The Credibility of a product is absolutely critical, whether it is coming from a brand-new startup, or an established corporation. There is a great deal that goes into the Credibility of a product, from the people that hype it, to its visual presentation. However, there are a few basic elements that go directly to the foundational aspects of product Credibility upon which the rest of the product’s truthfulness is built.
Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usefulness, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Credibility is one in the frequent discussion of cautious engagement, especially in the ever increasing, in both frequency and size, waves of introductions of online products.
Establishing and maintaining Credibility is the removal, or minimization of concerns arising from these types of questions. Many elements (design, accuracy, usability, timeliness, advertising, etc.) contribute to the positive, or negative, perception of overall product Credibility, but for Quick-UX’s evaluation we assess only the most elemental. For a refresher of the Quick-UX Credibility Rubric visit: Quick-UX & Credibility: Do you believe?
Today, we will look at the first of a set of two products that achieved a solidly Low Credibility value of 0.325.
Low Credibility
Each of these 0.325 scored websites leave a varied resultant feeling of Credibility, in-part due to design, marking, color choices, etc. But, overall this set of products with solidly Low Credibility were assessed low values due to a lack of fulfilling some of the most basic, and easiest to achieve, fundamental elements inherent to any quick assessment of a product’s Credibility.
Example 1: Pogby
Pogby is an event planning and venue booking product that presents a welcoming experience.
But, while there are clearly…
- No obvious typos and
- Contact methods are provided,
…many other elements are absent, most importantly those …
- Showing the real people behind this organization, and
- Establishing other characteristics that cement the "realness" of the organization (e.g. physical address).
The content and function of the site is presented fairly well.
But, when it comes to the content of ‘About Us,’ there is a clear disconnect in expectation.
The ‘About Us’ page goes far in describing the intricacies of the product, but misses on the ‘us.’ They leave one central question unanswered..
Who is/are us?
Awk Ad
Pogby has a nice color scheme. This color scheme is strangely very well coordinated with the single advertisement of the product.
The position of the ad, coupled with its color scheme, brings up questions of ulterior motives and inherent biases. While not having a direct impact on the Quick-UX Credibility value, this does hurt the product’s Credibility.
Is this website run by American Express?
Is there a bias towards venues that work exclusively with American Express?
These questions may be "nonsense" to the individuals behind the product, but the are nonetheless fueled by these poor decisions of matching color schemes coupled with the advertisement’s placement and persistence.
Furthermore, just by placing the ad within the page header, on a level of importance to the product’s name and logo, is much too forward an advertising strategy for the average user. When websites are too aggressive with their presentation of ads, they wear away at their own Credibility.
Should Do
Pogby presents a user experience with a very solidly Low Credibility. In the near term, to improve their Credibility, they should focus…
- Show the living, breathing people behind the product. Talk about them and bring some authenticity to the product.
- Provide a broader array of contact methods. (for example: direct to team members, telephone, address, etc.)
… and very importantly…
- Move the ad. Label the ad as an ad. Or if it is not an ad, and this site is more tightly tied to American Express, don’t obfuscate, provide greater transparency into this relationship and how it impacts the overall user experience.
Quick & Useful
Over the next few weeks I will be exploring and ins-and-outs of Credibility, walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Credibility …
No Credibility
Barely Low Credibility (part 1, 2, 3)
Solidly Low Credibility (part 1, 2)
Average Credibility & Tech News (part 1, 2, 3)
More Average Credibility (part 1, 2)
High CredibilityUpdate: Renewed Pogby
Update: LikexoQuick-UX Credibility, In Conclusion
Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.
Enjoy!
Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy
UPDATE: Resulting from an analysis that took minutes, Pogby was able to take focused action, over 1 night, and implement changes with a significant impact on this product and its Credibility. (Read more)
| Add to Social Bookmarks: |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Product Guy 
Really appreciate your experience. We are working on the content to update the site. Thanks again for taking the time to provide the feedback.
LikeLike
That’s awesome. Looking forward to the update. Please keep us posted.
LikeLike
We made some rapid changes last night. Please check it out when you have a chance. Appreciate the feedback – josh
LikeLike