1 / 33

USING WEB ANALYTICS TO UNDERSTAND CLIENT RESPONSE TO CHANGE

USING WEB ANALYTICS TO UNDERSTAND CLIENT RESPONSE TO CHANGE. Jane Miller Victoria University Thursday 12 th November 2009.

raleigh
Download Presentation

USING WEB ANALYTICS TO UNDERSTAND CLIENT RESPONSE TO CHANGE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. USING WEB ANALYTICS TO UNDERSTAND CLIENT RESPONSE TO CHANGE Jane MillerVictoria University Thursday 12th November 2009

  2. The scope for this project was to examine whether the implementation of a “Web 2.0” interface on a “traditional” Web 1.0 Library catalogue impacted on the habits and behavior of users The new interface introduced wasInnovative Interfaces’ “Encore” search and discovery platform The plan was to utilise easily available web analytics tools to explore trends Google Analytics Crazy Egg THE SCOPE

  3. The following were identified as the key questions to be explored within the study; Does the pathway used by the “average” user change in any way with the alteration of the web opac interface? Does the adoption of Web 2.0 features significantly change the site’s usage in relation to both numbers of visitors and the time they spend on the site. Does the volume of use of specific content (pages, services) change as a result of the interface change. AREAS FOR INVESTIGATION

  4. THE STORY SO FAR…….

  5. Victoria University, dual sector University based in the western suburbs of Melbourne 12 locations 47,000 students studying across both sectors (vocational/higher education) onshore and offshore WHO?

  6. WHO? • The Library has used Innovative Interfaces, Innopac and then Millennium as it’s ILMS since 1991 • The Web Opac has been the main user gateway for discovery of and access to print and electronic resources since 1999 • Like many Libraries, the simple version of the Web Opac’s search form is integrated as the central element within the main page of the Library’s Web page.

  7. INTEGRATEDCONTENT SEARCH FACETS TAG CLOUD BOOK COVER ART

  8. THE VISION

  9. Key selling point of Encore was similarity to other Web 2.0 applications As full implementation neared and second version released - concerns raised about allowing clients to tag records. After discussion with Innovative - determined that turning off tagging, undermined the potential of the product as a Web 2.0 interface PHILOSOPHICAL SHIFT : PATRON ADDED TAGS

  10. The interface implemented as the main catalogue interface in December 2008 Plan to commence 2009 user education period highlighting Encore Link to the Web Opac retained as “Classic Catalogue” Commenced collecting metrics using Google Analytics in mid January From start of Semester 1, 2009 time needed to compile data over a representative period to determine impact EVALUATING THE IMPACT

  11. EVALUATION • History of seeking client feedback as part of Web site evaluation • In the past efforts have centred around • Focus Groups • Observed usability testing • Feedback from the annual Library client survey • Each of these methods have been comprised the central element of the evaluation process • For Encore, we had the opportunity to look at statistical metrics as well via the recently implemented Google Analytics and Crazy Egg

  12. QUANTITIVE MEASURES • Reviewed Google Analytics reports for 16th January 2009 – 31st October 2009 • Compared reports to the same dates in 2008 • Explored impact on overall site metrics • A number of interesting potential trends pointed to areas for further investigation • Also looked at Crazy Egg click analysis to determine whether there was any change in click patterns on the main page of the site

  13. GOOGLE ANALYTICS16th JAN – 30tH JUNE 2009 OVERALL SITE

  14. GOOGLE ANALYTICSENCORE INTERFACE • Time spent on Encore page appearing to contribute to time spent on the site overall

  15. AVERAGE TIME ON SITE: 3 POSSIBILITIES More time spent on the site/using Encore because: • The new interface is so content rich that users are spending more time • The new interface is confusing and it is taking users double the time to locate what they want • The architecture of the new interface means statistics are being inflated

  16. DIGGING DEEPER : USE BY COUNTRY

  17. GOOGLE ANALYTICS: GOALS

  18. SOME INTERESTING INSIGHTS

  19. HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF ENCORE GOAL CONVERSIONS BY COUNTRY

  20. HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF CLASSIC CATALOG GOAL CONVERSIONS

  21. CRAZY EGG – PRE ENCORE 2231 clicks 46 clicks

  22. CRAZY EGG – POST ENCORE 2852 clicks 370 clicks 162 clicks 20,000 Visits – 8724 Clicks

  23. FEEDBACKNO NEWS IS GOOD NEWS? • Feedback remains an important tool • Initially client (student) feedback - vaguely positive or relatively non existent • We have a feedback link on the entry page and have received only one post since the implementation. • “The concept behind the new catalogue is great. The only thing letting it down is the look. Can it be skinned so the site looks like it's part of VU? It currently has a mishmash of colours and the only branding is a logo squeezed into the corner.” • We have also posted to the Student Blog and Library Student Employees discussion group asking for feedback but to date no responses have been received

  24. INSYNC • In August we conducted the annual Library Satisfaction survey – Insync • Comments demonstrated an awareness of the new catalogue • Some were negative • Some were negative in relation to the older system • Again however, very little feedback regarding Encore

  25. WHERE TO NEXT? FURTHER INVESTIGATION AKA “CSI LIBRARIAN”

  26. FOLLOW THE LEADS : THE NEXT PHASE • Next step is to use the insights we have gained to investigate specific elements more closely • Areas we need to pursue • The length of time on the site and the reduction in web site bounces • Are people actually spending more time on the site and why? • Does the interface enhance or detract from the search process? • Does the lack of feedback equate to acceptance of the new interface or are there issues under the surface? • How did the long pilot period impact on the reception?

  27. METRICS FROM SECOND PART OF THE YEAR

  28. IN THE END….. • Statistical tools are invaluable for setting a context and highlighting issues for further exploration • They form part one of an evaluation process that resembles a jigsaw puzzle. • Act as a tool to prompt further conversation with clients • Provide clues as to what the conversation should be about • Google Analytics and Crazy Egg have indicated that there wasn’t a mass exodus from the catalogue as a result of the change

  29. IN THE END WE DON’T HAVE DEFINITIVE ANSWERS…… …..BUT WE DO HAVE BETTER, MORE FOCUSED QUESTIONS TO ASK

  30. THANK YOU Jane MillerElectronic Information Systems & Services LibrarianVictoria UniversityJane.Miller@vu.edu.au

More Related