Achieve ROI through realigning not redesigning
In last week’s NewMediaAge magazine (12 August 2010) the ‘Opinion’ column discussed how renewing a website is often better than redesigning it and starting from scratch.
I too am a strong advocate of the adage ‘good designers redesign, great designers realign’. With belts being tightened and organisations looking to maximise their return on investment (ROI), its more relevant than ever before.
Pounds are being stretched with everyone keen to get as much as possible for their money. This is driving organisations to ask for the same amount of work, if not more, for noticeably reduced budgets. But the expectation of measuring value through quantity puts pressure on agencies to deliver volume arguably at the sacrifice of quality.
The need to redesign
The desire to redesign is understandable. For the most part its just the result of an emotional response to aesthetics. If a website hasn’t noticeably changed for a couple of years, looks old or tired and isn’t performing to its full potential, the straight forward solution would appear to be to go back to the drawing board and start from scratch.
Alternatively, the case may be that responsibility for the website has shifted to a new person and they feel under pressure to make a visible impact on the organisation. It could even be that a need to increase traffic exists and its believed that a redesign will improve search rankings.
This approach basically equates to treating the symptom rather than the original cause.
Fundamentally we need to diagnose the initial problem, understand it fully and then identify the most effective solution. Although a redesign might solve key issues its overly drastic, expensive, time-consuming and far from guaranteed. Much like closing down and relaunching a shop simply because someone returned an item of clothing without explanation.
It’s not to say that carrying out a redesign doesn’t have its place. If you’re going through a re-brand exercise, your site is noticeably under-performing or is technically flawed a redesign/rebuild could be just want you need.
But in many cases it simply isn’t necessary. Instead of aiming for sizable visual changes we should focus on making noticeable financial impact – both cost saving and profit making. Ask yourself this; where will investment have the biggest impact on our business? I doubt that scrapping your current system and starting again is likely to be the correct answer.
As an agency we work closely with our clients to understand the challenges faced, set measurable objectives and educate on the best ways to optimise sites for effective ROI.
The power of re-aligning
During user testing we often find that although there are problems with the current site which negatively impact users there are also parts of the service that they react well to, even rely upon, elements that may be the first to go in a redesign due to the perception of low aesthetic value. When making recommendations following testing we have to be sympathetic to such elements.
NewMediaAge suggested that “If you take down an old site you could damage the reputation it has established, reduce its visibility and decimate its traffic, even if you manage all the redirects from old to new URLs… the risks and costs of starting again are simply too great. The site may not be perfect but there’s a danger that the one you have in mind will perform less well than the one they already have.”
Before instigating change we need to understand the objectives of the business and the needs of the users to help us develop an effective strategy which can then inform change. In contrast to our reasons to redesign such as “the site hasn’t changed for a couple of years” or “we need a redesign to drive more traffic” approaching it strategically helps us to identify and answer the actual problems. “Market trends have shifted. Should our website be adjusted accordingly?”, “Our users needs have changed. Do we need to adapt?” or “We’ve added three new sections and a slew of new content to the site over the last 12 months. Are we presenting content as effectively as we can?”
In the words of Cameron Moll, author of the book ‘Mobile Web Design’, “The desire to redesign is aesthetic-driven, while the desire to realign is purpose-driven. One approach seeks merely to refresh, the other aims to fully reposition and may or may not include a full refresh.”
The benefits of realignment
Because realigning addresses specific problems and is therefore more targeted the initial turn-around time of a project can be much quicker. By also removing the need for iterations caused by an emotional response to aesthetics, delivery costs can be much less compared to a redesign. The cost saving can then be employed to optimise the website overtime through the analysis of usage data e.g. web analytics, A/B or multi-variant testing.
From the perspective of the user, realignment causes far less perceived impact and therefore discomfort. Subtle changes designed to optimise the user experience are seen as positive improvements highlighting the business’ desire to constantly evolve the product. Few users actually want the sites they use to be redesigned, the only people who do are often the owners themselves. For example 97% of Facebook users were unhappy with the redesign causing widespread negativity and media backlash.
Through iterative optimisation, budgets can be spread out over time and used to greater effect. If a full redesign is undertaken and receives a negative reaction the motives and cost may even come into question.
Advocating incremental optimisation
Amazon is a great example of this approach. Amazon have never redesigned, instead relying on small incremental changes. First they identify the problems and then intelligently test solutions until the optimal one is found. Effectively Amazon replaces one big hit with multiple smaller ones.
We took a similar approach when working with Sky Business a few years ago. Rather than suggesting a complete redesign we identified key areas that we believed could be improved upon. Subtle changes to the navigation, global header and layout of the home page lead to an increase in natural search traffic by 20% and lead generation by 15%.
Central to the ongoing relationship with such clients is the desire to continually improve through user testing, innovation and analysis. But its more difficult to apply the same approach to new projects when the solution has often already been defined. Hopefully with tighter scrutiny of budgets companies will take a more pragmatic approach and look to identify what the reasoning is behind the need to redesign and consider the realistic impact it may have.
By taking an iterative approach agencies will be held more accountable for the work they produce leading to greater importance being placed on user research and data analysis. In short businesses achieve greater ROI, products become more usable and engaging for customers whilst agencies achieve measurable results proving the legitimacy of their service offering. All this simply through asking the right questions at the start.
