AccuTask

When building a website, many decisions come into play that affect the overall project, including information architecture, design, coding and testing, and more. Because there are so many facets of development to consider, the basics can often be overlooked. One of these basics is clear content navigation.

The goal of any website should ultimately be to assist its visitor in accomplishing their purpose in the most logical, intuitive way. Because the purpose of most websites is to present content to their visitor, it is imperative to streamline the path to it.

Jeffrey Zeldman wrote in his book, Taking Your Talent to the Web that all content should be accessible to the user within Three Clicks, or the visitor will get frustrated and leave. While this is a reasonable assumption, it isn’t necessarily accurate. I’m in favor of anything that helps web developers focus on streamlining their navigation, but a recent study shows that users don’t mind clicking to get their content, as long as it’s logical and quick.

Humans have an incredible ability of grouping and categorizing data. We need to recognize that people use these skills to both construct and deconstruct information, and then determine what task they will be performing at our sites.

For example, when building something, we take inventory of the resources that are available, group them into their functional classifications, then assemble them as needed. This is a constructive task. Even though many people use websites to gather information that will be later grouped and assembled, the actual process of information gathering is not constructive, but deconstructive. For this reason, we should present our content in a logical way that aids the deconstruction process.

To do this, we present content from a macro- level to a micro- level. Present information in their major, logical categories first, and let the visitor to our site perform their natural process of deconstruction. They will continue to click and break down the hierarchy until they reach their desired level of content… as long as it’s presented in a logical manner that lets them drill down quickly.

Some sites try to float everything they think is important to the top page of their site, with the intention of assisting the user in finding what they need. This method of content presentation only adds unneeded confusion and complexity to the site’s navigation and layout.

While it is sometimes helpful to bring important, or frequently used information up to the main page of our site, this should be the exception rather than the rule. Otherwise we will quickly clutter our page with content that is relevant to some, but useless to others.

Let visitors use their innate ability to search and deconstruct, and aid them by using clarity in navigation, and logical breakdown of topics and categories.

Have you noticed a trend in product packaging lately? I looked into my refrigerator the other day and noticed not less than six items that were packaged in squeezable plastic bottles! Some things have been packaged this way for years, and it is amazing that it’s taken so long for other products to “catch up” (pardon the pun). I vaguely remember the first time my mother brought home a plastic, squeezable bottle of ketchup. We were used to the glass bottles, and this plastic container seemed like the smartest thing ever made! No more having to wait for the thick red stuff to pour, we could just apply a little pressure and, “squirt!” Genius! But it wasn’t until recently that other logical food items started appearing in squeezable plastic containers. An idea long overdue, I think.

How a user relates to the product they’re using ultimately dictates the future success of that product. It is for this reason that companies who care about their future will look at ways to improve their product that enhances the user’s experience. Most companies have a research and development department, but their focus is usually more on making their item cheaper to produce by cutting thicknesses, reducing employees, using cheaper supplies, etc. Where these companies would benefit even more… both in the long- and short-term, is by securing their user base through good experience design.

Have you ever found yourself struggling with something that you know should be easy to use, and you ask yourself, “Why in the world do I even bother with this junk in the first place?” As a website developer, I have taken an interest in User Experience Design, and the habits of people that use them. One thing that has always intrigued me is why people subject themselves to poorly designed and built websites when other more well-developed options are available. In other words, why do Bad Designs work?

History is replete with example after example of people overcoming bad experiences. Whether we are talking about inventors like Alexander Graham Bell, or civil rights leaders like Rosa Parks, bad experiences are the mother of innovation.

In a world that is advancing rapidly in technology and innovation, it is still amazing that people willingly continue to use a bad product even though there are better solutions available. As a case in point, a friend of mine owns and uses a software that has been abandoned by its developers for over 5 years. Not only has this software been defunct, it has been replaced and improved upon to enhance usability, productivity and quality. The price is still very reasonable, but still he will not change. But this is just one example. You can easily apply the same attributes to places we visit, people we associate with, tools we use, and cars we drive. For some reason, we continually find ourselves using Bad things even though they cause us grief. So, Why does Bad Design work?

People are Stubborn

First of all, you have to recognize that people, in general, are stubborn. We use things that we hate to use, and buy things that we hate to have to buy, and visit websites that frustrate us to no end, because we are stubborn. We want to make things work, even though they aren’t designed to work. Hate them as we do, we continue to buck common sense and use, visit, and buy these things in spite of the better options. Bad Design works because we are stubborn.

People are Ignorant

Well, that is certainly a sweeping generalization, but in reality we cannot experience what we do not know. Often, Bad Design works because we aren’t aware there are other options available. Despite all of the shortcomings of the Internet service provider, AOL, people still use them because they are ignorant of their other options. For example, my aunt recently upgraded her Internet to 9.0. Did you catch that? She didn’t upgrade her AOL software, she upgraded her Internet… so she thinks. See, though she hates the advertisements that bombard her while online, and she hates the dropped connections, and she hates the busy signals, she persists to use AOL, because she thinks AOL IS the Internet. Bad Design works because we are ignorant.

People Love Rewards

I think I speak for the whole of mankind when I say that we love to be rewarded. Whether it is a pat on the back, or a hot slice of apple pie ala mode, or a great feeling inside, or whatever… I love rewards. Many people suffer through bad experiences because of the reward at the end. We work 40 plus hours because of the paycheck. People exercise because they feel good and their pants fit better. Though there are so many negative affects people suffer from things like recreational drugs, smoking, and alcohol, they subject themselves to the negative aspects because of the rewards. People use poorly designed and executed websites for similar reasons… because of the rewards they gain.

For example, let’s say a person visits a website to purchase movie tickets, but the interface is confusing and difficult to use. There is no search feature, and the movie times are not organized logically. The site requires registration as a member, when they don’t want to become a member… they just want to purchase a ticket. The form fields are confusing, and when they submit the form with errors, they are taken to a new page and forced to re-enter all of their information again. After trial and error, they finally figure out how to get what they need and complete the sale. The reward? Their tickets.

The rewards can be news content, video feeds, conversations, products, or various other tangibles. People get used to sacrificing a desireable experience for the greater good. People love rewards.

Conclusion

While it could never be argued that Bad Design is better than a well thought out and implemented User Experience, it is certainly true that Bad Design can work. As developers, we stand to gain measures in customers, user satisfaction, revenue and more by countering Bad Design. We can do this by educating people, streamlining the user experience, and clearing the way to the rewards they seek. Bad Design can work, but it doesn’t have to.