throbber
browser's print feature. To cancel. please close this Window.
`
`Fearless Feedback
`(5 May 00) OnlineOpinion gives your users a rant outlet and you,
`the perfect redesign tool
`Jeff Sengstack
`
`You beta tested, usability tested, and bug tested, and your site
`passed all with cheers of congratulations, but now that it's live, the
`emails keep coming in--complaints about the site's interface, the
`commerce, even the font size. Is there some way to harness your
`users' negative comments and let them know, before they've even
`given them, that you value their feedback and opinions? Yes, there
`is.
`
`With no fanfare, explanation, or even captions. tiny, inconspicuous
`plus signs wrapped in parentheses have started popping up on
`dozens of Web sites. Usually tucked away in a corner. Web visitors
`can easily overlook them. However, despite their unobtrusive
`presence, tens of thousands of Web users have rolled their cursors
`over them and discovered a tiny pop-up Web site rating system.
`
`Called OnlineOpinion (www.opinionlab.com), it lets customers
`readily rate a Web site on a page-by-page basis. Users may simply
`select a numeric rating for a page and move along or opt to drill
`down to a simple but more detailed opinion form, adding personal
`comments and snippets of marketing data if they so choose.
`
`MVP.com, a sports e-tailer, has posted the little parenthetical
`pluses since the Super Bowl. The company receives more than
`1 ,000 ratings and comments daily. "It gives us a competitive
`advantage," says MVP.com CTO ian Drury. "It lets us act with great
`speed and act smartly."
`
`Jackpot.com, a new ldealab advertiser-supported site, started using
`OnlineOpinion on April 20. Within ten days, they received 51 ,000
`responses--more than 5,000 a day. "There's absolutely no doubt
`that it will drive an economic benefit for the company," says
`Jackpot.com's operations vice president Adam Zauder.
`
`This simple but powerful tool is the brainchild of Opinionlab, a
`Chicago firm founded by Rand Nickerson, one of the developers of
`the Arbitron rating system. Nickerson has been at the forefront of
`opinion and audience data research for years. He discovered that
`traditional Internet user quality rating methods like pop-up surveys,
`feedback buttons, and email simply do not work. "Folks don't use
`them because they're unpredictable and idiosyncratic," Nickerson
`says. "They tend to be abusive rather than empowering."
`
`Opinions are a real plus
`Many site surveys won't let respondents opt out, or they ask
`questions users aren't prepared to answer and probe for personal
`
`Qualtrics, LLC
`Exhibit 1022
`CBM of U.S. Patent No. 8,041,805
`Page 001
`
`

`
`OnlineOptnion to be conven•ent, quick. and
`easy. It protects privacy and is consistent. "It acts the same way
`every lime. It never abuses you. never surprises you," says
`Nickerson.
`
`Unlike services like Bizrate, PC Data Online. and Media Metrix,
`which provide aggregate volume numbers, OnlineOpinion tells site
`managers what people think of the site and how to make it better.
`"It gets down to the granular level. which is particularly actionable."
`says MVP's Drury.
`
`Sites can download and install OnlineOpinlon in about 10 minutes.
`Virtually everyone coming to a site can use It immediately. There is
`no client download. The{+) floats in the same client-selected
`location on all its Web pages. Rolling the cursor over the(+) symbol
`reveals a five-point rating scale. Optionally, clicking on "comments"
`lets users rate content. design, and usability. plus type in
`comments. An additional optional step is to register and submit
`some generic marketing information
`
`Surprisingly, users have not abused the(+) to maliciously ·name·
`sites. Nickerson thinks he knows why Web users tend to settle into
`what he calls "personal Web space.· groups of sites they rely on:
`"They have an interest in optimizing that space. and OnlineOpinion
`gives them a convenient means to alert sites to problems and
`suggest solutions:
`
`Data are displayed on a clever and elegant spoke system. Each
`line represents a page; line length shows the relative number of
`opinions per page; and a color scheme differentiates positive.
`negative, and neutral response rates. The graphic highlights
`bimodal samples-widely divergent views--by placing a different
`colored dot at the end of a spoke. "Their spoke system is an
`enormously effective tool," says Jackpot's Zauder. "Most data
`analysis averages bimodal distributions Into non-committal
`opinions, but these folks are very intelligent about how data can lie
`to you."
`
`Penny for your redesign thoughts
`The first detailed data analysis is free. Additional queries behind the
`spoke graphic cost $850. For sites that do annual updates. that
`should suffice. Those that do more frequent revisions may choose
`to subscribe to an annual service for $15,000. Still in beta is real(cid:173)
`time data analysis that will regularly email new opinions and
`comments to site and page managers.
`
`MVP already has used OnlineOpinion data to redesign Its site and
`add new product lines. Originally MVP displayed products m lists.
`Click a product name and its image would appear. Customer
`feedback led to a redesign. Now. up to 16 images of products are
`displayed in a 4 x 4 matrix. "As a result, conversion has increased.
`which means revenues have increased. which is the name of the
`game." says MVP's Drury.
`
`Jackpot.com had what they thought was a streamlined registration
`and client software download process. "What we learned through
`OnlineOpinion's feedback was that it was really cumbersome." says
`Jackpot's Zauder. So they pulled all the elements to~ether onto one
`
`Qualtrics, LLC
`Exhibit 1022
`CBM of U.S. Patent No. 8,041,805
`Page 002
`
`

`
`clearer explanation of how the site works.
`"We've seen a very significant increase in the percentage of new
`site visitors who end up downloading the game."
`
`This open channel between users and Web sites is the "beauty" of
`the Internet, according to Kent Allen, e-commerce analyst with the
`Aberdeen Group. Until now, most of that interaction took customers
`away from sites. He gives OnlineOpinion a "ringing endorsement."
`"It's an embedded means to taking advantage of that open
`channel." Allen says. "Finding out about a pissed-off customer is a
`hell of a lot cheaper than losing a pissed-off customer."
`
`Opinionlab's CEO Rand Nickerson has big plans for his little(+)
`symbol. He sees a day when it, or something like it, becomes a
`feedback convention on the Web that will complement and even
`steer other rating techniques such as focus groups and usability
`testing. Both of those can be expensive but do sometimes provide
`"gems" that help justify their cost. Nickerson says that his little (+)
`will provide the same quality gems more frequently and for less
`money. <<
`
`Copyright © 2000 Hypermedia Communications
`
`Qualtrics, LLC
`Exhibit 1022
`CBM of U.S. Patent No. 8,041,805
`Page 003

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket