The Big Difference Between Digital Product And Web Design

Category Image 041
In the early days of the web, I remember how annoying it was when print designers would claim they could design websites, too. They assumed that just because they could design for one medium, they could design for the other. That assumption often led to bad user experiences. The skills for effective web design are quite different from those for print design. A similar thing happens today. Designers know how to design traditional marketing and e-commerce sites. They, therefore, presume they have the skills to work on SaaS apps and other digital projects. But when it comes to design, there’s a big distinction between traditional websites and digital products. If we want to work on digital products, we need to understand those differences and adopt a different approach to our work. People Interact with Digital Products More Regularly The biggest difference is that users interact with digital products more than most websites. Think about your own web use. What are the sites you visit most often? If you listed your top ten, well over half would be some form of digital product, from a social media application to a productivity tool. So, with that in mind, let’s dive into the specifics of how the frequency of usage impacts our design approach and what we can do about it. Why Frequency of Use Matters So Much The more we interact with a web app or website, the more important the overall user experience becomes. Users develop deeper connections with digital products. They also form more complex mental models of products they use often. This changes how they see the app in two fundamental ways.

Friction Becomes Significantly More Irritating

First, friction points become increasingly annoying. Users interact with a digital product many times per day. Any small problem in the interface compounds quickly. When you encounter a clunky UI or confusing workflow on a website you only visit once in a while, it’s frustrating but easy to overlook. But, when that same friction occurs in an app you use multiple times per day, it becomes a major source of irritation.

Change Undermines Our Procedural Knowledge

Second, the more we use an app, the more familiar we become with it and how it works. We end up using the app automatically, without even thinking, much like when you’ve been driving a car for years, you don’t think about the process. This is known as procedural knowledge. This is great news for digital product designers, as it means we can create interfaces that become second nature to our users. But, if we break their mental models or introduce unexpected changes, we risk causing frustration and disruption. So, knowing these two things, how does this affect our approach to digital product design? Well, let’s start by considering the problem of friction. Fixing Friction Points As digital product designers, we need to become obsessed with removing friction from the user experience. Failure to do so will alienate users over time and ultimately lead to churn. To mitigate friction, we need to constantly seek out friction points. We need to diagnose the exact problem and then test any solution to ensure it does, in fact, make things better. So, how exactly do we find friction points?

Finding Friction

The most obvious way is to listen to customers. User feedback is crucial in identifying friction points in the user experience. However, we can’t simply rely on that. Analytics can be your friend, too. Microsoft Clarity offers essential insights to pinpoint issues on your app. I would highly recommend using a tool like Microsoft Clarity. It gives detailed insights into user behavior. They help find points of friction. These include the following:
  • Rage clicks: Where individuals continuously click on something due to frustration.
  • Dead clicks: Where people click on something that is not clickable.
  • Excessive scrolling: Where users scroll up and down looking for something.
  • Quick backs: Where a person accidentally lands on a screen and promptly navigates back to the previous one.
  • Error messages: Where the user is triggering an error in the system.
These will help you identify potential friction points that you can then investigate further.

Diagnosing Friction

Once you know where things are going wrong, you can use heat maps and session recordings in Clarity. They will help you understand the problem. Why are people excessively scrolling or rage-clicking, for example? Session recordings are valuable for pinpointing particular problems in the interface. If the heat maps or session recordings don’t make things clear, that is where you would need to consider usability testing. Once you understand the problem, you can then begin exploring solutions and testing them rigorously to ensure they effectively reduce friction.

Testing Your Friction Busting Solutions

How you test your solution to the point of friction will depend on the size and complexity of the changes you need to make. For small changes, such as tweaking the UI or changing some text, A/B testing is often the best approach. You show the new solution to a subset of your users and measure the impact on those indicators of frustration. But A/B testing isn’t always the right approach. If your app has lower levels of traffic, getting results from a statistically significant A/B test can be time-consuming. Also, when your solution involves big changes, like adding new features or redesigning many screens, A/B testing can be expensive. That is because you need to first fully develop the solution before you can test it, meaning that it can prove costly if that solution turns out not to work. Your best approach in such situations is to create a prototype for remote testing. Initially, I usually conduct unfacilitated testing with a tool such as Maze. Unfacilitated testing is easy to set up. It requires minimal time investment, and Maze offers analytics, so you don’t necessarily need to watch every session back. Maze serves as a valuable resource for conducting remote testing, offering both test data and recordings for each test. If testing uncovers issues you can’t fix, then try facilitated testing. Facilitated testing enables you to delve into any arising issues by asking questions. Once you have a solution that works, it’s time to roll that feature out. But you need to be careful at this point because of the procedural knowledge I mentioned earlier. Dealing With the Dangers of Procedural Knowledge Introducing fixes to a user interface has a good chance of breaking a user’s procedural knowledge. Interface elements are often moved and so are no longer where users expect to find them, or they look different, and so users miss them. This can upset many existing customers. That can panic stakeholders and lead to rash decisions. To some extent, you need to accept that this is inevitable and prepare stakeholders for this eventuality. Users will normally adapt in a couple of weeks of regular use, and so there is no immediate need to panic. That said, there are things you can do to mitigate the reaction.
  1. To start with, you can let people know that change is coming. This allows people to mentally adapt to the change before it occurs.
  2. Secondly, if the change is significant, you may wish to give people the ability to opt out of it, at least in the short term. That is why some apps roll out features in beta and give users the option to opt in or out. This provides a sense of control that reduces people’s reactions.
  3. Finally, you can also provide guidance within the user interface itself. Tooltips and overlays can show users where features have been moved so new interface elements can be highlighted.
Slack use tooltips to explain how their interface works. The key is to strike a balance. You must add needed improvements while causing minimal disruption to users’ workflows. You will also need to carefully monitor adoption and adapt accordingly. Change The Way We Work That constant monitoring and adaptation lies at the heart of digital product design. You cannot rely solely on the initial solution but must be prepared to continuously refine and iterate as user behavior and needs evolve.

Pricing Projects As A Freelancer Or Agency Owner

Featured Imgs 23

Pricing projects can be one of the most challenging aspects of running a digital agency or working as a freelance web designer. It’s a topic that comes up frequently in discussions with fellow professionals in my Agency Academy.

Three Approaches to Pricing

Over my years in the industry, I’ve found that there are essentially three main approaches to pricing:

  • Fixed price,
  • Time and materials,
  • And value-based pricing.

Each has its merits and drawbacks, and understanding these can help you make better decisions for your business. Let’s explore each of these in detail and then dive into what I believe is the most effective strategy.

Fixed Price

Fixed pricing is often favored by clients because it reduces their risk and allows for easier comparison between competing proposals. On the surface, it seems straightforward: you quote a price, the client agrees, and you deliver the project for that amount. However, this approach comes with significant drawbacks for agencies and freelancers:

  • Estimating accurately is incredibly challenging.
    In the early stages of a project, we often don’t have enough information to provide a precise quote. Clients may not have a clear idea of their requirements, or there might be technical complexities that only become apparent once work begins. This lack of clarity can lead to underquoting, which eats into your profits, or overquoting, which might cost you the job.
  • There’s no room for adaptation based on testing or insights gained during the project.
    Web design and development is an iterative process. As we build and test, we often discover better ways to implement features or uncover user needs that weren’t initially apparent. With a fixed price model, these improvements are often seen as “scope creep” and can lead to difficult conversations with clients about additional costs.
  • The focus shifts from delivering the best possible product to sticking within the agreed-upon scope.
    This can result in missed opportunities for innovation and improvement, ultimately leading to a less satisfactory end product for the client.

While fixed pricing might seem straightforward, it’s not without its complications. The rigidity of this model can stifle creativity and adaptability, two crucial elements in successful web projects. So, let’s look at an alternative approach that offers more flexibility.

Time and Materials

Time and materials (T&M) pricing offers a fairer system where the client only pays for the hours actually worked. This approach has several advantages:

  • Allows for greater adaptability as the project progresses. If new requirements emerge or if certain tasks take longer than expected, you can simply bill for the additional time. This flexibility can lead to better outcomes as you’re not constrained by an initial estimate.
  • Encourages transparency and open communication. Clients can see exactly what they’re paying for, which can foster trust and understanding of the work involved.
  • Reduces the risk of underquoting. You don’t have to worry about eating into your profits if a task takes longer than expected.

However, T&M pricing isn’t without its drawbacks:

  • It carries a higher perceived risk for the client, as the final cost isn’t determined upfront. This can make budgeting difficult for clients and may cause anxiety about runaway costs.
  • It requires careful tracking and regular communication about hours spent. Without this, clients may be surprised by the final bill, leading to disputes.
  • Some clients may feel it incentivizes inefficiency, as taking longer on tasks results in higher bills.

T&M pricing can work well in many scenarios, especially for long-term or complex projects where requirements may evolve. However, it’s not always the perfect solution, particularly for clients with strict budgets or those who prefer more certainty. There’s one more pricing model that’s often discussed in the industry, which attempts to tie pricing directly to results.

Value-Based Pricing

Value-based pricing is often touted as the holy grail of pricing strategies. The idea is to base your price on the value your work will generate for the client rather than on the time it takes or a fixed estimate. While this sounds great in theory, it’s rarely a realistic approach in our industry. Here’s why:

  • It’s only suitable for projects where you can tie your efforts directly to ROI (Return on Investment). For example, if you’re redesigning an e-commerce site, you might be able to link your work to increased sales. However, for many web projects, the value is more intangible or indirect.
  • Accurately calculating ROI is often difficult or impossible in web design and development. Many factors contribute to a website’s success, and isolating the impact of design or development work can be challenging.
  • It requires a deep understanding of the client’s business and industry. Without this, it’s hard to accurately assess the potential value of your work.
  • Clients may be reluctant to share the financial information necessary to make value-based pricing work. They might see it as sensitive data or simply may not have accurate projections.
  • It can lead to difficult conversations if the projected value isn’t realized. Was it due to your work or other factors beyond your control?

While these three approaches form the foundation of most pricing strategies, the reality of pricing projects is often more nuanced and complex. In fact, as I point out in my article “How To Work Out What To Charge Clients: The Honest Version”, pricing often involves a mix of educated guesswork, personal interest in the project, and an assessment of what the market will bear.

Given the challenges with each of these pricing models, you might be wondering if there’s a better way. In fact, there is, and it starts with a different approach to the initial client conversation.

Start by Discussing Appetite

Instead of jumping straight into deliverables or hourly rates, I’ve found it more effective to start by discussing what 37signals calls “appetite” in their book Shaping Up. Appetite is how much the product owner is willing to invest based on the expected return for their business. This concept shifts the conversation from “What will this cost?” to “What is this worth to you?”

This approach is beneficial for several reasons:

  • Focuses on the budget rather than trying to nail down every deliverable upfront. This allows for more flexibility in how that budget is allocated as the project progresses.
  • Allows you to tailor your proposal to what the client can actually afford. There’s no point in proposing a $100,000 solution if the client only has $20,000 to spend.
  • Helps set realistic expectations from the start. If a client’s appetite doesn’t align with what’s required to meet their goals, you can have that conversation early before investing time in detailed proposals.
  • Shifts the conversation from price comparison to value delivery. Instead of competing solely on price, you’re discussing how to maximize the value of the client’s investment.
  • Mirrors how real estate agents work — they ask for your budget to determine what kind of properties to show you. This analogy can help clients understand why discussing budgets early is crucial.

To introduce this concept to clients, I often use the real estate analogy. I explain that even if you describe your ideal house (e.g., 3 bedrooms, specific location), a real estate agent still cannot give you a price because it depends on many other factors, including the state of repair and nearby facilities that may impact value. Similarly, in web design and development, many factors beyond the basic requirements affect the final cost and value of a project.

Once you’ve established the client’s appetite, you’re in a much better position to structure your pricing. But how exactly should you do that? Let me share a strategy that’s worked well for me and many others in my Agency Academy.

Improve Your Estimates With Sub-Projects

Here’s an approach I’ve found highly effective:

  1. Take approximately 10% of the total budget for a discovery phase. This can be a separate contract with a fixed price. During this phase, you dig deep into the client’s needs, goals, and constraints. You might conduct user research, analyze competitors, and start mapping out the project’s architecture.
  2. Use the discovery phase to define what needs to be prototyped, allowing you to produce a fixed price for the prototyping sub-project. This phase might involve creating wireframes, mockups, or even a basic working prototype of key features.
  3. Test and evolve the prototype, using it as a functional specification for the build. This detailed specification allows you to quote the build accurately. By this point, you have a much clearer picture of what needs to be built, reducing the risk of unexpected complications.

This approach combines elements of fixed pricing (for each sub-project) with the flexibility to adapt between phases. It allows you to provide more accurate estimates while still maintaining the ability to pivot based on what you learn along the way.

Advantages of the Sub-Project Approach

This method offers several key benefits:

  • Clients appreciate the sense of control over the budget. They can decide after each phase whether to continue, giving them clear exit points if needed.
  • It reduces the perceived risk for clients, as they could theoretically change suppliers between sub-projects. This makes you a less risky option compared to agencies asking for a commitment to the entire project upfront.
  • Each sub-project is easier to price accurately. As you progress, you gain more information, allowing for increasingly precise estimates.
  • It allows for adaptability between sub-projects, eliminating the problem of scope creep. If new requirements emerge during one phase, they can be incorporated into the planning and pricing of the next phase.
  • It encourages ongoing communication and collaboration with the client. Regular check-ins and approvals are built into the process.
  • It aligns with agile methodologies, allowing for iterative development and continuous improvement.

This sub-project approach not only helps with more accurate pricing but also addresses one of the most common challenges in project management: scope creep. By breaking the project into phases, you create natural points for reassessment and adjustment. For a more detailed look at how this approach can help manage scope creep, check out my article “How To Price Projects And Manage Scope Creep.”

This approach sounds great in theory, but you might be wondering how clients typically react to it. Let’s address some common objections and how to handle them.

Dealing with Client Objections

You may encounter resistance to this approach, especially in formal bid processes where clients are used to receiving comprehensive fixed-price quotes. Here’s how to handle common objections:

“We need a fixed price for the entire project.”

Provide an overall estimate based on their initial scope, but emphasize that this is a rough figure. Use your sub-project process as a selling point, explaining how it actually provides more accurate pricing and better results. Highlight how inaccurate other agency quotes are likely to be and warn about potential scope discussions later.

“This seems more complicated than other proposals we've received.”

Acknowledge that it may seem more complex initially, but explain how this approach actually simplifies the process in the long run. Emphasize that it reduces risk and increases the likelihood of a successful outcome.

“We don't have time for all these phases.”

Explain that while it may seem like more steps, this approach often leads to faster overall delivery because it reduces rework and ensures everyone is aligned at each stage.

“How do we compare your proposal to others if you’re not giving us a fixed price?”

Emphasize that the quality and implementation of what agencies quote for can vary wildly. Your approach ensures they get exactly what they need, not just what they think they want at the outset. Encourage them to consider the long-term value and reduced risk, not just the initial price tag.

“We’re not comfortable discussing our budget upfront.”

Use the real estate analogy to explain why discussing the budget upfront is crucial. Just as a real estate agent needs to know your budget to show you appropriate properties, you need to understand their investment appetite to propose suitable solutions.

By adopting this approach to pricing, you can create a more collaborative relationship with your clients, reduce the risk for both parties, and ultimately deliver better results.

Remember,

Pricing isn’t just about numbers — it’s about setting the foundation for a successful project and a positive client relationship.

By being transparent about your process and focusing on delivering value within the client’s budget, you’ll set yourself apart in a crowded market.

Rethinking The Role Of Your UX Teams And Move Beyond Firefighting

Fotolia Subscription Monthly 4685447 Xl Stock

In my experience of building and supporting UX teams, most of them are significantly under-resourced. In fact, the term "team" can often be a stretch, with many user experience professionals finding themselves alone in their roles.

Typically, there are way more projects that impact the user experience than the team can realistically work on. Consequently, most UX teams are in a constant state of firefighting and achieve relatively little in improving the overall experience.

We can complain about being under-resourced as much as we want, but the truth is that our teams are unlikely to grow to a size where we have sufficient staff to address every detail of the experience. Therefore, in this post, I want to step back and reconsider the role of user experience professionals and how UX teams can best improve the user experience of an organization.

What Is The Role Of A UX Professional?

There is a danger that as UX professionals, we focus too much on the tools of our trade rather than the desired outcome.

In other words, we tend to think that our role involves activities such as:

  • Prototyping
  • User research
  • Interface design
  • Testing with users

But these are merely the means to an end, not the end goal itself. These activities are also time-consuming and resource-intensive, potentially monopolizing the attention of a small UX team.

Our true role is to improve the user experience as they interact with our organization's digital channels.

The ultimate goal for a UX team should be to tangibly enhance the customer experience, rather than solely focusing on executing design artifacts.

This reframing of our role opens up new possibilities for how we can best serve our organizations and their customers. Instead of solely focusing on the tactical activities of UX, we must proactively identify the most impactful opportunities to enhance the overall customer experience.

Changing How We Approach Our Role

If our goal is to elevate the customer experience, rather than solely executing UX activities, we need to change how we approach our role, especially in under-resourced teams.

To maximize our impact, we must shift from a tactical, project-based mindset to a more strategic, leadership-oriented one.

We need to become experience evangelists who can influence the broader organization and inspire others to prioritize and champion user experience improvements across the business.

As I help shape UX teams in organizations, I achieve this by focusing on four critical areas:

Let’s explore these in turn.

The Creation Of Resources

It is important for any UX team to demonstrate its value to the organization. One way to achieve this is by creating a set of tangible resources that can be utilized by others throughout the organization.

Therefore, when creating a new UX team, I initially focus on establishing a core set of resources that provide value and leave an impressive impression.

Some of the resources I typically focus on producing include:

  • User Experience Playbook
    An online learning resource featuring articles, guides, and cheatsheets that cover topics ranging from conducting surveys to performing AB testing.
  • Design System
    A set of user interface components that can be used by teams to quickly prototype ideas and fast-track their development projects.
  • Recommended Supplier List
    A list of UX specialists that have been vetted by the team, so departments can be confident in hiring them if they want help improving the user experience.
  • User Research Assets
    A collection of personas, journey maps, and data on user behavior for each of the most common audiences that the organization interacts with.

These resources need to be viewed as living services that your UX team supports and refines over time. Note as well that these resources include educational elements. The importance of education and training cannot be overstated.

The Provision Of Training

By providing training and educational resources, your UX team can empower and upskill the broader organization, enabling them to better prioritize and champion user experience improvements. This approach effectively extends the team’s reach beyond its limited internal headcount, seeking to turn everybody into user experience practitioners.

This training provision should include a blend of 'live' learning and self-learning materials, with a greater focus on the latter since it can be created once and updated periodically.

Most of the self-learning content will be integrated into the playbook and will either be custom-created by your UX team (when specific to your organization) or purchased (when more generic).

In addition to this self-learning content, the team can also offer longer workshops, lunchtime inspirational presentations, and possibly even in-house conferences.

Of course, the devil can be in the details when it comes to the user experience, so colleagues across the organization will also need individual support.

The Offering Of Consultative Services

Although your UX team may not have the capacity to work directly on every customer experience initiative, you can provide consultative services to guide and support other teams. This strategic approach enables your UX team to have a more significant impact by empowering and upskilling the broader organization, rather than solely concentrating on executing design artifacts.

Services I tend to offer include:

  • UX reviews
    A chance for those running digital services to ask a UX professional to review their existing services and identify areas for improvement.
  • UX discovery
    A chance for those considering developing a digital service to get it assessed based on whether there is a user need.
  • Workshop facilitation
    Your UX team could offer a range of UX workshops to help colleagues understand user needs better or formulate project ideas through design thinking.
  • Consultancy clinics
    Regular timeslots where those with questions about UX can “drop in” and talk with a UX expert.

But it is important that your UX team limits their involvement and resists the urge to get deeply involved in the execution of every project. Their role is to be an advisor, not an implementer.

Through the provision of these consultative services, your UX team will start identifying individuals across the organization who value user experience and recognize its importance to some degree. The ultimate goal is to transform these individuals into advocates for UX, a process that can be facilitated by establishing a UX community within your organization.

Building A UX Community

Building a UX community within the organization can amplify the impact of your UX team's efforts and create a cohesive culture focused on customer experience. This community can serve as a network of champions and advocates for user experience, helping spread awareness and best practices throughout the organization.

Begin by creating a mailing list or a Teams/Slack channel. Using these platforms, your UX team can exchange best practices, tips, and success stories. Additionally, you can interact with the community by posing questions, creating challenges, and organizing group activities.

For example, your UX team could facilitate the creation of design principles by the community, which could then be promoted organization-wide. The team could also nurture a sense of friendly competition by encouraging community members to rate their digital services against the System Usability Scale or another metric.

The goal is to keep UX advocates engaged and advocating for UX within their teams, with a continual focus on growing the group and bringing more people into the fold.

Finally, this community can be rewarded for their contributions. For example, they could have priority access to services or early access to educational programs. Anything to make them feel like they are a part of something special.

An Approach Not Without Its Challenges

I understand that many of my suggestions may seem unattainable. Undoubtedly, you are deeply immersed in day-to-day project tasks and troubleshooting. I acknowledge that it is much easier to establish this model when starting from a blank canvas. However, it is possible to transition an existing UX team from tactical project work to UX leadership.

The key to success lies in establishing a new, clear mandate for the group, rather than having it defined by past expectations. This new mandate needs to be supported by senior management, which means securing their buy-in and understanding of the broader value that user experience can provide to the organization.

I tend to approach this by suggesting that your UX team be redefined as a center of excellence (CoE). A CoE refers to a team or department that develops specialized expertise in a particular area and then disseminates that knowledge throughout the organization.

This term is familiar to management and helps shift management and colleague thinking away from viewing the team as UX implementors to a leadership role. Alongside this new definition, I also seek to establish new objectives and key performance indicators with management.

These new objectives should focus on education and empowerment, not implementation. When it comes to key performance indicators, they should revolve around the organization's understanding of UX, overall user satisfaction, and productivity metrics, rather than the success or failure of individual projects.

It is not an easy shift to make, but if you do it successfully, your UX team can evolve into a powerful force for driving customer-centric innovation throughout the organization.

So Your Website Or App Is Live… Now What?

Featured Imgs 23

Whether you’ve launched a redesign of your website or rolled out a new feature in your app, that is the point where people normally move on to the next project. But, that is a mistake.

It’s only once a site, app, or feature goes live that we get to see actual users interacting with it in a completely natural way. It’s only then that we know if it has succeeded or failed.

Not that things are ever that black and white. Even if it does seem successful, there’s always room for improvement. This is particularly true with conversion rate optimization. Even small tweaks can lead to significant increases in revenue, leads, or other key metrics.

Want to learn more on testing and improving your website? Join Paul Boag in his upcoming live workshop on Fast and Budget-Friendly User Research and Testing, starting July 11.

Making Time for Post-Launch Iteration

The key is to build in time for post-launch optimization from the very beginning. When you define your project timeline or sprint, don’t equate launch with the end. Instead, set the launch of the new site, app, or feature about two-thirds of the way through your timeline. This leaves time after launch for monitoring and iteration.

Better still, divide your team’s time into two work streams. One would focus on “innovation” — rolling out new features or content. The second would focus on “optimization” and improving what is already online.

In short, do anything you can to ring-fence at least some time for optimizing the experience post-launch.

Once you’ve done that, you can start identifying areas in your site or app that are underperforming and could do with improvement.

Identifying Problem Points

This is where analytics can help. Look for areas with high bounce rates or exit points. Users are dropping off at these points. Also, look for low-performing conversion points. But don’t forget to consider this as a percentage of the traffic the page or feature gets. Otherwise, your most popular pages will always seem like the biggest problem.

To be honest, this is more fiddly than it should be in Google Analytics 4, so if you’re not familiar with the platform you might need some help.

Not that Google Analytics is the only tool that can help; I also highly recommend Microsoft Clarity. This free tool provides detailed user data. It includes session recordings and heatmaps. These help you find where to improve on your website or app.

Play particular attention to “insights” which will show you metrics including:

  • Rage clicks
    Where people repeatedly click something out of frustration.
  • Dead clicks
    Where people click on something that isn’t clickable.
  • Excessive scrolling
    Where people scroll up and down looking for something.
  • Quick backs
    Where people visit a page by mistake and quickly return to the previous page.

Along with exits and bounces, these metrics indicate that something is wrong and should be looked at in more depth.

Diagnosing The Specific Issues

Once you’ve found a problem page, the next challenge is diagnosing exactly what’s going wrong.

I tend to start by looking at heat maps of the page that you can find in Clarity or similar tools. These heatmaps will show you where people are engaged on the page and potentially indicate problems.

If that doesn’t help, I will watch recordings of people showing the problem behavior. Watching these session recordings can provide priceless insights. They show the specific pain points users are facing. They can guide you to potential solutions.

If I am still confused about the problem, I may run a survey. I’ll ask users about their experience. Or, I may recruit some people and run usability testing on the page.

Surveys are easier to run, but can be somewhat disruptive and don’t always provide the desired insights. If I do use a survey, I will normally only display it on exit-intent to minimize disruption to the user experience.

If I run usability testing, I favor facilitated testing in this scenario. Although more time-consuming to run, it allows me to ask questions that almost always uncover the problem on the page. Normally, you can get away with only testing with 3 to 6 people.

Once you’ve identified the specific issue, you can then start experimenting with solutions to address it.

Testing Possible Solutions

There are almost always multiple ways of addressing any given issue, so it’s important to test different approaches to find the best. How you approach this testing will depend on the complexity of your solution.

Sometimes a problem can be fixed with a simple solution involving some UI tweaks or content changes. In this case, you can simply test the variations using A/B testing to see which performs better.

A/B Test Smaller Changes

If you haven’t done A/B testing before, it really isn’t that complicated. The only downside is that A/B testing tools are massively overpriced in my opinion. That said, Crazy Egg is more reasonable (although not as powerful) and there is a free tier with VWO.

Using an A/B testing tool starts by setting a goal, like adding an item to the basket. Then, you make versions of the page with your proposed improvement. These are shown to a percentage of visitors.

Making the changes is normally done through a simple WYSIWYG interface and it only takes a couple of minutes.

If your site has lots of traffic, I would encourage you to explore as many possible solutions as possible. If you have a smaller site, focus on testing just a couple of ideas. Otherwise, it will take forever to see results.

Also, with lower-traffic sites, keep the goal as close to the experiment as possible to maximize the amount of traffic. If there’s a big gap between goal and experiment, a lot of people will drop out during the process, and you’ll have to wait longer for results.

Not that A/B testing is always the right way to test ideas. When your solution is more complex, involving new functionality or multiple screens, A/B testing won’t work well. That’s because to A/B test that level of change, you need to effectively build the solution, negating most of the benefits A/B testing provides.

Prototype And Test Larger Changes

Instead, your best option in such circumstances is to build a prototype that you can test with remote testing.

In the first instance, I tend to run unfacilitated testing using a tool like Maze. Unfacilitated testing is quick to set up, takes little of your time, and Maze will even provide you with analytics on success rates.

But, if unfacilitated testing finds problems and you doubt how to fix them, then consider facilitated testing. That’s because facilitated testing allows you to ask questions and get to the heart of any issues that might arise.

The only drawback of usability testing over A/B testing is recruitment. It can be hard to find the right participants. If that’s the case, consider using a service like Askable, who will carry out recruitment for you for a small fee.

Failing that, don’t be afraid to use friends and family as in most cases getting the exact demographic is less important than you might think. As long as people have comparable physical and cognitive abilities, you shouldn’t have a problem. The only exception is if the content of your website or app is highly specialized.

That said, I would avoid using anybody who works for the organization. They will inevitably be institutionalized and unable to provide unbiased feedback.

Whatever approach you use to test your solution, once you’re happy, you can push that change live for all users. But, your work is still not done.

Rinse And Repeat

Once you’ve solved one issue, return to your analytics. Find the next biggest problem. Repeat the whole process. As you fix some problems, more will become apparent, and so you’ll quickly find yourself with an ongoing program of improvements that can be made.

The more you carry out this kind of work, the more the benefits will become obvious. You will gradually see improvements in metrics like engagement, conversion, and user satisfaction. You can use these metrics to make the case to management for ongoing optimization. This is better than the trap of releasing feature after feature with no regard for their performance.

Meet Fast and Budget-Friendly User Research And Testing

If you are interested in User Research and Testing, check out Paul’s workshop on Fast and Budget-Friendly User Research and Testing, kicking off July 11.

Live workshop with real-life examples.
5h live workshop + friendly Q&A.