[Sigia-l] making the case for field research for innovation

[Listera]

"kipp lynch" wrote:

> Sometimes we seem to live in a field that is afraid of our own domain
> specific terminology.

I'm, in general, against any foisting of domain-specific jargon upon
unsuspecting bystanders.

> "ethnographic research", though that last term is often used incorrectly to
> mean any kind of field research.

I assure you, at least in the jungles of New York City, you won't get very
far with "ethnographic research" in an enterprise setting. You can have the
same result with different terminology. Your choice.
 
> I don't see many technologists or business people avoiding their domain
> specific terminology.

I try to remind people not to do it, perhaps way too often, on this list.
Many of my presentations to clients start with a slide of an incredibly
dense and completely buzzword/jargon laden sentence, summing up a project,
etc. I leave it up there for a while, without commentary. Pretty soon people
begin to giggle. The ice is broken. Very few addicts, after that, have the
nerve to slip back into jargon :-)

> Granted, more people are familiar with tech terminology than UX terms, but
> that doesn't mean we need to dumb down everything we say so they can easily
> relate to it.

That's not dumbing down. It's far more difficult to communicate in plain
English than in techno-babble. The point is for them to "easily relate to
it" not for us to show off, or be super definitive.

> This doesn't mean we should use obscure references or pretentious
> nonsense, nor does it mean that we shouldn't speak the users' language.

On that note of agreement... :-)

Best,

Ziya