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?
One field, in particular, stands out when talking about Credibility. That field is the news. How better to have a discussion on Quick-UX and Credibility than to see it in action, applied to products that deliver the, hopefully trustworthy, news.
Today, we will take an interesting look at the third of a set of three Technology and Web Blogs with Average Credibility values, from 0.45 – 0.625.
Example 3: GigaOM
Just eking out the claim to the strongest foundation of Credibility within this sub-series set of tech blogs is GigaOM, with Average Credibility and a value of 0.625.
Let’s start by taking a look at each of the touch points that GigaOM executed well, starting with contact information.
This product’s ‘Contact’ page contains contact information for…
- Key individuals by name and department,
- Departmental email addresses, and (+0.175)
- Telephone numbers. (+0.175)
It should be noted, at this point, that the department heads are listed alongside the department emails and, in some cases, the associated phone numbers. However, due to the impersonal and generic nature of the provided contact information, none of methods of email contact would be considered an example of ‘direct contact information for team members,’ as valued within the Quick-UX Credibility framework at +0.125.
On the ‘About Us’ page, this product, like the other products in this tech news group, provides a…
- Good history of the organization,
- Sense of breadth and scope of the GigaOM Network, and
- List of key team members, with accompanying biographies. (+0.125)
While GigaOM may have the strongest foundation amongst the tech blogs reviewed, addressing many of the core elements of Credibility, there is always room for improvement. Some such simple examples are…
- Supply clear direct contact information for the members of the GigaOM team, (+0.125)
- Present real pictures of these real team members, and
- Demonstrate this real organization exists in the real world, let the readers know where it is located, e.g. the physical address of HQ. (+0.125)
Quick Note: On Typos
Seeing as this is the last post in this sub-series I thought I would take a moment to discuss a Credibility value component that could be seen of unique import within the market space of online News and Content products.
Quick-UX is a constant and consistent measuring stick for both internal decision making as well as inter-product comparison, within and among industries. Its value is in its ability to minimize the subjectivity of User Experience evaluation and to provide a more structured way of thinking about the User Experience, from its parts to the whole.
Quick-UX heuristics do not vary from market to market. This, in turn, provides a commonality of quantitative features for simple learning, and quick assessment and comparison. However, you could also argue, in these circumstances, that should one of these news products have had a typo, or a systemic problem with typos, such an occurrence could have a much larger overall impact on the product’s Credibility.
This perceived supplemental level of impact represents a secondary order of analysis, beyond Quick-UX. Quick-UX, in a scenario where typos were a problem, would have quickly highlighted the issue, distinguishing key characteristics (or lack thereof) of Credibility, focused the attention, and provided direction as to one possible avenue of deeper analysis, market and strategy specific analysis.
Quick & Useful
Quick-UX Credibility is a measure of the starting point, the foundation of a product’s Credibility. How products, and the people behind them, strengthen, or erode, their trustworthiness through their subsequent actions governs the Credibility imparted to the product’s consumers over time, through extended exposure to the product. However, this extended exposure is only achievable after these products have successfully enticed and converted their visitors into returning readers, by way of a comprehensive User Experience, in significant part due to an initial demonstration of sound and, in these examples, Average Credibility.
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 …
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)
Update: Renewed Pogby
Quick-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.
The Product Guy