Archive for 'user experience'

Customer Vs User Experience

Since it came up in discussion at the recent London UX Bookclub where we were discussing Selling Usability: User Experience Infiltration Tactics by John S. Rhodes, I have been thinking about whether it would be useful to start calling myself a Customer Experience Consultant rather than a User Experience Consultant.

In the book, the author advocates using the term ‘customer’ rather than ‘user’ because your business colleagues will both understand & value a ‘customer’ more than a ‘user’. This is not really the reason that I would consider the change, though. It’s actually more about me and the kind of work I do.

The main reason that I would consider changing to a Customer Experience Consultant is because I’ve found that more and more the scope of ‘experience’ that I need to access and can have an impact on goes well beyond the website. Despite the fact that I have much more expertise in engagement with customers in digitally interactive environments, more and more the holistic experience that the customer has with the business I am designing for is relevant and important in the strategy, recommendations and ultimately design work that we do.

By defining myself as a ‘User Experience Consultant’ I am effectively signaling that my scope, interest and usefulness starts and ends at the digital border (however fuzzy that border may be becoming these days). I don’t think this does anyone any favours.

I’m also on the record as not being a huge fan of the term ‘user’, because there are so many more descriptive and humane alternatives. It would be a nice fringe benefit for me to get the word ‘user’ out of my job title.

Of course, there are downsides to this. ‘Customer’ is also a fairly limiting term, it implies consumer focus, it doesn’t allow for differentiation between the person who is ‘buying’ the product/service and the ultimate end user (who can sometimes be very different people!), and it is often too generic and not descriptive enough for companies we engage with, where ‘customers’ are called ‘members’, or ‘readers’, or ’subscribers’ for example. (Were I working inhouse I could tailor my title to suit, but as a freelancer this is more challenging!).

Another downside of this change is that it creates yet another definition for us (the IA/UX/IxD and however else we already define ourselves) to argue over, it is another title for clients to learn, and it doesn’t give any clues around ‘usability’ which is still something that a lot of clients look for when they are really looking for user experience (but don’t yet know it exists).

I’m not really one for labouring over definitions of what we do, and I don’t think I’m going to go out and change my business cards tomorrow, but it’s something I’ll be mulling over for a while I think. My gut feel is that there is something important here, but also a bunch of problems. I’d be very interested to get your thoughts on this as well, included suggested alternatives.

‘But is expanded choice good or bad?’, from The Paradox of Choice by Barry Schwartz

I use this study as an example with *so* many projects these days that I thought it might be useful to share the original source with you here. Schwartz is sharing the findings from a series of studies titled ‘When Choice is Demotivating’…

One study was set in a gourmet food store in an upscale community where, on weekends, the owners commonly set up sample tables of new items. When researchers set up a display featuring a line of exotic, high-quality james, customers who came by could taste samples, and they were given a coupon for a dollar off if they bought a jar.

In one condition of the study, 6 varieties of the jam were available for tasting. In another, 24 varieties were available. In either case, the entire set of 24 varieties was available for purchase.

The large array of jams attracted more people to the table than the small array, thought in both cases people tasted about the same amount of jams on average.

When it came to buying however, a huge difference became evident.

Thirty percent of the people exposed to the small array of jams actually bought a jar; only 3% of those exposed to the large array of jams did so

For the detailed answer(s) to ‘why is it so’ you should buy the book (and I strongly recommend it, as I said, I reference it *all* the time). For the short answer – people don’t do well with a lot of choice. Be a good designer and help them by guiding them towards good decisions, even if not the perfect one. A decision made can be remade and refined, which is much better than not seeing your customers for dust.

Drupal7UX – How does Drupal talk? (on brand, personality and tone of voice)

So, there we were, just starting to work through the workflow for Drupal – we got as far as the login screen when we thought ‘let’s write something nice on this screen’, and, pen poised… we were stumped.

We wanted to write something friendly like Moo would. Or Innocent drinks. We wanted to make it visually interesting like Vimeo do. Or Picnik. But… is that Drupal?

We realised we have no idea what Drupal’s personality is. And it would make our lives much easier, and help make a much better User Experience, if we can work out what it is.

Isn’t this completely touchy-feely and a waste of time?

Well no. One way or another, words will go on screens and a personality will emerge. Or, worse still, a few personalities, or a few dozen personalities. Much better that we spend a little time and give a little thought and see what we can come up with.

So, here’s where you come in:

The Personality Exercise:

Take a minute to v quickly answer the following five questions. Go with your gut reaction, don’t over think it. Try not to read everyone elses’ responses first. Don’t worry about being silly! (This is a kind of silly exercise after all, albeit useful)

  • If Drupal was an animal, what would it be?
  • If Drupal was a celebrity, who would it be?
  • If Drupal was a car, what would it be?
  • If Drupal was a profession/career what would it be?

So your answers might look something like this:

Drupal would be a squirrel/Paris Hilton/SS Commodore Ute/Teacher*

Get to it – what do you reckon?

*the opinions expressed above are not those of the author. Except for the SS Commodore one.

DRAFT: Drupal.org Experience Strategy

The redesign project for Drupal.org will be guided by an experience strategy that will inform our decision making in all aspects of the redesign and which will, we hope, be able to be used as ‘a star to sail our ship by’ (as Jesse James Garrett would say) – as a clear objective to design towards.

What is an experience strategy?

An experience strategy is a clearly articulated touchstone that influences all of the decisions made about technology, features, and interfaces. Whether in the initial design process or as the product develops, such a strategy guides the team and ensures that the customer’s perspective is maintained throughout.

- Subject to Change, Creating great products and services for an uncertain world, Merholz, Schauer, Verba & Wilkens (Adaptive Path) 2008

This is a good example of an experience strategy:

Google Calendar Experience Strategy

How it worked out for Google Calendar:

Google Calendar Stats

(hat tip to Peter Merholz for images)

Experience Strategy for Drupal.org (Work in Progress!)

  • Drupal.org is for anyone who is interested in Drupal (not just developers!)
  • Drupal.org will make building a site you’re proud of as painfree as possible (from deciding to use Drupal through design, development and deployment)
  • Drupal.org is the home of the Drupal community.
  • UPDATED: Drupal.org is the project management and release tool for the Drupal software (thanks Robert Douglass)
  • Drupal.org will support people and companies from their initial experience of the product and community and as they continue to increase their knowledge and experience with Drupal and become more active in the Drupal community.
  • Is a showcase for what can be done with Drupal

What we believe:

  1. Drupal.org is as much (if not more) a social site than a content site
  2. The Drupal Community is as important (if not more) than the Drupal Product
  3. The Drupal product is a market leading CMS solution
  4. The ‘end point’ (goal) is not getting more people to download Drupal, the end point is to get more people to have a Drupal site running that they love (with as little pain as possible)
  5. Anyone can find out what they need to know about Drupal on or from Drupal.org
  6. We must flatten the learning curve – anyone can learn as much as they want to learn about Drupal
  7. Modules are easy to find and evaluate and are an obvious asset to Drupal
  8. People can see/learn and align themselves with Drupal’s (and Open Source) values…
  9. Drupal.org is a living organism and, with the help of the community, will continue to grow and improve.

How this plays out

Drupal Family

Drupal.org has two equally important audiences – people who are new to Drupal and people who are already part of the community.

Drupal.org needs to inspire and educate people who are new to Drupal – the end goal being that they become active participants in the Drupal community who have a Drupal site (or sites!) up and running that they are proud of.

Note: getting people to ‘download’ Drupal is not the end point. If anything, it’s just the beginning.

Drupal.org also needs to be a comfortable and safe home for members of the Drupal community, wherein participants are both able to develop their own skills and experience (grow up), as well as help others on their developmental path (help grow others up).

Things we need to do:

  • be nicer to ‘outsiders’ (non drupal, non developer)
  • encourage people to engage with the community (starting by showing them that it exists!)
  • work at flattening the learning curve
  • get all the right content on the site and keeping it updated
  • show the community in action (without ruining it)
  • make things findable (IA)
  • communicate drupal/opensource values
  • help Drupal users kick ass

Getting past the brick wall

Brick Wall

As one person I’ve interviewed described it: ‘I can get Drupal downloaded and installed and get an ugly blog that I don’t want, but then I hit a brick wall’ – Drupal.org’s job is to help people over that brick wall – to help them get the site they want using Drupal.

Helping Users Kick Ass

Bert Boerland pointed me to this great diagram that Dries posted a while back (inspired by Kathy Sierra) which I think really nails a big part of our strategy.

Drupal Users Kick Ass

So, that’s what we’re thinking.

Over to you now. What do you think of this as an Experience Strategy for Drupal?
Questions? Comments? Suggestions?

(Remember, there are lots of ways you can point us to things you think are important for d.org)

The general public myth (or, the whole world is not your user)

This feels like pretty basic stuff to me, but it’s incredibly important not to overlook the basics, so let’s talk about it.

I was prompted to think about this again when taking questions after talking at the GUADEC conference in Istanbul recently and someone asked about how you design a good experience when you’re designing for everyone – technical experts and newbies, people in countries around the world.

Surprisingly, or perhaps not, the answer is quite simple.

Just don’t. Don’t design for everyone. It’s impossible.

All you end up doing is designing something that makes everyone unhappy. Who needs that.

But why does this happen? I call it the myth of the general public.

So, there is this idea of the general public … but have you ever met *anyone* who considers themselves to be ‘the general public’? I don’t think I have.

This became particularly clear to me on a research project I was working on a few months ago where every single person I met told me about how unique their particular area of interest was, and how my client, a museum, only catered to ‘the general public’. The people I talked with complained that museums have ‘dumbed down’ so much because they are talking to ‘the general public’ and said that this made museums less useful for them to interact with, because of their specific interest and expertise.

This is what happens when we design for everyone – we ‘dumb things down’ to the point that they become useless or inefficient for most people. How does this happen? Well, because although everyone in the world might want to use your product or your website, they’ll want to use it in a very particular way.

In order to design your product well for them, you need to understand how they’ll use it and design to support that behaviour.

But wait! That means that all of a sudden the whole world is not my target audience! Horror!

Never fear, all is not lost. Despite the fact that you’ve design the experience beautifully for the specific audience (or audiences, you are allowed more than one!) that you have selected and understand well, other users will insist on using your product/service/website even if they are not in your target audience. In fact, the glowing recommendations that your audiences will provide will encourage others to use your service.

Yes, some audiences may have to work a little harder than others, but some audiences are better equipped to work harder. And at least the audience you *really* care about is being well looked after.

Josh Porter in his recently published book ‘designing for the social web’ (which I recommend that you read because if you don’t know everything that’s in his book, you should) makes this argument a lot more succintly than I have here so I’m going to quote you a slab:

Get as Specific As You Can

Question: Who is the audience you’re targeting?

Wrong Answer: Well, anyone really. Our application has a very broad set of uses.

Right Answer: People who do this very specific activity…

This is a discussion I had with an entrepreneur who was starting a new software company. He was targeting  his software at what he called ‘the general public’. And on the surface of things, this makes sense. He didn’t want to limit his softward by saying that it was for a particular audience, as that would make it harder to swim with the current if that strategy didn’t work out. (Investors like flexibility too). For whatever reason, his software ended up being for all audiences.

In practice, however, software built for the masses rarely works. Even in the cases where software has gone to the masses, it started off in a nice and then grew outward, as people realized that it doesn’t have to be used in any one way.

Targeting a broad audience is precisely the wrong approach. The more specific you can get about how to use your application, the more your software will resonate with your potential audience.

Del.icio.us, the social bookmarking tool, is about as broad a tool as you can get. Anybody who wants to bookmark web pages can use it. That is to say that their potential audience is everyone on the web.

Byut Del.icio.us doesn’t fall into the trap of designing for everyone. They do a good job providing specific use cases.

And, if your software is flexible and can be used by many different types of audiences, choose a few profitable/big ones and be specific about each. The more specific you get, the better.

See. What Josh said. The general public is a myth. Don’t design for it.

Heathrow Terminal 5 – Another rant about respecting conventions

This seems to be my theme at the moment. Respect conventions.

Respecting conventions doesn’t mean that you have to slavishly follow them, that would be boring and unnecessary, BUT if you *are* going to break with convention then make sure it is very well sign posted, otherwise people will make mistakes.

I give you terminal 5 at Heathrow. 

Firstly a quick question – how long before an international flight do you need to get to the airport? 

The vast majority of people would say that the conservative answer is 2 hours but they don’t usually give it quite that long. 

Another quick question – how long before a flight to a European destination do you need to get to Heathrow? 

Again, most people will give you an answer around the 1 hour mark.

Now… you may already know this, but if you want to fly from London Heathrow Terminal 5 to Istanbul in Turkey (as I did the other day – yes the weather is beautiful, thank you!) they want you to get there not one, not two, but THREE hours before your flight.

We arrived an hour before our flight the other day and were severely reprimanded and had to be given ‘permission’ to proceed from the check in desk to try to get our flight. Fortunately (for us) the entire security software system crashed and massive queues meant that most flights (including ours) were delayed and we made our flight with plenty of time to spare.

So, given that getting to the airport 3 hours before the flight is apparently a big deal for BA, and given that T5 is relatively new, and given that in all my years of international flights, I’ve never been expected to be anywhere any earlier than 2 hours before the flight, you might expect that BA would make a big song and dance about this 3 hour requirement.

You’d be wrong.

They *do* make a big song and dance about the fact that we were leaving from T5 and that T5 is a new terminal. I definitely knew that because they advised me at almost every interaction I had with them regarding this flight (and these days there are quite a few touchpoints between purchasing the ticket and boarding the flight). But what did they tell me about time?

This is an excerpt from the email they sent me one week before the flight, specifically to help me to prepare for my upcoming flight:

IMPORTANT: For flights departing from Terminal 5, you must pass through ticket presentation and security at least 35 minutes before the flight departs. For other important information about passport, visa and UK domestic flight security checks, please visit ba.com/t5information.

So, honestly. Do they *really* expect me to turn up 3 hours early when this is the information they give me.

Perhaps they do, but I can tell you that a good portion of the passengers for the Istanbul flight were stuck in the security queue with us, having arrived much later than 3 hours before. And I doubt that it was because they were being naughty travelers, or that they liked the adrenaline rush of almost missing a flight. They just assumed, as we did, that turning up an hour before a flight from London to somewhere in Europe was the right thing to do, because that’s what we’ve done many times before.

This is what we do as humans. We make assumptions based on past experience and if we think we *know* how something works we don’t bother investigating it in detail, because we could spend our time and energy investigating things we think are new and interesting.

If people are making assumptions about your product, service or interface design and you’re *not* following the conventional approach, make sure whatever you’re doing differently is very clearly signposted. And then signposted again. Otherwise mistakes will happen.

And a customer who is making a mistake is very rarely a happy customer.

(disclaimer – yes, yes. I know that technical Istanbul is both European and Asian, doesn’t really make a difference to the discussion tho’)

Thoughtless design is going to cost me money… (or, why you shouldn’t ignore conventions)

BT Aqua Phone

Here is a new phone we got the other day. It’s our landline phone. Pretty cute huh? It’s called the Aqua by BT. Don’t buy it. I paid about £100 for a set of these phones. They are going to cost me a lot more than that in no time.

Here’s the thing. How do you end a call on a slide phone (which is what these are)? Simple – you close the slide, right? Well – yes, on every other slide phone that I’ve ever encountered, but not on this phone. Closing the slide does nothing… except closing the slide. So, when I went to make a call last night I discovered that, in fact, a call was still in progress. A call to a mobile phone, that had been connected for 8 hours. Ouch. I am *dreading* seeing this months phone bill because this isn’t the first time we’ve made this mistake. Although, this is probably the worst example.

We keep making this mistake because the slide-to-end-call convention is such a strong part of our model of how a slide phone works. We will keep making this mistake – despite the fact that we will be punished, seriously, by our telco.

As cute as these phones are, they’re going to be returned very soon because the experience of using them is so broken.

Moral to the story – if you’re designing something that has existing conventions associated with it – ignore them at your peril. Otherwise you’ll end up designing something that sucks as badly as this phone. And we don’t want that, do we.

End of rant.

‘I can’t work this!’ – iPhone’s cameo in Sex In The City Movie

Yes, I’ve seen the Sex In the City Movie, I’ll admit it. Either the rest of the UX community hasn’t seen it yet or we’re all just ignoring the fabulous user experience moment that Carrie has with the iPhone. For those who haven’t seen it, she is handed the iPhone (not hers) at a time when she urgently needs to make a phone call. She looks at it briefly, pronounces ‘I can’t work this’ and asks for a proper phone.

Unsurprisingly, Gizmodo reported it this way: ‘Confirmed: Carrie Bradshaw is too stupid to work a iPhone‘. Very helpful.

Personally, this was my favourite part of the whole movie (which says more about the movie than it does this particular moment). I loved the fierceness of her reaction to the unfamiliar interface.

It reminded me again that those of us who are ‘into’ interface design are really a fairly small group and how important it is for us to remember that the vast majority of people who encounter our interfaces do so on the way to achieving a task – sometimes one that is urgent and very important to them.

The people who encounter our interfaces in that kind of moment are not going to find them interesting, but an obstacle. And that they won’t take the time to ‘explore’ and ‘enjoy’ and ‘learn’ our amazing interface design.

It would be easy to say that SJP’s encounter with the iPhone showed that it lacked ‘usability’, but in fact it is probably more instructive as to the importance of evaluating usability over a longer term than just a one hour session in a usability lab. As I’ve said in the past, if something like the iPod, and no doubt the iPhone had been ‘usability tested’ using the traditional methods, they no doubt would have ‘failed’ and the world would be poorer for it.

All these things I had to think about because the movie was so disappointing… (speaking of bad UX).

Tone of voice matters (show some respect)

I had to share with you this particularly appalling piece of email marketing that hit my inbox the other day. The back story is that somehow I had come across a £25 voucher to use at VirginWines – I went and had a look at the site to see if it was something I was interested in – after all, £25 worth of wine for free is usually something I was interested in. Before I realised that I would have to spend well in excess of my £25 voucher to be able to buy any wine on this site, I registered to ‘redeem my voucher’ and gave them my email address.

Several weeks later, this arrives:

Dear Leisa

I am not a sensitive person by nature, but I have to say that I am feeling a little hurt. We’ve invited you into our Club, but you’ve clearly decided not to.

So, as a one-off attempt at sheer bribery, I‘m offering you your first, trial Club case HALF PRICE at just £47.88 (that‘s a ridiculously low £3.99 a bottle!). Plus, two FREE gifts, worth £30. That‘s an overall saving of nearly £80.

Sound good? Then click here to claim your HALF PRICE case and FREE GIFTS.

But you‘re probably not ready to join yet. You‘re probably thinking…

I can buy the wines anywhere.

Well you can‘t actually. The boutique wines we reserve for our Club Members never appear in the supermarket. And they are always offered to members at a lower price than non-members get them for.

It‘s just like one of those ghastly book clubs.

Er…sorry, not correct on this one either. Quite simply, you have no obligation to take any wine you don‘t want. You don‘t even have to pay us for any wines that don‘t blow your socks right off.

I‘m not the joining type.

If we explained that the reason we have a Club in the first place is because 40,000 people can buy better than 1, perhaps you‘d change your mind? If you join us, 40,001 people will buy better than 40,000.

Or maybe you‘ve just not got around to it. Which is fine. People who buy wine by the case tend to be busy.

So what would be a good reason?

Here‘s one good reason to test us out right now. We‘re keen to recruit new Members. So, for one last time I‘m offering you your first, trial Club case HALF PRICE at just £47.88

Take our HALF PRICE case NOW, and you‘ll receive a complimentary pair of beautiful Dartington Wine Glasses, completely FREE. Plus, a FREE professional lever corkscrew, worth £20.

Still not sure?

What is the worst thing that can happen? If you don‘t like the wines, I promise to refund you instantly, without any fuss whatsoever. If you agree that these wines are a big step better than you can get in the supermarket, you can look forward to a lifetime of feeling superior to non-members.

So why don‘t you join us now and find out what it‘s all about for yourself? Not next week, but right now.

Cheers

Rowan Gormley
Founder, Virgin Wines
www.virginwines.com/reasons3

0870 050 0305

The insight that the tone taken in this email gives me to this brand is profound, and frankly, I don’t want anything to do with a company who has this kind of attitude in their customer communications.

We’ve spoken before about positive ways to handle ‘abandonment’ – well, here is the flipside, a combination of guilt-tripping (‘I am not a sensitive person by nature, but I have to say that I am feeling a little hurt. We’ve invited you into our Club, but you’ve clearly decided not to’), cynicism (‘So, as a one-off attempt at sheer bribery…’) and smart talk (‘Er…sorry, not correct on this one either…’). Yes, consumers today are media literate and this level of ‘openness’ could potentially work well, but be nice about it. I’m supposed to enjoy buying wine, with this email VirginWine have put me right off my drink!

Take care with your tone – and of course, this applies to any kind of copy that you’re writing. And know that only *very* few brands can be anything but nice to their customer.

Understanding abandonment – how thoughtful ‘checkout’ design pays dividends

I’ve been doing a lot of my shopping online recently and it has gotten me thinking about the opportunities for designing ecommerce systems that we often don’t bother spending time on. We just plug in ‘off the shelf’ solutions and this means that all too often we’re not thinking about ways that we can design the shopping experience so that it better supports the way that people actually want to shop online.

It seems from many online shopping experiences that there is an assumption that the online shopping experience has just a few simple steps:

  1. locate the product you want to purchase
  2. select that product (put it in the basket)
  3. pay for the product and arrange delivery

Although, for some people some of the time, the process is this simple, very often there are much more complex pathways that people take when shopping – both online and offline. Unfortunately, very often the design of online systems doesn’t support this additional complexity. Very often just a few small changes would make a great difference.

Here are just a few examples I’ve come across lately.

Scenario: I’m in the market, but I’m not quite ready to buy.
Design requirement: Save shopping basket

There are many reasons why people don’t quite complete a transaction, but one that I find is really very common is this one… I’m just not quite ready to buy yet. It could be that it’s a large transaction and I need to be completely certain that I want to buy it, it could be that I’m comparing your product or price or service with your competitors, but quite often I’ll do the first and second stages of the shopping process – locating products and putting them in the trolley – but not be quite ready to give you my payment details.

It is amazing how many e-commerce systems ‘forget’ all the shopping I’ve done – some apparently deliberately, with time out error messages to boot. This means that, when I come back with my credit card out and ready to shop, I have to start all over again – finding the products and putting them back into the basket. Depending on the size of your product range and the state of your information architecture, this can sometimes be a particularly daunting task – daunting enough to perhaps result in abandonment.
Where is the value to anyone in ‘forgetting’ what’s in my basket? Who benefits from this? Certainly not your customer who has to go to extra effort when they return to make their purchase, and not the business either, who will almost certainly be losing revenue as a result of this design decision.

Amazon (predictably) are a great example of how not to forget what’s gone in the basket – their ‘buy later’ functionality means that I can even choose to not buy something that is in the basket and *still* not have it deleted or forgotten. Amazon is an excellent example of how to manage this ‘remembering’ – but many small ecommerce sites have similar functionality – you don’t have to be Amazon to be able to do this.

It will take a little more technical effort and design work to manage this ’saving’ of the basket but it should definitely be the default for all e-commerce systems.

Scenario: I’m in the market, but I’m not quite motivated to buy.
Design requirement: Follow up and provide incentive

I also call this one ‘The Almost Impulse Buy’ – again, the customer goes almost all the way through the purchasing process but pulls out just as it comes time to commit with their wallet. There are a lot of reasons why people don’t quite go through with the purchase, but three surprisingly common ones are:

  1. they simply forget! – surprisingly, buying your products is not the only and most important thing that your customer is dealing with. Other more important stuff comes up, they get distracted – and they quite simply forget that they were ever just about to hand over some of their hard earned cash to you. They move on and don’t make it back.
  2. they need just a little more reason to buy – it could be that they don’t really *need* your product, or that they don’t really need to buy it from you, or that they feel as though they should do a little more research or wait a little time before buying – there is not quite enough motivation for them to complete the purchase at that time.
  3. something you’re doing sucks – it could be that something is broken, a question is not answered, or something about your product or service just doesn’t quite match your customers needs… this is unresolved and, as a result, so is this transaction.

Each of these ‘problems’ has a very similar solution – get in touch! Drop me an email, tell me you’ve noticed that I didn’t quite complete my purchase, ask me if something was wrong, give me an alternative method to purchase (a return email, a phone number) or a way to tell you what was wrong, give me an incentive to complete the purchase now.

Recently I almost purchased a hamper online at Fortnum & Mason – about 24hours after I *didn’t* complete the transaction I received an email from them letting me know that they’d noticed, asking me if there was a problem and telling me that if I *did* complete the purchase they’d put me in a draw to win an enormous hamper for free. Nice work.

Other smaller sites have sent me emails that seem to me to be human generated – one even had a little note telling me that something I had almost purchased was now available as a special deal. Perhaps they’re hand done, perhaps they’re automated, the end result is a little warm fuzzy for the customer – you noticed that they didn’t go through with the purchase and you care enough to find out why and to try to win their business. For the small amount of effort that this would require, it wouldn’t take very many conversions to make this time and money well spent.

Scenario: I’m just researching but information I need is buried in your purchasing process
Design requirement: Make desired information more easily accessible to your customers outside of the purchasing process.

Sometimes abandonment isn’t actually abandonment… sometimes it’s just research that can’t be done any other way. Understanding delivery charges and timeframes is an example you’ve probably come across before – you can’t find out about what delivery options are available without going through the process of purchasing, even though you’re not at all committed to that purchase. I once had a client who had a geographically restricted service, but the only way you could find out if that service was available to you was to commence the purchase transaction where step three was ‘put in your postcode to find out if we can provide service in your location’. These things sound pretty dumb and obvious, but you run into them all the time. Meanwhile, back at corporate HQ, people are wondering why shopping baskets are being abandoned at step three…

As well as making it easier for your customers, providing this information outside of the transactional process also helps you get more accurate numbers on the effectiveness of your design – those customers who are just going through the motions to get the information shouldn’t be counted as abandonments at all – in many cases, this results in undue resources being spent on redesigning step three, when, in fact, the real problems that cause committed customers to drop out are somewhere else entirely.

So – just a few of my favourite ways that you could potentially make some small changes and reap almost immediate benefits for your e-commerce business. I’d be interested to hear of any other basket/checkout related bugbears you have and how they should be addressed by user experience designers.