"As the web consulting industry started to take shape, firms tried to create proprietary approaches that would separate them from the competition by giving the perception of a more disciplined and scientific focus on the work. It seems that just about all of the approaches were similar except for a few nuances or catchy acronyms. I've been in Thailand for a few weeks, and there is a common expression that I think perfectly fits some of the formalized IA approaches. "Same, Same but different.""
"In a misguided effort to measure the effectiveness of an architecture, many researchers assess variables such as time on task (how long it takes a user to complete a given task) and error rate and recovery (the number of errors and how users recover). While these may be relevant in certain situations, like diffusing bombs or responding to 911 calls, I think they can be misleading when trying to measure the average user's experience on the Internet."
, from oldest to newest:
I agree and like this interview with Seth Goden, well until I reached the end of the article when he mentioned...
"They have earned my wallet share both for good service and because they have me locked in with high barriers of switching. So, even if a new site comes online with killer IA, they're going to have a hard time getting me to use the service because I'm sticking with the tried and true."
I don't really think anybody ever rationally considered IA to be a deciding factor in user preference. I agree that I am a creature of habit too, but better service, better product selection, or better price (if it is a commerce site) may change my current preferences. IA helps to ensure that if a business offers one or more of these business benefits the user finds the site usable and the information that helps make these choices helpful. IA is the component that makes sure things are done correctly, but is not a factor for impressing prospective users/customers.
To illustrate this point I had been a devoted Amazon user for my online purchases. A couple years ago I found FatBrain and began using them as they had better discounts on some of the books I was purchasing. FatBrain's site was very usable, but it was the selection of books books, price, fantastic customer service (an e-mail or call would get an immediate responce and often physical check of the progress of my order), reviews, and discount sales were integrated in a manner that I found extremely helpful. I would find many other resources that I was interested in because of their site build, which I assume was attributable to an IA. FatBrain was bought by Barnes and Noble. The site's layout changed and I no longer could find, with any amount of determination the items and areas that were of use to me. The grouping of items that I found helpful previously was no longer in existance and the categories changed the results behind the clicks. Most importantly the prices increased, the customer service also dwindled, as did their bargin areas. Had FatBrain kept the great customer service and great prices I would have put up with the poor site design. I was gone and back using Amazon as my preferred on-line book provider.
In short, IA matters as but not as an entity on its own. Getting IA wrong loses your users (customers for those in commerce sites) and conversely getting IA right helps users take advantage of the main reason they are at a site. IA helps a user that comes to a site for one purpose find associated information that may also be of interest to the user.
I also differ with the interview in that from my view the past few years tended to segregate elements of the IA/UX/Usability Research tasks into separate jobs. It seems that many of these rolls have moved back in to single positions or fall under one roll in the process. The IA, it seems to me, is often the role player that guides and performs the user testing research, evaluates the outcome, and ties the findings to tasks.
Posted by vanderwal @ 07/20/2001 03:54 PM pst
~~~
The most interesting thing about this article (to me) was Seth G.'s comment about software-based methodology coming to the fore. I've felt a groundswell of this lately, especially with the increasing resemblance of web applications to software applications.
Not coincidentally, traditional software design methodology happens to be what my company's IA methodology is based on, for the most part.
Seems to me that most IAs will have to study software architecture/design in order for their skills to be relevant in 2+ years.
Posted by Anne @ 07/21/2001 10:25 AM pst
~~~
