Thanks for your replies. I got some great insights from Sarah and Jared's article.
I'm not too sure if this organization I spoke about undertook the card sorting exercise. My guess is they didn't - like any other place, the team simply exercised their choice over the hundreds of users and faltered. I term this as 'shock treatment' given to the inmates in the mental asylum -- perfectly normal users are treated as 'inmates' and their common sense is misjudged every time. Nothing new. The team in this case has assigned a temporary link to the new website beside the usual old screen during the login phase. My take on the choice being offered for both the sites is doubtful because firstly the old user might still be tentative in trying out the new site. Secondly, if the user cannot find the link in the new design, he/she might simply enter the old website again. Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of redesign and helping create a new mental model? My suggestion is what if we update each section in phases finally completing the entire site. This will allow the late adopters to 'wet their feet' in the new design while still completing their tasks efficiently in the old version. Does this sound lame? My suggestion comes from an understanding of the eBay process which designs each section feature by feature rather than update the entire website all at once? that makes sense to me to avoid any 'shock treatment'. Thanks for your insights once again. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=42676 ________________________________________________________________ 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
