Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides

Char, I agree. I think our best bet is to limit the metaphor and address the time required with, "It depends."

After all, to get fruit from a tree, you could start plant a seed, transplant a sapling, or rehabilitate a mature but neglected specimen. But practically no one in our audience is sitting there wondering what their first website should look like. They all have websites that are at various stages short of performing to their potential. So we make the metaphor caring for the tree you already have, not planting a tree from seed.


So what can you do to rehabilitate a neglected tree? To fix a website?


For a tree, ensure that it has a sound root system -- add compost to the soil, fertilize if needed, make sure it's getting the right amount of water. For a website, make sure the code follows standards, that heading tags provide a sound structure and valid tab order, that color contrast is adequate, and that meaningful images are explained.

In both cases, you might have already done that. If so, getting where you need to be will take less time.


For a tree, prune for strong branching and to select fruitful stems. For a website, improve the link text, improve your forms, and use skip links to make skimming easier. In both cases, this gives sustained benefits only if the underlying structure is sound. But, in both cases, doing this will lead to benefits in the near future as well as over the long term.


And then there's the issue of scale. Are you reviving one tree, or a whole orchard? Does your website have ten pages, or ten thousand? So, it depends.

And, even if you aren't involved in e-commerce, you will see improvements in the efficiency of producing information and its effectiveness when published. Not all trees are fruit trees; some we plant because we need their shade.

Does that work better than the image of planting a tree?

Cliff



________________________________
From: Char James-Tanny <charjt@helpstuff.com>
To: 'EOWG' <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides

But isn't everything relative? I mean, will people really look at an image of a tree and think that it takes 40 years to get full advantage of an accessible website?

I think the tree fits the metaphor, and I think people will understand that it's time in general, not specific time, that is being described. (We could always add a description to that effect.) And while other plants might better describe the "quickness", the fastest plants are annuals...and they die at the end of the season.

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Shawn Henry
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 1:10 PM
To: EOWG
Cc: Cliff Tyllick; Sharron Rush
Subject: Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides

  Thanks for the ideas on images to represent ROI.

I like several things about the tree image; however, I have one disconnect: how slowly trees grow. For example, I think it takes around 5 years for an apple tree to bear fruit. I'm concerned that the slow growth of a tree might make it a poor metaphor for the point we want to get across.

I think we want the image to convey that in many cases organizations will start seeing returns within a few days of launching a redesign that fixed significant accessibility issues.

(p.s. Some personal perspective: We considered planting some young trees last year and were dismayed at how long it would take them to grow to the height we wanted. On the other hand, I've been watching my chives grow over an inch per day the last few days!)

Looking forward to more thoughts...
~Shawn



On 4/9/2011 11:29 PM, Cliff Tyllick wrote:
> Cecelia, that's similar to the thought that I had — although being more literal-minded, I was thinking in terms of a graph. The more I think about it, the better I like the image of a tree, though. But let's tie each stage of investment to an example that shows that the type and amount of return you will get depends on the type of business you're in.
>
> The tree is your information resources. If you plant it right, water it properly, and give it time to develop a good root system, it will at least stand sturdy and give you shade. This is like a governmental agency, which derives no profit from its content, still getting payback from an accessible site in the form of greater efficiency. How? Because they use their word-processing software properly, it consistently produces a complete and correct table of contents for any document in an instant. And because they've separated content from presentation in the development of their website, they can easily repurpose it for cell phones and other mobile devices.
>
> But maybe you're a nonprofit, and all those meaningful links have helped more people find your site. Some of those people need your services, so you're reaching them more efficiently, but some of those people are potential donors, and you're reaching them, too. Another year's growth. Another year's leaves. How much? It depends, but for this documented example, traffic increased this percentage.
>
> And what if you're not a nonprofit? What if any part of your site is for e-commerce? Then you're still another case — your content drives your income, and the branches of your tree are bearing fruit. (Let's make them oranges — circles are easy to draw, and orange can stand out well against deep green. Try FF8000 against 053106.) Better SEO, more fruit, more income. How much more? Well, it depends on how integral the Web can be to your business. But in this case...
>
> You see where I'm going? Integrate the "investment in your tree" slides and discussion into the "documented results" discussion. We might not need to add many slides.
>
> And, to the end, add a slide that shows another year's growth, another crop of fruit. And make the point that just as you don't have to replant a peach tree every year, you don't have to retrain your employees every year, either. But, with your and their continued understanding of and focus on accessibility, the benefits will continue to accrue.
> What do you guys think? Would this be a good direction for us to take? If so, I'll work on a revised series of slides that demonstrate the concept.
>
> Cliff
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> *From:* Cecilia Farell <cecilia@ceciliafarell.ca>
> *To:* Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org>
> *Cc:* EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
> *Sent:* Sat, April 9, 2011 4:39:33 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Suggested for Biz Case slides
>
> Hi Sharron et. al.:
>
> I really like that. The one thing I would add is some way of representing the change over time, i.e., return increases as investment decreases.
>
> How about if we repeat the image over 2 or 3 slides, with the 1st showing a lot of "root fertilization" with little tree growth, the 2nd showing less fertilization and more branches and trees, and the 3rd (well you get the point)?
>
> If there is a limit on the # of slides, the 3 images could be made smaller and placed all on one slide.
>
> Any thoughts? Thanks,
>
> Cecilia
>
> On 08/04/2011 5:18 PM, Sharron Rush wrote:
>>
>> Here it is as plain ppt (no x) Maybe that will take care of the corruption .
>>
>> Thanks Char!
>>
>>
>>
>> At 04:12 PM 4/8/2011, Char James-Tanny wrote:
>>> Oh, I like that :-) Easy to understand, and right now, I can’t think 
>>> of anything that’s missing. (OTOH, my brain isn’t quite all here 
>>> today, so I’ll look at it again this weekend and compare it to some 
>>> old presentations I’ve done.)
>>>
>>> BTW, I got a “this file is corrupted” message when I tried to open it. The Repair function (Microsoft Office 2010) solved the problem, whatever it was.
>>>
>>> *From:* w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org [ 
>>> mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Sharron Rush
>>> *Sent:* Friday, April 08, 2011 4:52 PM
>>> *To:* EOWG
>>> *Subject:* Suggested for Biz Case slides
>>>
>>>
>>> I did this in just a few minutes, but the idea is what I am trying to convey rather than the graphic design itself.  I am sure someone can improve it.
>>>
>>> In this case, there are no numbers or graphs that people will expect to relate to an actual case study.  it is clear that the ideas are conceptual.
>>>
>>> Whether they are as persuasive, well that's the question now, I guess.
>>>
>>> best,
>>> Sharron
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>> Sharron Rush |  Executive Director  | www.Knowbility.org 
>>> <http://www.knowbility.org/> |  512 305-0310 /Equal access to 
>>> technology for people with disabilities/
>
> --
>
> Cecilia Farell
> cecilia@ceciliafarell.ca
>