improve the ux of your content and prove it
TRANSCRIPT
@pnoreault #LavaCon
Improve the UX of Your Content and Prove It
Pam Noreault – ACI WorldwideTara Knapp – ACI Worldwide
Contact usTara Knapp
Manager, Information DevelopmentACI Worldwide
[email protected]@gmail.com@tara_knapp (Twitter)Tara Knapp (LinkedIn)
Pam Noreault
SR Manager, Information DevelopmentACI Worldwide
[email protected]@gmail.com
@pnoreault (Twitter)Pam Noreault (LinkedIn)
Journey• Beginning• Imagine - What could be• Our road• Content quality• (Re)evolution• What’s stopping you?
Beginning
Imagine!Customers are your biggest advocates.
Where is your content on a scale of 1 to 3?
1 = Hot Mess 2 = Partial Mess 3 = Utopia
Methodology before
Methodology now – inching upwardsPersonas
(product level)
User Research and Analysis
(release level)*usage patterns
Information Model(release level)
User Stories
User-Centered ContentInformation Model
(deliverable)Concise writing
Topic-based writingTask-based writing
Writing for translationWriting for accessibility
Validation Testing
How we select content to fix1. Select deliverable2. Select content to uplift
Before model After models
Before overview
After overview
Before topic
After topic
Road led us here – BUT prove the changes made a difference
Contextual overviewsConcise/clear contentReduced
content/eliminated clicksTopic-based (text scanning)Accessibility – checklist of
fixesTranslation – checklist of
fixes
How many of you are doing content validation with customers?
Validation methodologyModel for PDF Documents• Uplifted four documents
Methodology• Teams of 4-7 writers per document• Tested each document with at least 2 users from 2 customers• Tested 1 hour via WebEx• 4 tasks tested on each doc• Presented 2 docs – old + new• Order of docs alternated
Validation protocolDirections
• Think aloud• Tell us when you have completed the task or you give up
Test Protocol• Each task was timed. • Each task was completed successfully/unsuccessfully. Testers could
give up.• After all tasks were completed on one doc, testers rated the content.
Scale: from 1 to 5. • After all tasks were completed for both docs, testers rated their overall
experience. Scale: from 1 (poor) to 7 (great).• Data recorded in a Google form• Sessions recorded with permission
Sample taskYou are a operations manager put in charge of monitoring the system. Task: Use the user guide to determine your two areas of responsibility in terms of configuration.
?
Percentage of tasks completed correctly
Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 Document 40%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Old Doc New Doc
Results – Document 1 (Average before & after)
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Results – Document 2 (Average before & after)
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Results – Document 3 (Average before & after)
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not ValuableSimple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Results – Document 4 (Average before & after)
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Simple 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Complex
Effective
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Ineffective
Clean 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Confusing
Clear 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cluttered
Valuable
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Not Valuable
Average overall ranking – 1 poor to 7 great
Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 Document 40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Old Doc New Doc
• Content located faster in 3 of 4 new models. • Validation tasks completed with increased
success in 2 of 4 new models. • Content rating higher in 3 of 4 new models.• Overall content ranking higher in 2 of 4 new
models.
Laugh and cry moments• Surfing & browsing• Clueless & perfectionist• Change haters• Fear of failure• When is done really done• Aha moments• Technical snafus• Testing heavy-duty reference
content was a bust
Customers are their biggest advocates. What the writers learned
Lessons the writers came up with• Do a dry run
• Observing the users’ choices can be as useful as the data
• Cannot predict how users will do the tasks
• Define what “done” means
• Reference-based content should not be tested with the same methodology as task-based content
• Rebooting your computer prior to testing has its benefits
• Repeated contact with customers removes the fear factor over time
1. We require user research and content validation, where appropriate.
2. We get creative…..• Collaborate with people who work with customers• Monitor and mine data from social networking sites• Join LinkedIn groups - ask questions & post surveys• Seek input from people who represent the same personas as our users• Participate in customer-focus groups (Design Partner Programs)
Re(evolution)
What are you waiting for?
Pam Noreault• [email protected]• [email protected]• @pnoreault (Twitter)• Pam Noreault (LinkedIn)
Tara Knapp• [email protected]• [email protected]• @tara_knapp (Twitter)• Tara Knapp (LinkedIn)