Review: What the SEC did right and wrong with the redesign of its website

Having designed my fair share of websites for both major corporations and municipalities, I can attest that having the government as a client is an opportunity both brilliant and, as one of our team members put it, “fraught with possibilities.”

The most challenging aspect has to be the dizzying array of sign-offs required to move to the next step. Also not to be underestimated is negotiating the internal politics that any large organization has going on at any given time, especially around something so public as a new website. See: What the SEC is up to with its website’s fancy new look.

Add to that the general public weighing in and the desire of the organization to appear attentive and caring of the feedback and you get a general idea of how challenging a project of this magnitude can be.

It was with those factors in mind that I inspected the eagerly awaited redesign of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website that went live last week. Having done so, I hope to give RIABiz readers some insight into not only what it takes to design and build a site of this scope, but also evaluate some of the plusses and minuses we see in the new SEC site’s design and function.

Handy pull downs

The SEC site is huge (our handy-dandy file count tool counted well over 64,000 files) and huge sites take a lot of planning. Not only for the way the site will appear on launch, but for the long haul as it’s updated and changed by the various departments taking care of their own sections. See: BrightScope sticks to its guns as it responds to outspoken critics of its Advisor Pages.

In the old site you had
to dig and dig some more
for some information.

Upon entry to the new site it’s clear that its designers have taken a careful and considered look at the user experience. The initial feel of the site is definitely one of approachability. Starting at the top header and working across to the top right, it’s easy to see which government department I am visiting. The search function is nice and clear and the handy pull down menu for the different search areas is a good touch and is very scaleable as the site grows.

More search options brings you to EDGAR — the obviously much-loved acronym for Electronic Data Gathering Analysis and Retrieval system. Big organizations love these acronyms, but in our experience, it really doesn’t matter to the user — I doubt anyone really thinks there’s someone called EDGAR handling the search function and filing for the SEC, but there you go. (”...I’m sorry, I can’t do that Dave.”) See: Government shutdown may wallop SEC to the long-term detriment of RIAs.

Less digging

From an information-management standpoint the homepage is nice and clear — with a spotlight area that allows fast access to topical articles (Bernard Madoff and Ponzi schemes seem to be quite hot topics right now), and the “Requests for Public Comment” and dedicated “Information For” areas do a reasonably good job if bringing those areas out of the depths of the site and onto the homepage where people can actually find them. Prior to this you had to dig and dig some more for this information, or maybe rely on the redoubtable EDGAR to help you out.

A big improvement but with amateurish
touches.

This is the exactly the kind of change that says a lot about the site designer and the site owner — that they listened to, and learned from, the users and the focus groups and the UX studies and the card-sorting tests and the heuristics monitoring and all the other things we do to try and make the experience rich and rewarding for a visitor.

Blink and miss it

On the homepage, the only thing that caused some question was the annoyingly hyperactive image slideshow — it was extremely distracting and too fast to really be of much use. We’re all for a dynamic site, but this is reminiscent of the old “blink” tag that was put out of its misery a few years ago.

One other thing that smacked of “oops, we forgot that, let’s shove it in here” is the “Notice” element at the top right of the page — it’s odd, out of place and actually the last thing I noticed as I reviewed what is, for the most part, an extremely well-designed homepage.

The top navigation has clearly been carefully considered and does a superb job of categorizing what was, prior to the redesign, a dizzying array of jargon scattered down the left margin of the page. The new navigation is crisp and clearly labeled with drop-down menus that allow a user to quickly see the sub-pages that live underneath. We even like the drop downs that seem to behave themselves quite nicely (not always the case) and allow the user to clearly see which rollover selection they are about to choose.

Breadcrumb trail

Unfortunately this is where the niceness ends. On the high-level “About” page for example, the sub-navigation moves to the left margin and the understandable and manageable six items in the drop-down menu suddenly bloom into fourteen, with an additional 10 put in a confusing area below. Rule number one for website design is never surprise the user with new navigation or unexpected navigation. if you really need to add things, make sure you let the user know why with clear descriptions and a safe way back to where they arrived from in the first place — in other words: drop breadcrumbs.

Even worse, the top navigation has totally disappeared and the only way back to home is via the back button on the browser or the logo at top-left of the page.

The secondary pages may still be in the redesign phase (although that’s also not optimum for the user) — at least we hope so. The experience on the sub-pages was a real let down after getting such a nice feeling on the homepage of the site.

So, great homepage experience, severe disappointment and confusion on the sub pages, but probably that’s in the works for the next iteration of the site. We look forward to seeing how it progresses.

In the meantime: Open the pod bay doors EDGAR….

Originally from the United Kingdom, Philip Andrews is Creative and UX Director at Headset LLC in Fairfax, Calif. Philip has helped clients like IBM, AT&T, Hitachi, Sun Microsystems, Netscape, Kraft Foods and American Express build web-based systems and services since the beginning of the World Wide Web in the early nineties. Philip designed IBM’s first website, consulted on the re-design of Infoseek’s “Raptor” service that would then become Disney’s Go platform and designed Hitachi’s Zooworks tool which would be later be sold to Nielsen as part of their online ratings service. Currently Philip is working to enhance the user experience for American Express card members. An avid cyclist he lives in Marin County with his ever-patient wife Sarah and above-average-intelligence-dog Buddy.