Design and implementation of a system for evaluating the mobile Web usability by Kaveti, Rajesh, M.S., University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2010 , 51 pages; AAT 1478732 My Interest: 1) Mobile web usability. 2) Usability analysis. 3) Elaboration on Design & Implementation. Action: To read the Dissertation in the future. Motivation Led by the rapid growth of the smartphone market, mobile Internet usage in US is expected to approach 100% penetration and to reach 50% total usage by 2013. The usability of the mobile Web, however, remains as a thorny issue. A recent study shows that the task completion rate using the mobile Web ranges from 38% to 75% on different phones. The average success rate was only 59%, substantially lower than the roughly 80% success rate when testing websites on a regular PC today. Thus it is important to conduct usability research that is specifically tailored for the mobile Web, which will help provide better user experience and make broader impacts on the fast-growing mobile industry. Research Goal In this thesis, we present the design and implementation of a data-collection system for mobile Web usability evaluation, which consists of the instrumented Web browser on the mobile phones for data collection and the back end server components for data analysis. Methodology We chose the iPhone as our mobile platform and we developed a Web browser with the same look and feel as the default Safari browser using the iPhone SDK. The instrumented Web browser passively collects user interaction events, such as URL clicks, soft key presses, and finger movements. GPS and accelerometer data are also collected to provide usage context. We have implemented simple timing and key error analysis, which can provide insights to mobile Web usability. Future Work In future work, we plan to implement additional analysis methods and extend our system to other mobile platforms. II. RELATED WORK:.... 6 III. SYSTEM DESIGN 9 IV. SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION 12 The core application 12 UIApplication 12 The Application Delegate 13 Windows and Views 14 View Controllers 16 Event Handling 17 Text and Web 18 Instrumented Web Browser 19 Event Collection 25 Server Database 27 V. USABILITY ANALYSYS 30 VI. FEASIBILITY TESTING 34 |
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
20101013 - Kaveti, ...system for evaluating Mobile Web Usability
Sunday, September 26, 2010
20100926 - Platt, ..Electronic Performance Support System...
The efficacy of an electronic performance support system as a training tool for online faculty by Platt, Jeffrey Lynn, Ph.D., Iowa State University, 2008 , 336 pages; AAT 3342280 My Interest: 1) Usability Evaluation form. 2) EPSS – Electronic Performance Support System. 3) Methodology of Studies. Action: To read specific parts of the Dissertation in future. Background An instructional website was developed as an electronic performance support system (EPSS) to determine whether faculty would use and learn from such a resource. This website summarized pedagogical information about online instruction that users could access 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Methodology In Phase I of the study, five college professors with experience teaching online courses evaluated the usability of the website and made suggestions on how it could be improved. Revisions were made to the website to enhance clarity and comprehension in preparation for Phase II of the study. In Phase II, 35 college instructors agreed to use the website to learn about pedagogical information related to teaching online courses. Only two people visited at least 75% of the web pages, limiting the conclusions that could be drawn. Conclusion Two conclusions, however, seem warranted. First, an EPSS is not the most effective way to deliver non-mandatory faculty education because the primary goal of an EPSS is to enhance performance in a business setting rather than to facilitate learning in the academic setting. Second, any type of faculty development program must be developed from the learner's perspective and include interaction between the participants. CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 29 Overview 29 Design of Ped·a·GO!·gy 29 Phase I: Usability Evaluation of Ped·a·GO!·gy 35 Phase I Participants 35 Phase I Procedure 35 Phase II Use of Ped·a·GO!·gy as a Learning Tool 35 Phase II Participants 35 Initial Phase II Questionnaire 37 Section 1 of the Phase II Questionnaire 37 Demographic Questions 37 Software Experience 37 Section 2 of the Phase II Questionnaire 38 Innovation Adopter Status Scale 38 Online Learning Platform 39 Section 3 of the Phase II Questionnaire 39 Phase II Procedure 43 Phase II Measures 44 Phase II Performance Measures 44 Phase II Exit Evaluation 45 Innovation Attribute Scale 45 Additional Questions 46 Chapter 3 Summary 46 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 48 Results 48 Phase I: Usability Evaluation of Ped·a·GO!·gy 48 Phase II: Use of Ped·a·GO!·gy as a Learning Tool 53 Computer Experience of Participants 53 Innovation Adopter Classification of Participants 54 Website Activity 57 Measures of Learning 60 Exit Evaluation of Ped·a·GO!·gy 63 Follow-Up Questionnaire for Non-Completers 65 Discussion 66 Efficacy as an Electronic Performance Support System 66 Diffusion of Innovation as a Theoretical Foundation 70 Hypothetical Outcomes 73 For Whom Ped·a·GO!·gy is the Most Useful 73 Concept Check Quizzes and Case Studies 74 Exit Evaluation of Ped·a·GO!·gy 75 Chapter 4 Summary 76 APPENDIX A. Ped·a·GO!·gy's INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL 84 APPENDIX B. PHASE I USABILITY EVALUATION FORM 300 APPENDIX C. PHASE II INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE 301 APPENDIX D. PHASE II EXIT EVALUATION 308 APPENDIX E. PHASE I EVALUATOR RESPONSES TO Ped·a·GO!·gy 311 APPENDIX F. FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONNAIRE FOR NON-COMPLETERS 320
|
Friday, September 24, 2010
20100925 - Ssemugabi, Usabiity Evaluation of Web-based e-Learning...
Usability evaluation of a Web-based elearning application: A study of two evaluation methods by Ssemugabi, Samuel, M.Sc., University of South Africa (South Africa), 2007; AAT 0668384 My Interest: 1) Set of usability criteria/heuristics. 2) Heuristic evaluation by experts. 3) User evaluation by learners. 4) Methodology of comparison of heuristic evaluation & user evaluation. Action: To download his Dissertation. To read his Dissertation in future. Problem Statement Despite widespread use of web-based e-learning applications, insufficient attention is paid to their usability. There is a need to conduct evaluation using one or more of the various usability evaluation methods. Research Goal Given that heuristic evaluation is known to be easy to use and cost effective, this study investigates the extent to which it can identify usability problems in a webbased e-learning application at a tertiary institution. Methodology In a comparative case study, heuristic evaluation by experts and survey evaluation among end users (learners) are conducted and the results of the two compared. Following literature studies in e-learning--particularly web-based learning--and usability, the researcher generates an extensive set of criteria/heuristics and uses it in the two evaluations. Results Discussion The findings indicate a high correspondence between the results of the two evaluations, demonstrating that HE is an appropriate, effective and sufficient usability evaluation method, as well as relatively easy to conduct. Comments: I have not downloaded his Dissertation yet. Need to do so because I intent to read in detail.
|
20100924 - Hart, ...Analysis of web site use and usability...
Who took the "u" out of usability? An analysis of professional Web site use and usability in a Midwestern urban school district by Hart, Timothy R., Ed.D., University of Cincinnati, 2005 , 144 pages; AAT 3176718 My Interest: 1) Usability questionnaire. 2) Focus group discussions. Action: Medium-low priority to read the Dissertation in future. Research Goal The primary goal of this study was to investigate usability issues surrounding a teacher-oriented Intranet site in a mid-size urban school district in the Midwest: * the factors that have affected teachers' use of the web site, * the influences that have impacted the overall design and usability of the web site, and * to what degree theories of effective web site usability have been implemented in the creation of this site. The characteristics of usability considered were communication of the site's purpose, content writing, links, navigation, graphics and animations, and graphic design. Methodology Data were collected via Data analysis was completed through the researcher's qualitative coding and triangulating of both the observational field notes and focus group transcripts. An Analysis of Variance was used to compare the means of the time required to complete tasks and the number of correct responses of the participants in the web usability card activity. This comparison was done by age, gender, and years of teaching experience. The usability questionnaires were used to compare the means of the extent of participants' agreement on a series of web site usability statements. Results Discussion Data analysis indicated that there are factors beyond web site usability that impact teachers' use of this web site. In addition, the restrictions of the web-based templates compound the factors that impact teachers' use of the web site as well as the designer's incorporation of usability theory in the design of the site. Conclusion Several conclusions were drawn from this study. The most important conclusion is that we must consider the stakeholders first in all issues of usability, including external issues that prevent teachers from using these web-based resources. |
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
20100921 - Clapsaddle, Measuring Usability...
Measuring usability: Categorically modelling successful websites using established metrics by Clapsaddle, Donna J., D.P.S., Pace University, 2004 , 209 pages; My interest: (1) established set of Usability Metrics. (2) relative importance of guideline metrics. (3) automated web usability tools. Action: To read specific parts of the Dissertation in future. Many owners/designers cannot afford the expense and effort of a thorough professional website usability evaluation. It is difficult for a novice developer to digest the glut of available guidelines and guideline sets in order to determine which particular guidelines to include when designing a usable website in a specific category. Furthermore, guidelines are often too vague to be implemented properly. The time from inception to completion of a website is relatively short (as compared to a software package) and as most websites are designed by amateurs, an economical and rapid usability assessment of their websites is necessary. Many of the currently available automated website rating systems are based on criteria that is often subjective and not based on "usability" per se. Comments: The above, I deem to be her motivation for her research. Using a traditional website categorization that includes e-commerce, informational, interactive and portal, this dissertation employs datamining algorithms to develop predictive, categorized models of an ideal website, based on an established set of usability metrics in order to enable the novice--the individual or small business owner--to design better websites. It establishes an order of relevance for a quagmire of usability metrics and their associated guidelines. It also serves to validate or refute previous research. It introduces a framework illustrating the relative importance of guideline metrics gathered from a selection of automated web usability tools. Finally, a more user-centered categorization is proposed which may serve as an impetus for future research.
|
20100921 - Al-Nuaim, Multimedia User Interface Usability Evaluation Tool
This evening, I am reading the abstracts of relevant PhD dissertations. Development and validation of a multimedia user interface usability evaluation tool in the context of educational web sites by Al-Nuaim, Hana Abdullah, D.Sc., The George Washington University, 2000 , 216 pages; AAT 9961553 The overall purpose of this research was to develop and validate an evaluation instrument and to test various hypotheses using the instrument to determine its value in eliciting more information from users who participate in the design and development of a multimedia Web-based interface. This evaluation instrument or tool, the Multimedia User Interface Usability (MUIU), is proposed to be used as an aid for designers or developers in conducting formative evaluations to locate usability problems of the online user interface. The focus of the MUIU evaluation tool is the quality of media elements used and the efficacy of their integration. The MUIU evaluation tool provides users with an opportunity to accurately convey their attitudes or perceptions on certain design features. The results of the evaluation are quantitative data that may be interpreted and applied to the redesign of the user interface. The original and successive versions of the MUIU evaluation tool were developed based on; The usefulness of the MUIU evaluation tool was addressed by comparing one novice group evaluations of an educational multimedia Web site, using their own words and expressions, to another novice group that used the MUIU evaluation tool. Content analysis of their comments and statements revealed that novices who had previously used the MUIU evaluation tool provided more meaningful and quantifiable results regarding improved usability and design defects with the interface than the novices who evaluated the same Web site but were not exposed to the MUIU evaluation tool.
Action: |
Friday, September 25, 2009
Sep 25 - Nielsen, The Need for Web Design Standards (Alertbox)
The Need for Web Design Standards
Unfortunately, much of the Web is like an anthill built by ants on LSD: many sites don't fit into the big picture, and are too difficult to use because they deviate from expected norms.
Several design elements are common enough that users expect them to work in a certain way.
Here's my definition of three different standardization levels:
Standard: 80% or more of websites use the same design approach. Users strongly expect standard elements to work a certain way when they visit a new site because that's how things always work.
Convention: 50-79% of websites use the same design approach. With a convention, users expect elements to work a certain way when they visit a new site because that's how things usually work.
Confusion: with these elements, no single design approach dominates, and even the most popular approach is used by at most 49% of websites. For such design elements, users don't know what to expect when they visit a new site.
How Many Design Elements Are Standardized?
To estimate the extent to which Web design complies with interface standards, I compared two studies: my own study of twenty-four features on fifty corporate homepages, and a University of Washington master's thesis that studied thirty-three features on seventy-five e-commerce sites.
Following are the extent to which websites have standardized on the fifty-seven design approaches studied:
Standard: 37% of design elements were done the same way by at least four-fifths of the sites. Standard design elements included:
* A logo in the upper left corner of the page
* A search box on the homepage
* An absence of splash pages
* Breadcrumbs listed horizontally (when they were used)
Convention: 40% of design elements were done the same way by at least half the sites (but less than four-fifths of the sites). Conventional design elements included:
* Using the label "site map" for the site map (which is recommended from user research on site map usability)
* Changing the color of visited links (recommended to help navigation)
* Placing the shopping cart link in the upper right corner of page
* Placing links to sibling areas (neighboring topics at the same information architecture level as the current location) in the left-hand column
Confusion: 23% of design elements were done in so many ways that no single approach dominated. Confusion reigned in several areas, including:
* The main navigation schemes, which included left-hand menu, tabs across the top, navbar across the top, Yahoo-style directory in the middle, and so on
* Placement of the search feature, which included upper right, upper left, middle, and elsewhere on the page
* The sign-in process
* Placement of Help
At first glance, it might seem wonderful that only 1/4 of the design issues created confusion.
But look at the design element examples at each standardization level. Unfortunately, the most firmly standardized issues are the simplest and most localized ones, such as where to put the logo or how to display breadcrumb trails.
The confusing design elements are the bigger issues that contribute more strongly to users' ability to master the whole site, as opposed to dealing with individual pages. Navigation is confusing. Search is confusing. Sign-in is confusing. Even Help is confusing, reducing the usability of the user's last resort when all else has failed.
Why Design Standards Help Users
We must eliminate confusing design elements and move as far as possible into the realm of design conventions. Even better, we should establish design standards for every important website task.
Standards ensure that users
* know what features to expect,
* know how these features will look in the interface,
* know where to find these features on the site and on the page,
* know how to operate each feature to achieve their goal,
* don't have to ponder the meaning of unknown design elements,
* don't miss important features because they overlook a non-standard design element, and
* don't get nasty surprises when something doesn't work as expected.
Why Websites Should Comply With Design Standards
One simple reason:
Jakob's Law of the Internet User Experience: users spend most of their time on other websites.
In visiting all these other sites, people become accustomed to the prevailing design standards and conventions. Thus, when users arrive at your site, they assume it will work the same way as other sites.
In my recent research into Web-wide user behavior, users left websites after 1 minute and 49 seconds on average, concluding in that time that the website didn't fulfill their needs.
With so little time to convince prospects that you're worthy of their business, you shouldn't waste even a second making them struggle with a deviant user interface.
Going forward, we must produce and follow widely-used conventions and design patterns for the bigger issues in Web design, including:
* the structure of product pages,
* workflow (beyond simplistic shopping carts),
* the main types of information a corporate site should provide, and
* the information architecture for that information (where to find what).
Intranet Standards
Design standards are one area in which intranets are better off than public websites.
A key distinction between an intranet and the Internet is that the intranet has a single authority in charge.
The intranet team can define a design standard and promote it throughout the corporation. The team can also implement a single publishing system that ensures consistency by placing all content into a single set of well-designed templates.
Source:
Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, September 13, 2004:
The Need for Web Design Standards
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040913.html
The Need for Web Design Standards (Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox)
Monday, September 21, 2009
Sep 22 - Weblog Usability: The Top Ten Design Mistakes (Alertvbox)
Summary: Blogs are often too internally focused and ignore key usability issues, making it hard for new readers to understand the site and trust the author.
Introduction
Weblogs are a form of website. The thousands of normal website usability guidelines therefore apply to them, as do this year's top ten design mistakes. But weblogs are also a special genre of website; they have unique characteristics and thus distinct usability problems.
One of a weblog's great benefits is that it essentially frees you from "Web design." You write a paragraph, click a button, and it's posted on the Internet. No need for visual design, page design, interaction design, information architecture, or any programming or server maintenance.
Blogs make having a simple website much easier, and as a result, the number of people who write for the Web has exploded. This is a striking confirmation of the importance of ease of use.
Weblogs' second benefit is that they're a Web-native content genre: they rely on links, and short postings prevail. You can simply find something interesting on another site and link to it, possibly with commentary or additional examples.
As a third benefit, blogs are part of an ecosystem (often called the Blogosphere) that serves as a positive feedback loop: Whatever good postings exist are promoted through links from other sites. More reader/writers see this good stuff, and the very best then get linked to even more. As a result, link frequency follows a Zipf distribution, with disproportionally more links to the best postings.
Some weblogs are really just private diaries intended only for a handful of family members and close friends. Usability guidelines generally don't apply to such sites.
Also, while readers of your intranet weblog might know you, usability is important because your readers are on company time. (As an example, see IBM's use of intranet blogs — among the ten best intranets of 2006.)
1. No Author Biographies
Unless you're a business blog, you probably don't need a full-fledged "about us" section the way a corporate site does.
Basic rationale for "about us" translates directly into the need for an "about me" page on a weblog: users want to know who they're dealing with.
It's a simple matter of trust. Anonymous writings have less credence than something that's signed.
2. No Author Photo
Even weblogs that provide author bios often omit the author photo. A photo is important for two reasons:
1. It offers a more personable impression of the author. You enhance your credibility by the simple fact that you're not trying to hide. Also, users relate more easily to somebody they've seen.
2. It connects the virtual and physical worlds. People who've met you before will recognize your photo, and people who've read your site will recognize you when you meet in person (say, at a conference — or the company cafeteria if you're an intranet blogger). A huge percentage of the human brain is dedicated to remembering and recognizing faces.
Also, if you run a professional blog and expect to be quoted in the press, you should follow the recommendations for using the Web for PR and include a selection of high-resolution photos that photo editors can download.
3. Nondescript Posting Titles
Sadly, even though weblogs are native to the Web, authors rarely follow the guidelines for writing for the Web in terms of making content scannable. This applies to a posting's body text, but it's even more important with headlines.
Users must be able to grasp the gist of an article by reading its headline. Avoid cute or humorous headlines that make no sense out of context.
Your posting's title is microcontent and you should treat it as a writing project in its own right. On a value-per-word basis, headline writing is the most important writing you do.
Descriptive headlines are especially important for representing your weblog in search engines, newsfeeds (RSS), and other external environments.
In those contexts, users often see only the headline and use it to determine whether to click into the full posting. Even if users see a short abstract along with the headline (as with most search engines), user testing shows that people often read only the headline. In fact, people often read only the first three or four words of a headline when scanning a list of possible places to go.
4. Links Don't Say Where They Go
Many weblog authors seem to think it's cool to write link anchors like: "some people think" or "there's more here and here." Remember one of the basics of the Web: Life is too short to click on an unknown. Tell people where they're going and what they'll find at the other end of the link.
Generally, you should provide predictive information in either the anchor text itself or the immediately surrounding words. You can also use link titles for supplementary information that doesn't fit with your content. (To see a link title in action, mouse over the "link titles" link.)
5. Classic Hits are Buried
Don't relegate such classics to the archives, where people can only find something if they know you posted it, say, in May 2003.
Highlight a few evergreens in your navigation system and link directly to them. For example, my own list of almost 300 Alertbox columns starts by saying, "Read these first: Usability 101 and Top Ten Mistakes of Web Design."
Also, remember to link to your past pieces in newer postings. Don't assume that readers have been with you from the beginning; give them background and context in case they want to read more about your ideas.
6. The Calendar is the Only Navigation
A timeline is rarely the best information architecture, yet it's the default way to navigate weblogs. Most weblog software provides a way to categorize postings so users can easily get a list of all postings on a certain topic.
Do use categorization, but avoid the common mistake of tagging a posting with almost all of your categories. Be selective.
Categories must be sufficiently detailed to lead users to a thoroughly winnowed list of postings. Ten to twenty categories are appropriate for structuring many topics.
On the main page for each category, highlight that category's evergreens as well as a time line of its most recent postings.
7. Irregular Publishing Frequency
Establishing and meeting user expectations is one of the fundamental principles of Web usability.
For a weblog, users must be able to anticipate when and how often updates will occur.
For most weblogs, daily updates are probably best, but weekly or even monthly updates might work as well, depending on your topic. In either case, pick a publication schedule and stick to it.
If you usually post daily but sometimes let months go by without new content, you'll lose many of your loyal — and thus most valuable — readers.
To ensure regular publishing, hold back some ideas and post them when you hit a dry spell.
8. Mixing Topics
If you publish on many different topics, you're less likely to attract a loyal audience of high-value users. Busy people might visit a blog to read an entry about a topic that interests them. They're unlikely to return, however, if their target topic appears only sporadically among a massive range of postings on other topics.
The more focused your content, the more focused your readers. That, again, makes you more influential within your niche.
Specialized sites rule the Web, so aim tightly. This is especially important if you're in the business-to-business (B2B) sector.
If you have the urge to speak out on, say, both American foreign policy and the business strategy of Internet telephony, establish two blogs. You can always interlink them when appropriate.
9. Forgetting That You Write for Your Future Boss
Whenever you post anything to the Internet — whether on a weblog, in a discussion group, or even in an email — think about how it will look to a hiring manager in ten years. Once stuff's out, it's archived, cached, and indexed in many services that you might never be aware of.
Think twice before posting. If you don't want your future boss to read it, don't post.
10. Having a Domain Name Owned by a Weblog Service
Having a weblog address ending in blogspot.com, typepad.com, etc. will soon be the equivalent of having an @aol.com email address or a Geocities website: the mark of a naïve beginner who shouldn't be taken too seriously.
Letting somebody else own your name means that they own your destiny on the Internet. They can degrade the service quality as much as they want. They can increase the price as much as they want. They can add atop your content as many pop-ups, blinking banners, or other user-repelling advertising techniques as they want. They can promote your competitor's offers on your pages.
The longer you stay at someone else's domain name, the higher the cost of going independent. Yes, it's tempting to start a new weblog on one of the services that offer free accounts. It's easy, it's quick, and it's obviously cheap. But it only costs $8 per year to get your personal domain name and own your own future.
As soon as you realize you're serious about blogging, move it away from a domain name that's controlled by somebody else. The longer you delay, the more pain you'll feel when you finally make the move.
Source:
Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, October 17, 2005:
Weblog Usability: The Top Ten Design Mistakes
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/weblogs.html
Blog Usability: Top 10 Weblog Design Mistakes (Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox)
Sep 21 - Nielsen, Corporate Usability Maturity: Stages 5-8 (Alertbox)
Summary: An organization that reaches the managed usability stage still has far to go to reach usability nirvana. Attaining these higher maturity levels requires many years of effort.
Stage 5: Managed Usability
At this stage, we can finally say usability has "made it" in a company. At stage 4, bits of usability budgets are scattered around the organization. However, these budgets can be canceled without notice, resigning the staff to work on non-usability areas of their projects.
At stage 5, there's an official usability group, led by a usability manager who has the charter to "own" usability. Typically, the group starts with only a few members, but tends to grow and acquire dedicated usability lab space as the company increases its user testing.
Stage 5 resembles stage 4 in the choice of usability methods: the focus is still on user testing, which mainly occurs too late in the development lifecycle. The primary difference here is that studies are conducted more consistently because the usability group refines its methodology as members learn from each other.
The group can also maintain a usability reports archive to compile past findings. Doing so enhances understanding of the company's users, which culminates in company-specific design guidelines. Such cross-study insights are an early move toward the systematic usability processes that characterize stage 6 of corporate usability maturity.
Finally, stage 5 is the first stage at which the company has a person -- the usability manager -- whose job it is to think about usability across the organization and across design projects. If usability managers spend all their time fixing individual design mistakes, they've failed their most important task: increasing organizational maturity and leveraging existing usability staff for more strategic purposes.
The problem is that the usability budget is too squeezed at stage 5 to implement all the recommended usability activities for all projects. Instead, the usability manager must select particularly promising projects.
Stage 6: Systematic Usability Process
The company has recognized the need for an actual user-centered design process, with multiple activities and milestones. On important projects, the team conducts early user research before they do any design. Typically, the company also has a user interface design standard or a centralized definition of preferred design patterns.
Further, in stage 6, the company likely has a process in place for tracking user experience quality throughout design projects and across releases. Upper management monitors these quality indicators just like they do other business indicators, and projects with sick designs are cured before they reach customers.
Finally, iterative design is more common at this stage because the company realizes that it can't achieve the best interface quality in one round of usability fixes. Much better results come from gradually refining a series of designs -- from early paper prototypes to the final implementation -- and testing them at each step.
While still not lavish, the usability budget at stage 6 is large enough that key projects receive sufficient resources to conduct a range of user research. The very fact that projects are prioritized according to the business value of their user experience is yet another sign of this maturity level. Finally, even projects that don't get a lot of usability resources go through at least some form of usability review before they're approved for release.
Stage 7: Integrated User-Centered Design
At stage 6, the company starts doing field studies. At stage 7, this form of very early user research becomes more prominent. Each development lifecycle step at maturity level 7 is infused with user data, including the project definition itself and the requirements phase.
Beyond simply estimating user experience quality -- which is typical of stage 6 -- the company often tracks quality at stage 7 through quantitative usability metrics. Furthermore, each project has defined usability goals that these measurements must surpass for the design to be greenlighted for release.
Stage 8: User-Driven Corporation
At stage 8, user data doesn't just define individual projects, it determines what types of projects the company should fund. That is, the company employs user research to determine its overall direction and priorities. Also, the concept of total user experience is extended beyond the screen to other forms of customer interactions with the company.
The main difference between stages 7 and 8 is one of degree. The company uses many of the same usability methods, but at this ultimate maturity level, those methods affect corporate strategy and activities beyond interface design.
While numerous management books advocate customer input into corporate decision-making, it's rare to find companies that use real behaviorally observed user data for this purpose. Instead, most make do with surveys or other less-valid indicators of what customers say, as opposed to what they do. To study customer's actual behavior, methods from the usability toolkit are required.
Source:
Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, May 1, 2006:
Corporate Usability Maturity: Stages 5-8
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/process_maturity.html
Corporate Usability Maturity: Stages 5-8 (Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox)
