Website Analysis for www.metrici.com

Submitted by Guest on 21 Jun 2006, 15:47.

Summary

Description

This is a sample report produced from Metrici Advisor.

It is an analysis of Metrici's own website at http://www.metrici.com.

Read notes for the website analysis report (opens in a new window).

Statistics

Score 80.0%, coverage 100.0%

What does this mean?

Priority 1 recommendations

Priority 1 findings represent high likelihood of serious disruption. These require very urgent action.

none

Priority 2 recommendations

Priority 2 findings represent the possibility of serious disruption, or high likelihood of moderate disruption. These require urgent action.

none

Areas for improvement

In addition to the recommendations, these are the main areas that could be improved. The numbers in brackets show the improvement to the score that they could bring.

2.1 Clear, simple language (5.01)
2.3 Front-loaded content (3.35)
1.3 Target readership (3.26)
4.2 Cross-browser testing (2.76)
3.5 Site map (2.29)

Findings and recommendations

Ref	Priority	Finding	Recommendation	See
R1	3	Website navigation could be improved. The website does not make good, consistent use of the main navigation links, quick links and site map. Readers may find it hard to navigate around the site to find the content they need. Readers will be frustrated, and this will undermine the value of the website.	Review navigation. Review the navigation of the site. Provide a prominent list of links on every page that guides the reader to the main sections of the site. Make the list the same on every page. Provide additional quick links which guide the reader directly to important pages. Quick links can be different on different pages, according to the context. Provide a text-based site map that includes all the main sections of the site, and all the main subsections within them.	3.3 Consistent navigation 3.4 Quick links 3.5 Site map
R2	4	Website content could be improved. The text of the website could be improved to make it easier to read. Typical problems include complicated or unclear text, long paragraphs, or hiding important information deep within the detail of the page.	Review web content. Review the content of the site. Use clear, simple language that your readers will understand. Use short pages, short paragraphs and short words. Use plenty of meaningful subheadings. Use lists. Front-load your content: put the important ideas first, with detail below.	2.1 Clear, simple language 2.2 Breaking up information 2.3 Front-loaded content

Ref

Priority

Finding

Recommendation

See

Website navigation could be improved.

The website does not make good, consistent use of the main navigation links, quick links and site map. Readers may find it hard to navigate around the site to find the content they need. Readers will be frustrated, and this will undermine the value of the website.

Review navigation.

Review the navigation of the site.

Provide a prominent list of links on every page that guides the reader to the main sections of the site. Make the list the same on every page.
Provide additional quick links which guide the reader directly to important pages. Quick links can be different on different pages, according to the context.
Provide a text-based site map that includes all the main sections of the site, and all the main subsections within them.

3.3 Consistent navigation 3.4 Quick links 3.5 Site map

Website content could be improved.

The text of the website could be improved to make it easier to read. Typical problems include complicated or unclear text, long paragraphs, or hiding important information deep within the detail of the page.

Review web content.

Review the content of the site.

Use clear, simple language that your readers will understand.
Use short pages, short paragraphs and short words.
Use plenty of meaningful subheadings.
Use lists.
Front-load your content: put the important ideas first, with detail below.

2.1 Clear, simple language 2.2 Breaking up information 2.3 Front-loaded content

Notes

Score. Each criterion grade attracts a score between 0 and 100%. Each criterion has a weighting. The score for each criterion is the weighting of the criterion multiplied by the score for the grade. The overall score for the asset is the sum of all criterion scores.

Coverage is the percentage of the criteria for which answers are available, adjusted to allow for criterion weightings.

Priority is a scale from 1 to 5, with one being the most important. It roughly summarises how likely the impact is to occur, and how significant the impact is likely to be. The likelihood is likely (probability > 50%), possible (probability 10-50%) and not likely (probability < 10%). The impact is significant (business activities can not be continued), moderate (business activities are impacted but can continue) and minor (business activities not impacted).

Requires very urgent action: significant disruption, likely.
Requires urgent action: significant disruption, possible; or moderate disruption, likely.
Requires action: significant disruption, not likely; moderate disruption, possible; or minor disruption, likely.
Requires consideration: moderate disruption, not likely; or minor disruption, possible.
Requires awareness: minor disruption, not likely.

This is only an indicative scale.

Home Page - http://www.metrici.com/index.html

Metrici Advisor - http://www.metrici.com/metrici_advisor.html
Information about the Metrici Advisor product.

Partners - http://www.metrici.com/metrici_partner.html
Introductory information about the Metrici Partner Programme.

Publications - http://www.metrici.com/publications.html
The index for all of the Metrici publications.

About - http://www.metrici.com/about.html
Background information about Metrici.

Privacy - http://www.metrici.com/privacy_policy.html
The Metrici privacy policy explained.

Service Status - http://www.metrici.com/service_status.html
The current status of the Metrici Advisor service and details of any planned maintenance.

Contact - http://www.metrici.com/contact.html
All of the contact details for Metrici.

2 Content

Weighting 43.48%, score 33.99%

2.1 Clear, simple language

Weighting 16.72%, entered, graded. Score 70% × 16.72% = 11.71%

We have tried to make the writing as clear as we can given the technical audience.

By and large we do better than most but, we still have work to do. For example, on the home page we have a list of questions Metrici Advisor can help answer. The list is too long. It needs to be simplified.

Grading: Language is good

The language is generally clear and simple. Some content could be made clearer or more simple.

Recommendations:

R2 Review web content. (priority 4)

2.2 Breaking up information

Weighting 6.69%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 6.69% = 6.69%

Sentences are generally very short and headings and sub-headings are used to good effect.

Grading: The information is broken down well

Sentences and paragraphs are as short as they can be, without being too short. There are suitable subheadings.

Recommendations:

R2 Review web content. (priority 4)

2.3 Front-loaded content

Weighting 6.69%, entered, graded. Score 50% × 6.69% = 3.34%

Overall, front-loading has been used quite well throughout the site. The home page is the only page that doesn't seem to be front loaded. It needs more work.

Grading: Some front-loading is used, but not as effectively as it could be

Some pages, paragraphs and sentences are front-loaded. However, sometimes the main ideas are not as clearly expressed as they could be, and require more of the text to be read.

Recommendations:

R2 Review web content. (priority 4)

2.4 Meaningful links

Weighting 2.23%, entered, graded. Score 50% × 2.23% = 1.11%

Meaningful text used in the vast majority of places, and certainly throughout the main body of the content.

However, some of the shorter marketing messages use links such as "learn more" and "read more".

Grading: Generally meaningful

The vast majority of links have meaningful text that makes sense. There are only a small number of "click here" or "more" links, and these are not in the main body of the content.

2.5 Title element

Weighting 1.11%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 1.11% = 1.11%

Grading: Title element is used effectively

Every page has a title. The title briefly and accurately describes the page, typically the same as the page heading. Different pages have different titles.

2.6 Heading elements

Weighting 2.23%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 2.23% = 2.23%

Grading: Heading tags are used consistently well

All pages have an h1 tag before any other heading tags. Other heading tags follow in strict succession, so, for example, h1 is never followed by h3 without an intermediate h2.

2.7 Description meta tag

Weighting 2.23%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 2.23% = 2.23%

Grading: The site uses the description meta tag effectively

Every page on the site uses the description meta tag. Each description is different, and aptly summarises the content of the page.

2.8 Keywords meta tag

Weighting 1.11%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 1.11% = 1.11%

Grading: The site does not use the keywords meta tag

2.9 Image tag alt attribute

Weighting 2.23%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 2.23% = 2.23%

Grading: All image tags use the alt attribute correctly

All <img> tags have an alt attribute that is set to suitably descriptive text, or to "".

2.10 Explanation of images

Weighting 2.23%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 2.23% = 2.23%

Grading: The site has no information-rich images

The site has no information-rich images such as graphs and charts.

3 Structure

Weighting 21.74%, score 18.88%

3.1 Page layout

Weighting 5.72%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 5.72% = 5.72%

Website design conventional in nature with a consistent look and feel achieved using a standard css.

Grading: Layout is entirely conventional

The layout matches that of other websites, with logo in the top left, main navigation horizontally near the top, search (if present) in the top right. Other elements, such as local navigation, are placed effectively and are consistent across the site.

3.2 Consistent look and feel

Weighting 5.72%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 5.72% = 5.72%

Grading: The look and feel is highly consistent across the site

The look and feel of all the sample pages is highly consistent. They are obviously all from the same website.

3.3 Consistent navigation

Weighting 2.29%, entered, graded. Score 100% × 2.29% = 2.29%

Very consistent navigation.

Grading: Main navigation is consistent across the site

All of the sample pages have the same prominent list of links to guide the reader to the main sections of the site.

Recommendations:

R1 Review navigation. (priority 3)

3.4 Quick links

Weighting 1.14%, entered, graded. Score 50% × 1.14% = 0.57%

There are not too many quick links on the site. There are quick links on a couple of pages to the "30-day free trial" and "how to buy" pages.

They have also been used extensively on the http://www.metrici.com/metrici_partner.html page to allow visitors to navigate between partner categories quickly and easily. I'm not sure if they are that helpful as the page is not too long and the page is inconsistent with the rest of the site.

Grading: Some quick links are available, but these are not entirely consistent and effective

Some pages have quick links, but the placement or style is not consistent across all pages, or the quick links themselves do not identify the most important pages.

Recommendations: