.oO Tailwind

Vodafone has struck a deal with My Space in a bid to put mobile blogging into the pockets of Europe’s Generation ‘C’. The deal will place important connectivity features directly in the pocket of 24/7 connected types such as post/edit videos/text/photos, manage network, view/manage profiles, mail and so on, all ready to go, out of the box.

This is a smart move I think as it’ll certainly help to make Vodafone more attractive o the teen audience and maybe claw back some declining market share. However, as teenager’s rarely pay their bill, who makes a decision about which network to join will find the idea of ‘Communitied-up’teens burning data fees like wild fire particularly attractive.

Of course this isn’t jut for the teen market, but its a point.

Which leads me to my key issue with telcos and their ‘connected’ services. I’ve been working on a number of ‘community’ tools for mobile companies over the last 2 years and there is always one thing that I think would greatly boost adoption.

It should be free to use.

They sell you camera phones, with email, wap, IM etc, then preclude usage by having non-transparent data charges.

At the moment I use (play) with a lot of mobile community services such as Shozu, but it always occurs to me that there is a black art in understanding how much it costs to use. Handset UI design is particularly useless as are the pricing models from the telcos.

On upload of a picture, or after a wap session users are often greeted with an unhelpful ‘435222 bytes transferred’ message or something similar, or maybe nothing at all.

This doesn’t help.

It certainly won’t help my mum understand what she’s paying for if her tech savvy son can’t.

Also, it’s always a real bind having to pay for services which are essentially free from your desktop. It seems silly to use services such as Shozu unless you really need to post that image to Flickr immediately, which of course none of us do.

This lack of transparency on costs is clearly a barrier to adoption for telcos and the one who’s brave to offer data/communication/entertainment services for a fixed fee will be a winner, surely.

Telcos are growing into converged service companies offering round-trip digital connectivity, yet they still act and sell as if they are a mobile phone company.

Broadband offers seem like they are bolted onto mobile phone propositions, services aren’t integrated, phones are feature rich yet the pricing remains a barrier. However, what is interesting is that Vodafone haven’t tried to replicate a blogging/network service offering in a walled garden. I only hope that these ‘My Space Inside’ handsets allow users to set-up any blog service the user requires.

My second point to make about the My Space / Vodafone deal is that I’m not so sure the brands are compatible. When big brands get involved with established social networks the relationship is often viewed with cynicism, My Space has been declining in popularity since it’s formal relationship with Murdoch and Flickr didn’t get off too easily when Yahoo! took over the reins.

Anyway, interesting. Let’s see how others respond and what happens.

Browsing Results

In this post we’ll discuss the importance of information design in building faith in your search tool. In Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink he describes the subconscious art of snap judgement. This concept is directly relevant to the art of designing search as it’s on the results page where thou shall be judged and users are quick to draw conclusions!

We’ll cover:

• Information Design
• Snap Judgement
• Relevance Transparency
• Shaping Intent & Results Manipulation

Generally the target page of any user experience is the most critical and in the case of search, sound information design of the search results page, or SERP as it’s sometimes known, is vital in more ways than you’d first expect. Firstly it’s the target page and therefore the most important page in this experience, but interestingly it is a target page that is adapted and recast by the user as they shape their intent based on the tools and information you present them.

Information design is the order of the day here as the aim is to rapidly address the users satisfaction criteria and converge them on to a single, successful result.

There are many potential paths the user can take from the SERP including:

• View a result
• Expand the result set
• Contract the result set
• Navigate through the result set
• Search within
• Search again
• Change indicie
• Bail

/state the obvious.

The page needs to be designed to deal with all these concepts sufficiently in mind to guide the user to the right decision based on some clever work around the information hierarchy and design. However, there is a fine art in getting this right despite the fact that there are several conventions employed and an obvious pattern language established.

First and foremost when users arrive at this page they are seeking instant gratification, they want confirmation that they are on the right path, that the information scent is high. SERPs employ a range of strategies to meet this need such as:

• Reiterating the input terms
• Highlighting the matched words in the excerpt
• Showing the number of matches
• Providing suitable result manipulation tools

Reiterating the terms indicates that the user has ‘been heard’ and that they spelled things correctly and that the query formulation was accurate. Too high a number of matches suggests a lack of focus whereas too few matched keywords indicates a more general results set than desired.

Varying responses to these pieces of information start guiding the user onto distinct paths; shall I search again? Shall I investigate some of these results? Can I manipulate these results?

Note these examples whereby results, ads, controls and asides are well placed and presented:

Yahoo Search for ‘Samsonite Suitcases’

Google Search for ‘Samsonite Suitcases’

Note how Yahoo! provides a richer set of options, links to shopping, ‘Also try’s’, Sponsored results, ’shared by Yahoos’ etc.

(Hint: this is why I prefer to use Yahoo rather than Google).

In those first few nanoseconds where users are assessing the quality of response and simultaneously validating both their query and the quality of the search tool alot of this ‘conversation’ takes place. However, in these micromoments they still haven’t finished. The user is yet to zone-in on a particular search result and SERPs are best designed to meet this scan-reading behaviour.

Users need to be able to separate controls, ads and results clearly and easily.

Designing well for this situation means having a good understanding of your users goals. I personally find that the new image search on Google has flouted these basic principles of good information design as they have hidden key criteria behind a roll-over. It inhibits a users ability to quickly asses the results set and make a choice. With the new design they have to roll-over each image to ascertain detail that helps decide which result to focus on.

Well designed SERPs pay attention to the information and typographic hierarchy of the page and can guide users eyes through the layers being displayed, reducing cognitive effort and shaping intent.

• Users scan the page
• They identify a valid result set
• They may identify an invalid result set
• They assess the source of each result
• They assess the synopsis/extract
• They zone-in on a particular result due to a combination of synopsis, source and keyword match

It’s for these reasons that sites such as Yahoo! and Google are so well loved, in addition to the obvious ones about accuracy. Through the use of sound information design they reduce cognitive effort in understanding the information, its relevance and what could be achieved with it. They utilise a recognised (née established) design pattern so familiarity breeds trust through reduced cognitive load.

So, in these very few seconds there is a significant impact in the users perception of the brand - does it deliver on the proposition? Is it accurate? Is it easy to use? Do I get why it’s returned things in this particular order.

The order of the results is HUGELY important. Users want accuracy they don’t want cynicism. it should be clear why results are there and there should be a clear separation between actual results and paid for adverts. Perceivably the results need to present themselves as impartial, it has to be clear why elements are where they are and in many ways you should see diminishing importance in well designed SERPS.

Of course all of this is well and good, but what we really need is to address the users satisfaction criteria. This means present them with the right information so that they can make an informed choice about which result in the set to focus on.

Users will all have varying satisfaction criteria and its this criteria that defines their choice in result. For example one user may trus one source more than the other because they have heard of it, another user may find that the synopsis accurately summarises what they areafter, on image search a user might ust ant something of a certyain size (like when searching for album art).

For example, when conducting a web search, displaying the source URL for a result is vitally important in terms of the credibility of information. This information shouldn’t be first in the information hierarchy and it shouldn’t be buried either. It should nestle nicely within the second or third information layer (it’s where a typographic hierarchy is quite important) and it’s where Google have gone wrong in the redesign of there image search.

Yahoo! released a search tool called ‘Mindset‘ which aimed to create more accurate search result sets based on shaping the user intent. What does this mean? Well a user could type in ‘Volkwagen Golf’ into the search entry field and then hit search to see the results, then they could drag a slider from ‘Shopping’ to ‘Researching’ and the results below would resort themselves in real time.

On this page note the information design, the separation of ads and the clear ranking.

In essence this allows the user to further define what it is that they are trying to do. Do I want to travel to Paris or am I researching places to go when I’m there?

Post-query manipulation tools are critical in shaping intent and they are the subject of our next posting Refining Results

Then of course there is advertising, but that in itself warrants a whole posting and I sense your eyes are getting heavy reading this one, we’ll leave it there.

As a reminder, here are the 7 Stages of Search Experience:

1. Intorduction to framework
2. Search Proposition
3. Personalisation
4. Query Formulation
5. Error Prevention and Correction
6. Browsing Results
7. Refining Results
8. Discovering More

Check out this ‘useful’ social network called Fon.

the basic premise is that in exchange for access to your access point at home, you can get access to other Fon points when you are out and about, a kind of gentleman’s agreement.

Use the map and check out who’s playing ball in your area… I was pleasantly surprised.

There are 3 types of community member (from the site):

Foneros are members of the FON Community. There are actually three types of Fonero:

• Most of us are Linuses. That means that we share our WiFi at home and in return get free WiFi wherever we find a FON Access Point.
• Aliens are people who don’t share their WiFi yet. We charge them just €/$ 3 for a Day Pass to access the FON Community.
• Bills are in business and so want to make some money from their WiFi. Instead of free roaming, they get a 50% share of the money that Aliens pay to access the Community through their FON Access Point. They can also advertise their business on their personalized FON Access Point homepage.

I just tried to get some help on the Sony Ericsson site as my phone is showing the white screen of death so I naturally chose the ‘Help’ option.

On clicking ‘I need help with my phone’ I was shown this pop-up, the lack of considerate design in these instances maddens me, why doesn’t it just link to the right page?

I’ve recently been working on a very exciting project and on said project we’ve been looking at way in which we can leave a lasting impression with regards to practical accessibility (will post about this concept later).

I was thinking about 2 things, firstly the accessibility and inclusive design angle and secondly the potential to join up Multimap with my other client.

This started me thinking about APIs and the fact that they are mostly used to ‘mash-up’ data services into new uses, then I saw this post on Google Blog that crystalised my thoughts perfectly. Typically, mash-ups take a data feed and mash-it-up with something else to create a new lens on said data. See Craigslist. But of course there are a smattering of mash-ups that have just been about using the same data but changing the interface. The best example I can think of is the various Amazon mash-ups out there that provide an alternative way of browsing their catalogue.

So what if we were to take APIs for mapping services and concentrate not on functional calls but on display parameters? We could create accessible versions with just a little bit more consideration and high contrast, reduced contrast options would be easy to create.

This is an unshaped thought, but something to mull over.

Uuurrrgh.

Yahoo! Whom I love, have left a bad taste in my mouth.

The cynical little fellas have only gone and used Flickr community photos in an advertising stint:

Here’s the link to Yahoo Wii.

There is a Flickr badge that aggregates photos tagged ‘wii’ in a page aimed at promoting the Nintendo Wii. I checked the Creative Commonsand it seems most are under Attribution.

But reading a bit further it seems that Yahoo! are going to change it to pull photos with the appropriate rights.

I bet the parent of the child in a basket isn’t too chuffed:

Naughty Yahoo. For that I take away your exclamation mark.

You know those times when you pick something up and play with it only to find your self continuing to play with it some 20 minutes later because you like the way it does something?No? Oh well, just me then…But I was fiddling with a colleagues cigarette packet the other week and thought it such a good piece of packaging design, I’d share it here.In the UK, Marlboro have released a limited edition pack which is a new style design that opens up on the side using a built-in hinge rather like a Zippo. Ergonomically I think it gives you better access to the contents, but stylistically it’s a nice change.The engineering that has gone into the packaging design amazes me; as the hinge, made from cardboard; and the clasp, also made from cardboard can be used again and again and never seem to weaken.It’s cool, look out for it in a bar near you.When you see it, open it, close it, open it, close it ad infinitum.

Readers that have dipped into some of my earlier posts will know that designing user experiences around site search and search engines has been one of my career pet topics. I’ve worked on numerous types of search tool and as such have long ago developed a framework for driving the interaction design of such an experience.

I’ve written these posts because on a number of projects that I’ve been involved in I have seen teams think of search as ‘a page’ within the system accesses via an omn-present text entry box, top-right. They are failing to realise the fine tuning required to created a well integrated tool for users to discover content and I wanted to provide a basic to medium level crib-sheet for creating search experiences. Consider it a checklist, though it’s not that list like I’m afraid.

Please see the following posts for the earlier parts in the series where I talk about things to consider when defining search user experience:

1. Introduction - 7 Stages of Search Experience
2. Part 1 - The Search Proposition
3. Part 2 - Implicit / Explicit Personalisation
4. Part 3 - Query Formulation

Continuing the series in Search Experience Design (which I have to say I completely forgot I’d started due to a new family addition - forgive me), we are now going to look at Error Prevention and Detection.

There are many different types of error prevention and correction that can be employed by search tools and they typically play out mid-query once the user has submitted something to the system. Some of them happen automatically, others require the user to clarify their intentions whilst others operate post-query on the search results page.

There can be a problem with keyword searching in general, I say referring to the earlier 3 mental models of search employed by users when devising a find strategy, I can again use the example of ‘thai green curry’. If the user simply enters ‘thai green curry’ then the search tool won’t be able to determine whether they want recipes for thai green curry or whether they to buy ingredients for it.

When users ‘talk’ to search engines they like to use this kind of truncated language but unfortunately it lacks the emphasis that would help them get better results, the error prevention and correction strategies employed by search tools aim to correct this.

These tools can range from mid-query devices (between the point of submitting a search request to the display of the results set) through to post-query devices such as Google’s infamous ‘Did you mean this instead?’

The purpose of these devices is to remove input error, reduce ambiguity and enable convergence to a more accurate results set. I’ve seen many a site specification delivered without these simple business rules included, some of the devices may include:

• Error tolerance (spelling mistakes Qwerry Vs Qwerty)
• Case tolerance (QWERTY Vs qwerty)
• Truncation tolerance (Qw… Qwer… Qwerty)
• Format tolerance (Qwerty01 Vs Qwerty 01)
• Colloquialisms (Localised labels / slang i.e. Bairn = Baby)
• Synonyms / Thesauri (similar terms, i.e. dog and hound)
• Near matches – Being able to match items that are thematically near rather than
  linguistically near. (Wedding Dresses – Photographers – Catering)
• Ambiguous queries – Dealing with a lack of clarity or trying to converge to a
  smaller result set (London, UK or London, Canada)

Post-query correction/convergence takes place within the search results page:

• ‘No Results’ sets – Handling situations where there is no matching information –
  pushing the user on to potentially relevant information
• ‘Did you mean?’ – Suggested alternative spelling

Interesting and progressive ‘No results’ handlers will always offer the user something for example a food site that didn’t have a recipe for ‘thai green curry’ should offer the user a range of other thai style dishes it has, or indeed at least some other relevant content.

Of course, the relevancy of alternative content and its ability to ‘reveal’ itself to users under error contexts is wholly reliant upno the content loading process and the metadata created with each record. However, our fictitious search tool doesn’t have a record so how would it know what to present?

I’m afraid this is where human intervention (and with it some emotional, rational and non-systemic logic) helps.

I once worked for a search company whereby 4 people sat and watched how people searched for things and plugged the gaps by building synonyms, relational data and a local vernacular. Of course this is okay if you govern your own content, but not if you are crawling others sites.

Back to error prevention and correction, it is also worth investigating any implicit corrections that take place on the query. As sometimes the search tool will identify a common spelling mistake and automatically correct it. Or it may be that due to a lack of results, the search tool has amended the search criteria and expanded or contracted the query, for example ‘there are no results for ‘Paintballing’ in London but there are for Surrey, Berkshire, Essex and Kent.’

Search help
I’ll quickly write something about help pages as they are used and can provide a variety of information to guide users in the finer points of your search engine. Topics that the basic level of help should cover include:

• The mechanics of search - how it works
• Detailed descriptions of each feature on the page
• Tips on how to conduct a successful search
• Explanations of al the search result manipulation controls on the search results page
• Advanced search techniques
• How to customise search

That’s it for now. there is obviously more detail but this post has already supersized and if you’ve read this far, the post is either interesting or you have serious staying power!

As a reminder, here are the 7 Stages of Search Experience:

1. Intorduction to framework
2. Search Proposition
3. Personalisation
4. Query Formulation
5. Error Prevention and Correction
6. Browsing Results
7. Refining Results
8. Discovering More