There is a lot more to branding than just usability

July 14th, 2006

In his recent post and MediaPost article, Gord Hotchkiss expands on Jakob Nielsen’s following point at a recent usability conference:

When responding to a question from the audience about the seeming contradiction between the need for building of brand exposure and best practices for usability, Jakob said that online, brand value is built through experience, not exposure.

Unlike so many followers of Jakob Nielsen would have you believe, branding is not just experience. Branding is a combination of experience and exposure. This “experience-only” position is usability-centric point of view that’s contradictory to the real world. It doesn’t take into consideration what visual branding is, what it accomplishes and what it represents for the business and the consumer.

Before I go any further, let me make one thing clear. I am a strong proponent of usability. I study it and incorporate it into every project I do. But usability is not the sole measuring stick in creating, and especially branding, a web site.

Defining Usability
Jakob Nielsen defines usability as:

Usability is a quality attribute that assesses how easy user interfaces are to use. The word “usability” also refers to methods for improving ease-of-use during the design process.

Let’s take a closer look at what he is saying. This definition refers to “…how easy user interfaces are to use” as well as “…methods for improving ease-of-use”. This is all about the interaction between the user and the web site. That’s it.

He then expands on this definition by saying that usability is defined by five quality components:

1. Learnability: How easy is it for users to accomplish basic tasks the first time they encounter the design?
2. Efficiency: Once users have learned the design, how quickly can they perform tasks?
3. Memorability: When users return to the design after a period of not using it, how easily can they reestablish proficiency?
4. Errors: How many errors do users make, how severe are these errors, and how easily can they recover from the errors?
5. Satisfaction: How pleasant is it to use the design?

Again, this definition is only about user interaction. I know there are other definitions out there, but it’s appropriate to use Jakob’s definition since he’s the one who made the statement about branding and experience. So based on his definition, where does branding come in? It doesn’t.

Defining Brand
I’ve been through many sites to find the best definition of branding and here is a complete and concise explanation. (feel free to disagree)

A brand is a product, service, or concept that is publicly distinguished from other products, services, or concepts so that it can be easily communicated and usually marketed. A brand name is the name of the distinctive product, service, or concept. Branding is the process of creating and disseminating the brand name. Branding can be applied to the entire corporate identity as well as to individual product and service names.

So what are we saying here? First of all, a brand is “…a product, service, or concept that is publicly distinguished from other products, services, or concepts…” Branding is the act of “…creating and disseminating the brand name.”

Think about a product or service you’ve used recently. Let’s take orange juice. What are your initial impressions of these brands?

• Tropicana – Family, tradition, and nutritional health
• Florida’s Natural – the orange groves and the natural growers that support it
• Simply Orange – the natural quality of their oranges because they are left alone

Now think about how you came to these conclusions. It is the combination of imagery, content, audio, video, etc. that creates those messages and reinforces them across all media. This may include print, radio and TV spots, signage, packaging and – wait for it – web sites.

Take a moment to visit these sites (links in list above) and think about their branding. How does it make you feel and think? Are you as interested in their products without it? Go ahead, I’ll wait.

What we get is an immediate impression of one product branded three different ways – and the importance of the visual elements in these brand choices.

The Discussion
Jakob Nielsen and other usability experts have said that on-line users crave consistency and hate change. That’s why usability standards dictate that navigation is on the top or on the left, the search field is on the upper right, hyperlinks are underlined, etc. I can go on and on. But does this desire for consistency stop with user interaction?

Absolutely not. It flows right into their feelings, impressions, and yes, experiences of a product and/or service based on that branding message.

Another very important aspect of branding is that it exists below the surface. The true effectiveness of a brand is when you don’t notice it. Branding gives the customer comfort and reassurance that this is the place they should be and confidence in the end result. When it isn’t there, then you definitely notice it.

This is the reason why eyetracking studies by Jakob Neilson and others – as Gord Hotchkiss discussed - show minimal or non-existent movement on images. The user instantly recognizes the brand and moves on to the information they are tasked to find. Eyetracking shows a concentration on content because the user doesn’t need to look at the visual branding elements any more. They registered it. They’re done. Yes, users have gotten smart about innately skipping over advertising or graphics that look like advertising. This is not disputed or my point. We’re talking about branding.

Hotchkiss continues:

They’ve come to the site not because they’re engaged with your brand, although that may have helped sway them in your direction, but because they’re engaged with a task.

People do go to a site for a task. Whether the task is focused or unfocused, they are going there for a reason. But don’t discount the fact that the reason they go to that site in the first place is because of the brand message that they’ve been exposed to and accept. If a potential customer went to a site and just saw the logo and text without any other branding element, what would their response be? Am I on the right web site? Maybe not on the surface, but just that instant, subconscious moment of doubt gives them an opportunity to leave the site.

And while I agree that huge home page images are a detriment to a site, Jakob intends to give the user only the information they want for that particular task and forego text and images for branding purposes. That is a detriment to the site as well.

The Point
Steven Krug, in “Don’t Make Me Think”, describes his principle of usability as follows:

In means that as far as humanly possible, when I look at a Web Page it should be self-evident. Obvious. Self-explanatory. I should be able to ‘get it’ – what it is and how to use it – without expending any effort thinking about it.

It should be obvious. But pay attention to what else he says, that he should be able get what it is and not just how to use it. “What it is” is the web site of the company he intended to go to and here is the information I need. Brand and content. Exposure and experience.

And he did it “…without expending any effort thinking about it”.

A Designer’s Side Note
In his supportive post of Gord’s article, Gary Bourgeault states that

…high-priced designers are being asked to make lower priced sites. There is nothing else to it. People are beginning to understand , after years, that pages that load slow and sites that aren’t clear in what the visitor is expected to do, underperform tremendously.

His point that “high-priced designers are being asked to make lower priced sites” is the only reason why they are up in arms about this “discussion” is absolutely ridiculous. Some designers are high-priced because they have the knowledge and experience in design, coding, usability, and/or content.

And yes, designers are being asked to make lower-priced sites because there are hacks out there that can read a book or open Dreamweaver and call themselves web designers. Any designer worth a damn will tell that person to go to that lower-priced designer, knowing full well that when their site does “underperform tremendously”, they’ll be back in a month to get it done the right way.

And By the Way…
I was also in the eyetracking seminar at the San Fran Usability Conference. No, I was not the self-serving “hot-shot” designer who spouted textbook design terms with nothing to add except stroking his own ego. Like the rest of the room, I thought that idiot should just shut the $@(%$*% up.

However, I was one of the many who brought up branding. It was a valid point and I would happily do it again.

0 Comments  |   2,290 Views  |   Design, Usability

Digg this  |   Bookmark at del.icio.us  |   E-mail This Post