Usability Testing on a Small Budget

December 15th, 2008

Nearly every business with a market-facing product can benefit from usability testing, ranging from software to industrial design companies. In general, any company whose products interface directly with consumers is a strong candidate for usability testing.

Even the most well-thought-out products can have unforeseen design flaws, which can only be fixed after direct consumer testing of the product. Different from traditional market research, usability testing relies upon controlled experiments which, potentially, can be costly. If you are a small business or a larger firm on a tight budget, then you’ll want to consider the most effective way of testing the efficiency of your product’s design.

It is commonly assumed that a large sample size is needed to capture differences across segments of potential users. Recent research has suggested, however, that only a relatively small sample size of needed in order to capture the necessary usability data (see Usability Sample Size Research.) In fact, the research shows that effective usability testing can be carried out with as few as three subjects through proper experimental design, which is much more beneficial than running a less effective experiment with more participants. Therefore, whether you can designing your experiments in-house or working with a consultant, ensure that you limit the scope of the participants, which can save you on costs.

Rather than just deciding to invest in usability testing, the entire experiment should be designed with ROI factors in mind – after all, that is the essential reason for performing the tests in the first place.
These ROI factors can be directly traced to improved outcomes in terms of training and support expenditures, employee productivity, improved sales conversion rates and improvement in the release cycle for future releases (see ROI White Paper.) Since experimental costs can be estimated in advance, a strict budget should be set, along with a range of acceptable returns on the investment. In particular, companies have to factor in the costs of implementing the experimental recommendations, in addition to the costs of performing the test itself.

When seeking out a usability testing firm or consultant, be clear about your budgetary restrictions, along with your expected return on investment. You may have to limit the scope of your project, but, in the end, the results will allow you to scale and grow in the future. Additionally, you may consider more limited in-house tests using software packages, which will give you some initial data before you invest in a more comprehensive usability testing review.

This article was submitted by Maya Richard, who currently writes about dial up internet.

Author: Adam Categories: usability Tags:

YouTube Goes Widescreen

December 2nd, 2008

youtube

I may be a bit late on this one, but about bloody time. YouTube has finally switched from 4:3 ratio to 16:9 so the masses of people wanted to upload widescreen video clips - which most video uses these days - can finally have their contributions viewed properly online. It’s strange because the likes of Vimeo have been using widescreen for ages, so why did it take so long for a multi-million dollar company like YouTube / Google to make the switch? I mean, YouTube has been going for years…

I’ve noticed that YouTube has added many new features to ist service of late, such as the captions and subtitles, annotations and endless lists of recommendations, suggestions and promotions. It’s almost like being in an online shop sometimes - but it’s always nice to see a widescreen TV.

Author: Adam Categories: Web 2.0, youtube Tags:

YouTube Embed Code is not W3C Compliant

November 18th, 2008

I was recently making one of my websites compliant when I became aware that the basic code that YouTube provides users is not compliant with the global XHTML standards - meaning that my site was not fully user-friendly while it was on there.

w3c

It turns out that the W3C Validator isn’t keen on <embed> tags appearing anywhere on the page, so I did a bit of research and cam across the following replacement code which works and is completely compliant with the standards:

<object type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” width=”425″ height=”350″ data=”http://www.youtube.com/v/yourcode“><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/yourcode” /></object>

The parts where it says your code need to be replaced with the extension that applies to the location of your YouTube video - this is present in the orginal embed code and can be just copied and pasted across.

Author: Adam Categories: Web 2.0, Web Optimization, youtube Tags:

A copyright owner has claimed content in one of your videos…

November 8th, 2008

I’m getting sick of YouTube.

youtube

Two of my videos that have been on YouTube for about two years now and had a combined viewing figure of over 7,000 views have recently been blocked from playback due to copyright issues.These two videos were both very popular and had recieved a lot of comments with praise.

It wouldn’t bother me but I have seen dozens of videos similar to mine which have used the same music and they remain online and untouched. Why should mine get blocked and theirs allowed to continue? I understand that copyrighs have to be protected so I won’t do anything about it and I accept that fact, but surely half the videos on YouTube are infringing those rights in exactly the same wa, yet they go unnoticed.

Author: Adam Categories: youtube Tags:

Google Chrome and the Unnecessary Reinvention of the Wheel

October 29th, 2008

In early September, the folks at Google quietly unveiled their Google Chrome web browser, intended to make yet another huge impact upon the market.  The fact of the matter is people just aren’t catching on to the hype the folks at Google were obviously banking on.

Certainly, Google has become a regularly used word, ultimately making it a verb in the process that many people use when they mean to search for something.  This is great and all, but Google can’t expect a one-two punch with everything they create, and the beta version of Chrome leaves much to be desired.

Look at the fact that Google Chrome still only has a very small percentage of market share with users, even after being on the market for nearly two months.  Hacks and bugs have plagued the browser since its release, and the Google homepage has even stopped advertising for Google Chrome.

Many in the blogosphere feel it would have benefited the internet behemoth more to have created a plug-in to be used with Firefox, which already has a prolific amount of plug-ins, with more in the pipeline.  Google and Firefox have worked together in the past, which begs the question: why go out and try to reinvent the wheel?

Google Chrome has tried in vain to change the way we use browsers, thinking it would be more intuitive, but ultimately falling short of its aims.  It is a disappointment of great proportions for those who thought Google would certainly not put out a product with so many holes left to be filled.

Then again, it is an open-source work-in-progress, which means someone out there may just be willing to cure Google’s ails.  One just has to wonder—will it be too late when that finally happens?

This post was contributed by Kelly Kilpatrick, who writes on the subject of how to become a travel agent. She invites your feedback at kellykilpatrick24 at gmail dot com

Author: Adam Categories: Web 2.0, Web Browsers, google Tags: