LinkedIn rolled out a new interface today designed to improve screen real estate and navigation. I wasn't aware of the redesign until I went out there this morning but immediately noticed the changes. While it's not stunningly beautiful, it's still very functional and that wins all the important awards in my book. That said, one area that still bugs me on LinkedIn is the Advanced Search.
A lot of times I'll go out to LinkedIn to see if I can find a contact, only to discover through the Basic Search that there are several David Jones (as an example) on LinkedIn. Go figure. Instead of paging through the results, I'll just back up and hit the Advanced Search.This is typically fine if I know the company that the contact works for, but in some cases, I don't know that information. I may just know that they work somewhere near Rome, Georgia. Unfortunately, to perform this search, you can't just enter "Rome, GA" into your search criteria. You actually have to know Rome's ZIP Code.
Yeah.
Harder-Than-They-Should-Be Steps
While I'm sure that's the easiest way for the search to function
technically, it's not at all functional for the people using the system, unless of course you're
this guy. He probably loves this "feature". But if you're not that guy, at this point in your search, you're going to need to hit the "Lookup" link. But not before re-scanning the page to make sure you're not missing a City/State entry field. (You're not).
Clicking on "Lookup", you're taken to GeoNames, a third-party provider of ZIP codes. Fine, so you type in 'Rome, GA" and you get 5 search results for Rome.
Now you need to remember back to the other screen and recall that you are searching a 50 mile radius. Since Rome, GA is way smaller than that, you can pick any of these and you should be fine. Even still, you have to remember that search radius and after remembering you still scan that list one more time just to be sure you pick the right result. These are unnecessary mental reps that ding the usability; the system shouldn't
make you think this much. Regardless, once you decide to pick one of the ZIPs, there's no "Use this ZIP" button or anything, you have to physically copy the ZIP, close the window or tab and then paste it (or memorize it or transcribe between screens) into the LinkedIn field.
Now complaining about copying and pasting sounds supremely lazy, but that step is just the culmination of a couple of harder-than-they-should-be steps. This search has just gotten annoying via death by a thousand (or 5 in this case) cuts. The reason these are cuts to the experience is that we're all used to Google (and other smart) searches now.
vs Smart Searches
Compare: I was playing cards with my buddy and he was showing off his new Droid. Specifically he was raving about the Google Search enabled voice dial, proclaiming. "You don't even need to have Pizza Hut in your contacts when you say 'Call Pizza Hut' . . . it just knows where your phone is, looks up the nearest Pizza Hut via Google, and calls that number for you." I had a similar experience with Google Search the other day. My wife and I were trying to send directions to a local park to some friends. The problem was that I didn't know the address of the park. I did, however know the name of a restaurant right next to the park. So in Google Maps, I just typed the destination as "Downwind Restaurant". Sure enough, Google knew where that was.
These are smart searches. The system is working for me in these examples. Contrast that to LinkedIn's search and you see why its geography search is distracting and annoying. Just let me type in "Rome, Georgia" or "Rome, Saskatchewan" "Rome, Italy" and have the system know the what I mean. Worst case, let me simply choose from the top three most likely places.
And sure this Advanced Search commentary is about a very small piece of functionality in an otherwise solid application, but attention to these details is what can set your brand and user experience apart. Better to be set apart by good experiences (Google's search) than frustrating ones.
Comments [0]