To be contrary though (again!) sometimes a little bit of “spit and polish” on one page does make a hell of a lot of difference too. Maybe in a different way.

Homepages, in particular, garner a lot of negative internal PR if it’s felt they do not look smart and in-keeping with what the organisation is trying to achieve. Plus, as they are incredibly visible to all and sundry, for better or for worse, a lack of attention could quickly get one into hot water.

But you’re right, when it comes to delivering the monthly report numbers, nothing works better than showing a design-driven increase in conversions.

Also I think a little of Steve Krug’s approach is useful – only change that which needs changing, and change as little as possible. The focus on getting quick and easy wins live and proving the difference certainly wins people over to do greater, more dramatic things.

The trick is to spin all of the plates simultaneously, without skipping a beat.

DJ

Any chance you have some before and after shots of the pages in question Giles?

Just found your site very interesting. I’m an SEO and often have the problem where design companies just don’t seem to understand the difference between, generating sales and look and feel.

We find it very diffiult to find design companies in south africa who can find a good balance between the two.

Though I think you are missing one important point, when it comes to making “Designs that impress the Board”: Measure!

Designers aren’t used to numbers and measurement, most of them will even shy away when you mention stuff like that. But being able to show a board that “this design change will improve your bottom line with xx%” will give you the power to do pretty much anything you want.

You are obviously doing that yourself, since you can say that your redesign boosted applications by 80%. But being able to say that requires measurement, which is essential when it comes to dealing with boards. Even if you are working in the creative field.