Comparing the Usability Test of Alibaba and Amazon Websites - Assignment Example

 Comparing The Usability Test of Two Websites. ALIBABA VS AMAZON Usability testing refers to the technique used in user centered interaction design to evaluate a product by testing it on users in order to evaluate its customer satisfaction standards. It is an irreplaceable usability practice since it offers direct input and feedback on how the real users of the product use, view, and rate its satisfaction level. This test usually intends to measure the ease of use and usability of products by its regular users. Therefore, it mainly focusses on measuring the capacity of human made products to meet their intended purpose. Some of the products that employ this test are computer interfaces, devices, web applications, websites, and other consumer products. This paper will therefore focus on the design and usability test of a website. It will compare two websites to find out their user efficiency. The websites that will be tested are that of Amazon and Alibaba. This test focused on these two websites because they tend to resemble in their functions and services offered and delivered to the users. Amazon and Alibaba are two websites that are dedicated to offering information about the latest technology and thus providing opportunity for buyers and sellers to engage in e-commerce. Introduction This usability test aimed at testing two websites which are dedicated to offering information about the latest technology and facilitating e-commerce. It ensures this by helping buyers to meet sellers and prospective buyers. It also help other site visitors to browse for latest products in the market. The two websites are that of Amazon and Alibaba. These websites were tested in order to establish customer satisfaction rates and to help develop recommendations for future considerations to help improve task efficiency of the two websites. Some of the metrics tested were successful task completion, likes and dislikes of visitors to the website, time spent on doing tasks, problems encountered when performing tasks, and subjective measures regarding the visitor’s take of the websites. Generally the two websites deal with marketing supplier products, like electronics, automobiles, machinery, apparel, textiles, and accessories. Therefore, these sites offer their users opportunity to post products, negotiate with buyers, and browse information on the latest products. Users of these two websites come from almost all the age groups and they range from 10-70 years. There needs upon visiting the site also vary with their ages? The young who ranges from 10-24, mostly visited the sites to check for updates on the latest technology with little purchasing. The rest especially those from 20-65 visited the site to purchase products with little browsing of products and services on offer. Their preferences concerning the design of the website also varied. The young preferred a colorful website that was interesting. Their counterparts focused on the content, and the services. This saw adults emphasizing on the ease of navigation as most of them were not techno savvy. Their level of technical ability also varied with adults expressing concerns over the technicalities involved in performing tasks. The young did not care much about how technical it was to perform a task on the website because most of them were patient to find how to perform the task and liked the challenge. Adults on the other hand disliked technical tasks and preferred straight forward tasks. Most of them were not interested in browsing too much of the web content. They were specific in what they wanted. It is against this backdrop that this study focused on two websites of Amazon and Alibaba to try and find if the users also shared the same qualities as with the trend above. This was done in order to help harmonize the websites and factor in the needs of the visitors from all the age groups that visited the two sites. Methods This usability test was performed on 9th May in a usability lab. The test was also performed in a different environment meant to resemble homes and outdoor environments of users visiting the website. The sessions for the test were developed and structured accordingly. Most of the sessions were designed to last between 15 to 30 minutes. These sessions represented the tasks performed in the website during the usability test. The equipment employed to perform the task varied. As most of the visitors to the website used different devices to access the website, the study also ensured that the various equipment were incorporated. Therefore, equipment’s that were used include desktops, smartphones, and laptops. The operating system of most of the devices used in the study was windows. This is because most laptops and phones operated windows. The browser used was Firefox as it was the mostly used to access the websites. The participants recruited for the test reflected those of the visitors who visit the two websites. The study ensured both sexes were represented. It also ensured that they were from different age groups. This ensured that the information and data collected from the participants reflected that of the real life users. Their technical ability was also evaluated to ensure task performance of participants was classified according to their technical knowhow. Tasks to be performed and tested in the websites were created and evaluated on the basis of navigability, readability, user task analysis, accessibility, and the speed of the website.Both performance and subjective measures were evaluated. The performance measures that aid in developing the task were success of performing the task, time, and errors encountered. On the other hand subjective measures relied on the self-report satisfaction and ratings of the users concerning the performance of the website. Techniques that were employed to try and evaluate the test were the concurrent think aloud (CTA). This was to help in understanding the thoughts of the participant by having them think aloud as they perform the tasks. The advantage of this technique is that it elicits real time feedback and emotional responses of the participant. Another technique that was employed is the retrospective think aloud (RTA). In this technique the participant is asked to retrace their steps once they finish performing the task. Some of the tasks performed are listed below; Someone is low on cash and intend to buy a laptop online. Browse product offerings and settle for the best laptop that is pocket friendly and has better specifications. Your phone seems not to be serving you adequately in terms of downloading content from the internet and downloading documents. Find the latest technology on offer. One is in town strolling and doing some window shopping then they come across the latest Xbox they have always admired in the commercials. Using a mobile phone compare the prices of those in the website and that one in the shop. You have been impressed by the services delivered through the website and want to be a member in order to be getting newsletters. Sign up and be a member of the website. One needs to buy goods online and is not quite sure of the delivery mode. Plus the company they are buying from is in a foreign land. Find out how one can make this happen and get their goods safely. The website only focusses on transactions and promotion of products. Find out what other services they deal in. Subjective measurements and tasks that were incorporated in the study focused on collecting information on the preference and views of the users regarding the websites. These include personal testimonies regarding their personal experience from interacting with the website. These were catered for by conducting focused groups discussions with the participant in order to get their views, opinions, and beliefs regarding the website. Likert scales were also utilized to evaluate the usability of the websites (Molich, Ede, Kaasgaard & Karyukin, 2014). These used ordinal data, statements, and numerical values to describe the output of the findings. Results When buying a laptop online most participants followed the following procedure; Alibaba They opened the website. Then went to the category of goods section. In the category section, there were headings of various goods. They then went to the electronics section and selected laptops. Then a page was displayed indicating specifications, number of items wanted, compare prices and how to contact the supplier. Amazon Opened the website. Also had the category section which when selected showed categories of several goods. Then they went to the section of laptops and computers which led to a guide that involve a lot of reading in order to settle for the best specifications. They also had sections indicating laptops below and above certain prices thus helping participants to settle for the price ranges they are comfortable with. Amazon’s laptops and Tablets page. Alibaba’s laptop purchase page When browsing for products participants demonstrated a faster speed in completing this task. Most of the participants from all the age groups demonstrated a higher speed in performing this task. The reason for this is that most of the products in both the websites were categorized and this enabled faster navigation in performing this task. Most of the participants took less than 10 minutes in performing the task as this was the maximum time sent for performing the task. With every participant completing the task within the specified time it indicated that the task was easier and visitors did not find difficulty in performing it. They were satisfied with how information was categorized to improve speed and efficiency. In this task users of Alibaba completed their tasks faster compared to those of Amazon, with those of Amazon complaining of loading speed. Amazon users also complained of too much texts that had to be read in order to complete the task and this seemed to have affected their speed in completing the task. Finding the latest technology on offer participants followed the following procedure; Alibaba Went to the search box and typed latest technology. Result displayed brought products with the latest technology most of them being mobile devices. Even though the search was not specific but the website displayed various products by highlighting the word latest technology. This informed users of products with the latest technology as some displayed android watches and solar powered battery chargers. Alibaba latest technology search. Amazon When participants typed latest phone technology in the website products were displayed but with no emphasis whether they were latest technology. It took time to load as if the website was not sure of the command typed. Amazon latest technology search. When performing the latest technology search on the two websites participants demonstrated a higher speed in completing this task. Most of them utilized the search box on top of the page. Participants using Alibaba completed the task faster than those with Amazon. Alibaba displayed satisfying results by highlighting text indicating latest technology. Amazon on the other hand took long to load the page as if it was not sure of the command typed. Therefore one could not tell whether the products on display used the latest technology. Comparing prices of products. Alibaba The browser in use was internet explorer on windows phone. Visitors typed the website’s URL and the page was displayed. Then they went to the category section to indicate the type of good they wanted to compare prices with. This website offered the price and gave the users option to compare prices in the same box. Alibaba website design layout on windows phone. Amazon. Participants opened the website using the same browser and the same phone model. Their website layout was appealing but with poor guidelines. It left the participants wondering what to do next upon arrival on the site. Participants tried their best to find the prices of Xbox but were not provided with a variety of prices to compare. Amazon design layout on windows phone. Another task that was performed was that of comparing the prices at the shop with those in the websites. This one participant used their phones. Time allocated for this task was 5 minutes. 20% of the participants completed past time. This task was to evaluate the speed of browsers and accessibility of the website in the various mobile devices. It was also testing the layout of the various websites. Alibaba showed faster completion rates for the task because accessibility of the various categories of products was faster compared to Amazon. Participants were mostly satisfied with the services of Alibaba in terms of their website accessibility throughmobile phones. Signing up Alibaba Participants were able to identify the sign in button easily as it was right at the top of the web page. The site offered opportunity to the users to sign in using other accounts like Facebook for easier synchronization. The only details needed were email address and the password. Alibaba account registration page. Amazon Participants registered or signed in a similar manner like in Alibaba. The sign up button was easy to identify. The details required to complete or perform the task were email and password. Amazon sign up page. Signing up to become a member of the website in order to get newsletters and follow the website activities was also another easier task that showed a higher completion rate from the two websites. But most of them did not want the idea of signing up because they did not want to be attached to the website. In this task the test performance was equally the same between the two websites. Finding help in performing tasks for the new users is another task performed. Most participants managed to complete this task within the specified time. The only variation is that both websites did not categorize their help activities giving the participants hard time in performing the task. Alibaba again demonstrated good help features in this section . Alibaba range of customer services. Amazon range of services offered. Other findings demonstrated subjective measurements of the participants on various aspects of the two websites. From the findings above it was clear that the website of Alibaba was more user friendly compared to that of Amazon which was quite technical and not user friendly to those who are less techno savvy. Most of the young participants preferred Amazon to Alibaba because it was more attractive considering the color schemes. The older population preferred Alibaba because it was simple and precise with little navigation when performing task. Recommendations After comparing the usability of the two websites and reviewed the findings this text provides the following recommendation; navigation through the websites should be made easier to avoid frustrating the visitors. Appearance of the website also matter especially to some client groups. Appearance of the website attracts the attention of most visitors and it can make them want to learn more about the products on offer. This in turn allows the users to interact more and thus increase service delivery. The websites also need to stop assuming that every visitor is techno savvy. They ought to simplify most tasks in order to accommodate those who with low technical abilities and those new to the sites. First experience matters a lot, therefore the visitors first experience should be simplified in performing tasks and accessing the website in order to allow them to return and also recommend to other users. The websites also need to ensure they are supported in most devices and can easily be synchronized to ensure similar visitor experience across the client base. The mobile age has seen most people abandoning the bulky desktops and laptops thus shifting to their phones. Most services therefore ought to be supported by the various browsers in the market and operate on the available operating systems. In conclusion based on the findings of this study, despite the two websites being close in terms of their usability, this paper recommends Alibaba to be the most users friendly. As much as the two need to review their usability features, Amazon needs to do more in order to accommodate visitors from across the wider and diverse client base. Reference Molich, R., Ede, M. R., Kaasgaard, K., & Karyukin, B. (2014). Comparative usability evaluation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(1), 65-74. Read More