Enterprise user experience flaws
Why the Poor UX of Enterprise Applications Is Destroying Your Margin
While most companies likely realize they have a lot of work to do, they haven’t determined the true extent or impact of poor UX - on both employee health and their profit margin.
It’s something we are all very familiar with. Whether it’s your computer telling you it can’t see your printer or the irritation of a USB cable that just won’t fit. We have all felt it.
- But does annoyance affect more than your blood pressure?
- How can the frustrations of a back-end Admin Panel hit your profit margin?
- More importantly, what can you do about it?
Save $400mln just by shifting the font...
By making a tiny change, the young Suvir Mirchandani had hit upon a genius way to save printer ink and taxpayer’s hard-earned money. Just switch the font to the sans serif font Garamond, therefore using far less ink.
...or save someone’s life!
Or the Ebola-infected man who released from the hospital due to an error in the buggy EHR system.
Before a UX designer started work on it, this process involved 20 employees and four weeks per application.
UX designers carefully examined the local culture, user journey, and user profile. They discovered it took:
- Nine days to register an application,
- 80 days for task assignment,
- a further 140 days to process,
- and then 40 days for a decision.
As a result, there were 31k applications in the backlog.
UX analysis revealed that the new system should be intuitive and straightforward. It must give users control and freedom while also preventing errors.
The result was a 45% faster response time to applications and automatic task assignment. The backlog was reduced by 8% weekly and the overall time to process each application, from start to finish was reduced by 60%.
The processes are too complex to be convenient
Large enterprise systems with decades of the lifecycle are unfit for changes
Beauty company Avon, whose business model relies on direct sales, knew their software system was in serious need of a facelift back in 2010.
With three goals in mind, they chose SAP AG as their software partner.
Priorities:
- boosting productivity,
- improving stock management
- and, finally, maximizing the efficiency of their product procurement process.
Unfortunately, the new system was a complete disaster and resulted in a massive number of their Canadian representatives resigning almost immediately.
Industry insiders suggest the UI was too technical, as it was based on the generic SAP user interface. No money was invested in making the system user-friendly for the sales force.
Cost? $125M USD but also several valued employees and the reputation of Avon CIO Donagh Herlihy.
Many businesses think they can ‘solve’ the issue of their poor UX with training. Long, boring sessions where employees sit carefully noting down a ‘how-to’ on various processes. Some employees create their own cheat sheets and pass them around to new employees who are then even more confused than they were before.
Large-scale software - like ERP systems - have a rather long lifecycle and features will always take priority. Over many decades, the core of such a system becomes flooded with millions of strings of legacy code.
Even slight changes in such juggernauts are hard to implement. Very often, what would seem like simple, architectural ‘tweaks’ are almost impossible. That's why bulky, ERP-like enterprise systems - with all else being equal - have the worst UX of all.
Mobile apps are huge and the ads within them make billions in revenue for businesses across the globe. Digital mobile ad businesses often find business booms quickly, but with that, processes become unwieldy. One such company found that UX changes made gargantuan changes to the way their business worked.
With a goal of 25% reduction in the campaign set up time, they wanted to identify how to better service campaigns and therefore clients.
To do this, they carefully analyzed every single click, keystroke, and process. They then interviewed staff on how they could make immediate streamlining improvements.
Focusing on the most time-intensive processes, they worked on automation and other speed enhancements.
Results: incredibly, they not only reached their goal but smashed it entirely - they decreased their process times by over 71%.
Is it affordable?
Is it affordable to bring in a UX specialist? It depends on your definition of affordable.
Is it affordable to have every employee do an extra 10 minutes of laborious work they should not be wasting time on?
UX best practice: in a nutshell
Cost/benefit ratio: can you afford not to improve UX?