Upload
kasen
View
49
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
What Makes a Great Web R&D Web Site? Highlights of the www.nrel.gov Redesign. November 5, 2003 Leslie Gardner and Joe Chervenak National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Outline. Where We Started Support – What We Needed/How We Got It Our Redesign Process Putting It All Together - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
November 5, 2003Leslie Gardner and Joe Chervenak
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
What Makes a Great Web R&D Web Site? Highlights of the www.nrel.gov Redesign
Outline
Where We Started Support – What We Needed/How We Got It Our Redesign Process Putting It All Together Lessons Learned Future Plans The Evolution of www.nrel.gov What Makes a Great R&D Web Site?
Where We Started
Where We Started
nrel.gov Y2K
Start from scratch!
Support – What We Needed
A major redesign would require– More resources– Management buy-in
Support – How We Got It
Applied for funding as an NREL-wide strategic initiative– Initiative benefits all centers, offices, and programs– Management buy-in is a critical success factor– Web site receives more than 130,000 unique
visitors every month (more than physical visitors to the lab)
– Users are getting more sophisticated– Web site redesign is aligned with management
priorities
Our Redesign Process
Analysis Information Architecture Design Implementation Project Timeline
Note: We validated with managers throughout process
Analysis Phase
Process – Analysis
Statistics and Search Logs Focus Groups Site Objectives Audience Formal Benchmarking Study Distilled to Four Big Ideas
Analysis – Statistics & Search Logs
Analyzed Web statistics and search logs to understand users needs
Findings:– Basic information on technologies is very popular– Users search on basic terms such as “solar
energy”– Renewable resource data, online photo library,
and publications are heavily used
Analysis – Focus Groups
Held internal focus groups to hear staff needs Results:
– They want researcher pages– They need help answering inquiries– They navigate the Web primarily by using Google
search– They improved our site objectives– They identified sites for us to benchmark
Analysis – Site Objectives
Advance the Lab’s mission – research and technology development of renewable energy and energy efficiency
Showcase and promote our expertise, capabilities, current research, user facilities, and publications
Share our unique data and software tools Provide nontechnical information for general
audiences Facilitate relationships with our stakeholders Enhance the Lab’s institutional viability and image
Analysis – Primary Audiences
NREL’s primary public Web audiences – Business and industry– R&D and business partners (other labs,
universities or private sector)– Public policy makers
Analysis – Secondary Audiences
NREL’s secondary public Web audiences– Consumers and general public– Educators and students– Media– Scientific and technical communities
Analysis – Tertiary Audiences
NREL’s tertiary public Web audiences– NREL staff– Investors
Analysis – Benchmarking Study
Initial review of over 200 Web sites– R&D organizations/labs– Universities– Think tanks & advocacy groups
Selected 44 sites for thorough study Developed criteria based on site objectives
– Example: How does the Web site showcase research projects, researchers, and accomplishments?
Analysis – Benchmarking Study
Benchmarking study:– Provided an abundant number of ideas– Gave us credibility with both management and
staff
Analysis – Four Big Ideas
1. Emphasize research and researchers Jefferson Lab
2. Focus home page on our R&D areas CREST
3. Include more information to address general inquiries/FAQs NOAA
4. Develop new templates to promote consistency and improve usability Brookhaven, INEEL
Information Architecture Phase
Process – Information Architecture
Pieces and parts
Process – Information Architecture
Information Architecture
Process – Information Architecture
1. Redesign goals based on analysis– Structure information by topics that users
understand– Emphasize research and technology
development– Consolidate all partnering information into one
area
2. User interests and tasks
Process – Information Architecture
3. Detailed content inventory
4. Defined initial bins and labels
Note: Primary navigation and terminology validated and refined throughout the process
Info Architecture – Approach
Info Architecture – Highlights
Clear goals and objectives greatly facilitated architecture process
Solved partnering with NREL by separating partnership information into R&D and applying technologies
IA team consulted on all iterations Recommended consistent navigation and
terminology on subsites
Design Phase
Process – Design
A need for design
Design – New Look and Feel
Corporate image and branding Leveraged knowledge from Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy template project
Design – Wireframes
Worked with wireframes to illustrate concepts and get early validation
Managers didn’t understand impact of their decisions until they saw full mockups
Design – Wireframe Example
Wireframes
Design – Wireframe Example
Design – Templates
Template for corporate pages (we own) Template for R&D subsites (others own)
– Developed common architecture based on site objectives
– We piloted one R&D site to begin working out issues
– Required lots of time to collaborate on new template that represents diverse research areas
Design – Templates
Round Two
Design – Templates
Round Three
Design – Templates
A good template model
Design – Templates
Subsites use the template
Implementation Phase
Process – Implementation
Content Coding Worked with individual centers, offices and
programs to redesign their sites into new template
Project Timeline
Lessons Learned
Plan for the unexpected Trying to lump all the ways we want users to
partner and work with the Lab into one category was difficult
Staff is struggling with topic view Hard to keep everybody happy
– “Where’s my stuff?”
Lessons Learned
Where’s my stuff?
Lessons Learned
Management values benchmarking data from other credible organizations
Associate Director buy-in was critical Validation is tedious and costly, but buy-in is
priceless Hit ‘em high, hit ‘em low, and hit ‘em in the
middle Individual criticisms and input must be heard,
but decisions must be made from Lab-wide point of view
Future Phase
Future Plans
We now have a 3-year plan (not 1-year) We want to implement these ideas:
– Develop FAQs – Formulate NREL’s research history– Use more multimedia – Develop comprehensive Information on all user,
test, and analytic facilities– Expand technology basics information– Conduct usability testing
The Evolution of nrel.gov
Our New Site
nrel.gov 2003
What Makes a Great R&D Web Site
No definitive formula yet, but all Web best practices apply to R&D sites
“Great” depends on the degree of how the site aligns with management and user needs
Formal benchmarking study is a good way to get ideas and identify current best practices for R&D Web information
Because we’re InterLab, how can we collectively use the Web to support R&D in our organizations?