While the ability to innovate with technology and create interesting and interactive elements on a site has progressed, a recent post on UseIt.com shows the amount of time we have to capture a user’s interest has not.

One site, which was tested using an eye-tracking study, demonstrates how a slow-loading promotional banner plus a large number of widgets on the site, create confusion for the user rather than the engagement opportunities that were intended.

When you think about your own site, what do you know about the load times — and the corresponding distractions that might result from slow-load times? The UseIt article gives some helpful guidance on how to get at those questions.

If you don’t read the full article, here’s a helpful tidbit:

…  From UseIt.com ….

The 3 response-time limits are the same today as when [Jakob Nielsen] wrote about them in 1993 (based on 40-year-old research by human factors pioneers):

0.1 seconds gives the feeling of instantaneous response — that is, the outcome feels like it was caused by the user, not the computer. This level of responsiveness is essential to support the feeling of direct manipulation (direct manipulation is one of the key GUI techniques to increase user engagement and control).

1 second keeps the user’s flow of thought seamless. Users can sense a delay, and thus know the computer is generating the outcome, but they still feel in control of the overall experience and that they’re moving freely rather than waiting on the computer. This degree of responsiveness is needed for good navigation.

10 seconds keeps the user’s attention. From 1–10 seconds, users definitely feel at the mercy of the computer and wish it was faster, but they can handle it. After 10 seconds, they start thinking about other things, making it harder to get their brains back on track once the computer finally does respond.

A 10-second delay will often make users leave a site immediately. And even if they stay, it’s harder for them to understand what’s going on, making it less likely that they’ll succeed in any difficult tasks.

Interesting stuff.  Check out the full article here: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/response-times.html

Recently I was planning for a conference presentation, which involved choosing a Twitter hashtag, sending it to conference organizers for use in the program book, adding it to the template of all my slides, and making sure I added an all-caps prompt in my notes to MENTION TWITTER HASHTAG! (my presentation notes are full of all-caps prompts). Oh, and I also wrote some content for the presentation itself.

With your audience sitting directly in front of you, why put all that energy into a social networking tool that has the potential to distract people from listening to you? And what’s the best way to integrate tweets into the conversation? (more…)

Periodically, we do a survey of Beaconfire staff to get impressions on a variety of issues. All opinions expressed here are solely those of their authors.

---

Last week, Beaconfire learned about seductive interactions.  No, stop thinking that! It’s not what you think!

I’m talking about using psychology to design better online interactions. In usability, we aim to make websites easier to use. In contrast, you can instead motivate (seduce) users to want to use your site, whether it is usable or not. That’s where the psychology comes in. If your site is funny, or playful, or surprising, visitors will be more motivated to use it.

The phrase “seductive interaction” comes from a talk by Stephen P. Anderson, who has put together some great examples and a large set of psychological techniques that can apply to the web. You can listen to a podcast of his talk from SXSW 2010, or read his slides, which are packed full of examples.

It’s a great reminder, especially to all of us who work with nonprofits, not to take yourself too seriously, or to stay too much within the mold. It’s all about standing out.

So, we asked staff:

What is your favorite example of a “seductive” interaction on the web?

Amy, Functional Consultant: Blogger does a great job with this.   “Create a Blog.  It’s easy and it only takes a minute.”  – which, even better than being seductive, is HONEST!  There it only takes a minute and it IS easy!

Marco, Software Engineer: This may be too tech focused for the blog.  But during the meeting I thought of the ZumoDrive service I use for online backup.  When you first sign up, they have this Learning “Dojo” that you go through to get familiar with the different features in your account.  And it’s presented like a game where you earn belts and there’s a reward.  When you’re done you get an extra  1GB of storage.  Check out the screenshot.

Marissa, Functional Consultant: The winner has to be Google Pacman.

Scott, Functional Consultant: I like Jeremy Keith’s narrative-style form. http://huffduffer.com/signup/.  One of the reasons is that It’s pretty simple to do.

Jo, Marketing Consultant: Every time you sign into Flickr, they teach you how to say “hello” in a random language. It makes me smile every time.

How about you? What’s your favorite example?

(update: 6/25/2010)

Mark, Functional Consultant: Found a couple of more recently that I thought would be worth sharing…

When you install Skype, they allow you to try their advanced web to phone feature. In doing so they prompt you to, “call someone you love.” Kind of delightful and unexpected.

Additionally, when you check out a preview of Flickr’s recent feature additions from the photo page you get a surprise. After stepping through four previous steps and clicking on the fifth, all of a sudden a panda bear appears in the bottom right of your screen and you are prompted to, “now have some fun with it.”

I thought this was great… totally unexpected (surprising) and delightful at the same time. Great example of bringing in several of the “sexy interaction” attributes that Stephen Anderson has been talking about.

As many of us work with the Convio system, it’s always great to pick up new tid-bits along the way on how to more effectively use the product. This past week we learned a bit more about using the emailing functionality – particularly working with conditional content within emails.

We learned that there is only one method to test and have the conditional content work accurately in sending out emails. The following methods of sending out email will NOT work correctly with conditional content:

• Sending Quick Emails: for instance they will not identify you correctly in all groups you may be a member of when you send.
• Email Campaign emails you send as tests to ad hoc email address will also NOT correctly work with conditional content.

To get conditional content to work in your testing you need to use Email Campaigns AND send test emails to a Reviewer Group.

In general when running tests of emails, the closest you can get to simulating production sends is to create and use a test in Campaigns (vs. Quick Email) and a reviewers list. Sending to the reviewers list more closely simulates the production send than sending to ad-hoc defined emails. Reportedly this has to do with using a test mail server vs. the prod mail server for the send. So next time you’re testing your campaign emails, be sure to take the time to construct a reviewers list and test-send the email there.

Occasionally too, we’ve had different experiences in how long it takes to receive test sends to various domains. In talking with Convio staff, this may have something to do with Convio having to constantly stay on top of being on major email providers “white lists” and possibly being subjected to more scrutiny on delivery.

Ok, cats and kittens – it’s quiz time. Got your pencils ready?

What single phrase when uttered aloud can send shivers down the spine of even the most stalwart organization executive? No, it’s not “Recession” (although a close second). If you guessed “Audit” you’re way off although “Website redesign” gets you warmer. Give up?

It’s “Rebranding”, officially defined as: “the process of giving a product or an organization a new image, in order to make it more attractive or successful.” Unofficially, defined as “Oh, Crap.”

Normally, it’s my job to help guide a client through this exciting, challenging and sometimes unpredictable process. I get to play therapist/subject matter expert/spiritual guide/bad guy as needed, without having any real skin in the game other than wanting the best for my client. Well, the chickens, they’ve come home to roost: Beaconfire is about to embark on this very process. And I’m not too proud to say that I’m a little freaked out. “The cobbler’s children have no shoes” ain’t just a saying, knowwhatImean?

Fueled by our 10 year anniversary next year (and a healthy dose of adrenaline/caffeine/insanity) we have decided to embark on a “LogoLift” ( i.e. not a full rebranding but a modernization of our existing brand) as we enter our next 10 years. Retaining brand equity at the same time as “re-imagining” the logo will be our first trick, followed closely by a redefinition of our voice across all communication vehicles. Piece of cake, right? The process kicks off this afternoon, and I think I’m more nervous for this “creative workshop” than for the ones I regularly lead for our clients. Why? Because my “Client” is a very smart, opinionated consultant – and we all know that no good can come from working with people like THAT.

Normally, I would offer the following helpful advice for a client starting down this auspicious path:

Simple imagery: The most effective is often the least complicated
Make a connection: Draw the audience in, don’t alienate them
Great typography: Clean, direct, engaging, but not lifeless.
Limited color palette: Pick 1 or 2 colors and work with hues to give depth and interest. Avoid applying mission symbolism to colors.
Don’t overthink it: If you cant explain how the logo represents your org to your mother in less than 10 words, try again.

Let’s hope I won’t be eating my words come Spring. As long as my blood pressure remains in an acceptable range, I will document our progress along the way, and let you know if we will celebrate our 10th with shoes on or not. Wish us luck?