What do you think of my website??

(Does it do what it should?)

It is perceived wisdom that every company needs a website and I am often asked by founders and owners of early-stage companies to look at theirs. What I think of the website is a question I have struggled to answer, at least to my satisfaction. I can of course comment on colour schemes, imagery, navigation and at least superficially on content, but in general, they leave me disappointed. It may be that my expectations are not aligned, but I have frequently felt that my opinion and feedback is not enough to be really helpful.

In trying to address this I recently started thinking about the purpose of a website, any website and it is immediately clear that there is no one single answer. I realised that this was likely the source of my frustration – I had no sense of the intended purpose against which I could provide helpful comments.

Similarly, I have not had the purpose of any website succinctly articulated to me, rather it feels that the site builder/designer has been given a jumble of content to fit together as they see fit and in line with current software tools and design fashion.

In order to try and break this down I have created a three-dimensional classification framework which can and I think should be used from the start when commissioning a website. The three dimensions are:-

• Content
• Engagement; and
• Retention.

Each has an ascending scale.

The resultant model looks like this

The idea is to consider the desired function of the website (or parts of the website) and establish where in the framework you want it to sit. Armed with that it is possible to judge whether the resultant pages and functionality satisfy the brief.

Looking at content first, the passive end is where the information presented by the website is simply to be a matter of record. For example, some running clubs have sites that merely record the times of all runners in various races as lists. They may be searchable, but little more.

The middle scale point is where the content is intended to inform. An example of that might be a product catalogue, which advises on specification, expected performance, pre-requisites, safety requirements, etc

The most active scale point is where the content is intended to inspire an action or reaction by the reader. A video demonstrating how to use a product to achieve a specific result could be here. Likewise a report on an issue with details on how to join up and support a concerned group could be another.

Of course, one can argue for more scalar points and if it is helpful to the user, why not? The point is to have some expected outcome that can provide purpose to the content.

My second scale is engagement; again with an ascending scale. The most passive is simply that the site visitor is using the site to merely confirm something. Examples are checking for opening hours, confirmation of address or phone number, member of the Board, etc.

The next step up is “attract”. In this, the website is intended to help the visitor favour the website owner’s products/services over any others. This is not as far as transacting business on the website, but is more than merely conforming facts – there is an element of persuasion/influencing involved.

The top of the scale is using the site to connect with a visitor in a meaningful way. This could be the ability to make a purchase, book a course, ask questions, join a discussion, etc.

The final scale is that of retention ie retaining the visitor’s attention. The language hear is more difficult, but please take the intent before rejecting the terms.

The lowest grade(?) is “amuse”. This is possibly a one-off or at least infrequent visitor. I use the term amuse as one never wants to leave a visitor unhappy, but it sort of captures the transitory relationship. An example may be when I quickly check if a store is open or not.

The middle grade of “entertain” is where the website visitor might visit infrequently but when they do they should stay and look around. This could be browsing a catalogue or searching for flights

The highest grade is “addict”, as in addiction. Here you want the visitor to become addicted to?the site, returning frequently and relying on it to some degree or another.

I think this is useful model to at least start thinking about whether a website is effective. I am sure readers could think of other dimensions. If you do and can describe an ascending scale then please do add your thoughts in the comments below.