I'm an executive coach. I've spent most of my career in software/technical leadership. I'm rebuilding my site and I'm playing with two completely different design directions.
The link randomly shows one of them. I'm especially interested in what you infer about me and the work from the first 30 seconds — and, if you compare both, which feels more trustworthy and why.
I'm interested in what's unclear, generic, or not working.
Clicking on the top header link sections for both variants causes the page to scroll around quite a bit - bouncing from section to section. it has a disorienting effect. It seems like the top heading links are out of order with the sections on the page, so there's a lot of "jostling" back and forth.
My approach section feels upside down. I'd maybe lead with the passage about I don't offer one-size-fits-all bit first and have my guiding principals afterwards but I'm 100% not a designer.
Overall, the site design feels clean and easy to navigate.
A few minor things caught on me, most of them are wording/word choice related.
It is entirely possible that much of this is also me projecting.
1. EXECUTIVE COACHING FOR TECH INDUSTRY CHALLENGES
Right at the very top, this branding tag feels a bit narrowly defined, and clashes a bit with some of the top-branded partners you've worked with, and some of the testimonials. When I first saw this, I sort of thought, "oh, this isn't for me" because I don't self-identify with this. I see a lot of finance/business, and while I guess you could say that folks in finance are assessing tech industry challenges, my mind first went specifically to the classic tech industry. Your explanation of your background and personal history does help bridge that. I do really like the choice of the word "outliers" where you show the logos; that might be a good word to sub in there at the top that will cast a wider net.
2. "Building Irreplaceable Tech Leaders"
This headline caught on me. To me this feels like some combination of impossible moonshot (how can you build something that cannot be replaced?), and possibly inadvisable. Not that it is your intention, but it feels like it's speaking a bit to an ego backed into a corner with a promise that it'll be coached in a way that it will survive whatever it's presently white-knuckling through. There is a sense of it's a bit too good to be true? Which may itself be the purpose -- it's a good hook.
3. Testimonials
Love your design here -- such a simple antidote to cherrypicking. It shows the extended context, which builds credibility and trustworthiness.
4. PROBLEMS WE’LL SOLVE
Minor nit -- the way it's phrased "PROBLEMS WE’LL SOLVE: The Weight of Critical Responsibility Can Lead To" caught on the editor part of me. This is doing too many things at once and it's uncertainty what it is we will do; simplify it down to add clarity. I might swap the order of this and make Problems we'll solve the section title (in bigger font), and then on a separate line, succinctly define critical responsibility (what it is -- right now, it's undefined), and then what it leads to.
5. Guiding Principles
The mouseover highlighting the boxes in blue makes my brain believe it's clickable but it isn't. Might be good to make this expandable in the future?
6. Core belief
This is a great little bit. I'd consider merging it with the guiding principles, or having a more prominent spot in the about yourself section. I'm leaning more towards the guiding principles, though, as the about me is towards the end.
7. Sentence casing
For your section titles (not the ones in all caps), consider sentence casing.
8. The navigation's order seems a little odd. When I click on it, it moves me up and down the page. Also whenever I see the "about me" at the very top of the nav, it does make me think that the "me" of you is seen by you as important / a play for credibility. I don't think that was your intention, having known you for a while now. :)
I like A a bit more. Feels a bit more like you, and I like the mix of blues and greens with the page -- it's a bit more "earthy".
From a graphics side, I liked background especially in the "Leaders in High-Stakes Roles Amid Rapid Change" part -- the ups and downs of the "mountains" is a good metaphor for the ups and downs which come with life; additionally, the line goes through ups and downs but ultimately goes up and to the right. Pendulation!
If I had to choose between the two, I preferred the visuals of A.
Would you give me some feedback for my birthday?
I'm an executive coach. I've spent most of my career in software/technical leadership. I'm rebuilding my site and I'm playing with two completely different design directions.
The link randomly shows one of them. I'm especially interested in what you infer about me and the work from the first 30 seconds — and, if you compare both, which feels more trustworthy and why.
I'm interested in what's unclear, generic, or not working.
Comment with your feedback here.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Clicking on the top header link sections for both variants causes the page to scroll around quite a bit - bouncing from section to section. it has a disorienting effect. It seems like the top heading links are out of order with the sections on the page, so there's a lot of "jostling" back and forth.
My approach section feels upside down. I'd maybe lead with the passage about I don't offer one-size-fits-all bit first and have my guiding principals afterwards but I'm 100% not a designer.
Love this. Thank you.
Happy birthday, Eric!
I viewed version B.
Overall, the site design feels clean and easy to navigate.
A few minor things caught on me, most of them are wording/word choice related.
It is entirely possible that much of this is also me projecting.
1. EXECUTIVE COACHING FOR TECH INDUSTRY CHALLENGES Right at the very top, this branding tag feels a bit narrowly defined, and clashes a bit with some of the top-branded partners you've worked with, and some of the testimonials. When I first saw this, I sort of thought, "oh, this isn't for me" because I don't self-identify with this. I see a lot of finance/business, and while I guess you could say that folks in finance are assessing tech industry challenges, my mind first went specifically to the classic tech industry. Your explanation of your background and personal history does help bridge that. I do really like the choice of the word "outliers" where you show the logos; that might be a good word to sub in there at the top that will cast a wider net.
2. "Building Irreplaceable Tech Leaders" This headline caught on me. To me this feels like some combination of impossible moonshot (how can you build something that cannot be replaced?), and possibly inadvisable. Not that it is your intention, but it feels like it's speaking a bit to an ego backed into a corner with a promise that it'll be coached in a way that it will survive whatever it's presently white-knuckling through. There is a sense of it's a bit too good to be true? Which may itself be the purpose -- it's a good hook.
3. Testimonials Love your design here -- such a simple antidote to cherrypicking. It shows the extended context, which builds credibility and trustworthiness.
4. PROBLEMS WE’LL SOLVE Minor nit -- the way it's phrased "PROBLEMS WE’LL SOLVE: The Weight of Critical Responsibility Can Lead To" caught on the editor part of me. This is doing too many things at once and it's uncertainty what it is we will do; simplify it down to add clarity. I might swap the order of this and make Problems we'll solve the section title (in bigger font), and then on a separate line, succinctly define critical responsibility (what it is -- right now, it's undefined), and then what it leads to.
5. Guiding Principles The mouseover highlighting the boxes in blue makes my brain believe it's clickable but it isn't. Might be good to make this expandable in the future?
6. Core belief This is a great little bit. I'd consider merging it with the guiding principles, or having a more prominent spot in the about yourself section. I'm leaning more towards the guiding principles, though, as the about me is towards the end.
7. Sentence casing For your section titles (not the ones in all caps), consider sentence casing.
8. The navigation's order seems a little odd. When I click on it, it moves me up and down the page. Also whenever I see the "about me" at the very top of the nav, it does make me think that the "me" of you is seen by you as important / a play for credibility. I don't think that was your intention, having known you for a while now. :)
Viewing version A by comparison:
I like A a bit more. Feels a bit more like you, and I like the mix of blues and greens with the page -- it's a bit more "earthy".
From a graphics side, I liked background especially in the "Leaders in High-Stakes Roles Amid Rapid Change" part -- the ups and downs of the "mountains" is a good metaphor for the ups and downs which come with life; additionally, the line goes through ups and downs but ultimately goes up and to the right. Pendulation!
If I had to choose between the two, I preferred the visuals of A.