Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
UX BENCHMARK STUDY
TelCo Industries
July 2013
2

INDEX
1.  SCENARIO
2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS
3.  BENCHMARK
4.  CONCLUSIONS
3

1. SCENARIO
•  The following selection has been drafted by considering the scenario of leading references for
TELCO ind...
4

INDEX
1.  SCENARIO
2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS
3.  BENCHMARK
4.  CONCLUSIONS
5

2. WEB ANALYTICS METRICS
•  The most important purpose for a website is to MEET THE NEED OF USERS, providing a clear an...
6

2.1 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Cross-Device
•  Apart from the desktop-based traffic, it is of
paramount importance to take ...
7

2.2 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Information Architecture
•  A website navigation scheme should make desired information or
f...
8

2.3 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Informations and Services
•  Both users and search engines love content-rich
websites, but h...
9

2.4 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Labelling and Wording
•  Using talking labels for links that lead to a
related page or menu ...
10

2.5 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Look and Feel
•  The interface should bring together information architecture with the bran...
11

INDEX
1.  SCENARIO
2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS
3.  BENCHMARK
4.  CONCLUSIONS
12

3.1 BENCHMARK: Comcast (USA)

http://comcast.com
13

3.1 BENCHMARK: Comcast (USA)
1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, (light) mobile version instead
2.  Information Architec...
14

3.2 BENCHMARK: Mobinil (Egypt)

http://.mobinil.com/home.aspx‎
15

3.2 BENCHMARK: Mobinil (Egypt)
1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, any mobile version
2.  Information Architecture: well...
16

3.3 BENCHMARK: Movistar (Spain)

http://movistar.es
17

3.3 BENCHMARK: Movistar (Spain)
1.  Cross–Device : not responsive, mobile version instead
2.  Information Architecture...
18

3.4 BENCHMARK: Telenor (Sweden)

http://telenor.se
19

3.4 BENCHMARK: Telenor (Sweden)
1.  Cross–Device: responsive
2.  Information Architecture: very well structured + poss...
20

3.5 BENCHMARK: T-Mobile (UK)

http://t-mobile.com
21

3.5 BENCHMARK: T-Mobile (UK)
1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, (light) mobile version instead
2.  Information Architec...
22

3.6 BENCHMARK: Verizon Wireless (USA)

http://verizonwireless.com
23

3.6 BENCHMARK: Verizon Wireless (USA)
1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, mobile version instead
2.  Information Archite...
24

3.7 BENCHMARK: Virgin Mobile (USA)

http://virginmobileusa.com
25

3.7 BENCHMARK: Virgin Mobile (USA)
1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, mobile version instead
2.  Information Architectu...
26

3.8 BENCHMARK: Vodafone (UK)

http://vodafone.co.uk
27

3.8 BENCHMARK: Vodafone (UK)
1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, mobile version instead
2.  Information Architecture: cl...
28

INDEX
1.  SCENARIO
2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS
3.  BENCHMARK
4.  CONCLUSIONS
29

4. CONCLUSIONS
Summary of the collected data, rated on a 0 – 5 scale
0/1 = poor; 2 = fair; 3 = good; 4 = very good; 5 ...
THANKS!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

2013 UX RESEARCH - UX Benchmark Study: TelCo Industries

821

Published on

Published in: Design, Technology
1 Comment
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
821
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
35
Comments
1
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "2013 UX RESEARCH - UX Benchmark Study: TelCo Industries"

  1. 1. UX BENCHMARK STUDY TelCo Industries July 2013
  2. 2. 2 INDEX 1.  SCENARIO 2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS 3.  BENCHMARK 4.  CONCLUSIONS
  3. 3. 3 1. SCENARIO •  The following selection has been drafted by considering the scenario of leading references for TELCO industries. •  The analysis is based on the best practices in use and it relates to the 8 companies listed below: 1.  Comcast (USA) - http://www.comcast.com 2.  Mobinil (Egypt) - https://www.mobinil.com/en 3.  Movistar (Spain) - http://www.movistar.es 4.  Telenor (Sweden) - http://www.telenor.se/privat/index.html 5.  T-mobile (UK) - http://www.t-mobile.com 6.  Verizon Wirless (USA) - http://www.verizonwireless.com 7.  Virgin Mobile (USA) - http://www.virginmobileusa.com 8.  Vodafone (UK) - http://www.vodafone.co.uk
  4. 4. 4 INDEX 1.  SCENARIO 2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS 3.  BENCHMARK 4.  CONCLUSIONS
  5. 5. 5 2. WEB ANALYTICS METRICS •  The most important purpose for a website is to MEET THE NEED OF USERS, providing a clear and relevant information environment that allows users to easily find what they are seeking for. •  To achieve that, a website should comply with the following key metrics: 1.  Cross-Device 2.  Information Architecture 3.  Information and Services 4.  Labelling and Wording 5.  Look and Feel
  6. 6. 6 2.1 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Cross-Device •  Apart from the desktop-based traffic, it is of paramount importance to take into account all the other devices, both tablets and smartphones. •  A good design has to build optimized contents to deliver the best navigation experience possible even for mobile-based traffic. •  RWD, Responsive Web Design, is an approach aimed at crafting sites to provide an optimal viewing experience: easy reading and navigation with a minimum of resizing, panning, and scrolling, across a wide range of devices (from desktop computer monitors to mobile phones).
  7. 7. 7 2.2 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Information Architecture •  A website navigation scheme should make desired information or functionality EASY TO BE FOUND. •  Ensure users can quickly find what their looking for by creating an easily understandable website structure. •  Information architecture should: •  Be easy to learn •  Be hierarchical •  Group navigation into logical units •  Be consistent throughout the website •  Use the minimum number of clicks to arrive at the next destination •  Provide feedback, such as the use of breadcrumbs to indicate how to navigate back
  8. 8. 8 2.3 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Informations and Services •  Both users and search engines love content-rich websites, but having a lot of content isn’t enough. •  Page contents must be relevant, clear, accurate and directly related to the website’s main purpose. •  There are two main reasons for content relevancy: •  Users who have to search through multiple pages to find informations won't be visitors much longer •  The more relevant the web site's content is for a specific topic, the more likely the site is to show up near the top of search results for that topic (Search Engine Optimization – organic results)
  9. 9. 9 2.4 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Labelling and Wording •  Using talking labels for links that lead to a related page or menu is crucial to guide user’s navigation process. •  Even the disposition of both items and sections has to be clear and immediate. •  It is recommended to use labels that are easy-to-get, and creative wording is forbidden. •  Information has to be presented, structured and sorted in such a way that machines can read and understand it as much as humans can, with NO AMBIGUITY.
  10. 10. 10 2.5 WEB ANALYTICS METRICS: Look and Feel •  The interface should bring together information architecture with the brand’s values. •  Type, colors, images, graphics are a logical extension of the brand’s visual identity. •  Reference parameters: •  Layout – items and spaces: disposition of objects in-page •  Cognitive noise: graphic consistency (correspondence between form and function) •  Visual noise: unnecessary and distracting elements •  Typography: choice and usage of typefaces
  11. 11. 11 INDEX 1.  SCENARIO 2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS 3.  BENCHMARK 4.  CONCLUSIONS
  12. 12. 12 3.1 BENCHMARK: Comcast (USA) http://comcast.com
  13. 13. 13 3.1 BENCHMARK: Comcast (USA) 1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, (light) mobile version instead 2.  Information Architecture: apparently well structured, an in-depht navigation reveals problems (duplicated menus; many external links to others company’s websites, that do not show any visual/structural connection with the reference website) 3.  Information and Services: the main offer is represented by a single macro plan, taylored for various services/ products + service details pages are well designed, both visually and structurally 4.  Labelling and Wording: ambiguous and confusing (ex: PRODUCTS is about services) 5.  Look and Feel: brand's visual identity is difficult to perceive (too many colors in page) + looking at the topheader, Comcast’s logo is too close to the Xfinity logo, and it could be confusing to users Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 1.5 2.0 3.5 2.0 2.5
  14. 14. 14 3.2 BENCHMARK: Mobinil (Egypt) http://.mobinil.com/home.aspx‎
  15. 15. 15 3.2 BENCHMARK: Mobinil (Egypt) 1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, any mobile version 2.  Information Architecture: well performing navigation structure with no ambiguous paths, even if some menus are duplicated/incomplete 3.  Information and Services: content is relevant, well-presented and meets the real offer (services + devices) 4.  Labelling and Wording: (almost) always clear and efficient – ex: under ENTERTAINMENT there are links to 8000 and 1111 for football options, which are too unclear to be mentioned in such a way in a second level menu 5.  Look and Feel: flat graphic, feeble impact, too much text Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 0 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.0
  16. 16. 16 3.3 BENCHMARK: Movistar (Spain) http://movistar.es
  17. 17. 17 3.3 BENCHMARK: Movistar (Spain) 1.  Cross–Device : not responsive, mobile version instead 2.  Information Architecture: different sections for different needs (personal, self-employed, business) + sections refer to each other as part of the same project (both visually and structurally) + not always easy to understand how to go back to the previously visited page 3.  Information and Services: well detailed informations and focus on the customer (the main menu has a dedicated option “Atenciòn al cliente”, with a support live chat) + core offers about landline and mobile based services, internet and tv services 4.  Labelling and Wording: work together with information architecture, emphasizing its structure 5.  Look and Feel: the usage of both colours and typography enhance the brand’s identity Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 3.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
  18. 18. 18 3.4 BENCHMARK: Telenor (Sweden) http://telenor.se
  19. 19. 19 3.4 BENCHMARK: Telenor (Sweden) 1.  Cross–Device: responsive 2.  Information Architecture: very well structured + possibility to switch from Private to Companies versions + breadcrumbs under the main menu, to support wayfinding decisions 3.  Information and Services: compared with the offer of the leading companies, contents seems to be relevant and consistent (services + products + customer assistance) 4.  Labelling and Wording: the main drop-down menus use, when possible, the same labels (ex: Deals, Good to know, Get started, Get more), and this feauture helps in making the web-site usage easy-to-learn 5.  Look and Feel: texts used to be coupled with graphics and icons, friendly approach, strong impact Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0
  20. 20. 20 3.5 BENCHMARK: T-Mobile (UK) http://t-mobile.com
  21. 21. 21 3.5 BENCHMARK: T-Mobile (UK) 1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, (light) mobile version instead 2.  Information Architecture: hierarchical structure is clear, appropriate and never redundant (in terms of duplicated menus/items) + from the top-header it is possibile to switch from Personal (default) to the Business duplicated site 3.  Information and Services: contents are relevant and consistent + the offer is as vary as complete, from products and services to customer care 4.  Labelling and Wording: effective and well coupled with contents 5.  Look and Feel: close attention to details, exept from typography usage (font size is often too small) Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 1.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.0
  22. 22. 22 3.6 BENCHMARK: Verizon Wireless (USA) http://verizonwireless.com
  23. 23. 23 3.6 BENCHMARK: Verizon Wireless (USA) 1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, mobile version instead 2.  Information Architecture: as the website is wide so the structure is solid and well-defined, starting from a clear separation based on different user’s target (Wireless, Residential and Business – Small business, Medium and enterprise, Government, Industries) + navigation rarely supported by breadcrumbs 3.  Information and Services: broad offer, everything is tailored to make the best proposals depending on the user’s location and needs – a Select Location form is required to access some important sections of the site 4.  Labelling and Wording: clear, well-explained and recurring (same wording for different sections) 5.  Look and Feel: graphics and text well-combined to communicate the brand identity + text could be used better (there are long and small-written paragraphs on main pages, with provisions and legal terms) Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0
  24. 24. 24 3.7 BENCHMARK: Virgin Mobile (USA) http://virginmobileusa.com
  25. 25. 25 3.7 BENCHMARK: Virgin Mobile (USA) 1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, mobile version instead 2.  Information Architecture: the structure of the website is not perceivable at a first sight but displayed step by step, with breadcrumbs 3.  Information and Services: the offer is not as rich as the benchmark suggest it could be (both in terms of products/ services and customer care) but well detailed and supported by a Why choose us option in the main menu – easiness to go 4.  Labelling and Wording: not always self-explaining and sometimes contradictory 5.  Look and Feel: user friendly + consistent throughout the website and with the brand identity Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.5
  26. 26. 26 3.8 BENCHMARK: Vodafone (UK) http://vodafone.co.uk
  27. 27. 27 3.8 BENCHMARK: Vodafone (UK) 1.  Cross–Device: not responsive, mobile version instead 2.  Information Architecture: clear and well structured in all its parts + the absence of breadcrumbs is partially recovered by the secondary menu on the left 3.  Information and Services: contents are as rich as clearly exposed 4.  Labelling and Wording: coincise and precise, never ambiguous neither redundant 5.  Look and Feel: user friendly + layout, colours, text, graphics work well and communicate accurately the idea of the brand Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel 3.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0
  28. 28. 28 INDEX 1.  SCENARIO 2.  WEB ANALYTICS METRICS 3.  BENCHMARK 4.  CONCLUSIONS
  29. 29. 29 4. CONCLUSIONS Summary of the collected data, rated on a 0 – 5 scale 0/1 = poor; 2 = fair; 3 = good; 4 = very good; 5 = excellent Brand Cross-Device Information Architecture Information and Services Labelling and Wording Look and Feel Average COMCAST 1.5 2.0 3.5 2.0 2.5 2.3 MOBINIL 0 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.0 2.6 MOVISTAR 3.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.1 TELENOR 5.0* 5.0* 4.5 4.5 5.0* 4.8 T-MOBILE 1.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.8 VERIZON 3.0 4.0 5.0* 5.0* 4.0 4.2 VIRGIN 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.5 3.6 VODAFONE 3.0 4.5 5.0* 5.0* 5.0* 4.5 * Best practice in use
  30. 30. THANKS!
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×