We consider three elements to be key in any user experience research we undertake:
A usable web site is not an end in itself; it is a means to achieving organisational and user goals. User experience research is only relevant in the context of the site strategy, the aims of the organisation, and the user goals that the organisation wishes to support through the site. We have tested websites that are highly usable, but that users feel are of little value: the goals 'on offer' are not relevant and users are left with a feeling of 'so what?'. More often, we have tested sites that have useful content but are not usable, where users cannot work out who the site is aimed at or what goals they can achieve. However, the result is the same - users have no desire to revisit or recommend the site.
Therefore, the first questions we ask are:
User experience research needs to be seen in the context of the broader site strategy. What matters is that target users can quickly and easily achieve their goals, and that achieving these meets the site owner's strategy and aims for the site. Users wishing to achieve goals that don't support the site strategy, or that the organisation can't sensibly support, should be 'sign-posted' away from the site at an early stage.
We, therefore, look at your web site as part of your 'bigger' strategic picture, i.e. to ensure the site is usable to target users wishing to achieve goals that support the site strategy.
User Centred Design (UCD) is fundamental to usable site development. However, this can mean anything from having a vague idea of a 'user' in mind through to rigorous evidence based research using real users. As research based consultants we obviously favour the latter. There are three key types of research:
But just doing the research and writing a report will often fail to bring about the 'right' change for three main reasons:
A key element of our approach is to encourage all those in an organisation who can influence the implementation of the research outcomes to attend at least some of the research and a discussion facilitated by Web Usability. This discussion facilitates the process of collaborative 'sense-making' (Weick, 1995), enabling the development team to take ownership of the research results, develop a collective articulated view of the priority issues to be addressed, and agree the appropriate actions in the context of the client's organisational environment.
Involving the client in this way is based on the theories of organisational development experts like Ed Schein (1997, 1999) and Chris Argyris (1970) who believe that the most effective way for consultants to help clients is to make the client part of the process: Most of what a consultant does in helping organisations is based on the central assumption that one can only help a human system to help itself
(Schein, 1999). Argyris (1970) identifies three basic requirements for a successful consulting project: obtaining good evidence; facilitating free and informed choice on the outcomes by the client; and facilitating internal commitment to the outcomes of the intervention. His belief is that all three of these elements need to be present in a consulting intervention - simply delivering an expert report will not bring about action.
The cooperative co-creation process helps to ensure that Web Usability delivers the appropriate solution to the client, in a way that that the client can implement, and that the client assumes ownership and only agrees to a plan that is going to be actionable within the client's resources. This bridges the 'knowing-doing' gap and minimizes the chance that the feedback will be 'filed' without action. We believe that this approach enables the delivery of actionable results, identifying quick wins and longer-term developments.
Our aim is to work co-operatively with our clients to undertake rigorous user experience research, focused on addressing the appropriate strategic and tactical questions, which will generate an achievable action plan. We see it as our role is to challenge clients' views about users and appropriate research methodologies, to ensure all projects meet our clients' objectives and provide value for money - we won't undertake a project if we disagree with the proposed approach.
Argyris C. (1970) Intervention Theory and Method: a behavioural science view. Addison-Wesley, Reading Massachusetts.
Schein, E.H. (1997) The concept of "client" from a process consultation perspective: a guide for change agents. Journal of Organizational Change Management 10, 202-300.
Schein, E.H. (1999) Process Consultation Revisited: building the helping relationship, Reading, Mass. Addison-Wesley.
Weick K.E. (1995) Sensemaking in Organisations. SAGE, California.