This got me thinking about what makes up a best practice. Here’s my take:

Best practices don’t accidentally happen. They are the reward gained from identifying a goal, developing or implementing the best tools, behaviors, or ideas that achieve that goal, and executing them.

Identifying the goal is important. It is the single spark that causes improvement to happen. But a goal must be changed based on resources and circumstances. Flexibility sustains momentum.

The tools and behaviors implemented don’t have to be revolutionary. They don’t even need to be new. But they must achieve the goal in the most efficient and graceful way possible. Innovation is extra credit.

But execution is the one absolute requirement. Ideas that aren’t executed don’t exist. It doesn’t matter if the final product is borne from inspiration or imitation. What matters is that it makes something better than it was. It moves the ball down the field. It achieves the goal.

So much for conventional wisdom.

For the most part, I’d rather have a root canal than use most support Websites.

Search for information and you end up with a list of a bazillion documents with truncated descriptions that read like Sanskrit.

Want to take a different path? Try ferreting your product out of a laundry list of every product the company ever made.

Or try the “follow our logical links” scenario—where you end up drilling to China.

At the end of all of this wonderfulness is the real insult. Support content that either requires an engineering degree to understand—or a wad of general purpose instructions that dance around the problem and miss the issue by a country mile.

Finally, don’t get me started about most site’s support program content. (You know, the stuff that explains why you have to pay to play.)  First, you can’t find it. When you do, it’s packed with so many superlatives you need a dictionary to figure it out.

Honestly, you’d think support teams would get it after doodling on the Web for 16 years.

Drum Roll, Please

Given my opinion of support on the Web, I was surprised how much the 2011 support evaluations reflected my opinions of these support sites. Most of the sites we evaluated deliver half of the content, features & capabilities deployed on best-in-class support sites. With the exception of four sites—Cisco.com, Symantec.com, IBM.com and the IBM Software Group site—every site’s usability misses the Good Practice mark.

I’d probably throw a bone to Dell.com, EMC.com, and Microsoft.com for coming close—but the rest are simply not up to snuff.

I’ve just finished putting the finishing touches on our new 2011 online support rankings and ratings report which published today. Here’s some of the more interesting things in this new report.

IBM, Dell and HP have all the goodies

IBM.com’s, Dell.com’s and HP.com’s monster-size support sites handed them the top rankings this year. If you want to create a world-class support size packed with every bell and whistle, you don’t have to look much further than here. Among the players, Dell.com is the biggest, but IBM.com puts its goodies together to better effect (its usability ranks third; Dell.com ranks fifth).

This brings me to the real tail that wags the dog.

Cisco.com proves an important point

When usability is the issue, we’ve always said that small can be mighty—and Cisco.com proves the point. Cisco.com’s support site took first place usability honors—which is a testament to all of the hard work we’ve seen on the site this year. If you are a siteIntelligence Case Studies Library subscriber, you can see Cisco.com’s best-in-class innovations here: https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blog/1088332/view/bytag/cisco (Category: support, Tag: cisco). (Have your login info handy).

From a usability perspective, Cisco.com has the most complete roster of support information that is easy to find. To see why, take Cisco.com’s site search engine for a spin and pay attention to post search filtering capabilities. Then check out the support zone’s fly-out navigational panel. If you want to learn why these matter, check out Cisco.com’s best practice case studies here: https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blog/1088332/view/bytag/cisco. (You guessed it: subscription & login required.)

Finding support content on most sites is a "Where's Waldo?" moment. Only 5 sites hit the mark.

Not so fast. The winners should cancel their victory lap.

So where are the pleasant surprises? Put Brocade.com, EMC.com, and Symantec.com on that list.

• Brocade.com has the most complete & thorough support program information (a Best Practice) -– and does the best job of encouraging visitors to take the next step.
• EMC.com’s support program information is easier to find—and does the best job of providing program contact information.
• Symantec.com delivers the best support click streams, which generated the highest Good Practice rating for all of its hard work.

And what about the rest of the pack? You know, those other 13 support Websites on the evaluation list?  Let’s just say there was another interesting surprise.

Earth to enterprise: what are you thinking?

With the exception of IBM Software Group, enterprise software sites need to up their usability game. From my perspective, their rankings are downright embarrassing.

CA.com ranks 11^th, Oracle.com ranks 12^th and SAP.com brings up the back of the pack in 15^th place. The only support sites that are worse than these triplets are reseller sites (CDW.com, Insight.com and Newegg.com) –and they don’t provide much, if any, support on their sites. Yikes!

So how does IBM Software Group stay out of this industry ditch? IBM.com’s highly integrated support portal is the wind beneath its wings. To see why this portal delivers a bit of online support nirvana, check out our case study in the Library: https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blogentry/5334686/. (Yep, you’ll need that pesky login information).

Dell.com support is really a tale of two cities.

Finally, no analysis is complete without taking a look at the conventional wisdom corner; in this case the prevailing belief that Dell.com operates the biggest and best online support site. This may (or may not) be true behind the Dell Premier firewall—but it’s a mixed bag if you are on the public side of the equation.

When the numbers are rolled up, Dell.com’s support zone’s content, features & capabilities rank #1, but its usability slips into fifth place–right behind the IBM Software Group site. As important, it only ranks first in one out of ten usability categories (a Good Practice for support zone logic). Other than that, Dell.com persistently ranks in second and third place.

The bottom line

So there you have it. The roster of winners based on 138 things support sites should provide–plus ten ways they should help users achieve their objectives. For the top five, I send hardy congratulations. For the rest of the pack, roll up your sleeves. There’s lots of work ahead.

Kenna Dian: Don’t Bother

Intel.com’s latest redesign is like buying an exotic car. It is visually striking, can be fun to drive, and has more bells and whistles than other cars on the road. But going exotic has tradeoffs. Choosing to pass on getting the full options package can leave the driving experience far less exciting than advertised. In fact, it may even break down–always in inconvenient locations. And the unique controls and design that seems edgy and innovative in the beginning quickly become confusing and irritating.

I really want to buy Intel.com’s exotic new design. But in the end, I simply can’t afford the time, effort and resources I need to invest to make it work. Some of my biggest gripes are:

The product content is like a Chinese dinner. There’s a nice selection of information available, but it is difficult to find anything really substantial in a single location.

Too many things that make you go “huh?” This site presents links, link summaries, and even images, that make no sense, are meaningless, or–at best–make the visitor work to know what they’re for.

Content below the fold is often invisible. Design misfires can make the page appear to be only one screen load when in fact there is much more. Unfortunately, this invisible content is some of the most critical for visitors wanting to buy Intel’s products.

All Flash, no pan. One thing quickly becomes apparent while surfing this site. If you don’t have Adobe Flash Player you won’t just have a mediocre experience—you will be missing information.

Marty:  Don’t Bother (with a couple of moments of brilliance)

I hate to say this Kenna, but my vote is split on the new Intel.com Website. On the plus side, this new design does a great job of pushing the whole negative design, smart search, ubiquitous videos, and mega menu balls down the field. It also had more doodads than a gourmet kitchen. On other hand, it’s also the poster child for some design decisions that should send smart teams right back to the drawing board.

When all of these pros and cons were added up and weighted, I ended up on the “Danger Will Robinson” side of the ledger. Here’s three reasons why.

Intel.com joins HP.com at the forefront of a very tricky (and IMHO dangerous) design trend—flexible designs. These layouts adjust to different screen sizes and resolutions so Websites can adapt to a potpourri of different user devices and platforms. The laptop. The desktop. The tablet. The phone.  Instead of designing a Website for each platform—why not use a flexible design that can act as a “one-size-fits-all” solution? Well, one reason is that it doesn’t always work. [There's more on why in the complete review published in our Case Studies Library--see the link below].

The name of this game is Apple, and it plays by its own rules. Here, the problem lies in the fact that Intel.com’s cool new tools rely on Flash—which is a non-starter on Apple devices.  That means Intel.com is about 150 million devices short of a Happy Meal.

This site is harder to crack than Fort Knox.  Intel.com’s new home page is a pluperfect example of a new genre. Visual.  Edgy.  Spare. Out of the norm. Unfortunately, it also seems to operate under the premise that most visitors want to start their journey by searching for the content located inside the site. I don’t know about you, but conducting a “hail Mary” search without any road signs is my activity of last resort.  Sorry Intel. D-

Read the complete review in the siteIntelligence Case Studies Library. If you are a subscriber, click here to check it out (login required).

If you are not a subscriber you can learn more about this service here.

Other Stuff to do:

Learn about how IBM.com is changing up the rules in the Visions of IBM.com’s grand redesign emerge blog post.

Fair warning, this post is long!

IBM.com has launched revised home and solutions pages that feature the next major piece in its evolution: a new take on mega-menus. Not surprisingly, IBM.com has put its own spin on what is fast becoming an industry norm. In this Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother we weigh in on the pros and cons of IBM.com’s latest design.

Marty | Neutral (with a qualified Don’t Bother)

One thing that’s sure about IBM: it always marches to the tune of its own drummer. That’s why I wasn’t really surprised when IBM.com launched its own rendition of the mega-menu.  With browser in hand, I took it for a spin.

After putting it through its paces, I’m essentially neutral about this evolution.

On the plus side, it’s lighting fast and creates a slick first impression. By using the whole page width, it makes maximum use of page real estate. This, in turn, makes it easier to handle those pesky stakeholders who insist on having their little piece of heaven on the global nav. It’s also a design optimized for companies with huge product and services portfolios.  Clearly IBM fits that bill.

So why am I neutral?  Let me count three ways.

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. There’s an old saw that nature abhors a vacuum—and the Web is no exception. Take IBM.com’s mega-menu real estate for example. Although a savvy design makes this menu look manageable at first blush, it is actually packed with 145 links spread across 5 main category tabs. The Solutions and Products tabs are the whoppers in the family, weighing in at 36 and 37 links respectively. Fortunately, the Solutions menu is listed in alphabetical order. I guess the “Products” tab owners missed the class on how to do A-Z categorization.

To be fair, there is no doubt that IBM.com’s new mega-menus are pencil slim if compared to the 200+ links buried in its older fly-out menus. But that doesn’t mean that progress should be measured in a best practice vacuum.

Here, consider two other mega-menu powerhouses with the same general tab layout: Cisco.com and Juniper.net.  Cisco.com’s mega menus clock in with 60 total links; roughly half of them (28) are on its new support mega menu (which qualifies as a new best practice and the industry’s first mega menu workhorse, read more here).  Meanwhile, Juniper.net weighs in at a very svelte 44 links.

As important, both of these sites visually break up their lists of links using asymmetrical layouts (Juniper.net) and, in the case of Cisco.com, additional visual cues that make it easy to spy and select the right links.

So what’s the point?  Simple. Finding and acting on a navigation decision is much faster and easier on the Cisco.com and Juniper.net sites.

When Mr. Magoo is you. Although most users will find the navigation panel easy to read, those in front of larger, high resolution screens are sure to have Mr. Magoo moments. One culprit is IBM’s decision to present links in a medium gray color—which is intended to provide a clear contrast as a link turns white when touched by a mouse. In practical use, this means that the Mr. Magoo crowd will end up mousing over every link in the lists until the correct one lights up. A beautiful design point, to be sure, but not one optimized for those of us whose arms aren’t quite long enough anymore. (If you don’t understand the reference, go ask your Mom).

On the plus side, I’m glad to report that viewing this new design on an iPad is a perfect user experience.  The font is an ideal size and the links work well with the touch of a finger. At the other end of the spectrum, don’t even get me started about the experience on a smartphone.

The law of unintended consequences. Everyone who works on the Web knows about the law of unintended consequences. The day the Oracle Technology Network site hijacked the Oracle.com home page (schwoops!). The year that Cisco’s IT organization redesigned and launched a new site—which created such an uproar that it had to provide a side link to the old site and ended up hiring a professional Website team (there’s a lesson here).

IBM.com’s marriage between its scrolling mega-menu and its F1 feature is just such an “unintended consequences” moment.

Simply put, users who happen to be moving to a menu on the right at the precise time that the F1 feature is cycling to the left are likely to have something akin to an out-of-body experience. Since a moving picture’s worth a thousand words, I’ve loaded a video of this experience into our Case Study Library. Just to let you know, a preemptive dose of Dramamine is strongly recommended.

So what does this mean in practical application?  Simple. If you plan to follow in IBM.com’s footsteps it’s a good idea to settle on static F1’s or a design that allows users to manually step through multiple features on the page. Combine automatic features and moving navigation willy nilly and you’ll need to hand out air sick bags.

Of course there’s plenty of other pros and cons associated with this new mega-menu launch—including why following IBM.com’s lead will require a design commitment well beyond your home page and why this is likely to be an unpopular decision with stakeholders.  For many companies facing limited budgets, marginal executive sponsorship, and a sea of cranky stakeholders, IBM.com’s gambit qualifies as a nasty rabbit hole you might want to avoid and thus, a Don’t Bother moment.

I’ve outlined these and other issues in my new case study which is available in the siteIntelligence Case Studies Library. If you are a subscriber, click here (you’ll need your log in credentials; Dramamine is highly recommended). If you are not a subscriber you don’t need Dramamine – and can learn more about this service here.

Kenna Dian | Don’t Bother

I have been using IBM.com’s new mega-menu design for a week now—opening it, closing it, spinning it, reading it. But after poking and prodding it every way possible I am only left with one question: where’s the added value?

If the purpose of a mega-menu is to display more navigation links using a larger panel, then IBM has hit the jackpot. But that is only one measly piece of a much larger puzzle. Mega-menus are also supposed to make a site’s global navigation easier for visitors to use. This is a much bigger job—and one where IBM misses the mark by a country mile.

IMHO, here’s why.

First, each panel is a blizzard of navigation links. Each menu is completely devoid of any design elements that would help users visually separate one category from another. In practical use, you end up scrutinizing each link to find the one you need, which is about as much fun as reading the white pages. Usability challenge: scannability.

Second, the topic headers are hot—or maybe not. After wandering through these menus for 4 days, Marty finally let me in on the secret: the yellow headers are actually links. Funny, I was wondering why some headers got to play on the “A” team (yellow font) while the others seemed to be permanently benched (grey font). I still don’t know the answer (but I can guess). Usability challenges: scannability (again), breaking your own convention, and category confusion.

Third, the categories in the global navigation bar aren’t linked to a top level page; their sole purpose is to open the navigation menu. Visitors who want to see all of IBM’s solutions, products, or services must hunt down the “all [insert site area]” link hidden in the blizzard of links. Oh, and support? Forget it. There is no “all” link in this panel. Bottom line, customers must know their destination or be in the know about the yellow header trick. Usability challenges: scannability (yet again), confusion, and inept zone access.

Fourth, visitors have to click on a link in the global navigation bar to open the panel, but if they let their pointer slip, this panel it will slap shut faster than a thousand pound door. This not only violates the current “click to open, click to close” convention; it also creates a rousing game of “now you see it, now you don’t” while the visitor figures out how to drive the menu. Usability challenges: common conventions, missed expectations, and general confusion (again).

From one perspective, I could argue that these issues are first experience nits that regular users will learn to work around. That might be true. But then there’s my final gripe.

Sometimes the IBM.com home page behaves like a Whirling Dervish. Here, the culprit is the marriage between the page’s navigation panel and the F1 feature. Select a panel to the right while the feature graphic is doing its thing and you’ll feel like you’ve ended up in a Tea Cup at Disneyland. Here, I agree with Marty. It’s a good idea to have Dramamine in your Web surfing kit. Usability challenges: breaking common conventions (again) and too many moving parts.

In the final analysis, I want to like IBM.com’s new mega-menu. I really, really do. But, every time I take it for a (open, read, close) spin I wonder what value I’m getting for all the work, time, and effort it takes to get what I need and go where I want to go. For this reason, I have to give IBM.com’s new mega-menu a reluctant Don’t Bother rating. Think of it as an opportunity for other sites to learn from IBM.com and do it better.

Other Stuff to Do:

Read how Cisco.com’s Support mega-menu raises the bar—again

Subscribers can check out the related case study in the siteIntelligence Case Studies Library. If you are a subscriber, click here (login required).

If you are not a subscriber you can learn more about this service here.

2011 is turning out to be the age of the home page. We’re seeing updates in record numbers– and some designs are actually breaking new ground. On the other hand, few of these designs are actually making it down to lower levels of the site—which is a big no-no in our book.

I’ll leave that point for a future rant. Meanwhile, let’s take a look at who’s producing these new home pages, the important design points and strategies they bring to the party—and explore the age-old question: why only the home page?

I’ll start with the “who” and “how” and leave my humble opinions for the end.

Juniper.net: An end-to-end refresh, plus a savvy F1. Design-wise, Juniper.net’s boasting a more monochromatic color palette these days that’s carried across the entire site. This attention to detail isn’t much of a surprise.  Juniper.net is one of few sites that is persistently refreshed from top to bottom and end to end.

But the real feather in Juniper.net’s cap is its deft F1 feature, which features its CTO in a series of inline videos discussing the issues and questions important to potential buyers. Think of it as the first home page that actually tells a complete story.

Level3.com: A top to bottom redo–but the home page is a bridge too far.  Level3.com’s claim to fame is actually a complete Website redesign—different layout, colors, and content approach.

Like Juniper.net, the new Level3.com home page F1 centers on addressing common questions—with a huge focus on differentiating Level3 from its competitors.  How it achieves this, however, is different. Instead of using execs or employees (a la Juniper.net) Level3.com opts for three fictitious characters who step in to discuss questions selected by the visitor. The feature is professionally done, but doesn’t feel as authentic as Juniper.net’s.

HP.com: Watching an interesting design wander off the rails. I wrote about HP.com’s new and evolving home page in our most recent Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother column, so I won’t bore you with a second rendition of who shot John.  With two Don’t Bother votes, there’s plenty to learn from HP.com’s home page launch.

SAP.com: A home page design that is as revolutionary as it is attractive. This re-design tips all the previous home page and Website architecture designs on their heads.  To learn more about this launch, read my blog about how SAP.com’s home page re-defines Website architecture. Let’s just say it’s not for the faint of heart—and will require a complete site revamp to pull it off.

IBM.com: Playing catch up, but moving in the right direction. IBM.com’s latest home page redesign is a bit like watching a launch in slow motion.  This transformation started this spring with the addition of a fat (and I mean fat) footer, a slightly darker palette, savvy graphics, and an inline mega menu that allows visitors to drill down into the Smarter Planet zone (read my POV on this great zone here).  Last week, we saw IBM.com’s take on the mega-menu revolution.  My POV?  Eh. Check our latest Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother review.

Microsoft.com: Back to the future.  Microsoft.com’s new home page is interesting. The layout has changed, but the colors remain the same—which makes it look like a lightweight redesign. It’s not.

In a turn away from the trends, all mega-menu style navigation is out—and static (pull down) navigation is in.  Also new:  site information organized in colorful decks instead of floating in space.  Not better or worse—just different.

Adobe.com: Variations on the theme clobbers consistency.  Adobe.com’s new design keeps its graphically rich heritage, but does away with the impressive flash animations. Is this a response to the recent backlash against Flash, or just Adobe.com maturing? Hard to tell.

Other changes include a darker color palette and a page shift from the left to the center. The latter may seem like no big deal, but it is affecting overall site consistency due to lower-level pages that still display a flush-left design.

The Gist

So, why are we seeing so many new home pages? Well, when you can’t afford a facelift, buy some better makeup.  But here’s the catch. A redo might give you a feel good boost and bragging rights with your execs, but if your lower-level pages are aging badly this isn’t money well spent.

Why?  Because a home page is only a fraction of the user equation.  In the real world, most of your visitors spend their quality time inside your site—wandering through those aging designs, navigation structures, and dreadful content you are ignoring.  That’s not the promise these cool new home pages are selling. Which means you just invested in an expensive game of bait and switch.

Kenna Dian | Don’t Bother

I have been watching the latest HP.com home page launch for the last three weeks with great interest—waiting to see how the new home page design would shake out. But after all this time, I am left wondering what on earth HP.com thinks it’s doing.

A short history. The cycle started about three weeks ago with a new home page, which suddenly disappeared the next day. Next, it appeared again in a rotation with the old home page. Within a week, there were 3 versions of the home page—then 4—and now we’re up to at least 5. Add two animated versions that show the visitor how to use the home page’s feature panels and navigation—and you have the whole picture.

I don’t know if HP.com will eventually settle on something—or will continue playing Russian roulette with its home page. But I do know that I’ve learned four things watching this…um…unique launch.

1. If you need to teach me how to use your home page—it’s broken. The site is currently running two versions that demonstrate how the home page works—which is a huge clue that one or more design points aren’t faring well with visitors.  My POV? If you have to demo your home page, it’s time to go back to the drawing board.
2. French Canadians are apparently dumber than the rest of the world. To see if other geos were getting the same home page launch treatment, I decided to take a trip around the world. Everyone is equal…sort of.  The U.S. got the new, static home page roughly 80% of the time. Europe got the animated demo versions first 99% of the time. After that, they got the new, static design. The Canadian—French site, however, got the demo version 2 to 3 times before the new static home page design kicked in. Sorry Quebec—looks like it’s the back of the class for you.
3. They’re watching you—or maybe not. After twenty or more visits to the HP.com site over three weeks, the site finally locked me out of its home page Olympics. Only the old home page for me. So I switched to Internet Explorer.  IE’s first page load made me wonder if my browsers were in collusion. The old home page started to load and then the site stopped and switched to the new (static) home page. I guess my reputation really does precede me.
4. A/B testing isn’t supposed to require the alphabet. I can’t quite get my head around why HP.com would use its Website visitors to bounce through 5 or more designs to see what sticks. I have to assume that there was a user testing budget in the plan—and that A/B testing was part of the mix. But 5 renditions and two demo pages for air cover? Come on guys. Next time, spend more time in the user testing lab. Your visitors are your buyers–not lab rats.

My siteIQ View | This botched launch has effectively announced that the new home page is only marginally effective, but misses the usability mark. In this world, the fix doesn’t lie in teaching visitors how to use the home page. It lies in accepting that something is seriously broken.

My message to HP—man, let it go. At this point, this approach is doing more harm than good—for HP and for the new design. It’s time to choose a design and move on—even if it’s the old one.

I’ve just posted a new “Tips & Traps” best practice case study and video that focuses on why the KISS principle would work better for HP.com. Subscribers can pick it up in the siteIntelligence Case Studies Library here (you’ll need your log in credentials).

Not a subscriber? You can learn more about The Library here.

Marty Gruhn | Don’t Bother

I have to go with you on this one Kenna. Like you, I never quite knew what to expect when I landed on HP.com. The old page. The new page. A different new page. A demo page. A page that doesn’t work. Honestly, it’s been like watching a schizophrenic at a cocktail party. Fascinating to be sure, but ultimately a train wreck in slow motion.

But that’s not why I call this a Don’t Bother. My call is based on what happens when you move beyond the magic curtain.

Talk about a fractured user experience. Select one product family and you’ll be treated to a Madison Avenue rendition of pretty pictures, prose, and plenty of pomp and circumstance. Select another, and you’ll be unceremoniously dumped onto pages that haven’t seen a design change since 2006 (and that’s probably a gift). In this case, the home page accurately describes the reality down below.

And don’t even get me started about the navigation. It’s on the top. The bottom. The side. Sometimes it’s actually invisible. It’s like trying to drive a car with a different stick shift on every bumper.

And then there’s the cardinal sin I’m seeing more and more these days. Agency driven marketing campaigns that grab your attention with snappy phrases, but never make the connection to the right products.

A great example was HP.com’s “organized mom” feature which dumped me onto the consumer store’s home page. Not sure which product in the blizzard of options was supposed to get me organized. Big surprise. I left without dropping a dime.

These and other behaviors are clobbering HP.com and a ton of other Websites—and making some important usability scores tank. Consider some of HP.com’s new scores (download a free copy of HP.com Usability Snapshot), which are hot off the press. Innovation and interactivity are roughly on par with close competitors, but consistency, navigation, and site logic are all systemic challenges.  Spend a little quality time on this site and you’ll see why.

My siteIQ View | I hate to fault HP.com for pushing on the envelope. It’s fun to be the coolest, the hippest and happenin’ digital brand. It’s also easy to believe that edgy designs and behaviors set new standards. Create a competitive advantage. Move buyers into the checkout line.

Unfortunately, history teaches something very different. Sustainable, best practice trendsetters are a sober bunch. They are incremental performers. They know how to smooth around the edges—and then layer innovative designs.

Most importantly, they studiously avoid committing the ultimate cardinal sin: assaulting visitors with behaviors that fracture the user experience and persistently break the brand. Hard to believe, but that seems to be a lesson that HP.com has yet to learn.

What would you think if someone told you they could eliminate the first 3 layers of your site? The blizzard of landing pages. Semi-redundant content. Pesky page load times. All of it.

Sounds impossible?  It’s not.

Last week SAP.com launched a monster redesign that promises to tip many rules on their head. Here’s four reasons to pay attention:

A new home page design & navigation. Believe it or not, SAP.com has been at the forefront of home page design trends for years.

When conventional designs put primary features in boxes, SAP.com made them the entire background. When mega-menus hit the airwaves, SAP.com invented the navigation mega-pane.

True to form, its latest design doesn’t introduce a totally new concept. It just executes an existing concept on a much larger, bolder scale.

Welcome to the pane-in-pane effect. The magic that totally changes the conventional Website architecture rules lies in SAP.com’s page-in-page mega-menus. This design allows visitors to browse two, and in some cases, three layers deep—without ever leaving the home page. Think of the implications. A world without long, boring landing pages. Navel gazing blather. Off the reservation designs. Long download times.

A peek into the future. One look at the site will tell you that the SAP.com site is still a work in progress, but you can see the end game in a couple of areas, such as the On-Demand CRM for Small and Medium Enterprises or On Demand Sales products. Here, SAP.com is laying the foundation for product marketing zones which operate as their own mini-sites. Sure, owners will have to color inside the lines and play inside the templates, but they will also get a clean, contemporary look and feel, plus control over their media, content, and message.

Don’t try this at home. Although SAP.com’s design is revolutionary and has some fantastic upsides, this approach isn’t for the faint of heart.  You need at least four things to pull this off—and none of them are optional.

1. Full buy-in from your boss, your boss’s boss, and stakeholders.  The first two will be easy.  The third? Not so much.
2. Execute centralized, iron-clad governance. A gulag mentality will probably work best.
3. Constantly monitor for rogue behaviors that quickly clobber the user experience. This is easier when you invest in #4.
4. Invest in a CMS system. If you don’t, you’ll go blind trying to chase stakeholders around.

SITEIQ VIEW | When you really examine the nuts and bolts of the new SAP.com site, you’ll see that it isn’t doing anything that we haven’t seen before. What sets it apart is that it’s taken a set of great ideas—and then reworked them to best effect. Used them on a grander scale. Pushed them a little farther.  Packaged them a little differently.  In the end, that’s what it takes to create a unique user experience — and a best in class Website.

The case study and video that details this re-design are available in the siteIntelligence Best Practice Library.

Subscribers Login Here.
Non-subscribers can learn more about The Library here.

Apple.com tests out a new startpage that leaves us going “Huh?”

Today apple.com startled some visitors with a “startpage” (it’s from the URL—it didn’t really have that name per se) chock full of the latest and greatest goings on at Apple.com. News, Tutorials, Movie trailers iTunes, and of course, the latest shopping deals. Apple…whaddya thinking?

Apple.com is the poster child of the latest minimalist design craze. Website teams everywhere are examining its site design to crack the code on presenting the most information in the simplest way. And the fact is, this startpage is overload for most companies today. That means it is a downright avalanche for Apple.com.

So please Apple.com. Continue to emulate the beautiful stark minimalism of the Apple products on your Website. Keep us guessing how you present your information so simply, but effortlessly. Please don’t change. We like you just the way you are.

This startpage was probably not seen by everyone. It seems it was on a random rotation, possibly for testing purposes. Apple.com, by this blog, I think you know my vote.

I don’t talk about Oracle.com much. In fact, I speak about them so little that one would be lead to believe that I hold a grudge against them. Sure, they unceremoniously erased one of the best enterprise systems sites from the Internet–Sun.com. But, I won’t hold that against them. No, I don’t write about them much for one reason:

My Mother taught me if you don’t have something nice to say about someone, don’t say anything at all.

There’s a litany of issues I have with Oracle.com ranging from design to innovation (or rather a lack thereof). But today, my rant is about Oracle.com’s content.

With communities and social networking becoming a requirement for IT Websites, product and service marketing content is becoming more focused on visitors’ needs. The prose tells them how the company’s products and services will solve their problems and help achieve their business goals. Some connect their technologies and benefits with real-world scenarios that visitors relate to. The best of the best even make it downright engaging to read.

The new message: “It’s all about you.”

Let’s compare this content approach to that on Oracle.com. A review of over twenty hardware and software product pages showed that Oracle’s name is mentioned a whopping 5 times more often than the words “you” or “yours” on a single page*. On some that number increased to over 10 to one. Combine that with page layouts that always begin with essays about “Why Oracle” and articles about its industry leadership, and you only get one message:

“It’s all about Oracle.”

But Oracle is not alone

HP.com also suffers from the “all about me” disease. HP.com’s ratios almost perfectly mirror Oracle.com’s. Product page content often mention HP five times more often than “you”. This increases to 10 to 1 on pages that provide lists of links to its products or related documents. HP.com does have one saving grace. Its page layouts mix up the content so it’s less obvious that HP is tooting its own horn.

The Bottom Line

The fact is people buy products because they have a problem that needs solved—not because the company is (or thinks it is) fabulous. Tout the product. Relate it to visitors’ needs. If they can understand this and it solves their problem, they will buy it.

What to avoid:

• Sentences that begin with the company name: if there is more than one, there is too many
• Listing the company name before actual product names: if visitors are on the company site, they know what company made the product.
• Topics that only speak about the company: this includes “Why [insert company name]?” content that runs more than 3 sentences.

How do the other enterprise systems sites fare?

IBM.com (software and hardware products) | The ratio of the usage of “IBM” to “you” or “yours” was a surprising 1:1 on many IBM Software page. In fact, on some pages the word “you” was used twice as much as “IBM”. IBM.com’s hardware product content does not fare quite as well with a ratio of 3 to 1.

Intel.com Business | The Intel.com site did not fare quite as well as IBM.com. On average Intel’s name was mentioned 3 times more often than the word “you”.

*Navigation panels were not included. Product names and links located in the body of the page were.

Last month Cisco released the latest evolution of Cisco.com, and the results are nothing short of amazing. Visitors taking a quick spin around top levels of the site will notice obvious improvements. The introduction of a more vibrant color palette. Updated page layouts. A new toolbar at the bottom of the page. And, some tweaks to its best-in-class mega-menu. But these enhancements, while nice, aren’t what make this redesign a step above the rest. The things that make the difference are far more subtle.

Design

Increased white space. Cisco.com has injected additional space around everything—content panels, images, headers, text, navigation panels—everything.  Benefit: Visitors can scan pages more quickly and easily.

Smarter use of imagery. Cisco.com has always displayed some of the most eye-catching photos of any IT Website, and was pretty savvy about using them. This time around, however, there seems to be fewer of them, and each and every one has a reason to be there. Benefits: Visitors can intuit feature content topics, navigation categories, and target audiences without reading a single word on the page.

Navigation and Architecture

All audiences receive equal billing. When most people think Cisco, they think products for enterprise companies. But Cisco also offers products and support for the SMB and Home/Home Office crowd. The latest redesign makes this more obvious than ever before. The global mega-menu provides separate navigation tabs for Enterprise, SMB, and Home audiences. And visitors who missed them there will find them at the bottom of all site pages, and often on second (and sometimes even lower) level pages. Cisco.com’s smart use of tab-top designs and compact navigation styles also makes access to other audience areas easy without taking up much space. Benefits: It informs SMB and Home/Home Office visitors that Cisco.com serves more than just Enterprise companies. It quickly redirects visitors that have wandered off track back to the site areas that best fits their needs. And, it provides greater visibility of all Cisco products—not just those for the Enterprise set.

The “Solutions” navigators are gone, but solutions-class content is not forgotten. Navigation to murky “Solutions” marketing is gone. But this doesn’t mean that visitors won’t get solutions-class content. Now these messages are artfully woven throughout the product and services marketing click streams and content. Benefits: Visitors intuitively identify Cisco’s products and services as solutions to their needs.  Also, visitors understand Cisco’s offerings quicker since solutions and product marketing content is integrated into a single click stream.

Improved “snacking” architecture. The former Cisco.com Website displayed some traits of the highly-effective “snacking” architecture. However, an  over-abundance of page content and navigational options often negated the benefits this approach provides. Cisco.com’s latest redesign has put page content on a strict diet, making the “snacking” architecture really shine. Benefit: Visitors digest even large amounts of content more effectively since it is delivered in bite-size pieces throughout the site.

Content

The content is shorter, crisper, and easier to read. The previous version of the Cisco.com Website seemed stuck in the trap most IT Websites find themselves in—it talked too much. The content was too long, extremely dense, listed too many benefits, and was often delivered in a single page of prose.  Not anymore. Content on the new Cisco.com is more focused, crisply written, and talks directly to the reader. Benefit: Visitors absorb marketing messages because they stay engaged while reading the content.

The content is delivered in small chunks. Cisco.com has been breaking up its content little by little over the last 12 months. But the latest site redesign really breaks it down. Marketing click streams now deliver shorter bits of content across multiple pages. Meanwhile, some product marketing pages distribute content by topic on the same page using tab-top navigation. Benefits: Visitors can experience a unique marketing message by choosing the information that interests them. Executives and managers can explore content that addresses how Cisco’s products address their business challenges, without wading through technical specifications. Conversely, Network Administrators can dig into the technical specifications by bypassing solutions-class content.