Affinity Diagram

Team 2PAC

As Is Evaluation of the OSU Off-Campus Housing Web Site

An Analysis of Craigslist

1. Visibility of system status:
-The division of nine different categories and sub-categories within, makes it a simple to navigate and successfully use the site.
 -When navigating past the home page, the search toolbar follows at the top of the page making it difficult to miss
-The event calendar is unclear for what it is actually used for
-Newest postings are at the top of ones newsfeed

2. Match between system and the real world:
The categories and sub-categories designed within is familiar to real world conventions. (Community, personals, discussion frames, etc.)
-The link "post to classifieds" should be renamed to "Create a Posting". Was unaware of what the link actually did until I pressed it.
-Unclear what the category "gigs" is

3. User control and freedom:
-Craigslist does not make it very clear how to go backwards while navigating within the site. The only clear option that is available is the back button located on the browser of the window. When providing user friendly buttons to retrieve/go back to previous sites encourages the user to explore the site with minimal frustration.
-Can not edit my craigslist searches. If I mess one up I have to delete it and create a fixed copy of it.
-There are no links under the "resumes" category

4. Consistency and standards:
-Consistency of text size is the same throughout the site
-The links should all be capitalized

5. Error prevention:
-Categories are not defined, so it is unclear which category is the best for the user to select.
-Cursor changing from an arrow to a hand signifies that a user can click on a link.

6. Recognition rather than recall:
-For returning users, Craigslist should recall which city was last selected and should be set as a default.

7. Flexibility and efficiency of use:
-Links provide successful feedback. Once a link is clicked it changes from blue to purple
-Search Tool speeds up the search process

8. Aesthetic and minimalist design:
-The existing craiglist interface is very minimal with an overall simple design
-The homepage has to many links making it hard to find your desired interest
-Adding a larger color pallet with pictures would increase aesthetics of the overall design
-There is minimal hierarchy in content located throughout the site
-Unsure the purpose to why "new","updated", and "craigslist is hiring in sf" is a different color (not blue)

9. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors:
-"There were no postings that match your search criteria" Would be helpful if there were suggestions of what the user should do next.

10. Help and documentation:
-Visible at the bottom of each page is a small help link available throughout the site. Although there is a help but present, I believe a "Help" or "Instruction" button should be included somewhere more visible to a user.

Summary:

Overall craigslist has a clear purpose and vision about their site. Although there are a few usability issues present, Craigslist is one of the most popular websites in the world for posting advertisements. With such high user traffic, making minor changes to this site should not be done until in-depth studies are conducted. Users become accustomed to Craigslist current aesthetics and functionality, and changing something could cause harm.

Analysis

As Is Analysis of Yelp.com

1.     Visibility of system status:  
Pros: The site automatically conformed to the surrounding main city, Columbus.   Has a main menu bar at the top of the page. Options are highlighted when scrolling over them. An overall search option is provided in this bar also. This website had other categories on the left side of page for a different way to search (Food, Beauty& Spa, Real Estate, etc.) Further down page it has a “Recent Activity” comments section showing in real time. 
Cons: Didn’t like that the “About Yelp” link was at the bottom of the page as a first time user. To me nothing really stands out other than the name of the page at the top and not much color.

2.     Match between system and the real world: 
Pros: The language is familiar to the user and follows real world conventions. Does have an “Open Now” filter when searching for housing.

Cons: When I searched for housing there were two different areas that had similar information links, which became confusing and scattered (at the bottom and then also at the right, which was under a different section called “People Also Viewed”). Also there are filters to help in narrowing search, but no filters for number of bedrooms, bathrooms, and pricing.

3.     User control and freedom:

Pros: There is a menu bar that stays constant throughout the whole website at the top of page. Also provides a home page option and a search. Also has an option to use their app on a mobile device, which is convenient. Can always use the backspace option.

Cons: Not many obvious options to choose from to narrow down search when looking for places to rent in general and knowing what specifics you want not included.

4.     Consistency and standards:

Pros: For the most part pretty easy to navigate.

Cons: I had trouble searching for off campus housing for OSU. I feel the search is word sensitive and very particular. I searched Off Campus Housing near Columbus, Oh and the results showed more than just housing options (CABS, Ohio Stadium, etc.)

5.     Error Prevention: No errors occurred when using this website.

6.     Recognition rather than recall:

Pros: Everything pretty much spelled out. The Yelp icon is always at the top left of every page on the site when one needs to go to the home page.

Cons: Would be nice to have a way to compare multiple places at the same time.

           

7.     Flexibility and efficiency of use:

Pros: I liked how certain things stayed in the same area when searching for housing (for example a site map stayed on the right side of the page, the filters stayed close to the top, and the list of results stayed to the left and middle of the page.)

Cons: The “Real Estate” option didn’t have many results to choose from. Searched words do not match results (For example, used Upper Arlington as the place and the results gave me random options around Columbus not even close to that city).

8.     Aesthetic and minimalistic design:
Pros: Pretty simple, not too complicated.

Cons: Not much color (mainly red and white), maybe color blocking would be more pleasing to the eye and also be able to find certain things faster on a page.

9.     Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors: I didn’t encounter any errors so I am not sure.

10.  Help and documentation: There is a “Help Yelp” option at the bottom of the page and a section for “Content Guidelines” as general rules for users. It also has the average “Privacy Policy” and “Terms of Service” options. 

SUMMARY

I would rate this website as an average search engine. Overall it seems pretty vague. When I searched real estate I would get more than just off campus housing results (CABS, Ohio Stadium, wrong location). My biggest problem was not having a feature to narrow down a search when looking for specific off campus housing. The number of bedrooms, baths, and pricing was not featured to help. Also the results didn't show pricing and I could not find specific places quickly. It did provide most of the basic information about housing and a link to the companies website. The reviews of each place to rent seemed kind of low. I would personally like to see more. It did have the conventional features, but it also wasn't very aesthetically pleasing.

           

As Is Evaluation of the OSU Off-Campus Housing Web Site

OSU Office of Student Life Neighborhood Services and Collaboration

http://offcampus.osu.edu/

Summary

Overall Grade: B

Although the site is well designed in general to fulfill its goal of providing a wide array of resources regarding off-campus living, it has usability issues which we can learn from in designing our own housing search web site.  The OSU site requires geographic searches to be done by zip code, which requires "knowledge in the head" that most students don't have; a drop down menu listing neighborhoods would be a better choice.  It buries annual surveys of students regarding landlords at a link titled "USG Renter's Guide;" this title does not make it obvious what this document has to offer.  The site also can't be tailored for use during repeated visits; if students had the option to log in (via BuckeyeLink, since this is an OSU site), then the system could be designed to save searches.

Visibility of system status

Grade: B
Although the Housing Search Tool appeared front and center on the Neighborhood Services and Collaboration home page (a good thing), the only way to access it from other pages is via a Tools menu buried at the bottom of the page.  Also, once in the Housing Search Tool, the Tools menu selection is not highlighted.  Worse still, the Roommate Search Tool pages do not include the main navigation or bottom-of-the-page link options at all.

Match between system and the real world

Grade: B
The Undergraduate Student Government produces annual surveys of students regarding landlords, which are posted at a link titled "USG Renter's Guide;" this title does not make it obvious what this document has to offer.  Another (less serious) issue identified was that the photos of Columbus neighborhoods are not in the same order as the corresponding text, which is not a natural mapping.

User control and freedom

Grade: B

Most pages on the site offer the ability to escape via main navigation link options across the top, plus a set of options even higher on the page with choices such as osu.edu, BuckeyeLink, etc.  However, the background color of this section is a gray that's nearly identical to the gray used at the top of most browsers.  This design choice reflects an intent to make these options less salient than the main menu, but completely blending them into the browser goes too far.  On a different and more specific note, one potential error is inadvertent selection of the Clear Search option on the Roommate search function, but this can be corrected using the browser back button.  

Consistency and standards

Grade: B

As discussed in an earlier section, the pages with the search function do not include the main navigation link options.  More problematic is the Lease Signing option in the Roommate search function.  When submitting a profile, a student in need of housing is asked if he is willing to sign a lease.  A student who has housing and needs a roommate can specify if she will require the roommate to sign a lease.  The problem is if the student who has housing tries a search that specifies "no, the roommate is not required to sign a lease," the search returns only candidates who specified "no, I won't sign a lease."  That search should also return candidates who said "yes, I am willing to sign a lease."  The design tries to be consistent in its use of "yes" and "no", but the terms don't actually mean the same thing here because they apply to different conditions.

Error prevention

Grade: B

In the Roommate search function, the Search and Clear Search buttons are both equally large and bright red (well, scarlet since this is OSU).  This results in the Clear Search function being too salient, which makes it too easy to inadvertently select.

Recognition rather than recall

Grade: C
The grade above reflects one very serious knowledge in the head issue: the only way to geographically narrow a Housing Search is by entering a zip code, information that will almost certainly need to be looked up by anyone performing a housing search.  A better option would be a drop down listing housing areas (and a map illustrating those areas).

Flexibility and efficiency of use

Grade: B

Can't tailor use for repeated visits.  If students had the option to log in via BuckeyeLink (since this is an OSU site), then the system could be designed to save searches.

Aesthetic and minimalist design

Grade: B
The aesthetic is OSU standard, but not unattractive.  Not a lot of excess information.  However, although the footer with address, phone, etc. at the bottom of every single page is a web standard (and a CIO requirement), it's too large for my taste.

Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors

Grade: B
One very obvious potential error that is possible with the system: you can set the (rental) Price From value above the Price To value, which will never return any search results since it's impossible.  The system could be designed to not allow a user to make such selections, or to at least provide a specific error message informing the user of the problem.

Help and documentation

Grade: B

The Help function above the main navigation menu is the Help for entire osu.edu domain, which might be confusing.  Although a complete Help function might not be needed for this specific site, perhaps a Frequently Asked Questions would be appropriate.

Re-evaluate Charter

1. What are the business goals?

-Provide value to students in the form of off-campus housing information

-Provide value to landlords in the form of housing listings

-Generate advertising revenue for our company

2. Web site Goals

-Mobile Access

-Become go to site for off-campus housing search

3. Users Tasks - What are things they want to accomplish?

-Basic Information

--- About us

--- Contact info

--- Company Name

-Services we are considering might include:

--- Landlords

------ Client Log-In requirement

------ Listing available properties

--- Students

------ Easy Housing Search

------ Roommate search

------ Reviews

-What is the cost? Why would people pay this much? What's the value? How available?

--- Free for students & Landlords

--- Fee for extras (Advertising, Preferential Listing)

--- Mention our site to companies and receive a certain discount off down payment

4. Differentiators

-Our service provides a one stop listing for all off-campus properties

-Provides reviews on website

-Need a Roommate? Site provides a roommate search

5. Audience/Behavior

-Undergrad and Graduate students looking for housing

--- Goals: Cost, Location, Quality

--- Mobile User

-Parents involved in the housing search

--- Goals: Cost, Safety, Quality

--- Web User

-Real Estate companies and individual Landlords

--- Goals: Reach as many students as possible

--- Web User

Research Plan

Goals:

1. This website will provide an entire list of real estate companies and privately owned properties for Ohio State students.

2. Provide current status of available units.

3. Communicate feedback/reviews about current off-campus housing.

What is the mission of your organization?

-Provides information about available off-campus housing.

How will creating this web site support your mission?

-Provides a single site eliminating time and hassle when searching for off-campus housing.

Who is the primary audience for the web site?

-Primary: Ohio State students are the main audience.

-Secondary: Parents involved in the housing search.

What do you want the audience to think or do after having visited your site?

-Easy to find and use. Reviews are helpful, and leave viewer satisfied.

What web-related strategies will you use to achieve those goals?

-User-Friendly

-Simplicity

-Aesthetically Pleasing

-Mobile accessibility

How will you adequately maintain the finished site?

-Contact real estate companies on a daily basis concerning properties that are available.

-Keep site updated with new posts about current properties/companies.

-We know it will be a challenge to keep the site updated with current availability of properties.