After creating personas, we started working on a possible user journey. The initial user journey was divided into three steps: Exploration, selection, and action.
To validate our design solution, we finalized our Key Performance Indicators. The objective was to have satisfied users on all devices.
- More people accessing the web on mobile
- More people interacting with navigation
- Fewer clicks to perform an action
- More time spent on each page
After brainstorming through a few ideas, we finalized three features and evaluated them on user impact and technical feasibility.
To base our navigation design on objective data, we created an online, open card sort using Optimal Workshop. 30 individuals participated, including five in-person card sorts. Participants sorted 57 cards. Most labels mirrored the Library’s top level and immediate second-level categories. About 10 cards were added to test potential new labels.
Card Sorting | Objectives
The objectives of card sorting were to identify labels with strong, common associations as well as areas where the overlap is so great as to defeat and confuse patrons. We wanted the card sort to reveal or inspire labels that convey information efficiently, and don’t overwhelm users.
Card Sorting | Findings & Results
- Participants identified 207 possible categories for the Library’s top level navigation. Most were not unique.
- The Participant-centric Analysis shows overlap that will require additional review.
- The contents of the categories reflect a common understanding of the category names.
- The extensive overlap of categories suggests that we need to find a way to associate categories and ensure users can explore categories without being infinitely derailed.
- Labeling opportunities exist for greater user engagement.
From the results of our card sorting activity, we created our first information architecture diagram:
Check-in Presentation with Stakeholder
At this point, we presented our progress to the stakeholder. They appreciated the effort but pointed two major challenges for us: 1) There was a business requirement to add a prominent Donate button. 2) Information architecture was too complicated in their opinion.