A while back I put together some slides to describe our design process at Sun to interested colleagues at other companies.  It's a pretty detailed slide deck (see link below), but there are a couple of key ideas.  One key idea is that 80-90% of the projects we see don't need a new design -- they just need standard templates and a standard treatment applied.  In those cases, we don't do very much design at all. We call these the "fast track" or "turn key" projects:





Here's how a "turn key" project works: We capture the initial requirements in an intake form (not shown here, but use your imagination of something that hovers just above the ideas phase). Then, if the project is non-trivial we ask the person requesting it to create a short strategic brief (a topic I have blogged about previously). Once we have these initiation steps complete, we can size up the project pretty quickly and understand whether it is something very standard ("turn key," as shown above) or requires new design work. The example shown above shows an informational page that we determined would simply need a standard template. So, in that case the team creating the page(s) would simply figure out their content and calls to action" (what they want the site visitor to do), and the right components. They'd then request some artwork from our central process for banners and graphics, put the page together (or have one of our publishing experts do so), and they'd be done. This process can take as little as a day or two if all of the pieces are in place, but of course usually it takes a while for the sponsor to figure out all of their content and objectives, and sometimes content and objectives change in the middle of the project (which eats up time and money).

But then there are the non turn key projects: In some cases, when we look at the strategic brief, it's clear that we need a brand new design. This can range from something simple -- like a new or extended template type -- to something complex like an overhaul of the search system or a rollout of a new commerce subsystem. That's when we bring in our full process:



In this full design process, we pull out all (or many of) the tricks: We review or gather customer research; analyze best practies from other sites; study site metrics if they apply; create simple scenarios, user stories and business use cases to model the experience; storyboard and walk through ideas; and then develop schematic wireframes, test, iterate, and create the final designs. This blog you're reading has been focused on this very design process (for instance, see Opteron Pages as a Web Design Case History), and I know my team at Sun
will keep posting about these best practies even after I have moved to Cisco.com, now this this is a group blog!

The full Design Process slide set explains a lot about our design process and the tools we use.  Ask your friendly local web design team at your company to explain the nuances -- they'll be glad to!

Technorati Tags:

Tunes: 94: Lefty Perz: Solseros Unidos
Comments:

Your software download forms could be made much easier to use, in so many ways. When I click a checkbox, the whole page reloads - why? How come you don't detect my operating system and suggest a download version for me? How come you don't explain the key differences in each choice? Sometimes I just see lists of cryptic filenames e.g. "blah_x64_intl_pt1.tar.gz". There are many other examples. Please look at how your competitors do this, in particular Red Hat, Dell, Microsoft, Apple and Google. In this Web 2.0 age, your web forms still look a bit Web 1.1

Posted by Kevin on May 26, 2007 at 11:24 AM PDT #

As an observation aimed at the previous comment: You would be well advised to read up on some of the postings by Seth Godin, especially his 'its broken' topics. In general, things that are 'broken' from a user's perspective may be due to a number of reasons. In the case of the sun downloads site, I find that it is often broken by design: There are other ways go do it, but given the intended audience, this is the best way to do it. For example, shortcutting the selection: Many folks are using their normal workstation to download bits that will run on their servers. Chances are that they are using a windows box to download this bits for their solaris sparc based server. These are not the same platform. RedHat users typically run a full browser on their servers and download directly to it. Sun users typically dont do this. Thus what works for a user at redhat's download site or microsoft's download site will not work for sun's intended audience. As for why the page reloads after selecting the 'accept' button: In this web 2.0 world, it is often simpler, faster and generally better to just use the old tricks than craft an overly complicated web 2.0 AJAX system that provides no additional functionality over the 'old way'. Note that 'no additional functionality' part. Google maps: good use of 'web 2.0'. Reworking the sun download site so that it avoids the 'reload': bad use of web 2.0. The Web 2.0 download sites are typically driven by a developer wanting to add "web 2.0" and 'ajax' to their resume, not to allow the site to become more usable. Finally, you get to the cryptic filename issue. That is not a function of the site but a function of the metadata associated with the download. Yell at the project manager for that product about that one. I've seen very good examples where things were explained well and simple, and i've seen some stuff that was tossed up there with no though to the usability. In those cases (not all of the cases, but the majority of them), the product was typically one being offered to the advanced user, so in those cases the cryptic filenames were to serve as a warning: "If you dont understand this, you should not be playing with this since it is offered with no support and if this confuses you, you will never get this thing installed using the minimalistic and cryptic installation guide our engineer tossed up..." Think of it as 'broken by design' again: if you cant figure it out then you should not be downloading it. Anyway, that's the way I see it. As a solaris system administrator, the site works fine for what I need to do. It took me all of 5 seconds to figure it out and get it to work. Compared to some of the other download sites, it is one of the better ones that I have to deal with. Now if only I could get a faster internet connection, having to download a pair of DVD's for the latest solaris release still takes a long time.

Posted by john on May 26, 2007 at 06:25 PM PDT #

We're done more design work than you can imagine on the download experience. Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a little while to implement the changes. Stay tuned in coming months!

Posted by Martin Hardee on May 28, 2007 at 10:48 PM PDT #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed

This blog copyright 2009 by MartinHardee