We all know what we need when we start a new project – that’s why we start it! Or do we?

Just because we have identified a problem or an opportunity to improve a process or piece of software doesn’t mean that we see all the issues or all of the requirements. It may seem obvious, but we can easily jump to defining the problem or the solution before we’ve determined the stakeholders.

I have a confession: when I think of the word stakeholder I have an image in my head of a Buffy type character about to stick a pointy stick into someone! That’s a good image to have, because stakeholders who are ignored in a project can come back to bite you (if you’ll pardon the mixed metaphor)!

The forgotten Stakeholder

The most commonly forgotten stakeholder, and coincidentally the one with the longest memory is the end user. We know that there are business process experts, programmers, project managers and a whole host of experts, but no-one knows the ins, outs and quirks of your business systems like the end users!

In most business processes that have been around for more than a year or two there are tips and tricks, fixes and work arounds that never get beyond the end user – unless someone asks. These are often show stoppers when a new or improved process is considered. If there is a particular feature that is used daily, but unknown by the project experts then that is the one feature that the end users will complain about post implementation (pun definitely intended).

Search out the Stakeholders

The first order of business, therefore for any project is to search out all the stakeholders – not just the ones who have a perceived expertise in the production of the new or improved process, but the workers at the coal face, the end users who know the process because they use it daily. The problem with unknown stakeholders is just this: they are unknown. The only solution is to cast your net far and wide at the outset of any project. It’s much better to have someone say ‘no, I’m not involved with that’ than to have them complain about lack of input after the fact.

Redefine the problem if necessary

Once you have cast your net and identified all the genuine stakeholders you can then begin to remap the process. You will inevitably find that there are differences between the theoretical process and the actual. All these modifications to the originally defined process must be included in the process definition before moving on to consider the direction of the project.

Happy Holders

If you conduct this pre-project discovery process fully you will find that your project will have a smoother ride to completion. You will also find that the stakeholders will have acquired a sense of ownership that not only makes them happier about the project, but, because of the sense of ownership will also have a vested interest in the project’s success. Being a stakeholder, therefore, is a two edged sword – it can work against the project manager if he has failed to cast his net wide enough, but for the savvy project manager who has included everyone  all these stakeholders in the project will have a determination to see the project succeed.

Where do you start with a large web design project?

It’s a difficult question, but one that becomes more vital the larger and more complex the web site project is. The web design community seems to be split fairly evenly between the designers – quite often graphic design led, and the coders – those who have come from an IT specific background, such as programming. The reality is that both design and function are important, and more than that, the homogeneity of the site as a whole must be considered as vital.

Think of some of the big web sites that you visit regularly, either social networking or news related or perhaps an industry specific site. The site itself becomes immersive: it is an environment all to itself, one in which the end user immerses himself to the extent that the framework on which it is built fades into the background. The question then is: if it fades into the background why is it so important? And the answer is simply this: if the interface, the elements, the functionality, the design is not 100% harmonious between the various pages or areas of the web site then the ability of the end user to become immersed is broken. The interface interferes with the user experience.

Extending the Design Brief

So, what do we do to mitigate this potential problem? It must be considered as a fundamental part of the overall design brief. We have accepted for years that a consistent corporate brand is vital, that paperwork, products, display furniture must all seamlessly integrate. In a sense it doesn’t matter how ‘pretty’ or otherwise the design is, the key is consistency. The consumer then sees a single brand.

For web design we must extend the design brief to include not just brand elements, but other visuals, such as the page layouts, the page elements (buttons, input boxes, graphic hints, columns and boxes). We also must consider functional consistency as part of the same design brief. All user interactions must be consistent across pages and elements, and if possible across devices. All navigation must be consistent and logical. The end user must be able to become immersed in the site so that they can navigate and interact without ‘seeing’ the surrounding interface. The ‘brand’ becomes so much larger than just the company logo and colour, but the end result is so much better for the user, and therefore for the business.

Back to the start

If we go back to the start, and think about where we begin with designing a complex interactive web site, we need to plan our site layout – page structure and flow, functional flow, termination points all with the understanding that these must be a unit: many parts, one entity.

All too often we begin web design and application projects with a specific function in mind, and quickly become bogged down in functionality when the ability to access that functionality is equally vital. Sit down and consider your business web site as a whole and think how it can be a homogeneous site: consistent in form and function from the big picture of the entire page right down to the individual elements that the user interacts with. Then you will be able to build function on top of this homogeneity knowing that the end result will be immersive and accessible for the end users. This can only lead to a more satisfying user experience and more interaction with the web site itself.

Here are the slides from a recent presentation that I gave on Business Computing and the Cloud. It was aimed at SMEs who currently have a more conventional LAN/Server/Desktop setup, just as an introduction to the concept of the cloud and how we’ve got to where we are now in terms of business IT.

Well, Microsoft have finally made their announcement: the new version of Windows is on its way! What does it mean to business users?

What’s in the Name?

It’s happened many times before: a company has used a version number that’s not strictly sequential. Usually there’s a good reason, even if that reason is commercial rather than technical. Famously the database program dBase was initially released as dBase II because nobody liked to buy version one software.

What’s behind Microsoft’s move to 10? I think there are two things behind it.

1. There are significant moves under the bonnet to consolidate platforms, to unify the Windows experience across devices. This is to be expected in the current technology climate. If Microsoft produce a product that lives up to this promise then I think they will be justified in giving it a number 10 as it will be a significant technological change.
2. We’ve been used to single digit versions of software for years – these things evolve slowly. But more recently some major players have been upping the ante. OS X, anyone? Firefox and Chrome are both well into double digits. There is definitely a sense of maturity that comes from a double digit version number, something that implies stability and maturity. I suspect that Microsoft had this at least in their minds as they considered the version number, and I’m sure that they believe that it is a mature product –  the justification will only come with the shipped product.

The Ecosystem

These days it’s not just about the operating system, it’s about the ecosystem: phone, tablet, web, PC – all have to work together. Apple have seen an increase in consumer purchases of Mac products because of iPhone users. Chromebooks are now becoming mainstream due to the ubiquity of Android and the Chrome browser. Microsoft are travelling in the other direction, but they have to provide an equal value proposition in terms of the entire ecosystem.

The promise of a single unified interface and architecture is a big one, but one that Microsoft may just be able to pull off. They have been providing the main building blocks of virtually every SME’s IT systems for too many years to think about, they have a wealth of experience and understanding. That understanding is changing however. Google have shown that a new kid on the block can change how people work. Google Apps for Work is doing this in some style.

The weight of existing users is still with Microsoft, and if you use any of their business server products then this will still be the most natural way to go. The Windows 10 front end will fit more naturally.

The Startup

Where Microsoft may not fare so well is with the new business startup. For these businesses the infrastructure requirements of becoming a ‘Microsoft shop’ may be too much. The barriers to entry to the ecosystem may be too high. If Microsoft can push their Outlook.com email platform across platforms and perhaps provide cloud applications for the middleware that most SMEs inevitably have then they may well be onto a winner.

Alternative Options

As has already been pointed out, there are viable and usable alternatives already out there. Both Apple and Google have broken into the operating system market in significant enough terms to deny Microsoft’s place as the only choice. However, for many small businesses it is probably still the default choice.

In my opinion and experience the Apple ecosystem isn’t comprehensive enough or cost effective enough to be an attractive option for the SME – always allowing for the fact taht there are certain industry sectors that will always prefer the Apple route. The Google offering is certainly more attractive as a low cost, hugely scalable collaboration ecosystem. As such it will work well for many businesses that haven’t yet made a decision.

Winners and Losers

In the operating system stakes there may not be any obvious winners or losers any more. The diversification of platform makes it harder to see success as well as harder to choose which way to go. The heavily cloud based offering of Google is certainly very attractive to the small business, and many larger businesses are finding it more than adequate for their needs.

I suspect that it will be the medium sized businesses that will stay with Microsoft. I think that the reason for this comes down to middleware – the bespoke applications, often developed in house, often starting with a spreadsheet, but usually moving up through Access or similar as the business grows. At present Microsoft provide more accessible tools for this sort of middleware, and a more straightforward path to building your own business data tools. If Microsoft can continue to provide this path, along with a comprehensive ecosystem to rival the rivals then I’m sure that Microsoft will continue to dominate at least the corporate desktop for a few years to come.

Update

Now that I’ve installed the new OS on a test system I thought I’d share my experience. I chose a Windows 7 system that does service as our home spare machine. It doesn’t see a lot of use, and it’s not a particularly powerful machine.

The first interesting experience was that the Windows 10 Technical Preview installs via Windows Update! This means not only that it’s an in place upgrade, keeping your existing accounts, applications and data, but that you don’t have the hassle of downloading ISOs and burning disks. The Windows Update download was around 2.6Gb, so be prepared for some time to download.

The second ‘interesting’ experience was the slightly surreal progress messages for the update. Windows 10 apparently likes to ‘take care of things’ and do ‘some more’ things. I did find these messages to be a bit too ‘user friendly’ to the extent that all they were saying about the process was: we’re doing some stuff…

Having said that, the fact that this was the only negative observation to make is very encouraging. The entire process, while time consuming as expected was flawless.

I’ve not spent much time on the newly installed OS, but at first try it certainly seems to have ticked most of the boxes that the end user wants. It’s got a recognisable start menu (albeit with live tiles tagged on the side) and it boots to the normal desktop on a non touch machine. Once I’ve had more time to explore the interface I’ll post again with some concrete user experiences!