This was originally delivered as a session for the CASE District 1 Conference: Jan 27, 2011 Is your institution’s website in need of an overhaul, but you simply do not have the time or resources to make it happen? We’ll walk you through an actual site audit for a prestigious higher ed institution, and showcase the evolution that can occur in a matter of weeks. By taking a look at the college’s original website, we’ll give you a sense of what can and should be improved upon, then fast forward to the refreshed website, to review what changes were implemented—-in under 12 weeks time.

1. 2011 CASE district i: Making the connection Website ER: Rapid Refresh vs. Total Redesign for Triaging Immediate Needs

2. Website ER: Refresh vs. Redesign “Is your institution’s website in need of an overhaul, but you simply do not have the time or resources to make it happen? We’ll walk you through an actual site audit for a prestigious higher ed institution, and showcase the evolution that can occur in a matter of weeks. By taking a look at the college’s original website, we’ll give you a sense of what can and should be improved upon, then fast forward to the refreshed website, to review what changes were implemented—in under 12 weeks time. “

4. Process

5. Results

6. Lessons learned from the Client

7. Lessons learned from the DesignersPrerequisites for Success – 3m Case Study 2: Plymouth State University – 5m Conclusion/Caveats – 3m Questions – 10m

8. About Us Jenny Rickard Chief Enrollment & Communications Officer Bryn Mawr College Alen Yen President/Creative Director iFactory, a division of RDW Group

10. 1,300 undergraduate students over 50% of whom are students of color or international students; 400 graduate students

12. The first student self-government association in the United States.

13. Among the top ten of all colleges and universities in the United States in terms of the proportion of students (male and female) who go on to earn the Ph.D.

14. Women at Bryn Mawr major in math and science at a rate that is 4 times the national average.

16. Refresh: what and why? A refresh involves doing a quick expert review of what’s wrong with your site, and then executing a plan to fix everything you can within an allotted timeframe. A refresh differs from the typical website redesign project in that it bypasses a number of best practices which ensure long-term success and the best quality of solutions Metaphor: kitchen remodelling vs. refreshing Same appliances Same cabinetry Repainting New knobs and handles The primary driver to do a refresh vs. a redesign is timeframe. Budget can also be a factor.

17. Refresh vs. Redesign: change in scope TYPICAL REDESIGN PROCESS: 7 – 9 months Brand messaging and positioning Website strategy and discovery Expert Review Stats analysis Focus groups Stakeholder interviews Competitive audit Strategic brief Usability test on existing site Technical audit Information Architecture Sitemap – reorganize hierarchical structure of all content Wireframe – redesign all user experience and navigation schemes for best practices Usability test of proposed solutions Functional specification Art Direction Look and Feel Code templates Institute new site-wide technical solution RAPID REFRESH: 1 – 2 months Brand messaging and positioning Website strategy and discovery Expert Review Stats analysis Focus groups Stakeholder interviews Competitive audit Strategic brief Usability test on existing site Technical audit Information Architecture Sitemap – adjust nomenclature for best practice, but leave structure intact Wireframe – remove troublesome elements and modify some elements of navigation Usability test of proposed solutions Functional specification Art Direction Look and Feel Code templates Institute new technical solution

19. Core project team – understanding everyone’s roles

20. Agreement that Core project team could make the decisions

21. Detailed RFP outlining the project - visual and technical requirements

22. Selecting a partner that understood the difference between a “refresh” and an “overhaul”

23. Communication with the community and “web stewards” as a way of including them in the process

26. Interim brand positioning and messaging led by Mary Ann Hill

30. Clearly defined roles

31. Existing “interim” institutional messages to incorporate into new design

32. Sticking to the schedule and meeting all internal deadlines

33. Not being too obsessed with including the entire community, but making sure the changes were being communicated and offering ways for them to contribute (eg., photo contest)

34. Creating a great team interaction: Bryn Mawr College Communications, Web Services, and iFactory

36. Pre-requisites for success Strong project leadership Organized communications and interaction tools Commitment to deadlines and feedback cycles Clear path for improving messaging and positioning Quality visual assets ready to go Understanding phased commitment to improvement Agreement by all that in this situation, perfect is the enemy of good Additional case study: Plymouth State University

37. Conclusion / Caveats / Questions Refresh is great for time sensitive needs aesthetic improvement better brand communications Redesign is required for true improvement in usability adherence to best practice continuously successful, updated site