> Personally I don't think the right answer to these sort of issue is > who's related to who in the org-chart. Being the boss doesn't help.
In an ideal world...yes! A part of the problem is definitely the way in which UX teams fit into the org structure. I find it odd when people who actually build the product (not just us, but developers etc too) aren't a part of the core team. And I've seen this happen in many instances. I remember giving the paradox of choice example to someone who wanted to have a Sign In, register & an offer button all on the navigation. His argument was having 3 buttons would increase the probability of a user clicking on it threefold :) I argued that on the contrary it would reduce it, apart from the fact that we'd lose some users for providing a bad UX. I'm sure most of us here would agree that a good UX is not just beneficial to the user, but to the business/ bottom-line as well. I'm just trying to figure out the most compelling way to convince those who control the purse. The A/B testing is a good approach, but the caveat there is that reducing the number of ads (for eg) is in most cases going to decrease revenues in the short term. This is a long term proposition and something like the brand value Gretchen was talking about. But then again that would be the difference between the great products & mediocre one's -- -Vishal http://www.vishaliyer.com ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
