Site Flaws redesigns get bogged down when all flaws are treated equally. These tips help you identify and remove the flaws that hurt the site, and your bottom line, the most.
By Joanne Cummings
When it comes to site redesigns, not all problems are created equal. Companies shouldn’t spend inordinate amounts of time and money fixing site flaws that are minor annoyances at the expense of fixing larger flaws that actually result in lost sales. Here are some tips for prioritizing your site’s flaws.
1. Go for showstoppers, not annoyances. Forrester Research says users experience two types of site flaws: showstoppers and annoyances. Showstoppers are dead-ends, such as site crashes, that leave the user with no alternatives or ways to continue. Annoyances are minor grievances, such as having to wade Site Flaws through pages of small type. Annoyances take time to build up and produce site abandonments. When resources are few, focus on the showstoppers first.
2. Eliminate multi-problem flaws. Sometimes a single flaw can produce multiple problems. For example, irrelevant search results can undermine visitors’ efforts to buy the right product, as well as slow down attempts at resolving post-purchase support issues. Organizations should tackle these types of flaws first, since when they’re done, multiple problems are eliminated.
Did you know that paper costs account for nearly half (and sometimes more) of a typical print job? Given that fact, it pays to make sure you address cutting paper costs at every turn. Site Flaws Here are two industry-respected ways to save paper costs.
* Size matters. Simply shaving a half-inch or an inch off the size of your product, be it a newsletter, brochure or magazine, can easily represent thousands of dollars in savings. Who says your newsletter needs to measure 8.5-in. by 11-in.? Perhaps you can convey your message in 8-in. by 10.5-in. and save money at the same time.
* Bulk savings. The stock, or quality and thickness, of your paper is also a decision you can make based not only on aesthetics, but cost. Sure, your target audience may pay more attention to a heavy, glossy paper brochure than a flimsy, newspaper-thin one. But maybe there’s a middle ground between the two. For example, one magazine production manager says that simply dropping from a 38-pound to a 34-pound stock for her New York-based business magazine netted the company $325, 000 over the course of a year.