Month: June 2007

  • Note to Dr. Nielsen – quality is everyone’s job

    Today’s Alertbox entitled ‘Should Designers and Developers Do Usability?’ Jakob Nielsen asserts “Having a specialized usability person is best, but smaller design teams can still benefit when designers do their own user testing and other usability work.”

    How do I disagree with thee, let me count the ways … modus ponens style:

    1. good quality is everybody’s job
    2. good quality includes good usability
    3. therefore good usability is everyone’s job

    In other words, despite the good efforts of the good doctor, the more people on your church or charity’s web development team who understand usability the better.

    Sure, not everyone has to have the same level of expertise, but said expert should conduct periodic tutorials for staff and lay persons on small, 15 minute-a-piece topics such as:

    • defensive design
    • how usability increases page delivery
    • usability features built into WordPress
    • useful usability URLs online

    If you’re reading this, I suspect you are that expert – or at least know whom he or she is.

    That in mind, what have you done to infuse the quality of usability not only in terms of web site design, but in building your church’s “institutional memory?”

  • 10 blogging mistakes pastors & laypersons should avoid

    Scenario – church uber geek gets the pastor all hooked-up with WordPress with Google Analytics. No long afterwards, pastor begins to pontificate like Spurgeon (or at least Phil Johnson). After a month, both geek-boy and the pastor are shocked to find out that the site averages 0.75 visits a day, with a bounce rate of 95%. What happened?

    I think a good number, specifically 10, of the reasons are best summed up by Jason Kaneshiro in his Webomatica post entitled “Ten Blogging Mistakes I’ve Made,” where he writes:

    “After several long months of blogging with steadily increasing results, I’ve encountered some bumps along the road. I thought I’d post some mistakes that I now regret and am working to rectify in my quest to improve this blog. Save yourself some pain and frustration: avoid doing these things; I wish I had!”

    I’ve modified his list a bit for application (and relevence) to your church and/or charity’s website – but here they are in no particular order of preference:

    1. Getting hung up on high-tech instead of compelling content;
    2. Assuming Google will do all of your site’s ‘networking’ and ‘advertising’ for you;
    3. Shoot-off-mouth first, ask questions later;
    4. Shotgun topics – too many points (pellets) in one post;
    5. Anemic headlines that have no zing;
    6. Ignored or devalued commenters and their input;
    7. Shotgun categories – not taking control of your niche of expertise;
    8. Assumed it would be easy;
    9. An ugly URL that is hard to remember (lest spell)
    10. Know-it-all-itis

    My personal favs of the above enumeration is anemic headlines and shotgun topics & categories … and with apologies to Kaneshiro, I’ll add one more to his most excellent list:

    1. poorly constructed exceprts and/or lead paragraphs.

    Three things I keep repeating here, and will continue to repeat:

    • People don’t read the web, they scan it;
    • Aggregators and search engines index and list titles and excerpts (or lead paragraphs where excerpts aren’t present) – write to that;
    • We cannot serve two (or more) masters – write to a single topic, if you have more, post more tomorrow.

    What about you, any other suggestions on how to drive in traffic through compelling, well-focused content?

  • Conversion Goals part ‘Duex’ – 1st impressions count!

    “It is vitally important that the first contact someone has with our church is a positive one. Andy Stanley says it this way, “Your sermon starts in the parking lot.” As more and more people begin their search for a church by looking online, the “sermon” could very well start with your church’s Web site. When I look at your church’s Web site, I can immediately tell you a lot about your church, your values, your mentality, your approach, and whether or not I’d want to be a part.” – Todd Rhoades, MondayMorningInsight.com

    Let me translate the above quote for those of you who still think a long animated Flash splash page leading to a huge image of your church’s empty parking lot is the way to go …

    … as more and more individuals shop for church homes online, the greater the risk your church runs into never seeing them visit if your church website sucks!

    Jesus saved me, the rest of you are going to h-e-double tooth picksYeah, pretty brutal – but enough of the ‘meme’ that God content is important, that aesthetics aren’t important.

    If you pull into the church parking lot and you’re greeted by a smelly, un-bathed, 3x-large individual wearing a dirty medium sized t-shirt and speedos, that the former reads in between the filth and holes reads “Jesus Saved me, the rest of you are going to H-E-Double Tooth Picks!” .. I’ll guarantee a majority of you will spend some quality family time at the local Perkins or Waffle House that morning.

    Same is true with the internet.

    If you have a web site that looks like you don’t care about their needs – then individuals seeking a new church home, or a conversion-conversion experience will go some place that does look like they care. It is that simple. Or as Rhoades writes:

    ‘Researchers in Canada have shown that the snap decisions Internet users make about the quality of a Web page have a lasting impact on their opinions. According to a nature.com article, “Web Users Judge Sites in the Blink of an Eye,” by Michael Hopkin’

    In other words solve their problems; don’t show off your fancy-schmancy solutions. Solving their needs is as simple and common sense as making the following information easy to find, read and render in print:

    • Church denomination
    • Geographic location
    • Days and times of services and studies
    • What stuff you have for their kids
    • Example sermons that show you’re not some slathering cult
    • Smiling, inviting faces instead of stony facades
    • Email contact
    • Phone number

    Yeah, you’d think the above list is obvious … but in the next few weeks, we’ll be referring back to this article as I show yet more good examples of bad church web design by well meaning webmaster type individuals who don’t have a clue as to what the conversion goals are for their cool church web site.

    Oh yeah, and a super-huge hat-tip and ‘terima kasih banyak-banyak‘ to one of my Malaysian friends: Wilful Sunflower for forwarding this article/link – keep’m coming folks!

  • Coolness does not equal conversion

    Wow, this commuter plane to JFK is freezing cold – as are attitudes by some church web masters to the needs of their congregation … and staff.

    What am I talking about? Usability and utility.

    I get quite a bit of search engine traffic along the phrase ‘coolest church website’ – a meme that bugs me a bit as I’d take useful and informative over cool anyday.

    Not so though with many sites I are cited on various compendiums of church website coolness.

    Without naming names, there I often find enumerations of sites that are more set project than a communications tool that either bestows knowledge on the local members of the body and/or drive persons into the pews, Bible studies and/or other ministries whose benefits have more permanent impact than a pretty Flash presentation.

    Mind you, this is not to suggest mediocre manifestations of HTML uglieness – we should always attempt to field high quality work – but rather the work should be geared and focused around ‘conversion’ goals. And I mean that in both the marketing and evangelical sense as both are far more measurable than cool.

    Anyway, something to consider when discussing the direction of one’s church and/or charity website.

    Bah – I hate it when these dinky commuter planes land – my ears!!!

    UPDATE – I couldn’t get this message out from my BlackBerry while at JFK, not due to anything geek, but rather because I was in a constant state of ‘sprint’ as timing between planes didn’t go exactly as planned.

    All that said, I’m now in a Malaysian Starbucks. The coffee isn’t so good – but the bandwidth is free. Tomorrow I’ll switch to tea!