And we congratulate the Minnesota Department of Revenue (MDOR) on recently launching its new website and the positive coverage in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. We worked with the Department’s web team and the developers to conduct user research, user experience testing, and consulting. Back in 2009 I blogged about our findings from audience research that users preferred a stronger audience-based navigation format for the MDOR site. Audience-based navigation is often not the best approach, but it works well for many government agencies because of the diverse audiences those agencies serve, each of which often has very different concerns.

Redesigning and developing a new website for any large organization is a huge endeavor – bigger than is often realized by teams doing it for the first time. And for public sector organizations, the scrutiny can be all the greater for obvious reasons. But given the benefits of providing excellent online self-service options, the effort and occasional headaches are well worthwhile.

Congrats again to Woodbury and MDOR on a great job!

• As of February 2012, 104 million people in the US owned an iPhone. (comScore Datamine)
• On a typical day, 68% of all smartphone owners go online using their phone. (Pew Research Center)
• IDC predicts that 106 million tablet computers will be sold this year.
• IDC also predicts that by 2015, more internet users in the USA will access the internet through mobile devices than through PCs.

In addition to the growing numbers, it’s important for web managers to be aware that, as Josh Clark says, “Anything that a user can do on mobile, they will do on mobile.” The first of Clark’s Seven Deadly Mobile Myths is that there is no stereotypical use case for mobile.

Are government organizations behind in adapting?

Given that millions of us are already using smartphones and tablets, and many more of us will be using them over the next few years, what are government organizations in Minnesota doing with their sites and applications to respond? That was the core question at our last Intersect meeting. It’s worth pointing out that with respect to web matters, government agencies in Minnesota are generally leaders, not laggards.

The results of a survey on mobile that we distributed to our Intersect membership a few weeks prior to the meeting show that most government organizations in the state are still in the early planning stages.

• About 80% have not optimized their public site for viewing on a mobile device, and have not developed any mobile applications for staff or other audiences.
• A third have not started planning a mobile web strategy; half said they were in early-stage planning. Only 14% had implemented a mobile strategy.
• Nearly half have seen a large to moderate increase in traffic to their sites from mobile devices.

Responses to an open-ended question about key challenges in adopting to a more dynamic and mobile web environment indicated a lot of uncertainty about where organizations would find the time, budget, and resources (either internally or via contractors) to handle new design and development work. There were also concerns from several organizations about whether a mobile audience truly exists for their content.

We were fortunate to hear from three early adopter organizations about what they have developed and what they have planned.

Metro Transit

John Siqveland, Public Relations Manager for Metro Transit, demonstrated Metro Transit’s mobile website, showing how customers with smartphones can have fast access to tools like NexTrip, to get real-time bus departures, and Trip Planner. John explained that Metro Transit so far has not developed apps for particular devices but has instead made data publicly available for app developers at datafinder.org. Check out the range of metro transit apps that have been developed so far.

John suggested that it may not be long before riders can use their phones to interact with a chip or image (or whatever ends up replacing QR codes) at transit stops to get real-time information.

MN Department of Natural Resources

Jed Becher talked about the DNR’s Android app, LakeFinder, their cross-platform app, MN Water Access, which locates public water access points, and a Fall Colors mobile site. All are available from the DNR's mobile apps page.

LakeFinder was developed as a proof of concept for the department, showing how mobile development could be done. As of April 2012 they have had nearly 17,000 active device installs. Jed said that the DNR is currently working on an HTML-based replacement for LakeFinder. They are also adding an HTML-based “Where am I?” mobile web version of the Recreation Compass to assist citizens in determining if they are on public land or where the nearest public land is located. The Department is also making high-use pages on the site more mobile friendly.

J. Hruby, Fredrickson’s VP of Sales and Marketing (and our most avid outdoorsman), congratulated the DNR for its work on LakeFinder. J. made an excellent point about how effectively the DNR has won fans in the public because of tools like LakeFinder, to the point where they are happy to pay higher fees to continue getting such great service.

City of Minnetonka

We ended the session with Marc Drummond, Web Technologies Coordinator for the City of Minnetonka. Marc was the person who introduced me to Ethan Marcotte’s concept of responsive web design over a year ago, and he is now redesigning Minnetonka’s website using responsive design techniques. Marc shared a beta version of the new site during his session.

Marc began his talk by referring to Stephen Hay’s famous tweet from January 2011: “There is no mobile web. There is only the web, which we view in different ways. There is also no desktop web. Or tablet web. Thank you.”

What designers like Ethan Marcotte, Stephen Hay, Josh Clark, and Marc Drummond suggest is that we “shouldn’t be developing completely separate mobile websites, or iPhone websites, or iPad websites, where well defined universal websites would suffice” (Josh Clark). Instead, there should be one web. As Marcotte wrote in his pioneering article on responsive web design: “Can we really continue to commit to supporting each new user agent with its own bespoke experience? At some point, this starts to feel like a zero sum game. But how can we—and our designs—adapt?”

The three technical ingredients of responsive design that Marcotte describes, and that Marc explained in his talk, are fluid grids, flexible images, and media queries. It also requires a new way of thinking. “Now more than ever, we’re designing work meant to be viewed along a gradient of different experiences. Responsive web design offers us a way forward, finally allowing us to “design for the ebb and flow of things” (Marcotte).

Resources to learn more about mobile

We'll be revisiting the subject of mobile user experience many more times. For now, check out Jeff Zeldman's excellent list of mobile web resources and best practices. This is a great place to start digging in to learn more.

Editor's Note: This entry is part of the Fredrickson Thought Leaders in Learning series. For this guest blogging series, we've invited well-known experts in a variety of fields to address leadership-level learning and development professionals with their thoughts on topics of their choosing. Our hope is to prompt discussion around an expansive range of ideas and concepts.

Who’s the wisest person that you know? Why does that person come to mind, and what are some characteristics of other wise people you know?

Competency, skills and expertise are desirable, but cannot take the place of wisdom. There are competent, highly skilled and even expert sailors, for example, who may not be wise. There is a saying among Lake Superior sailors that comes to mind: “The Superior sailor uses superior judgment to avoid situations that require superior skills.” For an example closer to home, if some organizations in the news lately had exercised more wisdom, they likely would have saved a bundle on legal fees.

As we think of truly wise professionals that we know, here’s what comes to mind:

• It’s not about them; they are relatively ego-less. Whatever the profession, it’s not about proving knowledge, displaying expertise or being right; there is a genuine focus on whomever they are helping and on arriving at the best solutions.
• They do more asking than telling, and ask great questions. They are great listeners. They ask questions that cause us to think, reflect on our goals, diagnose a situation properly and often arrive at the best solutions ourselves.
• They’ve “been there and done that,” usually multiple times under many different conditions and circumstances. We saw an article not long ago describing the false confidence that golfers can acquire after a successful afternoon on the driving range or consecutive great rounds at their favorite course. Golf pros, on the other hand, develop a kind of wisdom that comes from hitting many more shots on many different courses, in all weather conditions and circumstances. Wisdom does not come from one year of the same experience ten years in a row.
• They display exceptional discernment and judgment. Discernment precedes good judgment; it is the capacity for keen observation, sensing subtleties, distinguishing true from false, questioning assumptions and evaluating alternatives.
• They see the bigger picture. Amateur chess players typically react to threats or opportunities on a section or two of the game board at a time, and think one or two moves ahead. The wise, like great chess players, can take in a whole picture and its implications all at once. Wise professionals and leaders consider the 2nd, 3rd, 4th-order and beyond likely consequences of decisions and actions. They consider an immediate task or object as well as its context.
• They see the “smaller picture” too. They see not only the bigger picture; they focus on details when appropriate, and distinguish important from unimportant details.
• They don’t always “go by the book.” Perhaps because of the above, they are as or more attuned to the value of exceptions than they are to rules. To paraphrase the jazz great Miles Davis, they “don’t play what’s there; they play what’s not there.” Wisdom comes into play when there isn’t a rule book, manual or “standard operating procedures” to go by.
• They are still learners. Have you noticed how the smartest (at least wisest) people don’t act that way? There’s a kind of humbleness that comes from a mindset of suspecting there is always another answer or way, and perhaps a better one. They have curious, questioning minds – a large part of why they are usually the wisest in a group.

What’s the big deal with wisdom, and why be concerned about it? For one thing, many of our wise human resources are heading out the door from attrition or retirement. “Knowledge management” was a hot topic a while back, and now “talent management” carries the day. What about “wisdom management?” What are we doing to acquire, cultivate and retain wisdom in our organizations?

Whether in-house or contracted, wise resources contribute value that is distinct from merely competent or even expert talent. Their depth of experience and personal characteristics bring a different dimension to problem solving. Instead of merely helping solve problems, they help us discern which problems are worth solving or how to avoid them in the first place. Competent, skilled or expert resources can answer our questions; wisdom helps us make sure that we are asking the right questions.

When facing a challenge in your organization, make sure there’s wisdom on your team. Sometimes an outside view helps – fresh eyes that have seen a lot and bring new perspectives, making sure that we’re asking the right questions and solving the right problems. We need to give more thought to the role of wisdom in our work and organizations – when we need it, how to get and grow it, how to leverage it and how to retain it.

Would others describe you as “wise?” What can you do to cultivate your own wisdom?

How can you cultivate, retain and leverage wisdom in your organization?

"The young man knows the rules, but the old man knows the exceptions0". -- Oliver Wendell Holmes

About the authors of this Thought Leaders in Learning entry:

Al Watts is a veteran consultant and author of the book Navigating Integrity – Transforming Business As Usual Into Business At Its Best (Brio Books, 2010.) Al is the founder of inTEgro, Inc.

Lola Fredrickson is Chief Executive Officer of Fredrickson Communications.

]]> 2012-05-01T21:12:25-06:00 http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/lms_user_experience_testing_at_the_roundtable_for_learning_leaders/ http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/lms_user_experience_testing_at_the_roundtable_for_learning_leaders/#When:19:21:45Z The LMS we tested was a popular large-scale LMS and the member company that volunteered their LMS for testing has had this system implemented for a number of years. I don’t think specifically naming the LMS is of any benefit because the issues that we uncovered are certainly not unique to this LMS. What we found were some common usability issues that occur in a wide variety of systems.

This (admittedly brief) round of testing uncovered three issues where the LMS featured in our usability test could be improved:

• Search time - The time it took for the search to process was...extreme. Every tester who searched for a course experienced a wait of at least 45 to 60 seconds while the search was processed. Interestingly, as an outsider, I initially thought that the search had gone awry, but even the most novice tester had already learned to accept this pain point. Nevertheless, it was clear from the audience discussion at the Roundtable that speeding up the search would help tremendously with LMS usability in general.
• Extra clicks - We know that people do not like clicking any more than they have to. But as our usability lead, John Wooden, often points out, as long as someone has the “scent of information” (that is, they feel they are moving in the right direction), they don’t seem to mind clicking to get there.

  However, for the LMS that we tested, the process for launching the course required the user to click a button labeled “launch,” and then to click a link labeled, you guessed it, “launch”. All three testers remarked on this redundancy. As one tester put it, “If you ask me to launch again, I might say no!” This kind of extra click frustrates users because it feels like an inefficient use of time. We recommended linking the first launch directly to the course.

• Returning to a course after launching - In the LMS we tested, if a user stops in the middle of a course, closes the browser, and returns later, they need to find the course on a separate page of ongoing and recently-taken courses. Interestingly, the users who were more experienced with the LMS found this task more difficult than inexperienced users.

  Why? The experienced users were familiar with scrolling through the general list of courses, where they could launch a course they had enrolled in, but not yet started, by clicking the Launch button. They therefore expected to scroll through this same list to find a course they had started but not yet finished, by clicking a button labeled “Re-launch.” They did not realize they had to go to a separate page to find the course they had started and then click a link to resume the course.

  The lack of consistency in handling a course relaunch made this task especially difficult for them. We recommended adding a Re-launch or Resume button for courses that are in progress.

Although this was a small demonstration usability test with only three participants, we were able to uncover three significant issues needing improvement in the LMS in focus. The facilitated discussion that followed the demo test made it clear that usability is an issue with most learning management systems.

Even though an LMS is often purchased from a vendor, and therefore the purchasing company does not have direct control over all aspects of the LMS interface, usability tests can be well worthwhile. The results can be used to negotiate when renewing an LMS contract or, even better, to help evaluate an LMS before purchase. If changes can’t be made, identifying potential difficulties ahead of time can help shape documentation and rollout messages related to LMS deployment.

For more on the topic of LMS usability, see John Wooden’s article How Do We Improve the Learner Experience of LMS’s?

]]> 2012-04-24T19:21:45-06:00 http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/integrity_and_hrd_why_hrd_professionals_should_make_it_a_priority/ http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/integrity_and_hrd_why_hrd_professionals_should_make_it_a_priority/#When:16:15:59Z Editor's Note:This entry is part of the Fredrickson Thought Leaders in Learning series. For this guest blogging series, we've invited well-known experts in a variety of fields to address leadership-level learning and development professionals with their thoughts on topics of their choosing. Our hope is to prompt discussion around an expansive range of ideas and concepts.

Most human resource development professionals associate integrity with ethics, define it as some variation of “just doing the right thing,” and believe that you can’t really train people to have integrity anyway. Besides, how does integrity really impact the bottom line?

Integrity in the context of ethics or morality is really only one of a standard dictionary’s definitions, though, and not even the first. Its first and second definitions are about being “complete,” “whole,” “unbroken” and “perfect” – concepts that have more to do with effectiveness than just ethics. Think of “product integrity,” “design integrity” or “supply chain integrity,” and the whole picture – including HRD’s role – becomes clearer.

What do product and design integrity look like for training professionals? “Form follows function,” so a first consideration is clarity of purpose.

We can translate purpose here to include the mission of our function or role, as well as things like the goal of an intervention or the learning objectives of a training program. We model integrity when our actions, products and services fit the intended purpose. Training modules display integrity of design when they fit together and as a whole accomplish learning objectives within whatever budget and other parameters we have. Integrity for trainers includes accountability for results; we know that implies more than just “smile sheet” evaluations.

The greater our experience and responsibility in HRD, organization development and broader HR roles, the broader or more “whole” our perspective on integrity needs to be. Big picture-wise, HR and HRD’s overall purpose is aligning, or integrating, the people domain with the business or purpose of their organization.

Integrity, or “form following function,” in that regard means that talent acquisition, organization design, performance management, development and other HR practices need to fit, or be aligned with the organization’s mission, values and strategy. From my experience both inside organizations and as a consultant for nearly thirty years, I know of fewer ways to stifle effectiveness and engagement more than disconnects between stated purpose or values and actual organization or leader practices. Ralph Waldo Emerson put it this way: “Your actions speak so loudly, I cannot hear what you are saying!”

Even though it’s only one aspect of integrity, HRD and HR professionals cannot overlook its ethics and morality dimensions. We certainly have enough examples of how illegal, immoral and unethical practices have derailed organizations and leaders – Penn State, Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual and Goldman Sachs to name just a few of the latest. We cannot sit by and assume that a combination of laws, regulations, risk management specialists and legal advisors will take care of all that.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was passed shortly after the Enron debacle, and was an attempt to legislate ethical corporate practices. Then came the 2008 economic meltdown, fanned by “creative accounting,” lack of transparency, blatant conflicts of interest and plain old greed. “Inside-out” approaches to creating ethical cultures are always more sustainable than attempts to legislate ethical behavior.

HR and HRD professionals can play a pivotal role crafting ethical cultures from the inside out by helping their organization navigate these dimensions:

• Identity – HR and HRD’s roles here can include facilitating formulation of organizations’ strategic direction and values, and driving understanding of organizational direction and values throughout the organization.

• Authenticity – HR and HRD play critical roles by helping assure that leadership and organizational practices are true to their organizations’ mission, values and strategy, and by helping create “truth-telling,” transparent cultures.

• Alignment – We play central roles here by assuring that hiring, performance management, pay, succession and human resource development practices align with our organizations’ mission, vision, values and strategies. We can also help our organization and its leaders develop adaptive, change management and innovation capabilities in order to stay aligned with evolving market requirements.

• Accountability – As a rule, what gets measured gets done. HR and HRD professionals can help assure that sufficient attention is paid to variables that significantly impact organizational effectiveness, worker engagement and risk management.

Perhaps the multiple ways that integrity impacts ethics, engagement and effectiveness account for Noel Tichy’s perspective is that “Integrity is the cornerstone of free enterprise, and every leader needs a clear teachable point of view on it.” Human resource and human resource development professionals will benefit by adopting that perspective and positioning integrity centrally in their own strategies.

About the author of this Thought Leaders in Learning entry: Al Watts is a veteran consultant and author of the book Navigating Integrity – Transforming Business As Usual Into Business At Its Best (Brio Books, 2010.) Al is the founder of inTEgro, Inc. ]]> 2012-03-13T16:15:59-06:00 http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/skip_the_automated_readability_test_do_a_usability_test/ http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/skip_the_automated_readability_test_do_a_usability_test/#When:16:41:18Z Back in January it was reported that President Obama’s State of the Union address was written at an 8th grade reading level. In fact, a Smart Politics study of the 70 orally delivered State of the Union Addresses since 1934 found “the text of Obama's 2012 speech to have tallied the third lowest score on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test, at an 8.4 grade level. Obama also delivered the second lowest scoring address in 2011 (at an 8.1 grade level), and the sixth lowest in 2010 (at an 8.8 grade level).”

It makes sense for President Obama to focus on readability. He signed the Plain Writing Act of 2010, which requires the federal government “to write new publications, forms, and publicly distributed documents in a clear, concise and well organized manner that follows the best practices of plain writing.” I’m all for plain language and I applaud organizations that embrace it. (Kudos to Hennepin County in Minnesota for following the Plain Language law even though they don’t have to.) But I question the value of using automated tests to assess readability and I doubt the meaningfulness of the reading grade levels these tools spit out.

What automated tests don’t tell you

The Flesch-Kincaid test is a tool that many of us have used to calculate the reading grade level of text we’ve written or edited. But what do automated readability tests really tell us? What’s it mean when they say some piece of text is written at an 8th grade level? In truth, not much.

Automated readability tests are based on formulas and the formulas are based on elements that can be counted. The Gunning-Fog index, the SMOG (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook) test, and the Flesch reading ease scale are all based on counting words per sentence and syllables per word. In addition, as Janice (Ginny) Redish has pointed out*, the assumption underlying readability formulas – “that any text for any reader for any purpose can be measured with the same formula” – is simply invalid. Redish notes that automated readability tests leave a lot of questions unanswered:

• Is the content a good match for the audience?
• Is the audience familiar with the words used?
• Is the document organized so that users can find what they are looking for?
• Does the document include headings? Are the headings useful and meaningful to the audience?
• Does the page layout help users find what they need?
• Are the sentences grammatical?
• Are the style and tone appropriate?

Needless to say, these questions are all very pertinent in assessing readability, but they don’t lend themselves to simple counts. And there are other substantial weaknesses, too:

• Automated readability tests don’t work well on web pages that are written to be scanned. These tests count sentence length from period to period. So if you have text on a web page that uses lots of bullet points that do not all end with periods (which is just fine in my book), this will be a problem for an automated test. For the same reason, text presented in a table causes a problem, too.
• Readability tests don’t tell you how to make your text more readable. And in the act of trying to get a better readability score or lower reading grade level, according to the formula, you could end up creating new problems that render your text less readable. (I could eliminate the five-syllable word “readability” from this text and get a lower reading grade, but that wouldn’t be helpful.)

Why usability testing is better

The simple answer is that it provides a much more comprehensive and accurate gauge of how your users/readers perceive your text. I’ll give you an example.

A while back, I subjected some text that is sent to applicants for Minnesota unemployment benefits to the Flesch-Kincaid test to find out the reading grade level. It was high, too high. One of the reasons for this was the common use of such four-syllable words as “Minnesota” and “unemployment,” and the three-syllable word “applicant.” But would typical applicants struggle with these words? No. How do we know this? Because we did usability testing with actual applicants. A two-syllable word, “appeal,” caused more difficulty than the longer words that would be flagged in an automated test. But what testers struggled with more than any particular word was the order of ideas. The correspondence followed a general-to-specific structure, beginning with background and reference to a Minnesota statute, before going on to explain the specific determination of the applicant’s eligibility for unemployment benefits. What our testers told us was that they wanted to see this order reversed: start with what’s specific to the recipient – their eligibility – and then go on to the general and background information. We suspected this would be the case going into the tests, but it was good to have it confirmed by actual applicants. In any case, no automated readability test could have helped either identify or solve this problem.

Similarly, the biggest issue with another piece of correspondence was tone. Automated readability tests will not tell you anything about that either.

A usability test with a special focus on readability will tell you much, much more about how actual readers perceive your text than the narrow focus on syllables and word count in an automated test. They are quick, easy, and free, and they have the allure of quantitative data. But you get what you pay for.

What about that 8th grade reading level?

It’s interesting that President Kennedy had the highest average reading grade level in his State of the Union addresses: 13.2. But JFK understood the power of rhetoric pretty well, and I’ll bet that despite the high reading grade level, some of his words stick with you.

*"Readability Formulas Have Even More Limitations Than Klare Discusses," ACM Journal of Computer Documentation, August 2000/ Vol. 24, No.3.

In the previous blog entries, we have explored the major features of Articulate and Captivate, and discussed the strengths and limitations of each tool. Of course, there really isn't a winner. As I wrote at the beginning of this series, the only answer to the question “Which is better?” is “It depends.” The tools have different strengths and the best fit depends on your needs.

And for larger organizations or those with more complex or varied learning needs, the answer to the question “Which should I buy?” is often “Both.”

I've created a summary chart that I think clearly highlights the strengths of the two tools. Of course, some of these items can’t be reduced to a simple yes-or-no answer, so in some cases this chart simply reflects my opinion.

In 2012, we will see new players joining the rapid eLearning tool game. For example, Articulate Storyline and ZebraZapps are already attracting a lot of attention. There is also the possibility of new releases of Articulate Studio, Adobe Captivate, and SmartBuilder.

One of the interesting trends that we have noticed is the rise of mobile learning, and how the rapid eLearning tools are quickly incorporating functionality that gives them the potential to create mLearning content. For example, most of the new tools can publish your project as HTML 5 or in the mp4 video format. This gives eLearning developers an easier path to get a course running on Apple mobile devices such as the iPad.

I expect to see more projects developed with these new tools in 2012 and I will be using them myself for Fredrickson's Learning business. As always, I'm glad to share my thoughts and findings with you and I appreciate your comments on these blog entries. ]]> 2012-02-03T18:32:07-06:00 http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/self_service_nation/ http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/self_service_nation/#When:13:00:19Z During the webinar, I mentioned some of the navigation and other usability problems we found during a test we did on the City of Los Angeles' website. Here are some video clips from that test, so you can see the issues firsthand:

And here's the Self-Service Nation slide deck (.pdf). Again, thank you to everyone who attended. J. Hruby and I had a great time presenting and we hope you found it informative. Stay tuned for more webinars in the Fredrickson User Experience Webinar Series. ]]> 2012-02-01T13:00:19-06:00 http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/the_end_of_elearning_as_we_know_it/ http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/the_end_of_elearning_as_we_know_it/#When:19:17:59Z

• We believe a large majority of eLearning users in the near-term will still access courses using a desktop or laptop computer, instead of tablets or smart phones.

• While there will be no new releases of the Flash Player for mobile devices, the existing versions will still be around and will continue to function.

• The desktop version of the Flash player will still be available and Adobe has announced no plans to discontinue it or to stop releasing new versions. Flash is so prevalent on the web that we just can't see it going away in the next 3-5 years.

• Many highly-interactive components for mobile devices are developed and delivered as apps, which are not, and will not be dependent on Flash.

• Flash-based eLearning development will continue for the foreseeable future and Flash may still be a force in mLearning with the addition of the ability to publish courses for AIR or HTML5, which will be native to iOS (Apple's mobile device operating system) or Android. Adobe AIR runtime enables developers to deploy standalone applications built with HTML, JavaScript, ActionScript, Flex, and Falsh across platforms and devices—including mobile devices.

While the announcement about the mobile Flash player got a lot of attention, we believe that many may be reading more into Adobe's decision than is really warranted at this point. Adobe may be changing their direction as it relates to mobile devices, but this doesn't mean the end of the web as we know it.

It is certainly time to start thinking and learning about technologies like HTML5, but announcement of the discontinuation of the Flash mobile player doesn't mean that Flash is going the way of the dinosaurs. ]]> 2012-01-03T19:17:59-06:00 http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/handouts_for_usability_testing_a_government_website_a_live_demo/ http://www.fredcomm.com/blog/detail/handouts_for_usability_testing_a_government_website_a_live_demo/#When:18:31:38Z For those who didn't get a copy of the handouts, you can download a copy here.]]> 2011-12-09T18:31:38-06:00