Clarifying Terminology

Clarifying and defining terminology is the foundation of good user experience when it comes to content. Before joining this team, communication between design teams about word choice and cohesiveness was almost zero. So, when I was hired, I made it a part of my core foundational work to fix our terminology situation.

At Google, I was the only Content Designer working across a 200-person team focused on perfecting an internal CRM that assisted Google ad sellers with pitching and landing ad contracts with small, medium, and large businesses. What we delivered to those ad sellers was data, hard and cold, and after spending 6 months auditing over 30 features, there was one thing that stuck out to me, the word INSIGHT.

The Problem

Our users are experiencing an increasing amount of noise when it comes to data delivery and our insight adoption and CSAT score was low.

Here are the top issues I had with the way we utilized the term INSIGHT:

  • It was used throughout the UI to describe multiple types of data.

  • Users did not know how to parse through, take action, or prioritize certain data because it was categorized similarly.

  • Insights were expected to be regarded as top-tier pieces of information by users.

  • The term "insight" had no set definition, structure, or quality threshold.

  • Users reported feeling overwhelmed by the quantity of insights they had to go through daily and the quality of the insights being low.

The Solution

After holding a workshop with stakeholders on terminology, researching, working cross-functionally, and analyzing the problem through a content lens, I realized that the reason our users felt so overwhelmed by the data was because it was lacking categorization. What our team had been doing instead of categorizing the data was creating new features to house the data they deemed "different" leading to users having too many emails to open, tabs to click, and uncategorized data to parse through.

Here is a sample of how I categorized the data

How I socialized this solution

  • Engaged 1 on 1 with teammates and stakeholders to gather feedback. Having 1 on 1's allows me to get real, unfiltered feedback. This also meant that when I presented my solution in a large forum, I had alignment from the majority of my teammates and stakeholders.

  • Involved 1 respected designer that I had worked with previously on defining terms and who believed this solution was necessary. This gave my project more credit.

  • Found other teammates looking to solve this issue and teamed up for better results.

  • Created a deck to be able to present to higher-ups and larger stakeholders

  • Took the feedback I was given and tweaked where necessary while staying to true to what I believed would work (whether some agreed or not).

Team Feedback

One interesting piece of feedback I received multiple times is that stakeholders would not respond well to the way I was presenting the categorization. Currently, all stakeholders wanted their data to be seen as an insight since it was seen as being the most valuable. I realized that by ranking the categories I was seemingly "demoting" data and making it seem irreverent.

My goal was not to devalue one piece of data or another, but rather be clear about what each data piece offers so users could parse through the data clearly and decisively based on their needs. So I shifted my design and focused my presentation on the equal value of all data within these new categories.

The results

  • Designers began using my terminology in mock-ups and presentations

  • PM’s engaged in discussions about the new terminology and the need for change

  • Directors agreed on the terminology change

  • Implementation of the terminology within the product