Don’t hide the ingredients
I went to a nice cafeteria-style restaurant yesterday to get some lunch. I’ve been to this particular place before, but never ordered a sandwich there. That’s when I noticed something odd: The menu board only shows the names of their sandwiches, which aren’t very descriptive. Basically, there’s no way to figure out what’s in there without waiting in line to ask someone or finding a takeout menu.
Now, I’ve got nothing against a catchy, unique product name, whether it’s for a sandwich, a piece of software, or a coffeemaker. But if your business model requires customers to figure out what that name stands for in a crowded ordering area, you need to give them a few attributes they can understand. Otherwise, some portion of the people are going to get ticked off and head elsewhere.
In fact, I abandoned this very restaurant the week before and went someplace else down the block, precisely because I couldn’t figure out what I needed to order. It wasn’t until I found the secret decoder ring (in the form of their take out menu) that I could deciper the puzzle and choose the right sandwich.
Filed under: Design, User Experience | Closed
Ancient history
In a lot of programs, you can sort lists by date. But when salesforce.com finally added a sort feature to their search screens, they did something pretty silly: the list shows the oldest items first. Granted, you can click the column header again to show the newest entries at the top, but this is a needless extra click every time you use the feature.
I’m sure there is a non-intuitive, hopelessly complex way to change this option using the SForce-Enterprise2-Ninja API (if you have a lot of time and patience), but that’s not the point. As many others have said before me, the best solution is to have your defaults make sense for the typical user. If your product is used to track customer relationships, like salesforce.com, then the logical thing to do is showing the most recent events first.
Filed under: Usability, User Experience | Closed
Features that nobody uses
Ever notice those raised areas for “Diet”, “Decaf”, and other choices on a soft drink or coffee lid, or the places to check off the ingredients on a pizza box or burrito wrapper? Have you ever seen them marked with anything useful? It’s pretty amazing to me that despite seemingly zero value to staff and customers, these little widgets continue to appear on food containers. I guess no one ever complained about them, but you have to wonder if the space might be put to better use.
Websites and web applications can have this problem too. Old features and buttons have a way of sticking around too long. So the next time you’re updating your user interface, take a look at the historical usage logs. Remove the buttons that nobody seems to use, or move them to a less-prominent location. Then, you can allocate this real estate to more productive uses, like making the most important buttons even more obvious to new customers.
Filed under: Design, User Experience | Closed
Too many choices
I booked a flight on the United Airlines site today. After confirming my travel times, I was presented with the option to pay for a seat with extra legroom. When I declined that, another screen appeared offering a “special deal” for upgrading to first class. On this second screen, I had to wade through a big disclaimer (presumably for the special upgrade) and then find the button to decline the offer. That’s a lot of effort just to purchase what I asked for in the first place.
From what I’ve seen, many airline sites are pretty crude. They tend to lag behind other e-commerce sites in key areas like usability. But it would certainly be nice if they could follow a few simple guidelines for special offers, upgrades and add-ons. When presenting customers with these choices, put them all on a single, straightforward screen. If there are disclaimers that go along with the options, only show them if the customer chooses to take you up on the offer. And finally, don’t make the “No thanks” button hard to find. Otherwise, you may find that a lot more customers abandon their entire purchase because they were confused by your upgrade offer.
Filed under: Design, Usability, User Experience | Closed
Line forms here
Last weekend, I went to buy some shirts at a fairly popular clothing store. When it was time to pay for my purchases, I went towards the cash registers. The checkout area was split into three rows, facing two different directions. Since every register had the same green light, I had no idea which ones were open. So, I figured I’d stand and wait for the next available cashier to signal for me.
But then I noticed the problem: there was no sign or floor decal showing where to stand or where the line forms. People seemed to be buying things and processing returns at all sorts of locations, without any obvious pattern. So I took a guess and went to the right, and others lined up behind me. Despite our growing queue, some people ignored us and just walked to distant registers. We finally gave up and moved back to what was apparently the “official” waiting area, perhaps christened as such by people who shop there more often.
This should be pretty obvious, but if you ask customers to form a line, always tell them where the line starts and what it’s for. Something as simple as “Checkout line forms here” or “Wait here for next cashier” can save a lot of hassle for customers, reduce conflicts during high-traffic periods, and make your staff more efficient. In the online world, this means making sure that the button to check out or complete a transaction is clearly marked. And since customers can’t see what happens behind the scenes (after all, there’s no cashier scanning and bagging their items), including a progress bar with an estimate of how long it will take to submit their order is a smart practice, too.
Filed under: Design, User Experience | Closed
Avoiding the membership tax
I belong to an art museum that has a fairly standard annual membership program. You pay an annual fee, and get free admission throughout the year, along with the usual discount in the gift shop, etc. But they have one practice that really irks me: whether you’re a member or not, you have to pay for the bag and coat check.
Now, I can understand why they don’t want people carrying huge shopping bags into the facility and bumping into the art. But charging members for this service amounts to a sort of “membership tax” or tariff. Anytime you visit after shopping (even if all you bought was some toothpaste) or if you stop by in the winter, they collect $1 per item. If you visit once a week with some item in tow, you’ll shell out nearly as much as the annual membership fee in these little charges.
Here’s a better idea: either make the service free for members, or offer an add-on option that entitles the bearer to a year’s worth of coat and bag checks at a flat rate. Along with that, provide some guidance about what people can expect they’ll need to check. That way, the enforcement won’t seem so random.
More generally, I would argue that nickel-and-diming your customers every time they show up isn’t a smart long-term practice — especially when your business is built around selling memberships. If there are going to be hidden charges, disclose them up front and let customers choose to pay an additional fee to avoid them, if they so desire.
Filed under: User Experience | Closed
I’m often surprised to see how stores and other businesses post their hours of operation. Usually this is a simple matter, e.g. “We’re open 10-8 Mon through Sat, and 12-6 on Sun”. Aside from the question of which day starts the week (I’m partial to Monday rather than Sunday), posting these hours on your front door or on your website is a widely accepted and effective practice.
But 24 hour businesses, public services, and even web-based applications present their own challenges, since being closed is the exception, rather than the rule. For example, one of Wal-Mart’s 24 hour stores provides a simple sign that says “Open 24 hours a day, except on Christmas Eve and New Year’s Eve”. (Don’t quote me on those exact holidays, though.) This makes it easy for customers, who can count on the store always being open except for those few holidays.
In contrast, I saw a public transit system with a sign saying “Trains run to downtown from 4 am – 1 am”. Basically, they’re saying you can catch a train anytime, as long as it’s not between 1 am and 4 am. This is a lot to compute when you only spend a second or two reading the sign. Perhaps a better approach would be to say, “Train service to downtown is available throughout the day and night, except for 1 am to 4 am in the early morning”. This makes it much easier to compare your scheduled travel time to see if it falls into the brief window whem service isn’t available.
To generalize this a bit, if your service is available a lot more often than it’s not, and people generally expect it to be available, you should consider stating your hours like the Wal-Mart store mentioned above. Tell customers when you’re NOT open, rather than when you are. This is clearly a judgement call, but I think it’s worth considering the next time you’re updating your hours.
Filed under: User Experience | Closed
Please try again
Apple is widely respected for the design and usability of its products. But even they slip up sometimes. Case in point: I was trying to help a friend order a printed photo book from iPhoto. Whenever we tried to create an Apple account and submit the order, it said “An error has occurred – Please try again later.” After many hours of trial-and-error, we learned that this error meant he already had an Apple account, and needed to use that instead of making a new one.
This is one of those things that makes me crazy: telling someone to “try again later” when the issue is certain to keep happening, no matter how long they wait or how often they try. A much better practice is to make your error messages indicate how to correct the issue, like: “Our records show you already have an account with us. Please click here to login.” Or, if your software is mired in legacy code and it’s very costly to add specific messages, at least make the generic errors more useful. You might say: “Sorry, we couldn’t process your request. Perhaps you have an account with us already, or you put some strange characters in your name. Please check your info and try again. If you still receive this message, contact us for help.”
I know it’s not the prettiest approach in the world, but at least it might help customers resolve the issue or encourage them to seek out help before they abandon the process entirely.
Filed under: Design, Usability, User Experience | Closed
Pressing your own buttons
A few years ago, I had a Lexmark laser printer that would periodically run into an error. Instead of resetting itself, a light came on that said “Press button”. Once you pressed the big reset button, it would start working again. I thought this was pretty silly, since if the system knows enough to tell me to press the button, why can’t it just perform the reset itself? It’s not like I was doing anything physical, like clearing a paper jam.
Fast forward to present day, where I just came across a high-end espresso machine that does the same thing. After you turn on the machine, it says “Press clean button”. Once you press the button, it continues with an automated process that it obviously should be able to start on its own.
With these examples in mind, I offer a simple guideline: Don’t ask users to manually start a process that is (a) required to use the product and (b) fully automated once they start it. Instead, just have your product handle this on its own, and give the user a status indicator if you like. This proactive approach reduces hassle and provides a more streamlined user experience.
Filed under: Usability, User Experience | Closed
Sharp edges
In a brief glance at the items that I take along for an overnight trip, no fewer than 4 of them have sharp edges. Not just sort of sharp, but sharp enough to cut your hand or tear your travel bag if you put them in the wrong place. Some of these tubes and containers could even poke a hole in the others if you positioned them the right way.
I know there are manufacturing constraints that lead to this sort of design. But that doesn’t mean that the designers should ignore the problem. Rounding off the edges or using a softer material would be a big improvement.
I don’t think this problem is limited to packaged goods. It happens with software, too. When you install a program that makes another one stop working, or you have to take special precautions to avoid making errors on a website, you’re basically dealing with another form of sharp edges. If the products you sell are like this, perhaps it’s time to smooth out these problems for your users — and stop tearing holes in their workflow.
Filed under: Design, User Experience | Closed
You must be logged in to post a comment.