Website User Friendliness Q1 Travel Report

50 %
50 %
Information about Website User Friendliness Q1 Travel Report
Business & Mgmt

Published on February 24, 2009

Author: JuxtConsult

Source: slideshare.net

Description

The Website User Friendliness Travel Report studies, interprets, evaluates, measures and reports the ‘user-friendliness’ of a website taking into account both in its look factors as well as its usability factors. The study helps the online players measure, quantify and benchmark the ‘user friendliness’ and ‘usage satisfaction’ of their website vis-à-vis the key competing websites across six generic portals. The study is done among top 5 travel websites.

Website User Friendliness Study

Travel Portal Website User Friendliness Study Travel Portal Report Jan-Mar ‘08

Website User Friendliness Study © copyright JuxtConsult

Travel Portal

Website User Friendliness Study Table of content Introduction ........................................................................ 1 Methodology ........................................................................ 2 Category Websites Tested ...................................................... 10 Findings: Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores- Overall...................... 12 Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Overall ............... 13 Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Overall ....................... 16 Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Overall .................. 16 Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Overall .................. 17 Rating Dispersions by Individual Attributes .................................. 19 Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria.............................. 30 Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Website Users Only ...... 31 Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Website Users Only 32 Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Website Users Only ........ 34 Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Users Only ... 34 Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Users Only ... 35 Rating Dispersions by Individual Attributes .................................. 37 Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria.............................. 54 Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores - Website Non Users Only 55 Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Website Non Users Only ................................................................................. 56 Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Website Non Users Only .. 58 Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Non Users Only ....................................................................................... 58 Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Website Non Users Only ....................................................................................... 59 Rating Dispersions by Individual Attributes .................................. 60 Relative Importance of the Individual Criteria.............................. 71 Demographic Profile ............................................................. 73 Socio Economic Profile .......................................................... 77 Economic Profile.................................................................. 79 Net Usage Dynamics.............................................................. 81 WUF Index Ranking of Websites by User Segments......................... 82 Sample Sizes....................................................................... 89

Travel Portal

Website User Friendliness Study Introduction Internet users rarely bother to complain about the poor quality or experience of a website. They just ‘switch’ to an alternative website. Yet most websites do little to track their user’s experience and perceptions about their websites on various critical parameters - be it the appeal of their user interface, ease of navigation and task completion, or the satisfaction derived from the actual usage experience. To precisely fill this gap JuxtConsult has introduced its ‘Website User Friendliness’ syndicated study. The study helps the online players measure, quantify and benchmark the ‘user friendliness’ and ‘usage satisfaction’ of their website vis-à-vis the key competing websites. The study is unique in its methodology as it takes the concept of ‘usability testing’ of a website online – it makes the users use a website and give the feedback on its usage experience in ‘live’ online environment. The user feedback is real time and based on actual usage of the website. In order to define and measure what really makes a website ‘user- friendly’, we looked at a simple and interesting parallel of what makes a person seem ‘friendly’. In human interaction, we identify someone as ‘friendly’ only when that person firstly ‘looks’ friendly to us and then ‘behaves’ friendly towards us. When it comes to our interaction with websites, our expectations and behaviors are no different. We identify or treat a website as ‘friendly’ only when it both looks pleasant and acceptable to us and is easy and convenient to use. That is, A User friendly website Looks friendly + Behaves friendly To ‘look’ friendly, a website must be identifiable, appealing, relevant, and pleasant in its appearance. On the other hand, to ‘behave’ friendly a website must enable the task a user has come to perform on the website in a convenient, smooth, orderly and satisfactory manner. Accordingly, this study interprets, evaluates, measures and reports the ‘user-friendliness’ of a website taking into account both in its look factors as well as its usability factors. 1

Travel Portal Methodology The JuxtConsult ‘Website User Friendliness’ Model Any comprehensive measure of ‘user-friendliness’ of a website must cover all key aspects that determine its ‘user-interface’ (looking friendly) as well as its ‘usage experience’ (behaving friendly). At a broad level, we at JuxtConsult defined these key aspects as follows: User Interface (look friendly) Usage Experience (behave friendly) Visually appealing Easy to access Distinctly identifiable Easy to locate relevant information Organized interface Easy to comprehend information Relevant content Easy to navigate and conduct a task Better quality of content Offer relevant and adequate solutions Facilitate satisfactory completion of task Consistent in performance Highly interactive and responsive In order to identify the precise and measurable attributes under each of these aspects, we carefully mapped the typical flow of the ‘interaction’ a user usually has with a website. In doing so we identified 6 typical stages of interaction a user has with a website (and therefore, 6 critical aspects that need to be measured to arrive at any comprehensive evaluation of ‘user-friendliness’ of a website): The user accesses the website (Accessibility) Finds the website appealing (Likeability) Finds the content relevant (Relatability) Is able to smoothly navigate on the website (Navigability) Finds the website responsive when needs assistance/help (Interactivity) Is able to complete the task/purpose for which he/she visited the website in the first place (Task accomplishment) Digging a little deeper in these 6 critical areas we identified 19 individual ‘generic’ parameters that required to be measured to make the model a fairly comprehensive one. The parameters related to ‘e- commerce’ or ‘transactions’ were not included in the ‘generic model’ 2

Website User Friendliness Study per se (to retain its universality), but have been considered separately as the ‘seventh’ critical aspect of measuring user friendliness of the ‘e- commerce’ websites. The following graphics outline the precise ‘website user friendliness’ measuring and rating schema based on the 19 ‘generic’ parameters used in the JuxtConsult model and in bringing out these reports: © The Model The Website – User The User Friendliness Criteria The Measures Interaction Points Browser compatibility Accessibility Download time Is the website easy to access? Technical Distinctiveness (branding) Layout and interface Aesthetics (color, text, graphics) Likeability Does it look appealing? Identification with the website Design Ease of comprehension Relevance/Adequacy of content Relatability Is the content relevant and distinct? Content distinctiveness (quality) Content Ease of locating task info Ease of conducting the tasks Navigability Is it easy to use? Inter-page consistency in design Task Flow and flow Navigational cues and helps Error rate / error recovery Interactivity Is it able to assist the user when needed? Contacability (and responsiveness) Assistance Sense of security in using the site Level of task completion (success) Task Accomplishment Timeliness of task completion Is the user able to accomplish the task? Solution Adequacy of task compl. (satisfaction) 3

Travel Portal © User Friendliness Measuring Schema 3. Distinctive in identity (branding) 4. Presentation of content (layout) 10. Ease of locating task info 5. Aesthetics (color, text, graphics) 11. Ease of conducting the task 6. User identification with the site 12. Navigation flow between pages 16. Timeliness of task completion 7. Ease of comprehension 13. Navigational cues and helps 17. Quality of usage experience 1. Browser Compatibility 8. Relevance of content 14. Error recovery 18. Perceived sense of security in usage 2. Download Time 9. Relative quality of content 15. Customer responsiveness 19. Brand preference creation Site is likeable and relevant Site is easily accessible Site is easy to use with hassle-free navigation Site delivers task accomplishment Design Appeal Ease of Access Ease of Usage Usage Satisfaction Appeal Index Accessibility Index Navigability Index Satisfaction Index User Friendly Experience User Friendly Interface User Friendly Interface Index (UFEX) User Friendly Experience Index (UZEX) Website User Friendliness Category Level Website User Friendliness Index (WUF) 4

Website User Friendliness Study As shown in the schema, the 19 individual ‘generic’ parameters that determine the overall user friendliness of a website have been clustered together into 4 ‘sub index’ measuring the ‘accessibility’, ‘appeal’, ‘navigability’ and ‘usage satisfaction’ index of a website. Hereafter these are combined to arrive at two higher level ‘user interface’ and ‘user experience’ Index and eventually into the overall ‘website user friendliness’ (WUF) index of a website. The model thereby allows various websites in a category/vertical to be evaluated, compared, benchmarked and ranked on various aspects of their ‘user-friendliness’ in an objective manner (based on the index score derived from actual ‘ratings’ of these websites by their existing and potential users). Additional ‘Shopping Index’ for E-Commerce Category Websites For websites which come under the e-commerce categories, offering online transactions, an additional ‘seventh’ group of user friendliness parameters have been added to the model. This set of critical measure has been classified as ‘Shopping Friendliness Index’ of the e-commerce websites. The shopping friendliness of an e-commerce website has been measured as a cumulative effect of the usage experience it delivers while a user ‘transacts’ on the website, takes ‘delivery’ of the product/service bought online and the satisfaction with the ‘refund’ in case a cancellation is made and refund sought. The following graphics outline the additional ‘shopping user friendliness’ index measuring and rating schema used in the JuxtConsult model for the e-commerce category websites: 5

Travel Portal © Shopping Friendliness Measuring Schema 1. Successful transaction completion 2. Ease of transacting 9. Display/ease of locating refund policy 3. Comprehension of charges and prices 10. Comprehension of refund policy 4. Adequacy of payment options 7. Timeliness of product/service delivery 11. Timeliness of refunds 5. Sense of security while transacting 8. Appropriateness of delivery as per 12. Adequacy of refund amount 6. Promptness of transaction confirmation specification Transacting on the site is easy, Delivery of product/service is Refund process is well understood smooth and secure efficient and adequate and smooth Delivery Experience Transaction Experience Refund Experience Delivery Friendliness Index Transaction Friendliness Index Refund Friendliness Index Shopping Friendliness Index Category Level Shopping User Friendliness Index (SUF) As shown in the schema, the 12 individual parameters that determine the overall ‘shopping friendliness’ of an e-commerce website have been clustered together into 3 ‘sub index’ measuring the ‘transaction’, ‘delivery’ and ‘refund’ usage experience of a website. Hereafter, these three sub indices are combined to arrive at the overall ‘shopping user friendliness’ (SUF) index of an e-commerce website. In case of e-commerce websites, the overall ‘website user friendliness’ (WUF) index is calculated and reported after incorporating the ‘shopping user friendliness’ (SUF) index parameters as well. That is, the WUF index of the e-commerce websites is calculated based on 31 parameters and not just on 19 ‘generic’ parameters. 6

Website User Friendliness Study The Online Survey To test and get the e-commerce websites rated on these 19 generic parameters and the 12 additional e-commerce related parameters by their existing and potential users, an online survey methodology based on ‘live’ usage and rating of websites was used. The online survey was conducted using JuxtConsult’s own online user panel (www.getcounted.net) as well as using a ‘survey ad campaign’ on Google Ad Sense (contextual search ads). The online survey was conducted using an e-questionnaire segmented into three sections. The first section had a ‘screener questionnaire’ that was used to identify the ‘users’ of an online category, and of the various websites being tested within that category. Then the identified ‘users’ and ‘non-users’ (taken as potential users) of the various websites were taken to the respective websites for ‘live’ usage. This was done by providing the ‘URL links’ of these websites within the questionnaires. Half the respondents (of both existing and potential users of the website) were asked to surf the ‘homepage’ and the other half to ‘complete a simple assigned task’ on the website1. This split was done to keep the length of the ‘live’ usage sessions within reasonable time limit, so that including the feedback-giving time (questionnaire filling), the whole session does not become too long for the respondent. In this way we tried to minimize the impact of any possible ‘response fatigue’ in the survey to the extent it is possible to do so in such surveys. To ensure a statistically healthy representation and calculation of the ratings (and indices) for each website in the study, a minimum sample quota of 120 ‘reported response’ per website was fixed. This is the sample size on which the user friendliness index calculations are based. However, because of a break up of ‘live’ usage between the ‘only homepage surfing’ and ‘only an assigned task completion’, each respondent gave only ‘part’ rating of the website. This meant that in practice we would have to take 2 respondents (one of homepage and one of task) to compete one rating of a website as per the JuxtConsult Model. Accordingly, in sample collection, the quota per website was doubled to 240 respondents per website. The eventual break up of the samples as ‘set’ per website and between its existing users and non- users (potential users) was as follows: 1 The tasks that the respondents of the Travel category were asked to perform were – 1) search for an air ticket from Delhi to Jaipur, 2) search for a 3-star hotel in Jaipur, and 3) search for a tour package from Delhi to Rajasthan. 7

Travel Portal Table 1: Sample size by websites Sample Base Users Non-users Total Makemytrip Home page 60 60 120 Task 60 60 120 Yatra Home page 60 60 120 Task 60 60 120 Cleartrip Home page 60 60 120 Task 60 60 120 Travelguru Home page 60 60 120 Task 60 60 120 Indiatimes Home page 60 60 120 Travel Task 60 60 120 Total Category 600 600 1,200 Further to ensure that we report only those responses that are based on actual, and to an extent, sincere ‘live’ usage of the website, firstly the time taken to check/use the website was measured (from the time of clicking the URL link on the questionnaire to the time of answering the first feedback question). Thereafter, we decided to exclude from reporting those respondents who took less than 3 minutes to ‘surf the homepage’ and less than 5 minutes to ‘complete the assigned task’ on the website. For the 19 individual ‘generic’ parameters, except for browser compatibility, the ratings for the rest 18 parameters were taken directly from the respondents. For rating on browser compatibility, websites were tested internally at JuxtConsult by its own technical team on various popular internet browsers and then rated accordingly. The browsers on which the website opening was tested were – Internet Explorer, Firefox, Netscape and Opera. For the rest 18 ‘generic’ parameters where users’ gave the ratings directly, all ratings were taken on a ‘5 point qualitative scale’. For each parameter, respondents were asked to choose one of the five statements given as ‘options’. The five statements ranged from the most positive statement about that attribute on that website to the most negative statement about that attribute on that website. Of these 18 parameters, only one parameter’s response was taken from the respondents ‘past usage’ of the website (therefore asked only to the ‘users’). This parameter was customer responsiveness (measured as timeliness and appropriates of response to any query they may have made on the website in the past). On all the other 17 parameters the respondents were asked to give their ratings basis the ‘live’ usage experience and in real time. On the other hand, for all the 12 individual parameters on the ‘shopping friendliness’ index the feedback was taken from the respondents based on their ‘past usage’ of the website (therefore asked only to the ‘users’). This was done largely because it was completely impractical to ask the respondents to transact online ‘live’, nor was it possible to capture the ‘delivery’ and ‘refund’ feedback from them on 8

Website User Friendliness Study the ‘live’ basis. For these 12 ‘shopping related’ parameters again users’ gave the ratings directly, and all ratings were taken on a ‘5 point qualitative scale’. Eventually, all Index numbers (whether WUF or SUF) were calculated and derived from the individual parameter level rating, with each level index having its own calculated scale (depending on the number of individual parameters included under that index). The sample bases of various websites were equalized while calculating their website user friendliness and shopping friendliness index to ensure that there are no sample size biases in the reported findings. In the online questionnaires, a response format of ‘clicking’ a single or multiple options among the various given options was used for most questions. Wherever relevant, it was also possible for a respondent to answer ‘none’, ‘not applicable’ or ‘any other’. To enlist complete and sincere responses, an incentive of a significant cash prize was also announced to be given to one randomly selected respondent at the end of the survey. The questionnaire were pre-tested and timed to take approximately 15- 20 minutes for a respondent to complete depending on the speed of comprehension and answering of the questions. The questionnaire was structured and designed to reduce the level of ‘respondent fatigue’ to an extent that was practically possible. Over 1,430 unduplicated and clean responses were collected from the online survey for the 5 websites being tested under the Travel Portal category (in about 3 weeks of time for which the survey was ‘live’ online). After further cleaning of the data for the actual time spent on surfing the homepage/completing the task on the websites 1,309 responses were finally found to be valid and used in creating this report. The valid and usable data was then made representative of the entire online urban Indian population by using appropriate 'demographic multipliers’ using highly authentic Govt. of India population statistics. The weights used were derived from the JuxtConsult’s India Online 2007 study and are based on 3 highly relevant demographic parameters – SEC, town class and region. The end result is that the findings of this report possibly represent the ‘voice’ of over 24 million online urban Indians. Further, the findings represent and effectively cover internet users from all SEC groups, all age groups above 12 years, all income groups and all types of town classes (right down to 20,000 population size level towns)2 . 2 For more details on the demographic and socio-economic profile of the respondents see the ‘Respondent Profile’ section of this report. 9

Travel Portal Category Websites Tested Travelguru (www.travelguru.com) Cleartrip (www.cleartrip.com) Indiatimes Travel (www.travel.indiatimes.com) Yatra (www.yatra.com) Makemytrip (www.makemytrip.com) 10

Website User Friendliness Study Findings 11

Travel Portal Website User Friendliness Aggregate Scores- Overall Table 2: Website user friendliness index (WUF) - overall Brands WUF Index Relative Index Cleartrip 10.4 100% Makemytrip 8.9 85% Yatra 8.2 79% Travelguru 7.6 74% Indiatimes Travel 7.0 67% Base: 1,309 Table 3: User friendly interface index (UFEX) - overall Brands UFEX Index Relative Index Cleartrip 4.7 100% Makemytrip 4.4 94% Yatra 3.9 85% Travelguru 3.8 82% Indiatimes Travel 3.7 79% Base: 1,309 Table 4: User Friendly usage experience index (UZEX) - overall Brands UZEX Index Relative Index Cleartrip 3.7 100% Makemytrip 3.1 85% Travelguru 3.1 85% Yatra 3.1 84% Indiatimes Travel 2.7 72% Base: 1,309 Table 5: Shopping friendliness index - overall Brands SUF Index Relative Index Yatra 2.7 100% Cleartrip 2.8 79% Indiatimes Travel 1.8 67% Makemytrip 1.7 61% Travelguru 1.6 58% Base: 701 12

Website User Friendliness Study Website User Friendliness Sub Parameter Scores - Overall Table 6: Accessibility index (overall) Brands Accessibility Index Relative Index Cleartrip 2.9 100% Makemytrip 2.4 93% Yatra 2.2 85% Travelguru 2.2 84% Indiatimes Travel 2.1 80% Base: 1,309 Table 7: Appeal index (overall) Brands Appeal Index Relative Index Cleartrip 2.1 100% Makemytrip 2.0 95% Yatra 1.8 84% Travelguru 1.7 80% Indiatimes Travel 1.6 78% Base: 1,309 13

Travel Portal Table 8: Shopping friendliness index (overall) Brands SUF Index Relative Index Yatra 1.7 100% Cleartrip 1.5 86% Travelguru 1.0 57% Indiatimes Travel 0.9 50% Makemytrip 0.8 48% Base: 379 Table 9: Navigability index (overall) Brands Navigability Index Relative Index Cleartrip 1.4 100% Travelguru 1.3 89% Yatra 1.1 75% Makemytrip 1.0 73% Indiatimes Travel 0.9 62% Base: 1,309 Table 10: Usage satisfaction index (overall) Brands Satisfaction Index Relative Index Cleartrip 2.3 100% Makemytrip 2.1 93% Yatra 2.0 89% Travelguru 1.9 82% Indiatimes Travel 1.8 78% Base: 1,309 14

Website User Friendliness Study Table 11: Transaction friendliness index (overall) Brands Satisfaction Index Relative Index Yatra 0.9 100% Cleartrip 0.7 86% Travelguru 0.5 57% Indiatimes Travel 0.4 50% Makemytrip 0.4 49% Base: 379 Table 12: Delivery experience index (overall) Brands Satisfaction Index Relative Index Yatra 0.9 100% Cleartrip 0.8 90% Travelguru 0.5 59% Indiatimes Travel 0.5 52% Makemytrip 0.4 50% Base: 379 Table 13: Refund friendliness index (overall) Brands Satisfaction Index Relative Index Yatra 0.8 100% Cleartrip 0.7 87% Travelguru 0.5 57% Indiatimes Travel 0.4 51% Makemytrip 0.4 47% Base: 379 15

Travel Portal Website User Friendliness Perceptual Map – Overall .5 Ease of Usage .4 .3 Travelguru .2 .1 Cleartrip Delivery Experience -.0 Refund Experience Transaction Experience -.1 Ease of Access Usage Satisfaction Design Appeal Attribute -.2 Yatra Indiatimes Travel -.3 Makemytrip -.6 -.4 -.2 -.0 .2 .4 .6 .8 Brand 16

Website User Friendliness Study Average Ratings on the Individual Parameters - Overall Table 14: Summary table - overall Ratings (on a 5 point qualitative scale) Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Travel Yatra Makemytrip Browser Compatibility 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Download Time 4.6 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.2 Accessibility Index 2.2 2.6 2.1 2.2 2.4 Distinctive in identity (branding) 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.3 Presentation layout of the home page 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.3 Presentation layout of the task page 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.5 Aesthetics of text on the homepage 2.6 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.7 Aesthetics of graphics on the homepage 3.4 3.6 3.1 3.2 3.5 User identification with the site 3.9 3.8 4.1 4.0 3.9 Ease of comprehension 4.1 4.5 4.3 4.1 4.2 Relevance of content 4.2 4.1 4.0 4.3 4.2 Relative quality of content 4.3 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.2 Appeal Index 1.7 2.1 1.6 1.7 2.0 Ease of locating task info 4.2 4.7 4.2 4.3 4.1 Ease of conducting the task 4.2 4.4 4.0 4.2 4.1 Navigation flow between pages 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.2 Navigational cues and helps 2.7 2.4 2.4 2.9 2.8 Error recovery 4.6 4.3 4.2 4.7 4.1 Appropriateness of response to queries 4.7 4.8 4.4 4.6 4.7 Timeliness of response to queries 4.4 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.5 Satisfaction with query resolution 4.5 4.7 4.2 4.5 4.3 Navigability Index 1.3 1.4 0.9 1.1 1.0 Timeliness of task completion 3.8 4.1 3.9 4.3 4.1 Quality of the usage experience 4.1 3.7 4.0 4.3 4.0 Perceived sense of security during usage 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.3 Creation of brand preference 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.6 4.3 Satisfaction Index 1.9 2.3 1.8 2.0 2.1 Successful transaction completion 3.6 3.9 3.9 4.4 4.6 Ease of transacting 4.2 3.8 4.3 4.3 4.5 Comprehension of charges and prices 4.1 3.7 4.2 4.6 4.6 Adequacy of payment options 4.2 3.8 4.4 4.7 4.4 Sense of security while transacting 4.2 3.8 4.1 4.6 4.5 Promptness of transaction confirmation 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.7 4.5 Transaction Experience 0.5 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.4 17

Travel Portal Ratings (on a 5 point qualitative scale) Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Travel Yatra Makemytrip Timeliness of product/service delivery 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.4 Appropriateness of delivery as per specification 4.4 4.0 4.4 4.6 4.7 Delivery Experience 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.9 0.4 Display/ease of locating refund policy 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.3 Comprehension of refund policy 3.9 3.6 4.1 4.5 4.3 Timeliness of refunds 4.2 3.6 4.5 4.7 4.6 Adequacy of refund amount 4.0 3.7 4.0 4.6 3.6 Refund Experience 0.5 0.7 0.4 0.8 0.4 UFEX Index 3.8 4.7 3.7 3.9 4.4 UZEX Index 3.1 3.7 2.7 3.1 3.1 Shopping Index 1.0 1.5 0.9 1.7 0.8 WUF Index 8.2 10.4 7.0 7.6 8.9 Base: 1,309 Note – Individual ratings are based on a 5 point qualitative scale. For each parameter respondents were asked to choose 1 out of the 5 mentioned statements, which ranged from the most positive statement to the most negative statement. Index numbers are derived numbers from the ratings, with each level index having its own calculated scale and not adhering to any standard numeric scale. 18

Website User Friendliness Study Rating Dispersions by Individual Attributes Chart 1: Download time (overall) JFM '08 Extremely slow 1% 0% 1% 4% 100% 1% 0% 7% 8% 13% 6% 1% 23% 1% 8% 12% 22% Fairly slow 75% 15% 26% 23% 32% 50% Neither fast nor slow 69% 67% 60% 54% 25% 49% Reasonably fast 0% Adequately fast Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip Travel Base: 652 Chart 2: Distinctive in identity (overall) JFM '08 Didn't no tice the lo go 2% 3% 100% 4% at all 7% 11% 4% 8% 7% 17% 2% 7% 7% 10% 24% 4% I had to search fo r the 75% lo go 23% 27% 36% 28% 32% 50% I spo tted it but o nly after a while 55% 52% 25% 49% 46% 38% It was pro minent and I spo tted it easily 0% It was the first thing Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip that I no ticed o n the Travel page Base: 652 19

Travel Portal Chart 3: Presentation of the home page (overall) JFM '08 Extremely haphazard 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 100% and badly presented 3% 2% 1% 8% 9% 10% 16% 10% 29% 17% Fairly disorganized and 75% ill presented 27% 37% 53% 38% 50% 40% Just average in organization and presentation 54% 25% 45% Fairly well organized 36% 34% 30% and presented 0% Extremely well Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip organized and neatly Travel presented Base: 652 Chart 4: Presentation of the task page (overall) JFM '08 Extremely untidy 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 100% 8% 1% 1% 4% 7% and cluttered 0% 12% 6% 28% 21% Fairly untidy 28% 75% 33% 40% 20% 34% Averagely 50% presented 63% 54% 53% 25% Fairly well 45% 38% presented 0% Very well presented Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip Travel Base: 652 20

Website User Friendliness Study Chart 5: Aesthetics of text (overall) JFM '08 2% 100% 1% 4% 5% 5% It has too little 7% content and looks 18% 27% 32% 26% empty 75% It has too much 50% 91% text and looks 77% cluttered 69% 69% 67% 25% It has just the right amount of 0% text and looks Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip fine Travel Base: 652 Chart 6: Aesthetics of graphics (overall) JFM '08 100% 3% 4% 4% 5% 17% Too few 14% 16% 16% 24% 75% 16% Too many 50% 75% 70% 69% 57% 54% 25% Highly relevant and engaging 0% Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip Travel Base: 668 21

Travel Portal Chart 7: User identification with the site (overall) JFM '08 1% 0% Its just opposite of my 4% 100% 8% 10% 5% style and personality 6% 16% 2% 11% 4% 11% 16% 22% 75% 22% I find it difficult to relate to it 46% 31% 48% 24% 50% 31% I can live with it 25% 43% 39% 38% 33% I can relate to it to 32% some extent 0% It matches my style Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip and personality Travel completely Base: 652 Chart 8: Ease of comprehension (overall) JFM '08 0% 1% 2% 2% 100% 6% Extremely 3% 3% 9% 5% 9% 4% 9% difficult 6% 7% 10% 27% 75% Quite difficult 36% 37% 32% 46% 50% Neither easy nor difficult 65% 50% 25% 49% 47% 37% Reasonably easy 0% Travelguru Cleartrip Indiatimes Yatra Makemytrip Extremely easy Travel Base: 652 22

Website User Friendliness Study Chart 9: Relevance of content (overall) JFM '08 0% 0% 1% 2% 100% 5% 5%

Add a comment

Related presentations

Related pages

Friendliness | LinkedIn

Website User Friendliness Q1 Job Portal Report Views 5,623 views. Website User Friendliness Study ... Website User Friendliness Q1 Travel Report Views ...
Read more

Website User Friendliness Q1 Overall Level Report Jan ...

Website User Friendliness Q1 Overall Level ... EbookBro.com does not provide any direct free Website User Friendliness Q1 Overall Level Report Jan ...
Read more

Website User Friendliness Q1 Financial Info Report Jan ...

Website User Friendliness Q1 Financial Info Report Jan ... EbookBro.com does not provide any direct free Website User Friendliness Q1 Financial ... Travel ...
Read more

Web Design: 11 Characteristics of a User-Friendly Website ...

Jun 18 Posted 2 years ago christajoe. Nice Post Kay, Cheers! Smooth user navigation is one of the important elements of qualitative user experience.
Read more

Mobile-Friendly Test - Google

This test will analyze a URL and report if the ... This page appears to have an interstitial which makes it hard for a user to ... Do you use Google ...
Read more

Tablet Usability: Findings from User Research

We’ve now conducted 6 rounds of usability studies with tablet users. ... We found that most websites are fairly usable ... Research Reports. User ...
Read more

Q1 Resort and Spa - Gold Coast

Q1 Resort & Spa provides luxury 1, 2 & 3 bedroom apartment accommodation on the Gold Coast. ... Out & About with Kids 2014 Best of Family Travel ...
Read more

japan-guide.com user account - frequently asked questions

Frequently Asked Questions. ... to enhance user friendliness of our website, 2) ... Question Forum User Reports Japan Penfriends.
Read more