Choice 1.0

Conducting research and validating purchase decisions has always been a popular online activity. And whilst vendors make every effort to publicise key features and benefits, it’s websites like CNet, Epinions and Amazon.com that make experts of everyday users turned contributors. Tapping into the collective intellect of users – as a bona fide business strategy – has been well articulated in James Surowiecki’s ‘The Wisdom of Crowds‘, as well as in ‘Wikinomics‘ by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams. New and engaging businesses like Yelp and Burrp are cropping up globally, to capitalise on the power of public opinion.

Tapping into online user-generated content should be a natural extension for an outfit like Choice, Australia’s venerable consumer advocate with a cult-like following, especially amongst baby boomers. After watching a clever TV spot promoting their website, I decided to have a look. Unfortunately, where I expected a thriving online community of participants sharing experiences, I found a walled garden with restricted access to information. Subscriptions aren’t exactly cheap at $18.95 per quarter (or $16.95 for 72 hour access), when you consider that a little bit of effort can yield similar information for free a few clicks away.

Choice is a not-for-profit organisation, that prides itself on having the end customer as its only paying constituent. Understandably, providing premium, well researched content online for free could canabalise it’s print business. But perhaps there is also a middle ground. Why not provide product summaries and overall ratings for free, but charge for detailed analysis and comparisons? And why not allow users an opportunity to post their own experiences and ratings for any product or service (as opposed to a few pre-defined topics only)?

Choice has less to lose than it fears by adapting to the new online environment where individuals have both a voice and a vote. Hopefully, they will evolve their own online offering before a less worthy entrant fills the void.

Third-party auto sites in the slow lane

Visit an OEM car website, and you’d expect to see slick graphics, interactive demos, and one click access to every positive review and award conferred on them. This is done in large part to gratify the ego of the person who has likely already made a purchase decision (notice the photo-shopped desktop wallpapers for download?)

Which is why the burden falls on third-party auto sites to be the fair and balanced arbiter, providing shoppers with the tools to research and validate their decisions. Unfortunately, third-party auto sites underwhelm when it comes to creating an optimal user experience. Instead, they provide yet another billboard for car manufacturers to splash their marketing spiel.

Using user-centered design methodologies that rely on personas and scenarios, third-party auto sites can significantly improve the overall experience for site visitors. Support for user-generated tags as an alternate means of accessing information, and cluster search that contextualise results are a good place to start.

Have you recently used a third-party auto site to locate your next car? Share your experience with us.

Alpha, Beta, Game on

Online entrepreneurs often agonise over being ready enough to launch a web service. This is perhaps baggage carried over from traditional product launch strategies at old world behemoths, who have both the motivation and the wherewithal to go over every line of code and every bit of copy with a fine tooth comb before launch.

Thankfully, innovation need not be so severe. Two examples worth noting are Optimal Sort and SlideShare. Optimal Sort is an online card sorting tool made freely available (for now at least) to information architects by New Zealand-based Optimal Usability. The tool is simple enough to use, and has basic functionality you’d expect in a card sorting tool. Admittedly, the tool is far from perfect, and the developers make no secret of it. In fact, speak with Optimal Usability Directer Sam Ng, and you get the sense their modus operandi has been to launch the service, and get information architects to provide critical feedback on how to improve it. This iterative product development strategy allows for refinement based on user feedback, and can apply to larger organisations as well. A notable example is Fidelity Labs in the U.S., a website that serves as a beta platform for innovative tools and features.

SlideShare, referred to as You Tube for PowerPoint, is another example of getting your product out the door and improving it on the fly. At the recently concluded OZ IA Conference in Sydney, Australia, SlideShare CEO Rashmi Sinha talked about her learnings from the launch of SlideShare in a presentation aptly titled, “Fast, cheap & somewhat in control“. One of her insights – when you have developed a service that works but may have minor issues, go live with the service and invite user feedback. Early releases get your website exposure, while allowing you to invoke the “standard disclaimers apply” moniker for alpha releases.

Are you developing a web service and contemplating whether to have a public alpha or beta release? Share your thoughts, and URLs if you are game!

Offshoring design

While technology offshoring is par for the course at many large global firms, many had a tepid start with insignificant projects that scaled as confidence and trust between the customer and vendor grew. The offshoring learning curve is now being scaled by smaller businesses in North America and Europe, and many of these businesses are pioneering in their own right by outsourcing activities like brand identity development and usability projects. New Delhi-based Hatch Design has a respectable roster of international clients, some of whom have never met the Hatch team, and yet have taken the plunge and been pleasantly surprised with their overall experience.

And herein lies both the challenge and the opportunity. While the top tier offshoring market has an established hierarchy – Infosys, Wipro, TCS, Satyam, IBM, Accenture and Congnizant rule the roost – the bottom end of niche players is incredibly fragmented. A small business operating in Cardiff will not have the resources to evaluate and select the right vendor in India, China or Mexico to outsource design and development. As for niche players like Hatch Design, word of mouth and repeat business will remain key revenue drivers.

Whether we will see a consolidation of some of these smaller vendors remains to be seen. Perhaps, some will establish strategic partnerships or hope to be bought out by established tier one vendors.

Are you a customer who dared to offshore visual design or web usability? Or are you a vendor with a proven track record? Tell us about your experiences and lessons learnt.

Clear winner

Visit a travel booking website and chances are you’ll be served a visual treat of promos and banner ads seeking your attention and action. A notable exception is Mumbai-based travel site Cleartrip.com.  Beyond the minimalist design, there is careful selection of content and placement of function. And in their obvious passion for simplicity, they have managed not to compromise commercial sensibilities. Primary goals of customers – booking flights or hotel rooms – are simple tasks.  A clever tie up with Lonely Planet gives customers access to destination highlights, and features like a calendar showing the best airfares for the month are spot on for the local market.

Whatever the long-term prospects for Cleartrip, they have set the standard in their domestic market for online travel sites.

Have you used Cleartrip.com? Or had a better user experience with another travel site? Drop us a note and tell us about it.