Michael Hawley
April 9 11:30AM
Content management systems are powerful tools for web site teams. They allow
site designers to define an overall information hierarchy and page templates
that maintain a level of consistency for sites with large amounts of
information. However, content management systems also make it easy for a
distributed network of content providers to add content to a site. In a very
short time, a web site can outgrow the page templates and information
architecture that was originally designed.
Several of our clients have approached us with this very problem. They
originally designed their site with a certain organization and as content needs
changed, the original hierarchy of content no longer made sense. As we review
the various user-centered design techniques that we can employ to re-design the
site, invariably customers will become attached to the method of card sorting.
In particular they gravitate toward online card sorting as they feel the
quantitative nature of the exercise will give them a greater degree of
confidence in the results.
It is easy to see why online card sorting is such an appealing method. It is
fairly inexpensive, does not take a significant amount of time, and delivers
specific results on relationships between content that is based on accepted
statistical methods. Historically we have used online card sorting and several
variations of the method as the primary activity in information architecture
re-design projects. However, based on our experience with online card sorting,
we now find ourselves warning our customers that online card sorting will not
give them the quite the answers they are looking for. While we may still
include an online sort as component of a project, it is only a small component
of a larger research process.
I will discuss the limitations we have seen with card sorting and their impact
on our results. I will also discuss a test sort research study we conducted to
help us better understand the nuances of the method. During this portion of the
presentation, I will solicit audience participation. The audience will not
actually do a card sort. Rather, I will show the cards we used in our study,
then ask the audience to privately note what organizational strategy they would
use for the cards if they were the participant in a study. Lastly, I will
compare the organizational strategies of the audience with the variety of
organizational strategies we saw in our study and show how they align or don_t
align with the card study results. By asking the audience to participate, I
hope to demonstrate nuances of open card sorting and develop an understanding
of its strengths and weaknesses.
In addition to the limitations, I will also discuss several variations on the
method or alternative methods to card sorting our company has tried to develop
a customer-centric information hierarchy on large-scale sites. For each method,
I will give an overview of the approach, a sample from our work, and the
lessons we learned.