At Seybold a creative director came up to me after one of the panels wondrering why he couldn't teach himself IA, or suggest his designers learn IA, and skip hiring one. I had to admit that if he had good designers, and the site was not overly complex, he could easily do exactly as he proposed-- and if he considered IA to be sitemaps and wireframes. However, if he needed to consider metadata-theasuri-controlled vocabularies, if he needed to plot out multiple use scenrios, if he had multiple user groups whose needs had to be plotted out, prioritized and met, he might wish to expand a team to someone whose was a specialist in this area. Kind of like he might hire an illustrator to do some illustrations for a design. Or he might say, my kids can do it.
We often forget in these theorectical discussions that teams are made of people. It's entirely possible a CD might say, hey my lead IA Joe can design quite respectably, and this data input form requires no brilliant innovation, just excellent information design which Joe can provide. Or a CD might say, hey, my lead designer Carla is an outstanding informtion designer as well as getting the brand down pat... I've going to send Joe over to do some card sorts while Carla makes this messy form usable.
Design and IA have an overlap-- they aren't identical by any means, but they share some turf. That turf can be a cause for turf-wars, or it can be a place where a savvy CD can get a lot from his team.
, from oldest to newest:
the comments here are really different than 'User experience, usability, and information architecture are just the sorts of things that are sure to make a designer's eyes glaze over.'
Posted by ttk @ 10/01/2001 08:52 AM pst
~~~
The turf mentioned can be extended out to other parts of a web development effort, such as coding. In a sense, almost everyone involved in a given web development project is sharing responsibility for the holistic well being of the end result. In my experience the team members who exhibit interests outside of their department or specialty tend to be more collaborative and less defensively pigeonholed. Certainly having each specialist focused primarily on their area (designers on design, etc) makes a higher quality product, but without intermingling the turf wars can become a problem. I also believe that without the cross breeding of motivation, decisions start being made based on whom is the strongest personality, rather than for the betterment of the project and end user.
Posted by Nate @ 10/01/2001 09:12 AM pst
~~~
While some of us may live in a idealistic world where web designers know information architecture, good layout and excellect function over form, reality plays a pretty harsh roll in telling us that this is simply not true in the real world.
I agree with the statement Mike makes here, and I quot, "If you are a designer and have decided that these skills are not part of 'what you do' then you're selling yourself short." I live by the principle that IA and UE are just as important to the designer's role as typography, branding, colors and layout. I do believe form ever follows function and I do understand that IA is critical to the sucess of a web site. However, playing a blind eye to all of the hords of designers out there that apparently don't give a damn about IA for whatever absurd reason is just as bad as being part of the problem ourselves.
You are either part of the problem or you are part of the solution. You can not be part of the solution if you do not address the problem.
Posted by Nick Finck @ 10/01/2001 09:30 AM pst
~~~
'However, playing a blind eye to all of the hords of designers out there that apparently don't give a damn about IA for whatever absurd reason is just as bad as being part of the problem ourselves.'
you neglect to point out the hordes of IA folks who don't know what the hell they're doing.
not to mention tossing the handgrenade out there about 'branding.'
Posted by ttk @ 10/01/2001 10:11 AM pst
~~~
This balance and trade-off is common on small development teams and also with one or two person in-house Webmasters. It is rare to find someone that excels and enjoys both the design and the IA tasks. A designer can provide a greater value add by understanding some of the basics of IA/user experience design and conversely an IA will be able to better understand the design impact on usable interfaces by learning the elements of design.
In a similar vane it is good to note that great cutting edge design and a solid site based on IA/user centric design are not mutually exclusive. This is not like a teeter-tot where the extremes are at opposite ends away from the fulcrum. Each field of focus enhances the other and does not necessarily have to detract from the other.
Christina's examples highlight this.
Posted by vanderwal @ 10/01/2001 10:25 AM pst
~~~
mostly i agree with what christina is saying here. however, i'm interested in misconception that IA somehow equals user-experience. User experience, is shared across the board by everyone contributing to a project. The way information is architected, the decisions on which technology is used, the palette, the tone; all these contribute to the user experience.
Also, i find the thought of IA and design having an overlap to be humorous. Like saying there's an overlap between your arm and your elbow. IA is a specialized design field, just as interaction design is a specialized design field. It's all design folks.
Posted by mike @ 10/01/2001 10:33 AM pst
~~~
elbow and arm! i like that. I should have said graphic design, as I said earlier... that was my point of mentioning illustration. IA is indeed a subset of design: as is system architecture... all part of what's being called "big D design" these days. or user experience.
Posted by christina @ 10/01/2001 10:50 AM pst
~~~
Quote #1
"When you publish, you teach; and when you teach designers to limit the scope of their commitment to design you're being a bad teacher."
It might be true that when you publish you teach. However, that is rarely the primary purpose of design. And limitations on scope are intentional, and that seems entirely appropriate.
Does it really matter that a designer is being a bad teacher? Sometimes, but more often than not, that is not a concern. Unless the design is truly about art or education, then the responsibility to teach is extremely limited.
Designers design, teachers teach.
Quote #2
"Designers solve problems."
This is generally true. However, we need to be aware that there is some heavy baggage that goes along with this idea.
Any time a problem is solved, via design or some other mechanism, you create new problems. To take a very simple example, if you design a car to emit fewer harmful gases (problem solved), it is very likely that the price of the car will do up (problem created).
Going back to the first comment about teaching, what did we learn? We learned that solving problems creates more problems.
Designers are designers. They should be concerned with usability, information architecture, anthropology, but also Coca Cola, apple pie, and the Taliban. Why? Because designers need knowledge and information. To solve problems, not teach, designers need to have a handle on the problems to be solved. They also need the full scope so that when they solve their design problems, they can think beyond the immediate design goal.
Solving problems is not a trivial exercise, even when the problems are trivial.
To think that designers are in charge of all problem solving is also a trap. Usability professionals, for example, also solve problems. Their tools are different, but they do indeed solve problems. Problem solvers are all over the place. Be sure to think broadly.
Posted by John S. Rhodes @ 10/01/2001 10:50 AM pst
~~~
john,
i said designers solve problems. i also said IAs, usability professionals and the like are all designers as far as i'm concerned. i'm very aware we all solve problems, but also aware that we don't solve ALL problems. (I, for one, have no idea what to do with my hair today.)
But i do feel the need to attempt to understand the nature of the problems put in front of me. Part of that is knowing when a problem is over my head, true enough. But I wouldn't be a very good designer if i just through my arms in the air and said, "Hey, that's an IA issue. I ain't going neer it."
I am thinking broadly, John. If anything, I'm the one arguing for a broader definition.
Posted by mike @ 10/01/2001 11:23 AM pst
~~~
Mike,
I agree that the user experience should be embraced from the breadth of a design/development team. Some of the confusion could be that many folks here (reading eleganthack) come at the term from an IA perspective, where IA can be seen as a sub part of user experience design, which also includes the user group analysis (ethnography studies), task analysis, mental mapping, user testing, etc. To many with an IA perspective these tasks are outside graphic design, but the IAs need work closely with graphic design to completely embrace the user experience.
I like the arm analogy that you started using. If that arm has a compound fracture with the bone sticking through the skin there would be a team of specialists (if you are in a large enough community to support this breadth and you have the insurance to cover the specialization) that would focus on treating the wound. An orthopedist would set the bone and examine tissue and ligament damage, a plastic surgeon would treat the outer wound, a neurosurgeon may treat nerve damage, and a physical therapist would help with recovery. They are all doctors in the medical profession just as we are all designers and developers working on toward the same end goal.
The age of the medical profession has helped set its terminology, whereas in the Web and the broader Information Application development field is younger and has overlapping terms that have slightly different meanings the perspective of the different specialties. In the past few years specialties and niche roles grew in importance, but now it seems that many of us cross many roles and an even greater breadth of tasks.
Therefore, if I am outside the IA sphere (away from eleganthack) and working within the graphic design sphere I would completely agree with you about user experience design being everybody?s focus. Each of the designers and developers that know as much as can be known about the users and how that knowledge should positively impact the end product will bring greater success.
Posted by vanderwal @ 10/01/2001 12:32 PM pst
~~~
Thomas, good analogy... don't forget that a PHD is involved with being a doctor. And yet it seems that anyone and their mother's dog can call themselves a "web designer", an "information architect" or a "web developer."
Posted by Nick Finck @ 10/01/2001 01:13 PM pst
~~~
Mike,
I hope you didn't take my earlier posting as an attack. Instead, I was trying to expand on some issues regarding learning and problem solving. Mea culpa, if I offended you.
As we both seem to agree, many people solve problems. That is what we have in common. It is an interesting topic to me because in my role as a project manager I see different people using different tools and problem solving methods. That might seem shallow, but it has deep implications.
I want to really understand how usability folks solve problems versus IA folks. That will help me manage my projects. When I have my usability hat on, it will also help me interact with IA folks, and designers.
Regarding my teaching comment, you did not respond. Are my comments wrong or misguided in some way? I would sincerely like to know what you think about what I said.
For me, this thread is an investigation into the psychology of IA and of design. I would very much like to understand how various folks think (and problem solve). Do people really think when they provide a design that it is meant to teach other people? That definitely seems like a goal that is subsumed under the goal of solving a problem (or better, solving a customer problem and therefore making money).
Posted by John S. Rhodes @ 10/01/2001 01:31 PM pst
~~~
Good point Nick. Maybe the world needs better educated clients and project sponsors that have the understanding of how to sort those wearing labels of "web designer" etc. and those who actually can do these tasks.
As a point I am nervous about calling myself a designer in fear that someone might think I am a graphic designer. I can put two pixels next to each other but I would not call it design. I can of differentiate colors/shades/hues and have an interminable love of fonts/typography, but also know that is not enough to be called a designer. I do consider myself more adept at developing/programming applications. I know that applications have a greater rate of success if I focus on the IA/user experience design components. Whereas a graphic designer who ignores IA and user-centric design ends up with what could be called art, but an unusable application is worthless.
Posted by vanderwal @ 10/01/2001 01:47 PM pst
~~~
As a graphic designer turned IA turned interaction designer, I think the better trained you are the more likely the overlap in skills. Most designers have the skills for problem solving, some have the skills for dealing with lots of content and it's organization and for creating intuitive interactive spaces. Some designers don't. I think the type of background you have, the type of temperament you have all plays a part in whether or not you are a hybrid - like me - where the IA and developing the structure of the data and info is as interesting to work on as the end visual experience. I think there are huge overlaps - and many designers I know are embracing those overlaps. Most of these designers - the ones I know - were trained pre-computer, and their problem solving skills don't rely on the computer tools.
The traditional graphic designer who is feeling disinfranchised in the process or who doesn't want to do IA is definitely selling themselves short. Many of these designers seem to be younger in their careers and are probably focussed on the visual end as well as on what the tools can do rather than what their brain can do.
I am sure to hear some slams for that comment - but it is the kind of thing I have seen. This does a disservice to graphic design. Graphic design is about creating effective communications and solving problems - visually - for clients, for our companies, etc. It is not about art - but that is not to say that it can't be aesthetically pleasing.
In addition to the overlaps - I feel there are whole other portions of the IA spectrum that I wouldn't even begin to tread into. These are the areas that the Library Science specialist is the expert in. The metadata space, the content management and organization space as well as others. This is why - when I built my last team at AltaVista, the team had MLS degreed IAs and BFA/MFA degreed IAs and interaction designers. Sometimes one person CAN'T do everything.
Posted by erin @ 10/01/2001 02:36 PM pst
~~~
Just returned from lunch with an interesting woman who works for fitch, and she said she has noticed two distinct schools of design. One is the "design as art" school-- design for the purpose of innovation and expression. the other is the "design for use" school, with emphasis on customer-centric practices. She said that these two schools of thought came from actual schools, though I fear I've quite forgotten who teaches what. eh.
She also pointed out that companies follow these schools; she was at razorfish in 1997, and then it was very much design as art; fitch is very much design for use. interesting stuff-- anyone know which schools teach these mindsets?
Posted by christina @ 10/01/2001 04:43 PM pst
~~~
Illinois Institute of Technology, Institute of Design and Carnegie Mellon very much teach Design for Use. Cranbrook seemed to be known for teaching design for expression - a few years agog. RIT's Graduate Design program (where I went) was about solving the conceptual problem using cognitive psychology, information design, exploration, associations, semiotics, understanding the end viewer/user and their needs and other problem solving skills to design solutions.
Posted by erin @ 10/01/2001 04:56 PM pst
~~~
i think erin makes some very good points. although i'd argue that a designer that understands ia, interaction, cognitive psychology, etc. is not a hybrid. It's just a well-rounded designer.
hybrids are made when you mate mares with asses. heh.
Posted by mike @ 10/01/2001 05:20 PM pst
~~~
I'll remember to call myself well rounded from now on as I don't want to be confused with an ass/mare hybrid. What would that be called?
Posted by erin @ 10/01/2001 08:56 PM pst
~~~
Erin: An ass/mare crossbreeding results in a mule.
Posted by jze @ 10/01/2001 09:12 PM pst
~~~
I'm the guy who actually wrote the interview questions, and I'll be the first to suggest that they had a strong editorial slant.
My purpose in conducting the interview the way I did was not to practice some sort of "self-hatred" but instead to point out to the bells-and-whistles types that there's a Real World out there... and positive, perhaps even creative, ways to work within its restraints.
By understanding fundamental usability and user experience, a visual design specialist can make his or job a lot easier, obviating rejections and change orders from clients, CD's, and managers that occur as a result of undue attention to the end user. (This was also discussed recently on flazoom.com.)
I see this need as yet another consequence of the Web's "growing pains" as it's made its transition from print and CD-ROM conventions. As a trade, we are getting better... but we still have a ways to go.
From the tone of his post, it would seem that Mike is one of the "enlightened ones" but for each of him there are still three or four who are just getting their wits about them when it comes to the focussed practice of information architecture and related disciplines. As I pointed out in the first question, it was the latter (and in my opinion larger) group that was being taken into the greatest consideration.
The mission of the magazine is to educate, as Mike himself points out. While Nick and I have had some passionate (but civilized) debates on how to approach that task from an editorial angle, the fact remains that... if you know it all, you should probably request an invitation to contribute an article (or better yet, start a site of your own).
Otherwise, take the best and throw the rest away, regardless of its source.
Posted by Ben Henick @ 10/01/2001 10:02 PM pst
~~~
Cake Baking and Web Development - A Rant
If one were to approach baking a cake for a certain occasion, specifics would need to be identified.
There are Cake People that will determine the type of occasion the cake will be eaten, the number of people it will need to served to, the type of people that will be eating, and if the cake will be a desert or part of a larger sweets tray. These Cake People may sometimes realize that cupcakes are a better option.
The Cake People will specify the flavor of cake, the use of cherry chips or walnuts, the shape, size, number of tiers and the manner in which it is prepared. Cake People have recipes for all manner of cake, and know how to add or remove ingredients in order to make a wonderful cake.
Cake People are experts in preparing the cake. They have years of baking experience, know how to operate fancy ovens, can mix batter to a perfect consistency, can tell by view if the cake is done or not. They have a great set of cooking pans and dishes.
Then there are the Frosting People...
The Frosting People don't really care much about the cake itself. They apply the visible exterior to a finished cake, and are concerned with the appearance of the cake, believing this is the only reason someone will take a bite. They have bags of frosting and can do great things with sugar flowers and written names or happy birthday frosting balloons. They don't like to get dirty or covered in flour.
The Frosting People tend to want cakes to be round or square, bigger or smaller, based on what they want to write on them or what color the frosting will be. Many times the Frosting People will want to put strawberry frosting on a chocolate cake because they are overly fond of strawberry frosting. Usually they don't concern themselves with the fact that most people don't like eating a chocolate cake with strawberry frosting. It looks better in pink they will say, people like to eat pink cakes. Occasionally a cake will say happy birthday and be served at a wake.
Cake People will call on Frosting People to fix an imperfection of the cake, a small dent or odd corner.
Many Frosting People want to do the frosting first. They will tell you how it will be amazing, it will be the best frosting ever, other Frosting People will surely be envious of this, it will win all manner of cake awards, it will be a better cake than the party next door.
Then the Cake People are faced with baking a cake that can fit under all that frosting, fit the shape the Frosting People have set, and create a recipe for a cake thick enough to support all the frosting.
These cakes turn out to be not so good. But they seem to be more common lately. Maybe it's because most Cake People are tired of arguing with Frosting People. The Cake People rarely get props, as the people that eat the cake comment on how nice it looked, taking for granted it would taste wonderful.
People talk angrily if they eat a bad cake, pretty or not. They don't care why the cake was bad, they don't care about the difficulty of the baking process, they certainly don't care who's fault it was, they're just mad about having eaten a lousy cake.
Most often in these instances, the Frosting People are not held to blame.
The really good Cake People associate with Frosting People who understand how to bake a cake. They make sure the Frosting People understand why the cake is being made in a particular manner. Cake People are sometimes also Frosting People, Frosting People are rarely Cake People.
Good Frosting People add to the overall success of the cake by tailoring their frosting effots to the particular cake and the people it is meant to feed.
There are fewer good Frosting People than bad Frosting People.
Some Cake People have resorted to poundcake, forsaking the Frosting People, they have set up their ivory tower and are not leaving it. The Frosting People don't seem to mind, it's much easier to get a job as a Frosting Person than as a Cake Person.
It is a fact that people will buy a pretty cake before an ugly cake. Few people want to eat an ugly cake, or serve an ugly cake at a party. No one wants an ugly birthday cake, no matter how good it tastes.
The Frosting People think all people want to eat is frosting, not realizing that it only gives tummy-aches and sore teeth.
Posted by Andrew Heaton @ 10/02/2001 02:09 PM pst
~~~
Hey John,
I noticed that Mike didn't respond to your 'publish/teach' question.
What I got from mike's rant was not that IA/Designers were teaching, but that DigitalWeb was publishing the viewpoint (and thereby teaching) that designers don't have to learn IA.
Mike, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Posted by Scott @ 10/02/2001 04:20 PM pst
~~~
Cake-baking: An analogy gone awry. Please don't generalize as it really weakens your argument. You implied that all designers are surface-obsessed idiots and, to some degree, that powerless(!!) IAs haven't a clue about the role in which a beautiful skin plays in helping users interface with the information beneath everything. Will the lovely raspberries you place oh-so-gingerly as a garnish along with the fragile curls of chocolate shavings allude to the raspberry mousse between several layers of cake and chocolate ganache? You forget in your biased metaphor that butter cream frosting contributes as much to the overall taste of the cake as it does to looks...it is all part of the experience. Really, any good "Frosting Person" worth their #9 pastry tip wouldn't be using a gritty or saccharine frosting unless it was appropriate. Sheesh.
Posted by jze @ 10/02/2001 05:06 PM pst
~~~
Actually you inferred the cake people were IA's and the frosting people were graphic designers. there are plenty of fine cake and frosting designers, and plenty of IA's lovinglingly crafting their wireframes in 20 shades of gray, getting all sticky in the frosting.
personally I hate all frosting, though I do like good graphic design.
Posted by christina @ 10/02/2001 05:41 PM pst
~~~
ok. WHAT is up with the cake analogy? never mind the cake people and the frostig people. who are your CRACK people?!?
;)
Posted by mike @ 10/02/2001 10:21 PM pst
~~~
oh my, I don't think it's crack, i think we're dealing with potheads, pure and simple.
First we've got the original interviewer, making _no_ sense. Wait for the headrush to subside before approaching the keyboard, holmes.
And then the paisley-colored universe of gooey frosting people vs staunch cake people - someone just flat-out got the munchies, dude. Maybe a little acid flashback too.
and to think it all started with that cool arm/elbow analogy. sigh.
Giving a Good Design Forum a Bad Name
Posted by Scott @ 10/03/2001 10:35 AM pst
~~~
hey, i found the cake!
Posted by mike @ 10/03/2001 12:19 PM pst
~~~
wow. that cake is definately all about the frosting, no doubt (shudder)
Posted by christina @ 10/03/2001 03:59 PM pst
~~~
[ since the conversation has now devolved into cat poop jokes ... ]
Christina, are saying that the frosting people should just go play in the cat box?
Posted by mccreath @ 10/03/2001 06:46 PM pst
~~~
I imply nothing (except please don't offer that cake to me on my birthday-- ew!)
Posted by christina @ 10/04/2001 09:06 AM pst
~~~
