Nick Denardis, a top user on eduStyle and web influencer at Wayne State University, has launched what I consider a really brilliant idea. He’s doing video reviews of higher education websites. He’s basically pulling a couple of sites from the eduStyle feed and spending a few minutes critiquing design, style, code, etc.

He recently did a review of Notre Dame’s Business Operations site. (Watch his review here.)

It’s kind of funny to watch, from a site owner/producer perspective, and hear him point out a lot of the things we’ve already worked through or know we need to focus on next time. Watching reviews of other sites, it’s an educational look at how leading higher ed web designers and developers approach a site.

Watch his review of ND’s Business Operations website

Budget

1. When referring to a budget range, the Client will only remember the low end of the range.
   1. You will remember the high end of the range.
2. Fixed bid or flat rate projects always screw someone over.
   1. It’s usually not the client.

Timing

3. A Client who is in a hurry will inexplicably halt the project at the very last moment to perpetually make tweaks.
4. A Client who has caused repeated, lengthy delays will inexplicably kick into rush mode and require heroic measures to meet an arbitrary deadline.

Design

5. A perfect design is only perfect if the Client has changed it in some way.
   1. Leave a glaring imperfection in the design for the client to fix.
      1. Glaring imperfections in the design will destroy your credibility, causing the Client to question your abilities.
      2. Glaring imperfections should be subjective ones.
6. The Client is too busy to provide photo choices until after the designer has chosen photos.
7. Subtle design elements will go unnoticed by the Client.
   1. Pointing out subtle elements will either cause the Client to change them or offend the Client’s intellect.

Content

8. The Client will not deliver content on time.
   1. Any content delivered on time will be substantially revised at a later date.
9. The Client will require design to move forward using filler content and placeholders.
   1. Once design is available, the Client will provide content that does not match the placeholders in the design.
10. The Client cannot produce copy at the prescribed length; all copy will be far too long or far too short.

Development

11. The Client will insist on technical requirements based on buzzwords heard on television or read on CNN.
    1. The requirements were buzzwords no less than four years earlier.
12. The Client will insist on being able to make changes to code or implement new features without using code.
    1. The Client will back down from ridiculous requests upon hearing about the change of budget.
       1. If the Client does not back down, then Whoopee!

Blogging

Update: after being alerted to my lack of counting skills.

13. Posts that are written over pizza and remain as a draft for a week will inevitably not match up with the title.

Update: As Matt pointed out, InBev is Belgian, and not German. It’s like North and South Dakota to me.

Since InBev acquired Budweiser, I’ve been curious to see how the Germans Belgians would influence our American beer. The other day, I saw the first sign.

Bud Light’s latest ad campaign features a quality they call “drinkability.”

Congratulations! It’s merely drinkable! Hooray!

Top 9 Rejected Slogans from Bud Light’s Latest Campaign

9. Maybe You Should Upgrade to Budweiser

8. Recipe Not Improved!

7. Now with less urine

6. It’s Almost Non-Alcoholic!

5. It’s liquid!

4. Zum wohl! Op uw gezondheid!

3. Now with flavors

2. Only slightly worse than water

And the runner-up to the “Drinkability” slogan was:

1. It’s not poison!

I’m pretty sure their new German Belgian owners think this is an important quality to have—especially when compared to far superior European brews.

This is an excerpt from Seth Godin’s post, Is Effort a Myth?. I’m thinking about this a lot – that parts I already do and the parts I don’t.

With that forewarning, here’s a bootstrapper’s/marketer’s/entrepreneur’s/fast-rising executive’s effort diet. Go through the list and decide whether or not it’s worth it. Or make up your own diet. Effort is a choice, at least make it on purpose:

1. Delete 120 minutes a day of ‘spare time’ from your life. This can include TV, reading the newspaper, commuting, wasting time in social networks and meetings. Up to you.

2. Spend the 120 minutes doing this instead:

• Exercise for thirty minutes.


• Read relevant non-fiction (trade magazines, journals, business books, blogs, etc.)


• Send three thank you notes.


• Learn new digital techniques (spreadsheet macros, Firefox shortcuts, productivity tools, graphic design, html coding)


• Volunteer.


• Blog for five minutes about something you learned.


• Give a speech once a month about something you don’t currently know a lot about.

3. Spend at least one weekend day doing absolutely nothing but being with people you love.

4. Only spend money, for one year, on things you absolutely need to get by. Save the rest, relentlessly.

If you somehow pulled this off, then six months from now, you would be the fittest, best rested, most intelligent, best funded and motivated person in your office or your field. You would know how to do things other people don’t, you’d have a wider network and you’d be more focused.

This is great advice, but I’m less interested in the “six months from now” part and way more interested in the “effort” list. Those are things I enjoy and want to do more of. I want to spend that weekend day, blog, read, exercise, etc. If nothing else changed but I got to do more of those things, I think I would be happier.