About this talk
This talk focuses on designing for trust in user experience (UX), specifically for nonprofit organizations and digital platforms. The speakers, Jana Feaster and Joanna Jackson from Sandstorm, emphasize that users no longer assume trust by default; it must be intentionally designed into websites. They highlight seven actionable UX strategies that nonprofits can implement to build credibility, such as simplifying navigation, providing clear financial information, and using empathetic calls to action. The speakers also stress the importance of transparent financial documents and choice of imagery in shaping user perceptions. Throughout the session, they provide real-world examples from organizations like UNICEF and NJHS Foundation to demonstrate the effectiveness of their recommendations.
Full transcript
Good morning. >> How is everybody this morning? >> Should I talk soft >> or can I talk normal? >> You good? >> I love all these smiles. Thank you all for coming today. Okay, let's dive in. Okay, so welcome. We are Sandstorm. Not all of us. That table over there is our Sandstorm is who. Um, so my name is Jana Feaster. My pronouns are she, her, her.
and I'm the vice president of UX and creative at Stor. >> And I am Joanna Jackson and I'm user experience researcher and designer. My pronouns are she, her, her. And I hope you all party hard last night because we didn't get to because we're speaking this morning. So, we skipped out on karaoke to be here and we're very excited and passionate about what we're sharing with you
today. >> Yes, we are responsible, but not tonight. No, I'm kidding. Okay, so first you may not know who we are, but you probably have been by our booth, got some candy. If not, come buy it later. But let me just tell you a little bit about Sandstorm. So we are accessibility certified technology agency located here in Chicago. It says 25 plus years. I think we're close
to 30, right, Sandy? >> We're close. >> We're close. So but we work with purpose-driven brands and those are goes across many industries including global nonprofits, healthcare, professional association and higher ed. We believe in continued learning. So we have a lot of certifications including CPAC certified. Joanna is one of our CPAC certified um people at Sandstorm. We are AWS cloud. We are Pantheon. We are Aquiao. We
are Drupal. Hence why we're here. DEIB for equity and inclusion and we also are a womanowned business. We believe in interdicciplinary work. We work very closely with our team of UX, UI, AI, strategy, tech all together all the time as well as analytics. And finally, we started doing UX when I was just starting. So instead of us taking some classes, why not hire PhD in human factors
to come in and teach us? And that's what we did. So, what we're going to do is just dive in. And we always like to ground ourselves. I like visuals, but I also love stats. So, let's dive in. So, your challenge today is that trust is no longer assumed and it has to be designed. For most of the internet era, organizations assumed that users trusted them by
default. Websites were built around things like marketing, branding, authority, and very polished messaging. an organization would say trust us and users generally did. But even nonprofits who are still ranking the highest among like in search and in in trust ratings only have about 35% strong trust in recent surveys. So this means that most people are starting from skepticism. We know that users consumers are tired and skeptics
these days. And so now you have to design um so much more for trust. So and a lot of times nonprofits are failing some of these key trust signals in very common ways. Users don't understand what the organization does. Your navigation may be vague or confusing. It might be clear to you, but it may not be clear enough to the users. Impact may be buried or too
abstract. Trust requires too much effort. And sometimes it's just unclear on what to do next. So in a low trust internet, the job of UX is not persuasion, it's proof. And now we're going to tell you a little bit about how you So what we want to do is give you seven actionable UX plays. Since this is a playbook, we're doing plays instead of tips. We were
going to do this whole like metaphor for sports, but we're not that. We were going to do black eye paint, but no. >> And then UK lost on Sunday. So we we scrapped that >> for sure. For sure. But we're going to give you seven plays or tips that you can take home today and um make changes within your organization. So let's jump in. So first and
foremost one the first one very powerful is your navigation needs to build trust. Just not navigate your site but you What do we mean by that? One of our clients NJHS foundation they are located in New York. They are healthc care system and they also have their own foundation. They wanted to redo their website. So through that experience with them they were inspired by um Charity Water
and Charity Water of course if you have heard about them which I hope you have. They've been working on their branding for five years because no one understood them. It was one of their main initiatives and of course not everyone wants to be like them. So good for them, but bad if you're if you can't do it from a brand perspective. So when we started talking to
them about Charity Water, we dove in with a usability study. So looking at their old site, um we had users come in and from users that they would serve and the users were like, I don't know what this is. What does NJHS mean? It's unclear. Who do they serve? what do they do? I would not give money to them. So with that awareness in an instant we
have to orient people on who you are and what you do and give that authority, give that trust so then that they start diving in. So through our research and working with the client, we then launched the new MJHS foundation. Can I get an applause? It's really pretty. Is it better? Do you like it? Okay. before. >> After. Yeah. >> Oh, it's so fresh. But let's take
a look at that navigation. First off, what do we fund? So, who do they support? Who are they actually helping? And then ways to give and then donor impact events and about putting about at the end. So, it's not so about their mission because that's kind of abstract. And when sometimes we talk about our mission, it's really hard for people to understand it, but go into that
what we fund. And in this case, they fund a lot of different things. It was pretty intense on the different funds that they offer. But then reinforcing that with our headline of compassionate care together, we ensure atrisisk New Yorkers receive the care and compassion they deserve. And then our mission comes in. So instead of leading with your mission, have it be a payoff so people can dive
in. So in this instant when someone comes here they can orient themselves to who they are, what they do and also use that navigation to start diving in from a user perspective. Help me understand who you are so I trust you and will give you some money or donate your time or what have you. So our first takeaway is your navigation needs to answer questions like what
you do, how you help, and where the money goes. All right, our next one, playing off of the navigation. We're going to stay in that world for a little bit longer here. You have to earn the right to simplify your navigation. And we saw this a little bit with Charity Water in the first example as well, that Charity Water had this very simple navigation. Another example is
UNICEF. So, UNICEF came to us and they wanted to see if their navigation helped or hindered any engagement and donations. and we had some ideas on ways that we could better drive those donations. [snorts] They actually wanted to try and we wanted to try putting the whole navigation aside from the donation button in the in a hamburger menu which is those three lines. It looks like a
hamburger. We all tracking here. We're hungry yet? Okay. So, you can see our two different examples. One that navigation's in the hamburger and one is not. Now for a lot of organizations who are looking at this as an example or a guidepost, this is a very bold choice and it has to be done through building that trust and also testing. So when we AB tested this because
it's UNICEF and because they put so much time and effort and energy into building that trust and knowing who they are, knowing who they are, becoming a household name, they actually had almost a 7% increase in donations by putting their navigation in that hamburger and focusing more on that donate button. But that's because they did a lot of work that you're not seeing. So when we look
up to these larger organizations or sometimes you feel that external pressure to simplify or do what UNICEF is doing or do what Charity Water is, we'd really encourage you to do that testing first, building that trust first, making sure that there's other parts of the site that are reinforcing trust before you make that push to increase your donations. So our takeaway here, you can simplify that navigation,
but you have to earn the right to by building that trust, becoming a recognizable brand, and then you get to do the fun play in the AB >> Absolutely. And in your assess case, they've used optimizely to run their AB study. But if you do not have access to that, you can also do a usability study with users to see how they are reacting to your grant.
Number three, people give to outcomes, not ideas. So when we think about sharing where their money is going, a lot of times we have to think about where that user is in their journey. So full disclosure, I have my MFA. I used to be a professor and it took me a long time to figure that that was 180 billion or a million. No, it's a million. Oh
my god, I'm still confused. Right. So, I'm looking to donate to someone and and it's taking me time to understand these big numbers. I know they're big, but what does it really mean to me? How is my $25 going to help out? So, yes, we know Salvation Army is huge and they want to share their numbers, but it's really making it hard for those users to really
understand and have a personal relationship and what to give. So, what we recommend is making those dimensions a little bit more tangible. So, this is an example of how someone took the money and started breaking it down into like a $100 provides snacks while women are going through some financial training or $50 provides child care or $365 can provide a Chromebook. Now, to us from a UX
perspective, this is still pretty long. So, what we'd actually recommend is saying giving examples. It could be like giving examples that help with during financial training because it's all about giving people training. Then you can get rid of some of that content, make it more scannable. Like $100 provides snacks, 365 provides Chromebooks, and then $50 provides child care. So it makes it more scannable for users and
more tangible. Oh goodness, I think I have $50. I think I can give that for someone to have child care. And especially as a fellow parent, it's really important so that they can we can empower people. So you're tugging on those heartstrings compared to the 180 million billion. I'm still need to look at those zeros one more time. That's why I didn't do math. Okay. Then some
other institutions look at more interactive tools to make that experience even more personal. So in this approach here, um the users will actually type into the calculator, I want $25, and then it'll show them exactly how that money is being used. So you almost become like a I don't know a steward of your own donation, you know? It feels more empowering. It feels more like, oh, this
is where it's going to go. I know I'm making a difference. So takeaway number, this should be number three. I checked these numbers this morning. Don't say we helped thousands. So exact. So, show exactly what someone's $5 can do and make it in plain language, scannable, reduce that cognitive load so people can really feel a relationship and trust that their money is being used wisely. >> All
right, the real number four. Um, financial documents are actually increasing perceived credibility even when users are not reading them. if there's a lot of research out there about just being open and upfront with your financial documentation. People aren't always going to dive into those PDFs, but they want to know that you're willing to let them. And that's the big thing that we're going to talk about here
and show you a few examples of how you can do this. So, another UNICEF example here, but they have a whole page dedicated to their financials. They're not burying it in about us. They're not bingering it sever several levels down and they're kind of giving you a snapshot view at their financials. But what they're doing first is showing where those third parties have actually rated and vetted
them as good stewards of your money or a donor's money. So they start by describing and explaining how they are with financials. Then they show those third parties and then those PDFs are down below all of that information. So, they're not just treating it like they're checking a box, not haphazardly hyperlinking all these PDFs [clears throat] out in the world, but actually taking the time to explain
to you that money, show that it's been validated, and and then let you dive into the details if you would like. Another example that we've got is um from from here showing financials more of that kind of data approach first. So, we've heard and we've done some work with uh Charity Navigator and their users of actual other nonprofits who really struggle sometimes with getting those good ratings.
Especially if you're a small profit, it can be really difficult sometimes to get those good ratings even if your financials are good just because you don't have always the team that you may need to really pursue that the way some of these larger institutions can. You can still do things to help mitigate that by being upfront about your financials. So, what they're doing here is actually showing
graphs and data about where the money is going and the actual breakdown. And then they link their BDS below. And even if your overhead is higher, we always treat overhead sometimes like it's this big scary thing. If your marketing efforts are actually increasing donations, if your overhead is a little bit higher and it makes a really strong business case, this is a great opportunity to say that
and explain the numbers and then let people see those the the more in-depth documentation that you have. So, it's just showing your willingness to be upfront. They probably won't read your PDFs, but you want to show how you have them and what they say. So number four here, promote those third party ratings if you have them, but always show that career spinning breakdown and publish your financial
reports. And don't treat it like it's a chore. Give some extra care and attention to this page because it really matters in that trust. Okay, now we're up to number five. So use your CTAs to create empathy. And everyone's clear on a CTA call to action. Okay, good. Thank you. I said it the other day and people were like, "What?" >> Well, we're in Chicago, too. So,
it's Chicago Transit Authority here. I'm not from Chicago. People would talk about it and I didn't know what was going on. It's a whole thing. So, >> oh my goodness, I didn't even think of that. That's fantastic. >> So, don't use your trains to create empathy. Use your call to actions to create empathy. And what do we mean by that? You know, what is that? Okay. So,
let's take a look at St. Jude's. >> [clears throat] >> So um on the screen we have the homepage on desktop and to the right is the homepage on mobile. So when you think of St. Jude's you know that they help children get care. They also do research and they also seek donations. So the buttons along the bottom of the hero are almost reflecting like what we
call a user journey. So I might give to St. Jude just because someone told me to. that I would want if I needed to seek care. That's the first thing I'm looking for. And when you think about it, when the users come here and they're looking for care, they're at a heightened state. They're worried their child is something is going on and they need they're desperate. So,
you don't want to bury those kind of CTAs. You want to make them upfront so that they can start um engaging. So, they did that here on desktop. But if you look at mobile, when it responds, the donate button is first. So their analytics has shown that people donate more on money on on mobile than they do on desktop. So on desktop you're more like a researching
kind of mode if you will while on mobile you might be just out and about and then you're ready to donate. So looking at how your users are seeking from a content perspective and make it easy for them. What we don't recommend at Sandstorm is us to remove like refer a patient and explore our research on mobile because that's actually hindering people to find that content and
you're not making it accessible. So when you think of accessibility is that people can access all the content. So we can't hide buttons. So don't do that. If you do that, that's the first thing you should do after this is not hide your buttons. But it also does reflect where those user are in their journey. And this is just on the homepage. And what is really interesting
is if this idea of empathy, which we love empathy at Sandstorm, um you you should reflect those user goals for that section. So now we've gone into um a section about um re about the treatments and the navigation has changed, but we've also seen those CTAs have changed. Might be a little bit kind of rude to ask for a donation right here when you're looking for a
treatment. I'm focused on treatment. I need help. refer a patient. So there's an elegance to this and those CTAs are re reflecting where the users are. So with your Drupal setup, make sure you have opportunities to remove buttons and call to actions to help those users focus and feel like you're almost creating a relationship with them. So that trust is going up through that kind of um
one-on-one engagement. Are you tracking with me? Can I get some time? >> Okay. Uh a snap. Snap. Thank you. My kid is a spoken word kid. So if you like something, snap. You can also do a quiet clap. >> Or you can be like, "Wow." >> Holy [laughter] cow. >> Oh my goodness. >> Coming alive this morning. >> I know. I know. That galla last night. We
are We're still recovering. So um so our tip number five here is make the next step clear through your CTAs and reflect the journey on every page. Let's give them some empathy. just give them some love and then they will give you money or volunteering or what have you. >> All right. Number six, visuals carry meaning that your users do not forget and they will even hold
against you if you are not careful. Be very mindful of your imagery. So, we're going to show you some examples here. Um, the first one we did some usability testing for Aunt Martha's. And taking a look here on the right, they had a news section. They really were featuring imagery in their news and then the titles were a little bit shorter. They had some political folks who
can sometimes that can be an especially divisive area where people were having this very visceral reaction to seeing people that they may not align with from, you know, a belief standpoint and it was driving them away from wanting to make donations. Especially in this case, like we said, because the visuals are so big, but the titles are small, the context wasn't really there and wasn't clear enough
for why these people were on the homepage and in the news. We actually ended up removing the news section to help increase donations. Because even if these people are on here for a real reason, they're really actually making a change, some of their past baggage or what people know about them outside of that carries more weight than what they're doing for an organization or as a donor.
>> If I can for those that don't know, the top image that's Governor Pritsker here in Illinois. So um here in Illinois there people do have feelings about him. um some good and bad but in this case in particular as um Jordan mentioned donations but it's also seeking care. We were actually studying um additional studies with some patients and they saw that and they're like I will
not come here for care. That's how passionate they were about seeing that picture. So it was it was a happy accident. We weren't testing the picture at all. We were just testing whether they could engage and whether they wanted the news on the home page. So it was one of those moments as a UX you're like oh man this is really amazing. >> Yeah. We were just
like do you like the news? And they were like this is changing everything for me. And we were like okay hold on hold on. So >> yeah for sure it impacted the brand awareness as brand as well for Marthus. >> Yeah. So you want images that build trust not friction here. So avoiding things like polarizing individuals. And now if they're a really big donor and you want
to feature them and say thank you, make the context larger than the image or even forgo an image sometimes without talking about the impact that they're making and why. That's going to be really helpful for you here because you just don't want to leave with imagery that's going to create the feelings that you're not wanting to vote Um, and AI generated, we didn't really touch on that
in that example, but obviously as we know, people do not rock with the AI photos. So you even images that feel manipulative like you're showing people in a in a not great state AI generated or even super polished and bo you know photoshoot like is not resonating with people the way that it used to. It feels like you're trying to get more out of them or be
manipulative or not be forthcoming which goes back to our big trust kind of theme as we go through this. And then um do not create doubt about the organization's intent or values. So again, that framing is really important. Going to focus more on just being showing the real impact. So showing people that are experiencing the positive outcomes of your organization or, you know, feeling really authentic. People
actually prefer an a not so great iPhone photo over to something that feels AI generated. They're they're craving that authenticity. And you really have an opportunity here to be an icon class against all of the AI generated photos and these perfect photo shoots. And now for my favorite example. We all know in the arms of an angel It's 2 in the morning, you're watching George Lopez, a
commercial comes on and it cuts to the saddest montage of cats and dogs behind the scariest fence you've ever seen in your life. And cry. >> I know. And you're like, "Oh my goodness, I was not emotionally prepared for this." And this was their thing for so long. You know, donate now, help these things. And then you feel guilt and you feel just bad if you don't
donate, but you also feel like maybe they're playing too much at your heartstrings. And so this was their brand. Even ASPCA has changed their tune on the way that they're framing how the impact that they have. Happy dogs. We have happy dogs on their website now. So even they have started to buy into this understanding of showing what they're doing, the impact that they're having, and where
those donations go. There's a lot of research studies and eyetracking data out there about happy [snorts] donors give more. People who feel good and feel motivated, empowered are better givers and more willing donors than people who feel like they're being guilted into it, especially through your imagery. Um, so we we love in in the arms of an angel and you know, but definitely a little bit more
of a happy motivated donor headsp space to be in >> So our play here, use inclusive outcome focused imagery that reflects your audience. You can still play to their heartstrings without breaking their heart. Um, and make sure that you're framing context around anybody who may have, you know, where people may have visceral reactions. lead with the context or with the imagery completely in those cases. That's okay.
You're talking more about the impact here and you want to show that in a way that's most effective to potential donors. >> We are already at seven. We are flying through. So, >> y'all might get a little bit of a break to go get coffee before everybody else >> or take a little nap. >> Okay, so seven. Sometimes fewer clicks is not the answer on a lot
of Thank you. Oh, thank you. Oh, I'm so excited by that. Um, every time we start a new project, a website or digital experience, the client's always like, "We need to reduce those clicks." Yes. To embody sandstorm. Yes. And let's look at the context. So, let's talk about it here. Do we really need to reduce clicks? And we want to talk about forms. This is your bread
and butter. It's where people get money. and we want them to engage. So, normally in this instance, we would want people to have fewer clicks to complete that form. So, what was done is a AB study where they did a multi-page form and a multi-page form in this instance is what we're seeing here on the screen. You have content donation and then the button at the lower
right hand corner says next. So, you know you're going on to another page. So, it's a multi-page form. They studied this one compared to a long single page form. So one click and it's a really long form and you scroll through it. You know, we've all done this, right? Think that people will be able to get through the content faster. They just tab through. Fantastic. But what
they actually found is the multi-step donation form was better. It's more mobile ccentric. It's more easy to understand. It reduces that cognitive load. helps the user focus. So, they actually increased conversion rates by 75% and the average donation by 54%. >> think that's kind of a boom. Can I hear a boom? >> Thank you. >> We dropped our mics, but I don't think >> now in the
true Sandstorm way of Yes. And yes, this form is great, but we also think it could be better. So, example, so I love forms. Everybody at Sandstone knows I just love creating landing pages and forms. So the little arrow that points to the box, that little joyful arrow creates it increases conversions, too. So get a little arrow, a little image of an arrow in there. I can
talk to you more about it because it's just so much fun to figure out where to place it. But also on this one, you don't know how many screens there are. So it would really be great maybe by the next or at the top there's like something that shows you step one, step two, step three. So the user knows how many different steps they're going to go
through. and not be like by the third clip going, "Oh my gosh." It just helps them have kind of more control. And if they're in control, they feel happier, more engaged, and hopefully their donation will increase as it did in this >> And even here, another example or another kind of bit of feedback we would probably offer here is to look at using this as another place
to put some of those proof points. So, if you do have those really strong ratings or really great outcomes, put reminders here. make your FAQs a little bit more clear um here as well and and make this feel supportive as you're going through it. Like you want to help them. You want them to know how many steps it's going to take that you have answers to their
questions and that you are trusted because this is can also be a big drop off point for people. So we want to support them through that as much as we >> Definitely, as we've said before, test it, test it, test it, and then it works, then test it again and continue just to enhance it because we can always make it So, our play number seven is break
lawn forms up to give users control when donating. >> Definitely look at your mobile usage. If you have a lot of donors who are more mobile, you'll probably notice even more of an increase here because it's very much more of a supportive model for a mobile donor versus a desktop. >> For sure. >> It's also more accessible too because a lot of people don't have desktop computers.
True. We just keep going and we just keep going. >> Thank you. Okay, so as a recap of all your tips, your plays, you want to make sure your navigation answers who you are and what you do, especially if you're starting to build your brand, reinforcing your brand. Um, continue to do that. Make sure that it really helps the user orient themselves and engage. Then test that.
test your um navigation, your homepage to see if your brand is strong enough to start moving maybe that that navigation and putting in a hamburger like UNICEF did. But make sure when you do the AB study is everything is exactly the same. You don't want to change anything else. You want to just make sure the navigation is the only thing you change because if you change more
than that, then you don't know really what's helped people, right? So that's definitely a lesson learned and making sure it's just the one thing you want to study. Show exactly how someone's donations are being used. And remember the millions, billions, all that stuff. Just make it very simple. Make it really easy for someone to be like, "My $5, my $25, my thousands of dollars can do this."
And empower them. Promote third party ratings and share financial reports. Again, knowing they may not look at that PDF, but it's there. It's readily available. Guide the user through your site with CTAs that reflect that journey. Empathy. Have empathy for them. Think about where they're at in their mind, where they're at in their state of being, and make sure that that C CTA reflects that. Use outcome
focused images that reflects your audience. That one you might want to even just study with some of your volunteers or your um people that you serve. Every once in a while, just get it a temperature check and see what's going on. If you are a um partisan organization, then make sure of course that your language really reflects what the intention is of that image. Um another one
of our clients is trying to be nonpartisan, but the content is very hard when you see it. So that headline needs to be very clear in why you're using that image. And hopefully everyone will read it, but that's, you know, everyone's very, you know, uptight nowadays. Um then uh use outcome focused Don't be shar What's her name? Macklin. [laughter] >> Yeah. Don't be >> Don't be not
guilt tripping people. That's very 2005 of you. >> Yeah. Maybe as you're working on that listening to her music would be fantastic, but don't embody her in the >> And then break long forms up to give your users control. It is all about that trust, control, transer, trans transparency, guiding them through the experience. Okay, so we did end a little early. Sorry. Um, so does anybody have
any questions? We're happy. Yes. >> The data for users turning away um that you cited earlier as you're going through like the design uh is that sourced in this presentation? Like can we find it? We did site all of our sources for for the data. So, it is in this presentation. If you want to come up and we'll we'll give you the exact link too if you'd
like at the end. So, >> yeah, >> that would be great. This was really phenomenal and I was giving updates to my team as we went through it. We were learning and it's just was so helpful really interested in the professional photography. >> and then I worked at like international human rights and we introduced a safe polic advice against like the guilt tripping stuff. Not only because
it's not ineffective, but it's also like really disrespectful sometimes um especially when you're dealing with people in crisis. So, I'm glad to see that there's good data showing like positive association has a >> like bigger return on your efforts. So, great job. Thank you. >> Well, thank you very much. >> Yes. Um I found in I'm Catherine. I work with Michael J. Fox Foundation. >> We found
that >> the opposite of the breaking long forms up in our own >> work. It wasn't for donations. It was for like registering to be part of our, >> you know, like you can automatically sign in for webinars. So >> my gut instinct on that is that because we weren't just guiding people through a donation process, but that we were asking them for more information about >>
was why that watershed happened. But I would love your off-the- cuff feedback about whether you think that's the right direction or not. I I think it it definitely it probably the UX of the two forms too. You may have seen that if you had a multi-step form that had few elements changed or maybe showing that progress or things like that, it may have had a closer kind
of comparison between the two. I think it also does depend on what type of form, Jana. >> Yeah, definitely. I would test with the users and see almost an a comparison. But I think also with a webinar or something like that, your your mindset's a little bit differently of what you're doing. So you would be willing to give more content and maybe they're just powering through that
long form. So it definitely be something to study. >> Um I know that's not the best answer, but I'd like to study it. My gut is saying that's interesting. I'd love to learn more because yeah, but yeah, it's it's really cool. Let's talk about that >> It depends if it's more mobile. Maybe people are registering more for webinars on desktop where it's easier with that one page.
We're donating on mobile. >> Mobile devices are difficult for people with tremor. So that's that's a reality. And that's also something that makes our >> results different. Of course. Yeah. >> Maybe that is the accessibility point of view. >> Maybe navigating to another page is just not what they have the patience for. >> Um so yeah. Yeah, that's very interesting. For sure. Thank you. Great question. Yeah.
>> I have I have two. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um one with photos, one with form. So the photos, um as an agency, what do you do? How do you handle if the client doesn't have really any good photos or if it's like not the type of organization that's like working in the field and runs events and like does exciting stuff? Like how do you handle that
to get What was good about looking to stop your stage? >> For sure. It's a great question. What we would do um to work with instances like that is work with their brand with the marketing team to talk to what they want to do from a brand perspective. Maybe it's iconography. Maybe it really doesn't need um an image because let's say it's a long list of resources.
Those images, if they're stock images, they don't really reflect the content that you're clicking on like for a resource. So then it hinders the person like, well, why is this image related to this? So we'd actually recommend get riding the image and just because they're there for content so you can quickly scan but it is a balance of where you want to go from a brand perspective.
So um so we've used icons in the past or we just remove images. Sometimes we've used even um color like um and we have to be careful with color from an accessibility point of view. So you might want to check that from a contrast perspective um and also with different how it changes with different um color blindness. Um but it could be where it is um a
webinar is one color and so on and so forth. But again, you need to be very very careful with that. Make sure you test your contrast with your text, but also the the color with the background because that has to have contrast too. >> And that might be a case where you leverage your news like if you're focusing or featuring more of your news that does have
more imagery or areas on your site that do have it. Obviously with the advice that we gave of being careful with that, but you know there you can still use some of your imagery and there are also stock photography that is not so stock use it very very sparingly but if you're just completely out of images you know um definitely just taking that care and attention to
maybe they are more expensive but looking at those that less stock photography using it more as as an atmospheric than trying to cell point um can still be very effective >> and just shoot on your iPhone. You may as well, you know, like that people love that and we're seeing that more in that younger generation, but that's going to still continue to be a through line as
they eventually, you know, grow older and generations after them. That authenticity even with phone or or not a professional crazy camera makes people feel like you're really mission driven, you know, and in in the moment and telling the truth. So, question over here. >> You know, I was going to ask uh after the question from the Parkinson's folks, uh if you'd run into any other accessibility issues,
uh that interacted with stuff. You sort of answered that question already. >> Yeah, definitely. Oh, definitely. It's something we study all the time to make sure that everything's accessible, that it's built accessible, that it's designed accessible. even um you know again call to actions, clear things, the way the form responds, the way it works, all those things for sure. >> And also question um so you're talking
about like adding those proof points to the donation page. Um I find that that can very quickly become too much >> Um I'm wondering if you have any good examples of a website that does that. in a way that balances like here's the proof, here's how you should donate, but also like but here's how you like this is the actual forms. >> We can follow up on
that with you. How about that? >> And you know, it it's really don't overwhelm them. Sometimes if you if you do have those strong ratings, just even putting like the charity navigator and and the candid kind of down there is a subtle reinforcer. it's not taking over the page or kind of fighting with it, but it's just there in the corner of their eye, in the back
of their mind that, hey, we we are very legitimate and we try and we make the effort or a couple small stats. Um, we've also found that like this isn't going to help you very much because you were just talking about images, but the imagery behind those forms can sometimes help with that as well. >> And then just watch out for contrast >> and watch out for
[laughter] watching. >> Yes, sir. I wonder if you could describe the relationship of content strategy to UX. >> Oh, that's a whole talk in itself. >> So, um, so what we do with it is part of our UX strategy at the very beginning when we work with our clients, they might have, um, goals. A lot of things we're working on right now is um, in some of
our other professional association work is gating content. when do you gate it, when do you not? Um, so then we do a whole strategy session around that where we look up and out of inspiration because there's many people in the world that have done it right and done it wrong. So we want to uh look at that for um insights. So then that becomes part of our
strategy that we then reflect in our wireframes. So for us it's not a happy accident or it's not a by an end thing. So we find that if you can show it in the wireframe, you can then educate the team on you don't need to have that huge big block of content or this is how you make it more scannable or with the work we're doing now,
this is how you make it work for AI. So definitely through that wireframe because they're not being um enchanted by creative, by color, by imagery. They're looking at hierarchy. They're looking at where the content is positioned. And then we can start talking about how this will work for assisted technology, for AI, and for all those aspects. So for us, it's a thread throughout. Many times they already
have content strategy on their team, but we partner with them to help them um like kind of that outside resource that can kind of talk to them and see how we want to go from there. So um so for us, us is very much a thread line because many times for websites, content is the hardest thing, um to get done in time. Um, another thing we've learned
is, and I don't think it's gonna be talked about later. I don't think so. Um, because we have two more sessions today. Um, we used to say keep your content no matter how much like all your press releases because it's SEO juice, but now with AI is being served up incorrectly. So, this is time to it's time to prune. It's time to be very intentional with your
content. So, um, so that would also be part of our content strategy as well. >> I think the St. Jude example we showed earlier does a nice job of kind of reflecting how you can have an overarching content strategy of we want things to ladder up to donations but making those CTAs actually more contextual and not just having those same CTAs and and kind of being aware
of you may only need to find a provider in this case you we're not going to ask you to donate. So even your CTAs and kind of lading those up to strategy or substrategy um can be kind of a nice starting point for you and and kind of making sure the UX and the the content strategy are partners. >> Yeah. But let's say there's an instance where
you don't have a content strategy, we would we could do that um with our clients as well where we set up the governance and the race seat and the content strategy statement and everything. So does that help? >> Yeah, I was uh curious about how much the content drives the UX and vice versa because some of the examples you gave seemed to be like, hey, we've got
this overweening principle that we want to accomplish uh of of driving donations or something like that. It wasn't really content centric. It was more like this is the the ultimate, you know, end of the user journey here. We want them to do >> and you know whether content sometimes, you know, should come after that or before it. It sounded like you were saying that it's often concurrent
and >> it is. Yeah. >> It's a moving target. >> Yeah. Yeah. For us it's more concurrent because then you can start challenging it through that um that whole uh experience if you will. >> Yeah. We often will work more in like a redesign space. So there's a lot of content there. But even with the MGHS example where they had all this content and we were like
we need new buckets, you know, we need to not brand these things. And so some of those UX principles in that case actually kind of flow back down into their content of reshaping and renaming a lot of their pages to be more clear with those new navigation buckets for sure. >> People in the back, you're being quiet. Any questions? We can hear you. [snorts] >> Oh, there's
one over here. Go ahead. >> Um, this might be a little uh I don't know if this is appropriate. Um but regarding uh form security um is there a um a tolerance where um you don't want to deny uh someone from from actually submitting by getting caught up in a spam filter or something. Uh I know we've had trouble with um maybe making our recipes a little
too strict and um but then if they're not strict enough then we get unwanted um submissions and uh is there is there any kind of uh thought um on how you go about sort of finding that sweet spot or is it just part of you have an overlarge an overarching cyber strategy on on how to keep out un unwanted submissions? >> Does that make sense? >> I
think so. And >> what what was that? I was asking spam spam. Yeah. >> Yeah. Um may not be the most elegant answer, but I'd be working with my tech company or my my tech team, the developers, and also what um the what the client needs from a data perspective with those forums and how it works through their whole engagement. Um so it's a little bit more
of a tech conversation than what we usually do. Yeah. From a UX perspective, but we partner and talk about it. But I'd be relying on my developers to help me with >> Okay. Well, we will let you all go. What? Four minutes early. >> Yeah. Yeah. Great. Thank you all. Okay. [applause]
