Good Enough for Government

Neither site is going to win a Communications Arts award (and nor should they try), but Oregon's site looks especially unappealing with their choice of colors and gradients. A little easier on the eyes Mr. Kulongoski, please! Kudos for focusing on text-based navigation and simple loading pages. But it would be nice to see more identifying imagery with Oregon beyond a microscopic Crown Point. We'll pass it, but barely.

Unlike Oregon.gov, you can look at Mass.gov without getting vertigo. It's a more sophisticated design with a well structured layout. A nice separation in size between different headline styles and navigation makes it easy to determine content priority. Both sites go for the obligatory governor glory shot, which is generally considered a taboo with CEOs on commercial sites, but is certainly fitting for a state agency.

Both sites have considerable challenges in the monumental task of delivering unified user experience for the numerous state services, agencies and departments. Oregon gives it the old college try with a unified global navigation system they roll out to all participating agencies. In the "What were they thinking?" category, Oregon decides not to introduce this consistent global system on their homepage, and instead uses a two-level reverse fly out menu system on the right navigation. Not only is it incredibly difficult to use, but Oregon misses a golden opportunity to orient its users out the gate.

Stealing a page out of an early edition Amazon.com "How To" guide, Mass.gov has a simple tab-based global navigation system that focuses the site on typical user tasks. While not attempting to go as deep as Oregon in unifying the entire state into a central system, Mass.gov certainly executes well on its chosen approach. Tabs provide clarity and comfort for users. The navigation does break down (as expected) as you browse deeper into agencies and departments. Kudos to Oregon for trying to unite everyone under one umbrella. But for now, the East coast gets the nod.

We've covered the big home page navigation gaffe (see: navigation), but Oregon commits yet another usability cardinal sin. The site opens a new browser window for a majority of its links. Usability practitioners have a long list of why spawning new windows are evil -- the simplest of which is losing control of the back button. These trifles aside, Oregon's biggest usability problem is forcing site visitors to swallow a fire hose of navigation options and links on its homepage. Oregon.gov has flashes of brilliance when it does lock in its site structure deeper in the site. If more consistently applied, this site has the potential to pull it all together.

Huzzah! Mass.gov has a refreshing level of consistency across their user centered design. The home page surfaces key tasks that are balanced with new content and simple user-based navigation. Unlike Oregon, Massachusetts does not visually represent the complexity of state government in its design. Some potential issues arise with sub sites such as the Governor's page. By closely following the base template the site loses the global navigation system. Users will be confused by the transition to a new section and how to get back up. Both sites do an admirable job with text-based links in the footer to key policies, site maps and contact information.

Government sites are responding to their constituents' requests to be more transactional in nature. While Oregon may match Massachusetts hazelnut for baked bean in the number of services, the organization of services leaves much to be desired. There is little attempt to surface key services, and a massive services page is an odd and hard to use mashup of tasks, services and general information. A little user research and organization would go a long way in developing clear paths into pertinent services so users could go straight to the source without the wading through layers of information.

Mass.gov continues its domination by providing clear and easy access to key state services. A gray box on the home page calls them out front and center. That same design treatment is carried through the user sections and organizes services for residents, businesses, visitors and government. The main services page has a nice layout, but oddly enough doesn't surface the same set of services shows on the individual pages. They fall into some of the same problems as Oregon in murky classifications as to what something is or isn't a service. But hey, even Paul Revere got caught before reaching Concord.

You can't keep a good state down for long. In a stunning momentum shift, Oregon storms back into contention with a site that is W3C valid. In addition, prominent global navigation links tout Oregon's accessibility policy, link to text only versions of the site and allow users to change font sizes. The site is surprisingly bulky on the download (perhaps the overly fancy JavaScript menu) for a simple site, but overall, well done Oregon. Well done!

Mass.gov falls short to Oregon's excellence with 29 validation errors, but accessibility goes beyond valid code. The site does have a statement about accessibility and promises users that it is consistently tested based on Section 508 standards. However, you don't get the sense that they are quite at Oregon's level. But try this one on for size – The Mass.gov site ranks better in design and user experience and takes a half the time to download on a 56k modem connection.

It's difficult to review the content of sites that are strongly decentralized. But both sites could use stronger editorial oversight to weave together the many different sites with engaging copy. Oregon attempts to surface a lot, but it's a shallow attempt that fails to provide much context before directing you elsewhere. The "About Oregon" link for example immediately shoots visitors to a Travel site that while nicely designed, does not necessarily align with visitors' likely expectations. We're guessing that there isn't likely an editor in control, which should be job number one.

Mass.gov takes more of a portal approach to organizing content and playing air traffic control to its many services and departments. However, it does a much better job of featuring timely news and features across the entire site in a standard format. Small things like having news and updates that are relevant to specific sections of the site make a big difference in providing relevant content based on user type. The community based content (accessible in a pull down menu) is also a hidden gem off the homepage that has some fantastic city specific content.

Oregon had many challenges, but is a few small changes away from making some significant strides. A perceived lack of high level site strategy and usability planning seems to have left the agencies to fend for themselves. Although there is clearly a noble (and daunting) effort underway to standardize design and access to key state services.

If this was a heavyweight fight, Mass.gov would win early by TKO. By keeping the site elegant, simple and user focused, it has avoided falling in the trap of trying to be too many things to too many people. However, there is some work to be done. Namely in cleaning up some accessibility issues and improving the integration of deeper content.