Forty years ago not many people would have been able to accurately predict the advancements made in technology at the turn of the century and beyond. However, one prediction that has held true (relatively) is Moore’s Law conjured up in 1965.

Moore’s Law states that technology and computing will develop at an exponential rate. That is, every 18 months or so performance of technology is double that of what it was two years ago. In essence, technological growth is continuously accelerating.

But accelerating towards what? Exponential laws have no finishing point, they merely continue to grow at an enormous rate. So is this trend really to continue at the same rate or will there one day be a plateau? You would think there would be what with a limited number of resources in the world, but then again, I continue to be amazed by the latest products to come out.

Figure 1 The exponential growth of the number of transistors in computer processors (Taken from www.intel.com)

So without an end in sight, what does all this new technology mean? Well, put simply, those of us working in the computer and technology industry will have jobs for many years to come.  There is always something to push us forward, whether it be a competitor’s latest release, or a new idea that has only just taken off (3D television comes to mind). For us at UsabilityOne it means we will always have something else to look forward to testing, and for those of you who are thinking of updating websites, softwares or other technologies, it means you have a range of options that are always changing and always improving. So which one do you choose?

Although it can sometimes be overwhelming to try to take in the seemingly limitless amount of technology around us, we should not despair but should embrace. The most important thing we should take away from Moore’s Law is that we should always be on our toes, because as the nature of the law suggests, now more than ever before there will be new gadgets and gizmos coming at us.

Now, you may be sitting there thinking “I have all these proposals on my desk for website improvements and new designs but how do I know what is going to work best”. Of course there is no one simple answer – it depends on your business, your goals, your budget, etc. One tip we can give though is to work from the top down: What does your company do? What are your goals? It is crucial to have a clear sense of what you are aiming to achieve by implementing a new design technology. A couple of examples are listed below:

• A company wants to increase its sales so it implements an eCommerce feature on its site
• A university wants to improve its student interaction with its online learning facilities so they aim to implement a more interactive website using javascript and videos

To make the most of the myriad of available technologies, first decide what you want and/or need, then conjure a plan to best implement what is available. Identify the goals and objectives of the business, any boundaries which impact on your decision, and assess your timelines to choose a suitable direction in which to proceed. You may not need the best technology, you just need the best technology for you.

Often, UsabilityOne work with clients who are constrained in the changes that they can make to their websites by design rules enforced by an international parent company. Employing a consistent design can be greatly beneficial in building a strong international brand, however, in some cases these constraints can negatively impact the user experience of a local website. When constrained by these types of design rules there are several points to keep in mind:

1. Use language that is appropriate for the local audience. It is important that the website speaks to the user in familiar language and not only in terms of product names but throughout detailed content such as terms and conditions.
2. Use images that are appropriate for the local audience. The imagery used is an important branding tool,  used to differentiate categories of content and often are navigable items. The use of inappropriate imagery can be disconcerting and create mistrust. It is important that the images used depict scenes that will resonate with the local audience.
3. Ensure that the iconography and symbols used, are appropriate for the local audience. Icons and symbols that are instantly recognisable to a European audience may not be relevant to an Australian one.
4. Where strict adherence to international guidelines creates serious difficulties for your users, be prepared to bend the rules to ensure the best user experience is provided.

For some further reading, see Christian Arno’s post on Inspect Element.

The registration process was going smoothly. I just had to enter a password and I would be able to download my last superannuation statement. I entered the same combination of letters and numbers that I always use for my passwords and hit ‘Submit’. Suddenly, red text flashed up and informed me this password was invalid as I needed to include a symbol. Was I meant to be psychic? With a twinge of annoyance, I added a symbol and again clicked ‘Submit’. No luck. This time it told me I had to include two symbols. With gritted teeth, I persevered. After three more attempts, I ended up with a password that vaguely resembled “saRA80#!”.

Although I had no hope of remembering this password, I didn’t bother writing it down because I had already decided out of sheer annoyance to never to use this online process again. Why was my generic password sufficient for online banking but not for this relatively risk-free task? And come to think of it, why should they get to dictate how strong my password should be? As a customer, this should be my prerogative!

Requiring complex password policies not only frustrates customers; it results in higher costs for organisations. Customers will generally either stop using the online process and revert back to more costly customer service processes (increasing call centre demand with their multitude of forgotten password requests) or  write the password down, thereby defeating the purpose of this security measure altogether.

When security policies have such a negative impact on usability, it’s time to rethink priorities. What’s more important to your customers: an impenetrable password or easy access? Incorporate this into your research to find out, or let the user decide for themselves.

There are some serious coffee drinkers in the UsabilityOne office, and a number of us are fairly fussy about our coffees too. So when our new coffee machine arrived we were keen to fiddle with the settings and configure it just the way we like it.

Several weeks later, we still haven’t worked out how to do that. We do know how to change the language on the menu though.

When designing an interface, design for the most likely and frequent activities your users will undertake.

Mapping applications are a great way to present your contact information, particularly when your company has multiple stores or locations. However, if executed poorly they can actually add to the difficulty of you customers finding your stores. The following are some important design considerations when presenting information with a map.

Take care when starting on a map at the country level as the only way to find locations. Maps like the one below typically rely on visitors zooming and panning controls of that particular mapping application, something not all users are familiar with. Forcing visitors to use the map to drill-down from a country to suburb level can also be time consuming and error prone. When testing the example below, participants who were experienced with using online maps took an average of 19 mouse movements to locate the South Melbourne store.

Users like to be given options so they can choose a means of interaction that suits them best. Some users prefer drilling down using a map, others do not. Displaying alternatives to the map, such as a postcode search or state selection, allows users to choose the option that best meets their needs.

Below is a good example where users are given flexible choices in locating their nearest store. They can enter their postcode for an exact match, drill-down by state or interact with the map. The state selector still gives users an overview of locations, but eliminates extensive zooming on the map from the country level.

As with all features of your site; design your mapping feature so that the user can use it as they wish. Offering multiple ways to interact with the feature means users will be able to find one that best suits them.

The process was slower than I had expected it to be, but the real crunch came at the point of making a payment; my credit card signature needed to be assessed by the self-serve assistant.  It was apparent after a moment or two of scratching my head and looking about like a idiot, that it was I (rather than the system) that was required to notify an assistant that they were required to complete this transaction.  As the assistant was busy attending other customers I had to wait, for what seemed a long time, for my turn.  This seemed completely counter-productive.

I have used my credit card in a number of other comparative self-serve systems recently including car park and public transport ticketing machines.  In these instances signature validation was not required.  Of course, Woollies level of security with signature assessment is a notch above these systems, however, this experience for a first time user will undoubtably put many off from self-serving again.

When you consider how vital credit cards are for self-serve transitional purchasing, surely some revision is required to aid consumer adoption of the service?  I would encourage Woollies to consider one of the following:

FAQs are an old feature of the web, that have somehow outlasted most of their peers. Whilst we have (mostly) done away with animated GIFs, embedded MIDIs and scrolling text, the FAQ section is still appearing on sites 26 years after they were first introduced.

Whilst age alone is not a reason to stop using something, there are many reasons that implementing FAQs on your site is detrimental to the user experience.

Frequently asked? Really?

Do you have an FAQ section on your site? If so, have a look at what is listed there right now.

Are these really the most frequently asked questions from your users? How did you collect them? How many times do your users ask a question before you classify it as ‘frequently asked’?

In our experience, FAQs are actually not Frequently Asked Questions. Instead, FAQs are used for a number of different purposes. Often sites use FAQs as somewhere to put the questions they want their users to ask. Other times it is a place for information architects to put any content that didn’t fit anywhere else on the site. Neither benefits users.

If the content is something that you want users to see, don’t wait for them to go looking for it. It is a big risk to put any important information under an FAQ label, as many user will never look there, preferring instead to look under more descriptive labels.

If the content you are placing within FAQ is content that didn’t have a home elsewhere, perhaps you need to question its place on the website at all. All site content should be developed around the goal of answering users questions before they knew they had something to ask. If any content does not fit into this process, then what purpose is it serving. Anything important enough to put on the site should be important enough to have its own place on the site.

Why do I have to ask you?

So perhaps the content in your FAQ is actually a list of frequent questions from your customers. The next question you have to ask yourself is: why are they asking?

Imagine you run a corner store. If every second customer asked you where the butter was, would you not move the butter to somewhere easier to find?

Or if you ran a cafe and customers frequently asked whether you had soy milk. Would you add soy milk to your menu?

Websites are not different. If you really are receiving frequent questions from your users, something is wrong. When designing a site structure and content, the focus should be on answering users’ questions before they knew they had something to ask. Imagine, for every user who bothered to look up your contact details and get in touch to ask something, many more would have taken the easier route of just going to your competitor.

FAQ. The internet equivalent of a lean-to

During user testing, we recieve constant feedback from users about their thoughts on FAQ. Many refuse to use them, citing past experiences of seeing a page of unrelated, unuseful information. Others prefer to follow more descriptive links and labels, thinking that the site design should put them on the right path. Some users, and a larger group than you may expect, simpy have no idea what FAQs are; it’s not uncommon to hear users say “Facks? What’s that?”.

Regardless of whether they are used or not, FAQs always have the look of tacked on content. Something that wasn’t part of the original design. User either choose to avoid them, sticking instead to the more polished original structure, or venture in and find themselves stepping on a rusty nail or falling through a broken floorboard.

So rather than seeing FAQs as somewhere to put questions and answer, try viewing your entire site as frequently answering questions.