I just finished reading an article that discusses the relationship between branding and the user experience. Namely that user experience should be consistent and reinforce the perception of the brand. The author explores examples mostly of corporate web sites and I was left wondering how should we think about this for the non-profit world.

There aren't too many non-profits that have a strong branding presence. WWF is one. Those panda are easily recognizable. There are even smaller number of sites that have good branding and good, consistent user experience. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is one of few.

A positive user experience has a direct correlation to positive brand perception.

The article talks about detrimental errors and typos on a website are to a brand that tries to establish reliability. Most non-profits want to establish themselves as trustworthy, effective and transparent. When a website is badly organized, full of graphic inconsistencies, and looks dated, it does not reinforce these values. Users may be forgiving and think, the staff are off working hard and doing important things, or they may think the organization is inefficient and badly-managed. It all depends on perception. One thing is for sure: having a good user experience across the site can't hurt an organization's image.

It is a shame that many organizations wait until their websites become so unusable, dated, or get so many complaints from senior managment, staff or users before they find the momentum to embark on a redesign. However redesign can only be temporarily fix. After a couple of years or even months, a site will be on the same path to self-destruction and loathing. A large part of the problem resides in maintaining the site as much as in periodically redesigning the site. After you invest in a new car, you have to put the time and commitment into washing it, checking the fluid levels and performing scheduled maintenance for it to run smoothly all the time, and not become something your kids will feel ashamed to be seen in.

There are a couple of areas in which an organization can improve the maintenance of a site.

• As part of the redesign, establish clear style and editorial guidelines that the site administrators can follow. It takes only a relatively small amount of budget to go the extra distance to work with the designer to put together a style guide for instituting graphic design consistency for a site. Likewise it takes a few meetings to establish a few editorial guidelines that stakeholders can all agree to. It doesn't have to be a 100-page document. It can start out as a few pages, then grow as more complex situations need to be tackled.
  
  Establishing guidelines is important. It helps combat "it-would-be-great-if-itis" where senior management or site managers often make editorial and graphic design decisions in its absence.


• Designate (or hire) someone whose responsibility is the maintenance of the site according to pre-established style and editorial guidelines. Establish ownership. It is also important to empower that "Web editor-in-chief" to be able to make editorial and graphic decisions and adjustments to ensure quality across the site


• Perform audits on a periodic basis. When you own a house, you take the time to mow the lawn, steam-clean the carpets, and sometime repaint some rooms. Decay happens. In real and virtual worlds. Sites need housekeeping too. Invest the time to review the site periodically. Set an interval: Once every quarter, twice a year, before your annual conference or the annual report is published. Establish a time or event that will trigger the site housecleaning audit. You don't need to check the whole site either. Check high trafficked pages and a handful of random pages to make sure the the graphics are consistent, links are all working, and retire pages that are no longer useful.

Periodic maintenance goes a long way, and lessen the pain when you are ready to update the look of the site.