1. Rewriting a disclaimer
Team 2
Lisbon | 2010

2. User testing
How do I tell her the
document is awful?
... Just keep
smiling...
So what are you
thinking?

3. The participants

5. The current disclaimer

6. The current disclaimer

7. Heading for an info slide
Body text

8. The new disclaimer

9. 1. The lack of clarity on the ‘before’ version gives
users a poor image of the company.
“I was so discouraged after reading the first paragraph that I just gave up.”

10. 2. Users engaged more with the ‘after’ version than
the ‘before’ version.
Before:
“I don’t want to read it, but it
probably says things like, don’t
step on the wrong side of the
train…”
After:
“Now I might read it.”
“I understand what the sign says
now, but I believe that Gautrain
is responsible.... If my insurance
will not pay, the Gautrain must
pay.”

11. 3. Users disagreed with the disclaimer, even more
so when they understood the disclaimer.
The current disclaimer:
”The disclaimer is purposely not very clear, because if the
passengers understood what it actually said, they would not be
happy and would complain about it.”
The new disclaimer:
“I understand what the sign says, but I believe that Gautrain is
responsible in some situations. They are just saying this in
case.”

12. 4. Even if the content is understood people cannot
apply it to specific situations.
The current disclaimer:
“They definitely cover themselves against ‘loss, damage or
injury’, but I cannot figure out if this includes a loss of money
due to a missed flight.”
“I had to read it over and over and still have NO idea what
they’re on about. Only thing I got is that we are screwed. You
get on that train regardless.”

13. 5. An understandable heading made the document
more inviting.
Before:
“I would rather ask
someone what it
means – but no, I
have never asked
anyone what a
disclaimer means.”
After: “I can understand what it’s about now.”

14. 6. Shorter sentences and paragraphs made the
document easier to read.
Respondents could read the sentences
without getting lost.
7. Replacing jargon and legalese made the
document easier to read.
“I understand this part - released from
duty of care. Whatever happens, they
don’t care.”

15. 8. A clear division between content and definitions,
and improved design, made the document easier
to read.
“All those Government
names, executors, blah
blah... It confuses me SO
much!”
Bombela
WHO??

16. Points to explore...
• Consumers engaged with the rewrite
more.
• A document that is clear and
understandable could lead to more – not
fewer – queries.
• Regardless of whether the passengers
understood the disclaimer better or not,
they will still use the Gautrain’s services.