connecting*the*dots

(originally uploaded by wmchu)

As social tagging begins to catch on beyond the early adopters, content and commerce domains are opening up their information architectures to empower their consumers to tag, creating exponentially greater degrees of faceted, semantic relationships between their information objects.

Amazon is already in the lead to extend this open paradigm into the commerce space with object tagging and Mechanical Turk (a program which could seriously disrupt peasant-class wage pay around the world). Amazon’s past innovation isn’t a guarantee for future success, but their recent moves prove to be a good sign.

How Social Tagging Works

Folksonomies change the dynamics of generating useful index pages by centralizing human perspectives expressed through single or compound descriptive terms into navigable indexes. It’s the equivalent of a dynamic, open-ended thesaurus, eliminating the need to manage the static creation of valued relationships, as co-occurance stitches together threads of information like newly created and evolving synapses in the brain.

The usefulness of these visible, semantic relationships to the person searching for specific content or products is quite possibly the most sticky form of extended discovery not generated through database algorithms.

I mean, forget dropping out of my mental model to browse topical navigation or stopping to search for an explicit term or phrase; when I engage with a domain such as flickr or del.icio.us, my desire to stay within the domain is increased simply because the language I use to define my world through tagging simultaneously allows me to peer into the world of like-minded folk (ergo: folksonomies).

Tagging creates community through the overlap of perspective.

While this extends conversation, it can also impact the sales potential of commerce sites by adding another layer to collaborative filtering, which Amazon has already acknowledged through their advancements in tagging. Now, extend this concept further into the realm of consumer contributions with industry and one can envision the incentive for business to slightly open their gated approach of mass manufacturing in this age of personalization, allowing customers to participate in defining what a company produces by simply tagging their existing objects.

• Tagging builds community
• Tagging increases the findability
• Tagging can give customers a transparent stake in the process of creating services/products/content

Back To The Interface

Try thinking about tagging interfaces on a few distinct levels:

• Interfaces which display common tags from across a particular domain need to be designed to maximize their semantic relationships.
• Object-level interfaces need to be re-crafted to both accommodate the display of previously applied personal tags and tags applied by the community.
• Management screens, which can give ownership of personally applied tags to the people that spend their time generating them, need to be compiled from contributing domains across the web for individuals to manage and, potentially, collect residual dividends related to sales generated from exposed tags.

I recently stumbled across an interesting site that leverages the API of del.icio.us tags. Kevan Davis created extisp.icio.us to scrape user tags and visually represent them using only words or images:

My good friend, DeWitt Clinton, created Delancy, which leverages the open nature of del.icio.us, providing an enhancement with the ability to manage tagged objects by personal click-through popularity:

Kevan’s enhancement focuses on re-presenting information in a way that presents our constantly evolving association with the world outside, while DeWitt’s enhancement focuses on adding feature value, assisting us to quickly find our most used bookmarks.

This type of innovative, open source development reflects the same type of creative energy that non-developers posses — people that are becoming hooked on tagging, hooked on participation.

Sharing Interfaces, Creating A Usable Web 2.0

Now that Silicon Valley is reaping the rewards of innovative open source development—observing hundreds of prototypes across numerous types of applications—how long will it be until these companies begin to act in a similar fashion? Yes, I’m talking about open collaboration.

TypePad enables me to tag my posts by assigning categories, but the management screen is a simple list, one that doesn’t allow me to easily create more manageable sub-categories (I’d probably group my tags by proper names, places, titles, descriptors, etc.). Mena, it’s becoming painful for me to manage my 200+ tags; how about TypePad teaming up with del.icio.us to use their management screen?

del.icio.us does many thing well, including their flexible interface for managing tags by give user created groups of tags nicknames. So simple, but so powerful. Why aren’t domains like TypePad, flickr, Flock, etc. bartering with del.icio.us to leverage this successful interface—one that thousands of early adopters are already using and loving — while providing their own best practice proprietary interfaces or code in return?

This level of collaboration amongst businesses is an example of what would allow companies to focus on developing more focused innovation, enhancing development cycles, reducing resource allocation and most importantly, providing best practice consistency across applications where possible. Toyota recently leased the technology of its Hybrid engines to Ford and other automakers.

How much quicker would a usable and useful Web 2.0 network be created if companies operated in such a manner?

The collective intelligence of humanity seems to be amped to contribute. Are we ready for them?

For the past three weeks I’ve been using Measure Map pretty religiously, trying to get a feel for its depth to see if it’ll be useful as a tool for me to use moving forward. My first review touched upon the usefulness of the features, but admittedly, it was much more of a review of the presentation. After pounding on it some more, I’ve a few more thoughts on the service (remember, this is still an alpha release):

Searching For Search
Measure Map presents the search terms that led visitors to my site from three major search engines: Google, Yahoo! and MSN. Below are the terms the were used between 11/05 and 11/20:

68
boondocks
bo peabody
bush crony appointments
bush lies
"contextual column"
"courtney bolton" new york
"David Reid" Baghdad
Dick Chaney and FBI Leak
DOTs
download ofoto
DUMB AND DUMBER
efrat yardeni
evangelic green card
"farrakhan"
farrakhan syracuse university
"Free Flow of Information Act"
Greensboro Troublemaker
Hadj guestbook 2005   
haiku George Bush
impeach Bush Now
javol
"jon stewart" + crossfire
Louis Farrakhan Rosa parks funeral
measure map
"organ failure and death" bush torture "new york times"
"navy seal"
newsbusters
revolution america
"Rosa Parks childhood"
"solo journalism"
sony apology 2005 for compromising PC
Visual map of shield law placement

While this feature is a common stat in an analytic tool, the data display isn’t complete:

• Technorati, Icerocket, A9, etc. query hits are listed elsewhere as links
• Image query hits don’t even show up

MM has a cleanly designed interface for displaying terms which originate from specific search engines, but it doesn’t include terms that originate across all search engines. If Technorati, Icerocket, A9, etc. can be presented on the link page, they can just as easily be presented on the Search Engine and Search Terms pages.

MM also differentiates text queries from image queries for no apparent reason. When I pause to see where visitors are coming from and formulate my understanding of why people are coming to my blog, images queries round out the story. Unless there are technical reasons for not presenting all search terms in one section, this should be a no-brainer enhancement.

My Blog Is More Than Just Posts
The number presented in the Posts icon on the homepage doesn’t equate with total page views (a common data point across all analytic services). I understand that Adaptive is trying to keep this simple—reducing page views to post views is one way to do it—but I’m losing visualization of a bunch of data. Here’s the problem:

• When a search result or link to my homepage is followed, MM doesn’t present it alongside my post pages (it’s buried on the most granular Link section interface)
• When a search result or link to a category/tag index page is followed, the same happens as above

Here’s a possible solution for keeping this simple and presenting the most data as possible:

1. Re-label the Posts section to become "Page Views" This basic nomenclature and data point isn’t represented anywhere in MM
2. On the first interface in the new Page View section, present the stats in one table and clearly mark each type of page view with a text or iconic descriptor. Then add a simple widget for choosing: All, Homepage, Categories or Posts.
3. Of course, make it smart to remember which view the user last used
4. Back on the homepage, bubble up the number of posts and categories viewed (out of how many exist) within the large icon, directly under the total number of page views.

Now, at a glance, I’d be able to see my total page views, while also being able to dig deeper and get a sense of which pages are being hit. Simple and powerful.

The United States Of America
I fully realize that the Country section is icing on the average analytic cake, but it is so much more than that within the context of a global perspective. So I’m thrilled to have a tool that visualizes for me where my visitors reside around the globe, while providing a fun geography refresher course. But now I want sweeter icing; I want to know where my visitors are coming from within America.

ESPN.com generates this very view when they present poll returns from around the nation. Yes, this is US-centric, and doesn’t provide a peek into granular levels elsewhere around the world, but if the data is available (which it is) expose it. The zoom feature practically begs for it to be implemented, as I’m dying to see if a rancher in Montana is connecting*the*dots.

I’m really looking forward to the beta release.

For the last two days, Dan, myself and the Ameritrade crew from Nebraska (that’s right, I said Nebraska) observed 10 active traders as they were walked through the prototype for the new trading platform we’re designing. We were a bit apprehensive going into it because we were adding numerous features and changing the paradigm of the trading model all together, but amazingly enough the response was enthusiastic and positive.

Of course some pretty bad design decisions in specific screens rose to the top through the interviews. By the 7th trader we were all covering our eyes and screaming at the mirror when they hit those areas. Dan and I even started a “task war,” pushing the moderator to lead the clients through each other’s shoddy screens. Yes, our professionalism deteriorated a bit, but we walked away with reams of notes and have a solid 3 weeks to crank out revisions for a second round of testing.

If all goes well (knock on wood) this product is going to be sweet when it hits the market.

I noticed something the other day about my online shopping pattern: I don’t browse and I hardly ever buy on a whim.

After contemplating such startling, introspective findings for awhile (uhm… finished), I started to wonder whether this could be the case with most people that shop online? That got me to thinking more, so I mosied on over to Amazon.com to perform an off the cuff user interview/usability study of myself and my tendencies, comparing them to the holistic user experience of the site.

I admit it wasn’t very scientific, but what I discovered was interesting.

• When I shop at Amazon, 99 times of 100 (I multiplied this session by 99) go directly to the search field and enter a product attribute.
• After landing on a results page, I choose a product description page.
• 4 out of 10 times (ballpark figures folks), I’ll review a few user comment reviews on the product as a the final check before deciding to make a purchase or not.
• If it’s a go, then WHAM! I’m in the cart experience and out the virtual door.

What I just described is the Amazon shopping experience from 1996-97. It’s a utilitarian approach and it fits me when it comes to shopping, especially in the real world (but that’s a whole other conversation.)

Online shopping, for me, is about keeping your recommendations to yourself, don’t clutter the page with collaborative filtered data such as ‘purchase circles’ or ‘listmania,’ and just let me find what I’m looking for and get me out of the store… fast.

My assumption is that this is how most people use Amazon. I could be wrong. I’ve been known to be… often. But if that were the case, even if the numbers were only 30% that followed my shopping pattern, wouldn’t the overall user experience be a bit too much? Wouldn’t Amazon be relying too much on quirky collaborative filtering techniques to become the next generation shopping experience?

I mean, first there’s a welcome page, then the Sean store, then a trailing history of what I’ve viewed, then recommendations built dynamically based on those views and presented throughout the UI. On top of all of this there is untargeted and targeted marketing messaging (hmm, sometimes in the form of recommendations?) presented to me at each turn…

Who’s handling the UXdesign here? How many marketing MBA’s are in a room with a cornered IA or DBA hatching plots to create cross-pollination of product silos? Come on, do I really care that people who bought my book also wear clean underwear from Target? Is this the smartest Amazon can be?

Amazon deserves credit for recently removing some of the superfluous features of the site from the main experience and placing them into the well hidden ‘explore’ category on a secret page somewhere in their navigation scheme. But the powerful information that this site could provide the customer should be generated at the customer’s whim.

Please, Mr. Bezos, we’re living in the realm of customization. Allow us to create our own product page. Let us choose if we want these extra features and how we want to view them. I understand there’s a fine line between satisfying the needs of your retail partners and pushing product, but when in doubt, bite the bullet and go with the us, the people, the customers.

Amazon is now six years old, the ancient mother of e-commerce sites. Now would be the time to design an experience for individual shoppers. Create a completely personalized shopping experience through customizable interaction design. It’s the next step in online shopping, and you know how the saying goes in the retail world: the customer is always right.

I’m now booked with reviewing hours and hours of user interviews, run by Ameritrade’s client experience consultants. I asked for it, and marketing gave it to me. The info is great — hearing the God’s honest truth about your site can be quite interesting — but the format of the interviews is pretty drawn out and somewhat unfocused. Unfortunately, we never get to see what screens they are reviewing at a given time because the brilliant camera operators don’t cut to a fire-wired view of the laptop screen. Details, details…

Technical problems aside, I’m moving forward with my design process as my initial three personae for the trading platform redesign project are being rounded out as the customers open up to the interviewer. Good stuff. Now I just have to roll up the specifics into a document that focuses on the goals of the individual personae and develop a few mental models for the beginning of the redesign of the site/applications.

It’s great to finally have the opportunity to do things the right way. Kinda.

We at Datek are only a few months away (hopefully) from signing on the dotted line and merging with Ameritrade. A major result of that milestone will include a re-architecture of the two discrete sites into one new user experience; a forward-thinking trading platform. In expectation of that date, our marketing group has been doing a great job in gathering user data (video tapes of user interaction with the two existing sites, focus group feedback, etc.) and we — the user experience design team — are about to embark on the first step of the the planning process; creating the first stab of an evolving bible of Ameritrade/Datek personas.

Before I started work on designing Command Center, personas were not part of the software design process at Datek. During the initial stage of the project, I contacted a friend of mine (CCO of Onclave, Dave Reid) to borrow a persona template. After mind-melding with Dave and then internally with our marketing department, I came up with two detailed personas two reflect our active trading customer base. Sure, they’re not based on personal interviews with clients, but as stakes in the ground, the tangible reference of human personas consistantly assisted me in the design of the product and proved to be worth the effort.

The shift of our software design process, from a business centered to user centered, has grabbed huge traction over the last few months, and I feeling that the change in approach will positively affect our customers interaction with the Winter ‘03 site launch.