Ignore the customer experience, lose a billion dollars (Walmart case study)

The article states that Walmart asked customers in a survey if they wanted the Walmart stores to be less cluttered. This is such a common question and gets asked in all kinds of scenarios from stores to websites. How many times have I heard in a usability study that something looks too cluttered? Hundreds. The trick though, as Walmart found out, that that doesn’t mean anything should be removed. Walmart’s error was assuming removing something means less cluttered. The term “cluttered” has come too mean too much stuff, but does it mean really too much stuff or the appearance of too much stuff? If you had the same amount of stuff in a 9,000 square foot house and then had it in a 400 square foot studio apartment, would if feel like too much stuff in both scenarios? What if Space Bags were involved?  What if the stuff were diamonds? What if the stuff was chocolate?  The questions can go on and on, but the point is you can’t just ask “Is this cluttered?” because unless they are looking at some minimalist design, customers will answer yes, but that isn’t what they mean.

To find out what they mean, you have to watch what they do and ask a lot more questions, repeatedly. Or you could go through an exercise like Walmart has, but I wouldn’t suggest it.

Search

Google and Bing dominate searches today, but it shouldn’t be too difficult for Facebook to add that in. They are already incorporating Likes into Bing  adding what it is calling a “social layer” and Facebook updates have been searchable for years. Facebook already has the social layer down pat, getting the actual search results couldn’t be out of reach for them. Would you rather go to a site because it ranked high up in an algorythm or one that lots of your “friends” like?

eCommerce

The biggest drawback for a company wanting to represent themselves solely on Facebook is that they lose some interaction in terms of forms gathering data or in actually selling their products on Facebook. Facebook is improving the pages features today and more interactive integration can’t be far behind. They could always start small by acting more like an aggregator like Kayak, Shopzilla or BizRate.  Then friends can like those items (adding that “social layer” again) and drive traffic to Amazon or whatever site while getting credit for the click.

What Facebook has and what everyone wants is its audience and that audience gives it tons of valuable content –  absolutely free. Whenever I’m asked which site I think does the poorest job of design, I always say Facebook, and I still believe that. Finding information is difficult and aesthetically it is very bland, but this is a case of content being king. As long as my sister-in-law posts pictures of my newborn niece on Facebook instead of Flickr and as long as my oldest friend keeps sending me email through Facebook, they’ve got me. I might as well buy some shoes on there as well.

His tweet that started it all:

As terrible as it is and how disturbing that he thought it would humorous, you only have to look at the other ads he has done after other tragedies. One of the more publicized was one that read, “GOD DRESS AMERICA” shortly after 9/11. Of course that was before Twitter. 

Hours after this tweet an apology came via Twitter and Facebook, but the most interesting thing that happened was  @kennethcolePR and #KennethColeTweets sprang up. This happened within hours of Cole’s original tweet. @kennethcolePR had over 6,000 followers by the end of the day and hundreds of people came up with their own parodies with the hashtag KennethColeTweets and thousands more retweeting everything.  A Google search shows over 600 news articles written about the debacle. All of this in less than 24 hours.

Today, it looks like KennethColePR is coming down with an offer:

So, what does this all mean? I can’t say and I’m certainly not a “social media guru”, but it does make me more in awe of the Internet than ever. It is truly this magical thing that can spawn a revolution, it can help you find an old friend, it can teach you just about anything from how to make macarons to how fix a carburetor and it can do all of that in less than a day.

Things Not to Do on Facebook:

1. Be vague. It isn’t appropriate to post statements such as, “Decisions, decisions….” “Peaceful.” “Sometimes I just wonder…”  ” Why?”  “Crazy.” These are obvious calls for help and you’re just begging people to comment to you.

2. Quote too much. An appropriate, humorous or thought provoking quote should be like a nice bearnaise sauce. It is something that should be used sparingly. If you post more than two quotes a day as your status, then you’re just being a poser.

3. Posting statements that do not apply to any of your “friends”. One example would be Veteran’s Day. While that is a great day to thank the armed forces and their families for their service and sacrifices, if you don’t have any “friends” that are or have ever been in the armed forces or are not the family of someone in the armed forces, then why post a thank you to Veterans on Facebook? Who is going to read that and be thanked? It would be much more appropriate to say thank you to someone in uniform or someone that you know is affiliated with the services or how about just send a card to a USO?

4. Posting too frequently. Unless you lead a very exciting, glamorous or humorous life, there is really no need to post more than twice a day, MAX. No one cares that much about your activities and you’re just clogging up their feeds with your stuff.

5. If you happen to be “unfriended” by someone, just let it go. Please do not write any sob stories via e-mail begging them to take you back. Also, do not post on a mutual “friend’s” feed asking why that person “unfriended” you. By doing all of this, you are really just making them glad that they did “unfriend” you.

6. Play games/quizzes. While I understand that some of the games on Facebook might be fun, there is a wide world of video games out there that are much more fun and challenging and they won’t annoy your “friends” or compromise their privacy.

7. Similar to being too vague, don’t make negative statements about yourself in an attempt to have people comment how wonderful you are. “I wish I was a better cook.” Usually elicits, “You’re a wonderful cook.” “I love your cookies.” If you need affirmation like that, you’ve got bigger problems.

8. Suggesting someone to “friend” your spouse/significant other that the other person has never met. To me this seems like a either a desperate way to get your SO in with your “friends” or it tells me that your SO is insecure and wants to know what your “friends” are saying. How about you meet for brunch instead?

9. Posting pictures where you look good, but everyone else looks bad and tagging them. Now this may make you feel better, but it is not going to score any points with the “friends” that don’t look their best at the time. You don’t know who else will be seeing these or what they could be used for, so let people tag themselves if they choose.

10. Arbitrarily sending our “friend” requests to everyone that Facebook suggests to you. If this is not someone who if you passed in the hall you would speak to, then do not “friend” them. Also, if you have never met this person in the real world, do not send them a “friend” request. This is not a contest. I don’t think Mark Zuckerberg is going to give you a cut of his fortune if you have a couple of hundred or thousands of friends.

In my opinion, the discussion is just about semantics. When I started my career in the Web world people that built Web sites were called Web Designers or Webmasters and these days that role is usually fragmented into information architects, interaction designers, visual designers, usability researchers, content strategists and so on. Does that mean an information architect can’t make graphics or a visual designer can’t conduct a usability test? No, but it means that someone who is truly gifted that can create a beautiful graphic may not have the skill set to talk to strangers and interview them well. Same goes for the information architect who couldn’t draw to save their lives. The Web world is made up of individuals and all have their strengths and weaknesses and it is a new industry as well which just makes titles and job descriptions that much more ambiguous. I see user research and interaction design as the brains of a user experience design and the visual design as its soul. They all contribute to the overall user experience,but in different ways. Is it possible that there are rock stars out there that can perform all of these function at the utmost level? Maybe, but I haven’t encountered them yet.

One of the comparisons that has been tossed around a lot is comparing UX designers with being a chef. As Top Chef proves though, most chefs can’t make pastry, thus pastry chefs. Baking is a much more exact type of cooking and needs a very different skill set than say a fry cook. Same goes with the comparison to the medical profession. If you have a cold, you can go to a general practitioner, but if you needed brain surgery who would you go to?  

The Web is a big place and there are many different types of sites out there. The bigger, more interactive sites need these specialists. A simple content site that just shows content with no interaction can get away with one person doing it all from graphics creation to development. Are all of these people called the same thing? It really just depends on the company.

It’s all about titles really. They keep changing as the industry evolves and people outside of it start learning and appreciating our contributions more. Your skill set and what you can bring to a Web site is the most important thing, not matter what you call yourself.

I just hope the next trend in titles has the word superstar in it.

So, imagine my surprise when I go to the site today to purchase a dress I had been eyeing to see this:

This image has been up all day.

I understand redesigns and all the havoc they can bring, but can any company in this day and age afford to have their e-commerce Web site down for an entire day? I just don’t understand. How about doing this switcheroo in the middle of the night? It can’t be going well since the site has been down this long. I hope the redesign is worth it.

The Internet equivalent for those kind of stores can be found as well. Sites that obviously don’t care how long it takes to load or how easy it is to find something or if it hasn’t been updated since 2008. They don’t care about your experience, they are just there and they just can’t be bothered. This is the experience currently being offered up by talbots.com.

My biggest complaint against talbots.com is how long the home page navigation takes to load. Like a lot of its competitors, they have the beauty shot taking up most of the space and you have to rely on the navigation bars to get anywhere you really want to go. Well, talbots.com makes you look at the beauty shot in suspended animation for up to 20 – 30 seconds before you go anywhere else. I’m on a high speed connection and I have tried to access the page on T1 lines, high speed DSL, different computers and browsers and it is all the same. Once can and do click on the top navigation it can take anywhere from 5 – 25 seconds to load the page.

They are also in dire need of a card sorting exercise. “Apparel” to Talbots means female sizes 2 – 20. Then there are Petites, Woman, Woman Petites, Shoes and Accessories, Outfits, Pearls of Wisdom???? and Sale. Aren’t the petites and woman sizes considered apparel as well? Apparel is defined as clothing after all. Pearls of Wisdom though, that is a new one. This is their attempt to do something, but I’m not sure what. With titles like What’s New, What’s Next, Style Advice and Sharing your stories they are all over the place trying to do ten things at once and doing them all poorly. Sharing stories asks you to share your worst Valentines Day or what you are reading this summer. I guess this is their attempt and encouraging people to stay on the site longer and return more often, but they could just accomplish that by not making me wait 20 seconds every time I click on something.

My next complaint involves their Shopping Cart or Shopping Bag (they reference both of them interchangeably) and the lack of a cue that something is really there after I select it.

Before Item Goes in Cart

After Item Goes in Cart

Can you tell the difference? No messaging came up, no pop-up, no nothing easily discernible. How do I know I was successful? I have to look to the top right corner under shopping bag.

Shipping Page

Once you make it to checkout, you can sign into your account. Your e-mail and password is not enough though, you must answer a security question as well. After you jump through that hoop, you get to the shipping information where you fill in your information and then you are asked if this address should be saved to your account or be considered your primary address. Don’t do it! It will put you in an endless loop where you check yes and then hit continue and the page keeps refreshing over and over again with no error messages. What is worse is if your browser window height isn’t greater than 944 pixels, you will never see the billing information bar below and you will be stuck in no man’s land.

If you ever need a reminder of this read the Read Write Web article Facebook Wants to Be Your One True Login. People who had Googled “Facebook Login” got to this page and thought it was Facebook and the comments are filled with angry and confused people. Now, who would have ever thought that by titling an article in an online magazine with the words “Facebook” and “Login” would drive so much traffic of users wanting to get to their Facebook page? And why after landing on this page did they not realize that it was an article and not the Facebook home page? These are our users.

Another reminder would be this “man in the street” interviews Google conducting asking people in Times Square if they knew what a browser is….

The challenge is designing for the Web that caters to the novices (as much as humanly possible) as well as our “expert” users. The real point is that we can never assume anything and people in the web design/technology world can never put ourselves in their shoes.

OmniGraffle on iPad

How Design recently posted a list of apps made for designers, Top 10 iOS Apps for Designers . The one I was the most interested in was the OmniGraffle app for the iPad which would allow you to create wireframes and flow charts on the go and then transfer them over to your computer later. Now, this really wouldn’t work for me personally because I don’t own an iPad or a Mac or use one at work so I’ll keep bringing my laptop with me everywhere.

The other one I like (and has a great title) is What the Font which allows you to snap pictures of a font you’re not sure about and the app will identify it for you. It is the Shazam for fonts.

Jakob Nielsen says, “Elaborate usability tests are a waste of resources. The best results come from testing no more than 5 users and running as many small tests as you can afford.”  Granted, Microsoft has a lot of different types of users (though the Kin was designed specifically for younger, social networking savvy people), but my mind simply can’t get around the numbers here. Who could coordinate all of that? Who read all of the results? Wasn’t there some repetition somewhere? How many personas do they have? How long did it take? Doesn’t the 80/20 rule come into play somewhere? And how much did it cost?  The red flags must have come up at some point and they were disregarded.

I’m stuck in middle America and I can’t say anything about the politics that goes down in Seattle and San Francisco, but I certainly hope that the Kin doesn’t damage the reputation of user centered design. It is a sobering fact that while the Kin limped to a quick death with the feedback of 50,000 people, the iPhone 4 has soared on the feedback of likely only Steve Jobs. When an accepted solution to an obvious iPhone 4 design flaw is to “Just avoid holding it in that way” it makes it harder to be a user centered advocate in the corporate world. I really hope that Office 2010 kicks some serious butt not only for Microsoft, but for our cause as well.