Mystery meat navigation caused a bit of a stir in the office last week when Nick (our Director of Digital) took a look at an IA document and announced 'well, overall it works but that menu [points] is a bit mystery meat' -and then he walked off. After a few minutes of silence one brave soul then asked the question 'what do you mean mystery meat?'. So what does it mean.
Mystery meat is a phrase that originates from the early days of IA to describe anything where the meaning or target (in the case of a menu item) is unknown - a mystery. Mystery meat itself is a phrase to describe good old fashioned school cafeteria fare such as 'meat curry' and 'meat pizza'. Where the 'meat' could stand for anything from chicken to duck (or worse, depending on the school you went to). In web design terms then mystery meat is used to describe any part of the page or menu where the end user is left guessing as to the content, link target or relevance until they have performed some prescribed action. A good example is any site where you get images of things (not icons per se) that represent menu links - the image may be completely unrelated to the content/meaning of the target page.
Typically, mystery meat rears its ugly head when pure designers get to have a go at putting together a web design without the input of an information architect and so add beautifully designed, yet experientially poor images in place of good old fashioned content.
If you of any good example of mystery meat then please, let me know!
Wednesday 17 June 2009
Sunday 7 June 2009
Do I need a website?
Taking things for granted are never good. We all know this. However, one of the team at Sagittarius recently went to a new client presentation where the issue of the 'current website' was discussed and it suddenly became obvious that sometimes those that understand the Internet and digital channels actually take it for granted that everyone else gets it too.
At this particular meeting the marketing head and a director did not seem that bothered that their website, even though online for a year or two, had no search visibility whatsoever. A Flash based website with no supporting HTML or meta-data. A quick search on Google proved the point that Google knows nothing more of them than the URL that they have purchased, with only the index page having been indexed but with no description.
Furthermore, they did not see it as an important part of their marketing or business strategy. When strategies for customer acquisition and customer retention were discussed the marketing manager even asked whether the website was even relevant. Again, another example of those that understand digital taking it for granted that any organisations website, its information and functionality, play an integral part in both finding and acquiring new customers and maintaining existing relationships.
Having discussed ways in which the website can reach new customers through search marketing, build brand awareness and engagement and nurture long-term relationships the question then turned to that of return on investment and once again, the client asked how the website could possibly stack up against a more tradition direct mail campaign in terms of ROI. Again, the answer seemed obvious but once again the team at Sagittarius ended up explaining how in terms of ROI websites often offer better ROI than nearly all traditional media channels - if done properly. Herein that last sentence seemed to lie the problem. 'If done properly'. As the existing website was so poor, with absolutely no impact, visibility, engagement or reach it seemed that the organisation was quite happy to accept that the website has no real value or use.
I suppose it's a bit like 'if a tree falls in a forrest and no one hears it, does it make a sound'; if I have a website and no one sees it, does it have a value, the answer is still yes because the truth is, that unlike the tree that no one heard, the website will still be found by all those that do know the brand in question and check out the website as part of their engagement and research/consideration process.
So, 'Do I need a website?' - even the most analogue marketing people would still say yes, even if its just for brand protection and to assist those who have been introduced to the organisation through some other means. However, in the opinion of this humble digital gull, the answer should be an overwhelming yes, a yes so large that it smacks you in the head like a large kipper falling from an aeroplane (trust me, it's a big impact) as the reasons for it are so many and the value it adds in todays society is so great for all the reasons mentioned in this post, plus many, many, many more.
At this particular meeting the marketing head and a director did not seem that bothered that their website, even though online for a year or two, had no search visibility whatsoever. A Flash based website with no supporting HTML or meta-data. A quick search on Google proved the point that Google knows nothing more of them than the URL that they have purchased, with only the index page having been indexed but with no description.
Furthermore, they did not see it as an important part of their marketing or business strategy. When strategies for customer acquisition and customer retention were discussed the marketing manager even asked whether the website was even relevant. Again, another example of those that understand digital taking it for granted that any organisations website, its information and functionality, play an integral part in both finding and acquiring new customers and maintaining existing relationships.
Having discussed ways in which the website can reach new customers through search marketing, build brand awareness and engagement and nurture long-term relationships the question then turned to that of return on investment and once again, the client asked how the website could possibly stack up against a more tradition direct mail campaign in terms of ROI. Again, the answer seemed obvious but once again the team at Sagittarius ended up explaining how in terms of ROI websites often offer better ROI than nearly all traditional media channels - if done properly. Herein that last sentence seemed to lie the problem. 'If done properly'. As the existing website was so poor, with absolutely no impact, visibility, engagement or reach it seemed that the organisation was quite happy to accept that the website has no real value or use.
I suppose it's a bit like 'if a tree falls in a forrest and no one hears it, does it make a sound'; if I have a website and no one sees it, does it have a value, the answer is still yes because the truth is, that unlike the tree that no one heard, the website will still be found by all those that do know the brand in question and check out the website as part of their engagement and research/consideration process.
So, 'Do I need a website?' - even the most analogue marketing people would still say yes, even if its just for brand protection and to assist those who have been introduced to the organisation through some other means. However, in the opinion of this humble digital gull, the answer should be an overwhelming yes, a yes so large that it smacks you in the head like a large kipper falling from an aeroplane (trust me, it's a big impact) as the reasons for it are so many and the value it adds in todays society is so great for all the reasons mentioned in this post, plus many, many, many more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
