Review sites still contain screenshots of the Greenwich theme. It's the least appealing looking and we should opt to show off CiviCRM UI with Shoreditch or Radstock themes. Many reviewers state the feeling along the lines that it is "tired looking" and "dated". This fits in line with Goal 3 from the roadmap.
Goal 3: UI improvements
CiviCRM is amazingly powerful, but we haven't won many beauty contests lately. Our interface has grown in complexity over the years and some amazing functionality is hidden away or hard to work with. To tackle this, we've established a plan to migrate CiviCRM's user interface to Bootstrap - an increasingly popular framework for designing web-based applications. This migration will: provide an easy to maintain, consistent look and easier to navigate interface, putting more of CiviCRM's powerful functionality within easy reach of of our users give us a 'mobile friendly' interface that allows our users to work with CiviCRM on the devices of their choosing. reduce the learning curve for new users by providing an experience they'll be familiar with from other web applications Like Form Builder, work is well underway. Thanks to the efforts of Compucorp, a bridge between the current style and Bootstrap has matured. Dubbed Shoreditch, this new theme has quickly risen as a popular extension within CiviCRM. It's also spawned related UI improvements on WordPress (thanks to the efforts of Christian Wach), Drupal (thansks to MJW Consulting) and Joomla (thanks to Nic Wistreich) worth checking out.
I've updated the screenshots e.g. https://www.capterra.com/p/79192/CiviCRM/ and used The Island theme based on the fact CiviCRM Spark uses it. Feature the contact summary screen and Mosaico email builder since it is a widely used feature (80% use mass email according to Mozilla survey) and Mosaico is the top extension according to stats.civicrm.org.
Another screenshot to add is the contribution dashboard or one from CiviCRM home dashboard with visual reporting but I'd need to move data around to make the chart sensical. These review platforms limit you and only allow 3 images max. For later. Anyway, there's some progress as the screenshots aren't from 2014 anymore and leave a better impression.
I’ve secured access for Capterra, GetApp and Software Advice. @josh has invite.
The Capterra profile is mostly updated: https://www.capterra.com/p/79192/CiviCRM/. Getapp and Softwareadvice seem to be held for review even though descriptions are distinct from Capterra. (It is required to differentiate the 3 descriptions) Working on this.
Target the following platforms and improve our profiles and inclusion into the top categories CiviCRM serves. The goal in this step is to give us the best initial impression with evaluators.
Capterra is the largest. Gartner controls Capterra, Software Advice and Getapp.
Here are some of the top categories to prioritize.
Nonprofit CRM | 1 |
Association Management | 2 |
Fundraising | 3 |
Event Management | 4 |
Membership Management | 5 |
Volunteer Management | 6 |
Advocacy | 6 |
Grant Management | 7 |
Peer-to-Peer Fundraising | 8 |
I get it, perhaps we should get user reviews for civicrm.org at the same time and add them into a new site concept. Case studies are great, but for a first impression it's common to see the short, warm fuzzy reviews on the homepage and we don't have that.
I'm personally fine with it, though I'm a bit skeptical about the value. It kinda bugs me a bit that we're pushing valuable content onto other sites when maybe we could somehow leverage it to optimize our own site better. Maybe I'm just grumpy because the pricing of some of these sites (like G2) is cost-prohibitive to us (but not to our competitors), so we're really playing a losing game here.
Off my soapbox, the process is just send me the message, specifically a 1) heading 2) sentence or two and 3) a link (if there is something we're linking out to).
Shoreditch doesn't work on all the CMSs.
Is there a reason anyone for instance, some would install WP and not use CAU, Shoreditch, Haystack or name the next theme? Or put another way, actually use "Greenwich". The reviews are brutal but we're not helping ourselves by using screenshots of Greenwich. Let's show our best self. Right now, stats say it's Shoreditch via the https://stats.civicrm.org/?tab=sites.
@josh sounds like you are OK with an in-app prompt #5 (comment 91265).
What are the steps to generating in-app messages like this? And maybe it would be wise to give a heads up to partners in case they wanted to silence this for whatever reason. Up to you, but from the looks of it we've given partners a chance to solicit reviews and that has had poor results.
Include report and campaign in next partner update, state that @guyiac is drafting content to make it easy to encourage clients, cite Paul B's effort last year.
Stale. My assumption is most partners get a shot at getting a testimonial as the first priority and the reviews for civicrm are left behind. I am curious what kind of success there has been in this direction?
Posted in MM Town Square: https://chat.civicrm.org/civicrm/pl/ckkfgt7ebpbdbrotra1uu9g7yr
I'd do both but for sure in-app was my first thought #3
Perhaps we should cast a wider net and use the in-app messaging functionality? We very rarely use this and it might have a bit more uptake as it would display for all users that log into their civicrm instance (they may not be registered at c.o and they may not be members). Reviews at these sites are typically done by individuals anyhow, so perhaps a nice appeal that we would appreciate a fair, balanced and thoughtful review at these sites would be the way to go.
Can we get an email out to the member database on civicrm.org to provide reviews on the popular platforms? These will be the best contacts to ask. I can provide the email content.
Absolutely, me too.
Hopefully we will have an outline to share soon about Civi / post-Greenwich theming.
Thanks @nicol! Yeah, while the theme will vary in what is actually used by end orgs, it's not good to market Civi without much "makeup". Anything but "Greenwich" I'll be happier with.
FTR @andyburns as far as I know Finsbury Park is the only theme that was tested on / runs on all of Backdrop, Drupal 7, Drupal 9, Joomla and WordPress.
Review sites still contain screenshots of the Greenwich theme. It's the least appealing looking and we should opt to show off CiviCRM UI with Shoreditch or Radstock themes. Many reviewers state the feeling along the lines that it is "tired looking" and "dated". This fits in line with Goal 3 from the roadmap.
Goal 3: UI improvements
CiviCRM is amazingly powerful, but we haven't won many beauty contests lately. Our interface has grown in complexity over the years and some amazing functionality is hidden away or hard to work with. To tackle this, we've established a plan to migrate CiviCRM's user interface to Bootstrap - an increasingly popular framework for designing web-based applications. This migration will: provide an easy to maintain, consistent look and easier to navigate interface, putting more of CiviCRM's powerful functionality within easy reach of of our users give us a 'mobile friendly' interface that allows our users to work with CiviCRM on the devices of their choosing. reduce the learning curve for new users by providing an experience they'll be familiar with from other web applications Like Form Builder, work is well underway. Thanks to the efforts of Compucorp, a bridge between the current style and Bootstrap has matured. Dubbed Shoreditch, this new theme has quickly risen as a popular extension within CiviCRM. It's also spawned related UI improvements on WordPress (thanks to the efforts of Christian Wach), Drupal (thansks to MJW Consulting) and Joomla (thanks to Nic Wistreich) worth checking out.
The amount of reviews on the various review platforms for CiviCRM is quite low (G2, Software Advice). Outside of getting partners to solicit #2 (should do at the same time they are getting reviews for their agency), I think the most efficacious would be a dismissable notification on the CiviCRM dashboard as MIH campaigns have used.
Alternatively, a less invasive option is to add a menu option under the "Support" tab.