March 15, 2004 | View Comments (23) | Category: Information Architecture
Summary: Footers and how we can better utilize them.
Footers are something that have been discussed at a couple of places such as textbased, asterisk*, and Digital-Web. There is a ton of information that could be put inside of a footer, yet many footers are underutilized. My footer consists of more than just the copyright statement, but also a kind of mini-sitemap to the rest of the site. When Keith redesigned his site he put better use to his footer and although the change is subtle, you would be surprised at how greatly it can help people.
I believe ecommerce sites have the greatest to gain from a better use of footers, yet very rarely do you see them used. Why not provide a mini-sitemap to the rest of your site that would ease navigation? It has long been determined that users don't mind scrolling, but I hate scrolling back up and most of the time the "global navigation" of a site is inadequate, no matter how well it has been planned out. So a quality footer would fit me perfectly.
Obviously, blogs also benefit from this sort of architecture, but I think it depends on what you consider your blog. As mine was a more informational source than "diary", I figured people would be coming for a couple of days looking for different information so I tried to provide them with a footer that would help them along. Granted if I only wrote every couple of days, this whole design would probably not be necessary. However, in this format and with this footer, we are able to have three conversations successfully going on at once.
To be honest the whole point of this entry was to simply ask what is the essential information that should be placed in the footer of a site? For me it is usually About, Contact, and copyright. Very rarely do I work on something that requires more than that. But as I have mentioned, I would like to provide better information in the footers of my sites. What information do you see as being essential and are there any other sites that have great footers?
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/176
Ah, yes, search...really need to get that put in one day. *Mental note*
I consider it a footer because it is on every page. If it was just on the individual pages or the homepage then I could see your point.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
I had written briefly about this, focusing mainly on the idea that users should be presented with options at the bottom of the page.
From a usability standpoint, it saves the user from having to search for where they want to go next. From a site owner's perspective, it increases stickiness and hopefully conversion in the case of a transaction oriented site.
The bottom of the page is a decision point for visitors to your site. They will either decide to continue browsing your site, or leave.
The complete entry is here. I think it is irrelevant to worry about what constitutes a footer. Ultimately, if it's at the bottom of a page, it's the last thing your visitor will see. I don't think that a full site map is the right choice, as it is realatively overwhelming and not focused enough. I think that the footer should simply contain content that is related to the current page and possibly of interest to the user.
On our site, we simply offer links to the five most recent entries with links to our related sites right next to it. Our goal is simply to provide the visitor with an option when they are done with the current page. Otherwise they have to scroll back to the top of the page which isn't quite as convenient as clicking on a link to related content right there in the footer.
Garrett Dimon (http://www.brightcorner.com)
I see your point, however if you look at the sites referenced in the textbased article, there is a clear indication of the seperation of the content from the footer.
For example, 37s repeats the line of navigation. It's clear that you have ended the information and begun the "closing of the deal" section.
Same with Asterisk and the others, you know you have come to a completely seperate informational element of the site. It's a small area at the bottom of the page - clearly seperate but still equal to the content.
What you're calling your footer, takes up 2/3rds of your page design (in relation to a post only - not post + comments), and has no real seperation visually from the content.
It's cool, if that's your bag, but that's my explanation of why I don't consider it a footer under the classic definition.
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Actually,
Couldn't it be argued for the sake of discussion that your footer actually serves more as your primary navigation element? In fact, that's the only way I surf this site, the tabs at the top of your pages have pretty much become invisible to me.
So then, if your primary navigation is in your footer, is your footer really a footer - or is it a navigational element within the content area?
BTW - For clarity, my last post was a response to Paul, not a comment on Garrett.
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Don't know how I forgot it, but my feedback your footer, Scrivs, would be that it's on target, but overwhelming. There are too many links. Of course, it could just be my personal preference to not be presented with too many options like a kid in a candy store.
My feeling is that it should be more of a guide with a few targeted options. In this case, I would say focus just on recent activity, new posts, comments, etc.
Specifically, I would seperate your categories list from the activity because it is relatively static content as opposed to the dynamic nature of your other links in the footer. Also, I would scale the recent entries and comments back to 5 or so links each so it isn't so overwhelming.
Garrett Dimon (http://www.brightcorner.com)
I'm with mark on that... what you have isn't really a footer, even though it's global. A footer is generally like the last 50-100 pixels or so before the end of the page. You have global navigation near the bottom of the page, instead of off to one side or another where it usually is on a blog.
But really, that's just semantics.
What should be in a footer? On a business site at least, always without fail the physical address of the business, a telephone number and email address or link to a contact page (or both), fax number if applicable, privacy statement/policy, and terms of service/use if applicable. Copyright is optional, since you're not really required to post notice of copyright and haven't been since the 70s. But it doesn't hurt to have it on there and might prevent some idiot from stealing it. Sitemap if it's applicable, but I'd far rather see a good search function in the header than a sitemap in the footer.
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
And of course the primary navigation for the website. left that out. Especially if you use graphics instead of text in your navigation, it's important to have them as text in the footer, unless there are a large number of them, in which case linking to a sitemap would be better... but that's an IA issue, not a 'what should be in the footer' issue.
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
Others:
Privacy Policy, Accesibility Statement, Link to top of page...
I think that the 'old school' idea of small hyperlinks like this:
home|page1|page2|page3|etc
Work well, and are often used.
I tagged up some of these links for a client of ours, to track how often they were clicked versus other possibilities, and there was an interesting correlation between time on page and usage. It seemed that when they did stay on a page and read it through, they used the 'footer nav'.
People do use them, but they look so 80's, ya know?
Mike P. (http://www.fiftyfoureleven.com.com/sandbox/weblog/)
Garrett -
I really like your comparison of a footer to the "last minute" purchase carts at the registers of the grocery store. Perfect comparison.
JC -
I agree that generally all you see in business sites is the legal mumbo jumbo blah blah blah. It's interesting that most don't see the footer as being the perfect opportunity to place the "pay-off" for the content - a call to action (as opposed to just providing links) to actually contact the company or motivate them to drill past the first page.
As Garrett points out, if they've read that far down, it can be safely assumed there is some level of interest. Why not use the space to close the deal?
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Mark -
Most pages don't have a call to action because they just don't need one, they're not selling anything. The primary reason for some of the stuff (address, phone, etc) is that Yahoo won't list your site without it, not that that's as big a deal now as it was 2-3 years ago.
The legal mumbo jumbo goes there because it's a pain to put anywhere else, it's not important, you just have to have it there on the page, so it gets stuck in the footer where it won't be in anyone's way and is still there if anyone cares.
But the footer definitely gets lots of use, especially when it's in the first screenful. I think it's because it's generally more obviously a link than other navigation which is often styled to remove the underlines and so on. Sometimes designers forget that underlines == links in favor of being decorative... the footer with its standard styled links, underlined, maybe even default blue text, saves headaches for those folks.
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
It seems like there are two parallel conversations going on here.
The first is what information should be included in the footer from an objective standpoint. The other conversation is that footers should become more than just a collection of links that people have come to expect. I'm not sure exactly which one was the one scrivs intended, but interesting ideas abound in either discussion.
JC -
I beg to differ about the call to action. Most sites may not be wanting someone to initate or complete a transaction in the strictest sense of the phrase. However, I would think every site would want to present a call-to-action that says, "Stay on the site. How about checking out this link?"
Another option is advertising. I personally don't like this solution, but I would think presenting Google ads, or something similar at the bottom would lead to a decent conversion rate. The ads are already targeted to your content, so it is useful for the visitors, while at the same time helping your site generate revenue.
Garrett Dimon (http://www.brightcorner.com)
JC -
I would disagree w/you a bit. A business site, even if it's not actively selling product, is still no less selling. Their selling their brand, service, marketability, capability...in every square inch of the site - including the footer.
There is no reason why a footer can't be more than just the "bleh" repository for information that doesn't fit anywhere else.
I see it as actually visiting / calling an office and having the receptionist just "vomit" up uninspired contact information to me, or leaving me with an experience that not only speaks positive volumes about not only that person, but also the company they work for.
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Google Ads are a great addition for a personal site (even one like paul's which is an extension of his business), if it has focused enough content that they're not always showing public service stuff. Not so sure on a business site, since they might advertise the competition. It's a cost/benefit thing I guess. They're probably usually better to have than not to, unless they impinge on your corporate image. Re the call to action, you have a point, as you put it. I was addressing specifically the comparison to the checkout lane at a grocery store, purchases and so on.
It really comes down to a question of what the purpose of the website is, and whether it would benefit the visitor to remain on that site or whether they're better served by moving on elsewhere, either because your site has met their needs adequately and they're moving on to something else, or because you didn't and they need to go elsewhere to find it. Partnering with websites that offer complementary services and/or information may be useful (www.carbuyingtips.com is a good, if cluttered example)
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
Other uses for a footer... On our intranet the footer contains search boxes for stocks and weather, and a link to open the page in a new window with a printer-friendly stylesheet applied.
The header has search boxes for employees and a timestamp.
A few pages on our public website have ad buttons near the bottom of the page, but not in the global footer, only on the pages where they're appropriate.
I see what you're all saying, I just don't see alot of alternatives for the footer that wouldn't be far better if implemented in a more visable area of the page.
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
Better than 3rd party advertising, but with the same effect - customized footers.
Along the thought of my previous post, and Paul's mini site map, and furthermore considering Whitespace is an informational site - it's unreasonable to believe everyone has equal interest in each and every post.
So instead of having a link to the past 3 postings, why not put something along the lines of "Did you like this post? Here are some others you might also enjoy...Or you can view our archive located here."
It's almost exactly what he's done with the link to dedicated servers.
He's using the footer to navigate, but also selling people on the idea to drill down further into the site.
It's also impact selling, same as the carts at the grocery store.
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Now here's a website that uses its footer most thoroughly. (really good store BTW, excellent customer service, fast shipping, and great prices... I bought about $150 worth of accessories for my phone for a bit under $40 bucks)
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
There ya go, Paul... if only you could measure the effectiveness of a google ad based on page... then you could link to your top payouts from every page. :-)
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
I have to say that this site is now on my list of 'Daily' sites. Always something interesting/controversial on the front page :)
As for footers, my site doesn't even have a footer.
Kevin Francis (http://denial.loose-screws.com/)
Lots of good stuff here. And all stuff I will think about in the future. Thanks.
As for me, the most important thing I have in my blogs footer at the moment, is a link to 'Get Firefox!'
I think that ALL footers need one of these at the moment. lol.
phil baines (http://www.wubbleyew.com/blog/)
I almost always add a mini-navigator towards the bottom of my pages since like Scrivs I hate having to scroll back to the top for "global navigation"
The ideas of putting search and a mini-sitemap (perhaps a context based mini-site map) are both excellent.
James
"Yeah, a man could dream."
And damned if dreams didn't just come true today... did you get the email from google? sounds promising.
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
Keep track of comments to all entries with the Comments Feed
©2003-06 9rules, Inc. | Thoughts Feed | Notes Feed
Amazon Stores: Powertools | Jewelry | Books | Health | Landscaping | Kitchen | Movies
#1
Paul -
Perhaps I'm wrong in my interpretation of what constitutes a footer, but I do not consider your site map to be part of it - but rather being in the bottom part of your content section. Your footer, as I see it, only contains the powered by and copyright statement.
Since you are an informational site, I would really see having a seach function in the footer of more use than a "mini site map."
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)