Predictive text or dropdown. Which is better?

Which is best, predictive text (aka type-ahead), or a pre-populated dropdown? As ever the answer is ‘it depends’. However, I do sense that predictive text has become the default, even when it might not be the right thing to do. Which approach to take on the British Airways booking panel was the single longest running argument I had with colleagues at BA.

British Airways old booking panel

To choose where you wanted to fly from there was one dropdown for country and one for city which was populated according to the selected country. However, to choose where you wanted to fly to, it was predictive text. When the user started typing matches would show up for city, airport, or country names.

The funny thing was that time after time colleagues at BA asked why we didn’t change the dropdowns to predictive text. My boss, my team, colleagues in the business would all argue passionately for predictive text in the ‘From’ field. The reason that was odd was that on a number of occasions in usability labs customers would ask why we didn’t change the predictive text to dropdowns in the ‘To’ field. Not one customer ever asked for what my colleagues wanted. Yet when I explained this internally people found it very difficult to accept as it was so counter-intuitive to them.

So why was the panel designed that way? Good question. I’m not sure I can clearly articulate the original thinking, but here’s the post-rationalisation. If you are flying from somewhere the likelihood is that you know where you want to go from – or at least which country. It’s also likely that many customer don’t know which airports BA flies from, but by selecting the country they get a definitive list. It also means that you don’t have to be able to spell the name of an airport or city to get a hit, and if your favoured city isn’t in the list then you know for sure BA don’t go there. Those factors aren’t catered for in predictive text.

If you are flying to somewhere there’s more of chance that you’re not so familiar with the destination. If you know you want to go to Sofia you may not know which country it’s in. You might not even know what continent it’s on. So the predictive text is less constraining where a search might be more diverse.

In the usability labs customers liked the fact that didn’t have to think – so long as they knew their departure country.

By contrast, let’s take a look at what Ryanair do.

Ryanair booking panel

Both the ‘from’ and ‘to’ fields have a consistent design which in principle is good. You can pick the country, and then you pick the airport. But you can also just type something in. If you didn’t know which country Dusseldorf was in, and typed ‘Dus’, then Dusseldorf would show up. The customer gets the choice of which method to use.

I do recall a time when Ryanair had all destinations in a single dropdown which covered the entire page of a desktop screen. It was a bit much.

There is a sense in which pre-population merges into a hierarchical navigation. Amazon couldn’t have a single dropdown with all their products in it, but you can drill down through the product listings to get a relevant (more or less) set of results. It’s the same principle as the BA and Ryanair menus, just presented in a different context.

A simple rule of thumb is that if there is a ‘small’ set of possible choices, then use a pre-populated dropdown. If you use predictive text then a key issue is how you handle errors. You could disable progress unless a valid choice is made from the options displayed. This eliminates the possibility of the user getting an error from the search, but doesn’t help if they don’t know what the choices are or what the spelling is.

If you don’t force a valid choice then if the user enters an invalid search term it’s typical to see ‘did you mean’, as exemplified here by Amazon. I searched for ‘beetles red album’, and the system guessed that I wanted the ‘Beatles’ red album, but still allowed me to insist on ‘beetles’ if I really wanted to. This is useful.

Amazon response to search for ‘beetles red album’

It can also be useful, even if the user enters a valid search term, to show alternatives.

There is a Sydney in Australia and also one in Canada. There have been occasional stories in the press of travellers flying to the wrong one. Perhaps if their search engines had been clearer that there were other ‘Sydney’s the error might have been avoided.

There is a Grenada in the Caribbean and a Granada in Spain. Just because someone types in, or selects, a valid search term doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s the one they want.

The booking panel on ba.com now has predictive text

BA predictive text

This approach doesn’t wait until the user has hit the ‘enter’ button to let them know their search term isn’t recognised, and it makes helpful suggestions.

Summary

As is often the case with design there are some useful patterns out there, but which one you choose will depend on context.

If you have a limited number of defined choices use a dropdown. There’s no hard rule on how many is too many. That again can depend on context and how users react. Once you get to too many then you need to start categorising into a menu structure.

If you use predictive text consider whether you want to force a valid choice. Let the user know that their text is not recognised (where appropriate), and offer alternatives. You still often see a simple ‘no results’ as a consequence of a simple spelling error. Consider whether it’s better to alert the user to the issue before or after the search button is pressed.

The two approaches aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive, as the Ryanair example shows.

A little thought and consideration of the issues could make a significant difference to experience on many sites.

Here’s a comment from an ex-colleague, Allan Dade.

Predictive text can pip drop downs to the post if they are built correctly for screen readers. Drop-downs are a tad easier to build to standards as long as the number of ‘results’ are announced so that the visually impaired customer doesn’t have to. Longer dropdowns can cause display issues on mobile, while assistive choice can be disrupted by the way a user uses their device.

Internal and recruitment applications need as much UX as ecommerce

Companies need to give as much attention to their internal digital applications as they do to ecommerce

Most companies these days have realised that they need to ensure at least an adequate user experience on their customer-facing digital touchpoints. Many though haven’t realised that they need to put the same effort into internal applications.

Whilst those responsible for external facing applications can often justify the necessary expense with an ROI based on revenue, it’s more likely that internal developments would be justified in cost savings or productivity which can be hard to calculate. That’s not to say that revenue is easy to judge either. It’s also typically the case that the people in charge of internal applications have (even) less experience of UX and usability than their external facing colleagues.

I have been subjected to many awful internal interfaces for the likes of raising purchase orders, staff expenses, workflow management, time management etc. I once set up a meeting with the owner of a purchase order system which had to be used by staff who wanted to make a company purchase. The system was notorious amongst users, most of whom only had need for occasional use. Many hours were wasted with people spending too much time helping colleagues navigate the arcane structure. In our meeting I suggested to the owner that there was a problem with usability, and that internal productivity would be improved with adaptations to the system. The owner disagreed. They received few complaints, there was a help system, and anyone who needed more help could just ask. I enquired whether any users had been involved in the implementation of the system. Oh yes, said the owner, we had an expert panel. The problem was, as I’ve said, most users weren’t experts. I didn’t have the time to chase the argument.

The consequences of poor internal usability can be severe. A PO could be raised for the wrong amount, or the wrong currency, or in a way that made it hard to receipt. In another system I had to declare a gift from a supplier. I used a drop-down to declare the type of gift, filled in the rest of the form, and pressed the button. Some time later an irate compliance officer contacted me to say that I’d broken the rules by accepting the gift. I pointed out that I had no intent to do so as evidenced by the fact that I’d declared it, and that the form had not given me the relevant information. Yes it had, the officer said, it was in words at the end of the form. It was true, the words were there but I’d missed them. The appropriate place for them was when I’d selected the type of gift – I should have been presented with an unavoidable and relevant message at that point.

There are other examples, but hopefully you get the point.

An oft-quoted excuse is that the system in question has been bought-in, that there are limited customisation options and that they cost money. It’s a fair point, but needs to be weighed up against how fit for purpose the system is. That calculation is often not made. Some vendors are better than others at ensuring the usability of the systems they sell, but if their customers aren’t asking for usability then the vendors aren’t going to put a lot of effort into it.

All of this was highlighted when I recently applied for a job using a system that isn’t fit for purpose by most standards. I just happen to have picked this as an example. There have been others.

Applying for a job

Start on Linkedin…

I saw a job on Linkedin that I wanted to apply for. Head of Online Search at LexisNexis.

Job ad

To Neuvoo

When I clicked the ‘apply’ button I went to the page below on Neuvoo.co.uk, which is a job site. I had hoped to be able to immediately fill in a form but had more realistic expectation of going to another job listing, which it was. I wasn’t immediately sure if I was in the right place due to the ads at the top – but I was.

Job list

Since I was here to apply, not read the same description, I looked for another ‘apply’ button. I had to scroll down to the bottom of the job ad to find it. It would make sense to have an ‘apply’ button at the top as well as at the bottom. The idea is to make it easy.

Apply button

When I clicked to apply I did at this point expect to go to a form to fill in. Instead, I’m asked to sign up for email alerts.

Sign up form

Selectminds.com

I chose ‘no thank you’ which took me to the following page on selectminds.com, which is a ‘talent search and acquisition platform’ that’s been bought by Oracle. It seems that it’s a white-label platform used by many companies.

For the third time now I’m on a page with the job listing and an ‘apply’ button. Who is thinking about the user journey?

Another job listing

Once again, I clicked on ‘apply for job’ and got the popup below.

Start of application

In this popup, the name fields are greyed out and can not be edited. It’s impossible to enter your first and last names. I had encountered this before and it had nearly stopped me from applying for a job. I eventually figured out that you have to be logged in. Because I’d used selectminds before (but not for LexiNexis) the site ‘knew’ that I had a login and that I wasn’t logged in, but there is no indication that this is why I could not proceed.

When I did log in, I saw the following.

Start of application again

Although the design takes the eye down to check the name fields you have to go back up to the ‘Go’ button to continue. It’s a basic usability issue that shouldn’t happen.

When you click the ‘Go’ button, all that happens is that a ‘Start your application’ button appears at the bottom of the popup. The ‘Go’ button is seemingly redundant.

The same form

Much of the text here isn’t needed. It says that you need Flash but I don’t have Flash installed and I didn’t encounter a need for it. It also warns that popup blockers should be disabled – they should not be essential in an age when increasing numbers of people are installing them.

There’s also an instruction ‘if you’ve previously registered, please login and search for the job you are applying for’. If this instruction is important it should be more obvious – in a bullet point – but I’m not at all clear why I should need to search at all. I’ve clicked a link to apply for a specific job and the page should know that I’m logged in. Flash is mentioned again.

Clicking on the red button, takes you to the next page.

Taleo.net

Another registration screen

I’m now on taleo.net, another white label recruitment platform. Small text beneath the image says that I’m logged in but the prominent content is a new user registration form. I was utterly confused – again.

As the previous instruction had been to log in and search for the job you wanted, I went to the ‘job search’ form. I tried two searches, firstly using ‘search’ as a keyword (because the job I’m applying for has ‘search’ in the job title), and secondly using the job reference.

Job search 1
Search again

Both searches resulted in no jobs found.

‘No results’ message

In fact, the form appears not to be working at all. I searched on the defaults for ‘all’ jobs in ‘all’ regions and still received no results.

I went to advanced search.

Advanced search

Here I saw the link to all jobs at Relx. It took some experimentation to find that only the ‘R’ is a link. One day I want to build a spoof website incorporating all the worst design elements that I’ve seen. I wonder if someone beat me to it.

The ‘R’ took me to yet another search form.

Another landing page and search form

Using ‘search’ as a keyword again yielded no results.

Searching for ‘search’

I listed all jobs.

Search results header

This time jobs are listed, but Head of Search is not one of them. Ironic really.

I went back to this screen.

Another registration screen, again

Although I’m logged in, I hit the G+ new user registration button, and got the screen below.

Application process

For reasons I cannot imagine this was the route I needed to follow. I didn’t need to search for the job, I needed to hit the Google Plus button. Go figure. I uploaded my cv. The guidance said that education and work experience will be replaced in my profile. I’m not sure what that means.

Resume upload

Next up was the form below. The system isn’t intelligent enough to read my cv and extract and pre-fill my name, address etc, and the contents of drop-downs are not displayed properly.

Personal information entry

There are two definitions of what’s meant by ‘State/Province’

2 State/province entries

The ‘region’ selection is an odd mixture of towns, cities, areas and counties. It’s one I’ve seen on other US sites. It’s like some intern was given the job of populating the drop-down from an old school atlas (remember those?).

Region selector

Thankfully, there were only a few more simple fields to fill in after this, and my application was done. I’m still waiting to hear.

Wrap up

There’s a business reason for this process – companies want to employ the best people. But the difficulty of making an application means that an individual’s persistence becomes the first filter, regardless of their fitness for the role. I don’t think that’s intended. With my application I included a message that the process had been difficult and that I could provide feedback if it would be helpful. I didn’t expect it to affect my application either way. No one took me up on the offer.

When applying for other roles through Taleo.net I’ve had other issues. Although (obviously) my job history is in my cv which is attached to each new application, there are still forms to fill in asking for job history. What’s the point? What am I supposed to do? I cut and paste. Likewise for educational achievements. It’s a waste of time.

Another time I had to give references. That just seems unnecessary at this point. When doing so I could not tell whether the ‘title’ field referred to Mr, Miss, Ms etc, or whether I was supposed to fill in a job title. Maybe getting it wrong accounts for another lack of response to my application.

It seems a little ironic to me that I’m applying for roles that relate to usability through systems with poor usability. There could be reasons why it’s not easy for companies to make changes, but those responsible should at least be aware. And care. I told one job owner that a job advertised on Linkedin linked to the wrong application form. It hadn’t been updated two weeks later.

For the likes of Selectminds and Taleo – there’s work to do.

Booking cottages – lessons for ecommerce

Help your customer

Small things can make a difference as to whether a customer ends up spending money with you. Sometimes a small missing item of information that the site owner doesn’t think is important would have made the difference. Sometimes it’s just making the search function a bit more easy to use.

I have a dog. Sometimes, we go to pubs. Some pubs don’t allow dogs at all, some allow them outside, some inside. Some pub web sites state whether dogs are allowed or not, but many don’t. Whether they are or aren’t I’m not the only one who will have that question. Help your customer.

Searching for cottages

I want to book at cottage for about a week in the UK. I have the following requirements.

  • 4 adults
  • 1 dog
  • 2 bathrooms
  • near a pub
  • start on Sunday, return on Saturday

I went to Best of Suffolk.

Best of Suffolk search bar

The initial search on Best of Suffolk has limited parameters, which is ok if there is some good post-search filtering. There’s always a tension between making a search form really easy to start with but you then have to filter, versus more questions but more relevant results. One simple thing that the site doesn’t do is cookie the search parameters. This means that if you come back to the home page to start a new search you have to enter everything again from scratch. Best practice with just about any search is to pre-populate the last search so that people can just adjust what they need, and to use a persistent cookie so you can come back another time and pick up from where you left off.

Sykes Cottages has a few more parameters, which I find useful, and it’s not so many that it’s off-putting.  Being able to state the flexibility of your search date is especially useful. However, they don’t cookie the parameters either.

Sykes Cottages booking panel

Filtering results

Back at Best of Suffolk the initial display of search results is quite good. There are large pictures of each property, and some of the key features are displayed as icons and text allowing you to quickly identify those you might be interested in.

Best of Suffolk search result detail

However, there’s no mention of proximity to pubs, and I want a tailored list. There’s a slide-open filter section at the top of the results. They are nice big icons, again with text. Pubs and pets are included, and one of the options is a swimming pool. It’s not a requirement, but why not have a look? So I include that too.

Best of Suffolk filters

However, when I set these filters there are no results (although it doesn’t actually say that). The obvious thing to do is to de-select the swimming pool filter. Yet when I go to the filter panel, all of the filters have apparently already been de-selected. Users will often try different combinations of filters and sometimes won’t recall what the last combination was that they tried, so this just makes it a lot more work. This is basic stuff. I also can’t filter on the number of bathrooms, which most other cottage sites do allow.

It gets worse. Here is what the filters look like after an unsuccessful search. The original search parameters are there, and no filters are selected. I want to get the original set of results back so just click ‘search’. No results. What I suspect is happening is that the filters actually are selected, but not shown as selected. It’s desperately poor work. Doesn’t anyone check this stuff?

Best of Suffolk filters

Sykes have a more traditional filter panel to the left of the cottage listings. You can always see what options are selected. Each time you add a filter the page refreshes. Many sites do this, but there are two factors that make it awkward here. Firstly it’s slow, and secondly the page reloads to the top each time, forcing you to scroll down and re-locate the filters again.  It’s quite laborious to set a number of filters. Functionally at least it works but the experience could be better.

Sykes filter panel

Dates and pricing

I start again from the home page on Best of Suffolk and persist enough to find a property that I’m interested in, but there’s further frustration ahead. Although I’ve searched on specific dates for 4 people I have to enter the information again on the property page. The calendar defaults to the current month even though I entered dates in May. I don’t really see why anyone should have to persevere with this.

Best of Suffolk date picker

When I move the calendar to May I find that there are changeover days, and you can only stay for seven days. I don’t understand the business well enough to know why this is necessary – I get that it’s more efficient if you sell out, but it could unnecessarily constrain sales. What would make sense here would be a message that you could pick other dates, and they’d get back to you if the owner accepted (especially sensible if it’s close to the date and the property might remain empty). They could at least suggest that you phone if you want other dates. But they don’t.

Best of Suffolk date picker

Despite the good visual design, layout, and well-written content, the functional experience is enough to put customers off. I did try to reach out to someone who I think is a founder of Best of Suffolk on Twitter, to give feedback, but didn’t get a response.

By contrast, Sykes lets you specify your own dates. On the date picker, an ‘arrival date’ is still marked, and it’s not immediately clear what the meaning of this is. As shown in the image below I’m planning to arrive on the 3rd and leave on the 9th, and the 4th is a changeover day. After some playing around, I think if your stay spans two weeks with an ‘arrival date’ sometime during your stay then you pay for two weeks. The cottages are priced by the week, rather than by the day as hotels are. Given that that’s how the system operates at least Sykes lets me do what I want if I’m prepared to pay for it. An additional customer-friendly enhancement here would be a message saying ‘if you arrive one day later, you will save £x’.

Sykes date picker

Other issues

There are a number of sites selling cottage rentals, as you might expect. The likes of booking.com, Expedia, and Air BnB get in on the act, and they appear to have some of the same technical constraints imposed by the way the business works. Whether these are technical constraints or commercial process I don’t know.

There are pluses and minuses across sites.

A common frustration is being forced to choose one specific geographical area. This example is from cottages.com. If I want to choose Cornwall and Devon, I can’t. I have to do a search on each on individually. This can be solved by using tick boxes which would allow for multiple selections. Often when I’m using filters and there’s a long list I would rather be able to exclude one or two, rather than include lots, but I rarely find this function offered.

A nice touch on the Original Cottages site is the ability to filter by drive time from home to the cottage. However, it doesn’t work. When I first tried it I got a swirly thing indicating something was happening, and it didn’t go away. I had to refresh the page to make it stop. More recently it just results in no search results, whatever length of drive I enter.

Original Cottages distance filter

The wrap up

So there you have it. As with many usability issues the good and the bad aren’t specific to cottages. If you’re in the business think about how you can strike the right balance between initial search parameters and filters. Do you cookie the search parameters, and are you thinking about the dimensions most meaningful and relevant to your customers? Also, it’s not just about making sure that a customer can add something to a basket and press ‘buy now’ – you have to look at what happens if they want to change their mind in the process. And, quite simply, just make sure it works. How could anyone not do that?

Lloyds needs to link its databases to avoid a bad customer experience

I’ve just had one of those experiences that sadly fails to surprise. I have a Lloyds Bank credit card, and in attempting to do an online transaction with it, was presented with the Click Safe authentication screen. This told me that I would be sent an SMS message with a code that I should enter on the next screen.

Lloyds credit card

The problem was that the code was going to be sent to my old mobile number. Several months ago when I changed my mobile number I had logged in to my card account and updated it. Maybe it had regressed? I’ve checked but my online account was up to date. Clearly Lloyds have separate databases holding customer information, and they don’t always talk to each other. It’s the sort of incredibly annoying thing that still happens.

My penalty for being in this situation was that I had to phone the euphemistically named Customer Services, never something I’ve looked forward to with Lloyds.

I had to speak to three people, which included a gap in between the second and third where I was told I would have to wait at least ten minutes, and I could phone back another time. I don’t think there’s ever been a time when I’ve called when they haven’t been ‘extremely busy’.

Of course, I had to explain the issue three times. All of the staff tried to be helpful and polite. The last chap had to take me through some laborious authentication questions, and then told me that he’d updated the system to authorise the transaction I was trying to make, and he’d updated my phone number. I should wait five minutes, then try the transaction again.

I waited more than five minutes, and tried again.

Transaction error message

I was told that the authorisation had been declined by the bank.

I waited, and tried again. Same result.

I phoned again, and although this time I check to use a number specifically for credit cards, I still had to be put through to ‘credit cards’ after explaining the problem.

The chap on the phone then explained to me that the problem was with the expiry date of the card. I guess that the error message couldn’t have told me that, as it would help someone who was trying to make a fraudulent transaction. I was using a password protection tool to auto-fill my card details, and although the information in the database is correct, it was appearing incorrectly on the payment form, and I hadn’t noticed. I still don’t know why that happens. I tried again with the correct information, and this time it worked.

There are a couple of take-outs.

Firstly, there’s no excuse for the lack of a joined-up view of the customer by Lloyds. When I updated my account online with my new phone number, it should automatically feed into whatever Click Safe uses.

Then there’s the inevitable transferring of calls, and the need to explain the problem multiple times. There has to be a better way.

It’s not all down to the business though. I did submit incorrect information when I tried again. I didn’t check, and if anyone had asked me, I would have insisted that I had entered the correct information. I know from experience on both sides of the fence that people will often swear blind that they did or didn’t do something online, only for the system logs to prove differently. People can look very sheepish when presented with the evidence, but that’s how people are. It’s not acting in bad faith. We’re fallible creatures who don’t always understand our own motives, and who don’t notice what actions we take. As far as possible, it’s the job of UX (and CX offline) to mitigate the impacts.

If you ask for ideas, make sure you feed back

Have you ever taken part in an idea-generation session, and heard nothing more about it? I would guess that applies to many of you. It’s a good way of turning people off, and generating a ‘what’s the point?’ attitude.

Generating ideas

There are great ideas lurking in many peoples’ heads that just need an audience. Some people are good at talking – but that doesn’t necessarily mean they have the best ideas. If you have an idea session, the extroverts will be clambering over each other to get their thoughts aired, whilst the introverts will be sitting at the back having a good think. It’s generally a good idea to let people know in advance if you want ideas.

There are a few situations that I think of in relation to idea generation. One is within the context of a project. Maybe you’re working on a design for a new interface, and want some critique of what you’ve done so far. An approach here is to stick up the designs on the walls, and leave pens and sticky notes around so that people can leave their thoughts. If you also post up a change log with revised designs, then those contributors can see what, if anything, became of their ideas. It provides them with reinforcement to want to contribute some more. It’s a good idea as well to list those ideas that won’t be implemented. It helps people to know that although their idea won’t be adopted, that it has nevertheless been thought about. It also helps them to understand more about the context of use, so that their subsequent suggestions can be more relevant.

Another idea-gathering context occurs when an organisation has time out, such as an away day or business unit forum. Maybe there are some business presentations, and then, to get more ‘engagement’, everyone is invited to come up with good ideas either singly or in groups, and then to present these back. There might be some voting for the best ideas, or management will gather them up for consideration.

I can’t say that I’ve seen a lot of value from these efforts. It does get people talking and thinking about things which is good, but generally the follow up has been lacking. Companies don’t typically have a lot of spare resource, in time or money or people, and so if new ideas are presented, then something else has to stop in order for them to be implemented. Some companies may be better than others at this, but it takes effort to review, compare, persuade, change course. And so the initial enthusiasm gets lost in the daily grind. For it to stand a better chance, one or more individuals should have responsibility for getting the ideas properly assessed – and it should be in their objectives. Those individuals could be at different levels in the organisation – they don’t have to be senior, and it can be a good development opportunity. If they are junior though, they should have a senior sponsor who takes the role seriously.

This lack of feedback and visible impact causes demotivation and cynicism over time. When I started at British Airways as a young developer, I enthusiastically joined in a Process Improvement Plan workshop. I remember well one of the old hands shrugging his shoulders, saying he’d seen it before, nothing ever happened, but at least he’d join in and help. I thought it was a poor attitude. Years later I found myself in the role of the old hand offering similar views, the result of having been through the mill many times.

Yet positive things can happen. When I was UX Manager at BA, a colleague and I went to the contact centres in the UK and the USA to get feedback. We wanted to know what the agents thought of ba.com. We wanted to know what we could improve so that customers wouldn’t be phoning them up with complaints or problems that the agents didn’t even know existed. The contact centre management set us up with different groups, and we sat round a table to talk about what the issues were. We had assumed that there would be some common themes, but were surprised at how diverse the problems were – different by geography and also the role of the agent. The one thing that was common across the groups was the sense of cynicism, that they’d all been through this process before, and nothing ever happened.

My colleague and I documented all of the issues – not just some – on a spreadsheet. We took it back to base, and sat down with the rest of the management team, and agreed who would be responsible for fixing which issues. We also agreed that for various reasons, some were unlikely to be fixed, and we recorded it all in the spreadsheet. As we made progress with fixes, we periodically shared the spreadsheet, warts and all, with the contact centre staff. The response was incredible. People were so happy that we’d actually really listened to them, that we were actually doing something about it, and that we were letting them know about it. Even the old hands got enthusiastic.

This isn’t rocket science.

  • If you want ideas, let people know in advance
  • Provide a forum or method that lets everyone have their say, not just the loudmouths
  • Ensure someone has responsibility for gathering and feeding back
  • Immediately feed back on what the ideas were (and make sure you don’t place your own interpretation on someone else’s idea)
  • Feed back on progress to appropriate timescales
  • If you’re not going to do anything with the ideas, don’t ask in the first place