Comments on: 80% or 20%? The Long and Short “Tale” of It http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/ Internet Healthcare Collaboration Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:49:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Rob http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-127 Rob Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:32:01 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-127 Ed, the article from Josh Porter is right on the mark. Another person who actually talks about this is Steve Krug, author of "Don't Make Me Think". I saw him and Lou Rosenfeld lecture about IA and Usability in Chicago in 2003, and they both touched upon this topic. Steve demonstrated this by showing a slide for signs leading a user to a garage sale.This was an excellent example of showing the user they are headed in the right direction. In this case it was for his garage sale, which easily translates to web very easily when looking for content too. I highly recommend seeing the both of them lecture, its a great two-day seminar and worth every penny. Thanks -R Ed,

the article from Josh Porter is right on the mark. Another person who actually talks about this is Steve Krug, author of “Don’t Make Me Think”. I saw him and Lou Rosenfeld lecture about IA and Usability in Chicago in 2003, and they both touched upon this topic. Steve demonstrated this by showing a slide for signs leading a user to a garage sale.This was an excellent example of showing the user they are headed in the right direction. In this case it was for his garage sale, which easily translates to web very easily when looking for content too. I highly recommend seeing the both of them lecture, its a great two-day seminar and worth every penny.

Thanks
-R

]]> By: Ed Bennett http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-126 Ed Bennett Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:35:11 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-126 Rob, I think you are on the right track - the research I've read disputes the old "Three-click rule" http://www.uie.com/articles/three_click_rule/ Site visitors will keep drilling down on navigation links, and not become dis-satisfied, as long as they feel they are making progress and not getting lost. This is great news for big sites. Narrow & deep may be better than wide & shallow. Asking the visitor to chose from five options five times in a row requires less thought than choosing from 25 options three times in a row. But both structures navigate to 15,625 individual pages. (if my math is right...) Ed Rob,

I think you are on the right track – the research I’ve read disputes the old “Three-click rule”

http://www.uie.com/articles/three_click_rule/

Site visitors will keep drilling down on navigation links, and not become dis-satisfied, as long as they feel they are making progress and not getting lost. This is great news for big sites. Narrow & deep may be better than wide & shallow. Asking the visitor to chose from five options five times in a row requires less thought than choosing from 25 options three times in a row. But both structures navigate to 15,625 individual pages. (if my math is right…)

Ed

]]> By: Rob http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-125 Rob Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:32:47 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-125 Great comments and views on the subject. Chris, Ed, Neal, et. al. I understand that its next to impossible to put 2k of content within 2 clicks of the home page. Not even Amazon or eBay can achieve that. In my experience, if you have a content heavy/rich site and I've worked on some extremely heavy content based sites. The user needs to feel/get a sense that when they click on a category, that the information they are seeking, no matter how deep it is in the site, they are at least headed in the right direction. I'm not arguing against search at all, I think search plays a vital role in finding information on content driven sites. Especially users who are looking for Long Tail content or any content at all. I feel you need to have a good balance. R Great comments and views on the subject.

Chris, Ed, Neal, et. al.

I understand that its next to impossible to put 2k of content within 2 clicks of the home page. Not even Amazon or eBay can achieve that. In my experience, if you have a content heavy/rich site and I’ve worked on some extremely heavy content based sites. The user needs to feel/get a sense that when they click on a category, that the information they are seeking, no matter how deep it is in the site, they are at least headed in the right direction.

I’m not arguing against search at all, I think search plays a vital role in finding information on content driven sites. Especially users who are looking for Long Tail content or any content at all. I feel you need to have a good balance.

R

]]> By: Chris Sadler http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-124 Chris Sadler Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:56:51 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-124 Great discussion. While I'm all in favor of thoughtful, good IA, I agree with Ed that the search utility on a site goes back to the idea of the long tail. If 80% of our visitors are interested in 20% of our content on the site (jobs, main clinical areas, physician search, etc.), that better be intuitive in the navigation. But it's impossible to put 2,000 pages within two clicks of the home page (isn't it?). We have eight main categories in navigation plus a couple of other ways to reach content quickly (i.e., quick links), but that's simply not enough for some ... niche ... subject matter to be near the top. The search utility is great for quickly accessing the niches. As it is on eBay and Amazon. If I want Harry Potter, sure, it's right there for me to access. But if I want Highlands Pipes and Drums, it might just be easier for me to type that in search. (Unless I've shopped there before and Amazon knows my preferences, but that's another topic.) Great discussion. While I’m all in favor of thoughtful, good IA, I agree with Ed that the search utility on a site goes back to the idea of the long tail. If 80% of our visitors are interested in 20% of our content on the site (jobs, main clinical areas, physician search, etc.), that better be intuitive in the navigation. But it’s impossible to put 2,000 pages within two clicks of the home page (isn’t it?). We have eight main categories in navigation plus a couple of other ways to reach content quickly (i.e., quick links), but that’s simply not enough for some … niche … subject matter to be near the top. The search utility is great for quickly accessing the niches. As it is on eBay and Amazon. If I want Harry Potter, sure, it’s right there for me to access. But if I want Highlands Pipes and Drums, it might just be easier for me to type that in search. (Unless I’ve shopped there before and Amazon knows my preferences, but that’s another topic.)

]]> By: Neal http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-123 Neal Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:45:51 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-123 I have to remind myself that there's search, and then there's search. We have a general search option available on every page. That's the one that doesn't get used a lot. But we have many focused search options that get you to doctors, facilities, classes and events, health conditions, and more. The search for each of those is separate and distinct. When you combine all of those into the search category, Ed's probably right. Actually, on our site it would then be much more than 50% of the visitors who don't bounce out. I don't know if that means our search is integrated into the navigation, as Ed describes, but the outcome may be the same. Neal I have to remind myself that there’s search, and then there’s search. We have a general search option available on every page. That’s the one that doesn’t get used a lot. But we have many focused search options that get you to doctors, facilities, classes and events, health conditions, and more. The search for each of those is separate and distinct. When you combine all of those into the search category, Ed’s probably right. Actually, on our site it would then be much more than 50% of the visitors who don’t bounce out. I don’t know if that means our search is integrated into the navigation, as Ed describes, but the outcome may be the same.

Neal

]]> By: Ed Bennett http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-122 Ed Bennett Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:33:56 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-122 Good points as usual from Neal and Rob. Of course our websites need both tools - well-designed navigation and smart search tools. My point is that the truly motivated visitor will use search to find specific content, and that ties in with the long-tail concept. When your site contains content on thousands of subjects, internal search is a navigational short-cut to that material. Good navigation is necessary to move around the first few hundred hierarchical sections of your site, but beyond that you will need other approaches - site maps, indexes, subject lists, etc. Here's one example: http://www.umm.edu/ency/index/eng_index.htm Right now, navigation and search are separate tools. Traditional navigation defines the fixed structure of the site, while search runs as a program. I think future web tools will blur the line between the two. Regular navigation will handle the "head" and search will navigate the "tail" - and do it seamlessly. In the meantime, our usage stats breakdown differently from Neal's. We get 10,000 visitors a day who look at more than one page, and 5,000 of those visitors use our internal search. So for visitors who don't bounce out, we have a 50/50 split between navigation and search. This might be tied to our traffic sources, which are mostly from search engines. These folks are already in "search mode", so they may be more likely to repeat their search on our site. Thank you both for the thoughtful comments - I really enjoy the discussion. Ed Good points as usual from Neal and Rob. Of course our websites need both tools – well-designed navigation and smart search tools. My point is that the truly motivated visitor will use search to find specific content, and that ties in with the long-tail concept. When your site contains content on thousands of subjects, internal search is a navigational short-cut to that material.

Good navigation is necessary to move around the first few hundred hierarchical sections of your site, but beyond that you will need other approaches – site maps, indexes, subject lists, etc. Here’s one example:
http://www.umm.edu/ency/index/eng_index.htm

Right now, navigation and search are separate tools. Traditional navigation defines the fixed structure of the site, while search runs as a program. I think future web tools will blur the line between the two. Regular navigation will handle the “head” and search will navigate the “tail” – and do it seamlessly.

In the meantime, our usage stats breakdown differently from Neal’s. We get 10,000 visitors a day who look at more than one page, and 5,000 of those visitors use our internal search. So for visitors who don’t bounce out, we have a 50/50 split between navigation and search. This might be tied to our traffic sources, which are mostly from search engines. These folks are already in “search mode”, so they may be more likely to repeat their search on our site.

Thank you both for the thoughtful comments – I really enjoy the discussion.

Ed

]]> By: Rob http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-121 Rob Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:51:48 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-121 Ed, In my experience you have two types of users who come to the site: one who quickly scans the site to see if they can find what they are looking based on the navigation (labeling) and if they can't figure it out, they search for it as a last resort. The other type of user doesn't bother looking at the navigation, they just go straight to the search box and query. If you cater only to those that search, then no doubt your search has to work really well. Otherwise the user will give up and leave because they won't want to click on each tab to try and find information if they don't think its leading down the right path. To your point about using the navigation on ebay and amazon. I do use the navigation links on ebay and amazon. On ebay, you don't do a search to list an item. You click on Sell in the top right-hand corner. At some point on either site you will have no choice but to use the navigation, you can't rely on search for everything. It also depends on how much time you have too. eBay and Amazon have gone to great lengths to work on improving their IA and using their sites a good user-experience. It doesn't matter if your site is 10 pages or 100k pages deep in content, you shouldn't ignore or make up for the lack of IA with search. R Ed,

In my experience you have two types of users who come to the site: one who quickly scans the site to see if they can find what they are looking based on the navigation (labeling) and if they can’t figure it out, they search for it as a last resort. The other type of user doesn’t bother looking at the navigation, they just go straight to the search box and query.

If you cater only to those that search, then no doubt your search has to work really well. Otherwise the user will give up and leave because they won’t want to click on each tab to try and find information if they don’t think its leading down the right path.

To your point about using the navigation on ebay and amazon. I do use the navigation links on ebay and amazon. On ebay, you don’t do a search to list an item. You click on Sell in the top right-hand corner. At some point on either site you will have no choice but to use the navigation, you can’t rely on search for everything. It also depends on how much time you have too. eBay and Amazon have gone to great lengths to work on improving their IA and using their sites a good user-experience. It doesn’t matter if your site is 10 pages or 100k pages deep in content, you shouldn’t ignore or make up for the lack of IA with search.

R

]]> By: Neal http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-120 Neal Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:13:23 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-120 I would have thought the same thing, but when we did usability studies all but one participant used the site navigation to the exclusion of all else. When asked why, they responded that searches are usually so useless that they don't bother with them any longer. And if we look at our search logs vs. our traffic logs, there's no comparison. So we can assume that our users will utilize the site search the most, but actual practice doesn't bear that out. At least not on our site. I would have thought the same thing, but when we did usability studies all but one participant used the site navigation to the exclusion of all else. When asked why, they responded that searches are usually so useless that they don’t bother with them any longer. And if we look at our search logs vs. our traffic logs, there’s no comparison. So we can assume that our users will utilize the site search the most, but actual practice doesn’t bear that out. At least not on our site.

]]> By: Ed Bennett http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-119 Ed Bennett Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:50:50 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-119 Rob, In my opinion, experienced web visitors use internal search by default. It's the best way to find what you want on a large complex site. How often do you use the navigation links on Ebay or Amazon? I bet those guys have invested big bucks to create the most logical navigation possible. Of course all sites need clear navigation, but our most motivated visitors use the internal search. It's our job to make that search tool really useful. Provide a "best match", catch mis-spellings, group results by categories, etc. Ed Rob,

In my opinion, experienced web visitors use internal search by default. It’s the best way to find what you want on a large complex site. How often do you use the navigation links on Ebay or Amazon? I bet those guys have invested big bucks to create the most logical navigation possible.

Of course all sites need clear navigation, but our most motivated visitors use the internal search. It’s our job to make that search tool really useful. Provide a “best match”, catch mis-spellings, group results by categories, etc.

Ed

]]> By: Rob http://webiscope.com/2007/08/80-or-20-the-long-and-short-%e2%80%9ctale%e2%80%9d-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-118 Rob Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:37:18 +0000 http://creativity-unleashed.net/webiscope/?p=43#comment-118 Chris, that was an interesting article on Long Tail in health care. I would go further as to add that looking at your search logs can also give insight into your users mental mode and how they search for information, what terms they search on also speaks volumes as to why they are searching in the first place. If the information architecture of the site is labeled in a manner that does not make sense to the user who trying to find information, they will most likely try searching to compensate. So if users are constantly are searching for medical records and the content exists on the site, but its buried underneath about us. Its time to re-evaluate where that content should go or move it to a section that makes sense or logical to the user. The search logs are also a great place to generate your natural keywords list, because you know those are the keywords people are searching with. "For example, "Detox" is the term a user would, as opposed to inpatient medical stabilization that a clinician would use. Big difference in the way people think and the terms people use. Knowing your target audience and mental mode helps in providing a site they will continue to use. Chris,
that was an interesting article on Long Tail in health care.

I would go further as to add that looking at your search logs can also give insight into your users mental mode and how they search for information, what terms they search on also speaks volumes as to why they are searching in the first place. If the information architecture of the site is labeled in a manner that does not make sense to the user who trying to find information, they will most likely try searching to compensate. So if users are constantly are searching for medical records and the content exists on the site, but its buried underneath about us. Its time to re-evaluate where that content should go or move it to a section that makes sense or logical to the user.

The search logs are also a great place to generate your natural keywords list, because you know those are the keywords people are searching with. “For example, “Detox” is the term a user would, as opposed to inpatient medical stabilization that a clinician would use. Big difference in the way people think and the terms people use. Knowing your target audience and mental mode helps in providing a site they will continue to use.

]]>