Virtual Floorspace

Another exercise that helps discover attributes that pull retailers into the consideration set for a given product type involves filling out a table with a list of the attributes most likely to differentiate retailers in that category and ask customers to rate several retailers on these attributes. As a simple example, you could ask customers to fill out an evaluation of retailer attributes using the following worksheet. (SA: Strongly agree; A: Agree; N: Neutral; D: Disagree; SD: Strongly disagree)

• Convenient
• Simple
• Cost saving
• Easy to find products/services
• Easy to check out
• Easy to get details
• Provides help when needed
• Has the products or services I’m looking for
• Great customer service
• Great online experience

Based on these ratings, the user experience design strategy should include guidance about how to achieve differentiation for a given user type using design components. Most retailers have much more detailed quantitative data about differentiators, but they are usually aggregated such that its difficult to target these findings to a given type of customer or persona. This kind of module helps bridge that gap, although a follow-up quantitative exercise may be needed to drive out more comprehensive findings that are representative or validated to the extent needed to guide user experience design of a high-traffic web site.

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (http://www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer interviews, e-commerce, e-retail, selection set, user research

Lisa Pecunia posted an entry about User Ratings and their credibility to her blog (http://making.grouvia.com/2009/10/22/ratings-are-overrated/#comment-25) and to the User Experience group of Linked In. I think she has a point that is worth some reflection. As an overall system, I think that the ratings disparity will correct itself. Here’s why.

Two complex variables implicit in the ratings system are Trust and Authenticity. They are not independent. Trust is a characteristic of the people viewing the ratings. Authenticity is a characteristic of the people responsible for the ratings.

In user research sessions, I have met some people who tend to trust a source until it is proven untrustworthy. I have met others tend to distrust a source until it is proven trustworthy, particularly when the source has a vested interest in a positive rating (ok, I’m in the latter group). Both groups will lower their trust for a given source when they have an experience that belies that trust. For example, you trusted the rating that your VA had received in the rating system, and were disappointed with the results you experienced. There could be many reasons for this disparity. But in the end, you put less trust in that system because it had betrayed your initial trust level. You may try to correct that system by assigning a slightly lower rating, but in the future you will definitely have less trust in that system’s ratings.

On the other side of the ratings system, the people supplying the ratings practice a certain level of authenticity (the quality or condition of being trustworthy or genuine). Some companies supply the ratings as they are submitted. Amazon doesn’t need to care if people don’t like the book. They can find another one. An online shoe retailer, on the other hand, has to care if somebody says a certain shoe brand is crap. That may affect a lot of purchases, particularly if the customer repeats this assertion in a number of places online. The shoe retailer has to decide to what degree they should “adjust” the ratings by omitting negative outliers. Rating by rating, they are building the perceptions of their authenticity.

The authenticity of a given source of ratings is not known until an experience reveals it. You had expected a degree of authenticity from the VA ratings, because a lack of authenticity defeats the purpose of the system. The people supplying the ratings were (apparently) not authentic. Their lack of authenticity was discovered through experience and you adjusted your trust level. Others probably have had the same experience. Together, a large group is lowering its trust, and the perception of authenticity is decreasing overall.

Companies used to be able to control the conversation that impacted the perception of authenticity, thus engendering trust by spending large amounts of advertising dollars. But not anymore. That conversation is out of their hands. In aggregate people will continually adjust their trust level, and communicate those adjustments to others, which will cause harm to the reputation of authenticity of a given source. In user research sessions I have found that lack of trust is one of the most difficult barriers to overcome in a transaction-based web site, so a decrease in aggregate trust will be felt in the bottom line.

This bottom line impact will take a while to surface. It will eventually be recognized as a problem by the companies that lack authenticity in their ratings. But by then it will be as difficult to recover trust in the ratings system as it is in every other context.

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (http://www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (http://www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized authenticity, design strategy, e-commerce, trust, user experience, user ratings

In a retail store, a person walks in and an associate (hopefully) asks, “How can I help you?” The customer then has an opportunity to explain where he or she is in the process of purchasing a product or series of products. The sales associate can step to any point in the sales process, and at any level of detail that the customer indicates they are ready for. They may simply want to know where the nails are, in which case they are looking for directions. They may want to know how to build a deck, in which case they are looking to the associate to provide instructions. Or they may be preparing to remodel their den, in which case they may want an overview about the whole project, or may want advice about how to approach various parts of the project. These three quests involve some of the same products, but are vastly different in the type of support that the associate can offer.

On a web site, the interaction design needs to anticipate and evaluate what the customer is doing and what they need in order to leave with all the products they came to buy. The knowledge that the site has of the customer’s goals may be based on past purchases or recent interactions, or could depend on clickpaths and searches. Or the site can attempt some type of conversation that involves some responses to questions and then a series of product-finding steps. Regardless of the approach, the interaction design of the site needs to take into account the purchase stage and process that the customer is in, as well as the preferences of the customer, in order to provide a higher order of service than the typical search and navigation system have to offer.

Fortunately, most e-commerce customers and sites do not have an infinite number of high value, high frequency interactions. They tend to fall into patterns. Those patterns can be understood through a number of different research methods, and, once understood, can form the basis of high value usage scenarios. These scenarios can then be used to guide interaction design. The scenarios are different from use cases, which consist of every function that the system is capable of carrying out. Scenarios focus on valuable events, whether the value is based on total spend or frequency of occurrence.

So customers often want directions, or instructions, or counsel. What these customers are probably not looking for when they enter the store are lots of advertisements about products unrelated to their quest. And yet, dissect many e-commerce page designs, and you see some space devoted to directions for finding a particular item (navigation), less space devoted to instructions, although that is slowly changing, and precious little space offering practical advice about choosing between one product and another, although that information is well-understood by many of the store associates. Fortunately, social media tools are starting to bridge the advice gap. It’s just a little hard to tell the chaff from the wheat sometimes.

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (http://www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer research, design strategy, e-commerce design, online conversations, user experience strategy, user research

The previous posts discussed the customer interview protocol, and an approach to determining how different customer types form the consideration set. Outside of the protocol, I would like to add some notes about the consideration set, and then tie them back into e-commerce design strategy.

All of a brand’s sales channels are not necessarily encountered or actively shopped, at the same point in a shopping process. For complex purchases, the process is likely to be rather erratic. The larger or more complex the purchase, the more advantages customers can find in flitting from one online retailer to the next. It saves vast amounts of times not having to physically go to the store to do the initial research. Customers are able to compare apples to apples, in many cases with comparison charts to aid them. If not provided by retailers, they are provided by aggregators in that category. And of course they can hunt for the best price.

Customers then switch channels for other kinds of decision-making inputs, such as gaining a feel for the quality or durability of the product, as well as its placement in three dimensional space that represents an area of their home or office. Also, while in the aisles of a store, customers are able to gain insight and information that they don’t know to ask online, either by conversing with store associates or other customers. Some of this latter benefit is sublimated by social media, but social media is not at the point where it is an adequate substitute for serendipitous product knowledge in all retail categories for all complex product purchases.

The customer’s motivation to access different retailers in multiple channels is not equal throughout their overall purchase process. When they first begin to form a thought in their mind about a complex product, they begin to notice messaging in various forms that portray that product. They begin to develop brand affinities if they are not immediately locked into one based on preformed notions or past experiences. They may begin to notice the patterns of promotional events or opportunities related to that item. This retailer always puts clothes on deep discount 6 weeks after the start of the season. That retailer always has buy one get one free promotions on holidays.

Then an event occurs that makes the purchase more urgent. Purchase triggers are different for different customer types, which is why customer modeling is such an important science for multichannel retailers. Perhaps they are moving or are getting married or are expecting their first child. Perhaps their kitchen table doesn’t fit the purposes that have become important in addition to eating.

Once a customer enters an active purchase process, that is they are scanning sites and shelves for the most appropriate quality level, the best set of features for the price, the item everybody says they should buy, etc., then they have entered a funnel that will end with a purchase. Retailers that are not present at this point are not likely to have a chance, except for major promotions or happenstance shopping luck. In this case, a push banner ad could trigger a consideration.

The point of this description is that retailers have to understand where customers are in their purchase process when they acquire them in any channel, and have the appropriate level of answers for that customer type at that stage. The best store associates are adept at doing this. Many of the best e-commerce web sites are not good at this. This level of user experience design requires targeted customer research, which is the primary focus of Usography’s consulting practice.

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (http://www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized consideration set, customer research, e-commerce design strategy, user research

To understand the competitive set of each participant, ask them to list the competitive sources of products or information related to the topic you are researching. Ask them to describe:

• The relative value of each source
• Likes and dislikes of each source
• Successful and unsuccessful interactions with competitive sources
• Experience using similar or competitive web sites
• Rating of your site vs. competitive sites based on specific criteria

As a result of the competitive set module, you should have obtained:

• List of competitive sites
• Positive and negative aspects of competition
• Ratings to compare across participants
• Competitive benchmark in terms of design and/or functionality
• Opportunities to reach parity or superiority

Sample script:

• When did you first start planning your last stay in a vacation resort?
• When you started planning, which companies were you considering staying with?
• Why did you include each of these?
• Which companies did you leave out of this list? Why?
• Are there any companies that you wish you would have included in this process? If yes, which one(s)?
• Are there any companies you wish you would have left out of this process? If yes, which one(s)?
• Which web sites did you visit?
• Which web sites did you know about but not visit? Why?

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (http://www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer interviews, e-commerce, e-retail design strategy, selection set, user research

A major step in any purchase process Is the concious or unconscious determination of sources from which to make the purchase. These potential sources are called the consideration set, because they are the business entitites under consideration to fulfill the need, whether it be for shoes or for car service. In some cases, consumers may make a decision regarding brands or sources that is final and they don’t need to form a consideration set. However, even at that point, other providers are trying to find a way to compete with that source and therefore, the concept of consideration set is still a valid construct.

The objectives of the competitive set module are:

• Understand how the participant forms a set of possible sources
• Understand the criteria used to prioritize and select the source
• Understand the degree of loyalty to each source and what led up to it

If your web site or company is not in the consideration set, it is unlikely to win the business. Therefore it is key to understand how customers form the consideration set of competitors, one of which will be selected to provide the product or service. If your interview sample exists solely of customers of your web site, then you will naturally be in the consideration set, unless some event has pushed your site or company out of consideration, which is important to understand. It may be helpful for this module to talk with people who are customers of your competitors but not yet your customers.

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized consideration set, customer interviews, customer research, Depth interviews, design strategy, e-commerce, user research

The following is a sample script for the user motivations module of an in-depth interview. The objective of this sample exercise is to understand the overall context before travel, during travel, and after travel that may involve needs associated with web site usage.

Sample script:

Establishing the behavioral and motivational context

Previous experiences

Now I’d like to talk about your last three vacations. Can you tell me about them?

Where did you go? What was it like? How did you get there? What kind of hotel or resort did you stay in? What was it like inside? Outside?

Please describe your room or suite in detail. How much did the room or suite cost?

Overall approach

When you think about taking a vacation, what do you think about first?

What are your favorite types of vacation? How do you go about planning them?

What is your approach for selecting one hotel or resort over another?

If prompting needed: For example, leisure, fun activities, mix with other people, be alone, beach, mountains, woods, water sports?

If you had to select one of these basic approaches to selecting a resort, which would you say you focus on most?

-       Luxurious sparkle

-       The time of my life

-       Unique experiences

-       Rejuvenation, R&R

-       Meet interesting people

-       Good times for good value

Where would you like to go, but haven’t yet had the time or resources to go there?

Is the choice of location and resort yours alone, or is it shared with someone else?

If shared: What is your role in terms of selecting the hotel or resort and location?

Information resources

When you were planning the trips, how did you find out about the places you would stay? What resources did you use?

Probe for comprehensive list.

What other resorts did you read about but didn’t go to? Why not?

4. Summarize motivation

As time permits, restate the approach in terms of steps

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer interviews, design strategy, e-commerce, in-depth interviews, research protocol, user motivations, user research

Discovering motivations can take place through the interview process, through a photo-elicitation or card-sorting exercise. Motivations can also be discovered by observing an online or offline activity and then asking questions about it afterwards. The researcher should be careful to avoid suggesting motivations to the participant and asking them to confirm or deny the motivation. This is leading the participant, and the accuracy of response will depend heavily on the personality of the participant. Constructing a motive and then reading into the motivation can obviously lead to misinterpretations.

Another method for discovering motivations is to use a Likert scale. [xxx example Likert scale questions.] Likert scales in an interview setting can be used to understand the motivations of the individual participant, which may also help understand a composite user archetype. The scales can be used to compare and contrast different participants. But they can’t be used in the interview context to generate conclusions about the larger population of users. That would be crossing over from qualitative data capture to quantitative data reporting, which is never a reliable approach.

Photo elicitation

Photo-elicitation is an interview technique in which participants are shown a series of images, and they are asked to comment on those images. The images may be photos that the participant has brought or that have been assembled by the research team. They may have been created as part of the research process, for example the participant may have been asked to create them as homework in preparation for the interview. Or, they may have been existing photos that were assembled for the interview, for example collected by the research team from a stock photo web site as illustrations of a concept related to the research topic. In a photo-elicitation exercise, the researcher shows participants a series of images and asks them to comment on them, possibly asking questions that lead the participant to talk about specific topics related to the research.

Sample script: Photo-elicitation for resort booking system

What is the first thing that comes to mind when you see these images?

Show series of resort photos from brochures and web site.

Show series of photos of people on vacation from stock photo site.

When customer responds positively to an image: What are some words you would use to describe how you would feel if you were part of this scene?

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer research, design strategy, interview protocol, research protocol, user motivations, user research

The customer motivations module probes the deeper emotional and cognitive factors that underly customer behavior in the context of the activity being researched. This module may reveal what seems to be irrational or contradictory reasons why people do what they do on web sites. The responses are very personal, but patterns can be discovered that cluster people into behavioral segments. This module is an extension of the participant characterization module described above, but I call it out separately because the focus is less about who the participants are and more about what drives their behavior in the context of the topic under study. It follows the Context of Use module, so that customers have had a chance to reflect on the activity in detail, and now can tell us about thoughts, feelings, attitudes, values, etc. that impact their behavior and decisions.

Objectives of the customer motivations module are:

• Understand the perceptions and attitudes that influence behavior in the activities related to the research topic
• Determine how motivations are supported or thwarted by aspects of the customer experience
• Find opportunities for design touchpoints that satisfy motivations

Motivations vary widely among users of web sites and information devices. Furthermore, in a research setting, it is very difficult to determine with confidence if the motivations that are described are the real underlying motivations, or if they are what the participant thinks are the motivations but the actual motivation is something different, or if the participant is simply inventing a motivation to mask the real motivation. Nevertheless, motivations are at the core of behaviors, and understanding behavior is at the core of user research. Determining what drives different user types to a given behavior is a critical component of the investigation. Motivations are typically used as a basis for user segmentation.

The goal of motivation research should be to facilitate user goals and eliminate barriers, leading to success of the system, and increased sales, rather than to manipulate customer behavior through the use of hidden triggers.

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer research, methodology, user interviews

The subject matter you are researching will determine the types of questions and exercises you will include in the customer interview protocol to fully understand the context of use. Some different types of questions and exercises that I have found helpful to discover context of use factors for customer purchase processes related to e-commerce web sites are described below.

• Description of the participant’s history, experience, and knowledge level in the subject matter
• Description of typical situations that precede the activity being researched
• Detailed account of an event that involved the use of the web site in question or a competing web site
• List of web sites used for information during the course of the activity, which either supplemented the use of the site for which the research is being conducted, or instead of that site. Details of information resources consulted, and the value of each to success of the event.
• Step by step description of activities related to the research topic, such as Category-specific purchase patterns or decision-making considerations.
• This task analysis focuses on the context of the purchase or event or subject matter; a description of web site usage comes later in the interview.
• Discussion of gaps, or missing information or support tools, in the experience
• Discussion of problem points other than information gaps that arose before, during, or after the activity
• Prioritization of factors using card-sorting or rating scale to reveal preferences, values, trade-offs related to satisfaction of needs and wants associated with the activity
• Perceptions about brands related to the need fulfillment that were confirmed, altered, or newly discovered
• Point(s) at which participant wanted to stop the process
• Description of what would be considered a success in this situation or topic

The main goal of the context of use module is to reach an understanding of the most important factors that influence a customer’s behavior when they are in situations that lead them to use web sites like the one you are designing. Some specific takeaways or inisights that the questions and exercises listed above could elicit to help shape web design include:

• Information typically needed to make a decision or selection
• Ranking of decision-making factors in terms of importance and frequency
• Mental model of the subject matter
• Obstacles in the activity that need to be overcome
• Opportunities for an improved user experience
• Tools that may be supportive or competitive with the web site in question
• Task steps that need to be accommodated
• Success metrics according to participant

Copyright 2009, Paul Bryan, Usography Corporation (www.usography.com)

Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/uxexperts

Uncategorized customer experience, in-depth interviews, interview protocol, user research