[Sigia-l] The fuzzy line btwn IA and Design

[Ziya Oz]

"Christopher Fahey [askrom]" wrote:

> Deliberately making wireframes look more low-fidelity than they actually
> are seems to me to be a bit backwards.

I'm not sure how much 'lower-fidelity' you can get than wireframes :-) but I
was just showing George how to 'roughen' his lines in a mainstream vector
app; not necessarily advocating the practice itself. I, myself, rarely use
wireframes and prefer outlines.

> I have an inherent reaction against dumbing-down anything - it's usually a
> sign that there is probably a more elegant and efficient solution.

I think this is in the same vein as greeked text or Lorem ipsum. If it helps
aggressively or pathologically curious clients better focus on the big
picture, it'd be harmless.
 
> Like I said in an earlier post, if I am sure the final product will use
> Times New Roman on a light blue background, then my wireframes will
> certainly have Times New Roman on a light blue background. Why the heck
> not?

"(3) CONFUSION: A high-fidelity wireframe might confuse stakeholders
(clients, managers) into thinking that the wireframe is the final
design. They may sign off on a visual design layout"    :-)

As you say, you need to size up the client's expectations and sophistication
and act accordingly.

I'm not the best person to push an opinion on this, as I have been a
designer and coder for many years and I can often design and execute a
prototype in the time it takes most folks to come up with wireframes. My
problem has been *not* making prototypes so real that clients end up
thinking that the product is just about finished, thereby screwing up
timeline expectations.

This, of course, is not unique to IA. In advertising, for example, some
clients are better pitched with rough comps others with very polished ones.
Some print or video pitches almost directly go into actual production with
minor tweaks. So there's a range of client expectations.

I can say this, though, from experience: there's an inverse relationship
between the time it takes to go from rough wireframes to working prototypes
and clients' enthusiasm for the project. If you stretch it too much with
excessive gradualism then that sense of satisfaction when finally shown the
working prototype is lost forever. The sooner you get to that point the
higher the level of participation from the client side. Indeed, the quality
and dept of client suggestions and participation I get while playing with an
actual prototype is significantly higher than the earlier stages while being
shown wireframes, flow charts, etc.

More than anything else the client *feels* confident that the project will
successfully finish: they see the light at the end of the tunnel and, that
alone, makes everyone realize that the product will soon become reality and
that perhaps they should get with the program, help, take ownership,
promote, brag, add to resume, etc. :-) So I want to get to that stage as
soon as possible. Because I'm able to skip a lot of the intermediary stages
with extreme speed, I've been able to see the difference.

In the end, I believe, while presenting wireframes or prototypes to the
client the most important thing is not what you show but what you say. The
ability to 'sell' it at various stages is what's critical. I consider the
'quality of lines' utterly secondary to the process of gaining the client's
confidence.

Best,

Ziya