City of Richmond Hill

The City of Richmond Hill Website

Serves as a comprehensive digital platform, offering access to a wide array of services, information, and opportunities accommodating diverse user needs.

Users and their Goals

Residents: Individuals living in Richmond Hill seeking information about local services, events, and community initiatives.

Businesses: Local businesses interested in permits, regulations, economic development opportunities, and other relevant information.

Community Organizations: Groups or associations within the community looking for resources, support, or information on community events.

Job Seekers: Individuals seeking employment opportunities within the municipality.

Municipal Employees: City staff and officials accessing internal resources or information relevant to their roles.

Tourists: Visitors looking for information about attractions, events, and amenities in Richmond Hill.

New Residents: Individuals who have recently moved to Richmond Hill seeking information about services, facilities, and community engagement.

Stakeholders and their Needs

Municipal Government: Elected or appointed officials who may use the website for communication, policy dissemination, and public engagement.

Local Businesses: Entities with a stake in economic development, business permits, and information relevant to the local commercial environment.

Community Organizations: Groups involved in local initiatives, events, and community development that rely on the website for outreach and information.

Other Government Agencies: Other levels of government or governmental bodies with a stake in coordinating information and services through the website.

Residents: The general population of Richmond Hill, who expect the website to provide essential services, information, and updates.

Methods

For the heuristic evaluation of the City of Richmond Hill's website, a systematic approach was adopted to assess its usability based on Jakob Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics. The evaluation primarily focused on understanding the user interface and overall user experience. The chosen evaluation method involved the following steps:

1. Website Familiarization

Before delving into the evaluation, significant time was spent exploring various sections of the website to gain a comprehensive understanding of its structure, features, and content.

2. Task Definition

A set of tasks were defined to represent common actions that diverse user groups might undertake on the website. These tasks were designed to cover a range of functionalities, from accessing essential services to exploring informational content.

3. Task Execution

The defined tasks were systematically executed to simulate user interactions with the website. The goal was to identify potential usability issues, assess the website's responsiveness, and evaluate the clarity of information provided.

4. Heuristic Evaluation

Each task was analyzed with respect to Jakob Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics. An evaluation table was created, with each heuristic serving as a criterion for identifying usability problems.

The following tasks were formulated that were representative of different potential user groups:

Task for Residents: Obtain detailed information about local community events.
Task for Businesses: Apply for a business permit online.
Task for Job Seekers: Explore current job opportunities within the municipality.
Task for Tourists: Find information about local attractions and plan a visit.

Findings and Recommendations

As I navigated through the City of Richmond Hill's website, my exploration unveiled several usability concerns across different aspects of the interface. These findings shed light on potential challenges users might encounter while interacting with the platform and I offer recommendations to help enhance the user experience.

1. Visibility of System Status

Problem: The emergence of a "Thank you for your feedback" pop-up with a perplexing green "cancel" button poses a conundrum for users. This design flaw also violates consistency and standards, creating cognitive dissonance in users and an uncertain submission status.

Recommendation: Include the sentence “Your feedback has been successfully submitted” along with a green button saying “OK” or an X on the top right corner.

2. Match Between System and the Real World

Problem: The permits page introduces a disparity between the page's content and its title, labeled as "CSS." This internal jargon deviates from real-world clarity.

Recommendation: Match the title with the content on the page - in this case the title should be “Permits.”

3. User Control and Freedom

Problem: The absence of a clear exit option for the "Access HR" action button restricts users' control and freedom, lacking a designated emergency exit.

Recommendation: Incorporate a clearly marked exit button, offering users the freedom to navigate without feeling trapped in an interaction.

4. Consistency and Standards

Problem: Inconsistencies abound, such as non-capitalized labels among capitalized counterparts, pop-up windows having a different look and feel from each other, and a repetitive presence of "Contact Us" information. These inconsistencies undermine external and internal consistency.

Recommendation: Ensure that all labels follow established industry standards, in this case the appropriate use of capitalized words, no all-caps words, and use of different styles of buttons to signify differences in actions or information. Additionally, it’s recommended that pop-ups follow the same conventions and that the “Contact Us” information is included in the footer rather than in the centre of every page.

5. Error Prevention

Problem: The job opportunities page introduces a subtle yet critical mismatch between user expectations and functionality, notably in the search bar's "Search by Keyword" and "Search by Department" options.

Recommendation: Style the “Search by Department” label as a button to clearly signify that a user must click it in order to use its functionality.

6. Recognition Rather than Recall

Problem: The careers section introduces a challenge where date input instructions vanish as users type. This inconsistency in guidance presents a hurdle for users' memory load as date conventions are often varied.

Recommendation: Have the instructions written outside of the text box so that they are permanently visible.

7. Aesthetic and Minimalist Design

Problem: The "receive email updates" pop-up, layered atop the page without a clear separation from the underlying content, hinders visual clarity and contributes to cognitive overload. The abundance of buttons, exceeding 30+ on each page, creates visual clutter and confusion, distracting users from vital information.

Recommendation: Darken the page behind the pop-up, directing users' attention to the essential content while ensuring a more seamless and focused interaction. Reduce the number of buttons, eliminating redundant elements such as repeated "Popular Links" and other L2 buttons which are located both on individual pages and within the mega-menu.

In conclusion, my exploration of the City of Richmond Hill's website illuminates areas for improvement, each accompanied by specific recommendations. Addressing these issues will enhance the user experience, fostering accessibility and usability across diverse user groups.

Limitations to the Study

These limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings of the evaluation, and future assessments may benefit from addressing these constraints to enhance the overall validity and reliability of the results.

1. Single Evaluator

The evaluation was conducted by a single evaluator, which may introduce biases or overlook certain usability issues. Collaborative evaluations involving multiple evaluators could provide a more comprehensive perspective.

2. No User Testing

The assessment relied solely on the evaluator's perspective and did not involve actual users. Direct user testing could uncover issues that might not be apparent through heuristic evaluation alone and provide insights into user preferences and behaviours.

3. Limited Context

The evaluation did not fully take into consideration website analytics such as user demographics and user goals.

RichmondHill.ca:
Expert Evaluation

By identifying and addressing usability concerns, I have demonstrated a commitment to enhancing accessibility, consistency, and overall clarity in digital services, catering to the diverse needs of users and stakeholders.

Thank you for reading!

RichmondHill.ca:Expert Evaluation

By identifying and addressing usability concerns, I have demonstrated a commitment to enhancing accessibility, consistency, and overall clarity in digital services, catering to the diverse needs of users and stakeholders.

Thank you for reading!

RichmondHill.ca:
Expert Evaluation