DBR port folio #3

The labels for the web sites are going to be designed using several methods. First of all some labels are defined using conten authors’s knowledge of the content that the web site is going to contain. According to Morville & Rosenfeld this method is useful for finding candidates for labels but not the final labels. This I because the content authors are professional indexers and don’t necessarily speak the language of the user (2007, p. 105). The labels defined by the content authors are tested with users by using an open card sorting as described earlier. The data from the card sorting are analysed and held together with log data from the former web site. More specifically the log data are analysed using Search Log Analysis (SLA) following recommendations from the article by Jansen, Understanding User – Web interaction via Web Analytics (2009). SLA has a grounded theory approach where theories are grounded in observations from the real world rather than hypotheses. This means that the method has an inductive approach as well as the DBR method (p. 65). Using the knowledge from these three methods I as a designer define the final labels in collaboration with the content author.

When the web site is launched and has been running for about a month it is possible to test whether the instructional goals has been fulfilled. As described earlier the instructional goals are: 1) the users should be able to find information that they are looking for and 2) be inspired to explore the web site and find additional information of interest. Both goals should be fulfilled leaving the user with a feeling of having had a good experience where their individual wishes have been taken into consideration.

A useful method for doing this is web analysis. When doing a web analysis Jansen is describing several metrics (2009). There is a lot of useful and interesting metrics that directly or indirectly tell something about goal 1) and 2). In the following I am going to describe some of the most obvious ones.

Keyword Analysis tells us what keywords the user are searching for when finding our site. By looking at these keywords in relation to the labels it tells us whether we have succeeded in speaking the language of the users when designing the labels. Top pages is a metric that shows which pages of the web sites that receive the most traffic. By looking at this it is possible to analyse whether the pages has been sorted so that the post popular pages are the ones that are easiest to access. It is also possible to get an indication of whether we have succeeded in designing the page so that it suits the different target groups. E.g. if the main menu Handikapvenlig has very low traffic compared to the other main menus maybe the disabled people doesn’t feel that the web site design suits them. Visit length is an important metric as it tells us whether the user is spending time at the web sites or just entering and leaving right away. This information can be combined with another metric Referring URL which tells what sites have directed traffic to the web site. My combining these two set of data it is possible to see which sites that are referring the most time-consuming users. E.g. does a site for disabled users refer a lot of users that spend less than five seconds on the site? If this is the case, it could also be an indication that the design is not appropriate for the segment of disabled people. The last metric that I am going to mention is Visitor path. This gives us information about how the user navigates through the web site and can give an indication of whether the user finds what he/she is looking for.

Even though web analysis provides some valuable data it has some shortcomings. Jansen stresses that  “These shortcomings include failing to understand the affective, situational, and cognitive aspects of system users.” (2009, p. 51). He therefore recommends that the method is combined with other data such ad surveys and laboratory studies (ibid. p. 51ff). In the case of testing whether the instructional goals of the web site for Feriecenter Slettestrand has been fulfilled it would be ideal to combine the web analysis with a usability test followed by an interview or a post questionnaire. 

This post is going to be updated with reflections upon the interpretive framework used in this design...

DBR port folio #2

According to Cobb & Gravemeijer some specific issues should be clarified during the preparation phase. These issues include clarifying the instructional goals and documenting the instructional starting points. This includes describing a envisioned learning trajectory and finally, setting a theoretical framework (p. 69). In the following I am going to reflect upon these issues in relation to the design of the web site focussing on designing labels for different target groups.

The instructional goals of the design can be divided into two categories: 1) the users should be able to find information that they are looking for and 2) be inspired to explore the web site and find additional information of interest. Both goals should be fulfilled leaving the user with a feeling of having had a good experience where their individual wishes have been taken into consideration.

The instructional starting point is documented by looking at the different users and their knowledge about the company so far. In relation to this Cobb & Gravemeijer stress that you shouldn’t document the level of reasoning typical of e.g. students at a specific age, but the consequences of their prior instructional histories (p. 69). In relation to the users of the web site I interpret this as not looking at the characteristics of the specific target group, but at their existing knowledge of the company or of the concepts that we want to present at the web site e.g. “adventure holidays”.

The company already has experience with the target groups and their information needs and a lot of the content from the old web site is going to be transferred to the new one – just organized and to some degree labelled differently. The target groups also already have knowledge about the services and experiences that the company offers. But a lot of these offers are not very visible at the old web site and because of that, the marketing has so far been characterized by passing from mouth to mouth. The challenges in building upon the old design are therefore to organize and label the offers that the users maybe already know of. And when doing so keeping the soul and the personal touch that has very much characterized the (missing) marketing strategy so far.

This brings me further on to the envisioned learning trajectory because when designing the web site, it is important to make sure that the users feel that there is a person in the other end so to speak. Maybe the users have been used to just calling the staff in the reception when they needed information. With a well structured and information rich web site this call should be unnecessary. But this also requires that the web site has this personal touch and individual offers for the specific target group. More specifically the design is a complete re-design of the old web site using some of the content from the old one. Focussing on the labelling of the web site the new labels should ensure that the content of the web site is labelled with the user’s language.

The theoretical framework used in the design process will be theories about information architecture. More specifically Morville & Rosenfeld’s Information architecture for the World Wide Web. Hereunder theories about labelling and organising content. The method used for collecting data, card sorting, is also a method described by Morville & Rosenfeld. Besides that the foundation of my way of executing the method are also inspired by articles found on the Internet – for instance: http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/card_sorting_a_definitive_guide

This article describes card sorting in at very concrete and “how-to” way. There are several ways of analysing data from card sorting and I have not decided on how to do it yet.

The chosen way of approaching this design is influenced by my professional background as I spend last semester on information architecture and got inspired by the methods and theories that I was introduced to. I have not worked specifically with labelling content before by I find it very relevant and essential when it some to user-centered design. 

Design-based Research Method (DBR) port folio #1

During the course in Design-based Research Method (DBR) I am going to write a port folio where I reflect upon theories and methods used in relation to this design-method. This will be done in relation to tasks that I am working with during my internship.

The design that I am going to focus on during this course is the design of the web site. The problem that I am working with deals with the challenge of designing a single web site that appeals to various and very different target groups. These target groups are 1) mountainbikers and adventure holidays in general, 2) companies (course attendants), 3) families/normal guests and 4) disabled people (also using many of the offers available for the other target groups). The different target groups work very well together in praxis, but when it comes to marketing they have different information needs. The goal is to make the site appear as a whole where all the target groups are equally important. The problem is also defined by the fact that web communication and digital marketing has not been prioritized in the company so far. But the younger generation is about to take over and a graphic designer has been hired to change the entire appearance of the company: web site, brochures signs, merchandise and so forth.

In the design of the web site I am going to focus mainly on labelling in regards to the target groups. So far I am planning to use card sorting as at method to get a better understanding of the language that the different target groups are using. I am also going to focus on search optimization, which is also related to labelling, categorizing and defining headlines. 

In their article Design methodology and design practice (1999) Löwgren & Stolterman recommend to take a closer look at the problem definition before the design phase starts by using the why why why?-method. By using this method the design possibilities are broadened and more aspects are brought in to the design phase. Using the why why why?-method in relation to designing new labels for the web site could create the following why-chain:

Why testing the labels by using card sorting?

To get a better understanding of the user’s language

Why? 

To make the language of the web site appeal to them

Why?

To make it easier for them to navigate on the web site

Why?

To make it easy for them to find the relevant content?

Why?

To make them wanting to visit the place.