BOMshell Could Have Been Avoided By Designing For Crayfishermen and Cattle Drovers, Not Citydwellers

People don’t really like change. And they especially don’t like it when it comes to digital experience design. So when the Bureau of Meteorology released its updated website last week, some level of public grumbling was to be expected. But the hurricane of public contempt -- “Not happy BOM”, “aBOMonable!”, “How very Canberra” -- is refusing to blow over, and could have been avoided.

There are three lessons we can take from the cautionary tale.

Never Sacrifice Your Superuser

When the BOM (or “The Bureau”, as it insisted on being called in a 2021 in a similar public debacle) site launched on Thursday, the people who were most vocal about the changes were farmers, sailors, and pilots – professional users who are on the site up to 10 times a day.

Townsville commercial fisherman Nathan Rynn told the ABC he checked the site from his boat and "couldn't see the kilometres per hour on the radar and the direction of the wind."

For Nathan, key information that was once available on a single page now requires multiple clicks to access. For farmers and emergency service personnel, the new site is clunky, confusing, and difficult to navigate.

But what Nathan finds frustrating works okay for me. As someone who only uses it to check if my BBQ might get washed out, I like that the site is more customisable, mobile responsive, and less overwhelming. But designing the site for me is a big mistake.

When you optimise for the light user, you disenfranchise expert users who really know and care for your brand. You end up creating something for people who aren’t invested, and that can lead to something that isn’t that interesting. The BOM reckons the site was created with community consultation, and I’m sure it was.

But the BOM should have spent enough time designing with and for the crayfishermen and cattle drovers.

Keep Signature Experiences Sacred

Every brilliant brand has a signature experience at its heart; something that sets the brand apart and perfectly captures its promise. We’re talking the Bunnings BBQ, MECCA’s Beauty Loop, Spotify Wrapped.

For the BOM, it’s the radar -- in fact, the BOM is the radar. It’s what makes the BOM different from all the other weather apps and sites. People loved the BOM site, and they loved it because of the radar.

On the new site, not only is the radar less functional, missing towns or key geographical markers, but it is also relegated further down the site (at least, before you customise it).

Your signature experiences are the heart of your brand. They need to be loved, crafted, and cared for. The design should have started with the radar, and 80% of time and effort focused there.

Better Utility is the Case For Change

BOM's senior meteorologist, Miriam Bradbury, told the media the site changes were designed to "bring our website into 2025 looking much more modern, much more sleek”. This was an own goal, feeding a narrative of aesthetic over utility, and form over function.

Never say you changed an experience to make something look "more modern," especially a government resource people love and depend upon. The case for change needed to be improved resilience, security, accessibility, and new capabilities, like faster loading or better API integration.

Basing the change on “look and feel” opens you up to the inevitable complaints about cost and waste, with new fury today about the redesign’s $4 million cost (not actually bad value for critical infrastructure).

Yesterday, Bureau meteorologist Michael Logan defended the change, and did a better job telling a new message: "The underlying IT just wasn't as secure, as resilient and as reliable as it needed to be."

Sadly, the damage is now done. And it’s unlikely this storm will blow over anytime soon.