Site Redesign: When Hell Freezes Over Use a Blowtorch
by Melissa Matross on Mar 22, 2009
- 3,501 views
Hotwire is a data-driven company: all projects have to have clear financial return; all customer interactions - purchase, quote, drop-off and click rates - are closely tracked. As a result, there was n...
Hotwire is a data-driven company: all projects have to have clear financial return; all customer interactions - purchase, quote, drop-off and click rates - are closely tracked. As a result, there was never enough support from the numbers alone to complete a redesign since Hotwire’s launch. So, when hell freezes over… use a blowtorch.
Based on my experience driving the first successful Site Redesign at Hotwire, I will share strategies and tactics to:
* Sell your large-scale UX project, gaining support from executives and approval to
augment UX and Engineering staff to resource the effort.
* Make your project happen by creatively distributing the work, all while showcasing UX
leadership and maintaining momentum toward completion.
* Demonstrate UX successes and build equity within the organization for future work.
I will also share lessons from successes, failures and pain at Hotwire to help guide those embarking on a large-scale UX project.
This presentation will not simply be a user experience case study of the Hotwire redesign, but rather will focus on strategies to successfully use your project to position the UX team and manage the organization from start to finish.
Accessibility
Categories
Tags
More...Upload Details
Uploaded via SlideShare as Adobe PDF
Usage Rights
© All Rights Reserved
Statistics
- Favorites
- 20
- Downloads
- 0
- Comments
- 0
- Embed Views
- Views on SlideShare
- 3,495
- Total Views
- 3,501
nananwu
Welcome to “Site Redesign: When hell freezes over use a blowtorch”
My name is Melissa Matross
Head up User Experience at Hotwire
We’re just finishing out a Site Redesign
This talk is about the organizational sides of running a large scale UX project – how to get buy in, manage the project, demonstrate successes and things to look out for...
all projects have to have clear financial return;
therefore it can be very difficult to get buy in on solely a UX focused project.
Resources
A better site!!
A project came up that was going to significantly impact our Flight Search Results page
The page was significant in number of page views, but low impact to the site from a financial perspective
It was 1 page only
Find an advocate:
My boss – the VP of Product, supported the experimentation.
I needed to approve all work for the guinea pig by him, but he allowed us to experiment and helped convince other execs when we went live.
Break YOUR rules:
We didn’t have a clear style guide, but we COMPLETELY changed the look and feel, breaking any rules that we may have had
Take the time & Get it right:
This is what is going to be the example that you use to apply to the rest of the site.
You will use this design to convince others that you need to redesign the site.
Shop it around – after launch (especially if you have financials to back it up!)
Talk about the mess you have today (current state) and WHY
Areas for improvement
Inconsistency : resulting in a “patchy” look and feel
Not scalable : requiring in major work to add new features
Brand is not clearly communicated
Technology and look and feel not current
Talk about WHY this is the case:
Drivers:
Lack of communication of updates and changes between departments
Lack of education (brand, style guide, standards) and enforcement
Time between updates (things change)
Lack of ownership of the pages (hosted by vendors)
Lack of resources for updates
Give a relevant evaluations/statistics that execs care about
According to the 2007 JD Power study, Independent Travel Websites received the lowest marks for appearance/design
JD Power awards
Improved Branding
Site will become more consistent and branded, leading to an improved brand perception and increased user trust
Increased User Loyalty and Trust
Improved user retention: More visits from existing users whose needs are better satisfied
Greater credibility
Faster Time to Market and Better Knowledge Management
Improved CM
Reduction in page drop-off (and hopefully a better quote rate) from a more consistent design
Navigation to features that help save consumers money, resulting a better PR and improved word of mouth
SEO improvements
This is an area that you have to be really focused and clear on
It may take a lot of time or revisions – but that’s ok
Don’t be general - Be specific:
I initially said that our “vision” was to be Useful, Usable and Desirable. How is that different than any other site??
Our goals for the project were to be: Branded, Simple, Consistent and Efficient
Use their language.
I incorporated marketing’s branding terms into our vision for the site.
GET AGREEMENT on the goals
Talk about infrastructure improvements in your goals.
Efficiencies gained – explain how you are improving infrastructure generating time savings
Be willing to let some stuff go
For me, as sad as it is – I let go of persona development (since we have strong customer segmentation and lots of user research knowledge within the team)
This means:
Assess the nature of the redesign: navigational overhaul? Interaction design changes? Look and feel update? Both?
How are you going to plan out the work – phased or all at once? Why?
What are the benefits of each approach?
Take into account resources – what do you want?
How much time do you need to do the work? What are your targets?
I came prepared with Developer costs both contract and offshore and UX contractor costs
Typical redesigns require that all work be done at once - this will lead to significant workload on both the UX and Engineering teams
Due to our small teams, we would likely need to use outside agencies
Outside agencies require a significant increase in workload of Business Owners to review work
All the work at one time requires more significant risk in QA and launch support
Hotwire has tried the “typical” redesign in the past and it has been unsuccessful for the following reasons:
There was not a lot of buy in at the executive level
There was not a lot of collaboration between departments
The redesign was done by an outside agency (without a full steering committee) and was not in line with the business goals or brand direction
It required a significant investment from Engineering, and Engineering was not informed for the planning of it
This will allow us to get pieces of the new design on the site more quickly
The improved experience will be on the site earlier
Project work will be more evenly distributed (rather than the entire redesign with one launch)
We have the opportunity to learn from early launched projects and correct for other parts of the site
Will not require a significant temporary staffing for redesign push
Organizational development will run in parallel to direct site work
Effective development of research and standards will allow us to be more effective on future projects
User Research and segmentation documentation will run concurrently with project work (separate resources)
Deliverables and standards will be defined as part of each project
For example: After each Interaction Design phase is completed, the Inventory and Template Guidelines document will be updated
Disjointed user experience during redesign process
As a result of launching sections of the site at different times, the site will not have a consistent user experience while in transition
Increased design and development complexity during redesign process
During a phased redesign we would likely face more extensive design challenges and duplicate work due to the two different designs
Communication around standards development is critical to it’s success – by running it concurrent with projects there is risk that items will fall through the cracks
Car Details & Local Car
Rework
We will need to apply extra effort on projects that are complete to keep consistent with current project learnings
Timelines
There is a risk of rushing the redesign resulting in frustration, overwork and lower quality deliverables; also, a risk of letting things lag and losing momentum
A lot of factors can get in the way of completion:
loss of momentum,
conflicting priorities,
resource constraints, to name a few.
Updates are only to the look and feel of the page without changes to functionality or architecture
There may be changes to page level interactions and behaviors
Site Redesign
Updates to the look and feel of the page with changes to features, functionality and architecture
Fundamental architecture changes would be investigated and carefully considered
On a smaller scale with a Site Redesign, we would consider:
Re-architecting sections to streamline the experience
Identifying and planning for new features that may be added
Removing pages or sections
We did both.
Site Redesign Queue (SRQ): Smaller areas of work that do not provide immediate benefit from a functionality or architecture overhaul, do not allow for significant functionality changes or version testing
Lighter-weight efficient process as a result of the smaller scope:
Business Partner fills out a Requirements doc (heavy-weight Creative Brief)
Functional design consults (in some cases provides a lightweight doc)
Engineering & QA work is done by a GSI team
Managed by a producer
Projects : Larger scale areas of work that Identify areas of significant benefit from or in need of new functionality
To date, examples include: Billing, Confirmation, Homepage
Planned for My Account & Help, but due to conflicts we scaled it back and moved it into the queue – we’ll address new functional pieces later
Resource allocation:
UX
Offsite team for Eng
Producer
Less UX project development time:
Interaction Design: borrow from standards to get started with WFs, less research/discovery of instances
Visual Design: fewer comps & annotations, reference standards
Potential Engineering advantages:
Front end development: May save time if leverage component based framework; similar code snippets or standards can be used
QA: Less unique instances may lead to less QA time
Could some small projects become enhancements as a result?
Risk mitigation:
Knowledge of states:
There have been instances in the past where knowledge of functionality has not been documented – as a result we have lost functionality over the course of minor updates
Example: Code share states on flight updates
Design Errors:
The more standardized we become, the less errors and bugs should exist
Fewer templates and variations will exist
Business Partners
For queue efforts: business partner is critically involved as key stakeholder
Lightweight requirements document
Attends all review meetings
Site Redesign Committee
Cross functional committee including Creative Director for online advertising, merchandising, front end architect, marketing
meets 1-2 times per month
Goals of the committee:
Ensure cooperation and collaboration between teams
Serve as department representatives
Ensure that all teams are aware of redesign decisions
Provide a forum for review and decision making for cross functional items
Discuss and develop common point of view on everything from CMS to Flash
Let people know when stuff is coming
This helps maintain momentum
Executive updates:
After each release, let the execs know. Talk about:
Wins & successes early and often.
Progress
What’s next
Who is involved?
Re-iterate goals repeatedly
Talk about standards efficiency
Recognized in a book
Omniture
PR/Conversion lift
Drop-off decrease
Bug fixes
Customer Care call decrease
Drop-off: No clear change
SRQ:SRQ has been successfully tested process and could provide longer term value to the organization
Help
Be flexible!
Learnings from new page:
Unexpected sensitivity on Hotel Details– in the future, we will test any changes to the hotel path
For investigation: Is there a difference in response based on customer segment (HFC vs. other repeat vs. new)?
For investigation: Should Air Details now have a ‘Continue’ button above the fold?