The ROI of bad usability
– posted October 5th, 2009 by Colman Walsh Comments (7)
Investing in usability pays. It can increase your revenues and lower your costs. It’s a case we’re constantly making for our clients, particularly in these straightened times. But what about the case for bad usability? Can doing things badly also pay off? According to my own guerrilla research, it looks like it can.
Cars clamped on Noel Purcell Walk
Consider Noel Purcell Walk, a small street in the centre of Dublin, a few yards from iQ Content’s office. Every day around rush hour it has a long line of clamped cars parked on one side. Having been clamped here once myself, I know exactly why: bad signage.
The parking sign (below) clearly states that it is pay and display between 07:00 and 16:00, Monday to Saturday. Ergo, I can park here for free at any other time (this being the convention elsewhere in the city). But not so fast. A cryptic appendage says something about 16:00 to 19:00. There is no English, just hieroglyphics. I don’t know what this means, so I’ll just ignore it and get on with my shopping.
The current parking sign by Dublin City Council (left) and a suggested improvement by iQ Content
This is the trap that unwitting car-parkers fall into every day. Our simple signage improvements could save them a lot of hassle. But consider the sums. Assuming that 3-4 cars are clamped here every day, at €80 a pop, Dublin City Council could be making the guts of €100,000 per annum from this particular sign. Despite the obvious injustice, this is one usability problem that might not be fixed in a hurry.
7 comments so far
1. Dominykas on Oct 5th, 2009 - 17:34
As a foreigner, I appreciate the standard “no stopping or parking” signage. You learned the rules of the road, right? Sure, the suggested version is much clearer - I’ll give you that
But you’d also have to add Irish onto…
However, the “parking ***allowed***” sign in a red circle is much more baffling, to be honest - took me a year to get used to it, when I first started driving here.
2. Ruairi on Oct 6th, 2009 - 08:14
Great post Colman. Its a gripe we’ve all dished out €80 for at some stage.
Going back to the web - another often overlooked ROI of bad usability is website owners deliberately putting features behind as many clicks as possible to maximise page impressions.
3. Jacko on Oct 8th, 2009 - 16:36
Sorry, but I can’t see your cause for complaint, here. If you’re driving on Irish roads, you’re obliged by law to be familiar with Irish road signage, and that includes the “No Parking” sign.
4. Ruairi on Oct 9th, 2009 - 09:03
Jacko - we’re all supposed to be law abiding citizens. I think the point is that the signage here is poor => greater occurrences of clamping => ROI on poor signage/usability.
It’s hard to be a within the law when parking your car if you can’t read the sign(s) in the first place..
5. Colman on Oct 9th, 2009 - 09:15
Thanks for the comments guys.
Jacko, it’s true that by law we should all be familiar with road signs. The reality is that many people are not.
Clarity on symbols and better structure of signs would save people money.
6. » Hold that elevator! | The intuitiveness of symbols - iQ Blog on Oct 13th, 2009 - 11:03
[...] not look like an inconsiderate ass. And that pressure translates those symbols into, well, in the words of Colman, [...]
7. ritchielee on Oct 14th, 2009 - 16:18
Everyone understands the diagional for No i.e. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ritchielee/315950179/
I don’t see how a cross through white space means No Parking.