Why does it take me twice as long at the “new” ATMs BOA?

July 14, 2009 at 1:48 am 4 comments

I’m wondering what testing BOA did on their “new” ATMs? I wondered this when I first encountered them and I’m wondering it again as I was stuck waiting for about 10 minutes recently behind someone trying to deposit multiple checks and take out money. It was aggravating to say the least. And the poor person was left apologizing to the three of us that had ended up waiting for her to finish because she felt bad at holding things up when it really was the process…not the user.

I get that they are trying to make the experience more convenient by making you not have to use the envelopes or count the money anymore but did anyone find that process all that difficult? Based on what user feedback did they decide to make these changes? When you have to add in 4 more steps just to deposit 1 check (that only gets worse the more you want to do) to the process how much easier are you actually making this for me or any other user? I have to tell you what kind of deposit I want to do (check or cash). I have to verify the amount you read on the check (and its accuracy is NOT good, so here goes more steps if you have to enter the correct amount). I have to then tell you I’m done with my deposit and then finally I can move on. Oh, wait, actually I have to tell you first what kind of receipt I want! Really, just print one with the images and be done with it. I haven’t attempted to deposit cash in one of these ATMs yet but I’m sure it only goes in much the same manner.

For someone who designs user experiences this one really does boggle my mind. They have taken what was pretty simple and made it more complicated, convuluted, and time consuming. It seems like a bit of a step backwards. Technology can make many things better, but as the saying goes “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

Entry filed under: Uncategorized.

Someone explain to me how bing.com is a “decision engine”? Anyone else get more enjoyment out of the comments on boston.com’s news stories than the stories themselves?

4 Comments Add your own

1. David Rondeau | July 14, 2009 at 2:40 pm

I’ve been thinking lately about this kind of thing a lot. These poor user experiences seem to be especially pronounced when the system or some part of the system is not subject to the normal forces of a mass consumer market. (See my post at IXDA http://www.ixda.org/discuss.php?post=43446#43446)

I wonder if the “solution” was actually dreamt up by some technology company who thought it was a good idea and that company then “sold” the new technology to Bank of America. It’s quite possible that no user data was gathered before designing and no user testing was done before implementation. The company may have provided what I would call. a “solution in search of a problem” to BofA, who believed what they were told about the product. And why wouldn’t they, they’re a bank, not a design firm.

At this point it probably won’t matter how much people complain about the new ATMs because it will be cost prohibitive for BofA to replace them all. In this case, the actual user of the product has been removed from the free market equation.

Another possibility may be that BofA bought and implemented the product because it would save them time, money, or both by streamlining the work of the bank employees that have to deal with things deposited into the ATM. Even if this is true, it would have been beneficial for BofA to consider the user experience of the ATM. After all, a bad experience at one touchpoint will still have some negative affect on BofA’s brand perception.

David Rondeau
Design Chair
InContext Design

Twitter: dbrondeau
Reply
- 2. traciuxd | July 14, 2009 at 2:54 pm
  
  I would have to agree with you that it did probably happen that way..or something close to it. What’s sad is that it is also true that they can’t go back and change it now. Their only way to intervene would be to not finish updating all the machines. But I doubt that will happen.
  
  It’s definitely something that is bound to have some impact on the brand perception. Especially when I’m not sure any other bank is using the same system yet or will be likely to if this gets lots of flack.
  
  I think it will be interesting to see how it plays out. I can’t imagine I’m the only one who thinks this new system is much more frustrating and time consuming than the simple put the stuff in an envelope one was previously.
  
  And here is another blogger who had about the same thoughts as me. http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2007/06/13/my-first-experience-with-the-new-bank-of-america-atms/
  Reply
3. sangriaporcupine | August 19, 2009 at 11:12 pm

Am I the only one kind of glad about not having to waste paper (aka the envelopes)? I also do use ATMs that don’t see too many people in line.
Reply
- 4. traciuxd | August 20, 2009 at 12:09 am
  
  Not wasting paper is definitely a good thing, that’s not the problem. But what value when they disrupt the experience and service so much?
  Reply

TraciUXD's Blog