Web design in Oxford

Translation is not dilution

The fear is that explaining the work simply makes it look less rigorous. In practice the rigour lives in the detail, which stays exactly where it is; what changes is whether a non-specialist can get far enough to reach it.

The structure that works: one sentence on what the problem is, one on what you do about it, one on why it matters — then the technical account underneath for the reader who wants it.

Spin-outs that do this well raise money and partnerships more easily, not because the science changed but because more of the right people could tell what it was.

Several audiences, one site

A research business is usually talking to investors, commercial partners, potential hires and occasionally the public, all at once. Those groups want different things and reward different registers.

Giving each a clear route — rather than one page attempting all four — is the structural decision that matters most, and it is free.

The ordinary city underneath

Beyond the research economy, Oxford is a tourism, retail and services city with an enormous seasonal and term-time swing.

Those businesses need the ordinary disciplines: fast on a phone, findable locally, and honest about opening hours in a city where visitors outnumber residents for much of the year.

Questions people here ask

Will simplifying our description undersell the science?

No, provided the technical detail remains underneath. The greater risk is that a non-specialist cannot tell what you do and moves on before reaching it.

Who should a spin-out's site be written for?

Decide, then give the others their own route. Investors, partners and hires want different things, and one page trying to address all three usually persuades none.

Do we need case studies if the work is confidential?

Anonymised problem-and-outcome descriptions still work and are often permissible. They demonstrate judgement, which a capability list cannot.