Sixth feature in the series of dimensions of usability.
Stanford's Persuasive Technology Lab investigates topics such as:
- what causes people to believe (or not believe) what they find on the web
- what strategies do users employ in evaluating the credibility of online resources
- what contextual and design factors influence these assessments and strategies
- how and why are credibility evaluation processes on the web different from those made in face-to-face human interaction, or in offline contexts
What makes your web site, your product more credible than others? We should focus on and understand the design and visualization elements that influence whether users trust and believe what we tell them.
I personally trust online presence that are sincere and honest representation of products, services, whatever is out there. A polished content/representation that's simply too perfect, coming from the desk of a copywriter or a marketer - is a complete turn-off and introduces a bias. I tend to stay away from companies, whose sites claim to do it all, have the most flattering testimonials from "unnamed" sources, and have impeccable language splashed - all of which usually is in complete contrast to the imperfect human owner. We should avoid pretense in all context. Credibility cannot be faked, cannot be purchased. A sincere, honest approach that's consistent, even if with flaws, would inspire much more trust and a following that lasts long, if not forever.
Lately, blogs as a platform are being used more for promotion of products or services of a company. Hence, the level of trust is taking a dive, since lesser and lesser blogs are in a non-commercial and honest writing form. A company, whose blog is more about thought-leadership, building awareness, or sharing knowledge, is bound to come across as credible. I'll in near future dedicate a specific feature on "usability of a blog" - where the attempt will be to extrapolate this example and cover more aspects with examples.
Few credibility guidelines:
- proof of a company: about us/contact details page
- explanation of how sensitive data will be used (credit card, phone numbers, email, etc.)
- proof of third-party evidence of your product/service quality (testimonials)
- professional design
- regular site updates, keeping it fresh and alive
- avoidance of errors and coming soon...
The above guidelines - are they enough to establish credibility in today's time of gazillion channels flooded with untrustworthy content mostly? We should do more. We should create valuable, useful and honest content, whether it be in form of articles, reviews, guides, white papers, blog entries or forum posts. We should keep marketing messages out of our content; add them separately, and keep them separate. Ditto with advertisements and videos. We should link out to other credible web sites from our site - probably the best way to establish the existence of your own company - by linking to other sites that reference you. Like press articles, affiliation listings, professional membership details, directory listings, etc. Here's a link to a slightly old presentation from Stanford about Web Credibility.
Few Non-Credible examples:
Likewise, there are tons of examples of credible sites; large corporations like: Google, SAP, IBM, Microsoft, Sony, ICICI Bank, and many many more. We should however be cautious of site-clones of these big brands; there's usually some obvious give-away in recognizing the fake from genuine. Web 2.0 trend has added discredit to noble initiatives such as Wikipedia and Ask.com - since any user can submit/edit any information on these platforms, regardless of the quality and authenticity of their sources. In that respect, both "Wikipedia" and "Ask" fall under the category of Non-credible sites.
In conclusion, what you do categorically does not matter. It's all about being there, being honest, being accountable, personally. Putting yourself upfront, writing the site in your own words, making your own promises, one-on-one. This way, you separate yourself from all competitors.
Watch this space for a feature on the last dimension: Valuable.
