I had a difficult time with the website of many large government agencies, e.g. MOM, IRAS, LTA, CPF.
They contained too much information and is difficult to navigate. One has to click on many links to get to the right page. It is easy to get lost in the "spider web".
At many places, the user has to read a page of disclaimer and accept responsibility, before the user can proceed forward. This is not fair, and is sheer arrogance of the government agency.
Getting an access password is very troublesome. One has to submit a form and wait several days for the password to arrive. It is easy for the mail to be overlooked, in our busy environment.
There is much that organisations can do to simplify the procedure and make ie easy for the public to use their website. We should remove impractical security and privacy and introduce them only at the necessary points.
The SIA website usually gives a lot of trouble. It sucks. I had to call their telephone many times and it is also hard to get through. Why can't a big airline have a proper working website?
Many of these companies don't know that websites can be their asset. And many don't know how to generate revenue from the website (to their wallets) which explains the low quality of websites. It's not as if their lives depend on it.
a good website is one that needs to bring the customer to the infomation that he needs in the shortest time and in the manner that suits the customer. IMHO, simplicity is usually a good bet.
however, different classes of customers will respond to different layouts. No one size fits all. Thus personalisation of website is also desired.
web analytics will help determine if the above is achieved.
However, depending on what your website do, different considerations are required. A common mistake is to take "good website" and modify your own from these. and also to refrain from features that exists in "bad websites". "good" or "bad" are subjective (of course, there are best practices on websites building) and each project should be evaluated in their own right.
I had a difficult time with the website of many large government agencies, e.g. MOM, IRAS, LTA, CPF.
ReplyDeleteThey contained too much information and is difficult to navigate. One has to click on many links to get to the right page. It is easy to get lost in the "spider web".
At many places, the user has to read a page of disclaimer and accept responsibility, before the user can proceed forward. This is not fair, and is sheer arrogance of the government agency.
Getting an access password is very troublesome. One has to submit a form and wait several days for the password to arrive. It is easy for the mail to be overlooked, in our busy environment.
There is much that organisations can do to simplify the procedure and make ie easy for the public to use their website. We should remove impractical security and privacy and introduce them only at the necessary points.
The SIA website usually gives a lot of trouble. It sucks. I had to call their telephone many times and it is also hard to get through. Why can't a big airline have a proper working website?
ReplyDeleteSingtel's Contact Us page's email form require NRIC. That's ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteCollect all these NRIC when people want to feedback/complain for what?!
Many of these companies don't know that websites can be their asset. And many don't know how to generate revenue from the website (to their wallets) which explains the low quality of websites. It's not as if their lives depend on it.
ReplyDeleteGov sites requires SingPass to enter. Why so troublesome unless you are accessing something personal?
ReplyDeletea good website is one that needs to bring the customer to the infomation that he needs in the shortest time and in the manner that suits the customer. IMHO, simplicity is usually a good bet.
ReplyDeletehowever, different classes of customers will respond to different layouts. No one size fits all. Thus personalisation of website is also desired.
web analytics will help determine if the above is achieved.
However, depending on what your website do, different considerations are required. A common mistake is to take "good website" and modify your own from these. and also to refrain from features that exists in "bad websites". "good" or "bad" are subjective (of course, there are best practices on websites building) and each project should be evaluated in their own right.