Alistair Harper — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:38:51 GMT

I am a bit surprised by the focus of this article. Do many people still spend time analysing web server logs? The limitations of this form of analysis seem to have been well understood for sometime.

I agree that there are limitations in using web analytics tools in usability analysis. Fundamentally, these tools tell you WHAT a customer did on the site not WHY they did it or HOW frustrating the found the experience.

I still think that there is great value in web analytics, but not so much in providing answers, but in helping provide a focus. An example could be the analysis an extended application process. A web analytics tool can be used to identify the points at which users are giving up on completing the process, down to a specific form field on a specific page.

This can then be reviewed. Maybe that page needs to be redesigned, maybe the field asks for information that users need to go and look up, or maybe the field is asking for personal information that some users do not want to give out.

Analytics may not provide many answers – but it can help you understand exactly what questions need answering

Alistair Harper — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 14:35:59 GMT

Although initially a bit dubious about this approach, I think I can see times when it can be useful.

Props to Mark Dykeman for reminding us that analytics tell us ‘what’ is going on not ‘why’ it is going on. My major issue with this approach was that it seemed to make inferences on why people come to a site based upon analytics data. These inferences could easily be flawed, as Jonathan suggests.

But as Andrew asserts, personas are about communication. Grounding personas in analytics data could make them more acceptable to some audiences, and counter the argument that they are just ‘magicked’ out of thin air.

I don’t believe in a prescriptive, one-size-fits-all approach. And this could definitely be a useful approach for some projects.

Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Alistair Harper