ANJJ Institute Research TeamAarti Shriniwar

Jamie Lueke

Jeweleeh Tieu

Nidhi Gupta

Introduction and PurposeTarget.com versus Wal-

Mart.comAffordable retail chains for

furniture, clothing, electronics, food, etc.

Tasks:◦Store Locator◦Product Search◦Gift Registry◦Career Search◦Weekly Ads

MethodWeb based researchEvaluation Method: 4 Participants

Each task was compared with both sites

Wesite description

Navigational organization Levels of grouping in product

category

Consistency

Good: same menu in every page

Poor: Search field and links swap locations

Error Handling

Poor: Assumption of the item the user is looking for and does not offer alternatives that are close in spelling

Good: offers similar spelling items as an option

Widgets

Good: search filters before the fold

Poor: search filters below the fold

Visual Momentum

Good: Conduct search and next page is titled Search Results

Poor: click gift & registry but next page is only labeled gifts

Target.com Local IssuesPoor screen real-estate on page Do we really need 3 links to get to

one page?

Walmart.com Local Issues: Provides only City, State and zip

codeHow do we know how to get there?Additional information is below the

fold

ConclusionTarget.com and walmart.com has

effectively used grouping and mappingTarget.com’s menu options is consistent in

every page where walmart.com’s menu option is not consistent

Walmart.com’s product search results provide a brief description where target.com does not

Target.com has good visual momentum and walmart.com does not

Usability errors in both website which ironically would complement each other

Thank you