11:FS Pulse, how we score
A team of in-house UX experts provide the scoring and analysis for each user journey.
Each expert has their own product “domain” to focus on and score – for example, “Business Banking”. They familiarise themselves with the vast amount of brands, journeys and features within their specialism, which in turn provides them with the ideal experience to interpret and apply this scoring sheet to journeys within their domain.
The scoring sheet itself is heavily influenced by the principles of the Nielsen Norman Group, which emphasises the importance of utility, usability and visual design when it comes to evaluating user experiences.
Below you’ll find the 11:FS ratings breakdown for utility, usability, and visual design. These three metrics are combined to form the overall rating for each score with the following weighting: utility (40%), usability (40%), visual design (20%). This weighting has been chosen to reflect the greater importance of utility and usability over visual design.
In addition to the internal guidelines our UX Analysts use to evaluate strengths, identify areas for improvement, and assign scores, the ten Nielsen Norman Usability Heuristics provide an excellent framework for understanding our analysis process. Originally developed by Jakob Nielsen, these ten heuristics offer broad principles rather than narrowly defined rules. Where relevant, we use them to guide our assessment of a user journey’s overall usability. They can also be useful identifying opportunities to enhance your own work.
1. Visibility of system status
The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within a reasonable time.
2. Match between system and the real world
The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order.
3. User control and freedom
Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked "emergency exit" to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo.
4. Consistency and standards
Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions.
5. Error prevention
Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action.
6. Recognition rather than recall
Minimise the user's memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate.
7. Flexibility and efficiency of use
Accelerators — unseen by the novice user — may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions.
8. Aesthetic and minimalist design
Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility.
9. Help users recognise, diagnose, and recover from errors
Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.
10. Help and documentation
Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user's task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large.