By the end of this post you will know why most sites find it very difficult to design navigation and filtering strategies for their users, why it’s such a valuable problem to solve, and one possible approach to starting to solve it.
It is proven that humans are entirely overwhelmed by too much choice. On the other hand, limiting choice too much is also a disaster, meaning it increases the chances you don’t find what you’re looking for at all. It is important to have something to compare to, but we must be able to hold that comparison in our head, and we cannot do that with many options at the same time1.
That is why web navigation and filtering proves to be one of the most difficult things to get right, but equally, has the most potential to increase revenue. You must make an accessible path to all available choices, while giving the user the control over which paths they take to reach a given subset of choices. Your job is to get the user on the path they need to be, to the product/s they want, with as few possible activities/clicks as possible, giving just enough choices along the way.
So what can we do to keep enough choice but reduce the burden of the consumer so it’s not overwhelming? One option is to offer a guided shopping experience. This isn’t new in the offline world. In any physical store, the sales associate is a guide. If it were economically viable, having a helpful salesperson for each individual customer should theoretically increase the number of happy customers you have. If you visit a new city, a taxi driver can be your guide. If you are in a restaurant, the waiter is your guide.
The principle is always the same. Someone has knowledge of most possible choices, at least more than you. You give them signals, which they interpret to reduce the choices slowly to a manageable subset for you, and then you can comfortably choose. What is the guide actually doing? They actively help you to find what you are looking for. The word active is important. It differentiates a guide from something like a map. A map is passive. It gives you all the possible options, and it is up to you to navigate through them on your own. Here is a more complete example: Imagine you enter an enormous flea market all by yourself. You are looking for a rug for your living room, and there are over 500 stalls in this market. What do you do?
The first step is illustrated below, it is the “type” problem decision tree, going down the path of each type to the depth which can help you find the single type you need.
You reached the rugs. The emphasis now changes completely. You are no longer refining by the type of product. You are now refining by the attributes of a single product type, meaning – the “kind”. This is an important stage. The heuristics have moved from looking for things which meet the definition of “rug”, to the heuristics of a “suitable” rug. Again, the “kind” of rug. Put another way, a type is more akin to a category, in that categories should be mutually exclusive, they should not overlap too much. Otherwise, it creates difficulty for the user. Kind is more akin to a set of filters, they can be used in combination with each other.
The next step begins, the kind problem. You work backwards from your definition of suitable, to attributes or characteristics that rugs possess. Once that map has been made, you can match up as many of those attributes in one rug as possible. If it is the right price, then perhaps that is your rug.
So what actually happened here? There were three distinct stages in your search:
Why is this made easier if it is a guided experience, and what does that mean in this sense?
The approach we just illustrated is entirely passive. The site in question did nothing active to help the customer, leaving them to do all of the work. You used the site’s static functionality to slowly reduce the number of products shown, by giving it ways of filtering the overall number of products for you.
How can it be improved by being made active, or put another way, guided? The easiest way to think about this is to try and find ways to reduce the cognitive load or overall effort on the part of the end user, in the areas where they have choices to make.
When it came to calculating choices, what do you think were the hardest parts of that journey in terms of effort? Typically, it’s mapping customer preferences to attributes, and the process of trying to find the subset of products that most meet that combination of attributes.
Therefore we can infer that the overall navigation to reach the “type” is not the first thing we need to optimise. It is the “kind” problem which causes the most difficulty. This is where guided experiences shine. It is also where they are really hard, because if you get it wrong, it’s useless.
There are a small number of steps you can take to design a guided experience optimally:
Why do these points help? We said that guided experiences are hard. It’s true. You have taken over the burden of the search, you are now the consultant. Therefore, if you don’t give the user enough flexibility to give you enough/the correct information, or if you get those possible options wrong, the user may as well not have bothered. These points ensure the experience is flexible enough to receive enough data from the user, but rigid enough to ensure it can actively reduce the load on that user by helping with their map, and their combination troubles.
To sum up, we looked together at:
If you have built your own guided experience, please, tell me how it went. What am I missing here? The more we talk about this, the better we can build for each other as consumers.
This blog post was inspired by an article from Baymard research.
1. Footnotes:
Matthew Foyle
Solutions Engineer @ AlgoliaPowered by Algolia AI Recommendations
Julien Lemoine
Co-founder & former CTO at AlgoliaAlexandre Collin
Staff SME Business & Optimization - UI/UXMaxime Locqueville
DX Engineering Manager