blueflavor.com: Latest blog entries

Blue Flavor joining forces with Pondry

Nick Finck — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:46:56 -0500

Some of our readers may have noticed we have been really quiet for some time now both on the blog, Twitter and other places. This is all for good reason. There’s something that has kept our heads down, fleshing out the details, crossing T’s, dotting I’s and such. We are very close to bringing this development to completion and feel today is the day to share the news with you…

The Blue Flavor family is proud to announce that we are joining forces with our long time strategic business partner Pondry. Pondry is a web agency that focuses on developing cloud-based solutions. Much like Blue Flavor, Pondry believes in open and honest transparency, a high level of quality in the work they do including an adherence to web and mobile standards, good experiences that put the user’s needs first, and creating optimal solutions only once the problems and challenges are fully identified.

Through this, we will be able to continue to provide our customers with the quality and expertise expected of the Blue Flavor team. With the addition of Pondry’s resources, proficiency and knowledge of custom web application development, we are excited for the new level of end-to-end, robust solutions we will be able to offer.

Over the course of the next few months you may see some changes around Blue Flavor. As with any transition, some employees will choose to move on for a number of reasons (some not related to this announcement) and they will be missed. There will also be changes regarding our brand and web presence to better communicate our newly establish position. We will keep you updated as these developments progress and materialize.

This will be a long process, but we feel that once everything is done we will be a stronger, more effective organization to serve our customers. We look forward to this future together with Pondry and we are happy to have such a talented group of professionals join forces with us. We hope to win your business and prove our expertise and effectiveness to you. If you have a web, mobile, software or system project, please get in touch.

More on CodeIgniter

Kenny Meyers — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 11:54:44 -0500

Over at EE Insider, I’ve written another article about CodeIgniter, a lightweight PHP framework. While my previous article there was a synopsis of CodeIgniter’s philosophy, this one is the first in a series about building a tumblelog with CodeIgniter (very similar to Jeff Croft’s excellent website). The series will be four parts and appearing every week so please check it out and I welcome your thoughts at EE Insider or over twitter (@kennymeyers). Thanks again to Ryan Irelan for his aid in editing and publishing the article.

Blue Flavor in .net

Keith Robinson — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:08:15 -0500

Both Jeff and I had the honor to do some writing for .net Magazine recently and our work is out (in his case) and almost out (in mine) over in the UK. The US versions will follow shortly.

Jeff’s piece (found in issue 189) is about creating a custom CMS with Django. It’s an interesting tutorial that covers well the basics and gives a pretty good perspective on development with Django, which really is a nice framework for publishing content and perfect if you need a custom CMS solution.

My article is a feature (in Issue 190) about project management. I go over the essentials, talk about some do’s and don’ts, offer up a load of advice and explain why I feel that while project managment is essential to running smooth projects, it’s not something you need to over do.

Also, just a plug for .net. I’ve been picking up the American version, Practical Web Design, for about a year now and it’s a really good read. The content is well-written, interesting and relevant. They’re doing a great job and if you’ve not checked them out, you should.

Let Mark Bittman Teach You Business

Tiffani Jones — Mon, 18 May 2009 18:59:37 -0500

By now, we’re probably all in love with minimalist celebrity chef and food writer Mark Bittman. We love his blog over at the NYT, we love his accessible cookbooks, and we especially love the common-sense, approachable, enviro-conscious philosophy that drives his work.

I think people in business—and especially people running their own businesses—could learn a ton from Bittman’s style.

Simplicity.

Bittman’s cookbooks are elegant and call for high quality ingredients—but they are also incredibly simple and easy to get into. In the spirit of simplicity, he builds most of his recipes on the foundation of previous ones. One of the awesome side effects of this is that you actually end up learning (as in, memorizing) various methods, so you don’t have to consult his cookbook every single time. This makes the process easier, and encourages busy people to cook more often.

Do what works.

Bittman’s all about whole and organic foods, farmer’s markets, and green living, but he’s aware that not everyone will jump on board with a eco-purist’s lifestyle. Instead, he recommends improving bit by bit: buying vegetables from farmer’s markets when possible, building meals around in-season ingredients, and incorporating new foods and techniques into your process slowly, rather than all at once. This is how you become a good cook of healthy food over time, and avoid frustration.

Do only what matters.

I love Bittman’s gloriously simple list of the kitchen tools he thinks aspiring cooks should have. He tells you exactly what you need, and reminds you that you don’t need to spend thousands of dollars on expensive cookware to learn how to do it.

Perfect is the enemy of great.

Possibly the best advice Bittman gives about cooking is captured in his common statement: “Perfect is the enemy of good (or great)”. In other words, he encourages home cooks not to freak out trying to make everything perfect. Focus on what’s really important (in Bittman’s estimation: healthy, wholesome food that you actually like and have the ability to cook), and learn how to do that well. If the way you’re cooking doesn’t fit comfortably within the larger context of your life, he suggests you find a different, more logical way.

Be a good communicator.

Bittman is an excellent communicator. His writing is clear and crap-cutting. His recipes are uncomplicated, yet delicious. This helps him write and speak moderately, succinctly, and convincingly about sustainable food practices and what regular people can do to incorporate those into their lives.

Cooking and Business.

I think Bittman’s way of thinking has huge applications for people doing business. From using common sense and avoiding overspending on unnecessary frills, to focusing on what you actually like (not what people tell you you should like) and what works given your constraints—Bittman’s ideas function wonderfully as positioning, branding, and business strategy primers.

Jeff Croft Interviewed at Mirificam Press

Tiffani Jones — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:48:16 -0500

Check out this interview between Blue Flavor’s Jeff Croft and Matthew Griffin of Mirificam Press, where Jeff waxes poetic about his philosophy in life, the purpose of design, and the nature of truth. That’s right. Prepare to be enlightened.

Nick to Speak at PS-SIGCHI

Tiffani Jones — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:09:04 -0500

On May 28th, Nick will be speaking at SIGCHI. In his talk, he’ll dive deep into the Life Cycle of a Wireframe: from methodology, to process, to delivery.

If you’re an information architect, interaction designer, visual designer, or regular old user experience-curious creature, you’ll like this one.

In case you’re interested, here are the details:

When: May 28, 2009, 06:00 PM - 08:30 PM

Where: The Boardroom in the One Union Square Building, 600 University Street, Seattle

What: Networking and food between 6p-7p. Nick’s presentation will start at 7p.

Hope you can make it!

Don’t Lose That Creative Thinking

Keith Robinson — Tue, 12 May 2009 13:44:01 -0500

This one is for all the designers out there.

(For the purpose of this article I’m defining “designers” as information architects, interface designers, visual designers, web designers, software designers, user experience professionals, etc. If you don’t see your job title in there and you’re involved with design at all I’m still likely talking about you.)

So, designers… Have you fallen into a rut? I think you might have.

It’s far too easy for designers, of all stripes, but particularly those working in what are, in my opinion, young mediums (information architecture, user interface, web, mobile, etc). to lose hold of the things that make working in a young field so exciting: creative thinking, innovation, experimentation, etc.

As we begin to set down guidelines and rules for how we work and begin to document that things that work well for us, we also run the risk of letting those things govern how we work. This can result in a loss of creative thinking and innovation in favor of rules and industry best practice. Which might also result in, among other things, making our work boring, unrewarding and, ultimately, unsuccessful. Especially in the face of change. What was an established pattern might, in the blink of an eye, become dated or no longer even a good solution, let alone a great one.

The web, for example, hasn’t been around long enough for us to have figured it all out. Sure, as new technology is rolled out we’re forced to innovate, and that’s awesome, but it seems like with every new technology comes a wave of designers who’ve “mastered” it, documented it and laid down some rules and guidelines for it.

Following that mastery comes a wave of designs and solutions that limited themselves to the scope of those rules and guidelines and we’ve got to wait for technology to mix it up for us again.

Things are changing all the time, and at a fairly rapid pace, so we’re kind of forced to think creatively at times. Technology is leading the way, the “how” of things are dictating the “who”, “what”, “where” and most importantly, “why”. I think there is a lot of opportunity for designers to be proactive and put the “who”, “what”, “where” and “why” in front and use the “how” to figure out how it’s done. But to do that we need to constantly challenge the status quo and push the boundaries not only in terms of the designs and solutions we come up with, but the processes through which we come to those solutions.

Ask yourself…

How many times have you, or one of your colleagues, based a design decision on a Google search? What about decisions driven quickly and directly by a single user’s feedback? What about by analytics data? My guess is that more than a few designers I know have done those things more than a few times. I know I have.

What about your design process? Do you base that on something you read at 37 Signals, or here at Blue Flavor or somewhere else? Or maybe you’re going with the user-centric approach. Do you use the same process every time for every project? Do you feel a bit awkward making a stand without having a ton of research and data to back you up? I’d bet more than a few designers I know would say yes to one or more of these questions. I know I can.

Are we still creative?

What ever happened to creativity and opinionated thinking in design? Has science and data removed the artistic? What about trusting your instinct as a designer and making the way for future innovation. I can’t tell you how frustrating it is to sit back and watch people do the same thing over and over and then turn around and question someone who’s making a creative stand.

Sure it’s easier to solve a problem using design patterns or a repeatable process. The problem with that is that every problem is different, and my feeling is that sometimes you’re missing out on the best possible solution. In my opinion, our goal, with everything we design should be to come up with the best possible solution. Sure, as with any problems there are multiple solutions and varying measures of success, but the goal should always be to find the best solution you can.

As well, as an aside, sometimes the best possible solution, by definition, is something unique and different. If everyone knows and follows the same design patters and processes the you could infer that everything being designed would be pretty much the same. “The same” or “similar” is not the best possible solution in many cases.

Managing constraints.

There are always constraints a designer needs to work within when problem solving. Designing a web application, for example, requires you to have a solid understanding of your user’s goals, as well as a firm grasp on what the system can and can’t do. When working on 97 Bottles, for example, I would repeatedly approach Jeff to gauge the feasibility of a feature or UI tweak. Sometimes we’d decide not to do something for technical reasons, even though it would have been better for the user. That’s hardly ideal, in a perfect world we’d come up with solutions and have the resources to get them implemented, but that’s not always (or even usually) realistic. In any case, constraints will always be there and they can often be used to a designer’s advantage.

Having said that, I find that the biggest constraints I ever come across are those of my own making. There are times when I’ve got a vision for something, for example, but I lack the skill or know-how to accomplish what I want. That’s a very valid constraint and one I think many designers struggle with. It’s the reason why, if you choose to follow the path of a designer, you need to always be learning if you want to grow.

But what you lack in skill or know-how can always be taken care of, if the designer is motivated to do so. If it can be done and you’ve a mind to do it, you can and probably will figure it out. It’s one of the many reasons web designers are also technically savvy. I’m learning iPhone development right now (slowly, but…) and I’m doing that because I’ve got ideas and I want to make sure I can see them implemented correctly. I would advise any designer to learn (or try to learn) things outside of their job description; if you’re not you’re selling yourself short and probably will never be the designer you can, and should, become.

The self-imposed constraints I worry about are more along the lines of letting history, patterns and industry accepted practice color your thinking to the point where you don’t even explore other possibilities.

Sometimes this is due to laziness (or being too busy or deadlines, etc.) but sometimes it’s simply due to accepting that all the necessary thinking has already been done on a particular problem and any further thinking will be a waste of time energy. That’s a trap a designer should always be on the look out for. Trust me, no matter how solid a solution is, there is always more thinking that can be done and there is likely a slew of problems using said solution that could be solved better.

I see this all the time. Such and such says that search boxes always appear in the top right corner. All web designs should be flexible width as opposed to fixed. Links must always be underlined and blue. This is what I call solutioneering; or putting a solution before understanding the problem. And it’s bad.

Let’s take a look at that last one; hyperlinks. There are so many patterns out there for how to do a link given the particular context. Some of those patterns are pretty narrow minded and as such the impose limitations that probably don’t need to be there. I think a common patten might be something like: all links should be underlined when they appear in a body of text. I can buy that. However, that’s more solutioneering. The problem is something like: a user needs to understand intuitively that a link is a link. Does that mean underlined? Does that mean blue? Not at all. But if you were to read up on design patterns for links you’d likely get a bunch of solutions along those lines.

Does that mean that design patterns are bad? Of course not. They’re tools, and like all tools, it’s all about how you use them. The problem, if there is one, is that these tools; design patterns, industry best practices, established processes, etc. can, and often do, lead to close-minded thinking. Which can, in turn, lead to new problems being solved in a half-assed manner. No, the problem doesn’t lie in the data, patterns, guidelines and processes themselves, it lies in how designers use them.

I absolutely love dissecting other people’s solutions and learning from their processes. I bet most designers do. I also love data; especially about my users. And it’s all great! You can learn a lot from how others work and seeing how people interact with your designs, whether it’s in person or pouring through data and reports. It’s a huge part of maturing as a designer. It helps build a solid background of fundamentals and helps build empathy. These, again, are tools you’ll need to solve problems yourself and tools to help you implement your solutions correctly. (After all a good solution, much like a good idea, is nothing without proper implementation.)

Find your own way.

But don’t take my word for it. Think about it and decide for yourself. Another thing that goes along with this is listening to “experts” and those who speak with authority. Just because something works for me doesn’t mean it’ll work for you. I’ve never solve your particular problems and neither has anyone else. As well, when reading up on a design pattern or best practice, look at the source and ask questions. Do these patters apply to your problem? Are they provable or just a well argued opinion? (Which doesn’t make them invalid, by the way.)

If someone is touting the benefits of their patented process or the validity of an established pattern, ask them to prove it. I’ve got about 14 years of experience designing for the web. That’s more than many. And there is still a whole lot of things I don’t know, a whole lot of problems I’ve never seen (let alone solved) and a whole lot more I can and want to learn. I trust myself as a designer, but I also know when to scrap everything and try to think about a problem with no preconceived notions of how I’m supposed to think about it. I think designers should be the ones to break the rules. Let’s not let the geeks and scientists have all the fun!

I feel (yeah, and think a bit too) like we should be using design to push the boundaries of what we can do. Let’s let technolgoy work for us! Not the other way around. I’ve been saying that for years in regards to users, but it applies to designers as well. Not only in our designs, but in our processes and everything we do. There is no one way to design a web site; let alone one way to solve a particular design problem. Next time you find yourself running to an established way of doing anything, take a minute and try to work it out on your own. Use those patterns and processes as constraints, not as a manual of how designs should be done.

A few parting shots.

It’s a designer’s job to solve problems. If you want to use someone else’s solutions to someone else’s problems you probably shouldn’t be a designer.
Design is all about creative thinking, and it’s that creative thinking that adds value to the projects you work on.
No problem is solved to the point where it still can’t be thought about and worked on. There are no perfect solutions.
Design should be opinionated, even when used to solve problems that might seem to be best to be solved with a more data-based, scientific, methodical approach.
Some of the best solutions come from a place of intuition, emotion and creativity. I know some of my most successful designs came about seemingly by accident.

The “How Are You Different” Question

Tiffani Jones — Mon, 11 May 2009 13:10:24 -0500

Over at BF, we’re doing some preliminary work for our new website, which has got us all thinking about story telling, explaining who we are, and providing compelling reasons to go with us, versus the competition. It’s got us asking: How, exactly, are we different?

A few answers to that question come to mind:

Our process is structured differently than a lot of agencies. As often as we can, we try to eliminate unnecessary processes and deliverables, so we can spend the majority of our time (and our clients’ money) on what matters: The actual work of designing and building websites. This means keeping project management light (clients work directly with experts, and don’t have to route everything through a PM), reviewing and producing deliverables that actually get used in the design and dev process, and keeping all lines of communication direct, open, and transparent.

We’re collaborators. We don’t just disappear into a black hole of design and pop out genius works of art every month. We work with our clients on an almost daily basis to review deliverables, set expectations, brainstorm, etc. This hands-on, iterative process works very well for us and helps make our clients happy.

We’re small. There are only seven of us, but we manage to output a whole lot of high-quality work. This is partly because we don’t waste our energy on processes that don’t push projects forward. It’s also related to the fact that:

We’re experts. With the exception of myself and one other, everyone on the team has at least 10 years (and in some cases, up to 14) doing IA, Design, or Dev. This means we’re very good at managing ourselves and coming up with solutions that make sense. When you have experts on your team, you don’t have to rely so heavily on process.

We like to innovate. We look for new and smart ways of doing things, always. We like it, it energizes us, and it’s a big part of why people come to us.

We’re practical. As much as we like big ideas and innovation, we always ground our work—from costs, to design philosophy, to execution—on what works for businesses trying to succeed in the world. We don’t let innovation run over our clients’ practical concerns.

We act like humans. We are people, our clients our people, and we recognize that the nuances of regular relationships (personalities, interests, style, sense of humor and ambitions) are involved in business relationships as well. We treat our clients like real people and put a little bit of who we are into each wireframe, design comp, and coded page.

As obvious and breezy as figuring out “who you are as a business” should be, it’s actually quite tricky. But if you are an entrepreneur or business owner, it’s an immensely important question to ask yourself, every day. The answer will help guide your business strategy and management style, and keep your operations on track.

Excitement and the Design Process

Tiffani Jones — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:56:54 -0500

Lately I’ve been PM’ing a lot more, and therefore thinking a lot about what makes the big web projects we do go smoothly. As you might expect, smooth projects typically involve realistic expectations that both the client and agency understand. They also tend involve empowered, communicative project managers on both ends. And they tend to be scoped very well, with enough time and money budgeted to do the job right.

But let’s just pretend that (mmmgulp) you or someone else has failed on one of these measures: Say you’ve got nine stakeholders on the client’s end, all sending you random messages (Make it green! No, brown!) through the night. Or you’ve been tossed a project with crazy deadline and an unrealistic budget. Or you’re dealing with a client who’s never heard of photoshop.

Should you call it quits and count on landing a better, more suitable work? Or is there a way to work gracefully within chaos and being annoyed?

Since we don’t all have the luxury of “firing annoying clients” (and since we wouldn’t want to do this anyway), there has to be another way. Interestingly, I’ve found that this way doesn’t always have to involve meeting after meeting where we try to “reset expectations”. And it doesn’t always require sticking someone’s nose in the job order to make sure they totally get it.

Sometimes, the best anecdote for chaos burnout is positivity and excitement, on both the client’s end and yours. I’ve found that kick off meetings that end with a client smiling and saying (even if subtly), “We’re really excited about this!” start off a ton better than those where the client doesn’t mention their take on the work. Similarly, clients get fired up when we say we’re excited to work on their project.

I’m not talking about a love-in here. A little effort toward thinking of the design process as fun can go a long way. It can also help divert everyone’s attention from worrying about what might go wrong to thinking about what’s possible. What might go wrong is exhausting. What’s possible is motivating and inspiring. It makes us work faster and better.

Based on my experience, I’m confident that excitement about the work can help us move gracefully through less-than-perfect projects.

Saying Farewell to Tom Watson

Keith Robinson — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:41:59 -0500

I’m both excited and sad to announce that Tom Watson, our immensely talented interaction designer and one of our first two employees, is leaving us. He’s accepted a job down in the Silicon Valley working for Facebook as a product designer. It’s a gig that sounds incredible, exciting and challenging. I’ve got no doubt that he’ll be amazing down there and Facebook should count themselves lucky to have him.

I can’t convey in words the true pleasure it’s been working with Tom and watching him grow over the last few years. When we brought him on it was to be a front-end developer; something he’s perfectly capable of doing, but no where near his true calling. In fact, I recall fondly (ok… maybe not ALL fondly) as Tom struggled a bit at first, never really realizing that it was just because his true talents lay elsewhere. I’m very glad he stuck with it and we were able to work out a good place for him. Over the months and years Tom helped out with just about every aspect of our business, eventually growing into the multi-talented interaction designer he is today.

He brought a rare blend of technical savvy, design sensibility, organizational skills and hard work to the table every day and he’ll be hard to replace. He’s certainly going be missed! (Well, except for by Jeff who can now rule the roost at Ping Pong!)

I know I speak for the whole Blue Flavor family when I say we wish him nothing but the best and expect to hear great things from his time down at Facebook.

May Refresh: Jared Spool on Intuitive Design

Tiffani Jones — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:11:04 -0500

Get pumped: Jared Spool, master of magic and User Engineering, will speak at Refresh Seattle on Sunday, May 3rd, about what makes a design seem intuitive. We’ll all head over to the Red Door for no-host drinks and great convo afterwards. Here are some specs for you:

Who’s Jared

Jared’s a usability expert. He’s been doing the work since 1978, before “usability” was even associated with computers. He’s guided the research agenda and built User Interface Engineering into the largest research organization of its kind in the world.

Jared spends his time working with the research teams at the company, helps clients understand how to solve their design problems, explains to reporters and industry analysts what the current state of design is all about, and is a top-rated speaker at more than 20 conferences every year.

About “What Makes a Design Seem Intuitive”

Building “intuitive” interfaces is hard. Jared will go over research he’s done at User Interface Engineering about why it’s so hard to build intuitive interfaces, talk about the two main components of an intuitive design, and and propose concrete solutions for making your designs better, whatever field you’re in.

Details

What: Jared Spool ROCKS Seattle Refresh
When: Sunday, May 3rd, at 6:00pm
Where: Adobe Conference Center (thanks, Adobe!)
What else: No-host drinks afterwards, at the Red Door

RSVP on Upcoming asap—space is limited!

Learning About Content Strategy

Tiffani Jones — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:00:43 -0500

Content strategy has been a hot topic lately, and there’s been a lot of evangelizing screaming around the tubes. One of the new-ish discipline’s most outspoken supporters is Kristina Halvorson of Brain Traffic, who gave a great webinar I sat in on today. I don’t want to just rip her slides, but I think it’s useful to consider a few points related to her presentation.

What the crap is it?

Based on much of what I’ve read, content strategy seems still to be a nascent discipline that folks are catching wind of. We kind of know that it lives somewhere between web writing, web editing, information architecture, SEO stuff, web analytics, and production. We know that it (and content in general) are often overlooked in the web design and development process, despite everyone’s insistence that Content is King. And we know it’s all about planning for what content will go where, who owns, authors, and maintains it, how the content relates to a company’s business and other goals, how it fits within a larger matrix of technologies and constraints, etc.

In other words, we’ve got a good sense of where content strategy lives, who might do it, what the deliverables might be, and what outside elements deserve consideration. But do we know how to do it, and do it well? I think this is the essential question.

How we do.

I’ve not done enough content strategy to be able to teach people how to do it, but I think we can all safely agree on the following:

A good content strategist has to understand Information Architecture. In other words, he/she needs to know how and why things like sitemaps, wireframes, and process flows matter—and be interested in how the way information is designed and presented on the page affects not only the beauty and cohesion of a website, but also a businesses’ bottom line.

Ergo, a good content strategist should have a solid understanding of basic marketing. Ideas like what “differentiation and positioning” mean, how to track analytics and think about conversion, what social media is, etc.

And of course, a good content strategist should know how to write, and for the web. This doesn’t only encompass copywriting; it also involves writing for SEO, metadata, technical and regulatory specs, and more.

This means that a good content strategist will not only have great writing skills—she’ll also have the technical chops to work within the constraints technology imposes on the the content. Knowing various CMS’s, understanding databases, etc. is paramount.

The Key?

Seems to me that good content strategy requires much more than the ability to create and compile great content—it requires the ability to lead projects, attend to larger concerns and constraints that are outside the scope of just web writing, kick ass documentation skills, and an understanding of every aspect of building and designing a website—since, in effect, the content strategist sits smack dab in the middle of all the disciplines, and mitigates between them.

WebVisions 2009

Nick Finck — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:46:57 -0500

That’s right: it’s time for WebVisions 2009! WebVisions is a three-day conference that explores the future of web design, technology, user experience and business strategy. The event takes place every year in Portland, Oregon and continues to draw some of the leading experts in the web industry. This year is no exception…

A quick glance at the line up for this year’s conference shows a wide range of web experts from Jared Spool, Molly Holzschlag, Indy Young, Chris Pirillo, and Mark Frauendelder from BoingBoing, to our very own Jeff Croft. He’s going to be doing a talk on recommendation engines and collaborative filtering. The event will take place from Wednesday, May 20th through Friday, May 22nd in Portland, Oregon. The first day is packed solid with 1/2 day workshops and is followed by two solid days of sessions.

Event Discount

We spoke with Brad Smith about the event recently and he was gracious enough to extend a special discount to Blue Flavor’s readers. When registering online, enter the promo code “uxgeeks” to receive the discounted rate of only $225 for a conference pass (normally $250).

Workshop/Event Combo Discount

But wait, there’s more! If you want to both go to event and attend a workshop, call up and register over the phone using the promo code “uxgeeks” to get a combo deal of $325 (normally $625 total). Workshop/Event combo is subject to availability (some workshops are nearly sold out). Contact Brad or Dana at (503) 230-2058 to register over the phone or for Group Rate pricing (groups with more than 9 attendees).

WebVisions 2009
May 20-22 at the Oregon Convention Center
Portland, Oregon

A Case for Communication

Kenny Meyers — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:36:38 -0500

I present to you one case that I find fascinating: the tale of money management applications on the Mac. The story of a communication failure, a triumph of consistency and an eventual rise from the ashes. It is an excellent look into how communicating consistently and frequently can aid you significantly.

Midnight Apps, had failed

A small little application called Cha-Ching, developed by Midnight Apps, was offering licenses for its next version in the Macheist bundle. Users would be invited to beta test the next version of Cha-Ching if they bought the bundle and all was glorious.

Unfortunately, what happened was a complete failure on Midnight App’s communication strategy for the application. It really starts with this thread on the Macheist forums. While the developer did respond in this forum, you can sense the frustration stemming from a lack of progress updates from the developers. In fact, in the thread where people are wondering where the beta application is, the conversation starts to turn against the company.

The conversation gets so heated, that users begin recommending other applications. One forum poster, takes a stab at Midnight Apps by recommending Moneywell: the reason given “developer is committed”. The commentator “rookie” even goes so far as to say “So I take it we’ve given up on ever seeing Cha-Ching 2.0?”. This hostility then pours out to their own forum where people post threads like this one. Midnight Apps had failed to meet their promise of a beta, and then failed to communicate why. The users were revolting, but they weren’t just angry, the started recommending other products.

So why did many of the forum users recommend Moneywell? What was the difference?

Communication is the only way

The answer was quite simple, Kevin Hoctor, the developer of Moneywell is a master of support and communication. You can take one quick glance at nearly every single post on the Moneywell user forums and see that Kevin is involved in nearly every one. This approach contrains his time and his resources, but the man is still able to release builds and fixes. While Moneywell is not updated weekly, his customers feel confident in their software choice. This is what lead disenchanted Cha-Ching users to point others in his direction, and his communication efforts explain one of the modern tenants of good business and why Midnight Apps created a mess for themselves.

Steady communication builds steady/loyal customers

Communication, and a steady channel of communication, is what turns a good company into a fantastic company. It is one of the key tenants of modern web applications, where the principle concept is “ask the users”. People feel more invested in their software, their design and their website if they are constantly reminded of your awareness of them.

There are always exceptions to the communication rule, Apple of course being the giant black obelisk of silence, and there are instances of constant user feedback ruining communication. However, most websites, software, and pretty much any consumer/business relationship benefits from having a steady stream of updates. It builds consumer trust and lets the user know their co-existence with your product is valid.

It’s an important part of our business here at Blue Flavor, and we use Basecamp and Sifter to make sure our clients know that we are investing our time and things are moving forward, even if we have nothing to show them.

There is a happy ending to this story

The great news is that Midnight Apps realized their stream of non-communication was not worth the productivity time it gave them. They could generate more users and carve out more interest in their application by opening themselves up and talking about what happened. They even asked How are we doing? to extremely positive reviews after their communication efforts increased 100-fold. This goodwill has spread to their business and applications, as Cha-Ching for iPhone is an excellent application.

Constant communication, even if you feel like you have nothing to say, makes everyone feel involved in the process. Don’t waste it just saying hello, or talking about the weather, but explain what you’re doing and what’s happening. Don’t wait for the juicy update, give micro-updates. People will always want to know more about what’s coming, but a taste of what’s happening now will appease them. It doesn’t take a lot of effort to send out a weekly email, but its reward is almost 1000%. So, get on with it.

Does Cold Calling Work?

Tiffani Jones — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:55:45 -0500

For agencies like ours, the idea of cold calling can be a groan and cringe-inducing experience. The majority of our sales, after all, involve marketing efforts that lead to people calling us when they need work, not the other way around.

When it comes to cold calling, there just doesn’t seem to be much bang for our buck.

Yet a few months ago, when we found ourselves with a few less leads coming through the funnel, we realized we needed to step up all our sales and marketing efforts. We created a new application (97 bottles), started blogging more, and got busy meeting new people at conferences. We also toyed around with the idea of cold calling.

Target.

Though it got pushed to the bottom of the pile, we finally took the cold calling plunge. Our developer chose a good target, a publications company he’s very familiar with, and which is known for its technical books. He sought them out, and pointed them my way.

Lucky for us, the person we cold emailed responded immediately and enthusiastically. We set up a meeting the very next day.

Meeting.

Our plan was for Kenny to introduce why we called and offer his thoughts about the site, and for me to weigh in about our process and style of working. We thought of the meeting as an introduction, and were thankful they were open to the prospect.

About thirty seconds into the conversation, however, we were asked to prove how good user experience and information architecture actually improve a businesses’ bottom line. After racking our brain for stats, we settled on a discussion of way-finding, and how a clear UX and IA encourage people to click on the most important items and make products easier to buy.

The lead seemed somewhat sated, but we left the conversation feeling like we still had some explaining to do.

Lesson.

Our cold call, which was by cold calling standards very successful, reminded us of a few things:

One: Not all businesses, even those familiar with new technology, understand how incredibly important a well-designed website is to selling products. We know this in our gut based on our experience, and most of the people who come to us know this. But because we are usually approached by clients, we don’t have a ton of practice explain this in a “sales-y” way, to people who don’t fully get it.

And two: There are some great lessons to be learned from people you cold call, that you simply can’t learn from warm leads. The people who come to you know why they’ve chosen you. If they’re thinking of spending thousands of dollars on a project, I can guarantee they’re impressed by your work. Not so with cold leads.

Even cold leads like ours, who are excited to talk to you, will ask you provocative questions that can help you view your business in a different way. They can serve as a gauge of “public opinion” about your services, helping you see beyond the core assumptions you have about how your company is valued and understood.

Our experience has lead us into a couple of days’ research about calculating the ROI of design and IA, how to measure it, and what it means. We’ve generated a list of ideas for how to display and talk about this info.

Plan.

We will probably not be spending huge chunks of biz dev time cold calling in the future, but we will likely incorporate it when we see something really juicy. As for the merits of cold calling in general, well: when done well, with the right targets, I think it can work to generate both awareness and money. In our case, it encouraged us revisit our sales strategy. But it would never work without all the other marketing and promo we do.

I like AIGA’s summary on this topic, from an article on soliciting new business:

Truly successful cold calling requires a mix of other marketing activities—regular promotional to increase general awareness followed up by personal calls on selected prospects.