Δ Mathew Sanders - Professional Freelance Interaction Design & Strategy
Home | What people are saying | Wireframe Design | Makeover | Fitness Plan Prices & Benefits | Experience | Blog | Contact

Webpage Makeover for Les Mills Homepage

June 21st, 2009

A Webpage Makeover is one of the services that I offer as a freelance interaction designer that delivers three concept designs of a single chosen webpage.

  • Makeover one focuses on quick wins that can be made by applying best practice conventions while keeping development effort to a minimum.
  • Makeover two looks at what is possible when content and functionality can be added or removed to the page.
  • Makeover three is a blue sky ideation concept which may take extra effort to develop, but is likely to have the strongest positive impact on the webpage’s performance.

As a case study, I’ve just done a mini Webpage Makeover for the Les Mills homepage. It’s a ‘mini makeover’ because instead of doing the three total concepts only the first - quick wins with best practice conventions has been included.

You can download the full case study for the Les Mills Homepage Makeover here (PDF 1.7 MB) or click through for a quick summary and screenshots…
Read the rest of this entry »

How Contact Energy lost $97,275 - by chasing $25

June 14th, 2009

Contact Energy LogoIt took six months from signing up as a customer with Contact Energy before I got my first power bill.

The bill arrived when I was away from home so I missed on the 10% early bird discount, and the next month my bill also included a late payment processing fee.

It was a nominal fee, but I’m quite stubborn when it comes to principles, so between arriving home from work and heading to the gym I called the Contact Energy contact centre expecting that it would be quite a simple matter to resolve.

15 minutes later I’d explained my situation to the customer service representative yet again (I’d made multiple calls over that six months querying when I’d receive my first bill and with each call I had to tell the same story from beginning to end) and I’d still failed to convince this person that given the circumstances I’d been unfairly charged. So while the contact center representative started telling me something that didn’t seem very relevant I lost all patience.

“okay, I’ve got to go now” and hung up.

In retrospect, that was pretty rude of me, but for me that point represented a six month build up of tension of making calls, never hearing back from Contact Energy, never knowing if my power was about to be disconnected, anxiety about what a 6 month power bill was going to be like, and that exact moment also feeling grumpy that I was going to be made late for the gym.

That phone call was the pivotal point in my relationship with Contact Energy. If that call had gone differently, and the $25 fee dismissed in the context of situation I most likely still be a Contact Energy customer today, and quite likely for the rest of my life.

But instead, I paid the fee and when Powershop opened it’s virtual doors to new customers I was one of the first in line to sign up as a customer.

Electricity is probably the most basic of commodities in the modern western world. Regardless of who you buy it from, there is no difference in the current that flows into your home, and the only real difference is the pricing plan that you’re charged - which is often minimal. And because it’s perceived to be a pain to switch power companies once you’re a customer you’ll often stick with them for life.

There’s a strong chance that I’m going to be an electricity consumer for another 50 years and without even factoring in increasing electricity usage, $97,275 is a quick and rough estimation of my remaining lifetime value as an electricity consumer.

What could have Contact Energy done to avoid this?

Recongise the life value of a customer

Firstly they don’t seem to have recognised the difference between immediate value (receiving a nominal extra $25 fee) and long-term benefits (at least $97,275 for the rest of my life). Strategically speaking because hunting around and switching power companies is a very unusual consumer behaviour, Contact Energy should really be doing their best not to loose customers switching to another company.

Give front line staff the tools they need to make practical decisions

I hung up on the contact centre representative because I was frustrated and angry. But I don’t think that the this person was being lazy, mean, or ignorant - they simply didn’t have the full picture of what was happening. They were speaking to me for the first time, and very likely had no easy access to the fact that I’d frequently called over the past 6 months and had previous frustrating calls. And the next time that I called, that person didn’t know anything about how rude and frustrated I’d been on the previous call.

Having this knowledge would have undoubtedly helped Contact Energy deal with me in a more appropriate way and keep me as a customer.

Remember me

With each call I made I had to start from the beginning and explain my story from the start. After not long it felt like I was a living broken record stuck on repeat and not making any progress. This moved from being just mildly annoying to frustrating to just plain exhausting.

There has been a lot of talk about customer relationship management (CRM) software in contact centers as being the golden bullet to long term loyalty, and in the same breath as being too complicated and expensive to implement.

I believe that there are a lot of smaller steps that can be made that still give a lot of value in helping contact center staff deal appropriately with customers.

For one, it’s common requirement for staff to categorise their call at the end in a call wrap where so that the organisation can have knowledge about why people are calling:

Instead of doing that, what if staff were asked to note what they think their caller felt at the end of the call?

Or what if staff we asked to record how they felt at the end of a call, and for a call where they ended feeling frustrated they were given some time to compose themselves before going straight into the next call?

In either case, this knowledge could be recored and used to help the next consultant adjust their approach when dealing next time that person calls, for instance by displaying a call history of that customer that gives an at-a-glance view of the duration of pervious calls, when they occurred, and how the consultant felt at the end of the call:

This isn’t a huge investment in technology, but it’s a quick way to give customer service staff important feedback about previous calls and armed with this knowledge, staff would be better prepared in dealing with this next call.

What is the worst experience you’ve had with contact centre service staff? What do you think would have changed the situation for the better? let me know by adding your comment!

Will bricks and mortar retail survive an increasingly digital future?

June 4th, 2009

I’ve been trying my best to keep the economy buoyant with shopping, but I tell you it’s tough work. Just recently…

  • my local independent bookstore hasn’t had a title in stock 4 times in a row;
  • I’ve had to order stock from clothing stores that haven’t had my size or colour;
  • local music stores haven’t had CDs that I’ve been wanting to buy; and
  • my optometrist hasn’t had contact lenses for my prescription in stock.

In each case, I’ve been given the option to order in what I’m looking for, but except for the clothes, I’ve declined this option, because if I can’t have the convenience of having it today, then I’m just going to find it, and order it online myself - it’s probably going to cost less, and I’ll be able to have the convenience of having it delivered directly to me, rather than having to make another trip to the store to pick up.

The good news traditional retailers is that for the time being they are surviving because:

  • it’s convenient to be able to go into a store, pick something up, pay for it, and it’s yours;
  • some people (notably Builders, Baby Boomers and the older Gen X) are still more uncomfortable with finding and buying products online (especially for clothing where people want to try a fit or feel of material);
  • some people (Tweens & Teens) are blocked from buying online (by not having access to a credit card); and most importantly
  • real-life shopping isn’t just about the the purchase, but for many shopping is a leisure, or social activity.

But times, they are a changing… Here’s why traditional stores might want to rethink their approach to retailing if they want to survive:

“Glorious explosion of subcultures”

Looking back at 1950’s high school there just a handful of popular youth subcultures: think jocks, preps and rebels.

Fast forward to today and there has been a glorious explosion of subcultures: Artsy, Band Gee, Barbie, Beatnic, Brainy, Cheerleader, Chola, Cholo, Cool Asian, Emo, Gangsta, Geek, Goth, Hardcore Kid, Hippy, Hipster, Jock, Loner, Metal Head, Nerd, Normy, Outcast, Plastic, Playa, Populars, Poseur, Posh, Prep, Punk, Queer, Quiet, Raver, Rock, Scenester, Skater, Slut, Stoner, Vamp, Wannabe, Weirdo, and Wigger (and that’s not intended in any way to be a definite list).

We’ve moved from more uniform world of cultures to one with much more diversity, and with each of these that we associate with there are unique differences in how we entertain and express ourselves.

As subcultures multiply, more niches around fashion and music will occur meaning that it will become less likely that traditional stores will be able stock all the products that people desire.

In addition, media such as music is increasingly becoming available for instant purchase and access online. Apple allows movies to be rented from it’s iTunes store, and devices like the Amazon Kindle continue to remove instant acquisition as a convenience allowed exclusively by physical retail stores.

Put simply: retail stores no longer have the monopoly on convenience.

Rise of the digital natives

People in Western nations who were born in the 90’s will soon form the next round of 20-somethings. These people are unique from previous generations because they have grown up immersed with the internet, cell phones, and iPods — they are the Digital natives.

Compare this to people born in previous generations — the pre-digitals. These people have grown up in a primarily physical world. When asked to describe of a collection of music, they will probably talk about a physical collection of CDs or records. When they think of going shopping, they will probably think of a trip to the mall or down their local high street.

Because Digital natives are equally familiar with digital and physical equivalents, when asked to describe a music collection they may be just as likely to talk about their iTunes library as they are a stack of CDs - they lack the exposure effect that has given physical equivalents an advantage with pre-digital generations.

As the population shifts towards having a larger group of Digital Natives we will see fewer people who are uncomfortable with the option of searching and buying products online.

Put simply: As we become more fluent with technology, physical stores loose the benefit of being the default paradigm of shopping.

More ways to pay

Until very recently, the main form of online payment was restricted to using a credit card, some groups of people don’t have access to credit cards (notably youth), and while some may find this hard to believe, there are many people who have simply preferred not to use credit cards (and given the fees in many countries - for good reason).

However, there are now various alternatives to the traditional credit card - many banks now issue debit cards - which allow funds from a cheque or savings account to be accessed through a credit card network, and it’s also possible to buy prepaid credit cards. Payments though a mobile phone are also being continuously explored, however as far as I know yet to be perfected.

Put simply: It will be less common for people not to have access to being able to make payments online.

A bleak future for retail?

I’ve painted a picture of a future where stores are less often going to have what we’re looking for (convenience is lost) and people don’t have second thoughts about finding and buying products online, and (except for their bank balance) don’t have barriers to purchasing online.

Traditional retailers are already struggling with the current recession, but I believe that this struggle has only intensified an already present trend, and that when the economy recovers the traditional retailers will continue to struggle — unless they adapt their current ways.

While I fear that traditional retailers who don’t adapt will not survive, I’m optimistic in general for those who are willing to change.

Subscribe to keep updated on the follow up post that looks at opportunities for bricks and mortar stores to thrive and survive the digital future.


Your thoughts

What are your thoughts on this post? Accurate prediction? Pointless hyperbole? Stating the obvious? I’d love to hear your thoughts, please add your comment and let me know.

Getting a return on nothing + strategic advantage

June 3rd, 2009

A lot of the time success is measured in terms of return on investment (ROI) or in plain English: How much benefit are we going to get compared to resources that are used?

Recently I’ve had some frustrations where people are not wanting to make the effort to obtain a benefit because it’s too hard - and none of their competitors are doing it anyway.

Call me an interaction designer naively stepping into some business boots, but I believe that if you’ve found something that improves the customer experience (by making something easier, or more enjoyable to do), and your competitors don’t have that something, then you’ve found a strategic advantage. If it’s difficult to build, then all the better because then it’s going to be harder for your competitors to catch up.

So, (in the theme of Margaret Cho’s mother [YouTube link]) to review:

  • Number 1: Just because it’s hard to do, isn’t always a reason not to do - that attitude wouldn’t have taken Edmund Hillary very far and puts New Zealander’s can-do attitude to shame.
  • Number 2: If you want to play leapfrog instead of catch up with your competitors, then loose the mindset of aligning yourself with competitors.
  • Number 3: But don’t be different for differences sake - novelty alone isn’t a strategic advantage in the long run, but aspiring to have the best possible customer experience is a good place to be.

Have you been in this situation before? What are you throughts?

Smoking health warnings, perception of risk, and designing for public health

May 25th, 2009

Since early 2008, tobacco products sold in New Zealand have required to have graphic health warnings included in the packaging.

There are a range of images that are used as warnings. I’m interested at the process that was used in choosing these images, and how effective they are at helping smokers understand the risks of smoking, and ultimately quit smoking.

Warning: Potentially disturbing images after the jump…

Read the rest of this entry »


Home | What people are saying | Wireframe Design | Webpage Refresh/Makeover | Website Fitness Plan | Prices | Contact | Blog

This work by Mathew Sanders is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 New Zealand License