Articles by Month: December 2006

Unfolding the fold

ClickTale have published research looking at whether users scroll to the bottom of pages. The key stats:

91% of the page-views had a scroll-bar.

76% of the page-views with a scroll-bar, were scrolled to some extent.

22% of the page-views with a scroll-bar, were scrolled all the way to the bottom.

[Thanks to etre.]

Posted by jamesr at 07:17 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Usability & user-centered design

Content management: goodbye 2006, welcome 2007

Apoorv Durga has published a post on trends in content management for the year past, and the year to come. To quote:

2006 has been an exciting year for content technologies. Based on some of the interesting happenings, the following themes (in no particular order) have emerged that might have an impact on this space in coming years.

Posted by jamesr at 10:43 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

2001 to 2006: five years of information architecture

Karen Loasby has written an article on the last five years of information architecture. To quote:

In 2001, FreePint featured an article on the still-new concept of information architecture (IA) in "Information Architecture and web Usability Resources". Five years on, IA may still be an unfamiliar term for many, but it is a booming field bustling with conferences, books and rather desperate recruitment consultants struggling to fill a myriad of vacancies.

Posted by jamesr at 08:50 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Human touch in taxonomies

Theresa Regli has written an article on the need for a human touch in taxonomies. To quote:

If "rocket" did mean the same thing to everyone, it would be far easier to sit back and let software create taxonomies and classify content without human intervention. But sadly, we're still picking classification terms out of long drop-down menus and clicking "submit." Content managers begin to see cross-eyed, corporate librarians revise and retrain. Is there a happy medium? What amount of "the human factor" -- the influence that people bring to the process of creating a taxonomy and subsequently, tagging content -- really makes sense? How much should subject matter experts be involved, from the beginning of the process through ongoing maintenance?

Posted by jamesr at 09:53 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

The Task Analysis Grid

Todd Warfel has posted details on his Task Analysis Grid, a way of communicating user needs to stakeholders. To quote:

One of the greatest challenges we face in the design field is communicating design decisions to other stakeholders (e.g. Business unit, Marketing, Engineering). We're often forced to attempt this through a requirements document. Personally, I've yet to come across a requirements document that is usable and doesn't take a couple of days to get everyone on the same page. So, we use something different - a task analysis grid.

[Thanks to Jared Spool.]

Posted by jamesr at 10:39 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

On beyond Tinkertoy

Dave Rogers has written an article on the future of usability. To quote:

To quote: I'm here today to say that usability is the Tinkertoy of Web design. It's a great (perhaps best) place to begin, but its dowels and connectors are inadequate for the now and future Web. It's time we outgrow our obsession with usability and user-centered design (UCD) and break new ground.

Please don't misunderstand, Dr. Nielsen. I'm not advocating the overthrow of UCD and usability; they are essential to the success of every site. So keep those personas, usability tests and card sorts coming in, folks.

Posted by jamesr at 08:25 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Bob Boiko: Taming the content beast (Australian tour)

We're very excited to announce that Bob Boiko (author of the Content Management Bible) will be coming out Australia for a tour in March. To quote:

Web managers face real challenges: their sites are being deluged by content that is out of control and of dubious value. IT managers are struggling too: they can't prove the value of their web systems to their leaders and so get inadequate funding to deal with the ever increasing content load.

The solution is a two-pronged approach: first, figure out the types of information that are really worth distributing; and second, model those information types so they can be effectively collected, stored and published to the intranet, web and beyond.

This two-day masterclass by Bob Boiko, author of the Content Management Bible, will provide proven solutions to the hardest of content management challenges. Out from the US, this will be Bob's only visit to Australia in 2007, so don't miss out!

The dates will be as follows:

• Melbourne (Crowne Plaza): 15-16 March 2007
• Canberra (Hyatt Hotel): 19-20 March 2007
• Sydney (Mercure Hotel): 22-23 March 2007

Bob literally "wrote the book" on content management, and has unique insight into tackling broader content management challenges within organisations.

Further masterclass details | Flier and registration form (PDF)

Posted by jamesr at 11:00 AM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Content management, Intranets

Seeing the world in symbols: icons and the evolving language of digital wayfinding

Jonathan Follett has written an article on icons and digital wayfaring. To quote:

Of all the objects that occupy our digital spaces, there are none that capture the imagination so much as icons. As symbols, icons can communicate powerfully, be delightful, add to the aesthetic value of software, engage people’s curiosity and playfulness, and encourage experimentation. These symbols are key components of a graphic user interface -- mediators between our thoughts and actions, our intentions and accomplishments.

In conjunction with information architecture, icons guide virtual wayfinding and help users to perform specific tasks efficiently. While the term wayfinding typically refers to orienting people in physical space -- using graphics, text, signs, and other design elements -- it's useful to examine the use of icons through the lens of digital wayfinding, as a way of generating a fresh perspective on how users perceive and interact with their virtual spaces.

Posted by jamesr at 10:48 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Taxonomy of tagging systems

Gene Smith has written an article that describes tagging systems, classifying them in different ways and exploring why users tag. To quote:

This is my cheat sheet for the paper "Position Paper, Tagging, Taxonomy, Flickr, Article, ToRead" (PDF). I'd recommend reading it (if you find tagging interesting you probably already have) but I wanted to extract its two conceptual taxonomies. They're helpful for thinking about tagging systems but the paper buries them a bit.

The paper deals mainly with social tagging systems, and it uses the classic tripartite model of tagging: resource (the thing being tagged), user (the person doing the tagging) and tags (the tag connecting the two).

[Thanks to Joshua Porter.]

Posted by jamesr at 10:36 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Clash of the titans: agile and UCD

Richard F. Cecil has written an article on the potential conflict between agile and UCD methodologies. To quote:

Agile software development [1] has become fairly popular in the last few years, leaving many UX professionals wondering how user-centered design (UCD) can fit into an extremely fast-paced development process that uses little documentation. User-centered design can involve a variety of techniques that provide insights into users' wants, needs, and goals, including ethnography, contextual inquiry, contextual interviewing, usability testing, task analysis, and others. But all of these take time -- time that an agile development process might not allow. There is hope, though. Agile and UCD methods are not completely at odds with each other -- and in some cases, agile development can even enable a more user-centered approach. By taking the time to understand the differences and similarities between agile development and UCD, it's possible to devise a process that is both user-centered and agile.

[Thanks to InfoDesign.]

Posted by jamesr at 09:05 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

The challenge of dashboards and portals

Joe Lamantia has written an article on the challenges of portals. To quote:

Executive Dashboards present an interesting array of design challenges ranging in all areas of user experience. Take your pick from a list that includes information and interaction design as well as information architecture. Add to that the business of creating information architecture that can provide a structure for growth and evolution. These challenges will be addressed in a six-part series over the next few months. The first article looks at problems facing dashboards which can be addressed by using a system of components that fit together to form a whole. Much like IKEA uses interchangeable islands, counters, and cupboards to create a custom kitchen, by using a system of tiles, it is possible to create an executive dashboard that effectively serves all its users.

Posted by jamesr at 07:07 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information architecture

The ICS Intranet 2006 Research Report

The Irish Computer Society has published the results of an intranet survey. To quote:

The Irish Computer Society is delighted to introduce the first ICS Intranet Report. The response to this initiative from ICS Members and the wider IT professional community has been impressive and has enabled us to generate a comprehensive overview of intranet activity in Ireland. We believe that this is an important piece of research which has highlighted some significant findings particularly in the areas of intranet usage amongst staff and future trends for the proliferation of the medium.

[Thanks to Martin White.]

Posted by jamesr at 08:11 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

Plan before CMS implementation

It would seem to be a statement of the obvious that organisations should do their planning before embarking on the implementation of their new content management system (CMS). Yet all too often this doesn't occur.

Let's state this more strongly: the day after the contract is signed with the CMS vendor, the vendor will show up asking: so, what are we actually implementing? If there is not a clear and simple answer to this, the project will go poorly, and the vendor will be more than a little frustrated (which itself may have consequences).

This briefing explores the specific details that should be worked out up-front, ideally before the tender or RFP is even sent out.

Product versus project

In many cases, the selection of a new content management system is seen as a technology project with the goal of obtaining a new 'product' or piece of 'infrastructure'. When driven from this perspective, it is seen as reasonable to 'put a CMS in place', and then consider how best to make use of it.

The first problem is that vendors will be asked to provide a fixed-price quote for the implementation, which will then be locked in as part of contract negotiations. When the vendor turns up on day one of implementation, they therefore expect that everything will be in place for an immediate start.

At the end of the day, vendors want the implementation project to go smoothly, not least because it means that they will get paid sooner. With a 6 week implementation plan standard for mid-market vendors, there is only limited scope for additional planning and design.

[CMb 2006-22, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:28 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Usability and IA are core skills for intranet teams

It goes without saying that an intranet is only successful if staff can easily find the information they need, when they need it. Recognising this, the majority of intranet teams follow a 'user-centred methodology' when they redesign the intranet. This involves making use of core usability and information architecture (IA) techniques, such as card sorting and usability testing.

In many cases, intranet teams bring in external consultants or contractors to assist with the redesign project, relying on these individuals to provide the necessary usability and IA skills. While there are many good reasons for doing this, what is often not recognised is that these skills will continue to be needed throughout the lifetime of the intranet.

For this reason, usability and IA are core areas of expertise for intranet teams, and all organisations should take steps to build this expertise internally.

More than just redesigns

The primary focus of usability and information architecture activities is normally on the major redesign of the intranet. Taking many months, this redesign should (and often does) follow best-practice user-centred design principles. Beyond this major piece of work however, it is not as widely recognised that there is an ongoing need for usability and IA expertise relating to the intranet.

If nothing else, once the consultants have finished their work, it is left to the intranet team to actually put the designs into practice. Since there is a limit to what the delivered designs can cover every issue, there will be many small (and sometimes large) decisions yet to make.

These decisions will arise throughout the implementation phase, and will have a significant impact on the overall success of the redesign. If the intranet team does not have the necessary knowledge and skills, much of the value of the consultancy or contracting services may be lost.

[CMb 2006-21, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:18 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Intranets, James' articles

Top 10 mistakes when selecting a CMS

Organisations often make the selection of a CMS much harder than it needs to be. They do this by running into common pitfalls that impact not just on the selection process, but on the overall success of the CMS project.

Over the past ten years, we have worked with many organisations on content management systems, and have seen a huge number of tenders released to the marketplace. Across these projects, the same issues are seen again and again. These most often relate to how the requirements are documented, or how the overall tender is structured.

They may also arise from a lack of clear scope for the CMS project, or from the limited understanding of content management issues and the CMS marketplace. With the aim of tackling some of these issues, this article lists the top ten mistakes commonly seen when attempting to select a CMS.

At their heart, these are all simple issues to resolve, primarily by taking a common-sense approach to the selection process.

It is easy to get caught up in the detail of the requirements and the CMS project, losing sight of the overall objectives and process. The starting point is therefore to step back and to evaluate where the project is at, and how it will proceed.

By reviewing the project against the 'top 10' in this article, it should be possible to chart a rapid (but careful) path through the selection process, to the final deployment of a CMS that works well for authors, site administrators and the wider organisation.

1. Not understanding the problem to be solved

All too often, organisations rush into purchasing a new piece of technology before fully understanding the problem to be solved. For example, CMS selection may unfortunately be done before:

• determining the business needs and overall business goals
• identifying the underlying website design or management issues
• creating an overall website or intranet strategy
• identifying what functionality will be delivered by the site (rather than the CMS)
• choosing which sites will be in scope for the CMS project

[December KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:06 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Launch party for Intranet Leadership Forum

The Intranet Leadership Forum was successfully launched last Thursday in Sydney, with many organisations attending from both the private and public sectors. With the assistance of drinks and good food, the intranet managers in attendance quickly realised how much they had in common with other teams, both in their challenges and goals.

Don't forget all members who join by Friday 22nd December will receive a pre release copy of the latest Step Two Designs comprehensive report on intranet planning, our 6x2 methodology. Also your first year membership is extended by 2 months, renewals will not be until February 2008.

Posted by jamesr at 07:55 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranet Leadership Forum

Party out the back

Party out the back

This time of year in Sydney, the increasingly warm weather brings out the party spirit. Down the road from me, an elegantly-lettered sign invited guests back to the patio at the end of a long summer day.

Posted by jamesr at 08:00 PM
Categories: Photos

Usability weaknesses inherent in portals

Joe Lamantia has written an entry on the usability issues with portals. To quote:

Portal user experiences suffer from a number of inbuilt usability weaknesses that the building blocks are designed to eliminate. For instance, flat tile schemes assume all tiles are structurally the same, and that they have no relationship to any other tiles. This makes all tiles of equal importance to the portal's information architecture. [Welcome to Flatland...] Yet any designer or information architect addressing diverse user needs and goals knows that the priorities of users make some content more important than others, and that the structure of the user experience should reflect these priorities and any necessary relationships.

Posted by jamesr at 06:44 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Usability & user-centered design

Getting out into the real world

Perhaps the single greatest pleasure of the work that we do is the opportunity to conduct "needs analysis" that involves getting out into the front-line environment of organisations. Following an "ethnographic" approach, we're able to spend time with the staff who do the actual work, building an understanding of their real needs and issues.

While we use a range of techniques (such as one-on-one interviews, workplace observation, contextual inquiry), the basic approach is incredibly simple. At its heart, it just involves going out with eyes and ears open, asking naive questions, and getting amazing answers.

Front-line environments are endlessly fascinating, and conducting this needs analysis without preconceptions always generates some surprising findings and recommendations. And every organisation is different, meaning that there is always more to be learnt.

For example, we've spent a lot of time now in call centres, whether in the public or private sectors. We've seen everything from the reliance on paper to the use of post-it notes stuck to every flat surface, through to advanced uses of instant messaging.

We've spent time with nurses in wards, early childcare nurses in the field, as well as doctors and other medical professionals. We've talked with consultants in a major consulting firm, researchers in a leading research body, train drivers and station staff. We've explored the needs of town planners, engineers, front-desk staff, sales teams and parking inspectors.

We've spent time on major building sites, in oil refineries, as well in offices talking with HR staff, admins, accountants and many more. We've discussed strategy with senior management, internal communications staff and information managers.

Regardless of whether the project is about intranets, information management, ECM or cultural change, the same basic approach holds true. I love doing this work, and I'm glad that we get an opportunity to connect so directly with the real staff who make their organisations run.

(For more on this topic, see our earlier article Conducting intranet needs analysis.)

Posted by jamesr at 08:40 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, Knowledge management

Panorama of Trocadero at night

Panorama of Trocadero at night

The first night I arrived in Paris I scaled the heights of the Eiffel Tower to look out across the city. While the Eiffel Tower is an intoxicating sight, so are the views of Paris at night. This particular panorama focuses on the Palais du Trocadero, which certainly stands out with its night-time lighting...

Posted by jamesr at 08:43 PM
Categories: Photos

The real role of librarians?

I've been speaking at a number of library-related conferences, including the current (and huge) Online Information conference in London. Now, I'm not a librarian, but I don't have to be to spot some of the issues that come up again and again.

Across all of these conferences is the common (and often unstated) theme that librarians are "under threat", and that they may be a "thing of the past". The strange thing is that I don't think it needs to be this way...

Librarians have become associated with books (and these are certainly being eliminated in most organisations), or with taxonomies and cataloguing (which no-one really understands). I find this a strangely narrow definition for librarians (and libraries).

Certainly there is a greater need for librarians than ever before. Every statistic shows that the amount of information is growing at a disturbing rate, and the problem of the age is finding and managing the information that we need.

This is where librarians should be playing a role, by going back to their original definition, that of the information professional who helps people find what they need. While there isn't a front desk at the library to walk up to, librarians can still greatly assist organisations by:

• pre-filtering information
• conducting research on behalf of others
• communicating key information
• assisting and educating in search

What this isn't about is just owning a list of powerful but incredibly difficult to use information sources. Instead, it's about getting out into the organisation to find ways that they can add direct value, often for key groups of specialist users.

All of this was brought to a head by a presentation last night at the Knowledge Cafe by Dave Pollard, who talked about the principle of re-intermediation. Terrible word, but the concept (of putting back in the middleman) is a great one in reference to these issues.

Anyway, apologies for my presumption in preaching to a discipline that I'm not even a member of...

Posted by jamesr at 01:06 AM | Permalink
Categories: Knowledge management

Information architecture 3.0

Peter Morville has written an article on what he terms information architecture 3.0. To quote:

Over the past decade, information architecture has matured as a role, discipline, and community. Inevitably, we've traded some of that newborn sparkle for institutional stability and a substantive body of knowledge. It's for this reason that some of the pioneers feel restless. And, while I applaud their courage and entrepreneurial zeal, as they step beyond the role and the discipline, I hope (for their sake and ours) that they stay connected to the information architecture community.

For those of us who continue to embrace the role and discipline, there's so much going on already, and the world of Information Architecture 3.0 will only bring more challenges, more opportunities, and more work.

Posted by jamesr at 12:46 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

User centred design: is it working?

Donna Maurer has posted her slides (and audio) from her keynote talk on User centred design: is it working? To quote:

We have to stop selling usability. It doesn't have a value proposition. Usability is a quality aspect of something --- it is not a process, an artefact, a deliverable or anything that anyone cares about what you are going to give them. I read consultants websites and I think, if I didn't already know about that, I wouldn't have a clue about what you are trying to sell me.

Posted by jamesr at 12:34 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Enterprise information architecture: a semantic and organizational foundation

Tom Reamy has written an article on enterprise information architecture, focusing on semantic and organisational issues. To quote:

Yes, EIAs can be a force for change, but so can anyone. The real question is: should the discipline of Enterprise Information Architecture be defined to include organizational change as one of its essential features. I don't think it should be.

Whatever it is that information architects learn to become enterprise information architects (EIA), I think it is essential that we not lose our focus. The heart of IA is information and knowledge, and we need to build on that foundation, not try to turn into something else when we add the term "enterprise."

Posted by jamesr at 12:22 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture