as he exists the train and a digital billboard displays "John Anderton, you could use a Guinness right now."

So how long until you walk past a store and it offers the "other people like/bought" experience outside of the confines of a website? Services like AT&T's Shop Alerts show promise by linking customers proximity to stores and offers. But these aren't the "other people like you" recommendations based on behavior that go beyond the proximity to a store you already like (and have already subscribed to).

Another service that brings us closer to beverage recommendations is the goHow application developed by Denver airport. Described as "blending real-time travel information with precisely targeted marketing messages," it targets travelers with relevant offers based on their locations such as departure gates, as well as their likely needs based on events. Your flight is delayed? You could use a Guinness right now. There is a bar around the corner and a restaurant near gate four.
However, as innovative as both of these technologies are, they rely on voluntary subscriptions and locations. What if you haven't subscribed to your carrier's service, or aren't at Denver Airport? Well, your friendly social platform is already building out the data that could soon understand when you'd like a Guinness.

Adrian Lewis from on the community weblog MetaFilter said that "if you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold," referring of course to the value of the data that folks like Facebook are amassing. Facebook doesn't just know what sort of trivia my old school friends and I like to play - it knows the brands I like and often where I am.

Looking at my own Facebook and Twitter pages, if Smith & Wollensky in New York had a party of six just cancel their reservation, and knew that five of my colleagues and I were at an industry event around the corner, the combination of these data points (my location, my likes, what I'm doing and at what time of day) could allow them to create an offer that brings them a customer immediately.
While privacy advocates may be concerned about large-scale information gather, the general public doesn't seem to mind. We are all surrendering privacy in exchange for convenience, credibility, badges or to be social. Who doesn't dream about an assistant that knows your coffee preference, a barman recalling your favorite beer, or a maître d' who knows your favorite table?
 
One consideration is the time of day - a crucial element in the real world, unlike in the online world where it's essentially irrelevant. My recommendations on Amazon are the same while I'm at the office at 1:00pm as they are at 3:00am while I'm in my pajamas. Smith & Wollensky however, is closed at 3:00am. They have an empty table at 9:00pm and a very narrow window to get revenue from it. If they want to be relevant to the mobile consumer, the time of day a potential customer walks past their restaurant is imperative.

While most of today's technology relies on the consumer explicitly stating their likes and locations, micropayments are becoming more prevalent, and they're eliminating the need for the consumer to identify themselves. Make a payment with your phone and it knows that you like Starbucks, when you like to drink coffee and the specific location you frequent.

What if the consumer doesn't make a purchase? CNN Money recently reported that malls are already implementing technology that anonymously tracks shoppers' cell phones to determine the path they take between stores. As the article points out, this technology applies techniques of the online world to gain insight into people that don't make traceable transactions.

There is of course, a social element to data gathering and it can be seen in two ways. Firstly, the data is sometimes used as only a conversation starter so you can be sold a product by a human. I used to have the pay-per-view soccer channel in the UK, and I would often get a call from "a fellow Chelsea fan" who would talk about my team and tell me that I should sign up for Chelsea TV. There are other times when social media and the "gamification" of services that basically harvest data for marketing applications are so influential that we volunteer all the information in exchange for a virtual badge or to be crowned mayor of our favorite restaurant.

While privacy advocates may be concerned about large-scale information gather, the general public doesn't seem to mind. We are all surrendering privacy in exchange for convenience, credibility, badges or to be social. Who doesn't dream about an assistant who knows your coffee preference, a barman who recalls your favorite beer, or a Maître D who knows your favorite table?

One could argue that the launch of Apple's Siri isn't just about talking to your iPhone and establishing a verbal relationship with your mobile device. It may be that your phone will soon be making suggestions such as enjoying a pint of Guinness after a run from the authorities. Perhaps it will be more subtle than that. Maybe we won't have billboards using our names and favorite brands as we walk past as envisaged by Minority Report. Perhaps our little pocket assistant will whisper wirelessly as we walk into a strange town bar and the barman will say, "you could use a Guinness right now."