Screen test

To discover how the insurance industry is doing on the web, we looked at a large personal lines provider, a medium-size general broker and a Lloyd's broker. We judged each site on four criteria: navigation; design, which includes colour, use of images and text; usability and content

John Nicholas is a contract website designer. He has designed websites for many financial companies and business to business operations. His designs include sites for Accenture, BT, e-gasandpower and the BBC

As in all industry sectors nowadays, it is important to have a coherent brand identity across all facets of the media. This is especially true on the internet, where first impressions are vital. Consumers, whether private or business, often make a decision on the visual aspect of a site before the content has the opportunity to make an impression.

Many traditional bricks and mortar companies were wrong-footed by the rise of the world-wide web and were slow to react. In the insurance industry it was nowhere near as easy for a start-up company to challenge established players, in part due to the complexity and expense of bringing a presence to market. With little pressure of competition, it is obvious, after visiting a selection of insurance-based sites and portals, that some have very visible design and navigation flaws.

E-commerce was meant to bring cost savings to consumers and to business, and the insurance industry should be no exception. Online processing of insurance requirements, whether for consumer (travel, car, home) or for business, could and should result in major cost savings.

Banks and supermarkets have started providing insurance services and most of them already have a strong presence in, and experience of, retail on the internet.

On balance, judging by their websites, it seems that many insurance companies are ill-prepared for the competition they are going to face in the wired world. There is wider acceptance of internet business among insurance customers and, belatedly, insurers are beginning to respond.

A key sector of any insurer's market is very internet savvy. This is the 25-35 age bracket, which has grown up with computers. They are used to dealing with professional business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) sites. This audience has high expectations of design, navigation and ease of use. Their view is that, if a site fails to impress, another one is simply a click away. A company has to build trust right away, as it gets only one chance to gain a customer, and many opportunities to lose one.

Planning a site is important, as many elements, such as links to other pages, depend on each other. The corporate brand should be strong through all pages of the site. And when users have clicked through several pages it is necessary to decide how you want them to find their way back. Navigation is one task that can infuriate users if not properly signposted. A small family orientated business will communicate with its clients in a very different way to a large B2B insurance portal. However, the design considerations are similar. Each site has to shout professionalism and each must engender trust.

The AA: (
www.theaa.com )

What's it like: The AA site has a clear information structure with a tabbed menu running across the top banner. When a section is chosen it is highlighted so the user does not get lost. The colours are representative of the brand and do not distract the user in any way. All links from the home page are consistent - with a blue underline, and the search box is placed centrally to easily access any subject required.

Information is grouped and there is an area dedicated to special offers and features.

The site uses an interesting mixture of web technologies and this is reflected in the speed at which some areas operate. Using the e-commerce sections proved to be fairly slow, even on a relatively fast connection. The site is graphics light, which should keep downloads fairly fast.

Could do better? It would be good to reduce the amount of information presented on each page. At first glance it looks like the AA has much to offer, but there is a major repetition of content, and too much to digest.

Studies show that 75% of users scan for information rather than reading, and leave sites if they cannot find what they are looking for quickly. Perhaps offering a second level of navigation would give a clear overview of what is on offer in each section. There are too many links and no clear way of getting to information without using the search facility.

It is a well-designed site. If it had a slight reordering of its content it would offer a fast and easy way to access services and products.

What's the score:
Navigation 7/10
Design 6/10
Usability 6/10
Content 8/10
Overall 27/40

Williams & Williams
www.williams-williams.co.uk

What's it like: The Williams & Williams site has, at first glance, a clear menu system. It clearly highlights which section has been selected, but moving around, it becomes quite apparent that it is fairly antiquated. The only way to move between items listed on the same page, once one has been selected, is to return to the home page and start again. And when users have selected an item, most will have forgotten what the original options were. It is recognised that users do not remember categories over more than two pages, so navigation menus should be visible at all times.

A good example of navigational inconsistency appears on the home page. Right at the bottom of the home page in small type is what appears to be the site's main entry point. Finding this is a challenge in itself on a small monitor, but having clicked it, I am even less sure of what is going on. It appears to be some sort of terms and conditions page, which then leads nowhere. Links within text areas are not immediately obvious. Overall, it is quite easy to get lost.

Visually, the way Williams & Williams chooses to represent itself, with its name and a spinning logo does not say much about the company. There is minimal explanation on the home page, and some terrible photo-stock images that are far too large to download in reasonable time on a 56k modem.

The text is hard to read on anything smaller than a 17inch monitor. It is obvious that the site's design is not a priority, with a terrible navigation system, minimal content and awful imagery. The background image, rotating logo, fonts and the use of frames suggest this site was created in someone's bedroom, circa 1997.

Could do better? The company would benefit immediately by re-designing this site. It wouldn't need to be an expensive overhaul, as it is simply an information site, and has no e-commerce facilities. Improving the navigation with better design consistency, visitors will be more interested in the "partnership for success" the company is trying to promote.

What's the score
Navigation 4/10
Design 2/10
Usability 3/10
Content 4/10
Overall 13/40

Jardine Lloyd Thompson
www.jltgroup.com

What's it like: The JLT site is clear and crisp with a very simple navigation system. There isn't much content on each page and very few links, which makes it easy to read. (If not that interesting). Images are kept to a minimum and they have all had the same treatment for consistency. Imagery supports the content rather than taking centre stage.

Unfortunately, the site relies heavily on Flash (a type of animated web content tool) and this requires a separate plug-in that is not necessarily part of a user's web browser. Instantly this will alienate some users, as they will not be able to see most of the content.

If used sparingly and correctly, Flash can sometimes add value to a site, but in this case it is overused, with animation that is superfluous to the message being displayed. It also greatly adds to download speeds but, as this is primarily a B2B site, the issue of download speeds may be less relevant as connection speeds are probably higher.

Navigation is easy, but when a new area is selected, it is at first highlighted when clicked, and then disappears once the user moves.

Elements not present include a left hand navigation bar, and primary navigation repeated at the bottom in a small font. The area at the top right of a screen is called a "dead area", as the eye seems to ignore that space. To place their logo here is tantamount to saying that the brand is not very important to the company.

Could do better? With such a simple design, there is not much to criticise. It is easy to move around and the focus is on the content, which in the end is the ultimate goal. Design is average, navigation is average, but this is simply an information-bearing site, with no

e-commerce facilities and does succeed in what it sets out to achieve.

What's the score:
Navigation 6/10
Design 5/10
Usability 6/10
Content 6/10
Overall 23/40

Tips for top sites
Design is about communicating or translating a message. This can be done in many ways, but all good design should include a few basic rules:

Simplicity - The eye is distracted by too much clutter. Information should be given in a simple form, as it is widely recognised that browsers' attention span is low. In many cases less is more when it comes to design. A common mistake is to fit too many elements on a page. A few well chosen elements can allow the user to digest the message and decide where to go next.

Relevant IMAGEs - Neutral colours and careful use of imagery are the key factors. Choose images with regard to what the image is communicating to the viewer. Speed is always a priority so images need to download quickly to support editorial content. Animation is most of the time not necessary, as it tends to divert attention and increase page loading times. If a page takes longer than from 10 to 15 seconds to load, a user is likely to get bored. In www.yahoo.com, for example, it usually loads each page in less than seven seconds.

Easy navigation - The user should be able to easily move around without getting lost and any information source should be no more than three clicks away from entry to the site. There should be multiple routes through a site and a clear indication of where a user is and how to get out. A site map and quick navigation links are also a must, along with some method of searching for information.

Conclusion
Internet users are much more mature nowadays in their expectations of design and access to online information. They expect professionalism in design and construction. Unfortunately, many insurance industry companies are suffering from a distinctly amateur online presence.

Insurance has greater potential for e-business than in many other industries and this is woefully under-represented.

So it is clear that there are many opportunities for the industry as a whole to catch up with the other sectors.