Case study: The journey to three game changer lessons in information architecture
By: Gabriela Fish
Tags: Case Study, UX Design, UX, Information Architecture, Heuristics

Although the number of clicks within the tasks remained the same (two clicks) from the existing user flow to the proposed user flow, the context of the navigation structure surrounding the clicks have shifted greatly.

Instead of nine primary tabs, there are now five. Instead of over 60 secondary labels, there are now only 27 secondary labels. The level of granularity within each level is clear and consistent. These shifts make navigation momentary — only a quick 12-second scan allowed for intuitive direction.

Additionally, this makes the site not only more efficient, but it completely shifts how predictable and learnable the site is to both first time and loyal users.

The two paths that test participants used speak to two distinct mental models around sporting goods. Presenting two pathways allowed for flexible application of opposing mental models, without being exhaustive.

While my proposed and tested changes revolved around site navigation, the information architecture could be improved greatly through further iterative testing and these recommendations:

Increase Accessibility: Improve contrast on every site page, especially when using grey text on white background. Remove text from images on Home Page and Sale page for screen readers functionality. Simplify Hero Images on Home Page: To add delight to the home page, cater the Hero Images to your users’ greatest needs and wants. Enhance images with less text and powerful imagery. Iterate; Test Tertiary and Faceted Navigation: Build out and test tertiary navigation and faceted navigation (search filters and sorts) in tree testing and/or in high-fidelity usability testing. Increase the number of tasks tested. Iterate from results. Build Out Interactive Features: Create a chat feature to talk with experts virtually and increase the controllability and credibility of the site. Build/enhance the holiday gift guide to mirror competitors and add delight.

Game Changer Lessons in Information Architecture

Through the dissection of the Paragon Sports website, I came to the following three lessons about how I will approach information architecture in future projects and jobs.

Lesson 1: Less clicks do not equate to an improved user flow; a clear and learnable pathway does.

Although every change in the site’s navigation was justifiable, I came to a hurdle when dissecting the user flows. For a simple task such as “purchase women’s running shoes,” the existing flow had four paths to task completion, while the proposed flow had three. However, within each path — there were still two clicks. I thought to myself, did I really change enough? Did I simplify the site for the user making it more effective and efficient?”

When I posed this question to a more seasoned designer (my twin sister) she pointed me to the wise words of Nielsen Norman Group:

The number of clicks will rarely tell the whole story — there are many aspects of the design that contribute to its usability, whether the task flow involves 2 clicks or 10… More important than focusing on the raw number of clicks is to ensure that navigation is well organized with clear pathways, that content gets progressively more specific the deeper into the site structure your users advance, and that your site visitors always know where they currently are and how to get to their destination.

It didn’t matter that each proposed user flow incorporated the same raw number of clicks as the existing user flow — the revised structure of the site removed distractions and made the site more learnable and usable, regardless if they are someone visiting the site for the first time or a loyal customer.

Lesson 2: Amplify what ‘sparks joy’ for users.

Just as Marie Kondo’s method for tidying begins with the reflection, “What sparks joy?,” Abby Covert’s heuristic evaluation method also prioritizes discovering what “delights” the user. The end-goal of information architecture at the floor is to organize, but at the ceiling is to delight — to offer not just a functional experience, but a memorable and joyful one.

Paragon Sports has survived a century’s worth of changes for many reasons, not the least of which are its “specialty shops” (in running, cycling, and tennis) and its on-site experts. Go to the Yelp reviews, and the employees are recommended by name as people customers should seek out for guidance on specified needs. These experiences clearly spark joy, but have not yet been adapted to Paragon’s digital presence. While competitors like REI keep a blog with videos and podcasts, and host a live chat option to actively respond to its customers, Paragon Sports has yet to do so. In order to take their website to delightful new heights, they must amplify on the site what makes them special to users in the first place.

Lesson 3: Question dominant mental models through the lens of diversity, inclusion, and equity.

This project with Paragon Sports happened to coincide with Transgender Awareness Week. Simultaneously, General Assembly happened to be teaching classes on diversity and inclusion, ethics in design, psychology and bias, and accessibility. The values of empathy and equity are central to my being. So as I was analyzing card sorts and tree tests that validated the strength of a gender-binary mental model, I kept wondering if the proposed design would continue to validate a non-inclusive societal structure. No matter how users were asked to categorize or maneuver through items, over 90% of participants were doing so by creating and utilizing the categories of “women” and “men.” As a designer, I see my role as listening to users, empathizing with them, discovering and adhering to their mental models. What happens when the dominant trends of mental models are exclusionary, and represent dominant (possibly oppressive) ideologies? My example within Paragon Sports is a minor one — as there are sizing needs for footwear and sports apparel that are closely linked to gender-based norms.

However, when taken beyond this case study, we must continue to ask why for every dominant mental model that presents itself, as it may reflect an inequitable and at times oppressive status quo. When the mental models reflected back to designers are anything less than inclusive with a purpose that does not advance equity, it is our job to advocate for all users. As designers, we can do this by recommending testing of varied models with a foundation in inclusive language. It is our responsibility as designers and empathetic human beings to advocate for those whose voices and visions are least often represented and heard in the room. It is our responsibility to bring them into the room. The only way to do that is to question any and everything that could be inequitable to even one user.