How To Sell The Idea Of A Website Redesign

Hi!

A client of mine has a site I built back in 2002 - and it shows now. He still loves it - but then he's not exactly the most internet savvy person. In his profession especially, visual impressions are important to build trust.

I think he needs a better looking site and I genuinely think that I could build a site that will get him more visitor conversions.

I'm wondering how I should put this though. Yes, things date and standards move on but isn't it almost like saying that I didn't quite do a good enough job in the first place? How do you justify to clients why they should pay for a re-design of a site you built before?

 

Hi wKarims,

I have exactly the same problem with a client and his site was also built back in 2002. I host his site and each year when I send him his bill I suggest a redesign but he is not interested. This is a website soon to be seven years old and I now find it a bit embarrassing but he seems to still be happy with it. He is a small town solicitor and when you Google "solicitor townname" he is still number one so he is quite happy.

A year or two ago I actually thought about offering to upgrade the website for nothing but he can clearly afford to pay for it and it goes against the grain.

I also thought about trying to convince him by pointing out deficiencies in browsers other than IE but the site still displays OK in them too. You may want to try looking at your client's site in Firefox, etc. and if there are any problems there point these out to him. You can say that these browsers came along after his site was developed so any problems are not your doing.

 

I reckon what you should do is approach with caution, but just explain, in simple terms, that people expect more from the Web these days, and that he's potentially losing business by not having a more up-to-date site. Also, maybe give him some ideas of what you're planning to do with the site, and who knows, they might be liked more than the current one!

 

A site's redesign should begin the moment the present site goes live. Not actively, maybe, but as a part of the ongoing site evaluation. I like to tell the story of the school of architecture that designed and oversaw construction of their own new building. The dean of the school became furious that students were walking on the grass instead of the carefully engineered and beautifully designed pathways. He called on the provost to assign campus police to cite these wrong-doers. The provost called the president, who took one look at the path worn in the grass, and ordered the dean to pave it.

You may think users should go from A to B. In reality they may have once, but now land on R and go to W. Businesses change their emphasis, customer demographics and needs constantly change. New designs reflect new realities.

cheers,

gary

 

You tell him/her/them that:
a. there are new codes/protocoles in the market that are very popular and common.
b. there are new design trends that make his site looks like its not up to date, neglected and poor
c. it wont effect his/hers current clients and/or projects, and probably will bring new clients and cover the expenses.

By the way, its all true.

 

Ok, ariese's advocate here. I'm a "designer" as well, but tender my thoughts in these areas with something far more important.

Remember the prime objective: A site exists to solve visitor problems. Not make money, promote your business, or dazzle the visitor with your artistic talents, these are all outcomes of the prime objective.

So reassess these questions: does it solve his visitor's problems? Does it navigate well? Are there any areas that can improve the visitor experience besides presentation?

Don't let this bruise your ego: as "designers," we tend to have fragile ones. Many of us tend to place presentation on a far higher pedestal than it deserves, and see it as a personal affront that our visual considerations are taken lightly or tossed aside. We get defensive, or even, as you, consider disassociating ourselves with these sites based on presentation alone.

After you've had your designs slam dunked a few hundred times and your ego takes a thorough thrashing, it stops hurting and you can start to see the value in this thinking.

Want an example? Why does Craiglist work? Why does THIS site work? Both are completely or nearly devoid of graphics. How is that possible?

In reality, this will free you. I have done probably thousands of sites. Many of them I consider ugly as sin. Many were developed before the year 2K, and in spite of suggestions, the clients refuse to change them. They function well and fear anything that might break whatever formula makes that work.

If you really can't get past this, address the above questions and others that deal with issues beyond presentation. Go at it in terms of functionality, changing monitor resolutions, address the issues outside of "design" that might prompt a rework.