Feng-GUI - a neat little app that will show you with a heat map how users are viewing and using your site.

I am starting "Technology Tuesdays". Where I will find something going on in technology I find interesting. While this will mainly focus on usability, information architecture, and other such career related topics, I will occasionally wander from those subjects to talk about other things that inspire ideas, thoughts, and conversations about the role of technology in our lives, sustainability, and other such hot topics of the day. I am using this to start vetting ideas. Should I move over to M or even if I stay here, I am being encouraged to develop ideas and talk about IA best practices and trends. Most of my thoughts at least in the beginning will come from things I have read that I find interesting or want to explore. These will in turn start to form my thoughts about IA as I hope to move into a space where I can speak at conferences, write for professional blogs, and basically move towards being a specialist in the area of User Experience. While I still hope to explore and play with development and design amongst other skills that I would like to keep fresh, the area of User Experience provides the most challenge and interest for me so it is the area I hope to specialize in.



--------------------------------------



For today's post I am posting some interesting links.



Milissa Tarquini's Blasting the Myth of the Fold

When I first started my career as a web designer, I remember the old adage "design for the fold" & "don't make the users scroll too much". Milissa's article argues that people are now use to scrolling and that the fold no longer has the relevance it use to. However, you still want to lay out the information and design on the page in order to encourage the user(s) to scroll to the remaining content below the fold.



--------------------------------------



Other links of potential interest:

Future of Web Design

Mostly Flex & code based articles - It's following some interesting things happening in code and flex development through Adobe.



--------------------------------------



And a presentation: Design Thinking in Business





--------------------------



And a video: Who is the T, in IT?





Courtesy of the_axel, who stole it from the_macross

I get that question a lot so in hopes to answer that question the following is taken from O'Reilly Press's "Information Architecture for the Web, 2nd Edition":



in·for·ma·tion ar·chi·tec·ture n.



1. The combination of organization, labeling, and navigation schemes within an information system.

2. The structural design of an information space to facilitate task completion and intuitive access to content.

3. The art and science of structuring and classifying web sites and intranets to help people find and manage information.

4. An emerging discipline and community of practice focused on bringing principles of design and architecture to the digital landscape.



---------------------------- More Definitions ------------------------------------



Information



We use the term information to distinguish information architecture from data and knowledge management. Data is facts and figures. Relational databases are highly structured and produce specific answers to specific questions. Knowledge is the stuff in people's heads. Knowledge managers develop tools, processes, and incentives to encourage people to share that stuff. Information exists in the messy middle. With information systems, there's often no single "right" answer to a given question. We're concerned with information of all shapes and sizes: web sites, documents, software applications, images, and more. We're also concerned with metadata: terms used to describe and represent content objects such as documents, people, processes, and organizations.



Structuring, Organizing, and Labeling



It's what information architects do best. Structuring involves determining the appropriate levels of granularity[2] for the information "atoms" in your site, and deciding how to relate them to one another. Organizing involves grouping those components into meaningful and distinctive categories. Labeling means figuring out what to call those categories and the series of navigation links that lead to them.



[2] Granularity refers to the relative size or coarseness of information chunks. Varying levels of granularity might include: journal issue, article, paragraph, sentence.





Finding and Managing



Findability is a critical success factor for overall usability. If users can't find what they need through some combination of browsing, searching, and asking, then the site fails. But user-centered design isn't enough. The organizations and people who manage information are important too. An information architecture must balance the needs of users with the goals of the business. Efficient content management and clear policies and procedures are essential.



Art and Science



Disciplines such as usability engineering and ethnography are helping to bring the rigor of the scientific method to the analysis of users' needs and information seeking behaviors. We're increasingly able to study patterns of usage and subsequently make improvements to our web sites. But the practice of information architecture will never be reduced to numbers; there's too much ambiguity and complexity. Information architects must rely on experience, intuition, and creativity. We must be willing to take risks and trust our intuition. This is the "art" of information architecture.





---------------------------- My Commentary ------------------------------------



In summary, we, Information Architects, are the ones behind the scenes who lay out the content and information to be found in any web site. We are the ones who make it easier for all of you the users to find what you are looking for. Our work is seen in the layout (where the navigation, images, etc, is located on a page) of a web site or system.



What's interesting about this is that library sciences is coming back in full force because of the amount of information at our fingertips and our need to categorize and organize it all into usable chunks. Librarians were doing this long before there was a web to be concerned about.

"On the Web, if a site is difficult to use, most people will leave. On an intranet, if employees perform their tasks more slowly due to difficult design, the company bears the cost of the reduced productivity. In fact, I estimate that low intranet usability costs the world economy $100 billion per year in lost employee productivity. This may not be the most important problem facing the planet, but it's not a trifling issue either.



Usability is an important, though not the only, determinant for the success of a web site or an intranet. Information architecture is an important, though not the only, determinant for the usability of a design. There are other issues, but you ignore information architecture at your peril.



Critics may say that users don't care about information architecture. They don't want to learn how a web site is structured; they just want to get in, get their task done, and get out. Users focus on tasks, not on structure. But it's because users don't care about the structure of a web site that it is so important to get the information architecture right in the design. If users did bother to study our web sites, they could surely learn how an obscure or illogical structure works and utilize that knowledge to improve their task performance. Humans are flexible creatures and can adapt to hostile environments if they choose to do so.



But since we know that users won't spend time learning our information architecture, we have to spend resources to design the best information architecture we can. Allow users to focus on their tasks, and let information architects be the ones to spend time worrying about the structure of the web site or intranet. This is a good division of labor, and the pay-off from good information architecture is immense. The more that answers are located in the places you look for them, the easier the design will feel to users, and the more successful the project. There will be more sales (for e-commerce sites), better reputation for good service (for marketing sites), and less loss of productivity (for intranets).



I am a great believer in having professional information architects design the structure of professional information projects such as corporate web sites and intranets. But I also think there will be an increasing role for personal information architecture in the future. It will soon be time to teach a simplified version of the discipline to high school students, and possibly even to bring it into elementary schools as well.



The modern world is one of information overload; we are constantly bombarded by an inflow of messages, and we ought to read much more information than we have time for. Keeping yourself from drowning in this morass of information will require personal information architecture skills for problems like structuring email folders and computer files as well as the ability to manage advanced search features.



In the long run, personal information architecture may turn out to be even more important than corporate information architecture. For now, though, read this second edition of Information Architecture for the World Wide Web and get your web site and intranet in shape to support your customers and employees. Good information architecture makes users less alienated and suppressed by technology. It simultaneously increases human satisfaction and your company's profits. Very few jobs allow you to do both at the same time, so enjoy."



Spoken by Jakob Nielsen

Quoted in "Information Architecture for the World Wide Web, 2nd Edition"

(Disclosure: This is stolen from the IAI listserve and not written by me.)



Let's say you work for a bank and you're creating information that

answers common questions -- how to open a checking account; rules

around your IRA (Individual Retirement Account) like how much money

you can put in, who is eligible, etc.



You have tested the search, the navigation, design, of the site -- but

what about the content? Do you have the right information that people

need to get the answers to their questions? Is it written in the best

way to address their questions? How do you test the content itself,

irrespective of the design/interface/brand?



Take several different versions of the same type of content -- so in

these examples, maybe 5 different ways of explaining how to open a

checking account, and 5 different ways of describing IRA rules. Take

out all the branding, graphics, etc to "anonymize" the information.

Make them all look the same visually -- black text, white background,

nothing fancy. Basically, make it look like the web circa 1993.



The 5 different versions might be different versions created

internally -- Joe in Marketing thinks he has the best copy, but Sue

the technical writer likes her version better -- or even versions from

competitors. Maybe you've just merged with another bank and you're

trying to figure out which copy to use on the new site. Set it up in a

grid like this



Opening account 1 2 3 4 5

IRA rules 1 2 3 4 5



Each number is a link to a different version of the content. Randomize

the order so Joe's versions aren't always #1 and Bank A isn't always

#2. Have a "key" so you know which number corresponds with each

source, but obviously don't show that to participants.



When you do the testing, explain to people how the test is set up --

testing the content, visually may be ugly but that doesn't matter, etc

-- and ask them to comment on the information based on the way they

would use it. If they'd just skim it at home, then do that here; if

they'd go through it word by word at home, then do that here.



You're looking for feedback on things like:

- the length of content -- too long, too sort

- the level of information -- too basic, too advanced

- the writing style -- too formal, too casual

- the amount of detail -- too detailed, too high-level

- the structure of content -- headings, paragraphs, lists, links



Let people pick a topic that interests them (it may help to have more

than 2 options) and have them start reading the first version. (You

may want to vary the order so not everyone looks at #1 first.) Get

them to talk aloud as they're reading and after they've finished

reviewing each one get them to list their major likes and dislikes and

rate it on a number scale. Repeat for each of the versions and get

them to pick their favorite at the end. Ask them if they were to

create an "all star" version, what it would include. ("I liked the

information in #2, the writing style of #4, and the structure of #5.)



As I mentioned before, I've done this several times and it's been a

very enlightening experience. In our case, the content *is* the

product, so it's hugely important that we get it right, but I'd

imagine this would be extremely useful for any site where content

plays a significant role.



It helps settle internal arguments about what content is "best,"

obtains objective competitive feedback, and allows you to create

guides/rules for writers to follow when creating content. By reducing

the number of variables involved (interface, visual design, search,

speed, etc. are all the same for each piece of content) you end up

getting honest feedback on the content itself that isn't clouded by

other factors.



------------------------------------------



1) Randomize the task sequence.

If all of the test sessions start with the same task, and proceed in the

same sequence, then you may be skewing your results. (In my view, the

participant's mental model can be strongly influenced by the tasks you set.)

To avoid that, I randomize the task sequence between participants.



2) Include 'non-specific' goals.

I don't always have a specific 'piece of information' that is a 'target'.

Instead (or in addition) i give them general areas, topics, or ideas to

pursue and see how they go (and what they say about the journey). In fact,

if it works with the content, a scenario is best.



3) Let the participant set the goal.

In a preliminary chat, you can draw out what participants are interested in,

or what they want to know. Then ask them to find information on the site

that is relevant to their own stated interests/needs/wants. It feels less

like a 'test' of finding the 'right answer', that makes it less formal and

gives the participants more of a sense of control.



4) Pre-interview.

I find I can learn a lot in talking with the participant before they start

"the testing". That's where I'll get an idea for a participant- set goal.

It's also where I'll learn a bit about their way of thinking and language,

which helps when I'm observing them.