It is common knowledge that the easier it is to access services and products on a given website the more likely users will be encouraged to come back. This usability test was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of the website, GE Money.com.au both in terms of ease of use and the ease of learning. It did so by answering the following five questions:
- Whether the site is one that users could visit often.
- Whether the website serves the purpose for which it was created
- Whether the site was visually appealing in its design
- Whether the website is accessible
- Whether the information on the site was presented
Objectives
The first step in the procedure was to come up with a checklist that would guide the entire process. This checklist had five major assessment objectives:
- To find out the accessibility of the site
- To assess the visual attractiveness of the site
- To assess the ease of navigation within the website
- To assess the ease of communication with the administration
- To assess the functionality of every item on the website
Test environment
Since the logistics could not allow for all participants in the project to test the website at the same time, the analysis was spread over two days. The participants were led into a room with a computer that had been connected to the internet. The room was an average living room and this was so that test subjects could not feel intimated because it had been established that the less comfortable the testers were the less accurate the results obtained. Only the subject and the monitor were allowed into the room for the entire period of the test to keep distractions at a minimum.
User profile
Eight people from various walks of life participated in this test. Below are their brief profiles.
Method
The first step was to get the participants comfortable with their environment. They were assured that this was not a test and that there were no wrong answers. It was also necessary to inform the testers that any difficulty in carrying out a given function was a fault of the website and not the user’s shortcoming.
The participants were then told the name of the website and given the URL. Their opinions about the content they expected from the website were noted down.
Next, the testers were allowed to have an initial glimpse of the site. There first impressions were recorded before proceeding to the tasks that were set out. Each individual was to perform the following four tasks (one at a time):
- Apply for a loan
- Apply for a credit card
- Contact the customer service
- Read the company’s privacy policy
In order to achieve even more results with the tasks, scenarios were formulated for each task as it was found out that people generally tend to respond more naturally to scenarios than to instructions. The following four questions were formulated for each respective task:
- You want to purchase a car and you need to get a loan for this purpose. Send in your application to the company online.
- You need a credit card because it has become unsafe for you to walk around with cash. Apply for one online.
- You have lost your credit card and you need to contact customer service. Unfortunately your mobile phone battery is dead and all you have is a laptop. Send a brief email to the company asking that they block the card usage.
- You are interested in reading the privacy policy of the company since you are one of their clients. Find it on the company’s website.
The testers were also encouraged to note down any problems that they encountered in the usage of the site.
Role of the test monitors
During the period that the test subjects were performing the tasks, the evaluators stood quietly and at no time were they allowed to voice their opinions. Whenever it was necessary to give feedback to points raised by the subjects, this feedback was to be neutral at all time. Ideally, the monitors were to be out of the direct view of the testers so as not to give clues via facial expressions.
Post test feedback
After all the tasks were done, opinions of the subjects regarding the website were sought. The testers were asked to give a general opinion of the site and whether their expectations had been met. The participants were also asked to detail what they remembered about the site. This was supposed to establish whether the site was structured in a logical way.
Findings
When the testers were told the name of the website and the URL, most of them confessed to initially thinking that it was a gambling website. They said that ‘GE Money’ did not sound like the name of a website that was intended to handle genuine financial issues and one of the testers said that it sounded more like the stage name of a rapper or a wrestler. Suggestions were made that if possible, a more formal-sounding title be obtained for the website.
On first arrival at the site, the most unanimous conclusion was that the website looked more like a fun project than a serious website targeted at handling people’s finances. This was due to the minimal provision of data on all pages. One lady actually said that she would go through the pages just to see the services offered but she would rather physically visit the company’s offices to do the application as compared to doing it online.
Applying for a loan was the most easily undertaken task. However, most of the individuals wanted to find out more information about the various packages that the company offered. A few went ahead to click on the loan adviser link hoping to get more information but to no avail. Most of the participants found the first part of the online application form useless because individuals could easily provide information which they knew the automated system required and move on with the application process. Getting back to the homepage was quite challenging since there was no clear home tab on the website. Most of the test participants suggested that instead of using the website title as the link to the homepage, it was more practical to have a tab labeled ‘home’.
Accessing the company’s privacy policy proved very difficult to all the participants. This was because the link to this page was hidden at the very bottom of the page and even the most attentive of users did not bother to scroll that far down. Suggestions were made that the tab panel at the top of the page be designed in such a way that it contained links to all the vital pages of the website.
The lack of a site search box on the homepage was also seen as major weakness of the website. Whenever the testers could not find the kind of information they were looking for, they automatically moved to the top right corner of the page trying to find the search box. Most of the participants claimed that on every occasion that they happened to use websites and could not find information that they were sure was on the particular site, the search option was always their next stop and in most websites it happened to be positioned at the top right corner.
When it came to contacting customer care, the participants searched around for the contacts. However, most were confused as to whether to click on the ‘customer care’ tab or on the ‘contact us’ tab. With either option, they still expected to find a well configured email box where they could type in their queries directly to customer care but were disappointed to find telephone numbers only. It was agreed that most people would rather leave a typed message for customer care than have to pick a phone and call.
One major weakness that was found with the website and actually with the whole company in general was that it lacked an area of expertise. The numerous services the website was trying to sell made the company appear like a ‘jack of all trades and a master of none’. Most of the interviewees said they found it hard to trust the company since they could not find a history of its successes anywhere on the website. One individual noted that the way the website displayed its telephone contacts prominently and kept the most important information hidden or even absent made it all look like a con-scheme.
When it came to the task where the testers were to apply for a credit card, they all moved swiftly and clicked on the appropriate tab. However, proceeding from there took quite some time as they went through the ten choices trying to find sufficient information that would guide them on what choice to make. They all looked frustrated having not found enough information on the cards and most of them just picked one at random and proceeded with the application procedure. A suggestion was made that if the company could not reduce the number of cards they were offering, it was only desirable for them to present enough details for each card.
The website was also found to be very lacking in terms of helping out the visitors. This was because there was no ‘help’ page and the ‘FAQ’ page contained less than ten items; a figure that is insignificant compared to the number of queries visitors can have per day. The testers suggested that a page be created with the largest number possible of help guidelines and it be given a well labeled link on every other page.
Evaluation
The usability test was very effective in evaluating the GE Money website. From the findings it is evidently clear that the website lacked in a lot of departments as summarized below.
Navigation through the website was found to be wanting with improper placement or lack thereof of links to several pages. Maneuvering through related pages was also quite challenging since no special method of coding for these relations was provided on the website.
Accessibility was average and the time it took to load the website was in tandem with the content. However, communicating with the administration was very challenging as there were two links that were supposed to carry out this function but it was not immediately evident which one was ideal for this purpose.
As far as clarity of communication was concerned, the website did not meet the expectations of the users and did not completely fulfill the purpose that it was created for. The numerous services that the website was peddling made the company lose its trustworthiness.
Consistency in the website design was one of the aspects that received high ratings. All the pages had the same colors and mode of presentation. However, some slight changes were suggested especially in the titling of the different pages since at some point it became impossible to distinguish the ‘GE Money-UK’ from the ‘GE Money-NZ’ page and since there was no proper home tab on either page, it became very difficult for the users to navigate back to the original ‘GE Money’ homepage once they landed on either of these two pages.
The visual presentation of the website also did not serve to push the agenda of the company. The minimalistic approach in terms of the information presented on the website pages was not ideal for a company that claimed to offer important financial services. The testers noted that the graphic layout seemed more appropriate for a company that sells fun products like holiday packages. It was recommended that the creators of the website borrow some ideas from bank websites such as the Barclays bank site.
Below is the post-test questionnaire which was used in the usability analysis.
Conclusion
While creativity is highly encouraged especially in building of websites, it is also important to bear in mind the purpose for which the said website is intended for. This will help create a product that will meet the functions of the organization. Before launching a website, it is advisable that a usability test be carried out so that embarrassing situations like the ones noted in this report can be avoided. The usability is even more mandatory in institutions that cannot re-brand once they have lost reputation. This project was indeed very educational as it provided for the chance to apply theoretical knowledge to a real life situation.