Website User Friedliness Q1 Generic Portal Report

Website User Friendliness Study

Generic Portal


Generic Portal Report

Jan-Mar ‘08


© copyright JuxtConsult

Generic Portal


Table of content

Introduction .............................................................. 1

Methodology.............................................................. 2

Category Websites Tested.............................................. 8

Findings:

Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Overall ............10

Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Overall.......11

Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Overall ..............13

Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Overall..........14

Rating Dispersions by Individual Attributes .........................15

Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria.....................26

Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Website Users Only............................................................................27

Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Website Users Only.......................................................................28

Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Website Users Only 30

Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Users Only.......................................................................31



Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Website Non Users Only.......................................................................44

Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Website Non Users Only ...............................................................45

Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Website Non Users Only.......................................................................47

Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Non Users Only ...............................................................48



Demographic Profile ...................................................62

Socio Economic Profile.................................................66

Economic Profile........................................................68

Net Usage Dynamics....................................................70

WUF Index Ranking of Websites by User Segments ................71

Sample Sizes.............................................................78

Generic Portal


1

Introduction

Internet users rarely bother to complain about the poor quality or experience of a website. They just ‘switch’ to an alternative website.

Yet most websites do little to track their user’s experience and perceptions about their websites on various critical parameters - be it the appeal of their user interface, ease of navigation and task completion, or the satisfaction derived from the actual usage experience.

To precisely fill this gap JuxtConsult has introduced its ‘Website User Friendliness’ syndicated study. The study helps the online players measure, quantify and benchmark the ‘user friendliness’ and ‘usage satisfaction’ of their website vis-à-vis the key competing websites.

The study is unique in its methodology as it takes the concept of ‘usability testing’ of a website online – it makes the users use a website and give the feedback on its usage experience in ‘live’ online environment. The user feedback is real time and based on actual usage of the website.

In order to define and measure what really makes a website ‘user-friendly’, we looked at a simple and interesting parallel of what makes a person seem ‘friendly’. In human interaction, we identify someone as ‘friendly’ only when that person firstly ‘looks’ friendly to us and then ‘behaves’ friendly towards us. When it comes to our interaction with websites, our expectations and behaviors are no different. We identify or treat a website as ‘friendly’ only when it both looks pleasant and acceptable to us and is easy and convenient to use. That is,

A User friendly website � Looks friendly + Behaves friendly

To ‘look’ friendly, a website must be identifiable, appealing, relevant, and pleasant in its appearance. On the other hand, to ‘behave’ friendly a website must enable the task a user has come to perform on the website in a convenient, smooth, orderly and satisfactory manner.

Accordingly, this study interprets, evaluates, measures and reports the ‘user-friendliness’ of a website taking into account both in its look factors as well as its usability factors.

Generic Portal

2

Methodology

The JuxtConsult ‘Website User Friendliness’ model

Any comprehensive measure of ‘user-friendliness’ of a website must cover all key aspects that determine its ‘user-interface’ (looking friendly) as well as its ‘usage experience’ (behaving friendly). At a broad level, we at JuxtConsult defined these key aspects as follows:

User Interface (look friendly) Usage Experience (behave friendly)

Visually appealing Easy to access

Distinctly identifiable Easy to locate relevant information

Organized interface Easy to comprehend information

Relevant content Easy to navigate and conduct a task

Better quality of content Offer relevant and adequate solutions

Facilitate satisfactory completion of task

Consistent in performance

Highly interactive and responsive

In order to identify the precise and measurable attributes under each of these aspects, we carefully mapped the typical flow of the ‘interaction’ a user usually has with a website. In doing so we identified 6 typical stages of interaction a user has with a website (and therefore, 6 critical aspects that need to be measured to arrive at any comprehensive evaluation of ‘user-friendliness’ of a website):

�� The user accesses the website (Accessibility)

�� Finds the website appealing (Likeability)

�� Finds the content relevant (Relatability)

�� Is able to smoothly navigate on the website (Navigability)

�� Finds the website responsive when needs assistance/help (Interactivity)

�� Is able to complete the task/purpose for which he/she visited the website in the first place (Task accomplishment)

Digging a little deeper in these 6 critical areas we identified 19 individual parameters that required to be measured to make the model a fairly comprehensive one. The parameters related to ‘e-commerce’ and ‘transactions’ were not included in the ‘generic model’ per se (to retain its universality), but have been considered separately as the


3

The Model ©

Is the website easy to access?

Is the content relevant and distinct?

Does it look appealing?

Is it easy to use?

Is the user able to accomplish the task?

The Measures

Browser compatibility

Download time

Ease of comprehension

Relevance/Adequacy of content

Content distinctiveness (quality)

Distinctiveness (branding)

Layout and interface

Aesthetics (color, text, graphics)

Identification with the website

Ease of locating task info

Ease of conducting the tasks

Inter-page consistency in design

and flow

Level of task completion (success)

Timeliness of task completion

Adequacy of task compl. (satisfaction)

The Website – User Interaction Points

The User Friendliness Criteria

Accessibility

Relatability

Likeability

Navigability

Task Accomplishment

Interactivity

Technical

Assistance

Solution

Task Flow

Content

Design

Is it able to assist the user when needed?

Navigational cues and helps

Error rate / error recovery

Contacability (and responsiveness)

Sense of security in using the site

‘seventh’ critical aspect of measuring user friendliness of the ‘e-commerce’ websites.

The following graphics outline the precise ‘website user friendliness’ measuring and rating schema used in the JuxtConsult model and in bringing out these reports:

Generic Portal

4

User Friendliness Measuring Schema

Ease of Usage Usage Satisfaction

1. Browser Compatibility

2. Download Time

Ease of Access

Site is easily accessible Site is easy to use with hassle-free navigation Site delivers task accomplishment

16. Timeliness of task completion

17. Quality of usage experience

18. Perceived sense of security in usage

19. Brand preference creation

10. Ease of locating task info

11. Ease of conducting the task

12. Navigation flow between pages

13. Navigational cues and helps

14. Error recovery

15. Customer responsiveness

User Friendly Interface User Friendly Experience

Website User Friendliness

Accessibility Index Navigability Index Satisfaction Index

©

3. Distinctive in identity (branding)

4. Presentation of content (layout)

5. Aesthetics (color, text, graphics)

6. User identification with the site

7. Ease of comprehension

8. Relevance of content

9. Relative quality of content

Design Appeal

Site is likeable and relevant

Appeal Index

User Friendly Interface Index (UFEX) User Friendly Experience Index (UZEX)

Category Level Website User Friendliness Index (WUF)


5

As shown in the schema, the 19 individual parameters that determine the overall user friendliness of a website have been clustered together into 4 ‘sub index’ measuring the ‘accessibility’, ‘appeal’, ‘navigability’ and ‘usage satisfaction’ index of a website. Hereafter these are combined to arrive at two higher level ‘user interface’ and ‘user experience’ Index and eventually into the overall ‘website user friendliness’ (WUF) index of a website.

The model thereby allows various websites in a category/vertical to be evaluated, compared, benchmarked and ranked on various aspects of their ‘user-friendliness’ in an objective manner (based on the index score derived from actual ‘ratings’ of these websites by their existing and potential users).

The online survey

To test and get the websites rated on these 19 parameters and some other identified aspects of ‘user friendliness’ by their existing and potential users, an online survey methodology based on ‘live’ usage and rating of websites was used.

The online survey was conducted using JuxtConsult’s own online user panel (www.getcounted.net) as well as using a ‘survey ad campaign’ on Google Ad Sense (contextual search ads).

The online survey was conducted using an e-questionnaire segmented into three sections. The first section had a ‘screener questionnaire’ that was used to identify the ‘users’ of an online category, and of the various websites being tested within that category. Then the identified ‘users’ and ‘non-users’ (taken as potential users) of the various websites were taken to the respective websites for ‘live’ usage. This was done by providing the ‘URL links’ of these websites within the questionnaires.

Half the respondents (of both existing and potential users of the website) were asked to surf the ‘homepage’ and the other half to ‘complete a simple assigned task’ on the website1. This split was done to keep the length of the ‘live’ usage sessions within reasonable time limit, so that including the feedback-giving time (questionnaire filling), the whole session does not become too long for the respondent. In this way we tried to minimize the impact of any possible ‘response fatigue’ in the survey to the extent it is possible to do so in such surveys.

To ensure a statistically healthy representation and calculation of the ratings (and indices) for each website in the study, a minimum sample quota of 120 ‘reported response’ per website was fixed. This is the sample size on which the user friendliness index calculations are based.

1 The tasks that the respondents of the Generic Portal category were asked to perform were – 1) check your horoscope for today, 2) check the day’s news of your interes, 3) check sprots content of your interest.

Generic Portal

6

However, because of a break up of ‘live’ usage between the ‘only homepage surfing’ and ‘only an assigned task completion’, each respondent were to give only ‘part’ rating of the website. This meant that in practice it would take 2 respondents (one of homepage and one of task) to compete one rating of a website as per the JuxtConsult Model. Accordingly, in sample collection, the quota per website was doubled to 240 respondents per website. The eventual break up of the samples as ‘set’ per website and between its existing users and non-users (potential users) was as follows:

Table 1: Sample size by websites

Sample Base Users Non-users Total

Rediff Home page 60 60 120

Task 60 60 120

Yahoo Home page 60 60 120

Task 60 60 120

Indiatimes Home page 60 60 120

Task 60 60 120

Sify Home page 60 60 120

Task 60 60 120

AOL Home page 60 60 120

Task 60 60 120

MSN Home page 60 60 120

Task 60 60 120

Total Category 720 720 1,440

Further to ensure that we report only those responses that are based on actual, and to an extent, sincere ‘live’ usage of the website, firstly the time taken to check/use the website was measured (from the time of clicking the URL link on the questionnaire to the time of answering the first feedback question). Thereafter, we decided to exclude from reporting those respondents who took less than 3 minutes to ‘surf the homepage’ and less than 5 minutes to ‘complete the assigned task’ on the website.

For the 19 individual parameters, except for browser compatibility, the ratings for the rest 18 parameters were taken directly from the respondents. For rating on browser compatibility, websites were tested internally at JuxtConsult by its own technical team on various popular internet browsers and then rated accordingly. The browsers on which the website opening was tested were – Internet Explorer, Firefox, Netscape and Opera.

For the rest 18 parameters where users’ gave the ratings directly, all ratings were taken on a ‘5 point qualitative scale’. For each parameter, respondents were asked to choose one of the five statements given as ‘options’. The five statements ranged from the most positive statement about that attribute on that website to the most negative statement about that attribute on that website.

Of these 18 parameters, only one parameter’s response was taken from the respondents ‘past usage’ of the website (therefore asked only to


7

the ‘users’). This parameter was customer responsiveness (measured as timeliness and appropriates of response to any query they may have made on the website in the past). On all the other 17 parameters the respondents were asked to give their ratings basis the ‘live’ usage experience and in real time.

Eventually, Index numbers were calculated and derived from the individual parameter level rating, with each level index having its own calculated scale (depending on the number of individual parameters included under that index). The sample bases of various websites were equalized while calculating their website user friendliness index to ensure that there are no sample size biases in the reported findings.

In the online questionnaires, a response format of ‘clicking’ a single or multiple options among the various given options was used for most questions. Wherever relevant, it was also possible for a respondent to answer ‘none’, ‘not applicable’ or ‘any other’. To enlist complete and sincere responses, an incentive of a significant cash prize was also announced to be given to one randomly selected respondent at the end of the survey.

The questionnaire were pre-tested and timed to take approximately 15-20 minutes for a respondent to complete depending on the speed of comprehension and answering of the questions. The questionnaire was structured and designed to reduce the level of ‘respondent fatigue’ to an extent that was practically possible.

Over 1,421 unduplicated and clean responses were collected from the online survey for the 6 websites being tested under the Generic Portal category (in about 3 weeks of time for which the survey was ‘live’ online). After further cleaning of the data for the actual time spent on surfing the homepage/completing the task on the websites 1,325 responses were finally found to be valid and used in creating this report.

The valid and usable data was then made representative of the entire online urban Indian population by using appropriate 'demographic multipliers’ using highly authentic Govt. of India population statistics. The weights used were derived from the JuxtConsult’s India Online 2007 study and are based on 3 highly relevant demographic parameters – SEC, town class and region.

The end result is that the findings of this report possibly represent the ‘voice’ of over 24 million online urban Indians. Further, the findings represent and effectively cover internet users from all SEC groups, all age groups above 12 years, all income groups and all types of town classes (right down to 20,000 population size level towns)2 .

2 For more details on the demographic and socio-economic profile of the respondents see the ‘Respondent Profile’ section of this report.

Generic Portal

8

Category Websites Tested

�� Rediff (www.rediff.com)

�� Yahoo (www.yahoo.com)

�� Indiatimes (www.indiatimes.com)

�� Sify (www.sify.com)

�� AOL (www.aol.in)

�� MSN (www.msn.com)


9

Findings

Generic Portal

10

Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Overall

Table 2: Website user friendliness index (WUF) - overall

Brands WUF Index Relative Index

Rediff 7.0 100%

Yahoo 6.9 98%

Indiatimes 6.5 93%

Sify 6.4 91%

AOL 6.2 88%

MSN 5.4 76%

Base: 1,325

Table 3: Friendly interface index (UFEX) - overall

Brands UFEX Index Relative Index

Rediff 4.1 100%

Yahoo 3.9 97%

Indiatimes 3.7 91%

Sify 3.7 90%

AOL 3.6 88%

MSN 3.1 75%

Base: 1,325

Table 4: User friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - overall

Brands UZEX Index Relative Index

Rediff 3.0 100%

Yahoo 2.9 99%

Indiatimes 2.8 96%

Sify 2.7 91%

AOL 2.6 88%

MSN 2.3 77%

Base: 1,325


11

Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Overall

Table 5: Accessibility index (overall)

Brands Accessibility Index Relative Index

Rediff 2.2 100%

Yahoo 2.1 96%

Indiatimes 2.0 92%

Sify 2.0 90%

AOL 1.9 88%

MSN 1.7 75%

Base: 1,325

Table 6: Appeal index (overall)

Brands Appeal Index Relative Index

Rediff 1.9 100%

Yahoo 1.8 97%

Sify 1.7 91%

AOL 1.7 89%

Indiatimes 1.7 89%

MSN 1.4 76%

Base: 1,325

Generic Portal

12

Table 7: Navigability index (overall)

Brands Navigability Index Relative Index

Yahoo 1.1 100%

Rediff 1.0 93%

Indiatimes 1.0 92%

Sify 0.9 84%

AOL 0.9 83%

MSN 0.8 72%

Base: 1,325

Table 8: Usage satisfaction index (overall)

Brands Satisfaction Index Relative Index

Rediff 1.9 100%

Yahoo 1.8 95%

Indiatimes 1.8 94%

Sify 1.8 92%

AOL 1.7 87%

MSN 1.5 77%

Base: 1,325


13

Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Overall

Brand

.3.2.10.0-.1-.2

Att

rib

ute

.2

.1

0.0

-.1

-.2

MSN

AOL

Indiatimes

Yahoo

Rediff

Design Appeal

Ease of Access

Usage Satisfaction

Ease of UsageSify

Generic Portal

14

Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Overall

Table 9: Summary table - overall

Ratings (on a 5 point qualitative scale) AOL Sify Yahoo Indiatimes Rediff MSN

Browser Compatibility 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Download Time 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.0

Accessibility Index 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.2 1.7

Distinctive in identity (branding) 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.3

Presentation layout of the home page 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.3

Presentation layout of the task page 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.4

Aesthetics of text on the homepage 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.7

Aesthetics of graphics on the homepage 4.3 4.2 3.9 3.8 4.2 4.2

User identification with the site 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.7

Ease of comprehension 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.1 3.8

Relevance of content 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.1 4.0 4.2

Relative quality of content 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.0 4.1 4.3

Appeal Index 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.4

Ease of locating task info 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.0 4.5

Ease of conducting the task 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.0 4.1

Navigation flow between pages 4.2 4.5 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.4

Navigational cues and helps 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.9

Error recovery 4.3 4.6 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.4

Appropriateness of response to queries 4.7 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.4 4.7

Timeliness of response to queries 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.4 4.6

Satisfaction with query resolution 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.4 4.4 4.5

Navigability Index 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.8

Timeliness of task completion 4.3 4.0 3.6 4.1 4.0 3.9

Quality of the usage experience 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1

Perceived sense of security during usage 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.3

Creation of brand preference 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.4

Satisfaction Index 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.5

UFEX Index 3.6 3.7 3.9 3.7 4.1 3.1

UZEX Index 2.6 2.7 2.9 2.8 3.0 2.3

WUF Index 6.2 6.4 6.9 6.5 7.0 5.4

Base: 1,325


15

62%

48%41% 39%

50%44%

21%

26%28% 31%

24%28%

7%

9%11% 16%

14%

3%10%

15%7%6%

8%6%

4%

5%7% 10% 13% 9%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

AOL Sify Yahoo Indiatimes Rediff MSN

Didn't notice thelogo at all'.

I had to search forthe logo

I spotted it but onlyafter a while

It was prominentand I spotted iteasily

It was the first thingthat I noticed on thepage

JFM '08

58%49% 54%

64%57%

41%

28%

28%26%

22%24%

32%

10%15%

16%13%

15%

18%

9%1%

3%5%4% 1%3%

1%2% 3% 0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely slow

Fairly slow

Neither fast nor

slow

Reasonably fast

Adequately fast

JFM '08

Rating Dispersions by Individual Attributes

Chart 1: Download time (overall)

Base: 676

Chart 2: Distinctive in identity (overall)

Base: 676

Generic Portal

16

62%55%

48%42%

57% 55%

30%39%

37%

34%

26% 27%

9% 5%11%

20%16% 17%

1%0%1% 1% 5%0%0%1%1% 2% 3% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely untidy andcluttered

Fairly untidy

Averagely presented

Fairly well presented

Very well presented

JFM '08

43% 42%

53%

38% 37%28%

39% 44%

34%

40% 44%

45%

18% 9% 10%

16%17%

25%

1%2%2%3% 1% 6%0% 1%0% 2% 2% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely haphazardand badly presented

Fairly disorganized andill presented

Just average inorganization andpresentation

Fairly well organizedand presented

Extremely wellorganized and neatlypresented

JFM '08

Chart 3: Presentation of the home page (overall)

Base: 676

Chart 4: Presentation of the task page (overall)

Base: 676


17

66%

50%

55% 54% 63% 60%

17%

33%

20% 14% 14% 21%

6% 9% 5% 9% 11% 8%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Neither engage

me nor distract

me

Too many

Highly relevant

and engaging

JFM '08

76%

54%

74% 73%62%

69%

22%

38%

24%19%

33%31%

2% 2%8% 5% 0%7%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


It has too little

content and

looks empty

It has too much

text and looks

cluttered

It has just the

right amount of

text and looks

fine

JFM '08

Chart 5: Aesthetics of text (overall)

Base: 676

Chart 6: Aesthetics of graphics (overall)

Base: 676

Generic Portal

18

45%38%

47%40% 42% 38%

21% 32%

28% 42% 39%

26%

21%

26% 16%

14%9%

21%

14%

2%

7%3%

4%2%

11%

4%2% 3% 5% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely difficult

Quite difficult

Neither easy nordifficult

Reasonably easy

Extremely easy

JFM '08

33%39% 36% 37% 36%

23%

33%26%

28% 29%38%

39%

24%18% 24% 20%

13%

25%

13%

0%

10%12% 5% 8%5%

3%6% 4% 7% 6%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Its just opposite of mystyle and personality

I find it difficult torelate to it

I can live with it

I can relate to it tosome extent

It matches my styleand personalitycompletely

JFM '08

Chart 7: User identification with the site (overall)

Base: 676

Chart 8: Ease of comprehension (overall)

Base: 676


19

42% 40%48%

32%40%

47%

37%36%

33%

37%

43%37%

16%17%

16%

25%

9%15%

1%6%5%

2% 5%2%

0%2%3% 2% 1% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Significantly inferiorthan the otherwebsites

Somewhat inferiorthan the otherwebsites

Same as offered bythe other websites

Somewhat better thanthe other websites

Significantly betterthan the otherwebsites

JFM '08

30%38%

50%44%

36% 34%

45%

45%

36%

33%43% 50%

22%15% 9%

17% 14%16%

0%0%1%

2% 5% 4%0% 6%3% 0% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Almost

irrelevant

Low

relevance

Averagely

relevant

Fairly

relevant

Highly

relevant

JFM '08

Chart 9: Relevance of content (overall)

Base: 676

Chart 10: Relative quality of content (overall)

Base: 676

Generic Portal

20

45%50%

41%45% 46% 44%

29% 15% 32%

36%24% 30%

16% 31%21%

15%

17%21%

6%

7%

4% 6% 3%10%

0%7%

1% 1% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Faced lots of difficulty

Faced some difficultybut was able tocomplete the task


Fairly easy with onlysome minor irritants

Extremely easy andhassle-free

JFM '08

61% 56% 53% 48%43%

62%

17% 29% 30%

23%25%

24%

18%13% 12%

24% 25%

13%

1%6%1% 4% 4%1%

0%1%3% 2% 0% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely

difficult

Fairly difficult

Neither easy

nor difficult

Fairly easy

Very easy

JFM '08

Chart 11: Ease of locating task info (overall)

Base: 651

Chart 12: Ease of conducting the task info (overall)

Base: 651


21

3% 2% 6%11% 12%

4%

12%

13% 7%

6%

50%53%

42% 32% 39%47%

17%

26%

4% 7%

12%3%16%

15%11%

30%33% 35%25%

30%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Had very few relevantinstructions

Had a fair bit ofrelevant instructions

Almost did not haveany relevantinstructions

Had most of therelevant instructions

Had all the relevantinstructions

JFM '08

54%63%

43% 43% 47%53%

17%

28%

29%

43%28%

38%

22%

6%

16%

7%

11%

8%2%

14%2%

8%5%7%

0%1%0% 2% 5%2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Relevant page did notopen at all

Faced lot of problems

Neither freely nor withdifficulty

More or less freely

Completely freely

JFM '08

Chart 13: Navigation flow between pages (overall)

Base: 651

Chart 14: Navigation cues and helps (overall)

Base: 651

Generic Portal

22

74%

63%69% 73% 76% 72%

24%

20%

27%26%

11%24%

2%

12%

2%

3%

0%4%1%

1%

1%0% 1%0%

0%

10%0% 4% 1%

0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


There was noresponse at all

Received only auto-reply, nothingthereafter

They responded butdid not resolve thequery

Query was resolvedonly partially

Query was resolvedcompletely

JFM '08

61%

72%

47%

59%54%

60%

20%

14%

30%

27% 35% 26%

9%

12%

7%

7%8%

7%

4%2%2%1%

13%

5%9%

1%1% 1% 4% 3%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Couldn't resolve andfailed to complete thetask

Resolved with greatdifficulty

Encountered butresolved with websitehelp instructions

Encountered error butresolved on my own

Did not encounter anyerror at all

JFM '08

Chart 15: Error recovery (overall)

Base: 651

Chart 16: Appropriateness of the response (overall)

Base: 268


23

53% 52%42% 46%

54% 56%

39% 41%

44%

49%39% 40%

7% 1%6%

5%4%

0%5%0%5% 8%

0%1%0%3%0% 1% 1% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Highly dissatisfied

Moderatelydissatisfied

Neither satisfied notdissatisfied

Moderately satisfied

Highly satisfied

JFM '08

64%57%

50% 46%

65% 68%

23%

19% 33%45%

14%

27%1% 24% 13%

9%

20%

0%5%

0%0%0%

0%

5%

0%1%7%

1% 4%0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Did not receive anyresponse at all

Fairly late

Neither promptly norlate

More or less in time

Very promptly

JFM '08

Chart 17: Timeliness of response (overall)

Base: 268

Chart 18: Satisfaction with response (overall)

Base: 268

Generic Portal

24

33%45%

36%42% 39% 40%

32%

41%

38%

38%35% 37%

24%

6%21% 12% 24% 20%

1%1%7%

6% 6%9%

2%1%1% 3% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Downright painful

Fairly troublesomeand irritating

Just about agreeable

Fairly pleasant andsatisfactory

Extremely pleasantand delightful

JFM '08

61%

47%43%

56%49%

43%

16%

20%

13%

17%

18%20%

18%

21%

17%

15%18%

19%

14%

3%

14%10%

20%

10%4%

1%2% 2%7%

2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Took significantlylonger than expected

Took somewhat moretime than expected

Completed in as muchtime as expected

Completed marginallyfaster than expected

Completed a lot fasterthan expected

JFM '08

Chart 19: Timeliness of task completion (overall)

Base: 651

Chart 20: Quality of usage experience (overall)

Base: 651


25

57% 59% 58% 60%54% 53%

27% 26% 24%29%

26%34%

12% 12%10%

8%

14%

11%

2%3%

2%5%

2%2%

0%4%2% 1% 3% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Very unlikely to visit it

Fairly unlikely to visit it

Not sure, may or maynot visit it

Somewhat likely tovisit it

Very likely to visit it

JFM '08

38%45%

37%47%

42% 46%

37%31% 45%

39%38%

36%

22% 21%14% 10% 16% 16%

1%2%3% 3% 4%1%1%1%2% 1% 1% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Completely insecure

Fairly insecure

Not sure if I can trustthe website

Fairly secure

Absolutely secure

JFM '08

Chart 21: Perceived sense of security in usage (overall)

Base: 1,325

Chart 22: Brand preference creation (overall)

Base: 1,325

Generic Portal

26

Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria Table 10: Importance ranking of the key individual criteria (overall)

Brands AOL Sify Yahoo Indiatimes Rediff MSN Overall

Fastest to download 80% 70% 90% 62% 76% 79% 76%

Simplest and most easy to understand language

50% 39% 49% 54% 55% 41% 48%

Most responsive and prompt in customer service and support

19% 27% 24% 38% 22% 26% 26%

Brand image in the market place 20% 35% 21% 30% 18% 21% 24%

Provide the best help 28% 19% 20% 24% 24% 25% 23%

Most neat looking design (aesthetics) 20% 29% 20% 13% 20% 24% 21%

Best assures safety against frauds & misuse of personal details & financial info

25% 20% 20% 16% 16% 18% 19%

Gives best assurance on privacy of info provided

15% 15% 22% 21% 21% 17% 19%

Matches my personality and style the best 18% 15% 15% 10% 27% 19% 17%

Most logical structure and flow of info. / content

8% 21% 6% 8% 12% 20% 12%

Helps accomplish the task in least no. of clicks

12% 9% 9% 17% 5% 8% 10%

Most consistent design, look & feel across the page

4% 1% 5% 7% 5% 3% 4%

Base: 1,320


27

Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Website Users Only

Table 11: User friendliness index (WUF) - website users only


Yahoo 3.7 100%

Rediff 3.7 98%

AOL 3.6 95%

Indiatimes 3.2 86%

Sify 3.2 86%

MSN 2.9 78%

Base: 707

Table 12: Friendly interface index (UFEX) - website users only


Rediff 2.1 100%

Yahoo 2.1 98%

AOL 2.1 96%

Sify 1.8 86%

Indiatimes 1.8 85%

MSN 1.6 77%

Base: 707

Table 13: User friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - website users only


Yahoo 1.6 100%

Rediff 1.5 94%

AOL 1.5 91%

Indiatimes 1.4 86%

Sify 1.4 83%

MSN 1.3 77%

Base: 707

Generic Portal

28

Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Website Users Only

Table 14: Accessibility index (website users only)


Rediff 1.2 100%

Yahoo 1.1 99%

AOL 1.1 95%

Indiatimes 1.0 87%

Sify 1.0 85%

MSN 0.9 77%

Base: 707

Table 15: Appeal index (website users only)


Rediff 1.0 100%

Yahoo 1.0 98%

AOL 1.0 98%

Sify 0.8 87%

Indiatimes 0.8 84%

MSN 0.8 77%

Base: 707


29

Table 16: Navigability index (website users only)

Base: 707

Table 17: Usage satisfaction index (website users only)


Rediff 1.0 100%

Yahoo 1.0 95%

AOL 0.9 91%

Indiatimes 0.9 85%

Sify 0.9 85%

MSN 0.8 79%

Base: 707

Brands Navigability Index Relative Index

Yahoo 0.7 100%

AOL 0.6 84%

Indiatimes 0.5 80%

Rediff 0.5 77%

Sify 0.5 75%

MSN 0.5 69%

Generic Portal

30

Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Website Users Only

Brand

.4.3.2.10.0-.1-.2-.3-.4

Att

rib

ute

.2

.1

0.0

-.1

-.2

Usage Satisfaction

Ease of Usage

Design Appeal

MSN

AOL

Sify

Indiatimes

Yahoo

Rediff

Ease of Access


31

Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Users Only

Table 18: Summary table (website users only)



Download Time 4.3 3.9 4.2 4.7 4.1 4.2











Appeal Index 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8





Error recovery 4.4 4.6 3.9 4.4 4.2 4.4










UFEX Index 2.1 1.8 2.1 1.8 2.1 1.6

UZEX Index 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.3

WUF Index 3.6 3.2 3.7 3.2 3.7 2.9

Base: 707

Generic Portal

32

56%52% 50%

35%

49% 54%

26% 31%25%

33%

21%

25%

3%9%

12%16%

16% 4%

7%

10%8%2%

5% 11%4%

5%11%

6% 8%5%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Didn't notice the logoat all'.

I had to search for thelogo


It was prominent and Ispotted it easily


JFM '08

57%

37%

54%

76%

52% 52%

26%

39%

21%

17%

18%25%

9%

10%19%

6%

22%15%

8%0%

5%

9%

7%1%

5%

2%2% 5%0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely slow

Fairly slow

Neither fast nor slow

Reasonably fast

Adequately fast

JFM '08


Chart 23: Download time (website users only)

Base: 365

Chart 24: Distinctive in identity (website users only)

Base: 365


33

67%58%

45%50%

56% 56%

32%

35%

37%34%

29% 28%

6%

14% 12% 12% 15%

1%2% 0%0% 2% 5%0%

0%3%0% 2% 3% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%



Fairly untidy

Averagely presented


Very well presented

JFM '08

35% 34%

58%

40% 40%

25%

46%53%

31%

37%42%

48%

19% 8% 7%

18%14%

23%

0%0%

5%0%4% 3%4%0%3%0%0% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

Chart 25: Presentation of the home page (website users only)

Base: 365

Chart 26: Presentation of the task page (website users only)

Base: 365

Generic Portal

34

67%

44%

54%49% 62%

72%

22%

37%

30% 12% 14% 8%

4%13%

4%8% 10% 13%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Neither engage me nordistract me

Too many

Highly relevant andengaging

JFM '08

73%

53%

77%70%

58%

78%

27%

35%

21%

21%38%

22%

1% 3%9%

5%0%11%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


It has too little contentand looks empty

It has too much textand looks cluttered

It has just the rightamount of text andlooks fine

JFM '08

Chart 27: Aesthetics of text (website users only)

Base: 365

Chart 28: Aesthetics of graphics (website users only)

Base: 365


35

45%35%

50% 46% 45%40%

18%32%

34% 40%37%

23%

26%27%

10%13%

5%

18%

16%

3%

7%

5% 3%0%

7%

6%4% 1% 3% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely difficult

Quite difficult


Reasonably easy

Extremely easy

JFM '08

30% 33%39%

34%44%

24%

28%31%

42%

33%

29%

36%

35% 23%

15%

21%15%

36%

5%8%10%

0%8%

7%

0%5%

0% 4% 4% 5%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%




I can live with it



JFM '08

Chart 29: User identification with the site (website users only)

Base: 365

Chart 30: Ease of comprehension (website users only)

Base: 365

Generic Portal

36

40% 39%

54%

33%42%

57%

39%

27%

31%

39%

42%

32%

15%

25%

14%

27%10%

9%1%

5%6%

1% 1%3%

0%1%2% 4% 0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

28%

42%

53% 53%

33%40%

49%

39%

35%27%

45%

47%

18%19%

12%

15%14%

13%

0%0%

0%

1% 0% 4%0%

8%6%0% 0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Almost irrelevant

Low relevance

Averagely relevant

Fairly relevant

Highly relevant

JFM '08

Chart 31: Relevance of content (website users only)

Base: 365

Chart 32: Relative quality of content (website users only)

Base: 365


37

49%59%

43%48%

53%46%

27% 11%

23%

30% 19%26%

14% 27%24%

16%

14%23%

6%

3%

3%10% 4%10%

0%

11%

0% 1% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

68% 64%

52%45% 41%

65%

17% 21%

29%

31%

23%

22%

15%10% 14%

14%32%

13%

0%0%5%

3% 5%7%

0% 0%0% 3% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely difficult

Fairly difficult


Fairly easy

Very easy

JFM '08

Chart 33: Ease of locating task info (website users only)

Base: 342

Chart 34: Ease of conducting the task (website users only)

Base: 342

Generic Portal

38

0% 4%9%

0%

17%8%

8%

16%

10%

3%

10%

53%

50%

43%

33%

39% 43%

20%

19%

2%

14%1%

7%

27%7%

27%

38% 38%

24% 29%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

48%

66%

44% 47% 49% 52%

17%

20%

19%

40%

24%

39%

27%

8%

24%

7%

9%

9%

0%

16%2%

6%

5%8%

1%1%0% 4% 7%2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%





More or less freely

Completely freely

JFM '08

Chart 35: Navigation flow between pages (website users only)

Base: 342

Chart 36: Navigation cues and helps (website users only)

Base: 342


39

67%63%

79%

64%

90%

75%

30%

14%

19%

33%

3%25%

3%

22%

2%6%

0%0%0%1%

1%0% 0% 2%0% 0%0% 1% 0%0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

62%

74%

37%

71%

45%

70%

24%

18%

38%

13%

42%

17%

9%7%

7%

7%8% 5%

4%4%4%1%

13%6%

4%2%

1%1% 5% 4%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

Chart 37: Error recovery (website users only)

Base: 342

Chart 38: Appropriateness of the response (website users only)

Base: 154

Generic Portal

40

53%57%

46%38%

58% 62%

42%30%

46%54%

34%

38%

3%

2%

8% 8%2%

0%0%0%

0%10%

1% 0%2% 6%0% 1% 0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Highly dissatisfied




Highly satisfied

JFM '08

60%

82%

52%

31%

81%

67%

20%

17%

46%

54%

3% 32%2%

0% 2%

15% 15%

1%0%

0%0% 0% 0%

8%

0%1%

10%

1% 0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%



Fairly late



Very promptly

JFM '08

Chart 39: Timeliness of response (website users only)

Base: 154

Chart 40: Satisfaction with response (website users only)

Base: 154


41

33%

45%35% 38% 41%

46%

27%

42%

40%39% 30%

32%

27%

7%25% 20%

27%16%

1%2%

2%0% 0%

13%

4%1%1% 4% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Downright painful





JFM '08

65%

32%40%

32%

49%40%

9%

30% 15%25%

29%

21%

21%

21%

17%

23%

18%

26%

14%

0%4%

16%

24%14%

4%1%2% 2% 5% 5%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

Chart 41: Timeliness of task completion (website users only)

Base: 342

Chart 42: Quality of the usage experience (website users only)

Base: 342

Generic Portal

42

58% 61% 61%67%

54%60%

26% 21% 24%21%

32%

31%

11% 16% 9%9% 10%

9%0%0%

2%2%

3%3%4%

3%2% 0% 3% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

40% 43% 40% 44% 45%52%

30%30%

43%41%

32%

33%

25% 22%12% 11%

21%14%

1%2%4% 4% 3%2%

1%0%3% 1% 1% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Completely insecure

Fairly insecure


Fairly secure

Absolutely secure

JFM '08

Chart 43: Perceived sense of security in usage (website users only)

Base: 707

Chart 44: Brand preference creation (website users only)

Base: 707


43

Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria Table 19: Importance ranking of the key individual criteria (website

users only)




53% 43% 42% 62% 61% 47% 51%

Most neat looking design (aesthetics) 18% 36% 22% 13% 15% 35% 22%

Matches my personality and style the best 24% 22% 20% 9% 38% 17% 22%



15% 21% 22% 30% 15% 26% 21%



18% 20% 19% 21% 16% 22% 19%


19% 12% 15% 31% 15% 19% 18%


9% 18% 3% 13% 11% 8% 10%


9% 11% 6% 24% 4% 8% 10%

Most consistent design, look & feel across the page

7% 0% 4% 6% 7% 5% 5%

Base: 707

Generic Portal

44

Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Website Non Users Only

Table 20: User friendliness index (WUF) - website non users only


Rediff 3.4 100%

Indiatimes 3.3 98%

Sify 3.2 94%

Yahoo 3.1 93%

AOL 2.7 79%

MSN 2.5 73%

Base: 618

Table 21: User friendly interface index (UFEX) - website non users only


Rediff 1.9 100%

Indiatimes 1.9 97%

Sify 1.8 95%

Yahoo 1.8 95%

AOL 1.5 80%

MSN 1.4 74%

Base: 618

Table 22: User friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - website non users only


Indiatimes 1.4 100%

Rediff 1.4 99%

Sify 1.3 93%

Yahoo 1.3 90%

AOL 1.1 77%

MSN 1.0 71%

Base: 618


45

Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Website Non Users Only

Table 23: Accessibility index (website non users only)


Rediff 1.1 100%

Indiatimes 1.0 98%

Yahoo 1.0 94%

Sify 1.0 94%

AOL 0.9 80%

MSN 0.8 73%

Base: 618

Table 24: Appeal index (website non users only)


Rediff 0.9 100%

Sify 0.8 96%

Yahoo 0.8 96%

Indiatimes 0.8 94%

AOL 0.7 79%

MSN 0.7 75%

Base: 618

Generic Portal

46

Table 25: Navigability index (website non users only)

Brands Navigability index Relative Index

Rediff 0.5 100%

Indiatimes 0.5 95%

Yahoo 0.5 86%

Sify 0.4 84%

AOL 0.4 70%

MSN 0.3 65%

Base: 618

Table 26: Usage satisfaction index (website non users only)


Indiatimes 0.9 100%

Rediff 0.9 96%

Sify 0.9 95%

Yahoo 0.8 90%

AOL 0.7 79%

MSN 0.7 73%

Base: 618


47

Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Website Non Users Only

Brand

.2.1-.0-.1-.2-.3

Att

rib

ute

.3

.2

.1

0.0

-.1

-.2Design Appeal

MSN

AOLSify

Indiatimes

Yahoo

Rediff

Usage Satisfaction

Ease of Usage Ease of Access

Generic Portal

48

Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Non Users Only

Table 27: Summary table - website non users only



Download Time 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.6 3.8











Appeal Index 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.7





Error recovery 4.1 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.3










UFEX Index 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.4

UZEX Index 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.0

WUF Index 2.7 3.2 3.1 3.3 3.4 2.5

Base: 618


49

69%

45%33%

42%52%

34%

16%

21%

31%

28%

26%

32%

11%

10% 10%

16%11%

2%

12%

21%6%

10% 10%

1%

3%5%1%

15% 16% 13%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Didn't notice the logoat all'.

I had to search for thelogo


It was prominent and Ispotted it easily


JFM '08

58% 61%54%

50%

63%

28%

29%18% 31%

29%

31%

39%

12%20%

14%19%

4%

21%

11%

1%1%1% 1% 1%0%0%2%

0% 0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely slow

Fairly slow

Neither fast nor slow

Reasonably fast

Adequately fast

JFM '08


Chart 45: Download time (website non users only)

Base: 311

Chart 46: Distinctive in identity (website non users only)

Base: 311

Generic Portal

50

54% 51% 53%

35%

57% 55%

26%43% 37%

34%

23% 25%

19%

4% 8%

26%

20% 19%

1%0% 4%0%1% 0%0%0%2%1%1% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%



Fairly untidy

Averagely presented


Very well presented

JFM '08

52% 49% 48%

36% 33% 31%

32% 35% 37%

44% 45%42%

16%10% 13%

14% 20%26%

1%0%7%2%

3%0%

0%0%1%3%0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

Chart 47: Presentation of the home page (website non users only)

Base: 311

Chart 48: Presentation of the task page (website non users only)

Base: 311


51

66%

56%

56%60% 65%

46%

11%

29%

11%17% 13%

35%

9% 6% 7% 10% 11%3%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Neither engage me nordistract me

Too many

Highly relevant andengaging

JFM '08

80%

55%

72%78%

68%58%

16%

41%

27% 16%27%

41%

4% 3% 1%7% 5% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


It has too little contentand looks empty

It has too much textand looks cluttered

It has just the rightamount of text andlooks fine

JFM '08

Chart 49: Aesthetics of text (website non users only)

Base: 311

Chart 50: Aesthetics of graphics (website non users only)

Base: 311

Generic Portal

52

44% 41%45%

34% 37% 35%

24% 31% 23% 44% 41%

29%

17%

24%21%

16% 15%

24%

12%

0%7%1%

5%3%

15%

1%0% 4% 6% 4%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely difficult

Quite difficult


Reasonably easy

Extremely easy

JFM '08

36%45%

34%40%

25% 23%

38%22%

16%

23% 51%

42%

11%15%

32%

20%

11%

14%

21%

0%

13%14%

9%9%3%

0%

13%4%

10% 8%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%




I can live with it



JFM '08

Chart 51: User identification with the site (website non users only)

Base: 311

Chart 52: Ease of comprehension (website non users only)

Base: 311


53

44% 40% 44%

31%37% 36%

34% 46% 35%

36%

44%42%

17%10%

17%

24%

8%22%

1%

8%4% 4% 9%1%

0%3%4% 0% 1% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

33% 34%

47%

34%41%

27%

41%

51%

36%

40%

40%

54%

26%11%

7%18%

15% 19%

0%0%1%3%

10% 4%

0% 3%0% 0% 0% 5%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Almost irrelevant

Low relevance

Averagely relevant

Fairly relevant

Highly relevant

JFM '08

Chart 53: Relevance of content (website non users only)

Base: 311

Chart 54: Relative quality of content (website non users only)

Base: 311

Generic Portal

54

39% 42%37%

42% 40% 40%

30%19%

46%41%

29%34%

18% 35%

17% 13%

20%

19%

7%10%

4%1%

3%10%

0%2%3% 1% 0% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

51%46%

55% 51%44%

59%

17%

37%

31%

16% 28%

26%

22%

16% 10%

31% 19%

13%

2%8%

0% 3% 1%

4%

0%2%

7%1% 1% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Extremely difficult

Fairly difficult


Fairly easy

Very easy

JFM '08

Chart 55: Ease of locating task info (website non users only)

Base: 309

Chart 56: Ease of conducting the task info (website non users only)

Base: 309


55

7%1% 1%

20%

7%0%

6%2%

45% 57%

39%

31%

39%

51%

14%

33%

14%

6%

5%

11%

11%6%

29%

5%16%

32%26%

31%26% 31%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

63% 59%

40% 40%44%

54%

17%35%

42% 46%32%

36%

16%

3%

5%7%

12%

6%4%

12%2%

10%5%

4%0%0%0% 0% 3% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%





More or less freely

Completely freely

JFM '08

Chart 57: Navigation flow between pages (website non users only)

Base: 309

Chart 58: Navigation cues and helps (website non users only)

Base: 309

Generic Portal

56

91%

64%

49%

86%

59%67%

26%

44%

14%

20%

21%

0%4% 12%

0%0%

9% 2%

0%

0%

0%

1%0%

0%0%

21%

0% 6% 3% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

59%

71%60%

50%

63%

50%

15%

10%

18% 38%

29%

37%

9%

18%

6%

6%9%

9%

4%0%0%

13%

4%16%

1%0%1% 1% 3% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

Chart 59: Error recovery (website non users only)

Base: 309

Chart 60: Appropriateness of the response (website non users only)

Base: 114


57

55%47%

36%

59%50%

44%

30%53%

39%

41%

44%

43%

6%13%

0%0%

1%

0%0%15%

0% 0%

21%

0% 0%0%3%0%0% 0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Highly dissatisfied




Highly satisfied

JFM '08

72%

30%

46%

70%

46%

72%

28%

21%

6%

30%

27%

17%

35%

27%

12%

0%0%0% 0%

49%

0%0%

0%

0%0% 0%0% 0%12%

0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%



Fairly late



Very promptly

JFM '08

Chart 61: Timeliness of response (website non users only)

Base: 114

Chart 62: Satisfaction with response (website non users only)

Base: 114

Generic Portal

58

34%44%

37%45%

38%33%

41%

39%

36%

38%

40%42%

20% 4%14%

5%21% 25%

0%0%0%

12% 13% 10%4%

1%1% 1% 0% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Downright painful





JFM '08

55%64%

47%

74%

49% 48%

27% 9%

11%

10%

8%19%

14%22%

17%

9%

18%

12%

15%

7%

23%

4%

16%

7%4%2%1% 1%

9%0%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

Chart 63: Timeliness of task completion (website non users only)

Base: 309

Chart 64: Quality of usage experience (website non users only)

Base: 309


59

55% 58% 56% 54% 55%46%

27%30%

23%36%

19% 36%

14%8%

11%

7%

19%

15%

3%3%

3%7%

0%0%

0%5%4% 1% 4% 2%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%







JFM '08

34%

47%

34%

50%39% 40%

47%

33%

47%

36%

46% 41%

19% 19% 17% 9% 12% 18%

1%1%2% 1% 5%0%

0%2%1% 0% 1% 1%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%


Completely insecure

Fairly insecure


Fairly secure

Absolutely secure

JFM '08

Chart 65: Perceived sense of security in usage (website non users only)

Base: 618

Chart 66: Brand preference creation (website non users only)

Base: 618

Generic Portal

60

Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria Table 28: Importance ranking of the key individual criteria (website non

users only)




46% 35% 57% 46% 49% 35% 45%


24% 33% 27% 47% 29% 25% 31%



Most neat looking design (aesthetics)

24% 21% 18% 14% 26% 12% 19%


9% 19% 29% 13% 28% 14% 19%


35% 20% 20% 11% 16% 12% 19%


7% 24% 9% 4% 14% 34% 15%

Matches my personality and style the best

11% 9% 10% 11% 13% 21% 12%


18% 7% 12% 11% 6% 7% 10%

Most consistent design, look & feel across

1% 2% 7% 8% 3% 2% 4%

Base: 613


61

Respondent Profile

Generic Portal

62

83%

17%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Overall

Male FemaleJFM '08

19%

8% 6%

43%

24%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Overall

Age 13-18 years Age 19-24 years Age 25-35 yearsAge 36-45 years Above Age 45 years

JFM '08

Demographic Profile Chart 67: Gender

Base: 1,325

Chart 68: Age group

Base: 1,325


63

JFM '08

27%

17%

44%

12%

0%

20%

40%

Overall

Upto 1 Lakh 1-5 Lakhs 5-10 Lakhs Avove 10 Lakhs

JFM '08

37%

8%4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Overall

Metro Urban uptowns Emerging Towns Others

Chart 69: City class - by population size

Base: 1,325

Chart 70: City class - by market size

Base: 1,325

Generic Portal

64

JFM '08

23%

11%

26%

40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Overall

North East South West

Table 29: Top 10 cities

Cities All -Online Travel

Mumbai 7%

Bangalore 7%

Delhi 6%

Hyderabad 6%

Chennai 5%

Kolkata 3%

Secunderabad 3%

Pune 2%

Thane 1%

Visakhapatnam 1%

Base: 1,325

Chart 71: Region-wise break-ups

Base: 1,325


65

Native language of respondents

Table 30: Preferred language of speaking - top 10 languages

Languages All -Online Travel

English 52%

Hindi 21%

Telugu 6%

Tamil 4%

Gujarati 4%

Marathi 0.8%

Kannada 4%

Malayalam 2%

Bengali 2%

Urdu 0.9%

Base: 1,325

Generic Portal

66

JFM '08

25%

33%

13%

7%

23%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Overall

SEC-A SEC-B SEC-C SEC-D SEC-E

JFM '08

29%25%

10%

30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Overall

Up to SSC/HSC College but not Graduate

Graduate & above-general stream Graduate & above-professional

Socio Economic Profile

Chart 72: Socio economic classification

Base: 1,325

Chart 73: Highest education level

Base: 1,325


67

JFM '08

9% 7%

3%

15%13%

3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Overall

Jr level salaried emp Sr level salaried emp Self Employed

Businessmen Student HousewifeOthers

Chart 74: Current occupation

Base: 1,325

Generic Portal

68

50%

32%

11%

7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Overall

Upto Rs. 10K 10-30K 30-50K Above 50KJFM '08

41%

15%

25%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Overall

2 Wheeler 4 Wheeler Others Don't own a vehicleJFM '08

Economic Profile Chart 75: Monthly family income

Base: 1,325

Chart 76: Most expensive vehicle owned by the household

Base: 1,160


69

15%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Overall

Don't own a credit card Own a Credit CardJFM '08

Chart 77: Ownership of credit cards (individually)

Base: 1,325

Generic Portal

70

57%

3%

38% 38%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Overall

Home Place of work Cyber Cafe In-transitJFM '08

38%

25%

17% 21%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Overall

Upto 1 year 1-2 years2-5 years Above 5 years

JFM '08

Net Usage Dynamics Chart 78: Experience in internet usage

Base: 1,325

Chart 79: Place of internet access (multiple)

Base: 1,325


71

WUF Index Ranking of Websites by User Segments

72

Table 1: By gender breakup (overall)

Male Female

Indiatimes Rediff

Yahoo Yahoo

Rediff MSN

Sify Sify

AOL AOL

MSN Indiatimes

Table 2: By gender breakup (website users only)

Male Female

AOL Rediff

Rediff Yahoo

Yahoo Sify

Indiatimes MSN

Sify Indiatimes

MSN AOL

Table 3: By gender breakup (website non-users only)

Male Female

Indiatimes Rediff

Sify Yahoo

Yahoo AOL

Rediff MSN

AOL Sify

MSN Indiatimes

73

Table 4: By age group (overall)

13-18 Years 19-24 years 25-35 years 36-45 years 46-55 years Above 55 years

Rediff Rediff Indiatimes AOL MSN Indiatimes

Yahoo Yahoo Yahoo Sify AOL AOL

AOL Sify Sify Rediff Indiatimes MSN

MSN AOL AOL Yahoo Rediff Rediff

Sify Indiatimes MSN Indiatimes Sify Sify

Indiatimes MSN Rediff MSN Yahoo Yahoo

Table 5: By age group (website users only)


Rediff Yahoo Indiatimes AOL MSN Indiatimes

AOL Rediff Sify Sify Rediff AOL

Yahoo AOL AOL MSN Indiatimes Sify

MSN Sify Rediff Yahoo AOL MSN

Indiatimes Indiatimes MSN Rediff Sify Rediff

Sify MSN Yahoo Indiatimes Yahoo Yahoo

Table 6: By age group (website non-users only)


Yahoo Sify Indiatimes Indiatimes MSN Indiatimes

Rediff Rediff Yahoo Rediff AOL Rediff

Sify Indiatimes MSN Sify Indiatimes MSN

MSN AOL AOL AOL Rediff AOL

AOL MSN Sify Yahoo Sify Sify

Indiatimes Yahoo Rediff MSN Yahoo Yahoo

74

Table 7: By socio economic classification (overall)


Rediff AOL Rediff Yahoo Indiatimes

Sify Yahoo Yahoo Sify AOL

MSN Sify Indiatimes Rediff Rediff

Indiatimes Rediff MSN Indiatimes Sify

AOL Indiatimes Sify MSN MSN

Yahoo MSN AOL AOL Yahoo

Table 8: By socio economic classification (website users only)


Indiatimes AOL Rediff Sify AOL

Rediff Yahoo Yahoo Yahoo Indiatimes

MSN Sify Sify Rediff Rediff

Sify MSN MSN Indiatimes Sify

AOL Rediff Indiatimes MSN MSN

Yahoo Indiatimes AOL AOL Yahoo

Table 9: By socio economic classification (website non-users only)


Rediff Sify Rediff Yahoo Indiatimes

Sify AOL Indiatimes Sify Rediff

AOL Yahoo Yahoo Rediff Sify

MSN Indiatimes AOL MSN MSN

Yahoo Rediff MSN Indiatimes AOL

Indiatimes MSN Sify AOL Yahoo

75

Table 10: By vehicle ownership (overall)

Two Wheeler 4 Wheeler Don't Own Any

Yahoo Sify Rediff

Rediff Rediff Indiatimes

AOL AOL Yahoo

Sify Indiatimes AOL

Indiatimes Yahoo MSN

MSN MSN Sify

Table 11: By vehicle ownership (website users only)


Yahoo Indiatimes Rediff

Rediff Sify AOL

AOL AOL Sify

Sify Rediff MSN

Indiatimes Yahoo Yahoo

MSN MSN Indiatimes

Table 12: By vehicle ownership (website non-users only)


Indiatimes Sify Indiatimes

Sify Rediff Rediff

AOL AOL Yahoo

Rediff Yahoo MSN

Yahoo Indiatimes AOL

MSN MSN Sify

76

Table 13: By region (overall)


Indiatimes Rediff Yahoo Rediff

AOL Sify MSN Indiatimes

Yahoo Indiatimes Sify AOL

Sify AOL Rediff MSN

Rediff Yahoo AOL Sify

MSN MSN Indiatimes Yahoo

Table 14: By region (website users only)


AOL Sify Yahoo Rediff

Yahoo Rediff Sify MSN

Rediff Indiatimes AOL AOL

Indiatimes AOL Indiatimes Sify

MSN Yahoo Rediff Indiatimes

Sify MSN MSN Yahoo

Table 15: By region (website non-users only)


Sify Rediff MSN Indiatimes

Indiatimes Sify Yahoo Rediff

Yahoo Indiatimes Rediff AOL

Rediff Yahoo AOL Sify

AOL AOL Indiatimes Yahoo

MSN MSN Sify MSN

77

Table 16: By monthly household income (overall)

Upto 1 Lakh 1-5 Lakhs 5-10 Lakhs Above 10 Lakhs

AOL Rediff Sify Yahoo

Rediff Indiatimes AOL Rediff

Yahoo Sify Yahoo Indiatimes

Sify Yahoo Indiatimes MSN

Indiatimes MSN Rediff Sify

MSN AOL MSN AOL

Table 17: By monthly household income (website users only)


Rediff Yahoo Sify Indiatimes

AOL Rediff AOL Yahoo

Yahoo Sify Indiatimes Sify

MSN Indiatimes Yahoo MSN

Indiatimes AOL Rediff AOL

Sify MSN MSN Rediff

Table 18: By monthly household income (website non-users only)


Sify Rediff Yahoo Rediff

Indiatimes Indiatimes Sify Yahoo

Yahoo AOL AOL Indiatimes

AOL Sify Indiatimes MSN

Rediff Yahoo Rediff AOL

MSN MSN MSN Sify

78

Sample Sizes

79

Table 19: Sample sizes by websites

Captured Data Usable Data

User Non User Overall User Non User Overall

Total Sample Base 735 686 1,421 707 618 1,325

AOL 105 107 212 102 96 198

Sify 116 113 229 113 101 214

Yahoo 127 110 237 125 94 219

Indiatimes 132 109 241 123 96 219

Rediff 129 131 260 125 125 250

MSN 126 116 242 119 106 225

Note- The sample sizes of various websites were equalized while calculating their website user friendliness index

80

Index: Charts

Chart 1: Download time (overall) .......................................................15 Chart 2: Distinctive in identity (overall) ...............................................15 Chart 3: Presentation of the home page (overall)....................................16 Chart 4: Presentation of the task page (overall) .....................................16 Chart 5: Aesthetics of text (overall) ....................................................17 Chart 6: Aesthetics of graphics (overall) ...............................................17 Chart 7: User identification with the site (overall) ..................................18 Chart 8: Ease of comprehension (overall)..............................................18 Chart 9: Relevance of content (overall)................................................19 Chart 10: Relative quality of content (overall) .......................................19 Chart 11: Ease of locating task info (overall) .........................................20 Chart 12: Ease of conducting the task info (overall).................................20 Chart 13: Navigation flow between pages (overall) ..................................21 Chart 14: Navigation cues and helps (overall) ........................................21 Chart 15: Error recovery (overall) .......................................................22 Chart 16: Appropriateness of the response (overall).................................22 Chart 17: Timeliness of response (overall) ............................................23 Chart 18: Satisfaction with response (overall) ........................................23 Chart 19: Timeliness of task completion (overall) ...................................24 Chart 20: Quality of usage experience (overall) ......................................24 Chart 21: Perceived sense of security in usage (overall)............................25 Chart 22: Brand preference creation (overall) ........................................25 Chart 23: Download time (website users only)........................................32 Chart 24: Distinctive in identity (website users only) ...............................32 Chart 25: Presentation of the home page (website users only)....................33 Chart 26: Presentation of the task page (website users only)......................33 Chart 27: Aesthetics of text (website users only) ....................................34 Chart 28: Aesthetics of graphics (website users only) ...............................34 Chart 29: User identification with the site (website users only) ..................35 Chart 30: Ease of comprehension (website users only)..............................35 Chart 31: Relevance of content (website users only) ................................36 Chart 32: Relative quality of content (website users only) .........................36 Chart 33: Ease of locating task info (website users only) ...........................37 Chart 34: Ease of conducting the task (website users only) ........................37 Chart 35: Navigation flow between pages (website users only) ...................38 Chart 36: Navigation cues and helps (website users only) ..........................38 Chart 37: Error recovery (website users only) ........................................39 Chart 38: Appropriateness of the response (website users only) ..................39 Chart 39: Timeliness of response (website users only) ..............................40 Chart 40: Satisfaction with response (website users only)..........................40 Chart 41: Timeliness of task completion (website users only) .....................41 Chart 42: Quality of the usage experience (website users only)...................41 Chart 43: Perceived sense of security in usage (website users only) .............42 Chart 44: Brand preference creation (website users only) .........................42 Chart 45: Download time (website non users only) ..................................49 Chart 46: Distinctive in identity (website non users only) ..........................49 Chart 47: Presentation of the home page (website non users only) ..............50 Chart 48: Presentation of the task page (website non users only) ................50 Chart 49: Aesthetics of text (website non users only) ...............................51 Chart 50: Aesthetics of graphics (website non users only)..........................51 Chart 51: User identification with the site (website non users only) .............52 Chart 52: Ease of comprehension (website non users only) ........................52 Chart 53: Relevance of content (website non users only) ..........................53 Chart 54: Relative quality of content (website non users only)....................53 Chart 55: Ease of locating task info (website non users only)......................54 Chart 56: Ease of conducting the task info (website non users only) .............54 Chart 57: Navigation flow between pages (website non users only) ..............55 Chart 58: Navigation cues and helps (website non users only).....................55 Chart 59: Error recovery (website non users only) ...................................56

81

Chart 60: Appropriateness of the response (website non users only).............56 Chart 61: Timeliness of response (website non users only).........................57 Chart 62: Satisfaction with response (website non users only) ....................57 Chart 63: Timeliness of task completion (website non users only)................58 Chart 64: Quality of usage experience (website non users only) ..................58 Chart 65: Perceived sense of security in usage (website non users only) ........59 Chart 66: Brand preference creation (website non users only) ....................59 Chart 67: Gender ...........................................................................62 Chart 68: Age group........................................................................62 Chart 69: City class - by population size ...............................................63 Chart 70: City class - by market size....................................................63 Chart 71: Region-wise break-ups ........................................................64 Chart 72: Socio economic classification................................................66 Chart 73: Highest education level.......................................................66 Chart 74: Current occupation ............................................................67 Chart 75: Monthly family income........................................................68 Chart 76: Most expensive vehicle owned by the household ........................68 Chart 77: Ownership of credit cards (individually) ...................................69 Chart 78: Experience in internet usage ................................................70 Chart 79: Place of internet access (multiple) .........................................70

82

Index: Tables

Table 1: Sample size by websites ........................................................ 6 Table 2: Website user friendliness index (WUF) - overall ...........................10 Table 3: Friendly interface index (UFEX) - overall ...................................10 Table 4: User friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - overall ...................10 Table 5: Accessibility index (overall) ...................................................11 Table 6: Appeal index (overall) ..........................................................11 Table 7: Navigability index (overall)....................................................12 Table 8: Usage satisfaction index (overall) ............................................12 Table 9: Summary table - overall........................................................14 Table 10: Importance ranking of the key individual criteria (overall) ............26 Table 11: User friendliness index (WUF) - website users only......................27 Table 12: Friendly interface index (UFEX) - website users only ...................27 Table 13: User friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - website users only ...27 Table 14: Accessibility index (website users only) ...................................28 Table 15: Appeal index (website users only) ..........................................28 Table 16: Navigability index (website users only) ....................................29 Table 17: Usage satisfaction index (website users only) ............................29 Table 18: Summary table (website users only)........................................31 Table 19: Importance ranking of the key individual criteria (website users only).................................................................................................43 Table 20: User friendliness index (WUF) - website non users only ................44 Table 21: User friendly interface index (UFEX) - website non users only ........44 Table 22: User friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - website non users only.................................................................................................44 Table 23: Accessibility index (website non users only) ..............................45 Table 24: Appeal index (website non users only).....................................45 Table 25: Navigability index (website non users only)...............................46 Table 26: Usage satisfaction index (website non users only).......................46 Table 27: Summary table - website non users only ..................................48 Table 28: Importance ranking of the key individual criteria (website non users only) ..........................................................................................60 Table 29: Top 10 cities ....................................................................64 Table 30: Preferred language of speaking - top 10 languages......................65

83

Index: Segment Wise Tables Table 1: By gender breakup (overall)...................................................72

Table 2: By gender breakup (website users only) ....................................72

Table 3: By gender breakup (website non-users only) ...............................72

Table 4: By age group (overall) ..........................................................73

Table 5: By age group (website users only)............................................73

Table 6: By age group (website non-users only) ......................................73

Table 7: By socio economic classification (overall) ..................................74

Table 8: By socio economic classification (website users only)....................74

Table 9: By socio economic classification (website non-users only) ..............74

Table 10: By vehicle ownership (overall) ..............................................75

Table 11: By vehicle ownership (website users only) ................................75

Table 12: By vehicle ownership (website non-users only) ..........................75

Table 13: By region (overall) .............................................................76

Table 14: By region (website users only)...............................................76

Table 15: By region (website non-users only) .........................................76

Table 16: By monthly household income (overall) ...................................77

Table 17: By monthly household income (website users only) .....................77

Table 18: By monthly household income (website non-users only)................77

Table 19: Sample sizes by websites .....................................................79

84

85