r+d

Posts on innovation, user experience, research and design 
« Back to blog

Data-Driven Innovation - Google DNS

I came across a rare blog post yesterday evening. It's rare because it stitches together data from a couple of places to help solve a conundrum. In this case, it also illustrated some fantastic vignettes on usability testing, data-driven strategy and innovation. What was the conundrum? Yesterday, Google launched its DNS service but it hasn't been exactly clear why. Google's official response effectively states that "It's good if the Internet is fast because people can be more productive." Sounds altruistic, just like another recent comment from Google about not stealing all of the talent in the world, but Jason Kottke (@kottke) has a different thought on why Google would be interested in accelerating page load speed.

From his post:

Google VP Marissa Mayer told the audience at the Web 2.0 conference that slowing a user's search experience down even a fraction of a second results in fewer searches and less customer satisfaction. Marissa ran an experiment where Google increased the number of search results to thirty. Traffic and revenue from Google searchers in the experimental group dropped by 20%. Ouch. Why? Why, when users had asked for this, did they seem to hate it? After a bit of looking, Marissa explained that they found an uncontrolled variable. The page with 10 results took .4 seconds to generate. The page with 30 results took .9 seconds. Half a second delay caused a 20% drop in traffic. Half a second delay killed user satisfaction.

Some lessons here:

  • Users say one thing and mean another so you have to understand latent/unspoken needs
  • Data is required to make strategic changes
  • Usability testing is fundamental to product success
  • Google's pretty smart (and so is Amazon, which is mentioned in the post as well)

There's a lot to like in such a short post. Full text can be found here.

Comments (2)

Dec 04, 2009
pkhoosh said...
Thanks for mentioning that experiment by Mayer. There's a paper in the Ergonomics in Design journal by Andre and Wickens (1995) that goes over several examples of how users want things that are not good for them.
With respect to that particular study by Mayer at Google, did they interpret their results in the sense that 30 search hits compared to 10 required more processing in working memory or other cognitive load factors? I'm guessing that contributed to drop in the bottom line as well as the longer page generation time.
Dec 04, 2009
Parker Smith said...
pkhoosh - Thanks for replying, In the context of the article, it sort of indicated that the difference between 30 hits and 10 hits was attributed to page load time. The point being that even milliseconds of time are important to user attention and satisfaction when aggregated over millions of page loads. Sort of like death by a thousand cuts - only in this case, it's abandonment by too many milliseconds of lag.

Leave a comment...