Steve Krug Interview · 1765 words posted 11/18/2002 05:14 PM
For years, usability expert Steve Krug labored in pleasant obscurity, helping clients like AOL, Apple, and Netscape develop better products and Web sites. But since the publication of Don’t Make Me Think! A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability (New Riders, 2000), he’s had to settle for relative obscurity. Nowadays he spends most of his time doing expert usability reviews and teaching usability workshops.
His consulting firm, Advanced Common Sense (“just me and a few well-placed mirrors”) is based in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, and online at sensible.com.
since1968: Don’t Make Me Think! was released just after the internet bubble burst. Many of the sites mentioned in the book (flooz.com, biztravel.com, etour.com) have either disappeared or are unrecognizable. Is it a challenge to work in such an ephemeral medium? Or should we just shrug and realize Heraclitus was on to something when he said “You never step into the same river twice”?
Steve Krug: Actually – depending on how you count – I think my book was released just before the meltdown (October, 2000). But either way, you’re right about the ephemeral nature of Web sites. Sometimes the Web reminds me of Dorothy’s observation about Oz: “People come and go so quickly here…”
Heraclitus? Somehow I always thought that was Confucius or someone else from the East. But that’s one of the things that makes the Web so interesting – all that information that can be used for the betterment of mankind… or for settling bar bets. “Was it Heraclitus or Lao Tse who said that thing about putting your foot in the river twice?” (Personally, I think settling bar bets is a pretty good use for it.)
What was the question again? Oh, right: the challenges of working in an ephemeral medium. Actually, I don’t think the Web is much more challenging than any other publishing medium. Think about magazines: dozens of them come and go every year, a few limp along for a while longer, and only a tiny handful survive for the long run. We’re not carving cathedrals, after all.
since1968: What are some of your favorite web sites right now, and why?
Steve Krug: Right this second?
- Boxes and Arrows, an online magazine about Information Architecture. It’s full of excellent articles if you’re interested in usability and Web design.
- Croc o’ Lyle, a “blog” about design and usability, written by a very smart guy named Lyle Kantrovitch.
- I use a reverse phone directory site all the time (type in a phone number, get back a name and an address), but I couldn’t tell you which one because I always use a bookmark to open it.
- The New York Times Associated Press news headlines page. There are lots of sites where you can see the latest AP stories, but I like the Times’ page because the way it’s formatted makes it very easy for me to scan it in a hurry. If I go there two or three times a day, I feel like I’m always up to date. Also, they seem to update it faster than any other AP site, so I’m more likely to find the very latest breaking news there. (Actually, I find it frustrating that there doesn’t seem to be a great source for breaking news on the Web – somewhere where you know a breaking story will always show up at the same time you see it crawl across the bottom of the screen on your TV. It’s puzzling to me that TV is still a better source for breaking news than the Web.)
- Google, of course. I use it dozens of times a day.
since1968: I recently moved to Southeast Asia, which has forced me to conduct more business over the Internet than I used to. I’ve been frustrated that so many sites don’t do business here, but they wait until you’re nearly finished with the transaction before telling you so. Is internationalization a usability issue?
Steve Krug: Well, the issue you’re running into isn’t so much internationalization as it is garden-variety sloppy design, stupidity, and rudeness. If you know people are going to be coming to your site who you can’t sell or ship to, why wouldn’t you let them know that as soon as possible – at the very least, when they put something in a shopping cart.
Of course, the problem for the site’s publisher is: where do you put that notice? You don’t want it to be so obtrusive that it takes attention away from what you’re selling. Is there a universally recognized icon for “Your money is no good here?” What should it say? “Shipping to US, Canada, and UK only”? “Sorry, US sales only”?
The sad truth is, if a site is selling something and they can’t sell it to you, then they really don’t care very much about whether they inconvenience you. There’s no financial incentive for them in keeping you happy. As with most things, sites will start to get more sensitive about the issue when they actually feel they’re losing money.
since1968: Here’s another example: I recently spent about an hour trying to pay my wife’s credit card online at Bank of America. What a terrible site. Is usability getting any better?
_[Editor’s note – In my original question, I mistakenly asked Steve about the Citibank site. I meant to ask about Bank of America. The error was mine, not his]._
Steve Krug: I don’t know the Citibank site, but we’ve all run into our share of sites that just don’t work. Is usability getting better? My gosh, yes. There are finally some well-established conventions that work pretty well, and a number of sites seem to be doing what I always used to tell my clients years ago: “Look at what Amazon is doing, and do that.”
There are still a lot of awful, broken sites, but I think that’s because there are so many sites. I think in another two years there’ll be another leap forward and sites will be – on average – much easier to use.
since1968: Some of my favorite sites are built by amateurs, and here I mean “amateur” in the sense of “enthusiast,” not “tyro.” Is there any correlation between a big budget and usability?
Steve Krug: See? Now you have to explain “tyro” for everyone who doesn’t speak British-idiomatic English. This internationalization business gets very cumbersome very fast.
I’m afraid I’m not very big on calculating correlations between things. But it reminds me of a line from an underground comic called The Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers from back in the 1970’s: “Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope.” Having a small budget and someone on the project with clout who really cares about whether users have a good experience – which is often the case with an amateur site – will often get you much farther than a big budget and no one guiding the whole thing.
(On the other hand, while a big budget doesn’t ensure usability, it doesn’t preclude it, either. Rich people can get into heaven; it’s just trickier.)
since1968: The art of Mark Matcho perfectly captures the tone of DMMT: simple, iconic, inspired. How did you hook up?
Steve Krug: (Thanks for “inspired”. That’s very nice of you.)
Alison Cecil, who did such a wonderful job designing the book, knew Mark’s work and thought his style would be a good match, and as usual she was right. I did my own detailed version of the illustrations (which _I_ liked a lot) while I was writing, then Mark redid them in his own wonderful style. (As so often happens with publishing projects nowadays, I’ve never actually met him.)
since1968: Are you aware of any other Web books that have “Hatch, Sen. Orrin” as an index entry?
Steve Krug: Now, that’s the kind of question I really like. It shows that someone enjoys the same things about the book that I do. I compiled the index myself, and I love that index entry.
No, I don’t imagine there are any others. But it’s one of those things you couldn’t possibly research on the Web, isn’t it?
since1968: In DMMT, you use the analogy of the farmers and the cowmen: “Farmers love fences, cowmen love the open range.” Are you a farmer or a cowman?
Steve Krug: Another great question! And believe it or not, I’ve actually thought about this one already. I tried to figure it out while I was writing the chapter in my book called “The Farmer and the Cowman Should Be Friends” (Subtitle: “Why most Web design team arguments about usability are a waste of time, and how to avoid them.”)
Generally speaking, I think you’d have to say the designers are usually the cowmen – the free spirits who don’t like being fenced in by convention – and the developers tend to be the farmers, somewhat more conventional, more results oriented, more focused on just getting the job done and making sure that things work.
I think I’m probably one of the townsfolk – like the blacksmith, or the owner of the general store – who the farmer and the cowman both come to for stuff they need to get their job done. Or maybe I’m the town preacher, encouraging them all to forget about their turf battles and just get along.
(The analogy comes from a wonderful – but little-known – song from the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical Oklahoma. I used to listen to it over and over while I was writing the book, and I never got tired of it.)
since1968: Are you working on another book or project?
Steve Krug: My stock answer has always been that it’s between my publisher and my wife: if they can offer Melanie enough money, I’ll do another book. Since she was the one who had to suffer the most through the first one, I figure it should be up to her to decide what would make it worthwhile. Personally, I have a lot of things I’d like to write about, if only I could make the time. I have a few projects in the works – my favorite has to do with eye tracking and usability – but it will probably be a while before they see the light of day.
Right now, I’m really enjoying teaching my usability workshops, which I finally started offering to the general public instead of just doing them in-house for companies. Teaching is much more fun than sitting in front of a computer.
since1968: Thank you for your time.
Steve Krug: Thanks for asking, Marc. Nice questions.
~~~
Buy Steve’s book from Amazon.
* * *