where content, technology and people meet. (SM) Publishing and content technology executives use Shore to measure and understand their markets and competitors, define marketing strategies and implement successful content products and services using Shore's highly actionable insights into vendors, institutions, individuals and virtual communities.
ContentBlogger is the 2007 SIIA CODiE Award Winner for Best Media Blog
COMMENTARY:

Insights and headlines from Shore analysts on trends in enterprise and media content markets.
  Subscribe to our feed (?) or add to: MyYahoo  iGoogle/Google Reader  Bloglines  NewsGator  Rojo
Friday, May 20, 2005
Most print database publishers have learned -- often the hard way -- that you don't mess with success, or even failure for that matter. Directory users are highly resistant to change, so even improvements come with real risk attached. What particularly fascinates me is that the it is the most poorly designed directories that have the subscribers most vocally opposed to making changes to layout, indexes and overall organization.

The explanation for this is partly that directory users are creatures of habit. Once they are comfortable with how something works, they don't want to have to re-learn the product. There's also a secret club aspect to it -- once users accustom themselves to cryptic codes, unintuitive indexing and arrangement, and non-standard abbreviations, it's as if they've cracked a code and joined a secret society that makes them a little smarter and a little more valuable in their organizations.

Not surprisingly, this passionate preference for the status quo extends to Internet-based directories as well. Unfortunately the ease of making changes to user interfaces has tempted more than one publisher to begin an endless series of "improvements" to their online products, leaving a trail of customer anger and frustration in its wake. On several occasions, I have experienced this myself, finding the online database I logged into on Friday bears no resemblance to the one I logged into on Monday. My first reaction, "why did they mess with something that worked just fine?"

In many cases, publishers have abdicated control over design of their Web products to their IT departments. Good intentions notwithstanding, IT-designed Web sites tend to favor neat and cool over functional an intuitive. This mindset even extends to colors. A professional site designer believes "less is more" in terms of color; a programmer believes that if there are 64 million available color combinations available, as many of them should be used as possible.

Publishers should monitor and discourage gratuitous "upgrades" to their Web sites. Changes to layout, navigation and functionality should be implemented slowly and only after customer testing. Familiarity with your interface is a form of subscriber "lock in," don't throw it away on a whim

By Russell - posted at 10:04 AM
permanent link to this entry        bookmark this entry:  AddThis Social Bookmark Tool
  0 comments (click to view or to add your own) 
Comments:  Post a Comment
 

To top of page To Top of Page

COMMENTARY: INDEX
CONTENTBLOGGER
INDUSTRY EVENTS
CONTENT NATION

Read ShoreLines, our free weekly email newsletter.

Sample issue
Follow us on Twitter
Get headline-only feed
Buzz news comments
RECENT ENTRIES
READ CONTENT NATION

Learn how to thrive and to survive as social media changes our work, our lives and our future.
Buy the book
Read it online
Read our social media blog
WEBLOGS: ARCHIVES
 
 

shorename.gif (1190 bytes)
[HOME] [US] [SERVICES] [COMMENTARY] [RESEARCH] [EVENTS] [PRESS] [CONTACT]
Copyright © 1997-2009 Shore Communications Inc.  All Rights Reserved - Click Here to Read Terms of Use
Corporate Privacy Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?