WUP offers web site strategy development services.

Download this product sheet in PDF format

• Why and when
• Our approach
• How we do site strategy development
• Outputs
• Client examples
• Fees

Why and when

In order to have an effective web site - one that is both usable and that meets the aims of the organization - there has to be clarity about:

• The target users
• The goals they wish to achieve
• The user goals the site is to support

What matters is that target users can quickly and easily achieve their goals, and achieving these meets the site owner’s strategy and is seen as valuable by the user. Therefore, a web site needs a clear strategy that should be developed at the start of a project.

Our approach

We offer a range of services to help organisations develop appropriate site strategies including user research - to understand user goals - and workshops for senior managers to develop site strategies.

One cost effective solution is a one day ‘Strategic Workshop’. This is aimed at senior managers with responsibility for setting, or who can influence, web strategy. In order that participants gain a first hand understanding of user goals and behaviours, we inform these workshops by filming a number of users on the site and showing this at the start of the workshop.

The workshop is highly participative; participants record issues using cognitive mapping techniques in order to capture their immediate reactions to the testers’ experiences. Subsequently, a WUP consultant facilitates a discussion so that participants develop a collective view of the key issues to be addressed, the implications of these, and the required actions and priorities.

How we do site strategy development

Workshop objectives

The workshop objectives are typically:

• To gain a shared understanding of the principal problems with the site
• To agree user types and identify the main user goals for each type
• To agree organisational site aims and user goals to be supported
• To make recommendations about the process for site development

Participants

The workshop is most effective if it is attended by a range of personnel from across the organisation including:

• Managers responsible for developing web strategy or who influence this
• Web team staff responsible for implementing the outcomes
• People who have direct contact with the organisation’s customers or users

Workshops work well with 10-15 participants, but up to 20 can be accommodated.

User testing

Prior to the workshop, WUP will record a small number of users (typically three) from different target audiences to obtain video footage to illustrate the key issues.

The profile of the testers is agreed with the client. WUP recruits the testers and conducts the testing sessions at our premises, capturing an image of the tester, sound and a screen shot of the site as it is viewed.

The testers are asked to explore the site and undertake tasks relevant to the user by an experienced WUP moderator. These tasks are agreed in advance with the client’s project manager.

Workshop Agenda

A typical workshop agenda is as follows:

Practical issues

Usually, the client provides the venue, refreshments and audiovisual equipment (though we can arrange these if required at additional cost). The following is required:

• LCD projector and screen
• Sound
• Lap top with internet connection (we can bring our own but need to be able to connect to the internet)
• 4-5 flip charts

Outputs

Following the workshop we would produce a short report that captures the key issues to emerge from the workshop.

Client examples

We have run strategic workshops for a variety of clients including:

Fees

Prices depend on the amount of research required and the number of participants but are in the range £3-5,000. This includes:

• Tester recruitment and payment
• User testing the site
• Workshop preparation and video editing
• Running the workshop
• Preparing workshop minutes

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help make your web site more effective

WUP offers wire frame development.

Download this product sheet in PDF format

• Why and when
• Our approach
• How we do wire frame development
• Outputs
• Fees

Why and when

Many web sites have screen elements (e.g. navigation bars, content panes, search boxes, etc.) that are not placed in the best position for the user. Often the layout of pages is based on what an organisation wants to ‘tell’ users rather than on user priorities. The best way to develop a usable wireframe is to involve users in its development. (NB a wireframe is a representation of all the key page elements, including the information architecture showing where they would appear on the page prior to any design elements being added).

Wireframe development is an integral part of the user-centred design of a website. Advisably, it should be carried out after the user goals the site should support have been agreed, and the information architecture (i.e. how content is chunked into a hierarchy) has been developed, but before any work on design is undertaken. However, existing sites with poor page layouts also benefit from wireframe development.

Our approach

Normally, wireframe development is part of a wider user-centred web design project involving research to understand users and their goals, and development of a usable information architecture. Therefore, the development of the initial wireframes is informed by the user research undertaken in these other stages of the project.

Typically we develop wireframes for a home page, navigation pages and the main content page types.

The prototype is ideally tested and refined through a series of iterative research sessions with representative target users. Two or three iterations of user research are normally adequate.

How we do wire frame development

We develop one or more variations of each template based on an understanding of users and their goals (identified through earlier research). We like to populate the wireframes with real content for a small number of user goals (10-20) so, when we test the wireframes, users can undertake their tasks completely.

User testing of the wireframes consists of two types:

• Formal testing (2 iterations) with observed usability testing of the whole prototype; the first typically following the development of the first wireframe prototype, and the second at the final wireframe prototype development stage to enable a ‘whole site’ perspective to be adopted. These iterations will involve key client stakeholders in site development
• Informal testing (number of iterations varies) with users, on elements of the site during prototype development. These are ‘work-in-progress’ sessions to test developments of, and identify improvements to, specific elements of the wireframes

The formal testing is conducted as follows:

• Each research session is typically conducted at our premises and takes place over one day. The session is attended by up to 8 client personnel.
• The research is split into two parts: user testing in the morning and consideration of the results in the afternoon to refine the prototype wireframes
• Prior to the test day, WUP agrees a set of user goals with the client to be used in the research
• WUP recruits the testers – profiles of which are agreed with the client
• WUP prepares a simple HTML representation of the prototype wireframe
• Each tester tests the prototype for c. 50 minutes individually.
• The testers are asked “Where would you click” to achieve each goal, through as many levels as there are in the prototype wireframe. They are asked to ‘think aloud’ so we can understand any issues about the usability of the wireframes.
• On the same day, following the user testing, WUP facilitates and contributes to a discussion to produce a revised wireframe for the next round of testing
• A report is produced summarising the research, analysis and detailing the revised wireframes.

Informal testing is conducted with a panel of testers, representative of the target audiences, in order to undertake short, fast, informal usability testing of development concepts. These might be new ideas or changes to elements that have previously encountered problems in testing. Testers can be called in at short notice to provide feedback as appropriate.

Outputs

The output of the research is a set of site wireframes showing all the key screen elements on the home, navigation and content pages. This is also detailed in a report.

Fees

Most of our work is tailored to individual client’s requirements and we quote an inclusive price for each piece of work.

However, the following gives an illustration of typical costs:

• Template development - £950 per template
• Formal (i.e. observed) user testing (6 testers) - £6,950 per round
• Informal testing (6 testers) - £4,950

Terms & Conditions

• VAT will be added to all charges at the currently prevailing rate. Payment will be within 30 days on the presentation of our invoice.
• Additional work not identified above would be charged at WUP’s standard rates (£950/day for directors, £750/day for consultants, £600/day for facilitators, £250/day for support staff). Additional expenses not shown above would be charged at cost
• Cancellation of booked sessions will incur cancellation fees as follows: cancellation within 4 weeks of the session, 50% of the fee payable; cancellation within 2 weeks of the session, 100% of fee is payable
• The rates quoted assume tester remuneration of £50 plus travel expenses up to a maximum of £10. If tester remuneration needs to be greater than this for any reason (e.g. securing individuals with high time value or on short lead times) then any costs above the basic charge will be invoiced at cost.
• It is assumed that the client will invite the observers to research sessions

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help make your web site more effective

WUP offers information architecture services.

Download this product sheet in PDF format

• Why and when
• Our approach
• How we develop an information architecture
• Outputs
• Client examples
• Fees

Why and when

Many web sites have an Information Architecture (IA) based on an ‘organisational’ view of the site’s content that does not reflect how users go about achieving their goals. Having a user-centred structure for a site IA (i.e. how user goals are chunked into a hierarchy), and having labels that are understood by users, is key to getting users to their goals quickly and providing a good user experience. The best way to develop a usable IA is to involve users in its development.

IA research is ideally done at an early stage of web site development, after the user goals the site is to support have been established but before any work on site design and layout; however, existing sites with a poor IA also benefit from this type of research.

Our approach

The approach we adopt offers a combination of both quantitative and qualitative research, using quantitative research to understand the closeness of the relationship between user goals, and qualitative research to gain insights into user behaviour and the language used.

We tend to use open rather than closed card sorting (i.e. with open card sorting users choose the labels for categories rather than putting them under predefined headings) as this does not prejudge the language they will use.

How we develop an information architecture

IA development is in two parts:

• Developing a prototype - this involves understanding how users ‘chunk’ tasks and the labels users give to these chunks, so that a prototype IA can be drawn up
• Testing a prototype - testing the prototype with users

Developing an IA prototype

In order to develop the prototype it is necessary to understand how users group tasks i.e. how they ‘chunk’ them and what labels they give to these groups. This research is undertaken by writing all the various user goals that the site is to support onto individual cards and getting potential site users to sort these into groups. This clearly requires the user goals the site is to support be identified in detail, often there are 50-100 or more supported user goals. This may require user research to identify these goals if they are not understood. It also requires a clear site strategy so the user goals to be supported (and not supported) are clear.

During this sorting process, a WUP moderator probes to understand why the tester is sorting the tasks in a particular way, and what labels they would attach to the various groups. An initial top level sort may be followed by sorting each group in turn into sub groups.

This work can be conducted in two ways:

• Qualitatively
• Quantitatively

Qualitative Prototype IA Development

The process adopted in qualitative IA development is augments some existing understanding of how users chunk and label their goals. It is a relatively low cost way to gain some additional insight into user’s behaviour and uses a limited number of respondents (e.g. 6). The client is, necessarily, an active participant in the IA development process. The research is conducted as follows:

• The research is typically conducted at our premises and takes place over one day. The session is attended by 2-3 client
  personnel
• Prior to the test day, WUP would agree a set of user goals with the client to be used in the research. Sets of cards listing the user goals would be prepared
• WUP recruits the respondents - profiles of which would be agreed with the client
• The research is split into two parts: user testing in the morning and consideration of the results in the afternoon to draw up the draft IA
• Each respondent participates in the research session for c. 50 minutes individually
• The respondent would be asked to group the goals; the moderator explores with the respondents their reasons for placing goals in the various categories, to suggest names for the groups and explore respondents’ confidence of the ‘fit’ of goals under these headings
• In the afternoon of the research day, the results of card sorting are reviewed and WUP facilitates and contributes to a discussion to produce a draft IA
• Subsequently, a detailed first draft information architecture is produced in HTML or paper format for further testing
• A report is produced that summarises the research, analysis and detailing the prototype IA

Quantitative IA Prototype Development

A more comprehensive approach to IA prototype development involves larger numbers of respondents so that the outputs of a card sorting exercise (as described above) can be subject to cluster analysis to identify the closeness of the relationships of the groups into which respondents sort the goals. The research is conducted as for the qualitative IA prototype development but:

• Typically 12-15 people are used in the research (or possibly more) depending on the number of target users for the site
• Following the user research, WUP analyses the results. This includes cluster analysis to determine the closeness of the user goals as chunked by the different users
• The results of the research are presented at a workshop of client stakeholders where selected parts of the research sessions are reviewed on video; the outputs of the analysis presented; and a discussion facilitated to produce a draft IA
• A report is produced that summarises the research and analysis and details the prototype IA

Testing the Prototype

The prototype is ideally tested and refined through a series of research sessions with representative target users. Two or three iterations of user research are normally ideal. The research is conducted as follows:

• Each research session is typically conducted at our premises and takes place over one day. The session is attended by 2-3 client personnel
• The research is split into two parts: user testing in the morning and consideration of the results in the afternoon to refine the prototype IA
• Prior to the test day, WUP agrees a set of user goals with the client to be used in the research - normally the same goals as used for the prototype development
• WUP recruits the testers - profiles of which are agreed with the client
• WUP prepares a simple HTML representation of the prototype IA to be used in the research session based on the outcomes of the prototype development research
• Each tester tests the prototype for c. 40 minutes individually
• The testers are asked ‘Where would they click’ to achieve each goal through as many levels as there are in the prototype IA. The results are recorded on a template
• On the same day, following the user testing, WUP facilitates and contribute to a discussion to produce a revised prototype information architecture for the next round of testing
• A report is produced summarising the research, analysis and detailing the revised prototype IA

While we are happy to undertake as many iterations of testing of the prototype IA as may be required, we also offer a training service so that clients can undertake some of this research themselves. Typically, we run a single iteration and, during this, train a member of the client’s staff in the required facilitation skills and other techniques so they can undertake any additional research sessions.

Outputs

The output of the research is an information architecture for the site, which is detailed in a series of reports:

• Following the development of the prototype - including videos of the card sorting exercise
• Following each iteration of prototype testing - including videos of each of the test sessions showing the screen being viewed, tester head shot, and the audio of the session

Client examples

Examples of IA research we have undertaken include:

Fees

Most of our work is tailored to individual client’s requirements and we quote an inclusive price each piece of work. However, the following gives an illustration of typical costs:

• Qualitative Prototype IA Development (6 testers) - £4,950
• Quantitative IA Prototype Development (12 testers) - £7,950
• Prototype testing (each session) (6 testers) - £4,950

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help make your web site more effective

WUP offers user research.

Download this product sheet in PDF format

• Why and when
• Our approach
• How we do user research
• Outputs
• Client examples
• Case studies
• Fees

Why and when

WUP undertakes user research that informs the development of effective web sites - at all stages from early concept testing through to established site redesign. This includes:

• User goal research - to understand user goals on a web site
• Organisational research - to understand an organisation’s aims and objectives
• Concept testing - to test new concepts and ideas
• Information architecture research

The appropriate research approach will depend on the question you’re trying to answer but we offer:

• Face-to-face interviews
• Paired depth interviews (2 respondents)
• Focus Groups
• Telephone research
• Self reporting journals
• Surveys and questionnaires - online and offline

Our approach

The approach we adopt to user research ensures the right research is undertaken to achieve client’s aims combined with a process to produce agreed and actionable results.

Strategic

In order to recommend the appropriate research approach we look at your ‘broader’ strategic picture. What is the purpose of the research, what are you trying to achieve, how will outputs be used. With our extensive user research experience we see it as our role is to challenge client’s views about their requirements, and research methodologies, to ensure all projects deliver useful outputs and provide value for money - we won’t undertake a project if we disagree with the proposed approach.

Action Oriented Process

When the research methodology permits, a key element of our approach is to encourage all those in an organisation who can influence the implementation of the research to observe some of the research and participate in a discussion facilitated by WUP. During the sessions, observers are asked to record issues using cognitive mapping techniques for subsequent discussion, in order to capture their immediate reactions to respondent’s feedback. Subsequently, a WUP consultant facilitates a discussion to identify the key issues. This discussion means that the client takes ownership of the research results, and develops a collective view of the issues that enables the identification of actionable results.

WUP consultants bring to these discussions our many years experience of strategic consulting in the private and public sectors. As the situation demands, we draw on this experience to ensure the discussions are guided by this knowledge.

How we do user research

How projects are undertaken depends on the research objectives and methodologies but typically there are three elements:

• Project preparation
• Recruitment
• Conducting the research

Project preparation

We plan the research in consultation with the client so the client gets the ‘right’ solution - not an ‘off the shelf’ one. We agree with the client’s project manager the key aims of the research, research methodologies, respondent profiles, research locations, timescales etc. We prepare a discussion guide or questionnaires for the research for approval by the client’s project manager in advance of the research.

Recruitment

When required, we undertake our own recruitment - we do not use third parties. We believe this allows us to recruit more accurately to our client’s specification, provide greater flexibility, and treat respondents in a decent and ethical way. We are experienced at recruiting respondents from a wide range of backgrounds and occupations, and with a range of experience, including responndents with visual, motor or cognitive impairment. All potential respondents undergo a detailed screening to ensure they match the respondent profile - a profile of the respondents is sent to the client project manager prior to the research session for approval. Respondents are paid a fee for their participation in the research: this ensures their participation and demonstrates appreciation of the value of their involvement.

Conducting the Research

How the research is conducted depends on the methodologies used, but typically includes:

• Preparing discussion guides or questionnaires
• Scheduling the research
• Undertaking the research
• Analysing the outputs

Outputs

The outputs of the research are dependent of the project but typically include:

• Reports
• Presentations
• DVDs of the research sessions

Client examples

WUP have undertaken a large number of user research projects. Recent work includes:

Case studies

• Home Office Case Study
• Houses Of Parliament Case Study

Fees

Most of our work is tailored to individual client’s requirements and we quote an inclusive price for each piece of work. However, the following gives an illustration of typical costs:

• Unobserved focus group (6 participants) £4,950 (N.b. this fully inclusive price covers all WUP’s fees, respondent recruitment and payment, studios, equipment hire, reports, DVDs and travel expenses etc.)
• Observed focus group and facilitated debrief £5,450 (N.b. this fully inclusive price covers all WUP’s fees, respondent recruitment and payment, observation studios, equipment hire, reports, DVDs and travel expenses etc.)
• Unobserved paired depths £500 per interview including transcripts and write ups
• Face-to-face interviews £500 per interview including transcripts and write ups
• Online survey (500 responses) £3,950, includes questionnaire preparation, setting up, running and analyzing the survey and producing reports

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help make your web site more effective

WUP offers usability testing.

Download this product sheet in PDF format

• Why and when
• Our approach
• How we usability test
• Outputs
• Client examples
• Case studies
• Fees

Why and when

Usability testing reveals the issues with a web site that interfere with a good user experience – how users achieve their goals and the usefulness and relevance of the content - surfacing both behaviours and attitudes. Improving the user experience increases user satisfaction and:

• Increases conversion rates on e-commerce sites and completion rates for transactions on public sector sites
• Increases the successful take up of information on information sites
• Increases return visits and recommendations

Usability testing, applied well, can also help organisations become more user focused by communicating the insights gained from the research.

Usability testing can be used at all stages in a web site’s development from paper prototypes to final designs.

Our approach

The approach we adopt brings together rigorous user-focused usability research combined with a process to produce agreed and actionable results.

User Focused research

We adopt a user-led goal-oriented approach to usability testing that surfaces testers’ behaviours and actions to help inform thinking about both strategic issues (how users want to interact with the site) and tactical issues (the usability issues that enable or inhibit user goals being achieved). We use a facilitation guide that encourages a user led journey, with a combination of free exploration, broad scenarios, and loosely defined tasks based on the tester’s preferences.

We do not use a highly scripted approach employing a set of tightly pre-defined tasks as this does not necessarily address the issues that users are most interested in. We believe that testers will engage more realistically in the testing process if they are asked to undertake activities in which they are interested and that are relevant to them in their ‘real’ lives. The research data that results from this process will provide more insightful and relevant results.

Action Oriented Process

A key element of our approach is to encourage all those in an organisation who can influence the implementation of the session’s outcomes to attend at least some of the usability testing session and a discussion facilitated by WUP. During the testing sessions, observers are asked to record issues using cognitive mapping techniques for subsequent discussion, in order to capture their immediate reactions to the testers’ experiences. Subsequently, a WUP consultant facilitates a discussion of the issues to identify the priority areas to be fixed. This discussion means that the development team takes ownership of the research results, and develops a collective view of the priority issues to be rectified that enables the identification of actionable results.

WUP consultants bring to these discussions their experience of watching a large number of testers on a range of different web sites, as well as a detailed understanding of usability issues. As the situation demands, we draw on this experience to ensure the discussions are guided by this knowledge.

How we usability test

Depending on the number of users to be tested on a site, our research typically has four elements:

• Project preparation
• Recruitment
• Unobserved user testing
• Observed user testing

N.B. the number of testers required in any usability testing programme depends on a range of factors (e.g. what it is wished to achieve, the budget and time available and the site’s target audiences). However, our experience of undertaking testing on hundreds of websites shows that typically a relatively small proportion of usability problems account for the bulk of the bad user experience on a site. These problems can be identified with a small number of testers (e.g. 3). It is seldom particularly valuable or cost effective to test more than 12 users, even on sites with several different audiences.

Project preparation

We plan the research in consultation with the client so the client gets the ‘right’ solution -not an ‘off the shelf’ one. Prior to the research, we agree with the client’s project manager the key aims of the testing, the tester profiles, testing locations, timescales, etc. We prepare a facilitation guide for the testing sessions for approval by the client’s project manager in advance of the testing sessions.

Recruitment

We undertake our own recruitment - we do not use third parties. We believe this allows us to recruit more accurately to our client’s specification, provide greater flexibility, and treat testers in a decent and ethical way. We are experienced at recruiting testers from a wide range of backgrounds and occupations, and with a range of experience, including testers with visual, motor or cognitive impairment.

All potential testers undergo a detailed screening to ensure they match the tester profile - a profile of the testers is sent to the client project manager prior to the testing session for approval. Testers are paid a fee for their participation in the usability testing: this ensures their participation and demonstrates appreciation of the value of their involvement.

Unobserved User Testing

The unobserved user testing is conducted as follows:

• The unobserved testing is conducted either at our facilities or using a mobile usability laboratory in suitable testing locations (Mobile usability laboratory consists of: Laptop running Techsmith Morae, with webcam and microphone, to record screen, tester’s face, audio)
• The testing sessions are facilitated by a WUP consultant using a user led approach (see ‘User focused research‘ above)
• Following the unobserved testing, an interim report is produced that summarises the research outputs to inform the people attending the observed user testing

Observed User Testing

The observed user testing is conducted as follows:

• The observed testing day is split into two halves, with user testing (3 testers) in the morning and a facilitated discussion session in the afternoon
• The observed testing session is conducted either in our observation studios or other suitable facilities and observed by up to 8 client stakeholders (ideally all those involved in implementing the research outputs should attend the observed testing including third party site developers if used)
• The testing sessions are facilitated by a WUP consultant using a user led approach (see ‘User focused research‘ above)
• The observers are active participants, capturing issues as they arise. A second WUP consultant facilitates this process. (See ‘Action Orientated Process‘ above)
• A discussion session is held after the research to discuss the outcomes and identify the priority issues to be fixed. This session enables the development team to take ownership of the research results, and develop a collective view of the priority issues to be addressed. This approach means that the team will, within a single day, develop a shared view and have a detailed knowledge, and ownership, of the issues raised, and will agree the implications of these issues, the required actions and the priorities. (See ‘Action Orientated Process‘ above)
• The sessions are recorded onto a DVD capturing the test screen outputs, a video of the tester, and audio outputs for analysis purposes and subsequent viewing by the client

Outputs

WUP undertakes a qualitative analysis of the data in line with the WUP Usability Framework. The data sources comprise the ‘real time’ issues captured by observers during the testing sessions and the DVD recordings, which are analyzed following the user research. Usability issues are sorted according to our Usability Framework, and used to support and augment the conclusions and actions agreed during the facilitated discussion session.

The outputs of the research are:

• Interim report of the outcomes of the unobserved testing
• A final report covering:
  • Background and objectives for the specific usability testing session
  • Key findings from the usability testing session covering the key usability issues
  • Verbatim tester comments to support the issues identified
  • Summary of facilitated discussion outcomes
  • A list of recommendations and a prioritized action plan as agreed at the facilitated discussion that would detail timescales and responsibilities (if agreed)
• DVDs of the testing sessions showing the screen being viewed, tester head shot and the audio of the session

Client examples

WUP have undertaken more than 100 usability testing projects for over 50 clients in both the public and private sectors. Recent work includes:

Case studies

• Kirklees Case Study
• Leicestershire County Council Case Study
• Virgin Case Study

Fees

Most of our work is tailored to individual client’s requirements and we quote an inclusive price for each piece of work. However, costs are largely determined by the number of users tested on a site, so approximate costs can be worked out by combining the cost of an observed session (i.e. 3 testers followed by a facilitated debrief), typically £5,450 (if conducted at our facilities), plus the cost of any additional unobserved testers at £450 per tester. Therefore, a 6 user study would cost £6,800. (N.b. this is a fully inclusive price that covers all WUP’s fees, tester recruitment and payment, observation studios, equipment hire, reports, DVDs and travel expenses etc.)

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help make your web site more effective

The following case studies give examples of our work:

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing

The Brief

As part of a major web site redevelopment project, the Home Office wanted to develop a user-driven information architecture that met user goals and satisfied the business needs of the department.

The existing site was attempting to reach all of its audiences, including stakeholders, practitioners and the general public. Whilst there was a great deal of useful and relevant content, a lack of consistency in the site organisation and an organisationaly focused information architecture made it difficult for users to achieve their goals.

How we responded to the brief

The project involved six main phases of work:

• Contextual research
• Usability testing and analyses of the site
• User research
• Determining site scope and goals
• Developing the information architecture
• Developing wire frame prototypes

What we did

WUP undertook all the user research in the redevelopment project and worked with Cognitive Applications (a new media production agency) to produce the information architecture and prototypes.

We undertook face-to-face and telephone research with 32 Home Office staff to understand their aims for the site and their understanding of user goals. We undertook focus groups and paired depth interviews with 18 respondents to gain insights into their goals and how they sought information. The Home Office was particularly keen to get feedback from socially excluded users.

We facilitated a meeting of key managers to gain agreement about the user goals the site was to support.

We undertook card sorting research to develop a prototype information architecture. This prototype was repeatedly tested through a number of iterations to produce the final information architecture.

This was then incorporated into a wire frame design for the site showing the key navigational elements for the home page, landing pages and content pages, which was also user tested.

The outcomes

The key outcome of the process was an architecture for the web site that addressed issues relevant to and of interest to users, was intuitive for target users, and which met the strategic needs of the Home Office and was bought into by a large number of Home Office stakeholders.

Timing

The project was conducted between June and November 2004.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with user centred design.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

MRC was redeveloping its website and was particularly keen to make the new site usable (and useful) to members of the general public as well as to their traditional audiences (i.e. medical research
academics). The MRC also wanted a new Information Architecture for the site but because budgets were limited the MRC was proposing to undertake much of the redevelopment work themselves and therefore
wanted appropriate training in support.

How we responded to the brief

Due to the funding constraints, we proposed a combined research and training project that included:

• User testing and research with 10 testers: 2 from each of the principal target user types. The testing was followed by a facilitated discussion of the issues to agree actions.
• Developing a ‘first draft’ information architecture informed by an ‘open’ card sorting exercise with 3 testers.
• Testing this draft information architecture with 6 testers.
• Training and consultancy support to help MRC staff develop the Information Architecture and the skills required to test it.
• User testing with 3 testers on the final prototype developed by MRC staff

What we did

The user testing and research was conducted in observation studios in London and was used to identify both user goals and usability issues with the site.

From this research c.50 main user goals were identified. Open card sorting research was then undertaken to understand how users would group information and the language they would use to describe the
groups.

With this evidence, a prototype Information Architecture was developed. This was then tested with 6 respondents. At the same time members of MRC staff were trained in how to undertake user testing of subsequent drafts they developed themselves.

With this evidence, a prototype Information Architecture was developed. This was then tested with 12 respondents to see where they would click for each of the 50 key user goals - amendments were made in light of this feedback.

The outcomes

The user research gave greater clarity to the goals the site should support. The skills transfer helped MRC develop a user focused information architecture and wire frames that were used to develop the final version of the site.

"Not only did WUP deliver on the user testing and IA development, they gave us the skills and confidence to develop and maintain the quality of the site post-launch" Allen O’Leary - MRC
Web manager

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in summer 2005 and took 12 weeks to complete at a cost of £15,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with user testing and training

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

Following usability testing of the Adviser hub of the Scottish Life web site, a number of issues were identified relating to site content:

• Not all content was presented or written in a way that made it easy for users to achieve their goals
• A content ‘good practice guide’ was required, and the content contributors needed to ‘buy-in’ to its development

How we responded to the brief

We proposed a ‘Content Contributors Workshop’, to be attended by content contributors, and ideally also by some senior managers with line responsibility for the content contributors. The objectives were:

• To gain a shared understanding of the principal problems with the site, especially those that relate to content and how it is presented
• To develop a first draft of the content guidelines

What we did

In order to provide participants with a first hand understanding of users’ needs and behaviours, we started this workshop by showing edited highlights of the recent user testing; while viewing the video, the participants identified issues about content. Using cognitive mapping techniques, the facilitators led a subsequent discussion so that participants could develop a collective view of the key content-related issues, the implications of these, and the required actions and priorities.

With the target users in mind, the participants then considered, through a series of exercises and group sessions:

• User goals and the content required to satisfy these goals
• How the content should be ’scoped’ and ’scaled’
• How content should be ‘chunked’ and labelled
• Where specific content should be located within the information architecture of the site
• The effect on users of sentence length, language complexity (FOG index), tone and acronyms and jargon

The outcomes

During the facilitated discussion, Scottish Life staff gained a shared understanding of the issues, and agreed on the areas to be covered in the development of web content guidelines. Subsequently, Scottish Life issued a Web Guidelines Good Practice Guide to the content contributors

"Extremely valuable in helping us develop a shared understanding of usability among our content contributors." Richard Spence
Online Marketing Consultant

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in November 2005 and took just 2 weeks to complete from proposal to workshop delivery, at a cost of approximately £1,750 (note this cost did not include the user testing which was part of an earlier project).

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with content guideline workshops.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

Virgin.com is a portal to the products and services provided by the Virgin group of companies. There are a large number of goals that can be achieved on the site, from booking holidays, buying mobile phones to obtaining loans and insurance. Virgin wanted to know how easily these goals could be achieved.

How we responded to the brief

As Virgin wanted some quick, high level feedback we proposed a single day of research with 3 testers, observed by the key stakeholders, followed by a facilitated discussion. This would allow the observers to identify the key issues and agree actions in a single day.

What we did

We discussed the objectives of the project with the project manager and prepared a facilitation guide to achieve these which identified 24 key user goals on which feedback was required.

We then recruited the 3 testers, people in their 20’s and 30’s who were regular online shoppers. The testing was conducted in viewing facilities in central London - convenient for the client.
The research session was recorded (audio recording and screen capture with tester picture-in-picture).

The observers watched the testing through a one-way mirror capturing issues on post-its as they occurred. Following the observed testing, a discussion was facilitated by a WUP consultant to agree the issues and appropriate actions.

Following the testing, we detailed the outcomes of the research and the conclusions of the facilitated discussion in a report.

The outcomes

The research identified a number of strategic issues about the Virgin site as well as c.50 usability issues. During the facilitated discussion, Virgin staff gained a shared understanding of these issues, and changes to improve the site were agreed.

"Thanks again for your work - I think we had a successful day. The outputs are really helpful for the redesign of the website." Pooja Tanna - Senior Site Producer

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in February 2006 and took just 2 weeks to complete from recruitment to delivering the final report at a cost of approximately £5,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

Leicestershire County Council (LCC) had commissioned an accessibility audit of their site www.leics.gov.uk. This work was undertaken by our accessibility partners ‘Communis’. Based on their recommendations LCC completed a programme of work aimed at making the site more accessible. LCC then wanted to see how effective this work had been in making the site accessible to disabled users. LCC was particularly concerned that local disabled users could achieve their goals on the site.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed a short series of individual usability tests with six local users with a range of disabilities; these included blind and partially sighted users and users who could not use a mouse.

What we did

We recruited 6 testers: two blind testers who used Jaws, two partially sighted testers who used Zoomtext and two who did not use a mouse because of RSI.

We discussed the project requirements with the client and produced a facilitation guide that covered both general undirected exploration of the site and some specific tasks including e.g. "You have jus installed a new fridge and want to get rid of the old one - you live in Loughborough and want to find the address of the Household waste site there - go do this"

In order to make it easy for testers to attend, the testing was conducted in a local hotel in Leicester using our mobile usability testing equipments (i.e. a lap top with web cam and microphone with relevant accessibility software loaded and Techsmith Morae to enable picture-in-picture recording)

The testing was conducted by a WUP facilitator who adopted a non-directive approach to surface testers’ behaviours. The recordings of the testing sessions were analysed to identify issues which were documented in a report that was presented to the client.

The outcomes

The testers had mixed success in achieving tasks on the site; however, all but one had a reasonably favourable view of the site content and usability by the end of their sessions, saying they would revisit the site. The testers were impressed with the effort that LCC had put into the site to make it accessible compared to many other sites that they use.

However, the user testing did uncover a range of issues that affected disabled users, which were passed on to LCC to be rectified. These issues were backed up with code examples and a best practice guide on implementation.

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in spring 2006 and took approximately 4 weeks to complete at a cost of approximately £6,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with user testing for disabled users

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

The Houses of Parliament were aware that their website was difficult to use, with large numbers of subsites with different layouts. As the first stage of a complete redevelopment, it wished to carry out a thorough review of the website’s information architecture, and obtain recommendations for a new approach to the overall navigational structure.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed a project in 4 parts:

• Understanding user goals - with an online survey
• Understanding how the site is used - by undertaking usability testing
• Developing a prototype - by understanding how users ‘chunk’ and label tasks with card sorting research
• Developing and testing the prototype Information Architecture

What we did

The online survey was conducted to identify user goals on the site. The main question in this survey asked: ‘Why did you come to this site today - what information did you want?’ The survey also collected demographic information. 844 responses were collected over two weeks.

Thirteen respondents usability tested the Houses of Parliament site and were interviewed to gain greater insights about their goals on the site.

From this research 50 main user goals were identified. Card sorting research was then undertaken with 12 respondents. Each goal was written on a card and respondents grouped these in ways that made sense to them, indicating their confidence of the ‘fit’ of each card in the groups.

With this evidence, a prototype Information Architecture was developed. This was then tested with 12 respondents to see where they would click for each of the 50 key user goals - amendments were made in light of this feedback.

The outcomes

The proposed information architecture reduced the primary level links to 4 from about 20. As a result of this and other changes, respondents managed to select the ‘correct’ link for 50 key user goals 95% of the time on first or second attempt, 86% of the time on first attempt. User confidence in the link labels was high, in marked contrast to the feedback from the usability testing.

"I’m really pleased with the results and feel confident we’ll be able to implement the basics of your proposed IA sooner rather than later." Dominic Tinley - HOP Web manager

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in spring 2006 and took 8 weeks to complete at a cost of approximately £29,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with information architecture.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing

The Brief

Avon and Somerset Constabulary (A&SC) had recently launched a new website and wished to obtain a user perspective on the site.

The objectives of the research were to assess:

• Users’ attitudes to the website - what goals did they want to achieve, what were their perceptions of the A&SC
• Usability - the ease and intuitiveness of the site - how easily users could users get to their goals
• The effectiveness of the personalised content on the site - users could look at information about crime and policing in their area

How we responded to the brief

We proposed a project in 4 parts:Because A&SC wanted quick, cost effective feedback to identify the major usability issues we proposed usability testing with three testers.

In order to ensure buy in to the research results, we felt it important that key A&SC stakeholders gained a shared understanding of the issues through active observation of users on the site. By following this with a facilitated discussion it would allow the observers to identify the key issues and agree actions in a single day.

What we did

We recruited 3 testers who lived within the A&SC area: 1 low-usage internet user, 1 user over 60 years of age and 1 user under 20.

We conducted the testing in Bristol city centre using our mobile usability equipment (i.e. a lap top with web cam, microphone and Techsmith Morae to enable picture in picture recording). A&SC web development staff discreetly observed the testing process (the research was undertaken in an adjacent room and the development team could observe the session ‘live’ via a video link). The team captured issues arising during the session on post-it notes, which were subsequently used to map the issues that had emerged. A facilitated discussion then identified the priority issues.

The outcomes

The research identified over 40 usability and content issues. During the facilitated discussion A&SC staff gained a shared understanding of these issues, and actions were identified that could be implemented within the project scope. As a result, A&SC was able to act quickly to improve the site.

Avon & Somerset Constabulary were pleased enough with the results to commission WUP to carry out a usability study for the A&SC intranet.

"We found the usability testing process an invaluable experience, a real eye opener in fact. A highly recommended process to go through" Scott Fulton - Internet and Multimedia Manager

Timing

The project was conducted in spring 2006, over a 2 week period.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing

The Brief

Kirklees Metropolitan Council (KMC) had developed a site for visitors to the Kirklees area and wanted to understand how useful and usable it was.

The site is aimed at visitors from both outside the area (mainly people from the SE of England) and local people. KMC particularly wanted feedback from ethnic minorities prevalent in the Kirklees area.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed testing with 8 testers: 5 of these in advance of a day’s observed usability testing with 3 testers followed by a facilitated discussion of the issues and to agree actions.

In order to ensure buy in to the research results, we felt it important that key KMC stakeholders gained a shared understanding of the issues through active observation of users on the site. By following this with a facilitated discussion it would allow the observers to identify the key issues and agree actions in a single day.

What we did

We in fact recruited 9 testers: 2 Kirklees residents from ethnic backgrounds; 3 older and 4 younger people, who all took holidays in the UK, booked holidays on line, and lived in the south of England.

We conducted unobserved testing with 6 testers in two locations (London and Huddersfield). The outcomes were captured using our mobile usability equipment (i.e. a lap top with web cam, microphone and Techsmith Moenable picture in picture recording).

The observed testing (3 people) was conducted in specialist studios in London where KMC staff watched the testing through a one way mirror. They were ‘active’ observers, writing issues on post-its as they occurred. Following the observed testing, a discussion was facilitated by a WUP consultant to agree the issues and appropriate actions.

The outcomes

The research identified c.70 usability and content issues. During the facilitated discussion KMC staff gained a shared understanding of these issues, and actions were identified that could be implemented within the project scope. As a result KMC was able to act quickly to improve the site.

"We have been very impressed with you and your team in delivering what we think has been a very successful and informative usability work package. We have also all learnt a lot personally about websites’ purpose and goals which we can all take forward in our careers" Regina Nolan - Project Manager

Timing

The project was conducted in spring 2006, over a 6 week period.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

VisitScotland.com is a public-private partnership partly owned by Visit Scotland. The site is aimed at visitors from outside the area and the local population with an interest in travelling within Scotland. VisitScotland.com and its stakeholders wanted to develop a shared understanding amongst key internal stakeholders about the issues that affect the usability of the site and the best process for improving its usability. There was a desire to ‘get on with things’ and make improvements as soon as possible, but resources for redevelopment were limited.

How we responded to the brief

Following a usability testing session we recommended a strategic workshop. The objectives were:

• To gain a shared understanding of the usability and information architecture issues of the main visitscotland.com website and associated niche and regional sites
• Identify target users and user goals
• To understand Visit Scotland and visitscotland.com aims for the site
• To discuss a process for the review and future development of the main, niche and regional sites (one that ensures it will be user focused, but which can be achieved quickly and economically)
• To make recommendations about next steps

What we did

At a workshop an edited video of the usability testing of VisitScotland.com website was shown. The participants were ‘active’ observers, writing issues on post-its as they occurred. A discussion was then facilitated by a WUP consultant to agree key issues with the site. The participants then considered their site aims and the user goals the site was to support and a process for the redevelopment of the site - helped by break-out group exercises and the use of reference websites.

The outcomes

A wide variety of usability issues were identified, along with possible solutions. The participants considered the VisitScotland.com site aims and concluded that a detailed set of aims needed to be developed to help judge the suitability of site content. A site re-development process was agreed along with recognising that a new approach to the site content and site management was required.

"WUP really helped us establish an understanding of usability concepts and the issues affecting our site. They challenged us to think about key underlying principles: who are our target users; their goals, and which goals we should make it our priorities to meet." Paul Wedgwood - Business Development Director

Timing and costs

The workshop was conducted in spring 2006, and including the user testing and reporting took about 3 days at a cost of £1,750 (The user testing was in addition to this)

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with strategic workshops.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The brief

Screwfix, famous for their range of low cost building materials, were undertaking a major review of their website. Their site is an important sales channel and they wished to get user feedback on various competitors’ sites to inform the redevelopment, with evidence of how customers search for products.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed testing with 6 testers: 3 of these in advance of a day’s observed usability testing with a further 3 testers, followed by a facilitated discussion of the issues and to agree actions.

In order to ensure buy-in to the research results, we felt it important that key Screwfix staff gained a shared understanding of the issues observing users on the site. By following this with a facilitated discussion, it would allow the observers to identify the key issues and agree actions in a single day.

What we did

We discussed the objectives of the project with
the project manager and prepared a facilitation guide to achieve these. We recruited 6 testers, a mixture of home owners with a keen interest in DIY and trade buyers, all who order online.

We undertook the unobserved testing in advance of the observed testing and prepared an interim report of the findings.

The observed testing was conducted in our purpose built viewing studios where Screwfix staff watched the testing through a one way mirror. They were ‘active’ observers, writing issues on post-its as they occurred.

The testers reviewed the competitor sites, and their preferences for the various search features were recorded.

Following the observed testing, a discussion was facilitated by a WUP consultant to agree the issues and appropriate actions.

The outcomes

Some clear conclusions emerged from the research about the features that made product searching easy for users. During the facilitated discussion, Screwfix staff gained a shared understanding of these issues, and actions were identified that could be implemented.

"Thanks for the report - the session has proved very valuable and given us a clear view about how we want to proceed." Paul Marko - Screwfix

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in July 2006 and took less than 2 weeks to complete from recruitment to delivering the final report at a cost of approximately £6,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with competitor site assessment.

Download this case study in PDF format

The Brief

The Environment Agency had undertaken a review of their internet and intranet operations, which recommended that the Agency should gain a better understanding of the users of Environment Agency’s web services, and these users’ goals. Consequently, the Agency decided on a research programme to develop personas for both the internet and intranet sites. The Agency also wanted to develop an understanding throughout the organisation about how the personas were developed, and gain commitment to the personas and their use in future web services development.

How we responded to the brief

WUP proposed a programme of user research to ensure evidence based personas, combined with workshops with Agency stakeholders to facilitate buy-in to the persona development.

What we did

WUP undertook:

• Internal Organisational Research: interviews with a range of people within the Agency to get their views on target users for both internet and intranet services, and also an analysis of web usage statistics
• Web Stakeholder Workshop: this involved key stakeholders from across the Agency who considered the internal research, to identify target user groups for the user research
• User Research: this was to gain a better understanding of users’ needs, and how they wish to obtain information. Over 50 respondents from all over England and Wales were interviewed, representing the agreed user types for both internet and intranet
• ‘Users and Goals’ Workshop: the feedback and analysis from the user research was discussed at this workshop, which involved stakeholders from across the Agency. The objectives were to agree the priority user types and the user goals that the Agency would support on its sites. This discussion provided the framework for the subsequent persona development
• Persona development: then the personas were developed, detailing the persona’s goals, priorities and constraints, some personal information, and how the internet or intranet would help them. Plus a suitable picture!

The Outcomes

The project delivered three intranet personas and five internet personas which are being used on a daily basis by Environment Agency staff to guide site development and content production: if content doesn’t fit the personas then it doesn’t get used. The user evidence and the process also helped gain commitment to the personas as tools for the sites’ development and started the process of developing a user centred culture within the organisation. The Environment Agency developed a range of materials to help encourage the use of personas, and the project recently won for the Environment Agency a gold 2007 international ‘Intranet Innovation Award’. But the personas aren’t standing still: the Agency is undertaking ongoing user research to update and refresh the personas to ensure they remain effective and relevant.

“We found the approach taken by WUP to be thorough and professional and the outcomes were practical and easy to use, written in a language that was relevant to Agency staff” Simon Ashley - Head of Interactive Development.

Timing

The project was finished in July 2006, was undertaken over a 9 month period.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with Persona Development.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing

The Brief

Businesslink is a Government Agency providing advice and support to small businesses in England. It was preparing a series of 50 guides on International Trade for importers & exporters for its web site. Businesslink wanted to test these guides with users, to assess their suitability and usefulness.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed testing with 15 respondents: 11 of these in advance of a day’s observed usability testing with 4 testers, followed by a facilitated discussion of the issues and to agree actions.

In order to ensure buy-in to the research results, we felt it important that key Businesslink stakeholders gained a shared understanding of the issues through active observation of users on the guides. By following this with a facilitated discussion it would allow the observers to identify the key issues and agree actions in a single day.

What we did

We recruited a range of respondents from small businesses involved in importing or exporting.

We conducted unobserved testing in two locations (London and the SW). The outcomes were captured using our mobile usability equipment (i.e. a lap top with web cam, microphone and Techsmith Morae to enable picture in picture recording).

The observed testing (4 testers) was conducted in specialist studios in London where Businesslink staff watched the testing through a one way mirror. They were ‘active’ observers, writing issues on post-its as they occurred. Following the observed testing, a discussion was facilitated by a WUP consultant to agree the issues and appropriate actions.

The outcomes

Overall, the respondents thought the guides were relevant and useful, found them easy to use, and said they would definitely use them in their businesses. However, the observers identified a number of areas where the guides could be improved.

"The feedback we got from the sessions was invaluable in shaping our thoughts on how to finalise the guidance offered on the site. The methodology used by WUP
allowed us to clearly understand the thoughts of users thus making it easier to improve our guides" John Davey - ITSW, Businesslink.gov.uk

Timing

The project was completed in July 2006, over a 6 week period.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

BAS wanted to redevelop its website as it was aware that it was difficult for users to find information, and much of the content was not useful and relevant to them. Part of the reason for the problems was with the design of the site but also to do with having sufficient clarity about the target users, their goals and the organisational aims for the site.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed a range of activities:

• An online survey - to understand users and their goals
• Usability testing - to understand issues about the site navigation and content
• Strategic workshop - for senior managers to gain clarity about the aims for the site and the user goals it was to support
• Developing and testing a new site information architecture based on user research
• Training of content authors in producing usable content

What we did

WUP prepared, set up and analysed the results of the online survey.

The user testing and research was conducted in our observation studios and identified usability issues with the site.

At the workshop we presented highlights of the usability testing and the online survey. WUP then facilitated a discussion about the site aims and the goals the site was to support.

From the user research c.50 main user goals were identified. Open card sorting research was then undertaken to understand how users would group information and the language they would use to describe the groups.

With this evidence, a prototype Information Architecture was developed. This was then tested with users.

Two training workshops were then run for content authors to improve their content writing skills. Again, videos of users on the site, as well as a range of interactive exercises, were used to inform this training.

The outcomes

The user centred design process adopted on this project meant there was clarity at the highest levels about users, their goals, the purpose of the web site and how these aims could be achieved. BAS subsequently finished the redesign of the site, which can be seen at www.antarctica.ac.uk

"Our work with WUP was key in ensuring that the redevelopment project was successful. User feedback since the launch of the new site has more than justified the investment." David Wattam - BAS Web Manager

Timing and costs

The project was between autumn 2006 and spring 2007 at a cost of c.£19,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with site strategy development workshops.

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

Sock Shop, fondly remembered by most as a high street shop selling all sorts of socks & hosiery, has started selling its products exclusively online via www.sockshop.co.uk. The Sock Shop site is therefore a highly important channel for business for the company. Sock Shop wished to get feedback on how users search for products. They also wished to get feedback on the checkout process to try and increase conversion rates on the site. The outputs from this would feed into future developments of the site.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed testing with 3 testers making up Sock Shop’s target audience (fashion conscious men and women in their late 20s to late 40s) followed by a facilitated discussion of the issues and to agree actions.

In order to ensure buy-in to the research results, we felt it important that key Sock Shop staff gained a shared understanding of the issues by observing users on the site. By following this with a facilitated discussion, it would allow the observers to identify the key issues and agree actions in a single day.

What we did

We discussed the objectives of the project with the project manager and prepared a facilitation guide to achieve these. We recruited 3 testers fitting to Sock Shop’s target audiences.

The testing was conducted in our purpose built viewing studios where Sock Shop staff watched the testing through a one way mirror.

A tester facilitator encouraged the testers to search for relevant products and go through the buying process independently whilst probing to get as much attitudinal feedback as possible - without interfering unduly in the user journey.

The observers were ‘active’, writing issues on post-its as they occurred.

Following the observed testing, a discussion was facilitated by a WUP consultant to agree the issues and appropriate actions.

The outcomes

A number of clear conclusions emerged from the research about the features that made product searching and buying easy for users. During the facilitated discussion, Sock Shop staff gained a shared understanding of these issues, and actions were identified that could be implemented.

"Thank you for the excellent work you did for us - we found it extremely useful."
Vimal Ruia - Sock Shop

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in June 2007 and took less than 2 weeks to complete from recruitment to delivering the final report at a cost of approximately £5,000.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing

Download this case study in PDF format

• The brief
• How we responded to the brief
• What we did
• The outcomes
• Timing and costs

The Brief

Aberdeen Asset Management PLC is an international investment management group, managing assets for both institutions and private individuals from offices around the world. Aberdeen Asset Management in the UK wished to understand how their site displayed on different mobile devices and whether it was usable on these devices.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed comparing the site on three different devices - a PDA (SPV M3100 using Windows Mobile 5.0), a Blackberry (8800) and a mobile phone (Samsung D900), with a tester on each device and presenting the outcomes to members of the Aberdeen Asset Management web team. The outputs from the devices was displayed on a PC and recorded.

What we did

We discussed the objectives of the project with the project manager and prepared a facilitation guide to achieve these and we recruited 3 testers who were familiar with the individual device they were going to be testing.

The testing was conducted in our purpose built viewing studios - the screens of the devices and a head shot of the tester were recorded (with audio).

Testers explored the site on their mobile device in a facilitator-led environment. Testers were asked to carry out scenarios whilst thinking aloud - the facilitator probed at appropriate moments to get as much feedback as possible - without interfering unduly in the user journey.
The research outcomes were then presented to members of Aberdeen Asset Management where they discussed the outcomes and actions. A full report was then completed and delivered detailing the outcomes and recommendations.

The outcomes

A number of conclusions emerged from the research about the usability of the site on handheld mobile devices. During the presentation, Aberdeen Asset Management staff gained a shared understanding of these issues, and actions were identified that could be implemented.

"The conclusions from WUPs research project are extremely beneficial and we’re now using the results to enhance our websites for use on mobile devices." Loral Quinn - Group e Marketing Manager AAM

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in August 2007 and took approximately 2 weeks to complete at a cost of approximately £2,500.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing

Download this case study in PDF format

Background

The new NDAQ database www.accreditedqualifications.org.uk was launched in early September 2007. QCA had an accessibility consultancy undertaken during the development of the new site, but wanted to test the site with users with disabilities to assess its ‘real user’ accessibility.

Objectives

To obtain user experience feedback from testers with a range of disabilities on the usability of the user journey through the NDAQ database.

How we responded to the brief

We proposed a series of individual usability tests with six testers with a range of disabilities.

What we did

We recruited 6 testers: one blind tester who used Jaws, one partially sighted tester who used Lunar screen magnification software, two testers who did not use a mouse and two who suffered with dyslexia.

We discussed the project requirements with the client and produced a facilitation guide that covered both general undirected exploration of the site and some specific tasks. The testing took place at our purpose built studios in
Chippenham.

The testing was conducted by a WUP facilitator who adopted a non-directive approach to surface testers’ behaviours. The recordings of the testing sessions were analysed to identify issues which were documented in a report that was presented to the client.

The Outcomes

Overall, the site tested well with the disabled testers. In particular, the blind and partially sighted testers thought the site worked very well with the assistive technologies they use:

• “I think it’s very good… from a navigational point of view I love the way it jumps straight to the page… I have seen an awful lot worse and I think it’s incredibly good” (Jaws user)
• “I think they’ve been really consistent which has really helped…they’ve kept it really simple, it’s not flashing in any way, the only graphic I saw was the picture of the woman’s face on the front and I think that was really good…they’ve really given some thought to the colours…the boxes across the top are very easy and clear…very easy site.” (Lunar user)

However, the user testing did uncover a number of usability issues. Recommended actions address these issues were agreed with QCA, supplemented with code examples and a best practice guide on implementation.

“We chose WUP because of their specialist expertise and experience in website accessibility and usability. WUP did an excellent job for us” Alan Long, Head of web based accreditation, QCA Strategic Systems.

Timing and costs

The project was conducted in Sept 2007 and took approximately 4 weeks to complete at a cost of approximately £6,800.

Contact us for more information on how WUP can help you with usability testing with disabled users

Here is the homepage for the WUP site. La la la

This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.