Can I use it? Evaluating Usability through Quick-UX.

user-useit The first of the 3 primary components of Quick-UX, of which I will be discussing in greater depth, is the one of Usability. Put simply, Usability is a measure of how easy something is to use.

In sticking with the primary goals of Quick-UX (quick assessment for summary, directional guidance, and quantitative comparison) the variables constituting the minimal representative subset for Usability are…

  • Accessibility,
  • Consistency,
  • Recognition,
  • Navigation, and
  • Page Load Time.


Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

I use a robust (and free) proxy for quickly assessing a product’s Accessibility through the use of the Functional Accessibility Evaluator (fae) link. The fae’s resultant scores are averages which, in turn, are normalized to a range from zero to one to represent the value for Quick-UX‘s Accessibility variable.


Consistency is a fundamental component of Usability. The less learning a new user has to do to use a product the more usable is that product. Products should not have multiple interface elements, page layouts, or content that are used for the same purposes, but vary depending on how the user got their or where they are currently looking.

For example, if the product/site is in the travel industry and the site often references ‘travel search engines,’ a consistency that can grow confusing (inconsistent) is when the language that describes the same engines varies from instance to instance, from ‘engines’ to ‘tse’s,’ to ‘search travel engines,’ etc.

The determining of the value for the Consistency variable is done through the brief surveying of the product, and assigning a…

  • 1 if there are no apparent inconsistencies,
  • 0.5 if only minor, non-intrusive inconsistencies are found,
  • 0 if there exist inconsistencies on major element(s) or a majority of minor elements. Inconsistencies on major elements lead to immediate confusion and second guessing information being conveyed.


The measure of the Recognition and intuitiveness of a product conveys how easily an average user of a product can immediately grasp how to use it. When evaluating this Usability variable remember… YOU are NOT an AVERAGE user. The Recognition variable is assessed from the perspective of an average user and is assigned a value of…

  • 1 if the interface and product, in general, feels familiar and is easy to use,
  • 0.5 if some poking, finesse, and interaction are required before the user will be able to gather his or her bearings in the use of the product,
  • 0 if the average user will have clear difficulty understanding (1) how to use the product and (2) what the product is trying to communicate.


Evaluating the Navigation variable as it relates to Usability (and Quick-UX) also includes, in addition to site navigation, the review of the site’s flow, transitions, interactivity, and clear communication of progress. If a user can’t figure out how to get from point A to point B, or is not presented with clear information as to how he or she got to point C or that there remain points D through Z to still travel, the overall Usability of the product can be sorely damaged.

The Navigation variable is assigned the value of…

  • 1 if the product presents a straightforward decision process, leveraging animated transitions when appropriate, providing clear feedback, and communicating progress within each multi-stage task,
  • 0.5 if the two following conditions are met:
  1. occasional, but easily correctable, mis-steps in accomplishing tasks and/or completing processes occur, and
  2. there exists a visible current progress indicator for all multi-step tasks,
  • 0 if any of the following scenarios occurs with frequency:
    • resultant Interaction or other resultant event occurs contrary to the desired decision path,
    • surprised by result of interaction, or
    • no communication of progress, flow, or navigation.

Page Load Time

There are some products out there (Twitter comes to mind) that could not possibly have an easier to use interface coupled with a simpler purpose (to say what you are doing) that are frequently rendered barely, or completely, unusable due to entirely unacceptable product responsiveness.

A company can have the best product around, but if the pages are too sluggish, they can achieve a real pain-point in the overall user experience, rendering a product unusable.

Assessing the Page Load Time variable requires very little of your time. However, I do recommend you average at least a few data points over the course of a day, or days, to make sure you have an accurate sense of the normal product responsiveness.

  • If the product typically loads the information promptly (within acceptable expectations) then the Page Load Time variable is assigned the value of 1.
  • If the product exhibits the occasional, inconsistent delay, use 0.5.
  • And, if the product (like Twitter, at the current moment) has frequent and long delays (including outages) the value for Page Load Time variable is 0.

Usability. Quickly. Done.

The quantitative assessment of these variables are structured to provide a quick and painless method of evaluation to form a summary, directional guidance, and/or values that facilitate inter-product comparisons through the answering of the basic question…

Can I use it?

When answers to the above question of Usability is combined with…

Should I use it? (Usefulness)

Do I want it? (Desirability)

… the result is a product’s overall, repeatable, quantitative assessment of User eXperience.

Enjoy! (and discuss)

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

This entry was posted in user experience and tagged , , , , , , , by Jeremy Horn. Bookmark the permalink.

About Jeremy Horn

Jeremy Horn is an award-winning, product management veteran with 2 decades of experience leading and managing product teams. Jeremy has held various executive and advisory roles, from founder of several start-ups to driving diverse organizations in online services, consumer products, and wearables. As founder of The Product Group, he has created the largest product management meetup in the world and hosts the annual awarding of The Best Product Person. Accelerating the next evolution of product management, Jeremy acted as creator and instructor of the 10-week product management course at General Assembly and The New School, and mentoring at Women 2.0 and Lean Startup Machine (where is he also a judge). To see where Jeremy is now check him out at (1) and (2)

36 thoughts on “Can I use it? Evaluating Usability through Quick-UX.

  1. Pingback: Quick-UX. Quick Heuristics for User eXperience. « The Product Guy

  2. Pingback: Should I use it? Evaluating Usefulness through Quick-UX. « The Product Guy

  3. Pingback: Do I want to use it? Evaluating Desirability through Quick-UX. « The Product Guy

  4. Pingback: Reveal More « The Product Guy

  5. Pingback: On the Recognition of Quick-UX « The Product Guy

  6. Pingback: Familiar pingg « The Product Guy

  7. Pingback: A Spot on myPunchbowl « The Product Guy

  8. Pingback: Mystical Presdo « The Product Guy

  9. Pingback: On the Consistency of Quick-UX « The Product Guy

  10. Pingback: Constant Gateway « The Product Guy

  11. Pingback: Inconsistent ActiveState « The Product Guy

  12. Pingback: Southwestern Discomfort « The Product Guy

  13. Pingback: On the Layout of Quick-UX « The Product Guy

  14. Pingback: On the Color of Quick-UX « The Product Guy

  15. Pingback: Sea Unfathomably « The Product Guy

  16. Pingback: Higgledy Haven « The Product Guy

  17. Pingback: Google: True Colors Shine Through « The Product Guy

  18. Pingback: Clean and Air Cooler « The Product Guy

  19. Pingback: On the Page Load Time of Quick-UX « The Product Guy

  20. Pingback: Twitter’s Crawl « The Product Guy

  21. Pingback: Twine Tied Up in Load Time « The Product Guy

  22. Pingback: Slow Paced Conversation Pieces « The Product Guy

  23. Pingback: Facebook PDQ « The Product Guy

  24. Pingback: Automating the Path to a Better User Experience « The Product Guy

  25. Pingback: Evaluating Accessibility: The Quick-UX Way « The Product Guy

  26. Pingback: Well-Rounded Accessibility « The Product Guy

  27. Pingback: Accessibly UseIt « The Product Guy

  28. Pingback: Nearly, Like an Eboy « The Product Guy

  29. Pingback: Bordering on Mediocrity « The Product Guy

  30. Pingback: Most Moderate of News: Bloomberg & NY1 « The Product Guy

  31. Pingback: CNET & Drudge: On the Cutting Edge of Fair « The Product Guy

  32. Pingback: NBC NY Bringing Fair Accessibility « The Product Guy

  33. Pingback: Less than Grand GoodReads « The Product Guy

  34. Pingback: 57 Varieties: Relishing Accessibility « The Product Guy

  35. Pingback: The Product Guy: Astonishin’ in 2010! « The Product Guy

Comments are closed.