Sections arranged in reverse chronological order. Best to read from the bottom up
Summary, decisions
To be written after all is said and done - a synthesis of the original email, later contributions and resulting conclusions. Either that, or simply update the appropriate sections of the main shop/search requirements page or sub-pages.
Additions post email
See original email thread (below). Add subsequent contributions to the discussion here.
- A less reliable method for capturing data on what users are looking for, but perhaps a good "plan B" is to ask them. I've often seen simple forms with headings like "Not seeing what you're looking for? Tell us what you want" following searches with or without matches. It's kind of like "Was this page helpful?." A cousin if this is asking to be notified - for example, when you search for a movie on Amazon, and it's not yet out on DVD, Amazon asks you if you want to be notified when it becomes available. -SP, 7/23
Original email thread
-----Original Message-----
From: Ladd Lavallee
Sent: Fri 7/20/2012 12:28 AM
To: Owen Richardson; John Piette; Susan Parker; Jim Maloy
Cc: Judy Ascensao; Ed DeGagne; Dawn Seiple
Subject: RE: Decision on search limitations
I'm living with all the implications here, too, but these feel like sound conclusions. In some of these circumstances, I wonder if our leading result should be a suggestion of our MOD capabilities. I can imagine a result that starts with 12.5", for instance, if that's all the info we have, and shows the balance of the description as dashes. On the other description lines, we might put an instruction to enter additional parameters. In other words, it would look like a result, suggest that 12.5" is within our capabilities, and encourage the user to go further. It might even be enough to take the place of "You have no exact matches". It could be followed by close stock matches.
Consideration number 1 brings up a related issue we haven't talked about in a while. That is, do we want to provide prices for plain bags and film that we do not manufacture, a la Marketplace. A lot of our quoting overhead, as I understand it, is dedicated to recognizing what we can't do. For instance, even if 12.5" isn't a measurement we can't achieve, we'd give a price and run for luck. That's not to say I want to quote every 200" layflat, so we still need to define some limits, but I do think we should pay attention to any funny gaps that still exist in our capabilities. With that thought in mind, I've copied Randy to put the idea in his head. He didn't have enough to think about.
________________________________
From: Owen Richardson
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 10:47 AM
To: John Piette; Susan Parker; Jim Maloy
Cc: Judy Ascensao; Ed DeGagne; Ladd Lavallee
Subject: RE: Decision on search limitations
Hey John -
Thanks for following up on the phone. Here's where I think we came out:
(1) We'll need to provide ranges of allowable values for gauge and size.
While it would be nice to know that customers want a 10 mil bag or a 200" layflat, I don't think we can allow them to flail about out there, trying this number and that until they get a result. I think we should forgo the data we might collect outside of established measurement ranges for this reason. (This is a big decision, let's live with it for a bit.)
(2) We'll need to be sure that any search that's made will generate a result - even if that result is only a You Might Also Consider close match.
Let's say we prompt the user who types in 10 mils to enter a value between 0.75 and 8 mils (as we do today). The user may get an exact match, but will at least get a few close matches under You Might Also Consider. It would not be wise to tell a customer to enter a value between X and Y only to then say, Sorry no matches, guess again.
(3) Should a user type in 12.5 inches (and nothing else), for example - the broad search results will say, "You have no exact matches". But we'll provide close matches.
(I don't think we've considered this scenario as yet.) We've said that when someone provides a partial spec - like width or gauge alone - that we'd show them all the products we have that fit with "Select" buttons to narrow the focus to one stock and one MOD alternative. But what if there are zero stock matches - say, 12.5 inches. In that case, we will provide all the stock 12 and 13 inch matches in all gauges and lengths under "You Might Also Consider".
I think I have this right, but let's mull it over a bit. I'll put these notes in the Wiki.
Owen
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Owen Richardson | Vice President of Sales & Marketing | LADDAWN, 155 Jackson Road, Devens, MA 01434-5614
(: 978.563.6175 | 800.446.3639, x6175 | Ê: 978.772.7792 | www.laddawn.com <http://www.laddawn.com/>
From: John Piette
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 3:32 PM
To: Susan Parker; Owen Richardson; Jim Maloy
Cc: Judy Ascensao; Ed DeGagne
Subject: Decision on search limitations
We are going to need a decision on how you want to handle the search limitations for the new website.
For example, do you want to leave options open, and record what the customer is looking for?
* If you opt for this how do you want to handle what the user sees when then enter search criteria that does not return any results at all?
* Also, does this mean we don't have any validations at all? Because how do you explain you can put in 150 for a width and get no results, but you can't put in 200 and get no results without it seeming inconsistent to the users?
Or are we going to limit what they can enter so that they should always get some results every time?
_______________________________________________________________________________
John Piette | Business Applications Analyst| LADDAWN, 155 Jackson Road, Devens, MA 01434-5614
(: 978.563.6203 | 800.446.3639, x6203 | Ê: 978.772.7792 | www.laddawn.com <http://www.laddawn.com/>