Information architecture. New, improved and informed by user research

It’s been a while since we blogged on here but work’s been ticking along nicely and we’re now at the point where we’ll look around for a supplier to make our new site.

A look at our Google Analytics showed users weren’t exploring the site much and one of the things out of a survey we ran confirmed that users wanted us to improve the website navigation.
So simplifying some of the names of the bits of the website, we ran what’s called a card sort which is the online equivalent of sorting a bunch of titles of website sections written on post it notes, into piles people think they should be organised. About 50 users completed it and some clear patterns emerged.
With that, we drafted a new information architecture or IA for short (site map to you and me which is a diagram that shows how the site is organised) but to double check it we ran another online exercise called a tree jack, again with 50 users, this time setting a series of questions such as ‘you want information on caring for a patient’ and the participants would tell us where they’d expect to find the content. If users’ answers were in line with what we had on the new IA, happy days. If not, some tweaks would be needed.
The result of the tree jack were pretty much identical to the card sort so the IA remains unchanged other than a few links to other areas of the site. As per the picture. For example some of the fundraising stuff, 50% of the tree jack participants said they’d expect to find it in ‘donate’. As is common on charity sites, donate is intended literally for people to make a donation there and then, but on that page we should definitely link to the fundraising bit in ‘get involved’.
New IA for Dorothy House?
So that’s us so far. Next stop making the alpha. Once the requirement document is written and supplier appointed, making the alpha will be quick and simple, but something to test with everyone to check things are heading in the right direction.


(Republished from Dorothy House Digital blog.)


Q&A on #digitalday

Today, ONS published a few ‘big ticket’ bits of content on the internet and e-commerce:

This always goes down well on social media (despite Ofcom’s Communications Market Report coming out this morning, which was news to us). So we picked some interesting facts and posted them all morning with some influential people kindly sharing our content around, helping #digitalday trend for a short time.



To give you an idea of the engagement of the different bits, below are the Twitter stats for today’s content. It’s quite healthy in places.

As an aside, the engagement we saw today, whilst good, pales into insignificance next to the success of Monday’s Commonwealth Games content, both on Twitter and even more so on Facebook. See the last item on the Twitter stats below.

Anyway, the crescendo for us today was a Q&A on Facebook at lunchtime (see screengrab below if you have trouble accessing the link), which went down well. We’ve found Q&As generally unpredictable in terms of attendance and participation. We’ve had some successful sessions on Twitter but our first session on Facebook didn’t exactly set the world alight. I think we learnt some lessons though – we need third parties to help spread the message, and we need to invite users that we see talking about the content on the day, to join the Q&A. Both of these helped improve things this time, as did the fact that internet stats have a broad appeal.



Having said that, I’m keen to continue to improve what we offer, so I invited feedback from the 71 who signed up to participate. Overall Facebook is a funny one for us. Engagement is increasing, but it’s a long way behind the success of Twitter where our content (in its current execution) is more suited. I’m not sure who I heard it from, but I like the metaphor that Twitter is a cocktail party and Facebook is a house party, albeit a house party with neater Q&A functionality and long form copy but a place people like to keep for personal interaction, not talk about worky content.

We debated whether today’s Q&A should be webinar or hangout (I’m not convinced the format is quite right plus it’s a bigger barrier to participation) and we’re also looking at Reddit’s AMA.

Q&As are something we’ll continue to tinker with at ONS but should be reserved for subjects where participation is likely to be high. Or should they? Should we make a regular fixture of Q&As for all of our content, regardless of whether it’s niche or mainstream?


Tweet Activity analytics for ONS