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.

Recently Marty Gruhn and I put IBM.com’s new mega-menu under the microscope and the results were…well…less than stellar. But a couple accidental slips of my cursor exposed some other new designs and approaches that are well worth taking a spin around the IBM.com site.

Navigation first, content second. If you click on one of the artfully hidden “all” links in IBM.com’s mega-menu (i.e. “all solutions” or “all services”) you will land on a page that is so simply designed and elegant that you will think you landed on a different site. You didn’t. This is the highest of the high levels of the new IBM.com. Sophisticated design aside, what is most notable is how the page is focused solely on navigating to the rest of the site. Broad, big-bucket links take visitors to more specific information, while the content only sets the context.

Introducing the mini-menu. With the popularity of micro-site Website architectures on the rise, moving around the dot com sites is becoming a problem. Some micro-site teams don’t want the big bulky navigation panel across the top of their pages*, while others want to design something that fits their own artistic vision. Enter the mini-menu. This design zips up the highest level of the global navigation panel into a tidy drop-down menu. In IBM.com’s case, it is activated by moving the cursor over the logo—another stroke of genius.

So, do these couple of accolades mean we are changing our stance on IBM.com’s mega-menu? Nope. Today it still has the same usability problems it did then. But one bad apple doesn’t spoil the bunch.

In fact, I highly recommend taking the top 2 to 3 levels of this site for a serious ride. If you bounce around long enough, you can begin to catch glimpses of the new IBM.com emerging. And if they actually pull off what it looks like they are shooting for, the new IBM.com will be a work of art—and a site to follow.

*See SAP.com’s new site (and read our post about the latest launch), some areas of Cisco.com, and the granddaddy of mega-micro-sites, Microsoft.com.

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.

Each of the case studies focuses on a different design or content best practice—but for my money, the “cult of personality” discussion is a compelling moment of brilliance. It looks like the IBM Smarter Planet team has actually cracked the code on how to marry social media behaviors with the company’s core business propositions. Here’s a thirty second summary of Kenna’s POV.

For the bulk of its 100 years, IBM has been the icon of the monolithic, faceless organization. The Machine. The Man. The System. This reputation was so entrenched that is employees were endowed with a unique nickname: “the blue suits”. Thus, it’s surprising – no shocking – that IBM should be the first company to successfully transform itself from a corporation into a clan. And its Website is playing no small role in its metamorphosis.

The strategy is brilliant because

• It leverages IBM’s core sales model (building relationships), gives it the golden opportunity to demonstrate expertise and passion, and translates a faceless corporation into actual people who are experts in their fields.
• It works by using photos, dynamic profiles, and links to start conversations.
• It wraps these attributes in a savvy design that takes advantage of new less is more white space trends and short, snappy & relevant content that is second to none.

And then there are the graphics. Relevant charts with factoids. Eye catching video panels. Moments of visual whimsy and delight (my favorite is the carrot that illustrates how long it takes to get from the farm to a store in California). This from that old stuffy IBM?

Library subscribers can read more about how and why this site works, view a video, and download these case studies at http://bit.ly/eOMKjU. Have your log in credentials handy—or contact us if you’ve forgotten them.

So what is implied navigation? If you have used a Website you have encountered it. Links that use vague phrases or single words that, within the context of the current page, promises one thing, only to deliver something else. These links often deliver “general purpose” pages that change topics, audiences, or make the visitor start over at the beginning. Let’s see it in action.

Intel.com uses implied navigation on the top level of its global navigation panel (in gray). The first two links are “For Business” and “For Home” users to access the sites optimized for them. Where the “implied” part comes in is the next to links, “Products” and “Support”. If I am in the “For Business” site, I expect that the product and support listings will be for business. Au contraire. These pages are, in fact, catch-alls. They apply to both audiences. The result is a page that doesn’t serve either audience particularly well (although the design does favor business users), requires visitors to start at the beginning to find the product they want, and make them wonder what they will get.

So with implied navigation becoming a necessary evil in minimalist designs, what are Web teams to do?

• Clarity | Be as clear as humanly possible.
• Context | Keep with the audience or topic.
• Architecture | Don’t start at the beginning of the click stream if the link implies the visitor will get a specific product or topic.
• Design | Use innovative designs when a page has to appeal to multiple audiences and design for the least knowledgeable group.
• Opinion | Get an outside eye. It may make sense to you, but that doesn’t mean it makes sense to anyone else.

Need more information about best practice navigation approaches—and who does them?

• Subscribers can login to the library.
• Not a subscriber? Learn about the best practice case study library.

I’ve had space on my mind. Not the kind that Stephen Hawking talks about. The kind that’s finally getting the attention of enterprise-class Web design teams.

It is the power of white space—negative space—empty space–the void.

The importance of using white space in Website design isn’t a brand new concept. One can find plenty of blogs and examples on the subject. A couple of IT sites have also tinkered with it over the past few years. Apple.com has mastered it. Intel.com isn’t far behind.

But now the results are in regarding how negative space designs directly enhance usability. This has turned designing with white space from an avant garde concept into a usability requirement.

So what’s so great about negative space? If you aren’t into design or have been too busy with your day job to pay attention, here are the main benefits:

• Pages are easier to scan
• Navigation options are easier to identify
• Visitor response times are quicker
• Content is easier to read

The (hopeful) end result? Better traffic metrics on non-sales content, better time-to-purchase ratios, and happier visitors and customers.

It’s easy for relatively small sites to jump on this design trend, and quickly reap the usability rewards. For large enterprise-class sites where marketing, cajoling, and negotiating are the paths to progress, this transition is going to require some fundamental behavioral shifts – and is likely to be a bumpy (did I say really bumpy?) ride.

Why? Let me count the ways.

Negative space design will severely limit the space available for the mountain of features, marketing manifestos, and grab bag links found on every enterprise-class Website. This, in turn, will require content managers and stakeholders to slash marketing content, keep it on point, and fit into designs that allow visitors to cut to the chase.

Negative space design means that the same number of stakeholders will compete for less space on important pages, and will have to adhere to stricter design guidelines. Global Web organizations will have yet another standard to enforce [yippee!] – plus a cavalcade of aggrieved stakeholders who want to share 500 reasons why they shouldn’t comply.

Barriers aside, negative space is a design trend that cannot be ignored. Its usability benefits are too profound. Its impact on Website design too far reaching. It’s a trend that will revolutionize and define best-practice-class sites over the next 24 months.

Want to learn more about designing with white space? Here are some great sites to peruse about the subject and gain inspiration:

• Whitespace | Great article from A List Apart that defines “white space” in design and provides useful examples.
• Using White Space Effectively in Web Design | A great tutorial from Web Design Tuts on the elements of white space design and how to use them.
• Give me my Web space | Considerations, applications, and words to the wise from Website maven Molly E. Holzschlag
• Finding Information on the Web: Does the Amount of Whitespace Really Matter? | An informative brief about the effects of white space design on Website usability, including user testing results, from the Software Usability Research Laboratory at Wichita State University.