Strategic redesign of research support content

As part of the refresh project for the University of Arizona Libraries website, the library’s UX team collaborated with the Research Engagement department to organize and consolidate the research support content to improve discoverability of support services.

I supported the project with a content audit, competitive analysis, and user interview sessions.

June 2024 - Present
Content Strategy, UX Research

The Problem

The research support section was the final critical challenge addressed in the University of Arizona Libraries’ website refresh project. The section was full of dense, outdated content in a disorganized structure that posed a significant challenge not only for those editing the website, but for users trying to navigate it. The content was split up between two sites—the Support for researchers section of the Main Library website and the external Data Cooperative site, a hub for data support services and resources. Students and community members struggled with finding support for their research projects while the library’s Research Engagement department, responsible for providing research support services to the UofA community, had difficulties maintaining the support content that was available. Therefore, the UX team prioritized restructuring and streamlining the research support content in our refresh efforts.

Project Details

Collaborators

I collaborated with my colleagues in the University of Arizona Libraries’ UX team on this project. Our team is composed of the following members, each of whom contributed unique efforts to the project:

  • Aly Higgins, lead content strategist and researcher

  • Bob Liu, lead researcher and designer

  • Arshia Amin, assistant researcher and designer

  • Mehraveh Vahediyan, assistant researcher

  • Rachel Schmidt (myself), assistant content strategist and researcher

Content Goals

  • Improve the findability and clarity of research support services and resources

  • Establish a sustainable content management workflow for the Research Engagement department

Personal Goals

  • Explore new user research methods to build a well-rounded UX research skill set

  • Gain experience working in a collaborative environment with other researchers, designers, and stakeholders

Content Audit

Given the vast amount of complex information across multiple sites, the first step in the research support refresh was to document the existing pages and record common issues to identify specific areas of improvement to prioritize when updating the content. I completed a thorough content audit of the Support for researchers section and the Data Cooperative website, noting each page’s navigation menu location, issues such as dense or outdated content, and page visit analytics from Siteimprove. The audit revealed:

  • 23% of the pages within the Support for researchers section contained outdated content

    • Outdated content was defined by missing updates reflecting recent changes and expired forms, links, and applications

  • 8 out of the 10 least visited pages in the Support for researchers section were 5 or more clicks from the library home page

    • Several of these pages contained dense or outdated content

  • 23% of the pages on the Data Cooperative website contained broken links and 30% of the pages contained jargon

  • 6 out of the 10 least visited pages on the Data Cooperative website linked to or referenced external resources or other university sites

These findings reflected our initial concerns with dense, outdated content that was poorly organized and difficult to navigate.

Breadcrumbs for page in Support for researchers section 6 clicks from the library home page

Several links to external resources on page in Data Cooperative website

Dense content on page in Support for researchers section

Pain Points

Based on the audit results, we identified several key pain points to prioritize when updating and organizing the research support content:

  1. Dense and nested content: Information was difficult to find because many pages contained dense content or were nested several pages deep. This resulted in more outdated content because the pages were challenging to navigate and errors were less likely to be spotted.

  2. Scattered information: The research support content was spread out between multiple platforms, requiring separate content management and technical support workflows. These inconsistencies increased the likelihood of outdated content, broken links, and complicated navigation.

  3. Misrepresented services: Several key research support services were either difficult to find because they were nested deep or unclear in what they provide due to heavy use of jargon, reducing discoverability of helpful services.

Competitive Analysis

After identifying several issues with our research support content, I conducted a competitive analysis of other university library research support sections to ideate structural solutions to our section’s information architecture and page layout. I selected 10 of the University of Arizona’s peer institutions with admirable research support sections to derive inspiration from. I explored how each university represented and organized research support, presented support services, utilized multiple platforms, and structured page navigation, as well as noting any overall personal likes or dislikes from each site. My key findings included:

  • Research support is presented in the top navigation in several different ways, most often as a dedicated research support tab or dropdown menu option

    • We house our Support for researchers section within a general research dropdown tab similar to a few other universities

    • The dedicated dropdown tabs for research support in the top navigation are easy to locate and provide a quick preview of the section’s key content

  • Most universities organize their research support content with either cards or a sidebar on a dedicated landing page

    • We currently have a research support landing page and use a sidebar to navigate between content pages

    • Card layouts typically provide a brief description and quick links for each category of content within research support, supporting efficient navigation

  • Many other universities host some or all of their research support content on external sites, most commonly through their library guides site

    • Hosting on several sites reduces the page depth and density on the main library website, but this can confuse users when navigating between sites

  • The research support sections that were easiest to navigate used clear breadcrumbs and limited the content to 3-4 pages deep

Breadcrumbs in CU-Boulder’s Research section 4 clicks from the library home page

UW-Madison’s Research Support landing page with card layout

MSU’s Research Support dropdown menu tab with key content

Content Implications

Based on the findings from the competitive analysis of other university libraries, I suggested the following adjustments to our research support section’s structure:

  • Limiting content to less than 5 pages deep to improve discoverability of content and streamline content updates

    • This could be achieved by reducing excess or outdated content, reorganizing related content into fewer pages, or dedicating a tab in the top navigation to research support

  • Organizing key content sections into a card layout on the research support landing page to improve navigation to specific content

    • Cards allow space for a brief description and quick links related to each section of research support, helping users quickly understand the key details

  • Providing clear navigation between websites if hosting research support information elsewhere

    • Hosting on multiple platforms may be necessary given the large amount of diverse content, so clear and efficient navigation through breadcrumbs or similar headers is essential to streamline navigation between multiple sites

In addition to these suggestions, I considered recommending a dedicated research support tab in the top navigation menu similar to many of the competitor websites to streamline navigation to support services and content, but this decision would have been too significant given the scope of the project. We were focused on reorganizing the content and structure within the research support section rather than changing the Main Library website’s navigational structure, so I prioritized recommendations within the existing research support section to best align with the project goals.

Stakeholder Interviews

The UX team shared my content audit and competitive analysis findings with the Research Engagement department stakeholders. Bob and Aly then facilitated interviews with unit leads to understand the current research support content and services. The stakeholders:

  • Expressed similar discontent with buried content and findability of key services

  • Favored distinction between the Support for researchers section and the Data Cooperative site as the latter has a devoted content management group and focuses on separate services

User Interviews

Following the stakeholder interviews, the UX team spoke with users to understand how they use the library for research support. We recruited 9 graduate students and faculty members who are novice users of the library’s research support services through library workshops and our participant pool. I helped facilitate interviews with 4 of these participants.

We asked the participants about their current research projects, the resources they use for support, and any challenges they experience with finding help. Of the participants:

  • 7 out of 9 have attended research workshops in the library, but only 2 of these 7 used the library website to find the workshops

  • Only 3 out of 9 have consulted with library staff for research assistance

  • 4 out of 9 are unsure what library resources or services exist and where to find them on our website

We then conducted brief usability testing of the Support for researchers section and the Data Cooperative website to understand how users navigate and discover research support content. Some participants opted out of part or all of the usability testing.

  • When asked to find research support on the Main Library website, 5 out of 8 participants located the Support for researchers section

    • The remaining 3 participants chose to search for specific services in the search bar instead

  • 3 out of the 7 participants who were shown the Data Cooperative website were familiar with its content

    • Those who were unfamiliar responded positively to its resources and services and navigated the site with ease

Screenshot from a user interview session I facilitated

Pain Points

The user interviews and usability testing validated several of my findings in the content audit and reflected the concerns expressed by stakeholders. The results also supported some of the initial pain points and highlighted new areas for improvement:

  1. Dense and nested content: Many participants are unaware of what resources exist and where to find them, and those who do utilize library resources such as workshops typically access them from other sources.

  2. Scattered information: Some participants who are familiar with the Data Cooperative website mentioned that they were unaware it is apart of the library. This distinction may negatively affect discoverability of support services.

  3. Misrepresented services: Most participants expressed difficulty seeking help because the current resources are too “generic” for their specific research questions and focus more on quantitative than qualitative research support. Despite availability of librarian support services, many participants are unsure how librarians can assist them with their research or how to contact them.

Content Implications

Based on the findings from the user interviews and usability testing, the UX team made several additional recommendations to streamline access to research support services:

  • Move research support workshops and consultation services to a more surface-level page

  • Improve descriptions of librarian services by explaining what users can expect from a consultation and how to prepare

  • Provide more detailed support in resource pages rather than presenting a list of links to external sources

Next Steps

The UX team shared our research findings with the Research Engagement department and plans to work on a cost-benefit analysis with stakeholders to determine whether to integrate the Data Cooperative site with the research support content on the Main Library website.

Personal Reflection

This project was one of my first experiences as a piece of the puzzle of a much larger collaborative project. Much of my work prior to starting my role as a UX student assistant at the University of Arizona Libraries was either solo or collaborative with a small group where I guided much of the process and made a lot of final decisions, so shifting to a smaller supporting role where I’m not participating in every step along the way was a challenge to adjust to. However, I gained valuable skills in remaining attentive to contributions from my teammates and factoring them into my findings as every piece plays an important role in the final outcome. I’m looking forward to building more collaborative experience and exploring new UX research methods as the project progresses.

Previous
Previous

Mobile app design for grocery store navigation