The document discusses ways to sneak good user experience (UX) into a project without a dedicated UX budget. It suggests involving users early in the design process through low-fidelity prototyping and usability testing to prioritize tasks and ensure designs meet real user needs. By testing assumptions and exploring alternatives quickly with users, better UX can be achieved within existing budgets and timelines.

1. Sneaking in a Good User Experience,
Without a UX Budget
WordCamp Lancaster 2017 • #wclanc @anthonydpaul

2. scope proposal
● Discovery
● Design
● UX / Research
● Accessibility
● SEO
● Development
● Quality Assurance
$500
$1500
$1000
$500
$500
$2000
$500
@anthonydpaul

3. scope proposal
● Discovery
● Design
● UX / Research
● Accessibility
● SEO
● Development
● Quality Assurance
$500
$1500
$500
$2000
@anthonydpaul

4. @anthonydpaul

5. scope proposal
● Discovery
● Design
● UX / Research
● Accessibility
● SEO
● Development
● Quality Assurance
$500
$1500
free
free
$500
$2000
free
@anthonydpaul

6. Sometimes we can't
sell good UX, we
have to sneak it in.”
@brownorama #ias15
“
@anthonydpaul

7. Anthony D Paul
Futurist, Researcher, and Usability Flag-Waver
@anthonydpaul

8. Before we start,
let’s avoid excuses…
@anthonydpaul

9. best practice is not a line item
● Discovery
● Design
○ UX / Research
○ Accessibility
● SEO
● Development
○ Quality Assurance
$500
$3000
$500
$2500
@anthonydpaul

10. you are a UX designer
● Everyone who affects the website
experience is a UX designer
● Even if you’re a bad one, creating
bad experiences
@anthonydpaul

11. When we create a bad user experience,
where did we fail?
@anthonydpaul

12. @anthonydpaul

13. We’re asking the wrong questions
of the wrong people
1 / 9
@anthonydpaul

14. Intake Form
How many pages? _________
Stock photography? Yes / No
Flash? Yes / No
Internet Explorer? Yes / No
Will you need a:
❏ Sign-up form
❏ Discussion board
❏ Shopping cart
❏ “Members only” area
@anthonydpaul

15. CONTRIBUTORS
only hearing
decision-makers
if they’re lucky
enough to be in
the room
COMPANY

16. COMPANY COMPETITORS CONSUMERS CONTRIBUTORS CLIMATE
Five C’s of a Situational Analysis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situation_analysis#5C_Analysis

17. COMPANY
How is the business supported today,
that can’t be broken?
How can the site better support the business?
decision-makers • brand • finance

18. COMPETITORS
What is the expected baseline in this market?
What is everyone else not doing yet?
direct • aspirational • indirect (recruitment)

19. CONSUMERS
What are our consumers trying to do and why?
What can we give our consumers that
doesn’t directly benefit our company?
(ex. knowledge sharing)
people • search engines • devices • APIs

20. CONTRIBUTORS
Which tasks are most repetitive or
cumbersome and can be optimized?
internal • consumers • APIs

21. CLIMATE
Does the world even need
another ______ website?
today’s market • trend forecast

22. We can’t create a great
user experience if we
don’t understand what
our site needs to do.
@anthonydpaul

23. We’re not time-boxing,
and we’re not prioritizing
2 / 9
@anthonydpaul

24. Why are we even working on this website?
Communicate the brand and a positive
[audience type] experience.
Allow [audience type] to quickly determine
[a specific thing].
Drive [audience type] toward contacting
[a specific department] to inquire about
[a specific thing].
@anthonydpaul

25. We’re not thinking about our users
and their most important tasks
3 / 9
@anthonydpaul

26. recurring: low-fidelity, with many hands
@anthonydpaul

27. “boomerang” task analysis
1. List all tasks performed within the site
2. Cluster by related tasks (result = audience roles)
3. Audit each cluster to make sure it’s complete
4. Prioritize roles and prioritize tasks within roles
@anthonydpaul

28. recurring: low-fidelity, with many hands
@anthonydpaul

29. audience behavior reports (e.g.)
Tips:
Google filetype:pdf
market report search
@anthonydpaul

30. We could’ve done it faster by
involving our clients/users
4 / 9
@anthonydpaul

31. recurring: low-fidelity, with many hands
@anthonydpaul

32. recurring: low-fidelity, with many hands

33. We skipped low-fidelity exploration
5 / 9
@anthonydpaul

34. recurring: low-fidelity, with many hands
@anthonydpaul

35. We didn’t test quickly and easily in isolation
6 / 9
@anthonydpaul

36. optimalworkshop.com/treejack
@anthonydpaul

37. optimalworkshop.com/treejack
@anthonydpaul

38. We didn’t usability test the whole shebang
7 / 9
@anthonydpaul

39. InVisionApp.com

40. TryMyUI.com

41. We could have saved time by
prototyping in WordPress
8 / 9
@anthonydpaul

42. usability test with an actual website

43. We didn’t think about real users
9 / 9
@anthonydpaul

44. Our instinct is to imagine someone like ourselves.
Most of our users are nothing like us in any way.
via Eric Meyer’s WC Northeast Ohio 2016 Keynote
http://wordpress.tv/2016/06/24/eric-a-meyer-design-for-real-life/
stress cases over “ideal”
@anthonydpaul

45. Who we test with defines who we care about.
i.e., Accessibility, real-world “Stress Cases”
via Eric Meyer’s WC Northeast Ohio 2016 Keynote
http://wordpress.tv/2016/06/24/eric-a-meyer-design-for-real-life/
don’t forget a11y
@anthonydpaul

46. a11y tools online

47. dclibrary.org/services/accessibility

48. Innovation is
often the product
of constraint.”
Todd Waterbury, Chief Creative Officer at Target
“
@anthonydpaul

49. @anthonydpaul

50. Detailed talks
http://stickielab.com/speaking
wireframing with WordPress • lean requirements
usability testing • information architecture
Stalker links
http://adp.rocks or http:// .ws or http:// .ws
Thank you
@anthonydpaul