[Sigia-l] I Want My GUT of Information Architecture!

[Chris Chandler]

"Nuno Lopes" wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> I appreciate your comments as it is yours, but I'm afraid to say that
> your answers do not tap the knowledge that I was trying to perceive.


But is the problem with the answer or the question?



> Statements like :
>
> >Again though, I've worked on plenty of teams where the only concern for
> the >"user" was to squeeze more cash from them or to make them stop
> complaining.
>
> are not actually what I was looking for if you know what I mean. I will
> not answer to that because it is out of scope of what I've written in
> this thread. Your profession or project role is not under attack, but
> even if it was, if a member of my team stated those kind of things would
> have at least highly unproductive impact in interpersonal relationships
> that I would have to manage.


Let me be clear -- I don't feel under attack at all. In any case. I was simply saying that a user focus is a rather rare
thing. If it is something you have no problems with, either you've got a first class development team going and perhaps
need no help from an IA, or you and I have different ideas about what that focus means.

I know it is off-topic for the original thread, but you've made me curious: Could you tell us a little about how user
concerns and interests are discovered and acted upon in your organization? Do you currently do user research? Do you
currently do usability testing? What roles make up the typical development team? If your team is building a website, who
makes the site map?




> >Like I said -- I think we tend to gloss over the part of our job that
> makes >us focus on the use. As if it's such an easy
> >thing that all we have to is give it a name and anyone can do it. It's
> >actually not natural for most people.
>
> I appreciate the value of user focus, and I've not said that it was easy
> to meet that focus. Also I think probably you are misinterpreting my
> intent of being in this list, I do not want to be an Information
> Architect. But I would like to know what kind of technical abilities an
> information architect brings on to the table.


I understand you don't want to be an IA.



> What kind of issues does
> this professional solves. My strategy to this is to tap into the
> knowledge that Information Architecture as discipline creates and
> studies. If required tap into the technical experience of a single
> Information Architect, but that is not mandatory.


If all you want is a list of things an IA typically delivers, I'd reccomend:

http://www.iawiki.net/DeliverablesAndArtifacts


> >Physically, it had a low level of structure.
>
> What do you mean by low level of structure?



I meant "low" as in "not high", not in terms of below, or deeper, or more fundamental.


> >Seriously, I'm the last guy to argue semantics. All I meant was that
> you >can now easily browse the product catalog using three different
> facets, >which I developed using the method of Ranganathan, and the
> database guy >recreated it using his own preferred language and tools.
>
> Excellent, so you fallowed a faceted classification scheme to organize
> information. As most professionals building websites don't have
> experience with that sounds a like you have an edge for witch I would
> probably hire an Information architect to work with me and my teams.
> Plus of course for communication skills etc etc (but these are not
> differentiators a priori).


I'm sorry to go off on another tangent, but "communication" is another one of those terms that is easy to say (not
directed at you, just a general observation) and not as easy to actually do.

Everyone puts "good communication skills" on their resume, but the point of communication skills for an IA is the
necessity of presenting our deliverables to multiple audiences. I create site maps that become the general
representation of the product to almost all the various groups. I write functional specs that have to be understood by
the coders. I create wireframes/storyboards that have to be understood by the designers. I develop user personas and
scenarios to communicate with marketing and the design team. I have to synthesize and organize usability testing results
to convince management that the CEO's great idea isn't going to work.

One of the original definitions of an IA was someone who "makes the complex clear." If I were interviewing an IA, I
would want to look specifically at ways that they have addressed these issues.


> So can I assume that knowledge of Faceted Classification schemes is an
> artifact an Information Architect among other things?



I'm not sure I understand your usage of "artifact" but I think my answer is yes.


> >I don't understand what you mean by "wrongly call." My title right now
> >happens to be "Information Architect" I not only
> >get to participate in usability tests, I often have a deliverable
> around >the results.
>
> Again you have not refuted my assertion by stating what supports your
> assertions at the technical level, the one that I'm interested.


I hope that we can have a discussion that interests both of us. I'm not particularly interested in "refuting your
assertions" because I think, and perhaps I could have stated this more clearly, that your premise in the paragraph I
responded to here -- that usability testing should only be done by people called usability engineers, (or HCI
specialists or whatever) -- simply doesn't make sense to me based on actual working situations.




The only
> reason I've stated that is due to the fact that the members of this list
> have consistently distract themselves with issues that are not on the
> table most of the times as far as I see it. Like all the arguments that
> you have put forward on this thread until now.
>
> Discussing Information Architecture should not jeopardize the importance
> of an Information Architect in a team as far as I see it.
> So why such a
> defensive approach?


Why do you consider explaining and giving examples of my work to be defensive?



> >Art is another interesting word. I don't believe IA will ever or should
> >ever become a science.
>
> Everything in the beginning is a mix of art and technology.


Do you mean that you think everything eventually becomes technology in the end?


>By being new
> it does not mean that it is less effective than others approaching the
> same issues. I just would like to know how effective is it?


Compared to what? Are you after something like "this web site's sucess was due 23% to the visual design, 50% due to
technical implementation, and 27% due to information architecture?"



Probably it
> is impossible at the moment, but this task can only be fulfilled by
> listing the artifacts used in creating an Information Architecture and
> measuring each one against a framework of reasoning and objectives. At
> the moment very rarely does artifacts are tackled in this list in a
> systematic manner.


Again, for a more systematic list, check out the IAwiki.


> >You know... I walked around the conference handing out business cards
> that >said my title was "knowledge choreographer" and "wisdom engineer"
> and no >one even batted an eye.
>
> I meant that I don't care within the scope of the theme in this thread
> and my post. Spare me your sarcasm for awhile please. Let's work
> together not against each other, we don't have any reason to do
> otherwise I believe.
>
> Hope this settles some issues.

My sarcasm there was aimed more at my fellow IA's at the conference, not at you.


-cc