Yes and no, Michelle.
1) Although the R&D staff's views & needs must of course be taken into account -- they are in charge of maintaining the site, after all -- they should not be confused with the clientele, i.e., the customers.
For example, when a customer goes to a store, to buy, let's say, a camera, he generally is not going to concern himself with the problems Nikon or Olympus have in producing a camera, or in the profit margin the store is (or is not) going to have on the sale of it. He simply wants to buy a good camera at a good price.
Now, the picture here is somewhat different. When users discuss what they would like to see -- or do not want to see -- on SI, they ought to keep in mind that the R&D staff is composed of mere mortals, after all, and that there is only so much they can realistically be expected to do. But the users still represent the customers, while the R&D staff represents the management, that is the company offering the services the customers are seeking.
In addition to the R&D staff, one needs also to consider management itself. The company is, I think, entitled to make a profit. Not necessarily a big one -- but a profit, nonetheless. Otherwise, why would it bother running SI at all? Go2Net is not a humanitarian organization, and we should not expect it to be.
Now, the customers: the SI membership. I would divide it into three parts, actually: 1) long-time active users; 2) inactive users; 3) new active users.
I assume that SI is primarily interested in (1) and (3): in keeping the long-term active users, and in attracting new active users. (If inactive users are paid up, I don't see the urgency, for SI, in getting them reinvolved. But of course I could be wrong.)
There could possibly be a conflict here. I don't know for sure. But I suspect that the long-term active users who have grown with SI have a stronger attachment to Classic SI, thanks not just to its specific features, but also to "sentimental" associations they may have with it. New members, I would guess, would be more likely to immediately start using the new interface, and would be content with it as long as it performed reasonably well. In short, they would not have even a basis for comparison.
Then other questions arise: is this new, redesigned interface more likely to attract new members than a redesigned Classic interface would have? Would offering both interfaces on the new site attract more, or less? Which options would be more likely to inspire long-time users to stay with SI, and which more likely to inspire them to leave? And so on.
I don't know the answers to any of these questions. But I trust somebody in management is asking them, and is working on getting the answers.
Joan
|
