We all use the internet every day, conducting searches, finding new sites, visiting our favorite haunts. That does make you knowledgeable. One thing you may not have thought of is that pretty much every site you visit follows certain conventions that allow you to get around, even if you haven’t been there before. For example, the logo of the site is almost always in the upper left and it’s usually “live” or clickable. If it’s not, it should be… since people are as apt to navigate home using the logo as a Home button.
In the upper right, you might expect a phone number or a cart button or a ‘my account’ link. You look in the footer for the guts of the site, like if you want a site map, or need to drill down for contact information. Navigation is generally along the top, with some secondary navigation on the left column. Can you imagine if things were rearranged, how irritating that would be? You’d be looking all over the page for things that aren’t where they should be. What if the navigation was on the bottom, and picture galleries ran from right to left to advance?
These things, web conventions, evolved over time. They became standardized, in a monkey-see, monkey-do fashion since one thing designers look at is a lot of sites to see what other people are doing. They’ve now hardened up into established practice and you violate them at your peril. The best way to dump your visitor is to upset her ability to easily navigate.
So you’re an internet expert at getting around and recognizing standards. However, this knowledge doesn’t mean you know everything about websites. Sneakily, it tends to make us think we know it all, since we’re on sites every day. We form opinions about websites based on our own aesthetic preferences, but this is not science. And it takes science and testing data to build a great website.
Did you know that vast amounts of testing data exist which have revealed the best color for a ‘buy now’ button? Go to the Target site. It’s not random. They tested every color in the rainbow to find which color sold more items. Target and other e-retailers rely on data, not aesthetics, to drive their choices. Data drives revenue. That’s the science to optimizing: test results.
Aesthetic opinions of the uniformed layman are the great crippler of websites. Aesthetic preferences are just opinions. You may think you’re morally right believing that a blue site is inherently more attractive than a green palette. But you’re not right unless data and testing tells you so. You only know which is best when you A/B test a blue versus green site and see what your traffic does. It’s easy to discern when you have a high bounce rate – meaning, people bail immediately upon entering. But what if you have lots of blue site users who click through to your shopping but don’t buy. Maybe fewer green site visitors stay, but more buy. This is what data analysis can do for a company. You let your visitors vote and their aesthetic prevails. Makes a bunch more sense than battling it out between marketing and sales in the conference room doesn’t it?
When we design a website we make certain recommendations based on our industry and testing knowledge. We’re not trying to just make a beautiful site, but one which performs because of the user psychology and testing results we understand. We’re going to abide by web conventions because otherwise you’re slitting your throat. We’re also going to suggest things you may be lukewarm about because you have a certain aesthetic vision.
Example: Flash websites. Oh, how we tried to proselytize against those! Oh, how we pleaded no! no! to clients who wanted them. They were bedazzled by the lure and visual impact of Flash and had no clue that Flash doesn’t index in search engines. So if you have an all Flash site, you’ve just made your site invisible and will have zero organic ranking.
Today Flash is used as an embed, an element of a site which functions wonderfully and there are things you can now do to tailor your Flash to index better, though it’s still a bit imperfect. And remember, no Apple product can see Flash. You’re flushing all those iPad and iPhone users.
This is the stuff we know about. Likely, you don’t know about it. That’s why you’re not building your own site. You don’t code, you don’t script, you don’t know search engines. And we’re not experts in your business. So please trust that our advice is always based in data, not opinion, and represents your best user scenario while at the same time balancing aesthetic concerns.
We’ll listen to all your ideas and then give our assessment as to whether it’s in your best interest. As internet experts, our view of your best interest is getting you traffic and keeping them on your site to engage with your content and take action. We don’t support our opinions by arguing aesthetics, but with data and that’s really the difference you should be looking for when you engage someone to architect and build your site and do your SEO. It’s not about fluffy pretty stuff. It’s about functionality, usability and the science of web interaction.
