headers
David Heller | 7 Jan 2003 21:13

[Sigia-l] User Experience to engineering personnel ratios

Hi there folks,
In trying to beef up our argument for increased user experience staff, we
are trying to research what is the ratio of personnel in your oganization of
engineers to user experience people.

For the purposes of this informal survey "user experience people" fit any of
the following roles (or closesly related):

UI Design
Interaction Design
Visual Design
Information Designers
Information Architecture
Usability Engineer
Field Researcher
Human Factors Engineer
Content Managers
Etc.

We are interested in hearing from software companies or in-house teams.
Of course I will send folks a summary of the data that is received, so
people should reply directly to me at the address in my signature.
Thank you,
- dave

David Heller
Sr. User Interface Designer
Documentum: The Leader in Enterprise Content Management 925.600.5636
david.heller <at> documentum.com
http://www.documentum.com/
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Nick Gassman | 7 Jan 2003 22:15
Picon
Picon

Re: Registration forms

On Mon, 6 Jan 2003 14:08:22 +0000, Jeremy Swinfen Green wrote:

>Does anyone know of any published evidence that long registration forms put
>users off and result in lower numbers of completed registrations? I have a
>client who wants a three-page 14-field registration form and believes that
>this will be just as effective as a 1-page name plus email address
>registration form in terms of generating numbers of registrants. I would
>like to persuade him otherwise but need hard evidence.
>
Blimey, it ought to be fairly intuitive even for people not very
familiar with the medium.

At BA we've worked to reduce the number of questions and stages in
registration, in response to customer feedback. I don't have hard
numbers to give you, but as someone else pointed out, it's a given that
the more clicks people have to do, the more of a drop-off rate there'll
be.

One thing you can do is to consider which questions are mandatory to
answer, and which optional. Then think of ways of collecting the
additional information over subsequent repeat visits (if any).

If your customer insists, make sure you collect the stats, and show the
drop-off over subsequent pages.

*    Nick Gassman - eCommerce Manager - nick <at> netwiz.demon.co.uk     *
              * http://www.britishairways.com *

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): list_name_here <at> LISTS.SYNTAGM.CO.UK
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Nick Gassman | 7 Jan 2003 22:19
Picon
Picon

Re: Usability in the Org chart

On Mon, 6 Jan 2003 17:00:42 -0500, Todd Warfel wrote:

>The group I work in has around 12-14ppl. We have broken our group into the
>following subgroups:
>
>User Experience Group (information architecture, usability analysis,
>interaction design, HTML and CSS production)
>Application Group (Java, custom application development)
>Database Group (Oracle)
>IT Support (desktop support, server support)

Todd, what's the breakdown of the 12-14 people across those areas?

*    Nick Gassman - eCommerce Manager - nick <at> netwiz.demon.co.uk     *
              * http://www.britishairways.com *

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): list_name_here <at> LISTS.SYNTAGM.CO.UK
           SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES:  http://lists.syntagm.co.uk
            (or send email to mailto:whudson <at> syntagm.co.uk)
    --------------------------------------------------------------
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Todd Warfel | 7 Jan 2003 22:59

Re: Usability in the Org chart

On 1/7/03 4:19 PM, "Nick Gassman" <nick <at> NETWIZ.DEMON.CO.UK> wrote:

> Todd, what's the breakdown of the 12-14 people across those areas?

(4) User Experience Group (information architecture, usability analysis,
interaction design, HTML and CSS production)
(6) Application Group (Java, custom application development)
(2) Database Group (Oracle)
(2) IT Support (desktop support, server support)

Cheers!

Todd R. Warfel

_//message first [method second]
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
_//user experience architect
Information architecture
Interaction design
Usability analysis
[P] (607) 339-9640
[E]  twarfel <at> messagefirst.com
[w] http://www.messagefirst.com
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.

In theory, theory and practice are the same,
but in practice, they're not -- anonymous

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): list_name_here <at> LISTS.SYNTAGM.CO.UK
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Anthony Colfelt | 8 Jan 2003 16:02
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: Registration forms

We've just finished designing a new Single Sign On system for BBCi here (due
for launch in March and roll out for the year after) and so registration is
coursing in my veins at the moment.

Nick Gassman said: "it's a given that the more clicks people have to do, the
more of a drop-off rate there'll be." and I'd like to dispute that. The
research we conducted into this was significant however, the sample sizes
and methods of gathering the information did not produce statistical data
such as amounts of clicks to fall-off ratios. Nor did we want that kind of
information (though we did do some hunting for it with limited success). The
reason we weren't interested in this kind of thing is because we felt it was
a little simplistic and general to suggest that 10 clicks of 'x'
registration system is the same as 10 clicks on 'y' registration system. The
research we did into registration forms around the web proved this was the
case and people were far more concerned with the *perception* of complexity,
mistrust and drudgery than they were with how many clicks it took.

For example, forms that were 2 screens deep and only one click to complete
were perceived as more daunting than more numerous but mono-tasked screens.
A clear indication of where one was in a reg. process (i.e. "how long till
we get there, Dad?") was also welcome and lowered the barrier to
participation.

The next big issue is that of privacy. Nobody wants to give away their
private details unless they feel that they can trust the gatherer of that
information not to sell it, spam them and generally be irrisponsible with
what is essentially a facet of their identity. The more personal info you
ask of people, the more resistant they are (I can hear people saying "duh"
but you'd be surprised at how often this needs to be pointed out to
marketing folk). "We want your email address" = "WE WILL SPAM YOU" (unless
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Nick Gassman | 10 Jan 2003 18:46
Picon
Picon

Re: Registration forms

On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:02:12 -0000, Anthony Colfelt wrote:

>
>Nick Gassman said: "it's a given that the more clicks people have to do, the
>more of a drop-off rate there'll be." and I'd like to dispute that. The
>

>For example, forms that were 2 screens deep and only one click to complete
>were perceived as more daunting than more numerous but mono-tasked screens.
>

>To summarise:
>*       More clicks are not necessarily a bad thing so long as users feel
>like they're making progress and see an end in sight.
>
Fair points. Clearly the point I made was a generalisation, but it still
works as a generalisation. Like for like, more clicks will give more
drop-off. More questions will result in more drop-off.

However, you might design a better process and me, and get less drop-off
for x clicks than I do. I think it's still a sound principle to say keep
the clicks and questions and entries to a minimum (people aren't there
to click and fill in lots of questions), but that simply doing that
won't solve all your problems, and good design can reduce some of the
problems.

*    Nick Gassman - eCommerce Manager - nick <at> netwiz.demon.co.uk     *
              * http://www.britishairways.com *

    --------------------------------------------------------------
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Nick Gassman | 10 Jan 2003 19:04
Picon
Picon

Academic/commercial collaboration

I recently attended an academic conference on computer-human
interaction. I was struck by the fact that such a high proportion of the
papers seemed so, well, academic. In order to achieve scientific rigor,
it was often felt necessary to reduce the number of variables to a
manageable set, that meant that the research had little relevance to
real-world issues. The matters addressed didn't always seem very
relevant. There's also the problem that so much academic research only
uses students as subjects, who don't necessarily behave like our
customers (unless you're running a student site).

On the other hand, there are a lot of bright people in academia, and
they are looking for things to research. They have time and some
resources. It seems a shame to me that industry can't somehow find a way
to collaborate, so that the academics still get to publish their papers
and do good research, but the results are also more directly applicable
to real issues.

I've been in discussion with people in the U.S. on this, and it's been
suggested that a list to bring the two communities together would be
worth trying. I'd be interested to know what people here think of the
issue in general, and whether there's any interest in such a list.

*    Nick Gassman - eCommerce Manager - nick <at> netwiz.demon.co.uk     *
              * http://www.britishairways.com *

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): list_name_here <at> LISTS.SYNTAGM.CO.UK
           SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES:  http://lists.syntagm.co.uk
            (or send email to mailto:whudson <at> syntagm.co.uk)
    --------------------------------------------------------------
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Todd Warfel | 10 Jan 2003 20:35

Re: Academic/commercial collaboration

Yeah, I'd agree that it seems the vast majority of papers at these
conferences are very academic. It seems like that's they way to do it so
that it gets recognized, it's what people are used to, it seems more valid,
the list goes on.

I'm running into that now while doing my PhD at Cornell -- pretty much every
paper I find for research purposes is highly academic. That is with the
exception of papers that I get from companies like TwoThirty Media, 37
Signals, and Information Appliances.

I'd love to see something that includes the academic, but really interjects
some more of "the real world" into the mix.

On 1/10/03 1:04 PM, "Nick Gassman" <nick <at> NETWIZ.DEMON.CO.UK> wrote:

> I recently attended an academic conference on computer-human
> interaction. I was struck by the fact that such a high proportion of the
> papers seemed so, well, academic.

Cheers!

Todd R. Warfel

_//message first [method second]
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
_//user experience architect
Information architecture
Interaction design
Usability analysis
[P] (607) 339-9640
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
William Hudson | 11 Jan 2003 16:57
Picon
Favicon

Re: Academic/commercial collaboration

Nick -

There is no shortage of mixed academic/commercial lists. This list is
one (it was one of the goals in setting it up and it does have quite a
few academic subscribers). CHI-WEB is another (send an empty email to
chi-web-subscription-request <at> acm.org to subscribe or see the web site
below). However, what is needed in my view is a more determined effort
in actually bringing both sets of interests together. This is something
that organizations like SIGCHI (in the US) and BHCIG (in the UK) do to a
limited extent, but nowhere near enough to have a visible impact.

Perhaps specific collaborative conferences and seminars would be a step
in the right direction. It may be that BHCIG has already done this, but
most of the conferences I have seen are either firmly academic or
commercial, rarely a deliberate mix. (There are exceptions like industry
day at the annual UK HCI conference.) Any BHCIG execs out there care to
comment? 

Regards,

William Hudson
UCD List Guy

and

CHI-WEB Moderation Team 

CHI-WEB Info and Archives: 
http://www.sigchi.org/web/
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
thevellas@hotmail.com | 11 Jan 2003 22:55
Picon
Favicon

Academic/commercial collaboration

Nick,

absolutely!

Unfortunately measures of success in academia are often abstract and
this is more so since it is often easier to talk about something than to
do it! I believe that the  dreaded Research Assessment Exercise (RAE)
has lead to much sloppy work and the dilution of work of real worth.

Yes a list (or this one?) could be used to bring theory and practice
into line! However industrialists need to be given a warning that not
all of those who preach know how to practice!

Alfred and Carol Vella
all <at> thevellas.com
01908 648566
194 Buckingham Rd Bletchley
MK3 5JB

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): list_name_here <at> LISTS.SYNTAGM.CO.UK
           SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES:  http://lists.syntagm.co.uk
            (or send email to mailto:whudson <at> syntagm.co.uk)
    --------------------------------------------------------------
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane