A Re-Examination of Fortune 500 Homepage Design Practices

Abstract

Research problem: As a follow up to an earlier article, this study compares Fortune 500 website homepage design in 2013 with the results of a similar study in 2008, providing an updated overview of homepage design practice that reflects the many technological advances that have influenced web design during the intervening period. The findings are useful for those wanting to know the state of homepage design in 2013, whether as current practitioners or researchers. Research questions: (1) What are the current homepage design practices of Fortune 500 companies? (2) What are the current Web 2.0 technology practices of Fortune 500 companies? (3) What changes in homepage design have occurred for Fortune 500 companies? (4) What are the differences in homepage design and Web 2.0 technology practices between the 100 largest and 100 smallest Fortune 500 companies? and (5) Is homogeneity in design increasing amongst Fortune 500 homepages? Literature review: Three key areas guided my analysis of homepages. (1) Usability research, which suggests guidelines for design based on aggregated performance of users, such as locating the search box in the upper right and for directing mobile users to an alternate site designed for mobile access. (2) Design practice studies, which suggest guidelines for design based on aggregated analyses of websites, such as having links to employment information and investor information on the homepage.(3) Design patterns: libraries of patterns to provide designers with responses to design problems, such as using collapsible panels or module tabs to reveal and conceal content on a page. These libraries also provide guidelines for design, such as using fat menus or sitemap footers to structure navigation. Methodology: Using content analysis, every Fortune 500 homepage in 2013 was analyzed for 68 major design elements in these categories--navigation, content links, support for specific types of users, visual design, multimedia, and web 2.0-and the results were analyzed. Results and conclusions: The homepages displayed greater homogeneity in design than a similar study in 2008. Overall, 12 elements-(1) corporate logo in the top left of the page; (2) link to an "about us" section containing company information; (3) link to information for those seeking employment; (4) horizontally oriented main navigation; (5) link for contacting the company; (6) link for information for investors; (7) link for terms of use or legal disclaimers;(8) link to privacy information; (9) link for news or a press room; (10) multimedia use; (11) links that do not appear on the page initially, requiring interaction; (12) search box, located in the upper right of page-were present on 80% or more homepages, and 6 elements-(1) web 2.0 features; (2) an image that can be clicked on as a focal point; (3) link to a sitemap; (4) link to Twitter; (5) link to Facebook; and (6) dropdown or pulldown menu-were present on 50% to 79% of pages. Between 2008 and 2013, many practices have changed, such as increases in page length, the overall numb...

You Shall Not Pass? The Design of Age Gates in an Emerging Cannabis Market

“…The "Design Turn" in TPC Design is a robust area of research in TPC, including an ever-growing number of studies on websites (e.g., Albers, 2009;Andrews et al, 2012;Cosgrove, 2018;Cushman, 2014;Getto & Moore, 2017;Jones, 2015;Lin, 2007;Ranade & Catá, 2021;Richards 2009;Still & Morris, 2010;St. Amant, 2005;Walters 2010).…”

Corporate Website Content Related to Disability in the Top 50 Fortune Firms in Turkey

“…There are several studies focusing on corporate websites of the Fortune firms, through various perspectives such as; web site usability (Huang & Cappel, 2012), web based public relations (Kim et al, 2010a), website design (Jones & DeGrow, 2011;Jones, 2015), website accessibility (Romano, 2002), meeting media/journalist needs (Callison, 2003), characteristics of e-commerce user-interface (Zhao et al, 2006), marketing communications (Perry & Bodkin, 2002), sustainable information published in websites (Knuz et al, 2014), e-recruiting for human resources (Lee, 2005;Young & Foot, 2005), home page content and purpose (Liu et al, 1997), privacy policies (Liu & Arnett, 2002), environmental responsibility (Kim et al, 2010). Amongst various studies in websites of Fortune firms, there are only a few studies focusing on information about disability.…”

The Impact of Social Media on Negative Online Physician Reviews: an Observational Study in a Large, Academic, Multispecialty Practice

“…Despite the u n k n o w n o v e r a l l i m p a c t o f I n t e r n e t s e a r c h position-particularly regarding both positive and negative online reviews-on brand management, there is a growing interest in the ability to use social media tools to potentially optimize website and individual online presence. 7,8 The aim of this study was to evaluate how a dedicated social media intervention for physicians who have negative online reviews could change the search profile of their online presence over time. We hypothesized that those with an increased social media presence would see a decrement in the Google position of their initial negative review.…”