Web Strategy: An Initial Review

Stakeholder Feedback and Next Steps

Robert Williams

​

November 14, 2017

Our Digital Front Door

2

2

Presentation Overview

1. Web Strategy Objective & Goals
2. Initial Review of the Website
• Understanding of:
• Audience and traffic since 2014 redesign
• Content structure
• Internal stakeholder feedback
3. Key Feedback Themes
4. Optimization Going Forward

�

3

3

Web Content Strategy Objective and Goals

• Position website as the “front door” to company for recruiting and business development
• Optimize the site experience for our users�
1. Establish a digital product vision
2. Determine approaches to get there
3. Resource adequately to support:
• Continuous improvement
• Measuring effectiveness and outcomes
• Maintenance

4

4

2013 Target Audiences

5

2013 Content Framework by Content Types

6

6

Content Framework - Overarching

1. Publishing platform and document database
2. Organized around static topic areas and content types
3. Extensive use of bi-relational tagging executed via manual operations function in CMS
4. Display templates largely driven by content rules + some personalized usage data
5. Entry-point to engagement on other platforms (events and email sign-up)

What is mathematica-mpr.com?

​

7

7

Mathematica-mpr.com Site Traffic

Source: Google Analytics, July 2014 - October 2017

8

8

Pageview Breakout by Site Section 2014 - 2017�

Source: Google Analytics, July 2014 - October 2017

9

9

Internal Stakeholder Feedback

How well is the current content framework serving our strategic goals and the experiences of our priority users?

10

10

Internal Stakeholder Feedback

Key discussion topics:

• What users want and expect
• Gaps in current experience
• How well does the website support various business functions �(e.g.: Lead generation, strategic communications & recruiting)
• General perceptions of quality�(look and feel, content organization & technical performance)
• Enhancement ideas

11

11

Internal Stakeholder Feedback

Hard to find information…I didn’t even know we had a podcast – that is great, but what is the next step we want them to take? …Some content and document types in the search menu don’t having meaning to me, and I work here…Designs and layout have a print orientation, creates some visual inconsistency over time. Photos have a generic look; we have resources and have created original imagery, should be using original imagery more frequently when possible …Site content can feel a bit “over-engineered”...Search results don’t display chronologically.. Boolean searches don’t work to refine search results… I refer people to Google search instead of our search…we need to tell our story on the homepage… not sure what more storytelling content gets us. Will just be more words on the site and we already have too many words… [Federal Agency] prospects are probably going to the site only as part of a passive vetting...checking bios, looking to get a sense of firm’s polish, legitimacy.; not that integral to the RFP process..State and foundation prospects don’t know us. They have no place to go on the website…Centers content becomes moribund; need to have a rescue mission plan…Our URL is hard to remember, looks awkward … After doing a blog post, there is no mechanism for getting feedback.. To much review in the blogging process; makes it difficult to sustain blog content …Need more publicity on the work… ”Publications” needs an academic look and feel… Sitecore is a constraint, often get told ‘we can’t do that in Sitecore’… Recommendation engine has gotten better, but doesn’t seem to be working as well as it could… too complex, wordy… We’re trying to get into new markets, website doesn’t help because the conversation is not “how can we help you?” Capabilities list is complex… States want to see state examples; where can we send them?… Competitors are rebranding to cleaner designs [specifically: Booz, ICF, NORC, Urban, Westat] …blog doesn’t look like a blog; can’t search by authors… We should have aesthetic alignment with academic-oriented research organizations…academic users are used to robust digital search tools and indexing approaches.. we want to showcase the depth of work being done including working papers in which there is an academic constituency for…Topics areas on homepage feel disparate. They don’t feed into an overarching story.. Site “feels” non-academic, especially for work section. We want to distinguish MPR from consulting firms, be more aligned with academic-focused researchers…data analytics is hard to find; is it a focus area or capability?... Going from PA to PI, support model may need to change; we may need dedicated SME content owners and increase the focus on business development…

​

12

12

Broad Feedback Themes

BRANDING

FINDABILITY

ENGAGEMENT

Tell our story better

• How we help clients
• Clearly articulate our capabilities suite�

Refine design

• Enforce design standards
• “Polish” the look and feel as competitors have done�(Booz Allen, ICF, NORC, Urban, and Westat).

​

Make content easier to find

• Improve search technology
• Review site taxonomy
• Simplify layouts
• Emphasize content with broadest appeal

​

Create more opportunities for engagement

• Media (CS)
• Policymakers (CS)
• New markets (BD)

​

Funnel users to content that supports communications or engagement

13

13

Key Theme: “Tell Our Story Better”

We have “lots of words”, but where and how to engage users with the broad Mathematica story and discuss…

• Value proposition?
• Markets served?
• How we help clients make better evidence-based decisions?
• Who are our clients?
• How findings and the work we do connect to broader story?
• Program improvement offerings?
• Our experts’ expertise?

14

14

Key Theme: Competitor Design Trends

15

15

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

16

16

Key Theme: Findability: “Content Hard to Find”

Search feedback:�

1. Search term not displayed on search results
2. Advanced search options not available for general site search
3. No “refine by date” for general search results
4. No contextualization for search results (i.e. display of key tags, like focus area or document type or URLs or published date)
5. Refined results display is lengthy in right rail presentation
6. Not clear if Boolean search operators work
7. No unique ref. IDs to search on for projects or publications

17

17

Key Theme: Findability: “Content Hard to Find”

Layouts and content design:

​

• More visual prominence given to content type than to content headlines

​

• Disparate topics lumped together on home and publications; not identified by focus areas�
• Dynamic content (“Trending” and “You May Like..”) may be overlooked as static content�
• New market audiences…where to go? Where to start?�
• Feels print-oriented�

​

​

​

18

18

Key Theme: “Engagement”

Connecting:�

• Learn more about and leverage visitor types to expand targeted communications�
• Emphasize prioritized contacts on Contacts pages and in CTAs

​

• Create Media Relations section

​

• Explicit Invites to “Talk to an Expert” when relevant

​

• Broader sitewide promotion of upcoming events and forums

​

• Find ways to engage new market prospects (foundations, states, data analytics)�
• Incentivize subscribing and registration�
• Create mini-inter-site campaigns (“roadblocks” )

19

19

Going Forward

• How to be more strategic in optimizing the site experience?�

• Codify a digital product vision
• Determine approaches and processes
• Resource to support ongoing activities

​

20

20

Going Forward: Digital Strategy Functions

21

21

UX-focused Research, Planning, and Execution�

Objective:

Align a digital product vision with:

• Messaging strategies
• Prioritized user goals
• Business development priorities
• Capacity to maintain a high-quality and polished experience

​

22

22

UX-focused Research, Planning, and Execution�

Goals:

• Learn about our users
• Improve existing experience
• Develop and sustain ongoing UX optimization processes

23

23

Tactics: 4 Project Tracks

1. Already-planned projects
• Execute on planned “must-have” projects
2. User research projects
• Collect and analyze information about our users
• Proposing enhancements to current the site.
3. Iterative enhancement projects
• Create and execute against a backlog of ideas
4. Long-term digital product vision
• Align with messaging to inform and craft a “big idea” product vision

​

​

24

24

Timing: Q1 2018 - Q1 2019

2018

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Survey Implementation

1. Planned Projects

2. UX Projects

3. New Iterative Improvement Projects

4. Establish Digital Product Vision & Determine Execution Approach

2019

UX Engagement

Decision on Redesign

UX Recommendations

25

25

Track 1: 2017-2018 Planned Projects

• Resources Search Pages Redesign - DONE
• Design changes to resources search pages to improve the presentation and usability:
• Decluttered advanced options and filters
• Surfaced more detail about results
• Added direct download option for PDFs
• Navigation Revisions 1 - Make “tools” more prominent - DONE
• Eliminated unneeded “Our” in navigation labels
• Updated styling of labels (font, weight, spacing)
• Digital Essay Template (PACT report) - IN PROGRESS
• Creating new template to accommodate long-form compilations of multiple media types cohesive for a single feature.
• 50th Anniversary Page & Timeline - IN PROGRESS
• Creating new section for the company anniversary and an evergreen company history timeline.
• Integration of New Search Engine - IN PROGRESS
• Selecting and implementing new site search engine to replace the Google Search Appliance (ITS project)
• Taxonomy of Publications Types - IN PROGRESS
• Consolidating publication type categories to simplify advanced search filtering.
• Navigation Revisions 2 - Improve Findability of Subtopic - PROPOSED
• Explore navigation design options to help with sub-topic visibility and findability. (key example: behavior health)

​

�

​

​

26

26

Track 2: User Research - Site Survey

• Implement a Voice of Customer or Site User Survey
• License a SaaS customer feedback product
• Sample products ( ≈10K/yr):�����
• Leverage internal survey design and data analytics expertise to:
• Understand current audience profile
• Understand user needs & gaps in current experience
• Validate and prioritize internal stakeholder feedback
• Identify low-hanging fixable technical or editorial issues �(broken links, functional bugs, confusing content, outdated content, typos, etc. )

​

27

27

Track 2: User Research - UX Engagement

• Engagement profile:
• Small to mid-sized UX design agency or consultancy
• Heavy expertise in information design, information architecture and customer experience strategy
• 1 year + possible renewal
• Will partner with internal resources on development projects.
• ≈ 10K-15K/month
• Outputs:
• Research-based recommendations to improve user engagement
• Wireframes
• UX mappings (customer journey, experience)
• Working prototypes
• Scope for iterative project plan
• UI design support for those projects
• Advisory role for development implementations�

28

28

Track 2: User Research - UX Engagement

When to Use Which User-Experience Research Methods

by Christian Rohrer on October 12, 2014

Tactical considerations for UX research:

29

29

Track 3: Iterative Improvements

Iterative Enhancement Projects: Design, development or content projects pulled from backlog based on the UX Research project. 

​

30

30

Track 3: Iterative Improvements

Example Project: Revise Site Navigation Approaches and Taxonomy

​

31

31

Track 3: Iterative Improvements

Example Project: Build new template for capabilities:

​

32

32

Track 3: Iterative Improvements

Example Project: Revamping information design of “related” components:

​

33

33

Track 4: Establish Digital Product Vision �

Long-term Digital Product Vision

• Align with messaging to inform and craft the “big idea” product vision
• Determine approach to execute:
• A redesign project (mainly aesthetic changes) OR
• A “realign” project 
• A single project  OR
• Continued iterations OR
• Phased releases working toward vision

​

34

34

Digital Product Vision�

35

35

Next Steps

1. Continue current projects (50^th Anniversary, Digital Essay, Search Engine)
2. Survey/ UX consultation engagement
3. Messaging: Determine intersections of the digital strategy projects with review of our messaging strategy

36

36

Questions?

37

37

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

How consistent are the design and UI treatments for:

• Buttons, search fields, page functions & CTA links
• Branding and typography for charts, graphics, data displays and icons
• Navigation elements on sub-pages
• Registration forms
• Content components:
• Work/Projects lists
• “People” blurbs
• Callout quotes
• Video/multimedia presentations
• Cross referenced or “related” information
• Dynamically generated content�

38

38

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

Buttons, CTA links, page functions and fields:

39

39

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

Secondary in-page navigation:

PDF downloads:

40

40

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

Video presentation:

41

41

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

People:

42

42

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

Reference to work/projects:

43

43

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

Block quotes, callouts:

44

44

Key Theme: “Design Consistency”

“Related” content:

45

45

Key Theme: Competitor Design & Content Trends

46

46

Key Theme: Findability: “Content Hard to Find”

Navigation:

​

• Differences between Focus Area and Capabilities may not be clear to users (example: Data Analytics?)�
• Depth of topics in focus areas not conveyed in navigation�
• Sub-topic duplication in multiple focus areas… how should they intersect? (Example “Criminal Justice”)�
• Different markets may use different language�
• Alpha order doesn’t convey relative importance of some topics over others

​

​

​

47

47

Key Theme: “Engagement”

Deeper Engagement:��

• Clearer vertical and horizontal navigation options on publications or projects�
• Paths to engaging with Mathematica about project. �
• Refine/test recommendation component (layout, content)

​

• Simplify “Related..” components on pages.�
• More options for promoting events

48

48