Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

Does your Web site initiate a conversation, or tell visitors to just "shut up and read?"

You may not remember it, but France used to be one of the world`s leading cultures and military powers. Even today, the myth persists of Paris being the capitol of high fashion (haute coutoure, being a French term). I say "myth" in the sense that the origins have faded but the process continues out of seeming habit.

Why culture? Is culture all that important to an evolving nation?

Back in the days of the kings and queens (monarchs), a salon was a way to bring the nobility together with artists, inventors, and thinkers---idea people. In many ways, a salon was similar to the Startup Nation community. The monarchy recognized that a society and country requires intellectual stimulation, art, imagination, and creative energy to grow. And so, they brought these folks together in the royal court. Back then "court" meant part of a castle, not only the legal bar.

Conversation was, in and of itself, the end goal---the purpose of the salon. It wasn`t a debate or an argument, and there wasn`t necessarily always a specific point to be made. The idea was simply to have conversations. Given the mix between the nobility and the "starving artists," nobody was allowed to ask how much anyone earned. It was considered bad form, not so much that you`d be arrested and shot for asking.

Anyone was encouraged to disagree, state their arguements, and have radical opinions. The rule, however, was that such disagreements should be stated in a pleasant, polite fashion. Otherwise, the conversation came to an end. Given that the whole point of the salon was ongoing conversation, ending the discussion would be contrary to the point.

Another aspect of the salon was that although any topic was open for discussion, you were encouraged to keep personal things to yourself. In other words, although there would be complex discussions of sex, people didn`t want to hear about personal sex lives. It was more about the concepts and theories of sex. So too, with many other topics. Again, very similar to how well-run forums work today.

Conversation became something akin to an art form. Even today, in many parts of Europe, the principles of conversation are taught to children. In France, many students can`t graduate from school without taking at least one course in philosophy, a course in rhetoric and debate, and other classes that help teach conversation. It`s a benefit of those "silly" public speaking classes we used to have in public schools. They`re gone, and oddly enough, conversation is becoming a lost art.

Americans tend to talk about the weather, dating, or the somewhat superficial topics of the latest news, TV show, or magazine. Few people spend much time examining their points so as to explain their reasoning. Many people have the habit of making pronouncements or criticisms, but can`t defend their statement with any personal thinking.

The result is, I think, a form of Web site that increasingly comes across as a one-sided monologue.

A conversation should initiate a topic, "So: What do you think about this?" It should be open-ended, asking (directly or by implication) for thought, reason, judgement, and opinion. BUT!...it should also immediately pause for "listener response."

I`ll propose that a "call to action," something many people bring up when discussing Web sites, is just that. It`s a pause for "user feedback."

Web sites are sales tools, information sites, reference locations and many things. But a sales pitch isn`t some unique form of communication. It`s part of the "set" of conversation. "Get the customer talking" is a primary rule in sales.

So too, a Web site offers "clicks" as a way to have a dialogue, rather than a one-sided lecture. Think of the headline on a home page or other page. "This is something I`m saying!" The following content can be either ongoing explanation, or it can be a form of "What do you think about that?"

A nicely done site then has a few bullet points that are "clickable." Those clicks are the text version of saying, "What do you think about that?" Would you agree?

I`ll also offer Amazon.com as a well-done, conversational Web site. "What do you want to do?" generates the immediately obvious "Search." The other menu items, offerings on display and so forth, all are the "opening gambit" in a conversation.

What sites would you use as examples of a two-way conversation with a reader? How about your Web site? Do you open a conversation, or do you just shout out what you want to say?

Most people are so busy thinking up what they`re going to say next, they usually don`t even hear what someone else is saying. "Be a better listener" is a nice little platitudue, but it rarely explains how to improve. Why don`t we have cute little sayings about "be a better talker?"

I really think we should start a new poll on here ...
"VOTE for the longest Craig post!"

This one might be a winner.

So, forgive me if I only read the first 2 and then the last paragraph ...

But yes, conversation is key. In fact, I`ve been doing a lot of thinking about blogging lately and how to change the design to invite more participation. Not design as in graphics, but design as in user experience and information flow. (It`s always trouble when I start thinking about things anyway, because then I find myself going back to fix the last 10 sites I worked on for free ... just for experience and experimentation`s sake.) You`ll have to wait for the results though ... seeing them takes time.

Have you noticed that some people you talk with can "hear" emotional tones in text-only language? I know I can, and several people I know can do it.

I wonder how that is? Yes, we have emoticons, but they`re not always present. Without them, I still can often "hear" the tone of voice someone uses. I think it`s a skill, but I have no idea on what it`s based. Maybe the underlying structure of the words.

Conversation isn`t easy. But neither is building a great Web site. I think there`s a connection between the two concepts.

Sometimes you are hearing it ... and sometimes you`re hearing the voice you`ve made up for people in your head.
It happens ... and then you get a good laugh out of talking to the person or meeting them in person for the first time.

Or you get this image off their little icons from chat rooms.
When really I`m mostly typing in boxers with a sleeping baby in her Ergo on my back. (Not now, but usually.)

mm...I`m referring to "tone" of sentences. Some people have no trouble "hearing" irony in text. Others have a difficult time.

We talk about developing a site according to monitor sizes, resolutions, and operating systems. I wonder why we don`t also develop to conform to people`s sense of humor, their literal interpretations, and their unexamined biases?

Technicians argue about how a site looks when it`s rendered. But what about standards having to do with using the language meant to communicate the content?

Craig, I enjoy reading your ideas.  I really do.

This post is very interesting to me because I am creating websites as a business and one of my main talents has always been expressing ideas through the written word.  (Not saying that to brag, just stating what I and others have observed about me since I was a child.)

The second paragraph in your last post makes me think of an idea I just read on the E-Myth website.  It was talking about knowing who your "most probable customer" is, and one way to do that is to find out what personality traits your existing customers have.  For example, does your business attract people who are more outgoing or introverted, more creative or technical? (It seemed this could also apply to the "personality" of the business they are in.)  The idea was that if you know what type of person or business is attracted to your company currently, you can focus on attracting more of the same, and will probably be more successful at it than with generalized advertising.

This is something I think about when working on ideas for a website, although not in a formal way.  I try to envision the typical customer (I ask potential clients what their typical customer is like) and think about what will appeal to that person, in both the design and copy.

I think being able to "hear" voice tone in writing depends largely on the writing itself being of good quality. 

As far as standards for language...well, there are grammar, spelling, and punctuation rules!  I think one reason there aren`t strict standards for language like there are for coding (for example) is that language is so much more flexible.  If I want to make a  blue background on a web page, there is one (maybe two) standards-compliant way to do it.  If I want tell a funny story about something my cat did, I could come up with thousands of variations that would all be correct, and many that would be considered an excellent telling of the story. 

Language is more of an artistic medium, but the rendering of a website is a technical issue.  I think that may be the key point.  You can only go so far with creating "standards" for art. 

-------------------------

EFFECTIVE WEBSITES
when results matter

www.effective-websites.com

so u tink wib sights doan nee langidge stannards?



Danae, I take your point. It`s true that the author of Web site content has far more flexibility because there isn`t a "compiler" or a browser that only can render the programming code one way. That being said, I think far too many people are getting hung up on the coding.

Fine, so you have or don`t have standard coding. Does it matter all THAT much? If your colors clash, the site is filled with typos and bad grammar, and the entire content is a 5,000 word paragraph with no breaks, is it okay?

Of course not.

Part of what I like doing is to come up with models and analogies that might show what we already know, in a different light---perspective. Sometimes by seeing things from a different angle, we get some interesting and useful new ideas.

And so, I`m going to assume that the coding part of a site is all under control. It may or may not comply with CSS standards and so on, but it works just fine. "A" next step would be to have a text-to-speech application read the home page.

Does it sound like a nice conversation? Or does it sound like some dry kind of lecture? I`d suggest that a conversational Web site also doesn`t mean asking a lot of questions. In place of those questions, I`m proposing that hyperlinks act as the "unh-hunh," "yeah," "sure...that makes sense," and all the other "filler words" we use in a conversation.

In a sale conversation, the salesperson says something like, "So...are you looking for a microwave oven?" Then there`s a pause. Some of that pause is for information. But a large part of that pause is to *engage* the customer and his or her attention. Without that engagement, the sales process is much harder.

If the customer says, "Unh-hunh" and stops, the sales person continues to try to draw them out. So too, on a Web site, suppose you sell home electronics. You could have a "Browse our Products" page, with passive images and little content.

Or you could have a conversational opening gambit. "Looking for great gadgets?" Then below that, offer link sentences.

• Try our new kitchen equipment.
• Shoot some family photos with cameras.
• How`s that TV doing?
• So what`s the deal with this new DVD format?

Each point would be hyperlinked to take the customer to their area of interest. But to get there, they have to engage their attention, focus a moment, and actively click the mouse.

Okay, I can go along with the idea that we could come up with guidelines for making a website conversational, and I think it would a useful thing to do.

1. You said to have links to different topics that a visitor might be interested in as part of the text.  I see that this serves two purposes.  One, it allows the visitor to choose which topics he or she is interested in (which is good on a website that might cover several topics), and two, if the website owner tracks clicks, it allows him or her to see which topics visitors are most interested in.

2. I agree that having non-rhetorical questions is not necessarily the way to go to make it conversational.  I think it works for some sites--for example, on a travel site it might ask "where would you like to go?" and have a list of destinations for you to click and get more information.  I think rhetorical questions can also be used effectively to get people thinking, especially if you want to make them more aware of the problem they have that you can solve. 

3. Interactive features add to the conversation aspect of a site.  The more social or entertainment-based sites can use polls well.  Here you are asking what someone thinks, they reply by clicking their choice, and then they see what everyone else thought, too.  I`ve usually found something satisfying about taking a poll, especially when there are many replies already.  Then you sort of measure yourself against the crowd, and suddenly looking at this website isn`t something that you are personally doing--it`s a group activity.  It`s social.  I think many websites could benefit by beefing up the social aspect of their site--by making the visitor feel like it`s not just him or her having an interaction with a company, but that many people have done this and are doing it, and it`s a good thing.

Craig, I would like to use this topic as the topic of my next Website Success Tips newsletter, which will go out in about two weeks.  I would credit you with coming up with the idea and credit your contributions.  I can even give you an "about me" paragraph at the bottom.  Is it okay with you that I use these ideas for my newsletter?

-------------------------

EFFECTIVE WEBSITES
when results matter

www.effective-websites.com

interesting ideas.


-------------------------

SUN: Hottest place in the solar system.

I see a problem with this... to list a link as "How`s that TV doing?" (just to use one of the examples).

First, when reading a new web page, people visually scan it. They rarely read each word. They want information to accessing their desired content and they want it now. Thus, keywords. By using a link named, "TV`s" they get all the info they were looking for.

Second, the navigation bar doesn`t allow for these long, conversational links.

I agree with your premise. But aren`t you talking more about sales tactic rather than conversations? "How`s that TV doing?" does make the reader think about his own situation, but does it really get a purchase? People online are there because they are looking for information on a specific topic of interest, or looking for a good deal on a product they are already aware of. It`s not often I get sales of people "stumbling" onto my site and suddenly deciding to read about quality earthborn & handmade vases.

So although it might spark the interest of a person here and there... the question is, are they open to a real conversation when browsing online or are they more interested in getting information or products they are searching for as quickly at possible? This is actually the reason I have a long, conversational description of my products, followed by a "fast fact" section. It seems to be people are more interested in `fast facts,` but the conversational structure is better for SEO and in providing that loving touch to your product. Not to mention reflecting your business style and gaining confidence in your potential customer.


-------------------------

Vincent Wilcox (a.k.a. KRAKR)
Drummer
My band: Letters Make Words