1. A6: Web Site Re-development Miles Banbery, University of Kent at Canterbury

2. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Abstract  How often should redevelopment be done?  How can we get institutional support for the necessary work?  How do you assess what needs doing and the effectiveness of your current provision?  Re-development in-house or buy-in?  What user testing should/can be done?

3. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Timetable for the session 09.15 - 09.45 Introductions 09.45 - 10.15 Overview of re-development issues 10.15 - 10.45 Kent redesign case study 10.45 - 11.15 Coffee 11.15 - 11.55 Group work 11.55 - 12.15 Reporting back (5 mins per group)

4. Introductions

5. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury About you...  Who are you?  What re-development do you want to do?  How do you know?

6. Overview of redevelopment issues

7. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury What you have to know...  Where are you coming from?  Where are you going to?  Why?  Who wants it / needs it?  How much will it cost?  How long will it last?  How will you know if it is successful?

8. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury But we did the Web two years ago!

9. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Who do you have to convince?  Budget holders –VFM / cost effectiveness  Strategists / Management –Key to delivery of other, wider aims and objectives - must tie in with institutional strategic aims  Providers –Easy to use, better quality information, more professional look/feel - they need to identify with it  Users –Better service - accuracy, personalisation, interest

10. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Magic phrases?  Our competitors are doing …  Legislation (accessibility, widening participation, trading standards)  More content / less maintenance per item  Fast/pretty/useful - razorblade of life  Design no longer portrays institution as …  We can make more sales, recruit more students by...  Our users said...

11. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury (Re-) Development stages  Strategy  Structure  Interface  Graphics

12. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Strategic design  What type of site are you?  Audiences –Types –Needs  Providers –Available Information –Wants  Available resources - centrally and departmentally  How will you know how it is performing?

13. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Assessing the audiences  Who do you want to come? –Potential students / staff –Current students / staff –Potential conference bookings –Corporate clients / partners  What is it they need? –User questionnaires / analysis –Market research –Focus groups –Comparing rivals’ Web sites

14. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Assessing effectiveness  Sales  Link popularity  Hits (Web stats)  Return visits (cookies)  Downloaded files  Solicited feedback  Unsolicited feedback  Availability of enhanced services  Cost-effective maintenance  Registered users  User testing  Trade publications / peer review  Awards  Share of e-business against traditional modes of delivery  Comparison with competitors  World standards

15. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Structural design  Information organisation / architecture  Putting things where people can find them  There is always more than one way  How it appears on the screen may not be how the files are arranged in the folders - but it is easier that way!  This is a subjective task

16. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Criteria for organisation  Dependent on type of site - product driven or audience driven?  Sorted by type of interaction  Sorted by user intent or user identification  Hybrids - Major sections plus exceptions and inter- linked services  Shallow organisation against deep structure  How many links to each page should you have?  There must be more than one way to use the site

17. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Interface  What components are on each page? (Don’t forget the content)  Navigation  Usability  No colour or size at this stage

18. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury Graphic design  Colour  Fonts  Shape  Size  Pictures / icons

19. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury The old problem...  In house –Staffing hungry - additional to normal service –Short-term contracts –Recruitment problems –Control kept on-site –Custom features –Matches the institutional needs –Needs re-writing when that is no longer the case –Wheel re-invention?  Out-source –A new view - fresh ideas –Varied expertise available at short notice –External credibility –Lack of control –Unknown resource applied to your project –Lump sum hungry

20. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury User testing  Do not rely on your own knowledge of you customer - use your customers  Time implications  Massive gains if mistakes found early on  The customer is not too stupid to use your site (on the whole)  Controlled environments - set tasks  Watch mistakes and record them - do not prompt

21. Discussion groups

22. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury What we have to do now 1. Problems 2. How we tackled them 3. Recommendations for UK HE institutions 4. Recommendations for external agencies

23. M.E.C.Banbery@ukc.ac.uk : 26/06/2001 (c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury What you have to do now …  Get into groups of 3/4  Nominate a reporter  Pick a topic from the list of four  Consider three problems of your choice and find three possible helpful suggestions or ideas for each