Presented by Jerome Nadel at Documentation and Training Life Sciences, June 23-26, 2008. A lot of attention has been devoted to the subject of Web 2.0. Companies are exploring how to incorporate Web 2.0 concepts into their externally-facing systems. Some take an IT-centric approach, focusing on the underlying technology and its implementation. Others examine the potential business benefits through improved communication and collaboration. However, both perspectives frequently struggle to demonstrate ROI in the face of uncertain user adoption and control/security issues. This presentation will examine Web 2.0 from a very specific angle: user experience in a business context, where "can do" meets "will do", and how that applies in life sciences, where customer needs are unique compared to traditional e-commerce or brochure-ware sites.

1. Web 2.0 and Healthcare
Jerome Nadel
Chief Experience Officer
Human Factors International

2. Collaborate Tag
Publish Rate
Upload
Rate
Blog Discuss
Wiki Apps
Human Factors International © 2008 2

3. “A brand must accept that they will be relinquishing
some control over their brand to their customers. They
Web 2.0
also have to trust that, over time, an accurate
collective opinion of the brand and its products will
emerge from any community initiatives and that the
brand can ultimately profit from learning from that
collective opinion.” CEO eluma.com
Enterprise 2.0
“Historically, knowledge management has focused on
connecting people with content. But now the
challenge is connecting people with people in
increasingly virtual organizations.” CKO Ernst & Young
Human Factors International © 2008 3

4. Connecting…
people to people
1.0 people to content
people to people
2.0
content to people
3.0
Human Factors International © 2008 4

5. “When it is all said and
done, people would rather
deal with a human being
than a machine”.
--pharma rep on wsj.com blog
Human Factors International © 2008 5

6. Habits changing?
Human Factors International © 2008 6

7. •25% felt overwhelmed by the amount of information.
•22% felt frustrated by a lack of information or an inability to find what
they were looking for.
•18% felt confused by the information they found.
Human Factors International © 2008 7

8. Convenience, Content and Credibility: What consumers are looking for on health information
sites
Arabella Crawford & Kath Straub, PhD
Research Question
80% of American internet users have
used the web to search for health
related information (Pew Internet and
American Life Project)
Why do consumers use the web for
health information?
• Which sites do consumers prefer?
Why?
•What triggers trust?
• Users go back because content was
• Has consumer behavior evolved with
useful and validate through other
the web? •Convenience and speed – no waiting. •Health information sites build trust based
sources
• The web provides control and privacy over on reputation then content. Consumers
the health research process favor sites that
Previous Research •Information is comprehensive – more than • Start with information they already Takeaways
Stanford, Tauber, Fogg&Marable (2002) users would expect any individual (doctor know
or other source) to know. • Are well written but easy to read • The web is increasingly important as a
•Consumers use the web as both a • Are presented by known sources health information resource.
preliminary (pre-doctor) resource and a • Include content written by • Quick comprehensive information is
second opinion source. experts the draw
• Content matters
• Consumers cross check content oSites that validate what consumers
with other sites to confirm know inspire trust to explore further.
information oContent is increasingly important in
gaining trust and inspiring repeat
visits.
oHealth consumers read more than
Method &Participants they interact
Web- based survey posted on World • Consumer have become more
Usability Day, 2007. Based on Silence, discriminating when looking for health
et al (2004) information – they look more like the
experts in previous studies.
• 718 recipients of HFI’s monthly
newsletter participated. Data from the
518 surveys were analyzed Bibliography
Fogg, B. J., Kameda, T., Boyd, J., Marchall, J., Sethi, R.,
•70% start at a specific site. 16% start at Sockol, M. and Trowbridge, T. Stanford-Makovsky Web
Credibility Study 2002: Investigating what makes Web
search. The remainder vary by topic.
Participant Demographics sites credible today, A Research Report by the Stanford
•As of Nov07, WebMD was the #1 cited Persuasive Technology Lab &Makovsky& Company,
GENDER AGE LOCATION
health information resource. Stanford University. Retrieved from :
•Mainly read content : general and topic http://www.webcredibility.org.
•Users favored ”unbiased” sources sites with
Female 65% 13 - 30 15% North America 80% “vetted” scientific information: Mayo Clinic, specific articles Fogg, B.J. Prominence-Interpretation Theory: Explaining
Male 35% 31 - 43 38% Asia 9% PubMed, Medline and other government •Self-evaluation (distant second) How People Assess Credibility Online. Proc CHI 2003,
•Content from other users is of more ACM Press.
44 - 61 44% Europe 7%
and non – profit sites.
62 - 75 3% Africa 1%
interest than interactive features Pew Research Center. Finding Answers in Sickness and In
over 75 1%
Health (2006). Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org
Sillence, E., Briggs P., Fishwick L, Harris, P., Trust and Mistrust
Human Factors International © 2008 of Online Health Sites CHI 2004, April 24–29, 2004, Vienna,
Austria., ACM Press
8

9. Convenience, Content and Credibility: What consumers are looking for on health information
sites
Arabella Crawford & Kath Straub, PhD
Research Question
80% of American internet users have
used the web to search for health
related information (Pew Internet and
American Life Project)
Why do consumers use the web for
health information?
• Which sites do consumers prefer?
Why?
•What triggers trust?
• Users go back because content was
• Has consumer behavior evolved with
useful and validate through other
the web? •Convenience and speed – no waiting. •Health information sites build trust based
sources
• The web provides control and privacy over on reputation then content. Consumers
the health research process favor sites that
Previous Research •Information is comprehensive – more than • Start with information they already Takeaways
Stanford, Tauber, Fogg&Marable (2002) users would expect any individual (doctor know
• Convenience and speed – no waiting
or other source) to know. • Are well written but easy to read • The web is increasingly important as a
•Consumers use the web as both a • Are presented by known sources health information resource.
• The web provides control and privacy over
preliminary (pre-doctor) resource and a • Include content written by • Quick comprehensive information is
second opinion source. the draw
the health research process experts
• Content matters
• Information is comprehensive – more than
• Consumers cross check content oSites that validate what consumers
with other sites to confirm know inspire trust to explore further.
users would expect any individual (doctor
information oContent is increasingly important in
gaining trust and inspiring repeat
or other source) to know. visists.
Method &Participants • Consumers use the web as both a
oHealth consumers read more than
they interact
Web- based survey posted on World
preliminary (pre-doctor) resource and a
Usability Day, 2007. Based on Silence,
• Consumer have become more
discriminating when looking for health
et al (2004) second opinion source. information – they look more like the
experts in previous studies.
• 718 recipients of HFI’s monthly
newsletter participated. Data from the
518 surveys were analyzed Bibliography
Fogg, B. J., Kameda, T., Boyd, J., Marchall, J., Sethi, R.,
•70% start at a specific site. 16% start at Sockol, M. and Trowbridge, T. Stanford-Makovsky Web
Credibility Study 2002: Investigating what makes Web
search. The remainder vary by topic.
Participant Demographics sites credible today, A Research Report by the Stanford
•As of Nov07, WebMD was the #1 cited Persuasive Technology Lab &Makovsky& Company,
GENDER AGE LOCATION
health information resource. Stanford University. Retrieved from :
•Mainly read content : general and topic http://www.webcredibility.org.
•Users favored ”unbiased” sources sites with
Female 65% 13 - 30 15% North America 80% “vetted” scientific information: Mayo Clinic, specific articles Fogg, B.J. Prominence-Interpretation Theory: Explaining
Male 35% 31 - 43 38% Asia 9% PubMed, Medline and other government •Self-evaluation (distant second) How People Assess Credibility Online. Proc CHI 2003,
•Content from other users is of more ACM Press.
44 - 61 44% Europe 7%
and non – profit sites.
62 - 75 3% Africa 1%
interest than interactive features Pew Research Center. Finding Answers in Sickness and In
over 75 1%
Health (2006). Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org
Sillence, E., Briggs P., Fishwick L, Harris, P., Trust and Mistrust
Human Factors International © 2008 of Online Health Sites CHI 2004, April 24–29, 2004, Vienna,
Austria., ACM Press
9

10. Convenience, Content and Credibility: What consumers are looking for on health information
sites
Arabella Crawford & Kath Straub, PhD
Research Question
80% of American internet users have
used the web to search for health
related information (Pew Internet and
American Life Project)
Why do consumers use the web for
health information?
• Which sites do consumers prefer?
Why?
•What triggers trust?
• Users go back because content was
• Has consumer behavior evolved with
useful and validate through other
the web? •Convenience and speed – no waiting. •Health information sites build trust based
sources
• The web provides control and privacy over on reputation then content. Consumers
the health research process favor sites that
Previous Research •Information is comprehensive – more than • Start with information they already Takeaways
Stanford, Tauber, Fogg&Marable (2002) users would expect any individual (doctor know
or other source) to know. • Are well written but easy to read • The web is increasingly important as a
•Consumers use the web as both a • Are presented by known sources health information resource.
preliminary (pre-doctor) resource and a • Include content written by • Quick comprehensive information is
second opinion source. experts the draw
• Content matters
• Consumers cross check content oSites that validate what consumers
with other sites to confirm know inspire trust to explore further.
information oContent is increasingly important in
gaining trust and inspiring repeat
visists.
oHealth consumers read more than
Method &Participants they interact
Web- based survey posted on World • Consumer have become more
Usability Day, 2007. Based on Silence, discriminating when looking for health
et al (2004) • 70% start at a specific site. 16% start at information – they look more like the
experts in previous studies.
• 718 recipients of HFI’s monthlysearch. The remainder vary by topic.
newsletter participated. Data from the
518 surveys were analyzed
• As of Nov07, WebMD was the #1 cited Bibliography
Fogg, B. J., Kameda, T., Boyd, J., Marchall, J., Sethi, R.,
health•70% start at a specificresource.
information site. 16% start at Sockol, M. and Trowbridge, T. Stanford-Makovsky Web
Credibility Study 2002: Investigating what makes Web
search. The remainder vary by topic.
Participant Demographics • Users favored ”unbiased” sources sites sites credible today, A Research Report by the Stanford
•As of Nov07, WebMD was the #1 cited Persuasive Technology Lab &Makovsky& Company,
GENDER AGE with “vetted” scientific information: read content : general and topic
health information resource.
LOCATION
•Mainly
Stanford University. Retrieved from :
http://www.webcredibility.org.
•Users favored ”unbiased” sources sites with
Female 65% 13 - 30 15%
Mayo “vetted” scientific information: Mayo Clinic, and articles
Clinic, PubMed, Medline specific
North America 80% Fogg, B.J. Prominence-Interpretation Theory: Explaining
•Self-evaluation (distant second)
other government andgovernment
PubMed, Medline and other How People Assess Credibility Online. Proc CHI 2003,
non–profit•Content from other users is of more
sites
Male 35% 31 - 43 38% Asia 9%
ACM Press.
44 - 61 44%
and non – profit sites.
Europe 7%
62 - 75 3% Africa 1%
interest than interactive features Pew Research Center. Finding Answers in Sickness and In
over 75 1%
Health (2006). Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org
Sillence, E., Briggs P., Fishwick L, Harris, P., Trust and Mistrust
Human Factors International © 2008 of Online Health Sites CHI 2004, April 24–29, 2004, Vienna,
Austria., ACM Press
10

11. Convenience, Content and Credibility: What consumers are looking for on health information
sites
Arabella Crawford & Kath Straub, PhD
Research Question
80% of American internet users have
used the web to search for health
related information (Pew Internet and
American Life Project)
Why do consumers use the web for
health information?
• Which sites do consumers prefer?
Why?
•What triggers trust?
• Users go back because content was
• Has consumer behavior evolved with
useful and validate through other
the web? •Convenience and speed – no waiting. •Health information sites build trust based
sources
• The web provides control and privacy over on reputation then content. Consumers
the health research process favor sites that
Previous Research •Information is comprehensive – more than • Start with information they already Takeaways
Stanford, Tauber, Fogg&Marable (2002)
• Health information sites build trust based on
users would expect any individual (doctor know
or other source) to know. • The web is increasingly important as a
• Are well written but easy to read
reputation then content. Consumers favor information resource.
•Consumers use the web as both a health
• Are presented by known sources
preliminary (pre-doctor) resource and a • Quick comprehensive information is
• Include content written by
second opinion source. sites that experts the draw
• Start with information they content
• Consumers cross check
already know validate what consumers
• Content matters
Sites that o
• Are well writtenother sites to confirm read
with but easy to know inspire trust to explore further.
information Content is increasingly important in
o
• Are presented by known sources gaining trust and inspiring repeat
• Include content written by experts visits. consumers read more than
Health o
Method &Participants they interact
Web- based survey posted on World • Consumer have become more
Usability Day, 2007. Based on Silence,
et al (2004)
• Consumers cross check content with discriminating when looking for health
information – they look more like the
other sites to confirm information experts in previous studies.
• 718 recipients of HFI’s monthly
newsletter participated. Data from the
518 surveys were analyzed Bibliography
Fogg, B. J., Kameda, T., Boyd, J., Marchall, J., Sethi, R.,
•70% start at a specific site. 16% start at Sockol, M. and Trowbridge, T. Stanford-Makovsky Web
Credibility Study 2002: Investigating what makes Web
search. The remainder vary by topic.
Participant Demographics sites credible today, A Research Report by the Stanford
•As of Nov07, WebMD was the #1 cited Persuasive Technology Lab &Makovsky& Company,
GENDER AGE LOCATION
health information resource. Stanford University. Retrieved from :
•Mainly read content : general and topic http://www.webcredibility.org.
•Users favored ”unbiased” sources sites with
Female 65% 13 - 30 15% North America 80% “vetted” scientific information: Mayo Clinic, specific articles Fogg, B.J. Prominence-Interpretation Theory: Explaining
Male 35% 31 - 43 38% Asia 9% PubMed, Medline and other government •Self-evaluation (distant second) How People Assess Credibility Online. Proc CHI 2003,
•Content from other users is of more ACM Press.
44 - 61 44% Europe 7%
and non – profit sites.
62 - 75 3% Africa 1%
interest than interactive features Pew Research Center. Finding Answers in Sickness and In
over 75 1%
Health (2006). Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org
Sillence, E., Briggs P., Fishwick L, Harris, P., Trust and Mistrust
Human Factors International © 2008 of Online Health Sites CHI 2004, April 24–29, 2004, Vienna,
Austria., ACM Press
11

12. Convenience, Content and Credibility: What consumers are looking for on health information
sites
Arabella Crawford & Kath Straub, PhD
Research Question
80% of American internet users have
used the web to search for health
related information (Pew Internet and
American Life Project)
Why do consumers use the web for
health information?
• Which sites do consumers prefer? Takeaways
Why?
•What triggers trust?
• Users go back because content was
• Has consumer behavior evolved with
the web? •Convenience and speed – no waiting. • The web is increasingly important as a
useful and validate through other
•Health information sites build trust based
sources
• The web provides control and privacy over on reputation then content. Consumers
the health research process health information resource.
favor sites that
Previous Research •Information is comprehensive – more than • Start with information they already
Takeaways
Stanford, Tauber, Fogg&Marable (2002) users would expect any individual (doctor • Quick comprehensive information is the draw
know
or other source) to know. • Are well written but easy to read • The web is increasingly important as a
•Consumers use the web as both a • Content matters health information resource.
• Are presented by known sources
preliminary (pre-doctor) resesource and a • Quick comprehensive information is
• Include content written by
second opinion source. o Sites that validate what consumers
experts the draw
• Content matters
know inspire trust to explore further
Sites that validate what consumers
• Consumers cross check content o
know inspire trust to explore further.
with other sites to confirm
o Content is increasingly important in in
information Content is increasingly important
o
gaining trust and inspiring repeat inspiring repeat
gaining trust and
visits. visits
Method &Participants o Health consumers read more than they
Health consumers read more than
they interact
o
Web- based survey posted on World
Usability Day, 2007. Based on Silence, interact • Consumer have become more
discriminating when looking for health
et al (2004)
• Consumers have become inmorestudies. like the
information – they look more
experts previous
• 718 recipients of HFI’s monthly
newsletter participated. Data from the discriminating when looking for health
518 surveys were analyzed
information – they look Bibliography T.,theJ.,experts in
more like
Fogg, B. J., Kameda, Boyd, Marchall, J., Sethi, R.,
•70% start at a specific site. 16% start at Sockol, M. and Trowbridge, T. Stanford-Makovsky Web
search. The remainder vary by topic. previous studies Credibility Study 2002: Investigating what makes Web
Participant Demographics sites credible today, A Research Report by the Stanford
•As of Nov07, WebMD was the #1 cited Persuasive Technology Lab &Makovsky& Company,
GENDER AGE LOCATION
health information resource. Stanford University. Retrieved from :
•Mainly read content : general and topic http://www.webcredibility.org.
•Users favored ”unbiased” sources sites with
Female 65% 13 - 30 15% North America 80% “vetted” scientific information: Mayo Clinic, specific articles Fogg, B.J. Prominence-Interpretation Theory: Explaining
Male 35% 31 - 43 38% Asia 9% PubMed, Medline and other government •Self-evaluation (distant second) How People Assess Credibility Online. Proc CHI 2003,
•Content from other users is of more ACM Press.
44 - 61 44% Europe 7%
and non – profit sites.
62 - 75 3% Africa 1%
interest than interactive features Pew Research Center. Finding Answers in Sickness and In
over 75 1%
Health (2006). Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org
Sillence, E., Briggs P., Fishwick L, Harris, P., Trust and Mistrust
Human Factors International © 2008 of Online Health Sites CHI 2004, April 24–29, 2004, Vienna,
Austria., ACM Press
12

13. Top 5 Trust Markers for Web Sites
1. Site is easy to use
2. Advice comes from a knowledgeable source
3. Advice prepared by an expert
4. Advice appears to be impartial and independent
5. Reasoning behind advice is explained
Going Online for Health Advice: Changes in Usage and Trust Practices Over the Last 5 Years by Sillence, Briggs, Harris, and
Fishwick. Interacting with Computers 19, 2007 pg. 397-406.
Human Factors International © 2008 13

14. Knowledge comes in many forms…
Factual / Formalized Organic / Experiential
Chat
Experience
Reports Studies
Notes Symptoms
Facts Research Comments
Business Rules Taxonomies Communities
Blogs
Wikis
“Where do I look?” “”Who do I ask?”
Human Factors International © 2008 14

15. Where should I go?
Factual / Formalized Organic / Experiential
“Where do I look?” “”Who do I ask?”
Human Factors International © 2008 15

16. Destination related to question?…
Factual / Formalized
Reports Studies
Facts Research
Where do I go?
Business Rules Taxonomies
Community/Emotional/
Experiential
Experience Chat
Notes Symptoms
Comments
Communities
Blogs
Wikis
Human Factors International © 2008 16

17. Knowledge comes in many forms…
Community/Emotional/
Factual / Formalized
Experiential
• “How many ibuprofen for my 6yr • “How are others coping with Cancer?”
old son?”
• “I want to know what its like for others to
• “What are the symptoms of a have a son with Autism”
poison ivy rash?”
“Where do I look?” “”Who do I ask?”
Lorem Ipsum Dolar Tags
Amit Ipsum
Lorem
Lorem
Ipsum
Ipsum Amit
Community/Emotional/ Amit
Experiential Content
Factual Content Videos
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
Lorem ipsum dolar amit dolar amit
Human Factors International © 2008 17

18. Knowledge comes in many forms…
Community/Emotional/
Factual / Formalized
Experiential
• “How many ibuprofen for my 6yr • “How are others coping with Cancer?”
old son?”
• “I want to know what its like for others to
• “What are the symptoms of a have a son with Autism”
poison ivy rash?”
“Where do I look?” “”Who do I ask?”
Tags Lorem Ipsum Dolar Tags
Amit Ipsum Amit Ipsum
Lorem Lorem
Lorem Lorem
Ipsum Ipsum
Ipsum Ipsum Amit
Amit
Community/Emotional/ Amit
Videos Experiential Content
Factual Content Factual Content Lorem ipsum Videos
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum dolar amit
Discussion
Lorem ipsum
Lorem ipsum dolar amit dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
Human Factors International © 2008 18

19. Human Factors International © 2008 19

20. Human Factors International © 2008 20

21. Will? Can?
Human Factors International © 2008 21

22. Understanding of
Decision Making
Performance Persuasion
(CAN DO) (WILL DO) Conversion*
Positive Customer
Experience
* Conversion = adoption, usage, purchase, participation, contribution, etc.
Human Factors International © 2008 22

23. Human Factors International © 2008 23

24. Human Factors International © 2008 24

25. Formalizing Persuasion, Emotion, Trust…
Strategy Heat Maps & Scan Paths Score Card
Personas Persuasion Flow Diagram Emotion Map
Human Factors International © 2008 25

26. Human Factors International © 2008 26

27. Human Factors International © 2008 27

28. Gaze Opacity Visualization
Human Factors International © 2008 28

29. Human Factors International © 2008 29

30. 1 Second 2 Seconds 3 Seconds
Human Factors International © 2008 30

31. Human Factors International © 2008 31

32. Human Factors International © 2008 32

33. Attract Engage Empower
Human Factors International © 2008 33

34. Attract Engage Empower
Human Factors International © 2008 34

35. Attract Engage Empower
Human Factors International © 2008 35

36. Attract Engage Empower
Human Factors International © 2008 36

37. Attract Engage Empower
Human Factors International © 2008 37

38. Attract Engage Empower
Human Factors International © 2008 38

39. Connectedness, contribution, and collaboration
1. Influence and persuade
2. Combine structured and organic knowledge
3. Enable contribution
4. Know me and serve me…
“Where do I look?” “”Who do I ask?”
Tags Lorem Ipsum Dolar Tags
Amit Ipsum Amit Ipsum
Lorem Lorem
Lorem Lorem
Ipsum Ipsum
Ipsum Ipsum Amit
Amit
Community/Emotional/ Amit
Videos Experiential Content
Factual Content Factual Content Lorem ipsum Videos
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
dolar amit
Lorem ipsum dolar amit
Discussion
Lorem ipsum
Lorem ipsum dolar amit dolar amit
Lorem ipsum
Human Factors International © 2008 39

40. Web 3.0?
Everything, everywhere
Just in time
When I need it
How I need it
Push to me
But filtered through people (not a web) trust is that much more important
content to people
Human Factors International © 2008 40

41. Headquarters Minneapolis Bangalore, India
410 West Lowe 8400 Normandale Lake Blvd, Suite 920 310/6 HR Complex, 2nd Floor
Fairfield, IA 52556 Minneapolis, MN 55437 Koramangala, 5th Block
Phone: (800) 242-4480
(641) 472-4480 Phone: (952) 820-4442 Bangalore 560 095
Fax: (641) 472-5412 Fax: (952) 921-2306 Tel: +91 (80) 5150 7221/22/23
Fax: +91 (80) 5150 7220
Boston New York
1050 Waltham Street, 1 Penn Plaza Mumbai, India
Suite 410 Lexington, MA 02421 New York, NY 10014 Chemtex House, 4th Floor
Phone: (781) 860-7200 Phone: (212) 905-3495 Main street, Hiranandani Gardens
Fax: (781) 860-7979 Powai, Mumbai - 400 076
Phone: 91 (22) 2570 8464/65/66
Fax: 91 (22) 2570 8468
Pondicherry, India
jerome@humanfactors.com Aurelec Premises, Prayogashala
Kuilapalayam Village
San Francisco Auroville 605 101
235 Montgomery Street Phone: +91 413 26232 95/96
Baltimore Suite 810 Fax: +91 413 2623297
1720 Thames Street San Francisco, CA 94104 Singapore
Baltimore, MD 21231 Phone: (415) 765-0962 9 Raffles Place,
Phone: (410) 327-1012 / 1013 Fax: (415) 765-0961 Level 58 Republic Plaza,
Fax : (410) 327-1014 Singapore 048619
London, UK Tel: +65 6823 1368
Chicago Winchester House Fax: +65 6823 1377
8700 W. Bryn Mawr Avenue 259-269 Old Marylebone Road
London NW1 5RA UK China
Suite 800 South
Tel +44 (0) 20 7170 4164 407, No. 555, Nanjing Road West
Chicago, IL 60631-3507 Fax +44 (0) 20 7170 4161 Shanghai, China 200041
Phone: (773) 714-2362
Phone: +86-21-52132061
Fax: (773) 714-4910
Fax: +86-21-52132062
Human Factors International © 2008 41