One of the things I like about my job working is a customer experience consultancy is that I’m surrounded by people with a very different outlook on life. Our user experience consultants tend to come from a behavioural psychology background and are great at using qualitative research techniques such as lab testing, eye tracking and ethnographic studies to get into the mind of users and to understand what makes for a good or bad experience. That’s obviously a different set of skill and tools from our quantitative, analytical approach to solving problems using vast quantities of data. Each approach is complimentary to the other with quantitative data good at asking the “what” and “when” type questions and qualitative techniques good at helping to understand the “why”.

Every now and then we get into one of those interesting conversations about which approach is best for solving a particular type of problem. Last week ones these conversations was around the topic of segmentation and which types of segmentation are best for addressing particular issues. Segmentation is one of those popular words that’s used a lot these days in the digital marking world and is usually means different things to different people.

Segmentation is the process of creating groups of individuals (customers, website visitors, prospects etc) that have something in common. Importantly what one group has in common is then different to the other groups. The purpose of segmentation is to make you, your marketing communications, your website experience, your product offering on so on more relevant where possible to these different groups. But how are these groups defined? There are three main ways:

• Demographic segmentation
• Behavioural segmentation
• Attitudinal segmentation

Segments can be defined by demographics, ie based on who someone is. Typically classical marketing approaches to segmentation use demographics as the basis as it can then be used for targeting purposes. Demographic segmentation in online can also be useful. For example, “gender” can be a useful segmentation split as the way that people behave online can be very different depending on whether they are male or female. So be able to segment your audience by gender, age, income etc can be really useful.

Another approach to segmentation is behavioural segmentation. This is not classifying people according to who they are but on the basis of what they do. This type of segmentation approach is very popular in digital marketing as it’s quite easy for us to understand how people behave as we have loads of behavioural data. Again it can be a very powerful technique to group people according to different behavioural criteria and to use that knowledge to improve the effectiveness of campaigns or to present different website experiences. For example, the way that people who are on their first visit to a website is often very different to the way that they behave on a subsequent visit and their needs are also often different. So why not present them with a different experience? Behavioural segmentation lies at the heart of personalisation.

Finally attitudinal segmentation is about classifying people not according to who they are, or what they do, but about what they think. Attitudinal segmentation is about getting into the minds of customers and understanding what makes them tick. People of different genders and ages may have similar needs when it comes to interacting with product and services, they may be trying to pursue the same goal or trying to achieve the same outcome. Often attitudinal segmentation is used for the development of “personas” which are used as tool to help designers get closer to the people they are designing for.

So which type of segmentation is best? Well, of course, the answer is that “it depends”. What problem are you trying to solve? What will you do with the segmentation when you’ve got one? The other questions then are “What data do I need and where do I get the data from?” I’ll be looking at the answers to these questions next time. Til then…

We face a number of challenges for designing usable interfaces on these shrinking devices. For one we need to contend with the increase in the number of applications and games that are freely available, mobiles are being used in many new and varying ways. Addressing how to make this interaction easy and engaging while on the move is a formidable task. The change from testing in labs to testing in the field will be an important one. Testing in lab conditions will highlight a high proportion of the issues but many more will be missed. Things like mid-day sun can be simulated to a certain extent but not walking and texting at the same time or looking after a child and trying to find someone’s contact details simultaneously. By using small cameras which can be attached to the handset which records participants’ interaction is one way. Another is to make use of embedded software which records users’ interactions, relaying the keystrokes and menu selections back to usability specialists to be analysed. However it is done, mobile testing is going alfresco. Far from being left out in the cold mobile manufacturers should take to the streets.

Back in 2000 site owners rarely allocated budgets for any kind of usability input into site design. Unsure of the benefits, but intuitively suspecting it could add value, they used all manner of subterfuge and creative accounting in order to run usability tests in an ad hoc fashion. As a result, usability was deemed the very antithesis of creativity and its practitioners lacked any real appreciation of the design process.

At the same time, usability advice had very tenuous links to the metrics being used to measure site success. For pressured marketers accountable for site redesigns, this became a very real problem. It’s regrettable that usability was pitched against creativity in this manner. Personally I blame usability hardliners like Jacob Nielsen, who advocate a design philosophy based primarily on ease of use to the detriment of the overall experience.

Thankfully there’s been a shift in focus from ‘usability’ to ‘experience’, with usability now seen as one important constituent in the overall concept of experience. This is helping to bridge the divide between the design community and user experience consultants who have embraced the change. This new emphasis on measurability of user experience helps designers by making it plain what works and what doesn’t in the eyes of customers. Shouting matches have been replaced by more collaborative design, enabling customer feedback to dictate which ideas to pursue.

We use different tools and techniques in concert to offer up different types of information about both customer behaviour and attitude, and then use many of the same tools to track improvements over time. These tools include web analytics, online surveys, usability testing (both lab and remote) and eye tracking, but also physiological techniques such as EEG that measure directly emotional response to the site experience. In recognition of the need to substantiate recommendations with figures, we even bought a web analytics agency in 2005 to acquire the knowledge we felt we needed. Omniture is now the dominant player in the web analytics space and we are an Authorised Omniture Partner.

Bad practice has unfortunately perpetuated the thinking that usability does not deliver a clear return on investment. In our day-to-day work with clients we now talk much less about usability and a lot more about the issues that online marketers are concerned about, for example conversion (or lack of!), retention, market share and profitability. By being able to reference analytics that point clearly to ‘pain points’ we demonstrate unambiguously what elements are affecting performance. This elevates usability to a strategic level as the enhancements to the user experience correspond directly to improvements in the financial KPIs.

Finally, it might not come as a surprise to hear that on our most successful engagements, we continue to work very closely with the design agencies to provide the insights they need to supplement their intuition and ultimately deliver more for clients.

As I wrote in a letter to NMA editor Justin Pearse, while this might be true of the majority of traditional design and build agencies, it is certainly not a failing that can be attributed to digital customer experience agencies.

In many cases, due to both time benefits and local market expertise, major brands choose to use local agencies for design and build. At Foviance we work closely with these companies to help to ensure they have the hard facts at hand needed to create a consistent brand experience across multiple markets. We are frequently the only constant in a global project beyond the brand employees. As such, we link with our own ‘Foviance alliance partners’ to bring in these large, international engagements.

Foviance carried out its first international project back in 2001 working with grocery retailer Otto through its partner, major fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) brand owner Procter & Gamble. Since then we have worked with a variety of major brands (including Microsoft, Sony, Nokia and Dell) as well as some less well known ones (such as Victor Chandler) on international consultancy engagements from Madrid to Macau. Our engagements have covered areas from global customer research to international websites, prototypes, mobile technology and even the tablet PC.

Neither is Foviance alone in being a customer experience agency that works internationally. Many of our competitors also operate globally, either through formal partnerships or relationships built on practical experience.

There are fundamental differences with the ways users interact between countries and continents. Variations can be caused by cultural, social, economic and less obvious language differences (such as there being no word for ‘Lucky Dip’ in Asia). It might be ideal for clients to have a single international digital agency, but without the support of traditional advertising or media networks there is no way that UK agencies could develop this expertise without taking a client through a process of trial and error.

International growth is dependent on expertise and experience. This is yet another reason why independent, expert research and consultancy partners will have a major role to play in the continued growth and future expansion of the UK’s digital industry.

Customers move between different channels at their convenience. What begins as a shopping trip on the high street could end with a sale closed online. From a customer’s point of view, everything the company does (or fails to do) is part of the experience. If there’s a queue on the phone lines, it could leave customers frustrated with the entire company, even if the experience in-store and online is exceptionally good. The lesson is clear: companies must offer a consistent and satisfying experience across all their channels, , from the customer’s initial interest through to the end of the transaction. At a time when the web provides near-perfect price information and few customers are brand-loyal, companies will be judged and differentiated on the experience they offer.

The web makes it easy to measure customer behaviour, but many web usability testing techniques apply equally to other channels. We helped a consumer electronics company by getting people to unpack deliveries in our lab. It was easy to see how customers would respond to the packaging and instructions and it illuminated part of the customer experience that normally takes place behind closed doors. We’ve helped financial services providers to understand their applications process, by asking customers to apply for mortgages in our lab and then complete the paperwork that would normally arrive a week later. We’ve also conducted research in-store and at the customers’ homes to find out how they use different channels and services and how satisfied they are.

In the past, companies have typically measured performance using operational metrics, such as the length of a call, which reflects its cost. But to improve customer experience, they must instead evaluate the experience customers receive, which could mean checking that service agents follow a consistent script or making sure that deliveries are on time. The key is to find out what influences the customer’s decision to use a particular company or channel, and making sure they are satisfied with the whole process. Having a perfect website won’t mean a thing if the delivery’s late, or the driver leaves muddy footprints in the hallway.