Razorfish, Germany

Case Study:

Audi

2

1. Schematics (wireframes)

2. „Jumping Boxes“

3. Right vs. Left Navigation

3Schematics

Documents separate & independent

Problem: Traceability

Changes & updates inefficient

Version control problematic

4Schematics

Solution: Adobe GoLive

Sitemap and schematics linked 1:1 Components = modular construction WebDAV server

– concurrent work on schematics– remote access by client

Cross Platform: PC and Mac; HTML

Convergence of deliverables

5Schematics

6Schematics

Disadvantages Site file grew to 30+ mb Unstable, crashed Sitemap tool is suboptimal Didn‘t get team buy-in

Overall GoLive met our expectations, but is the wrong tool for the job

Underscores need for an IA tool

7

1. Schematics (wireframes)

2. „Jumping Boxes“

3. Right vs. Left Navigation

8Jumping Boxes

Users surf with different window sizes

Problem: Variable Browser Sizes

One screen size Web design

Right navigation must be visible

9Jumping Boxes

Three page layouts offered – S, M, L

from 640x480 to 1024x768

Automated Layout

Fulfilled CI constraints

Brand: “Vorsprung durch Technik”

10

11Jumping Boxes

Disadvantages Technically difficult to implement Usability problems? Not needed for all page types

A complex solution for a simple problem

12

1. Schematics (wireframes)

2. „Jumping Boxes“

3. Right vs. Left Navigation

13Right vs. Left Navigation

Right navigation = Audi as innovator

Challenge: Competitive Difference

Smoother interaction with

scrollbar

Greater focus on content

Subjectively accepted by users

14Right vs. Left Navigation

2 prototypes: 1 left & 1 right navigation

64 users: 2 groups

External Test: www.SirValuse.de

Part 1 – Six tasks were timed

Part 2 - Eye movement analysis

Part 3 - Interviews

15Right vs. Left Navigation

Time

Tasks

1 2 3 4 5 6

R

L

Significant

Part 1 - Hypothesis

16Right vs. Left Navigation

Time

Tasks

1 2 3 4 5 6

RL

NoSignificance

Part 1 - Results

17Right vs. Left Navigation

Method: www.MediaAnalyzer.com

User rapidly coordinate clicks with where they look

Part 2 – Eye movement

Hypothesis:

right navigation > focus on content

18Right vs. Left Navigation

Results: Stronger focus on content

19Right vs. Left Navigation

Do you like the right navigation?

Part 3 – Interview

: |: ) : (7 23 2

20Right vs. Left Navigation

„Normal” methods with 25 participants

Subsequent Usability Test

Corroborated findings of first test

No difficulties with a right navigation

Positive subjective response

Only 1 commented on right navigation

21Right vs. Left Navigation

Conclusions Users are ambidextrous in terms of

navigation position

Consistency and learnability

People expect that websites vary

Interaction given by design and

layout, not prior expectations

(Affordance)

Razorfish, Germany

Thank You

jim@razorfish.de