Embracing User-Generated Content for a Superior User Experience: Learning from "Brandflip"

As marketing professionals, we all appreciate the potential value of website audits in identifying performance and usability issues. However, it's increasingly clear that conventional audits often fail to provide long-lasting solutions. In this post, we'll explore why typical website audits fail to deliver and suggest a more comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of problems.

The Limitations of Traditional Website Audits

Traditional audits focus on surface-level issues, such as aesthetics, usability, content, performance, and technical aspects. While resolving these issues may offer short-term improvements, they often only serve as a band-aid solution, leaving the underlying problems.

Addressing the Real Problems

Just as a doctor wouldn't treat a cough without addressing the patient's smoking habit, website audits should investigate the underlying reasons for the identified issues. In many cases, the blame is unfairly placed on the digital team responsible for the website's creation, while deeper organisational problems still need to be addressed.

Bridging the Gap Between Business and Web Teams

Instead of merely highlighting issues, a thorough website audit should delve into the organisation's digital readiness and project governance. A proper audit involves asking tough questions about how problems arose and encouraging a company-wide understanding of potential shortcomings.

Finding the Root Cause

If the root cause of an issue isn't immediately apparent, engage with internal teams to uncover their operational constraints. Experienced auditors can often spot recurring patterns and identify problems stemming from poor leadership, under-investment, interdepartmental feuds, or communication breakdowns.

The Future of Holistic Website Audits

Our vision for website audits involves comprehensive, long-term engagements prioritising high-quality assessments and user testing. By digging deeper and addressing the root causes of problems, we can ensure that audits provide lasting value and drive meaningful improvements in website performance.

‍

In some cases, an unsatisfactory or annoying experience may still lead to repeat visits and purchases, particularly in industries with loyalty programs and high switching costs. So, is it worth it for designers to invest time and effort in creating delightful experiences? To answer this, we must first understand how user needs shape the overall user experience.

When you think of "delightful UX," what comes to mind? Eye-catching animations, witty text, charming mascots, or aesthetically pleasing design? While these superficial elements contribute to delight, true delight encompasses more profound attributes often overlooked.

In this article, we explore the concept of user delight, differentiating between superficial and deep delight, and discuss whether it is worth pursuing.

User delight refers to the positive emotional response a user has while interacting with a device or interface. Although it may not be outwardly expressed, it can influence thoughts and behaviours during website or application use. Identifying delight can be challenging since it's sometimes verbalized, making it difficult to determine what genuinely makes a user experience satisfying.

Understanding the hierarchy of user needs is crucial in answering whether creating delight is a worthy goal for designers. Inspired by Maslow's hierarchy, Aarron Walter's Designing for Emotion suggests that users' higher needs, like pleasure and wonder, can only be satisfied once basic needs like functionality and usability are met.

There are two types of delight users experience when interacting with an interface: surface and deep.

Surface delight is derived from isolated interface features, often gimmicky, and can be tacky if the underlying product needs to be revised. These features have come to symbolise delightful interfaces, but more delight in these elements is required.

Deep delight arises from a holistic engagement with a site, achieved when all user needs, including functionality, reliability, usability, and pleasure, are met. Deep engagement occurs in a state of flow and is challenging to accomplish.

Achieving deep delight requires a streamlined workflow, minimised pain points, and an exceptional user experience. While more flashy than surface delight, establishing this foundation is critical before pursuing surface delight, as neglecting the user experience can lead to wasted time and resources.

While deep delight might seem like the holy grail of interfaces, a few sites successfully achieve this; Yelp, providing user reviews for businesses and services, and Unroll, me, streamlining the email subscription management process, are prime examples.

Prioritising delight creation is crucial. However, if a product lacks basic functionality or reliability, delightful features won't deliver lasting benefits. Ensuring good usability is vital.

Designers aim for visually pleasing interfaces to boost user engagement, but when usability issues still need to be addressed, interfaces fail to elicit the desired response. Advertising with forced surface delight can be risky, as it may appear inauthentic and untrustworthy for certain companies.

In conclusion, design teams should focus on the overall experience rather than prioritising surface delight for tangible payoffs. If a product is functional, reliable, and usable but lacks appeal, it might be worth reconsidering design goals.

‍