1 Was this article helpful?

Yes. Yes it was.

My company’s planning a redesign of its corporate website, and we were just discussing the FAQ yesterday. Let’s just say I raised some concerns. This article addressed many of my misgivings. Thanks for the practical advice.

posted at 11:12 am on March 30, 2010 by Melanie

2 How true

I’ve felt the same way for some time. Whenever putting together an FAQ I’ve felt it was somewhat a crutch for a lack of creativity and was only being created for either a sales tool or content filler. After reading this post I do believe that it has a purpose, but needs a bit more attention where it actually is used as either a “quick read” of the what, why, how much type; or a tool that actually identifies questions that are a) not being answered in the site content, or b) too hard to find in the site. Either way I think those that fall into the “what, why” category should only stay an FAQ until a point to where the question is addressed properly in the primary content of the site.

In hindsight, maybe the faq should be a page that is dynamic and changing. One that is always being added to and trimmed. One that serves as sort of a to-do list for the webmaster?

posted at 11:14 am on March 30, 2010 by MT_Peterson

3 Q&A as FAQ

OK this is blatant promotion, but at least it speaks directly to your topic.

It amazes me that people still do static FAQs when they could actually be providing their customers with a place to ask questions and then rank those based on how frequently/recently they’ve been asked. They can also answer them – and the person who asked will be automatically notified by email.

We’ve been offering this service for a while now, check it out at http://www.YouSaidIt.com and mention ALA to get a special discount because we are ALA fans.

posted at 02:22 pm on March 30, 2010 by cborwick

4 You are not your audience.

I think your FAQ article is missing a basic tenant of FAQs: the audience isn’t you.

http://yourhead.tumblr.com/post/484598556/frequently-not-you

posted at 03:43 pm on March 30, 2010 by isaiah

5 Great points

I’ve heard FAQs referred to as QWWPWAs (questions we wish people would ask), which I think is their central failing point…they’re not actually trying to be useful. Hopefully web Darwinism will weed these types of sites out.

posted at 04:19 pm on March 30, 2010 by jonraasch

6 A Good FAQ

Stephen,
Great article. I almost always think of FAQs as an indicator of failing in other parts of your site. It’s usually a section devoted to information that should have been conveyed in context elsewhere.

To be completely fair, some sites beg for FAQs. I love TeuxDeux. They use their FAQ well. It’s an opportunity to answer some select questions & express some humanity.

posted at 06:54 pm on March 30, 2010 by mcritz

7 Over Blah Blah

Yes a good FAQ page actually does answer your questions but I do see a lot that are trying to buff up the service or it would seem the FAQ page is their just for pure SEO purposes which as you can image can be sprinkled with keywords through it quiet effectively.

posted at 11:51 pm on March 30, 2010 by Bjarni

8 User-friendliness

True, most FAQ’s are usually useless. They either should consist of a few really frequently asked questions or be something more advanced to allow easier search, otherwise reading through a hundred questions list to find the one you need is pointless.

posted at 02:36 am on March 31, 2010 by awd

9 Good one

Been thinking similar things a while back.
http://northernsuns.wordpress.com/2010/01/26/are-faqs-still-state-of-the-art/
Like the idea of really including it into you content strategy instead of treating it as a must have.

posted at 05:15 am on March 31, 2010 by northernsun

10 Answer real questions

Nice article Stephen. Sometimes i see some FAQ’s on some websites that first half is nothing but repetitive text. I think some people don’t really understand what FAQ’s should be like :)

posted at 03:10 pm on March 31, 2010 by Web Yazılım