After I redesigned and relaunched the site the complaints vanished and I got nothing but praise. Even though we did no substantial addition to the functionality of the site, the internal voices loved it. As usual the patient’s definition of quality and the healthcare definition of quality differed.

In my theory the graphic design of the site is a reflection of organizational self esteem. Quality to the internal audience is a matter of how they feel about themselves when they look at their service line’s pages. It has nothing to do with real usability and functionality.

In the end it is good to please both audiences, keeping in mind that pleasing one does not always equate to serving the needs of the other. So what do you do?

Redesign the site, have a big grand opening party and then tout your awards.

Here’s my theory: Our employees look at the web site more often than any other audience. It looks old and “the same” to them.

Like somebody else who mentioned that people think their site isn’t flashy enough, ours is focused on meeting the needs of patients. Flashy doesn’t fit the audience, and gets in the way.

But it’s good to know I’m not the only one! Thanks everybody for sharing and making me feel better!

We’ve had similar feedback in past – everyone is a web expert!

Our approach is to be pro-active – We explain the decision making process, talk about the other design options and why they were rejected. Say something like: “Our research has shown that rotating logo’s distract people from your picture”

If you have good competitive data then use that – did you know that your site is ranked number 1 by Quantcast.com out of all Wisconsin hospitals? You must be doing something right.

and most important – start gathering visitor feedback. We use a simple survey at the bottom of each page. It’s a great way to build a testimonial document and it’s very effective for your internal audience.

Sometimes, you have to put aside the anger and frustration and listen to the message. But, boy, is that hard.

Like others have mentioned, when I do seek constructive criticism about how or why it sucks and what we can do to improve it, I most often get blank stares or the suggestion that we add more graphics. When the suggestions aren’t simply subjective design critiques (like those that don’t like our university colors) they’re often suggestions like why don’t we have a blog, which just leads back to the Web 2.0 blogging and podcasting issues that have been discussed here in the past.

Frankly, I think that the best way to combat this is with extensive user testing and research. The reality is that most that offer feedback are not the target audience for the site. If you have research to back your decisions and statistical data to support the accomplishments of the site, the rest really doesn’t matter.

There will always be people that say the site sucks. I think it’s just the reality of the medium we work with.

I hear “it’s not flashy” almost constantly. I agree with them and review the focus of the site, ask for input on a variety of information to better serve the parents and patients. I get a blank stare and then they ask, “we would really like to see more pictures”… *pulls hair out*

The problem for us is that, generally, we know what we’re talking about while they do not. We know what is industry standard, how efficient our structure is, and how the content markets the services. But everyone has an opinion, including those who truly don’t know what they’re talking about. Thus, we’re presented with an inherent problem: those who are making those comments are in charge of our funds (or have influence over those who do).

Ultimately it’s their opinions and nothing more that drive the future of your site. I, for one, am at a loss at how to combat this opinion-driven take-over and loss of control. There are always changes that can enhance a site, but sometimes the suggestions (and DEMANDS!) are so completely disadvantageous that it makes me wonder why a web expert was ever hired at all.

So, I wonder, Neal. Are you getting these comments from people who know a good site when they see one or who actively engage you on content? If so, it seems to me that they’re worth listening to. Otherwise, as you say, maybe you (we) need thicker skin.

For what it’s worth, I think your site is great and so do my boss(es).

- Chris

I suppose if people are holding you up to be at the level of media, for-profit business or entertainment that a hospital website is going to lag behind. I would imagine your clients have a much higher opinion.
For me, I always look at results and how we look versus our direct competition. The web is such a visual media, despite its’ richness in content.