I went to a web-design talk presented by Refresh Seattle last night. I had heard good things about their previous events and was looking forward to seeing what the presenter had to say.
Kevin Tamura of Blue Flavor gave a good talk on the design process, using a case study of his redesign of the Refresh Seattle website. Kevin seems like a nice guy and certainly knows his stuff when it comes to HTML, CSS, the graphic design process, typography, color, design tools like Photoshop, and web-page layout. But I’ve got to admit that I was put off by the lack of a strategic vision and/or an explicit business rationale for the redesign.
As a business strategist, I was put off by the lack of a clearly stated business intention for the site and its redesign. Granted, this is a small site for a small audience and was done pro bono. Still, I think it’s worthwhile to think through your business intentions (announce events? promote events? showcase prior speakers? link to presenters’ websites? link to related content? demonstrate content-area expertise? articulate the organization’s mission?) before undertaking any design project.
As a content strategist, I was put off by the fact that the redesign called for a one-page site. How about archiving info on old events so that folks know what you’re about and so that search engines have more content to index so that they can infer what your organization does?
As a web usability advocate, I was put off by the lack of consideration for sight-impaired users. Web usability best practices call for fonts that the user can resize, but the design he showed uses fixed-pixel-size text sizes. It also uses unconventional “navigation” (if one can navigate a one-page site), including a confusing, albeit clever, block of text that flips back and forth between presentation info and the presenter’s bio.
Anyhow, this event got me thinking about the importance of taking a strategic approach to internet marketing. I’ll write more about this soon because I’m tired of seeing friends and colleagues waste their hard-earned money on sites that show off the skills of the designer or programmer that built them rather than helping them achieve their business goals. I want to make it clear that I don’t think that folks like Kevin are malicious or poorly motivated; they are simply ignorant of, or indifferent to, internet marketing best practices, which is what this blog is all about.
So what can you as a bodywork professional do with this information? Well, I strongly suggest that you always keep your business objectives at the forefront when you undertake any design or technical project. It’s very easy to succumb to the esthetic vision of a designer or the leading-edge technical prowess of a programmer, but always ensure that those whiz-bang factors take a back seat to your business priorities.
3 comments ↓
Hey Larry, you’ve made some valid concerns here. I didn’t actually see Kevin’s presentation, but I think as his CD and someone sort of involved with this redesign I can address some of this.
While the concerns are valid, I think you’re also a bit off-base in some of your assumptions. Both about the site AND Kevin’s design choices.
Trust me when I say Kevin is by no means ignorant to, or indifferent of, internet marketing best practices. This is a back-burner side project with no real “business” or “marketing” goals. At this point in time there are no business priorities here, there is nothing to market.
The first and most important thing to note is that this was set up as a simple visual/brand refresh. Phase One of a larger project for the site. We simply didn’t have the time to delve into all of the things you talk about. We’ve got way too much client work. My goal in initiating the redesign was simply to give it a fresh look that was a bit easier to quickly decipher. Also, I wanted a project that gave Kevin a creative outlet to explore.
Kevin did all that and did it well, IMHO.
You mention business strategy. All good points, except this isn’t a business. It’s an event, and it’s primary goal (as of right now) is simply to allow visitors to quickly get the date, time and topic of the next meeting. Nothing more. If you go there now, you’ll note that it’s not up-to-date. That’s not a fault of the web site or design, but that there is no real “ownership” here yet. Another reason for most of the issues you bring up. We’re trying to get a team in place to address some of this stuff, but it’s hard with a real business to run, etc.
Blue Flavor does what we can, and we hope to take more ownership, but right now Refresh is the lowest priority we’ve got. And nobody else in Seattle has stepped up to help out.
Your point about content, IMHO, isn’t really valid for this site. I think a one page site works here and frankly, see little value in optimizing for SEO. I think we will plan on archiving events once we’ve got this into a CMS (which is in the works.) I still think we’ll go with a one page site (no “real” navigation) but there will be some kind of archive.
Now to your usability/readability. The fact is almost all modern browsers can resize fixed text. Also, look at our audience here…the argument against fixed pixel sizing and the content switcher is kind of mute when you see who we’re targeting.
Your points, in the main, are valid. Except when you look at the big picture as it concerns the Refresh Seattle site. And that’s important for you and your readers to know.
There is so much more that goes into making design decisions than “best practice”. Each project is different and requires a different sort of thinking. Kevin did exactly what we asked him to do - the rest is TBD. As well, this project has very little in the way of real stakeholders. Something that can make a real difference in how something is done.
Business goals and user goals are almost always balanced against things like time, budget, motivation, personal preference, etc. That’s the reality of internet marketing. That’s primarily what your seeing here. As much as I’d love to say that stays in the realm of the Pro Bono, I’d be lying to you if I did.
Thanks for your detailed reply, Keith. I appreciate the background on the project and your perspective. It also made me reflect on why I was so cranky about the lack of business considerations in the re-design. I think it’s because I feel a sense of ownership once I’m affiliated with any organization or entity.Simply by attending Refresh Seattle events and being interested in them I feel like a (teeny tiny) stakeholder in the enterprise. My comments were coming from that proprietary place.
Hey Larry. I figured as much, you are a stakeholder, as is every attendee. I would encourage you, if you have ideas and want to be more involved to be an active stakeholder. Join the Yahoo! group and post your suggestions there, etc.
Blue Flavor took over most of the management of Refresh to be sure the meetings kept happening and because nobody else was stepping up. I’m sure we’ll eventually get to some of the things you mention here. But, to be quite honest, we don’t have much time to think about this stuff. Let alone work on it.
For what it’s worth we do have a plan to address some of this when we’ve got time. I guess my main reason for jumping to Kevin’s defense is that his talk, and what he did for this part of the project, was much smaller in scope than what you mention here.
We’ll get there. It’ll just take some time.
You must log in to post a comment.