An online resource to back an argument for cleaner design

Question

I am working in the web dept of a large legal firm, and among other things am responsible for maintaining a professional look for all our email communications (over 600 pieces per year).

Right now I am in a rut. Using a lot of pressure and manipulation, a person in management got to "art direct" a couple of HTML emails working directly with a member of my team and I caught the design at the last moment.

Her "designs" introduced background images behind the text of the emails along with additional, high-contrast imagery sitting behind the title in the header.

I ended up mandating a design change, however she is very insistent on "her" design and questioning all my reasoning for simplifying the look.

Basically she is questioning my expertise and asking for "proof" that her design is not user friendly.

I have the meeting in a couple of hours and was wondering if anyone here could point me to resources that discuss these specific items:

1. Argument against background images positioned behind the copy of an email. The images are at about 10% opacity, which makes them incomprehensible, and makes the design busy and ugly (my perspective).

2. Argument against high-contrast images behind titles.

Now, I am aware of the technical implications of including images in HTML emails, Outlook 2007 not loading background images etc. This is not necessary a technical issue, but a serious aesthetic/usability step in the wrong direction.

Thank you!

Answer 1

http://www.asciiribbon.org/.

They have a lot of points on why not to use HTML ect, in emails.

• Quite a few e-mail clients do not support HTML e-mail.
• Other clients have a very poor or broken HTML rendering, causing the messages to be unreadable as well.
• Sending HTML e-mails causes great overhead, and is very inefficient.
• People that are limited to a text-only terminal, people with disabilities, blind people, basically anyone that cannot use a graphical interface easily or at all, are likely unable to read your mail.

(Extract from link)

Answer 2

I HATE email with designs and pictures on it. It is unprofessional IMO

I hate them.

the desirability/niceness of designs and art are subjective. So, how can you be sure all the people who receive them will appreciate them.

For me they are a big turnoff.

Answer 3

Facts:

Common sense in communicating dictates that anything that distracts you away from the message -- the content of the emails is not a good idea.

Is there images in the background of your letter heads and on all your invoices? Why so? Why not?

What do background images contribute to the value and perception of the message, the image of your corporation? Is it clearly known the impacts they have?

Go take a look at email newsletter sites. They are covered in guides and tutorials on how to email market effectively.

www.icontact.com www.constantcontact.com and so on..

Opinions:

Emails are not meant to be flyers. They are meant to communicate, clearly, simply and concisely while bringing a professional image. Making it look like a cartoon, or a flower shop, or whatever else you are dealing with probably doesn't add to it.

The issue you may run into is she is taking it personally because she is attached to the design for personal reasons and not designing for the needs of the business. So an attack on the design is an attack on her. She is too involved with her ego of looking good and avoiding looking bad or wanting some kind of glory.

Simply put, she should be the one qualifying to you why it IS good design, not the other way around. If she doesn't know, why is she asking you to prove it to her? How would she understand?

There's a book called Dealing with difficult people that may be of use to you.

Of course, if common sense was really common we wouldn't have to point it out as being common sense.

Update us on what happens!

Answer 4

In addition to what others have said, consider legal accessibility requirements. I found one example of the US Department of Education accessibility requirements. I'm sure searching for this one can find more examples.

Although it doesn't really apply, you may be able to reference the Americans With Disabilities Act, assuming you're in America.

Also, since you're sending HTTP formatted mail, maybe the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 are of interest. For example, Guideline 2.2 of this document states "Ensure that foreground and background color combinations provide sufficient contrast when viewed by someone having color deficits or when viewed on a black and white screen."

Answer 5

A professional email should only be graphic-intensive if those graphics either emulate the look of the company stationary, emulates the look of the company site, or if the graphics are interactive. A common example where this makes reasonable sense would be billing emails from Amazon.com. Note, however, that the content itself does not actually have any graphics, only the frame above, below, and to the sides of the content uses graphics. Similar stuff shows up in banking emails and paypal emails. This sort of thing makes it easier for people to associate the email with the site and makes for nicer printed records that match the online version of the same records.

For standard communication, I'd just go with a header and/or footer graphic.

Answer 6

Also consider looking up some references in Human Factors engineering texts that show readibility studies. I bet a quick library search in this area would yield much scientific data that her way causing reading errors, eye strain and or slower reading speed.

Answer 7

What I did was escalate to a person who has both the position and understanding of the importance of the issue. Also, presented a version with a cleaner design. Made sure to address all objectives, and did not imply that design decisions are open to discussion.