Journals by RSS
Journals by EmailA little while back, Michael emailed me an invitation to look at some findings from a study about online experience. I haven’t had a chance to check out the full document yet, but the executive summary contains quite a bit of information. I’ll consider here how some of the findings affect technical documentation.
Easy Access to Complete Information
One point made in the findings is that users’ “enjoyment” of a site is tied closely to how easily they can find the information they want and stay oriented at the same time. I think this is a given for technical communicators; we know that users want to get answers as fast as possible, and documentation must be navigable. Those two factors are easier to pin down than a third: “complete information.”
What constitutes completeness? As a whole, technical communicators don’t agree on this. By its strict definition, completeness would mean providing everything. And I think most of us can agree that we don’t want to give users everything. Otherwise, we overload users, and too much information takes away from ease of navigation. But how much is too much is a discussion for another time.
Up-to-Date Information Is More Important than Good Design
Just yesterday, a feedback email came through one of the applications I work on. The user said that she was using the help system to learn the application, and in one of the how-to topics, a link was named using old text. The link text had been changed some time ago, and I failed to update at least that help topic accordingly. As a result, this user was confused. So I wrote back with the correction and a promise to update the help text.
Yes, up-to-date information is extremely important. I get frustrated when I have to figure out how to really do something while working with outdated instructions. Just last month, PayPal sent my wife an email with instructions about verifying her email address (figure that one out…), and the link that she was supposed to use wasn’t actually present on the site! Again, she had to figure it out.
According to this study, designers place more importance on good design than do users, while users do the opposite. I have to side with the users on this one. Outdated information alienates and frustrates users, and no amount of “good design” can make up for that. Would you say to yourself: “I want to kick my computer because the information on this site is so wrong!… But the site looks nice, so it’s not a problem.” If you believe good design is better than up-to-date information, maybe you’d better stick with a cool, soothing color scheme.
Users Like a Broad Range of Information
Part of this finding is that links to related or recommended information are helpful to users. Even when they want to find a certain piece of information, users may be interested in a link or reference to another topic that will give more explanation. This suggests that we not provide the absolute minimum content we can get away with, but that we instead chunk it and link among those chunks so users can see what is related and relevant and decide for themselves whether they want to get more information.
However, another finding suggested that when users can’t find the information they want, they assume it’s not there, so they think the information is incomplete, when the real problem is that the information wasn’t fully searchable or easily navigable.
Designers Overestimate Site Effectiveness
Overall, the study found that designers tend to think their designs are more effective, easily navigable, and usable than the users do. This highlights the need for some usability testing before full releases. Whenever we design and write content with unfounded assumptions about our users, we’re making a mistake, one that could end up being costly.
The interaction design and technical communication fields overlap, so there is much we can learn from what users say makes a good site. I think many of these are already part of what we consider good technical communication: usability, clarity, and accuracy.
Related entries (auto-generated):
An Otherwise Good Experience Soured by Flawed Documentation
Usability and Maintainability Not So Incompatible
Time for Online Help to Get a New Wardrobe
Well-Phrased Links Help Both Users and Technical Communicators
5 Comments to 'Results of a Study about Online Experience'
November 13, 2008
Designers are paid to produce a design that look good. That’s why they are, well, designers. If a link is bad, the response is going to be, well, the users will figure it out.
If a designer handed over a dull design that had all the links working correctly, that designer wouldn’t be paid and would be fired.
If a designers hands over a zippy design where some content is outdated and some links are broken, the buyer will be happy, pay the designer, and hire the designer again.
What is important to users is not as important to the designer because it’s not as important to the person who employs that designer.
[Reply]
November 13, 2008
And isn’t that a sad commentary. I think there are some designers out there who care about the user above everything else, and the design is a means to the end of getting the users what they need. But in cases where that’s not the designer’s primary focus, it’s a chance for the technical communicator to be the necessary user advocate.
[Reply]
November 14, 2008
I’ve found that whenever I redesign my blog or change the intro music to my podcast, absolutely no one says anything. Their comments are always in response to the content of what I write or say. I’d say the same goes for help. Good point.
[Reply]
Trackbacks
Set Me Straight. Leave a Comment.