IT Staffing Firm Site Redesign

All of the homepage designs are strong - but there are two that (in my opinion) seem appropriate for the target audience.

Homepage A: is strong, and deliberate. The hero image (the diagram in the banner) is very successful in communicating what usability experts do. It would be great to see the other banners in the carousel being a 1:1 usability test, a contextual observation, and someone constructing a wireframe. The entire series of banners would tell a very compelling story to the target prospect that had perhaps a casual understanding (or interest) in Usability and UCD

Homepage B: the hero image appears to be a more detailed "emotional" story - perhaps an instant of an ethnography. If your audience is savvy to the neurophysiology connection - this banner treatment tells the story of cutting edge, contemporary research techniques. From a target audience - it requires the audience to interact based on elaborate details. As a reference - you may want to read up on the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/elaboration_likelihood.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/ElaborationLikelihoodModel

ELM can be used strategically for engaging your target audience. As an example - Homepage A is not really based on ELM versus Homepage B.

Homepage C: is my personal favorite, and in my opinion the most successful in addressing the expectations of the target audience. Like homepage A, it tells a compelling story about the UCD domain. There is an innovative playfulness - with a terrific visual hierarchy.

Homepage D: is ethereal and more toward the ELM strategic model. It is well designed - and communicates the message that as a firm, that expert designer are resident.

Each homepage has strengths - it depends on whether your audience is UCD savvy (and is seeking elaborate details) - then B or D homepage designs. If your audience has a casual understanding (or does not have time to be drawn into elaborate details) use the approaches in designs A and C. Finally, homepage C is the most professionally designed from the group.

Hey Viderity,

I can feel your passion about your website and I think all your designs as great as they could be.

I would love if you will go with the D.

My preference would be:

A C D B

Thanks, Haider

I think that you have seen my comments on the previous designs so I won't repeat here.

I prefer C but use the image from A. The image on C is too male WASP and will put off civil servants who have a big diversity agenda.

For similar reasons put the bottom logos from A onto the bottom of C especially the 508 compliance logo. It answers certain questions up front.

Otherwise C looks very professional consultant, is consistent, strong and balanced.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi I can see that you have added the footer in both A1 and A2 But I must admit, now my choice is going to change to A-2, it has come up nicely. All due to footer, the arrangement of content chunks and the imagery. Gives the feel of the IT staffing firm and looks really cool.

Great job Viderity.

keep it up and going!!

thank you

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I see you posted a new version, Option E Well, am not sure why such a dark imagery. Is it that a white background image has been applied a Multiply blend in Photoshop? Just guessing. Had the text in image been in white color, would have impressed more.

Also, this layout, otherwise, looks much balanced and composed.

But as I wrote earlier, footer is something I prefer distinctly. And that's why I have attached one with footer. Have a look.

But your designs are coming up nicely, I guess.

keep it up.

all the best! _____________________________________

Hi Viderity

I found the designs pretty good. Tough to choose from.

For designs A, B & C, I can say they fall under similar design pattern, utilizing same principles and form, mostly. And D being totally different in design.

For A,

1. Nice layout. Well aligned with sharp corners. Elegant look. Serves the purpose of being staffing firm.

2. Doesn't give the look of a web design firm. Typically, such firms' site would display major assignments and portfolios on home itself.

For B,

1. Nice layout, similar to A, but here, a clear demarcation of header and footer is visible. That's good.

2. Am sure you want to present your firm more as staffing than being a web design, and this one clearly indicates the fact!

For C,

1. Similar to A and B, just that it has dark background, This is something I personally feel, is repulsive, for being a staffing firm. It doesn't give that feel, serious feel. O yeah, this definitely looks like a web design firm :-)

2. The lower part appears little haphazard, and footer almost disappearing.

3. The navigation, at top, doesn't appear to be a navigation but more like links to external sites :-) Like ads! My feeling!!

For D,

1. Fresh look, with clouds, signifying, immense possibilities, in terms of firms' playground and talents you have to offer.

2. The imagery, is excellent. Climbing up! Adds great value to the entire look and feel of the page.

3. Buttons don't clearly identify as to what they will do, act as a link or as some action!

4. The Learn More button, beside which there is a white rectangle, gives feel of search feature, with button to search something. Misleading!

5. Top navigation must be made prominent. Not very clear. No distinction, visually, between header and top nav.

Those were my thoughts. Now, to rate them in my preference, I would go with high affinity towards following options:

1. Mostly Option B
2. Then comes Option D
3. Lastly, both Option A and C

Hope this helps you.

All the best

Cheers Prashant

It would be nice to separate design critique into various elements. For the overall look & feel, focus on visual hierarchy and usability. Then content. Within content, focus on slide show graphic, tag line, etc. It might be worth while to jump on the wireframe bandwagon to iron out layout. Then move to a low fidelity mockup with place Lorum ipsum text & desired color palette. Then move to a higher fidelity mockup - dare we say 'design' at this point - to start polishing textures, content and graphics.

Sometimes when designers work straight from content, those important wireframe and usabilty steps are overlooked, and just bells and whistles are left (cool graphic, textures etc) and there are some real foundation issues in the designs (AB). E is a little better grounded, but its not very far off from AB.

However, when some polish is missing (CD) but content has been considered from user interaction, then its easier to see more unique design possibilities. There are many different designs roads to consider, when you start at the wire frame. Looking at the contest, a lot of the layouts look the same with just a different color here or there. Nothing overly unique or customized; just some content and a fresh coat of paint.

I think there's quite a bit of segmentation and overlap across CF users' in the reviews because of this overlap.

To look at this objectively, there are dozens of possible interface designs, and I think only 2 different approaches are being showcased (ABCE) and (D).

Bottom line being: of these, I like D the most for its out of the box thinking (with any image you put in that layout), but I like C the most, as a successful design around a conservative thinkers (again, any image can be used in this layout).

There are definitely unfinished and unpolished elements, but by far it is the most seamless and requires the least effort from the users. Its modern, bright, colorful, corporate, adaptable and will play well with others.

Here are a few istock photo links based on the idea that you are selling the hassle-free contracting without the miles of paperwork and / or a solutions firm approach:

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-4817156-businessman-throwing-papers.php http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-9045692-exhausted-office-worker-rest-on-folders.php http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-12818037-contemplative-business-woman-with-sticky-notes-on-glass-window.php http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-13864765-business-woman-office-papers-documents-stack.php http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-10692444-happy-business-colleagues-standing-together.php

There's tons obviously, but its just a picture. I think the photos in any of them (ABCDE) are okay. Not great, not horrible. Could be better. Ideally, it could showcase your product in a cool and creative way, and not just be a stock photo. But whatever the image you choose, it should add to the design, not be the cornerstone.

Hello,

My view on this case:

A. It looks okay, but when opened in full format a lot of important information is missing above the fold. Also i find this to be the least attractive of the bunch.

A-1. This is my second favorite. It has a nice clean lay-out wich looks professional. But in this case also the call to action is to low on the webpage. I like the picture you use in the header since this fits your

A-2 Since this is my favorite one i will use this one as the basis of the improvements i would make:

The likes

• I like the way you allow the header to change here. This is a great way to make your unique selling points clear. I would use a picture of real staff here together with the picture of design B and others.
• I like the testemonial on the right. But i would make it a lot smaller. In this case it is a pretty long story wich distracts people from reading the story on the right.
• • Even though your a staffing agency i like the case studies. Maybe choose your pictures in a way that they focus on the solutions you bring. and not so much on desing.

The things i would improve:

• I would consider redoing the menu/logo here. Because this way the logo is always between navigation and text. Wich makes navigation with the menu difficult on lower resolution (more scrolling needed).
• How well is your search function implemented. Does it have auto correct? alghoritme for determining usefullness of results. Auto fill etc. Because when search is not implemented correctly it will makes your visitors think the page isnt there.
• Maybe you could replace the search with your contact details or a "call me back" button. This way it will show your customers you're serious about their business.
• I like the call to action in your text but i don't know if these buttons will work. They seem a bit unclear to me (what will happen if i click them). Also i would place them a bit higher on the page.
• Maybe give the site a more personal touch. Have your staff comment on the information on the pages. Give the visitor the feeling your service is always 1 click/call away.
• The quality brand icons are now very low on the website. Maybe make some room for some of them above the fold. Or put them in your header rotation. "We work with aknowledged brands and have lots of certificates".

C. Even though i like the design. I think this is more of a design showcase than a staffing agency. I would not use this one.

D. Same goes for thise one.

E. I like this one too especialy the contact information near the search field.

Hope this is usefull for you!

The dark background matte looks professional and the use of white space at the top makes the logo/company name more clear. The company name is using a thin font, so this is especially important.

One thing I notice right away though - the buttons just pop off the page. They don't blend. Now, maybe you don't want them to blend, but does the button, "All Case Studies" need as much weight as, "Email me!" or even "Learn More". Granted "Learn More"is above the fold, but the button size/look is the same as the others. I'm just thinking some of them could be made to look more subtle which would increase the draw to the others.

Also, the "Start your web project" button gets lost in the field and you change button naming conventions. Sometimes all 1st letters are capitalized; other times, it is just the 1st word that gets the capital letter treatment. ie. Email me, Start you web project.

That's my initial quick thought, but overall, I like it. Very professional looking. Might need some diversity with the people though. I definitely like this graphic the most. Sort of Minority Report whiteboard, but switch out at least one of the people for a minority candidate.

really cool , the most i loved and also you can add some line breakers between paragraphs :)

excellent work so much related to what you do and the top nav is really attractive :)

I like A and B best. Designs C and D are nice too but are better suited for an in-house web projects firm rather than a staffing/outsourcing firm. Also, it's odd that C and D list white papers as Resources and Case study separately when white papers and case studies are resources. E has a nice look overall, but I'm not a fan of the heavy grays.

If you go with A or A2, insert a more journalistic, interesting photo. The current ones are too stock. Also, on A2, make the photo fill the box and overlay the text for maximum visual impact.

Submitted on behalf of Mark Farmer

Notes on Design A: • Love the way the new logo looks! • Love the techno-tile background! • I think the nav bar, especially with the colored tab, is appropriately prominent. • Do you think the “For the government agency…” text competes with the slideshow? I do. Right now, I think there’s a disconnect between the slide and this very prominent text. It feels like the text is a caption for the slide and my eye doesn’t know where to focus first. It seems like that’s the message that should be in slide 1 (with the discipline- and other item-specific slides following). • I don’t think you need both the individual slide selectors (square boxes) and the next /previous links. It’s kind of overkill. • I don’t like the fuscia-colored text. It seems very out of place in the overall color scheme. • The client quote and whitepaper get lost at the bottom. They almost seem like they’re disclaimer text or other fine print. I liked it better when you had the two-column solution. • “Take me to your consulting areas now!” is awkwardly worded (“consulting areas” sounds like a physical place you’re going to take me to). Something similar to “Tell me what you do” or “Tell me about your areas of focus” seems to convey the meaning more clearly. • Still think you should include an 800 number (above the search box or centered at the bottom)

Hybrid of A & B might be the trick: • Use the 2-col layout of scheme B but place both the quote at the top and the whitepaper call to action beneath it in the RH column. • Retain the overall design feel of Scheme A but use the color palette from scheme B (it’s personal taste, but I think the denim blue is richer and more professional.) • If you’re going to retain the bold “For the govt. agency…” text in the page body, the slideshow text needs to be more understated so it doesn’t compete (like in scheme B). However, as I mentioned previously, the images have to be powerful and self-standing enough to communicate even if someone doesn’t opt to read the slide caption. • Alternately, you can lose the bold text in the page body and move it into the slideshow. I just don’t think having bold, in your face text in both places is good. They compete with each other and make me wonder where I should focus my attention. • I’m torn on the logo/search box placement. I think the solutions shown in both schemes work well.