K-State Department of Animal Sciences and Industry ...€¦ · VIII. Appendix G: Target Audience feedback, Main Content Area B IX. Tables, summary of data Table 1: Mean responses,

K-State Department of Animal Sciences and IndustryMarketing Research for ASI Web site

Survey responses from nine target audiencesMay 17 - June 3, 2004

CONTENTS

I. Summary: Marketing analysis and implications of responses

II. Appendix A: Feedback group questions

III. Appendix B: Target Audience feedback, Site A example

IV. Appendix C: Target Audience feedback, Site B example

V. Appendix D: Target Audience feedback, Site C example

VI. Appendix E: Target Audience feedback, Site D example

VII. Appendix F: Target Audience feedback, Main Content Area A

VIII. Appendix G: Target Audience feedback, Main Content Area B

IX. Tables, summary of data

Table 1: Mean responses, all target groups

Table 2: Mode responses, all target groups

Table 3: Mean responses, primary target audiences

Table 4: Mean responses, secondary target audiences

Table 5: Mean responses, tertiary target audiences

Table 6: Clustered summary of undergraduate students’ feedback

Table 7: Clustered summary of Graduate students’ feedback

Table 8: Clustered summary of prospective students’ feedback

Table 9: Clustered summary of livestock producers’ feedback

Table 10: Clustered summary of secondary audiences’ feedback

Table 11: Clustered summary of tertiary audiences’ feedback

June 4, 2004

Bob Cochran, Chair, Web Development CommitteeK-State Department of Animal Sciences and IndustryWeber HallCAMPUS

Dear Bob,

I have completed the second stage of your target audience analysis based on feedback received betweenMay 17 and June 3. In this part of the study, we obtained prior consent from 32 pre-selected members ofyour target audiences, and received feedback by email from 23 of them (a 72 percent response rate).

You’ll remember that in the first round of feedback, the focus was largely on the navigational structure(usability) and content interests of your target groups. After incorporating elements of navigation andcontent into four examples, we asked members of the feedback panel eight more questions that relatedmore specifically to the visual elements on the site.

A copy of the questions used to obtain the current feedback is included in appendix A. Also in theattached pages, you will find the web addresses and copy of each home page that the feedback panelistswere asked to view.

The results indicate that your target audiences strongly prefer site C (shown in appendix D). In nearlyevery target group, this site received the highest mean and mode ranking in the areas studied: graphicdesign, use of photographs, menus for sub-categories, type fonts and overall quality.

In general, users said they like site C because it has an “overall clear appearance,” “there was less clutter”and it “was simple and easy to follow.” Users also said they liked the menu positioning, fonts and “stronggraphic” on site C. It appears that simplicity and usability continue to be favored by these target groups.

However, I want to draw your attention to various responses which I believe can provide an even betterindication of particular elements preferred by your target audiences.

For instance, users rated site D only the third best in terms of overall quality, yet the menu structure wasstrongly preferred by many of the users who responded (based on mean and mode scores). One user, amember of your primary target audience, noted: “If you could incorporate the fonts on site C and themenus of site D, you would have a very appealing Web site.”

Similarly, the use of photographs on site B have appeal to your target audiences. While site C has thehighest mean score for all variables studied, the mode score for the use of photographs on site B was thesame as for site C (both received ‘1', the highest ranking possible), and your primary target groups rankedthe use of photographs on site B higher than site C in mean score.

In question 8 of the feedback questionnaire, we asked users to indicate their preference for the maincontent area. Seventeen of the 22 available responses to this question preferred a content area that listssub-categories available throughout the site (example A, appendix F) – as opposed to headlines thatfeature links to more information on current events and topics of interest (example B, appendix G). Yourprimary user groups unanimously preferred example A, whereas the limited support for example B camefrom some respondents in the secondary and tertiary groups.

In the accompanying tables, you will find clustered summaries of qualitative responses to the feedbackquestions. These will give you more indication of your user’s preferences. I can also provide the entire setof raw qualitative data to you, if you’d like.

I find some common themes in the qualitative responses. For instance, users continually associate goodWeb sites with “less clutter”; appropriate use of color, text and photographs; and availability of a searchengine. One user also preferred one site over the others because it was more “youthful,” which I interpretas not only appealing to younger audiences but also as being more modern in graphic design and, ofcourse, containing updated information.

The most common criticisms include a structure that makes it difficult to quickly find what the user islooking for; fonts that are unreadable (usually because they are too small, but there also seems to be apreference for sans-serif fonts); and banners with inappropriate or too many pictures (the collage on siteD, for example, was considered too “complicated” by one user).

The feedback in this part of the study, of course, needs to be weighed with our current knowledge of Webaudiences and supported by what we discovered in our first feedback study. That is to say that navigationand usability are the most important elements of a good Web site; the visual appeal, however, can andwill attract users to your information.

In other words, I encourage you and the professional staff in the Department of Communications tocontinue emphasizing the usability of the site, even while incorporating users’ visual preferences. In bothparts of this study, users continually are telling us that they want to find information easily.

Please share our newest findings as you wish. I am available at your convenience to discuss these further,and also will be talking with members of my department about the potential implications of the feedbackwe now have available.

Thank you,

Pat Melgares, Marketing CoordinatorK-State Research and Extension

cc: Roger Terry, Neal Wollenberg, Pat Hackenberg, Gamage Dissanayake, Linda Sleichter, Kris Boone

APPENDIX A: Feedback group questionsMay 17-24, 2004(Distributed by email; participants will have one week to respond; quantitative and qualitative results willbe compiled and analyzed by K-State Research and Extension’s marketing unit)

InstructionsPlease respond to the following questions based on your opinions, and not on what you think others mightwant to see on the listed Web sites.

Please return your answers by email to Pat Melgares ([email protected]) by 5 p.m. on Monday, May24, 2004.

Your individual responses are confidential and will be reported in cumulative data for the entire group ofrespondents, and for sub-groups of target audiences. If you have questions or concerns about remaininganonymous beyond contact with the marketing group conducting this survey, please contact Pat Melgares atthe same email address noted above, or call 785-532-1160.

We will notify you after these results have been compiled. We anticipate providing you a Web address whereyou can review the results of this and the earlier feedback session (conducted in March, 2004). Thank you!

***********

The sites we are asking you to view are test pages, so links to supporting (or secondary) pages may notcurrently be working, and much of the text is used for testing only. You are asked to judge the sites based onthe current structure shown at each web address. These test sites may not appear at actual size in your browser.

To answer the questions below, please view these 4 Web sites.Site A: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/asi_test/sample1.htmSite B: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/ansi/Site C: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/asi_test/sample3.htmSite D: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/asi_test/sample4.htm

For questions 1 through 5, please rank the sites according to the category indicated. Use the following scalefor your answers:1 - I like this site the best2 - I like this site second best3 - I like this site third best4 - I like this site the least of the four

1) Please rank these sites for graphic design and visual appeal (including colors and the organization ofelements)_____ Site A_____ Site B_____ Site C_____ Site D

2) Please rank these sites based on photos on the site (including their size, quality and location)_____ Site A_____ Site B_____ Site C_____ Site D

NOTE: On these test pages, drop down menus are used for sub-categories under “Students and Programs,Information, Disciplines, and Species”. Scroll with your cursor across the menu items on Site D to see howthese work. Drop-down menus may be incorporated into any of these four designs.

3) Please rank these sites based on the use of menus for sub-categories_____ Site A_____ Site B_____ Site C_____ Site D

4) Please rank these sites based on the type fonts used on the page (including fonts for text, headers andmenus)_____ Site A_____ Site B_____ Site C_____ Site D

5) Please rank these sites on overall quality_____ Site A_____ Site B_____ Site C_____ Site D

6) Please comment on the quality of these sites, including your reasons for preferring one or more of the sitesover the others. You are not limited in the number of words for your response.

For questions 7 and 8, please view these two web addresses.EXAMPLE A: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/content/sample1.htmlEXAMPLE B: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/content/sample2.html

These are sample pages that ask you to look specifically at the structure of the “content” area (shown as awhite background with purple text). Questions 7 and 8 ask you to consider your preference for the design ofthe main content area.

Note that regardless of the design of the main content area, the main navigation menu (with or without drop-down menus) will be located at both the top and bottom of all Web pages. The main navigation menu containslinks to “Home, Students & Programs, Information, Disciplines, Species.”

8) For the main content area, I prefer:_____ the design shown in Example A (http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/content/sample1.html)_____ the design shown in Example B (http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/content/sample2.html)

9) Please explain why you prefer one of the proposed designs for the main content area over the other. You arenot limited in the number of words for your response.

Thank you for your time. Return this survey by email to Pat Melgares, [email protected] by May 24, 2004. Your answerswill be kept confidential. If you have additional questions or concerns regarding this project, you may call Pat Melgares at 785-532-1160.

APPENDIX B: Target audience feedback, Site A exampleFound at http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/asi_test/sample1.htm

APPENDIX C: Target audience feedback, Site B exampleFound at http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/ansi

APPENDIX D: Target audience feedback, Site C exampleFound at http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/asi_test/sample3.htm

APPENDIX E: Target audience feedback, Site D exampleFound at http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/asi_test/sample4.htm

APPENDIX F: Target audience feedback, main content area example AFound at http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/content/sample1.html

APPENDIX G: Target audience feedback, main content area example BFound at http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/content/sample2.html

Table 1. Mean (average) responses, all target groupsVariable Site A Site B Site C Site D

Graphic design/visual elements 3.09 2.55 2.00 2.36Photographs 3.18 2.32 1.91 2.59Menus 2.91 2.95 2.00 2.18Type fonts 3.05 2.68 2.00 2.27Overall quality 3.02 2.50 1.86 2.61____________________________________________Respondents N = 22*

Scale:1 - I like this site the best2 - I like this site second best3 - I like this site third best4 - I like this site the least of the four

* One additional respondent’s feedback is not included because the respondent did not report a rank order of these sites

Table 2. Mode responses, all target groupsVariable Site A Site B Site C Site D

Graphic design/visual elements 4 4 1 2Photographs 4 1 1 2Menus 4 3 2 2Type fonts 4 4 1 3Overall quality 4 4 1 3____________________________________________Respondents N = 22*



Table 3. Mean (average) responses, primary target audiencesVariable Site A Site B Site C Site D

Graphic design/visual elements 2.75 2.50 2.33 2.42Photographs 2.92 2.17 2.25 2.67Menus 2.67 2.58 2.33 2.50Type fonts 2.67 2.67 2.25 2.42Overall quality 2.63 2.50 2.17 2.71____________________________________________Respondents N = 12*



Table 4. Mean (average) responses, secondary target audiencesVariable Site A Site B Site C Site D

Graphic design/visual elements 3.38 2.50 1.75 2.38Photographs 3.38 2.50 1.63 2.50Menus 3.00 3.63 1.75 1.63Type fonts 3.38 2.63 1.63 2.38Overall quality 3.38 2.50 1.63 2.50____________________________________________Respondents N = 8


Table 5. Mean (average) responses, tertiary target audiencesVariable Site A Site B Site C Site D

Graphic design/visual elements 4.00 3.00 1.00 2.00Photographs 4.00 2.50 1.00 2.50Menus 4.00 2.50 1.00 2.50Type fonts 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00Overall quality 4.00 2.50 1.00 2.50____________________________________________Respondents N = 2


Table 6: Clustered Summary of Undergraduate Students’ Feedback on ASI Web site (May 17-June 3, 2004)

Topic Theme Illustrations

Comparingoverall quality ofsample sites

Graphics, design,visual elements

“I like site A the most but the pictures on the site were not as good asthose on site D. But if you combined the two and made the Currentevents thing look a bit better (don’t put the dates in parentheses)...”

“Site A definitely has the best overall quality and looks the mostprofessional but the pictures are pretty weak. However, the picturesfrom the heading of site D are great but the subcategories are weak.”

Combiningelements

“Site C is just kind of plain in general. The scrolling calendar on site Bis great, but the pictures are weak and the font and subcategories arevery juvenile looking.”

Main contentarea

Clarity, ease offindinginformation

“[Example B] looks like a big cluster of information. [Example A] isn’tflashy, but it does get the point across and everything is neat andorganized.”

[Example A] is way better especially because B has that sheep quiz thatis going to ‘feature questions about...sheep’. Whoever put that on there,I hope it was a joke.”

“I prefer [Example A] because it is more to the point withsubcategories. You do not have to read the whole thing; you just lookfor a key word. I also did not like the ‘more’ portion on [Example B]because it just causes more work for the viewer.”

Table 7: Clustered Summary of Graduate Students’ Feedback on ASI Web site (May 17-June 3, 2004)




“[Site C] is just more inviting and I can find what I’m looking for.”

“C just has an overall clear appearance. I just would change the font sothat it is easier to read. I also like the pictures of the animals. For somereason, I prefer to see pictures without the people in them.”

“I like A the best by far. However, the picture is not of a student. Also,the page does not take up the entire screen.”

“I thought site B had the best combinations of graphics and accessibilityas far as ease in finding info quickly.”

Combiningelements

“I like Web site C. I do not like anything about D except for the text. Ithink it is important to use basic text like arial on Web sites so they areeasy to read.”

“I have never really liked the design of our current page [Example B],but the topics are good.”

Main contentarea


“For everything I would be looking for in a Web page is on [ExampleA]. I like the second one [Example B] for a news page.”

“I prefer [Example A] because it is much more clear and to the point.Basically, the second sample looks like a newspaper page and is toocluttered. I don’t like trying to find things, and A makes it a lot easier. Ithink pages need to be clear and concise.”

“[Example A] appears to be less busy and more direct in the content. Ithink it would be easier to access and appears to be of higher quality. Ireally dislike the ‘more’ on the other page. I think incomplete blurbs aredistracting.”

“I thought example A was much easier to find information quickly andit wasn’t as confusing or ‘messy’ looking.”

Table 8: Clustered Summary of Prospective Students’ Feedback on ASI Web site (May 17-June 3, 2004)




“I don’t like how the search bar changes places on some of the sites.You need to keep the form for the home page consistent on the otherpages to help visitors feel more comfortable.”

“They are all pretty good.”

Combiningelements

“I definitely agree on adding drop down menus to the final site. Theyadd a professional image and allow easy access to all the pages fromeach page.”

“I like the color scheme and image of site A, although I like the menupositioning the best in site C. I like the news features menu on site D.”

Main contentarea


“[Example B] looked more professional.”

“[Example B] is just too much. It just confuses you. Maybe if you had itmore spread out, it would be better. I definitely prefer the first one.”

Table 9: Clustered Summary of Livestock Producers’ Feedback on ASI Web site (May 17-June 3, 2004)




“Sites B and D were close for me as they both presented what I wouldlike to see when opening up a site. They show some of what the site isabout and the graphics were good.”

“Site A is very unappealing in all aspects.”

“I liked site C the best because there was less clutter. Basically, it waseasy to find things and the white areas made it easy for me to read thetype. You can put too much in a Web site.”

Combiningelements

“If you could incorporate the fonts on site C and the menus of site D,you would have a very appealing Web site.”

“Site B clearly was the easiest to use in finding links to items that I aminterested in. It would be fine to include a little news on this page. Also,it should include a search link like the one on page C, left side. It isVERY important to have an easy way to find things, especially people.”

“You might consider increasing the amount of automatic e-mailnotifications about when a Web site is updated... If you want to getnews out to people and get them to utilize your Web site, then look atthe excellent email newsletter sent out by the K-State AlumniAssociation.”

Main contentarea


“Example A shows most of the categories so that you do not have to gothroughs everal different drop-down menus to find what you are lookingfor.”

“[Example B] seems too busy. Didn’t want to take time to look for whatI wanted. Example A was much more pleasing to the eye.”

“Example B was too boxed in, hurt my eyes. A was a lot smoother andcleaner.”

“I like A much better. A is more like a phone directory to get me towhere I want to go. B is more like MTV to tell me what is hot news.Sure, B might grab the attention better of someone that happened tostumble across the Web site, but A is a much more useful resource.”

Table 10: Clustered Summary of Secondary Target Audiences’ Feedback on ASI Web site(May 17-June 3, 2004)




“The combination of photos, text, information content and layout makesite C the site that is most attractive and easiest to navigate, in terms offinding particular information that I might be searching for.”

“Site D has an attractive design and I believe a more interesting andcomprehensive visual display, but the format is slightly less easy to usein locating information.”

“Site B is very simple and easy to use, but the layout is less attractiveand almost too basic to really catch my attention.”

“It was difficult to locate the drop-down menus for sub-categories –they were almost lost above the photo.”

“Site C to me was the most colorful and easy to get around. Site B I amfamiliar with and don’t have a problem getting around on it. I do likethe rolling calendar of events on site B.”

“The eye-catching color and least cluttered were the most eye-catching...the simplicity of site D was most appealing to me because it gave meenough to find the information I may have been seeking without havingto read the entire page... Color was more appealing than the plain purpleand white of Site A as well.”

Combiningelements

“I think the sites look great. I would use the fonts from either C or Awith the design from B or C.”

“Site D is more youthful and shows pictures of the whole college. SiteC looks like the forage page, but is clean and easy to read. Site B hastoo much purple but the print is easy to read. Site A, woman kissing ahorse? Needs to represent more than one species.”

“Site C and A have the most appeal to me as a user. I like C because it’sclean and easy to read, with a strong graphic. Site A is attractive, but thetype is too small and I certainly wouldn’t use a girl kissing a horse.”

Main contentarea


“I prefer the more basic content area (Example 1) with all differenttopics clearly listed in a format that is very easy to use. With the Newsand Information area on the right, there’s a way to see the most up-to-date and current articles and events, while still maintaining the standardformat for finding other information.”

“Sample 1 is cleaner. Sample 2 has too many ‘More>>’ and someoneneeds to update daily if not more. Sample 2 is more like where you gofor the news, while 1 is a home page.”

“If you are someone who does not use the site very often, I feel[Example A] will get you where you need to be faster.”

“The first site reminds me too much of the current site. I like theheadlines on the second one that help give you an idea of the mostrecent events in each of the subsections.”

“I like having the little news bits to read and choose from. The first oneis less busy, but pretty plain.”

Table 11: Clustered Summary of Tertiary Target Audiences’ Feedback on ASI Web site(May 17-June 3, 2004)




“I like [Site C] the best. I think it is clean, well-organized and concise.The only thing I’m not sure about is the typeface; on my computer, itlooks very small.”

“[On site C], colors and logo definitely say K-State. Contactinformation is easy to access. I think this clean look is important for thenumber of Kansans that have dial-up Internet.”

“Site C was simple and easy to follow. The pictures were notcomplicated and easy to discern. Color scheme was pleasant and nothard on the eyes.”

Combiningelements

“Number two has some good things going for it; the large sans-seriftype and obvious categorizations. But the logo dominates too much.Sample four is pretty good, but I don’t like all the pix at the top. Toomuch collage.”

“Sites B and D were very close in quality. The top banner [on site D]was overly artsy and detracted from the content below (too much timegifuring out the phase in-phase out approach to pictures). If the bannerwas slightly less complicated in D, I think the intended artistic valuewill come through. Site A was just a bit too drab, although the logo onthe left was attractive. The colors were too muted.”

Main contentarea


“The color bar/subheads are vital to attract attention; site A is just toobland. Without those bars, it is hard to differentiate the items.”

“[Example B] is much too busy and not enough white space separatingthe boxes. B was hard to read. Most people don’t want to read or sorttoo much at this stage. They look for key words and follow the links.”

“[Example A] was easier to follow and arranged in a way that allowsyou to scan efficiently. The white space provides enough division ofareas that you don’t feel boxed in.”

Documents

K-State Department of Animal Sciences and Industry ...€¦ · VIII. Appendix G: Target Audience feedback, Main Content Area B IX. Tables, summary of data Table 1: Mean responses,