Both positive and negative comments in blogs should help prospective students make informed decisions about whether this is the right place for them, though. And in the end, that’s the goal.

A year ago–inspired by an idea from Milton Glaser–I posted a few thoughts on ambiguity and misdirection in Web design, musing that perhaps it isnt’ enough to make everything easy to find. You might find it interesting: http://uxcentric.blogspot.com/2005/02/doing-leonardo.html.

Kathy Sierra added some interesting ideas: http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2005/03/can_you_have_to_1.html.

Regards,
Dave R.

If you look closely at the reviews on Amazon, you may notice that there is rarely inappropriate language, off topic responses, or spams pointing you to pleasure-enhancing drugs.

Amazon is obviously moderating their reviews. They allow for civil discourse, but eliminate inappropriate responses.

Moderation could solve DJ’s problem. However, I think DJ would want to establish very clear moderation rules — what’s permissable (reasonab le complaints about service) and what’s not (angry, vicious attacks on your company).

If you have products or services that get criticism, getting that feedback will give you an opportunity to improve. It also gives you a way to talk about the improvements you’re making. “We hear you and we’ve responded with these changes.”

For those contributions that are moderated out, you can still have an offline discussion to try to calm them down and win them over.

All of this implies that your organization is commited to improving products and services. Not every organization has the where-with-all to make that happen.

Wow, that’s a great question, and one I’m sure a lot of folks are grappling with even as we speak. It’s even more interesting because I can’t find any examples of sites that allow reviews of their own products…if anybody out there knows of any please post it or send it along!

So we really don’t have much in the way of prior art. Apple, of course, doesn’t allow reviews of their own stuff, but does allow reviews of 3rd party products. Combine that with your observation that people use this information anyway (whether *you* provide it or not), and you’ve got a pretty compelling case that the reviews help users make better decisions.

To that end, our research has consistently shown that providing tools to help users make better decisions is a great way to make them happy and to keep coming back. But does that mean it’s a good idea to add reviews where they could trash you?

Let’s consider another medium: blogs. The Washington Post recently got caught up in a situation where they decided to take down blog comments. So it’s not all tea and roses.

However, when we were considering a blog here at UIE we had several talks about whether or not to include comments, given that comments gave anybody (specifically: trolls) a way to say just about anything. But, after looking really hard at how other blogs were faring, we realized that for the most part, most people on a site want to be there (that’s why they’re there). In other words, they’re already happy with what you’re offering. And if they’re not, the criticism they offer (sometimes negative) is tremendously valuable: we improve daily by paying a lot of attention to any and all feedback.

And time has played that out: we’re really happy with the success of the blog and we feel that we’ve opened ourselves up to more and better conversations with our customers. (just like the conversation we’re having here).

So, back to your problem. If reviews are really so helpful, and blogs comments can serve as a similar case, then it might be worth a shot.

Either way, we would love to hear about your results. Let us know how it goes!

We sell our own holidays and flights and believe in the power of customer reviews — but senior execs in the business are worried about managing negative feedback.

We have the “Amazon effect” for our business too: in the UK there are large community sites where users post reviews of their holiday experiences, and if necessary “dishing the dirt” about the flight, the service, the operator, the food, the cleanliness of their room, etc. Of course it is all unmoderated and unvalidated.

We know that people are likely to be searching for this kind of information anyway – but should we bring it onto our website for all to see, or leave it on other sites where we have no opportunity to manage it?

Cheers
DJ

“We give all Apple products a rating of ’5 Apples’ because we think they’re great,” the company said. Apple went on to say, “Would you trust us to display less-than-perfect ratings on our own products? We didn’t think so,”

You can find the full story on News.com: Apple store takes reviews–but not of its own stuff

That particular messaging has since been removed from the site, but it certainly highlights the situation that Apple was in, and it would suggest that they felt the rules were indeed different.

Interestingly, neither Dell nor HP have any reviews. One interesting anecdote from testing is something I’ll call the “Amazon Effect”. When testing computer sites we’ve often had users demand to be able to go to Amazon before they go directly to the computer maker’s site, for the very reason described above: they want to get both sides of the story.

I agree Amazon is doing a good job here. Nevertheless, what do you think to Apple’s implementation of customer reviews in their Apple Store?

From a business p-o-v this is a rather different issue as many of the products sold here are Apple’s own. I can get absolutely dreadful reviews of an Airport Express card or new Apple iPod earphones. Meanwhile, I notice that there are no reviews of their core products: iBooks, iMacs, Power Mac or iPods…

I presume Apple are harmed less if their accessories don’t sell due to adverse reviews – there’s always a substitute 3rd party product – but when your core business is selling a particular product and not selling a relationship or online experience (a la Amazon or eBay), the rules are different?

All the best
DJ

Seriously, you bring up a great point, Dave. The system has both good and bad points. It’s highly valuable in terms of keeping people in line, but it does seem to work almost too reciprocally. Certainly the fact that people can see your rating is likely to make you play nicer, but you’re right about the possibility of retribution for negative feedback.

We haven’t tested eBay lately, but from my personal experience people treat their reviews more of a relationship than as an objective rating for each transaction. People give the rediculous feedback like I just did in order to obtain the same in return, not because their experience was the best thing ever.

In general, people tend to do business with folks they like, not necessarily those who provide the best service over time. Ebay seems to be successfully modeling that behavior.