Merging firstname/last name into one field

Question

I am entertaining the notion of a single field for name entry on our scheduling web app. I think this is an excellent case for a "forgiving format" to make it easy to enter their names quickly. I would label it and possibly put additional placeholder text guiding the user. Like this:

It's important to catch first and last name correctly because it gets saved in our contact database that we provide to our users. However, people could enter "Joe De Maggio" or "Dr. Chopra" or "Ms Sally Ann Mc Dumont". The possibilities are many.

Is this choice wise? Is the engineering worth the UX? Does anyone know a plugin that tackles this?

Answer 1

There are a great many assumptions people make about names (also: W3C: Personal names around the world.)

Thankfully the W3C have some excellent advice on field design for names, of which the simplest is to use two fields (but not for first/last):

• Full name
  [________________]
• What should we call you? (for example, when we send you mail?)
  [________________]

Answer 2

Here's a scenario where it might work to your advantage:

1. The user enters their full name in one field.
2. The system reverse concatenates the name as best it can.
3. The field shows the split apart name so the user can verify it.

If it's correct, no further action needed. If it's wrong, a little edit button lets them go to the complex form (two fields) and correct their name.

But is all the development required to create a smart enough algorithm worth the saved microseconds of user time? I think not. I would spend more time on properly cueing the user to what your form expects, i.e. use standard, best practices.

Here's how I think it actually works for most people:

Answer 3

It does look like good UX but if the DB has different fields it's highly improbable that you are going to make it right 100% of the time.

Here is what I would do: implement a very smart parser, but, before commiting, ask for confirmation from the user. Chances are that the parser made it right (then the user would only have to confirm), and if it made it wrong, then provide two inputs or a reasonable amount of alternatives.

Let's say she enters Lalita Angie Singh:

Is this correct?

• Name: Lalita Angie
• Surname: Singh

No! Edit manually or continue with the form...

...in all, it does seem too much for a simple an imput as Name and Surname are, but craftily executed can be quite a novelty.

Answer 4

It makes for a great idea if the DB is also dealing with it as a single string. (Usually with a follow up field requesting how the user would preferred to be referred to in "short" form. e.g. Full Name: Dr Nicholas Riveria Short Name: Dr Nick)

If the DB is expecting the name as seperate fields then attempting to create a automated system to split the full name into its component parts is an almost impossible task... mainly because even humans tend to get it wrong (and if a human can't do it, what chance do they have in getting a machine to do it).

The classic examples of automated systems (and humans) failing at this is when it comes to dealing with users from cultures where it's normal to cite one's family name first. e.g. A lot of Asia and the Middle East.

My suggestion would be to change the DB instead... but failing that keep the fields in the UI in line with the DB and try one's best to indicate to the user which name should go in which field.

Answer 5

The viability of splitting a single field into name and surnames depends on:

• The desired success ratio. You can apply some heuristics such as consider a list of common names and surnames or adopting rules depending on the country to increase the ratio but 100% success is not possible*.

• The impact of a mistake. How bad are the consequences of splitting a name the wrong way? You may consider using two fields when users edit their name later. This way they can prevent a mistake.

I would label the field as "full name" instead of just "name".

*An example of a name that is impossible to split correctly is the full name of Pablo Picasso( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picasso) : Pablo Diego José Francisco de Paula Juan Nepomuceno María de los Remedios Cipriano de la Santísima Trinidad Ruiz y Picasso

Answer 6

Although I particularly like https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/15778/40116 the business requirement as stated by the OP.

It's important to catch first and last name correctly because it gets saved in our contact database that we provide to our users.

Would override any engineering or UX alterations. For the OP, they shouldn't change the way the input is done unless the business would agree to the change as this would also have downstream effects on their existing legacy infrastructure which may also require a proper split of first name and last name.

The closest thing I would recommend is to just trim the names for extra spaces at the end and in between and prevent numbers in the name.

The answer https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/15778/40116 would make better sense for self registration, but for administrative data entry for government or banking applications it is best to keep it separate especially for sorting.

Answer 7

The benefit to unifying the name field is that it's faster for users to fill out. This is due to less tabbing,flexible formatting and fewer eye fixations.

But it's not always good to unify the fields. What if you need to parse the last name from the first? Sometimes it's unclear which is the last name if you have a name with many word strings like Ludwig Van Beethoven. If you need to parse the last name for your app, you should use separate name fields.

Answer 8

If you need specific information - be specific:

• State you require BOTH a first name and surname.
• It's very possible to automatically split the two strings into their required components.
• It's also possible to apply validation routine to the input to ensure that two strings (no more / less) are entered separated by a space.

This would provide you with the same result as two separate inputs.

The main problem would the extra cost in terms of development time / complexity. You'd need to work out if the benefit justifies the increased cost.

Answer 9

I think this idea has merit, but I also agree that parsing it correctly in the general case is going to take a lot of work and you may never get it 100% right. If this isn't entered as if it were a mailing addressee, and thus subject to some pretty strict conventions, I think you are asking for trouble (and by "trouble" I mean corrupted/dirty data).

In addition to a high level of exercise with unit tests, maybe a hybrid approach would work? Have a single field as you want, whose contents are parsed out into additional fields that can be hidden behind a collapsible section of the UI. If the user wants to make sure you parsed it out right, they can expand the div (or you can do it for them when they tab out of the textbox) and they can see the split-out name. If it didn't work right, they could edit the individual name fields.

I think overall this would give your users the convenience you're after in the normal case, while keeping the form usable in exceptional cases.

Answer 10

For me the basic principle should be: make things as simple for user as they can be, but then give them the choice to go advanced path.

In this case i would use single field with something like "First name, Last name" as watermark suggesting that user should use a comma to split first and last name. However, if he doesn't do it, you should split it automatically.

Then user should be able to edit it in his profile in more advanced way.

The perfect example is the Gmail contacts app. There is one field for name. the first word you enter is by default considered as first name, and the rest of the string is last name (didn't try with prefixes like Mrs. or Mr.). However, then you can click on three dots icon and a popup form with details comes when you have ability to enter first name, last name, company, etc separately.

In my opinion this is the best approach.

Answer 11

One field is always more favorable to fill in than two, but there are two things at play here.

1.Being inclusive and trying to cope with any name in a culturally sensitive way.

2.Formatting it to how much of the western world does.

Some cultures who don't even have family names but do have two or three names. If we are trying to format a name so it is correct for everyone then the only possible way is to have a single field and expect the user to know how their name is written.

However most places you are trying to send this data, CRM etc. wants a name to be formatted as First and Last. I would like to think that maybe sometime in the future a single field will be more the norm.

These two concepts will never work for everyone. Is it culturally insensitive to allow or force it to be formatted for most of your customers whatever that be? I'm not even sure how that would work in multi cultural societies (where I live)

Answer 12

The user won't always have a last name because it is culturally dependent. So even if you wanted to provide the user specific info from your database you wouldn't be able to do that for every user.

What you can provide users is their full name because everyone has a name no matter what culture they're from.

I was on the fence about using one or two name fields but this article convinced be to go with one: http://uxmovement.com/forms/why-your-form-only-needs-one-name-field/