About me
Archive
About me

Moaning about NHS Mail’s terrible user interface

close

Warning: This post was published more than 6 years ago.

I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!

But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views might have changed in the 6 years since I wrote this post.
  • This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.

Many thanks for your understanding.

There’s a certain air of truculence on this blog at the moment. Yesterday, I took NatWest to task (again) over their awful customer charter, and only last Thursday, I slated Who Wants to be a Millionaire HD. And now, I’m about to moan again. Sorry about that – I know it’s spring, and perhaps my disposition should be sunnier, but there seems to be a queue of things I have to get off my chest at the moment.

Today, I want to moan about NHS Mail. This may seem utterly irrelevant to those outside of the NHS, and, in fact, to the majority within the NHS who choose not to have an account, but actually I hope it gives a reasonable insight into how not to design a user interface.

The user interface of NHS Mail is bloody awful. Really, really terrible. It’s designed by Microsoft, which perhaps goes some way to explaining that, but even for them, it’s bad. Let me give you a tour.

Firstly, the homepage, conveniently located at nhs.net. This looks utterly different depending on whether you are accessing it from an N3 connection, or a plain old internet connection. Neither of the homepages is particularly pretty, but the inconsistency bothers me in particular.

 

This is a bad thing for a whole plethora of reasons, but primarily because a lack of consistent branding surely presents a security risk. Anyone could knock up a log-in page in a couple of minutes, and a lack of branding would not make it appear untrustworthy.

Now, let’s look at that ex-net login page more closely. The password must be entered in two parts – the first three characters must be entered using the on-screen keyboard, presumably as some sort of protection against keystroke logging software. Yet this isn’t explained anywhere on screen, and it clearly reduces the accessibility of the site for those with disabilities. And the username and password boxes don’t even line up, which is just irritating.

You’re also asked to select whether the computer is private or public – but no explanation is given of the impact of this choice. It took me some considerable time to discover that the impact was actually that selecting ‘public’ prevents download of email attachments. This is hardly common behaviour for email systems – perhaps a little explanation might have been useful.

Assuming you manage to log in, you’re presented with this page.

Now consider some common – perhaps predictable – workflows.

Let’s imagine that  I want to send a new fax message. Where do I click? Logically, I would choose to click “New Message”. That sounds sensible. But it’s also very wrong. Perhaps the envelope in the blue bar at the top? No, that just reloads the current page.

In fact, the correct place to click is the “Spanner and Screwdriver” icon at the top – tool-tipped as “User Tools”, which brings up the following page.

From here, you jump to the icon at the bottom-left of the page labelled “SMS and Fax”, followed by a button on the top-left of the resulting page labelled “Create Fax”.

In precisely whose world is that a logical series of clicks?

Another example. We’re back at the inbox, as pictured above. I want to change my password. Simple – I click “Options” in the top-right. Wrong. On some pages, there’s a “Preferences” button appears the top-right, above “Options”. Is it there? No. Sharper readers will already have noticed from the above screenshot that it is, in fact, in “User Tools” again. Bizarre.

Something I frequently forget is the IMAP settings for NHS Mail. So where would one hope to locate those? Perhaps you’d consider clicking the “?” help icon? You’d be wrong. “User Tools”? Yes.

Perhaps you’d then be tempted to click on “Configure Microsoft Outlook”. That would be wrong. Perhaps you’d click “Help”. That would also be wrong. You must click “Guidance”, down on the bottom right, followed by “Training and Guidance” – not any of the other options, which include “User Guide”.

Again, something which should be really easy to locate is hidden away.

Frankly, the organsiation of the UI of NHS Mail is not fit for purpose. It’s virtually unusable, and I suspect that goes a long way to explaining why so few NHS people have NHS Mail accounts. And yet, I understand that Connecting for Health pays Microsoft £1.90 per user per month – that’s over £12m per year – for the service.

You’d think that, for that money, there would be at least some usability testing, yet it’s hard to see that assumption evidenced by results.

This 1,437th post was filed under: Health, Reviews, Technology, , , , , , .






More posts worth reading

What I’ve been reading this month (published 3rd April 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 4th March 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 6th February 2017)

Another night to remember (published 30th November 2012)

Toolbar relaunched (published 9th August 2006)

Photo-a-day 177: Costa Express (published 25th June 2012)

Suddenly, we’re generous to a fault (published 13th January 2005)


Comments and responses

Comment from maria


by maria

Comment posted at 12:38 on 8th June 2011.

i realy like ur blog… plz carry on


Comment from Annoyed 2


by Annoyed 2

Comment posted at 22:17 on 27th July 2011.

“if you can log in” HaHaHa Nope not from this laptop but my desktop logs in fine. Why?
Response from the helpdesk “Dunno – probably running windows 9”
Whats windows 9?


Comment from jonno


by jonno

Comment posted at 09:46 on 29th October 2012.

NHS mail really is like alot of NHS networking technology, truly awful . Over reliance on microsft and BT (with N3) and bad contracting practice started this.

Its problem is its all about ticking boxes as far as confidentiality is concerned. Its slow its unwieldy and you would be more secure on a company paid licence of gmail.

On my normal mail i could get an email off in 30-seconds, on NHS mail it can take at least 5 minutes just to get an address you don’t normally use as you clcik on links that don’t react and cant get back to the mail page.


Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


by sjhoward

Comment posted at 10:13 on 29th October 2012.

Yes, I was musing on that only this morning – it seems odd that so much of my online life is protected with 2-factor authentication these days, but NHS Mail isn’t. A paid licence of Gmail alone probably wouldn’t cut it, as it wouldn’t have a direct link into the GSI framework – but I would’ve thought that could be implemented with a minimum of fuss.


Comment from jonno


by jonno

Comment posted at 10:21 on 29th October 2012.

Do you have anything about N3? I searched all over the net for someone to tell me exactly how fast it is…everywhere keeps saying its a fast broadband network…but how fast. I found: DSL access circuit ranging from 512k to 2MB. Thats not fast unless you live in a broadband blackspot. OK its not asynchronous, so up and down is equal… But this may not be correct. When does the contract come to an end?


Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


by sjhoward

Comment posted at 11:54 on 29th October 2012.

I have no idea on either point, I’m afraid… There is a page about N3 on the Connecting for Health website, but I haven’t read it -> http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/n3


Compose a new comment



Comment

You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.



The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.