[Sigia-l] RE: Do IA processes shorten time to launch?

[Dennis]

Ziya Oz wrote:

> "Dennis" wrote:
>
> > IA is a way of organizing your thoughts before throwing money at a problem.
>
> True, but others in the organization have the same claim:

That's because it is not an exclusive claim among a collaborative client-focused
team.


> for example,
> designers do comps and developers create prototypes. Essentially the purpose
> of these is also to analyze and anticipate potential issues before going
> into production, as they see them. So in a 'role-contentious' situation that
> alone won't cut it.

In these situations, I've found that the role of IA works best as "internal
informant". That is, if there is contention over what value the IA adds when
others perform related tasks by virtue of their job, IA works best as the
trusted source of information and takes central responsibility for communicating
the project structure to the client while using input from across disciplines.

Heck, many times I've found this input invaluable whether it is contentious or
not. The goal is to draw your team together and accept the challenge of internal
communication. Many voices, one project.

Sure, some designers and developers won't see a need for IA, but ideally an IA
would be able to lighten some of the team's collective cognitive load by acting
as the central repository for all structural issues, even if other contractors
contribute to the mix and provide valuable insight through their documentation.

Did I mention this is an ideal world scenario yet? Your points about contentious
team members who fail to see the value of IA are well taken, Ziya, and in many
ways are more frustrating than the surly client who just ain't sure about IA.
See more below.


> In these environments, the IA has to bring something to the table
> unambiguously more valuable than the designer who can think in structural
> terms or the developer who can give shape to structure *and* be able to
> communicate it to the guy who signs the check.

The IA role in this environment has to become the strong visual communicator of
complex ideas.

A lot of what the designer and developer do in their documentation, whether they
realize this or not, is prepare their own personal technical blueprint of tasks.
While some clients can and do want to read this amount of detail, there are
always those who do not and need someone to translate.

Take the example of a functional spec: The project may need one, the developer
or IA could technically create one, but the client may need to have a "readable"
and complimentary version that clearly outlines for non-technical people what
the goals of the system are in a clear visual format of a site map, wireframes,
etc...

Or, not.

The risk of IA being marginalized is still high, but can be mitigated somewhat
by having contact with a project throughout it's entire development and not just
during the Design phase.


> As an IA, I wouldn't allow the question to be framed as 'faster-to-market'.
> Because that's not really a business proposition (unless, of course, you're
> a clueless VC :-).

Ha!  Has anyone staked claim on the phrase Smarter-To-Market yet? If not, start
using it liberally and I'll expect the royalty checks to start flowing any day
now...


> What happens when you get there? The endgame is not the
> speed with which you hit the market, but the market share you grab, the
> competitive advantage you can garner, the profit you make, etc. Does the IA
> help in that respect? And how? I'd make those the criteria.

Sounds suspiciously like ROIA (Return On Information Architecture) to me.

Anyone familar with the "5 Ws"? Learned 'em in grade school and they still apply
today: Who What Where Why When, and not necessarily in that order.

Any IA (or client for that matter) that doesn't rest until these questions are
answered is just asking for trouble ;-)

Best,

Dennis