rating higher education websites: the student experience

Bob Johnson Consulting, LLCBob Johnson Consulting, LLC 11

Rating Higher Education Websites: Rating Higher Education Websites: The Student ExperienceThe Student Experience

©Robert E. Johnson, Ph.D. 2009©Robert E. Johnson, Ph.D. 2009

J.Boye Conference Aarhus 2009J.Boye Conference Aarhus 2009November 4, 2009November 4, 2009

Aarhus, DenmarkAarhus, Denmark


Who is Bob Johnson?Who is Bob Johnson?

Higher education marketer since 1980sHigher education marketer since 1980sWriter of monthly “Your Higher Education Writer of monthly “Your Higher Education Marketing Newsletter”Marketing Newsletter”Owner… Bob Johnson Consulting, LLCOwner… Bob Johnson Consulting, LLCPartner w/Gerry McGovern at Customer Partner w/Gerry McGovern at Customer CarewordsCarewordsChair of Symposium for the Marketing of Chair of Symposium for the Marketing of Higher Education, 1994 to 2003Higher Education, 1994 to 2003Ph.D. in political science (UMass Amherst)Ph.D. in political science (UMass Amherst)


In today’s presentation…In today’s presentation…

Identifying website factors that are most Identifying website factors that are most important to visitorsimportant to visitors

Comparing responses from “future” or Comparing responses from “future” or prospective students with those from prospective students with those from current studentscurrent students

Where to focus website improvement Where to focus website improvement effortsefforts

If you could only make one change…If you could only make one change…


Customer Centric Index (CCI) survey…Customer Centric Index (CCI) survey…

Asks website visitors to select from 13 Asks website visitors to select from 13 website attributes to identify top 3 positive website attributes to identify top 3 positive or negative experiencesor negative experiencesCCI = % of positive votes castCCI = % of positive votes cast4 audiences to survey:4 audiences to survey:– Current studentsCurrent students– Possible future studentsPossible future students– Faculty and staffFaculty and staff– AlumniAlumni


13 survey factors in 3 groups…13 survey factors in 3 groups…

Information ArchitectureInformation ArchitectureContentContentSocialSocial


Factor Positive Negative

SearchHelpful search

results Poor search results

NavigationClear menus and

linksConfusing menus

and links

LayoutSimple layout /

easy to readCluttered layout /

hard to read

Visual appealLooks attractive /

appealingLooks unattractive /

unappealing

Speed Fast to do things Slow to do things

INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE FACTORS



Up-to-date Up-to-date information

Out-of-date information

AccurateAccurate

informationInaccurate information

Complete Complete information

Incomplete information

LanguagePlain language

Full of jargon, corporate speak

CONTENT FACTORS



ContactEasy to contact a

personHard to contact a

person

ParticipationEasy to participate

/ give feedbackHard to participate

/ give feedback

OpenGives me the facts

/ transparentMisleading / not

transparent

RecommendationsHas ratings,

reviews, recommendations

Has no ratings, reviews,

recommendations

SOCIAL FACTORS

Bob Johnson Consulting, LLCBob Johnson Consulting, LLC 99Copyright © Customer Carewords Ltd.

•Please choose the THREE factors from the list below that best describe your actual experience with the Enormous State University website. •Give a score of 3 to the factor which best describes your experience, 2 to the next best description, and then 1. •Please give only one score of 3, 2 and 1. •Leave the rest blank.


Investing improvement resources…Investing improvement resources…

Content28%

Social4%

Information Architecture

68%


Typical voting spread… Typical voting spread…

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 5% 10%

Up-to-date

Accurate

Complete

Plain language

Contact

Participation

Open

Recommendations

Search

Navigation

Layout

Visual appeal

Speed

Negative votes Positive votes


Action priorities…Action priorities…

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Contact

Open

Recommendations

Visual appeal

Plain language

Participation

Complete

Accurate

Speed

Layout

Up-to-date

Navigation

Search


CCI at 12 schools…CCI at 12 schools…

10 in presentation10 in presentation– Ball State UniversityBall State University– Bemidji State Bemidji State

UniversityUniversity– DePaul UniversityDePaul University– East Stroudsburg East Stroudsburg

UniversityUniversity– Fordham UniversityFordham University– Lund UniversityLund University– Tyler Junior CollegeTyler Junior College

– University of ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba– University of MissouriUniversity of Missouri– University of WaterlooUniversity of Waterloo

2 not in presentation2 not in presentation– University of University of

HertfordshireHertfordshire– University of OsloUniversity of Oslo

On next CCI ratings On next CCI ratings page onlypage only


11 CCI Survey Results…11 CCI Survey Results…% External Voters…………….. % Positive Votes% External Voters…………….. % Positive Votes

76%76% 91.6%91.6%74%74% 79.6%79.6%70%70% 86.1%86.1%67%67% 89.3%89.3%62%62% 51.0%51.0%61%61% 27.7%27.7%52%52% 4.8% 4.8%45%45% 10.2%10.2%11%11% 57.0%57.0% 3%3% 57.6%57.6% 0%0% 54.0%54.0%


More often than not…More often than not…

External users were happier than internal External users were happier than internal usersusers– Future students were happier than current Future students were happier than current

studentsstudents– Alumni were close to future studentsAlumni were close to future students

High concern overall with deficiencies in:High concern overall with deficiencies in:– NavigationNavigation– SearchSearch


Audience specific results…Audience specific results…

Future StudentsFuture Students


Areas of interest by votes received…Areas of interest by votes received…

Information Architecture factorsInformation Architecture factors– 4,490 votes = 49.3% of total4,490 votes = 49.3% of total

Content factorsContent factors– 2,763 votes = 30.3% of total2,763 votes = 30.3% of total

Social factorsSocial factors– 1,856 votes = 20.3% of total1,856 votes = 20.3% of total



Current StudentsCurrent Students



Information Architecture factorsInformation Architecture factors– 5,391 votes = 54.4% of total5,391 votes = 54.4% of total

Content factorsContent factors– 2,786 votes = 28.1% of total2,786 votes = 28.1% of total

Social factorsSocial factors– 1,739 votes = 17.5% of total1,739 votes = 17.5% of total


Key comparison areas…Key comparison areas…

Current studentsCurrent students

vs.vs.

Future studentsFuture students


Top 5 factors by votes cast…Top 5 factors by votes cast…

Current studentsCurrent students– Layout Layout (IA)(IA)

– Search Search (IA)(IA)

– Navigation Navigation (IA)(IA)

– Up-to-date Up-to-date (Content)(Content)

– Visual Visual (IA)(IA)

Future studentsFuture students– Navigation Navigation (IA)(IA)

– Layout Layout (IA)(IA)

– Visual Visual (IA)(IA)

– Complete Complete (Content)(Content)

– Accurate Accurate (Content)(Content)


Highest difference between positive Highest difference between positive and negative votes…and negative votes…

Current studentsCurrent students– ParticipationParticipation

82 to 15 82 to 15

– RecommendationsRecommendations57 to 057 to 0

– NavigationNavigation62 to 2462 to 24

– CompleteComplete74 to 3974 to 39

Future Future – VisualVisual

100 to 4100 to 4

– LayoutLayout96 to 2696 to 26

– ContactContact100 to 32100 to 32

– NavigationNavigation83 to 24 83 to 24


Least difference between positive and Least difference between positive and negative votes…negative votes…

Current studentsCurrent students– AccurateAccurate

100 to 74100 to 74

– ►►Search Search 40 to 2040 to 20

– LanguageLanguage100 to 75100 to 75

Future studentsFuture students– LanguageLanguage

100 to 79100 to 79

– AccurateAccurate93 to 6393 to 63

– Open Open 100 to 76100 to 76


What do CCI results mean?What do CCI results mean?

Difficult for one website to meet internal Difficult for one website to meet internal and external users needsand external users needsArgues for Internet and Intranet websitesArgues for Internet and Intranet websites– Intranet users need “nuts and bolts” website Intranet users need “nuts and bolts” website

that focuses on frequent task completionthat focuses on frequent task completion

Special attention to navigation & search…Special attention to navigation & search…– Help people to quickly find thingsHelp people to quickly find things

Less focus on “beauty” & “cool” Less focus on “beauty” & “cool” Increased audience researchIncreased audience research


If you can make only one If you can make only one change…change…

Consider this…Consider this…

Search + Site MapSearch + Site Map


Combine search & site map…Combine search & site map…http://www.stedwards.edu/siteindex.htmhttp://www.stedwards.edu/siteindex.htm


Key challenges for Key challenges for higher education websites… higher education websites…

Acceptance of “intranet” and “internet” Acceptance of “intranet” and “internet” approachapproach

Easier access to most important content Easier access to most important content and completion of top tasksand completion of top tasks

Greater use of web analyticsGreater use of web analytics

Continued growth of “web content editor” Continued growth of “web content editor” positions… the website as on “online positions… the website as on “online publication”publication”


Meeting the first challenge…Meeting the first challenge…http://www.devry.edu/http://www.devry.edu/


Thank You!Thank You!

Bob Johnson, Ph.D.Bob Johnson, Ph.D.PresidentPresident

Bob Johnson Consulting, LLCBob Johnson Consulting, LLC 248.766.6425 248.766.6425

[email protected]@bobjohnsonconsulting.comhttp://twitter.com/HighEdMarketinghttp://twitter.com/HighEdMarketing

Customer Carewords Research for Online Marketing Success: Customer Carewords Research for Online Marketing Success:

http://www.bobjohnsonconsulting.com/customercarewords.htmlhttp://www.bobjohnsonconsulting.com/customercarewords.html


AddendumAddendum

Overall CCI data resultsOverall CCI data results


Total Results from 4 AudiencesTotal Results from 4 Audiences

Current studentsCurrent studentsFuture studentsFuture studentsFaculty & StaffFaculty & Staff

AlumniAlumni


Voters by audience category…Voters by audience category…

Future students…Future students… 3,3423,342

Alumni…Alumni… 1,4161,416

Current students…Current students… 3,5943,594

Faculty & staff…Faculty & staff… 589 589

Total voters…Total voters… 8,9418,941

Total votes…Total votes… 26,823 26,823


Areas of interest by total votes…Areas of interest by total votes…

IA… 14,325 votes = 53.4% of totalIA… 14,325 votes = 53.4% of total

– Visual Appeal (2,834)Visual Appeal (2,834) High: 87%High: 87% Low: 57%Low: 57%– Layout (3,354)Layout (3,354) High: 85%High: 85% Low: 61%Low: 61%– Speed (1,797)Speed (1,797) High: 84%High: 84% Low: 49%Low: 49%

– Navigation (3,940)Navigation (3,940) High: 62%High: 62% Low: Low: 35%35%

– ►►Search (2,712)Search (2,712) High: 55%High: 55% Low: 24%Low: 24%


Areas of interest by votes…Areas of interest by votes…

Content… 7,396 votes = 27.5% of totalContent… 7,396 votes = 27.5% of total

– Language (1,263) Language (1,263) High:100%Low: 79%High:100%Low: 79%– Accurate (1,861) Accurate (1,861) High: 100%Low: 63%High: 100%Low: 63%

– Up-to-date (2,382)Up-to-date (2,382) High: 86%High: 86% Low: Low: 41%41%

– Complete (1,890) Complete (1,890) High: 82%High: 82% Low: Low: 40%40%


Areas of interest by votes…Areas of interest by votes…

Social…. 4,709 votes = 17.5% of totalSocial…. 4,709 votes = 17.5% of total

– Open (1,590) Open (1,590) High: 90% Low: 60%High: 90% Low: 60%

– Contact (1,871)Contact (1,871) High: 72% Low: 42%High: 72% Low: 42%– Participation (913)Participation (913) High: 73% Low: High: 73% Low:

33%33%– Recommendations (486) High: 76% Low: 0%Recommendations (486) High: 76% Low: 0%



Future StudentsFuture Students




– Visual Appeal (1,059)Visual Appeal (1,059) High: 93%High: 93% Low: 4%Low: 4%– Layout (1,194)Layout (1,194) High: 96%High: 96% Low: 26%Low: 26%– Speed (714)Speed (714) High: 87%High: 87% Low: Low:

41%41%


– Search (701)Search (701) High: 92%High: 92% Low: 50%Low: 50%




– Language (424) Language (424) High: 100%Low: 79%High: 100%Low: 79%– Accurate (810) Accurate (810) High: 93% Low: 63%High: 93% Low: 63%

– Up-to-date (677)Up-to-date (677) High: 86%High: 86% Low: 41%Low: 41%– Complete (852) Complete (852) High: 82%High: 82% Low: 40%Low: 40%




– Open (739) Open (739) High: 100%Low: High: 100%Low: 76%76%

– Contact (575)Contact (575) High: 100% Low:32%High: 100% Low:32%– Participation (314)Participation (314) High: 100% High: 100%

Low:59%Low:59%– Recommendations (228)High: 100%Low:61%Recommendations (228)High: 100%Low:61%



Current StudentsCurrent Students




– Visual Appeal (866)Visual Appeal (866) High: 88%High: 88% Low: 57%Low: 57%– Layout (1,254)Layout (1,254) High: 88%High: 88% Low: 58%Low: 58%– Speed (812)Speed (812) High: 74%High: 74% Low: Low:

48%48%


– Search (1,405)Search (1,405) High: 40%High: 40% Low: 20%Low: 20%




– Language (480) Language (480) High: 100%Low: 75%High: 100%Low: 75%– Accurate (637) Accurate (637) High: 100%Low: 74%High: 100%Low: 74%

– Complete (651) Complete (651) High: 74%High: 74% Low: 39%Low: 39%– Up-to-date (1,018)Up-to-date (1,018) High: 75%High: 75% Low: Low:

38%38%




– Open (437) Open (437) High: 90% Low: High: 90% Low: 50%50%

– Contact (824)Contact (824) High: 78% Low: 50%High: 78% Low: 50%– Participation (302)Participation (302) High: 82% Low: High: 82% Low:

15%15%– Recommendations (176)High: 57% Low: 0%Recommendations (176)High: 57% Low: 0%

rating higher education websites: the student experience

Business

votes content

positive votes

current students alumni

future students language

prospective students

total votes ia

future students high

internal users future