Toggle Next Previous

Examples From Our Intranet & Extranet Portfolio

by Yannis |May 18th, 2012

Most organisations we have recently worked with are grappling with the same challenge: having lost faith in the company’s monolithic intranet or extranet, employees have been creating and maintaining small, unauthorised communities on external social channels, mainly Facebook, LinkedIn Groups or Twitter. Organisations tend to respond in one of three ways: some throw up a fight, caution the perpetrators and even ban all social media use across the organisation; others turn a blind eye only to see such illicit activity gathering pace; and finally, the few left see this as an opportunity for transformation and embrace change putting their intranet or extranet at its core.

We have found that when it comes to intranets and extranets an important factor that determines a company’s strategy is the questions asked during the planning phase: if, for example,  the main question is “what do we want in our intranet” companies find themselves discussing platforms, technologies, modules, webparts or departmental requests; on the other hand, companies brave enough to ask themselves “what kind of company do we want to be” discover that their intranet is only a means to an end and not an end in itself.

Before designing and building an intranet or extranet, our job (or even duty) as a experienced supplier it to use our analytical process to help the organisation fist ask the right questions and then find the right answers.

Below is a list of intranets and extranets we have created belonging to a number of diverse organisations that have chosen equally diverse paths for creating them:

 

Global extranet for London Business School

 

Read more Read more

Toggle Next Previous

350m Smartphones and the Enterprise

by Gareth Phillips |March 13th, 2012

The conclusions of Forrester’s Ted Schadler and John McCarthy drawn from the interviews with 61 firms that are classed a mobile innovators strikes a number of chords with our experience.

It is definitely true that we are in a power shift. Tablet and smartphone sales data tell us that quite clearly. Quite whereabouts along the spectrum of that power shift depends on the organisation, its markets and the propensity of its stakeholders to consider and adopt new technology. In the firms that we have spoken to, it is that propensity that is driving the change.

Now you could argue that the propensity comes in part from the organisation and the market and you’d be right. But, it also comes from people’s attitude and their desire to create corporate competitive advantage – with a happy co-incidence of personal competitive advantage of being an early adopted. In short, it is about attitude and open-mindedness. And almost in all cases that we’ve experience it is driven by the business and not IT.

The downside of the business being the centre of gravity does drive change quickly, allows for easier (a relative term!) implementation of process change and perhaps a shorter-term ROI focus (as it is often operational rather capital expenditure).

The Forrester team see these challenges:

  • A multichannel coordination quagmire (e.g. how does an app work with a call centre’s process)
  • Business processes designed for transactions, not engagement (i.e. creating simple, one-off interactions)
  • Servers and infrastructure ill-prepared for exploding activity volumes
  • Middleware, application, and security models poorly constructed for engagement (i.e. the use of SOA and web service)
  • Design, development and governance processes misaligned with mobile requirements (i.e. designing with the user in mind not the existing system or data)

When we look at this from an enterprise app perspective (i.e. one used by employees), we’d include a few more consideration.

People

  • Designing for employees has subtle yet important differences to consumer or corporate app UX. At work our motivations are different. Given that by 2016 350m employees will use smartphones and business spending on mobile projects will have grown by 100 per cent to over $20bn per year
  • Building a small – forgiving, but representative – user base to aid the iterative development process is essential
  • Having a mobile champion or a team that’s empowered to enable mobility through the organisation will help – whether is the Chief Mobility Officer or a head of mobile

Process

  • Does the app support an existing process or re-invent it – or somewhere in between? It has to depend on what’s right on balance, but all three need consideration before development
  • Should business owners be allowed to create apps with the central teams’ support. On balance, yes because they have the business pain and gain. But they need rules in which to operate and support, plus a shared roadmap
  • Take mobile first approach with every app development

Technology

  • A Mobile Device Management strategy is essential. So is a clear strategy on supporting BYOD (By Your Own Device) and a rules on what platforms are supported
  • Creating a secure platform for devices that has a mobile friendly architecture
  • Look at the options of creating an enterprise app store

Lots to consider.  A fine balance needs to be struck between planning and doing. Some of the best planning insights come from having done something. Either way sharing development experiences across the organisation is essential.

Toggle Next Previous

Channel Partner Extranets: Evaluating the acquisition potential of 12 public homepages

by Yannis |October 9th, 2011

Most partner extranets have a public homepage that fulfils two main purposes: allows existing members to log in and attempts to attract prospective members. As part of our market research for a client, we reviewed 12 such public homepages (as well as the rest of the acquisition content) and below we present a quick evaluation. The extranets belong to global technology companies with each operating a complex network of partners. Unfortunately, with the exception of Microsoft, the overall quality of the user experience ranges from mediocre to poor.

A few notes on the evaluation below:

  • Each channel ecosystem works differently, so in some cases acquisition of new members might sit quite low on a homepage’s list of objectives. Nevertheless, for the purpose of this evaluation, wherever we saw even the smallest “Register”, or “More info” call to action we made the assumption that acquisition is indeed a key objective.
  • Most global organisations have localised partner extranets and some even have dedicated partner extranets for different product lines. To keep things simple we evaluated the homepage of only a single partner extranet from each organisation.
  • Regarding the scoring numbers: 5 is best and 1 is worst

 

Microsoft Partner Network

  • Appeal of visual design: 4
  • Strength and clarity of proposition: 3
  • Good usability: 4
  • Depth of content: 5
  • Prominence of call to action: 5
  • Total score: 21


Read more Read more

Toggle Next Previous

Why can’t enterprise software be more like a smartphone?

by Yannis |September 13th, 2011

I use both an iPhone and Salesforce on a daily basis. Comparing the two is like comparing apples (no pun intended) to oranges. But from a user experience point of view, such an improbable comparison could lead to some interesting observations about the past and future of software design philosophy.

A big factor behind the success of smartphones and tablets has been the fulfilment of users’ needs at a micro level. The “there is an app for that” catchphrase perfectly describes the concept of developing each application to solve a particular problem. It is a simple concept consumers understand and, considering the success of smartphones, find very attractive.

Compare this approach to how Salesforce works:

 

 

Of course it’s not just enterprise software that suffers from feature bling; most Microsoft and Adobe programs fall into the same category; Word or Photoshop anyone? There is a lot of talk this year around the future of software development and how the proliferation of mobile apps and the popularity of the Apple App Store are influencing things. But from a user’s point of view, simpler software packages with a bare-bones engine sold at a lower price and a post-sales marketplace of individual features and feature packages is likely to make software use (and purchase) a lot more fun.

 

Toggle Next Previous

Is feature porn killing usability in enterprise software?

by Yannis |July 20th, 2011

Nowadays, everything comes with features: my toothbrush comes with an added tongue scratcher, my morning cereal is fortified with all sorts of stuff and even my air freshener sports a motion detector. Enterprise software is no different; it might not come with added vitamins, but it’s certainly oozing features out of every USB socket.

Lately, we have been working with a number of organisations whose main offering comes with a screen interface:  contact centre solutions, BI software, risk management tools, etc. A common problem many people recognise but most fail to do anything about, is that bad usability can make using all this stuff a daunting task.

Read more Read more