Hi Sheila, I think the answer to this depends on the level at which you look at the issue. I agree absolutely that if different parts of a site have different goals or purposes then they are likely to need different metrics. For example, Im interested in online learning and use "learning outcome" measures to assess the learning effectiveness of my and other people's designs. I wouldnt expect 'brochure' sections to have learning outcome statements so I would evaluate these differently. But at a higher level of abstraction I think all sites need to stand up to the same set of tests: "Do users understand what this site is about? Do they know what they can do with the stuff on this site? Do they know where to look to find the stuff that interests them? Are they able to navigate around the site to get to and use the stuff that interests them?" So it's a good idea to apply some fairly high level, generic, metrics about intelligibility and usability, and then at a lower level to investigate how well the different sections do the specific things they are intended to do. In my experience poor web design results most often from lack of clarity about what the site as a whole and/or specific bits of it are really intended to do. If you can clarify that then establishing metrics is usually pretty easy. Stephen Professor Stephen Brown Director, Knowledge Media Design De Montfort University Portland 2.3a The Gateway Leicester LE1 9BH UK
Tel +44 (0)116 257 7173 Fax +44(0) 116 250 6101 mob +44 (0)7989 948230 http://kmd.dmu.ac.uk -----Original Message----- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 12 January 2007 13:44 To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Subject: [MCN-L] Metrics for Evaluating Web sites Hi everyone -- a recent article in the Communications magazine of the ACM discussed establishing success metrics for different types of Web sites. The argument was that for different types of sites you have different goals, and thus need different metrics. Although the article was written about Web sites in general, this is something I've been thinking about for museum sites. For those of you who are responsible for evaluating the success of your sites, do you use different metrics for the 'success' of different parts of your sites? For example, do you differentiate between 'brochure' parts of your site, where the visitor may just want to come in, find the information they want (hours of operation, for eg.) and leave, and those parts of your sites such as virtual exhibits, where you hope that visitors stay longer? Another area where you'd potentially have different metrics would be in any blogs or any other interactive areas your museum has on the site. I'm thinking that perhaps this would be an interesting topic to examine in a Metrics & Evaluagion SIG session at the next MCN conference. Any comments? Sheila Carey Audience and Programs Analyst CHIN BTW, the article I mentioned is "Web Site Success Metrics: Addressing the Duality of Goals", by France B?langer, Weiguo Fan, L. Christian Schaupp, Anjala Krishen, Jeannine Everhart, David Poteet, and Kent Nakamoto. Communications of the ACM, Dec. 2006, Vol 49, Number 12." _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
