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

[Nuno Lopes]

Hi Chris, thank you for your more in-depth comments as you exposed the
artifacts that you use, and for the references given. 

>But is the problem with the answer or the question?

Probably both. But I'm glad we have managed to go over that.

>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.

Not only development but analysis, but I must say that the artifacts you
exposed under the umbrella of "communication" are indeed very
interesting a it would simplify some processes.

>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?

I don't know if you want me to answer that, but definitely if I'm here
is because certain things are not running as smooth as I would like.

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

>http://www.iawiki.net/DeliverablesAndArtifacts

Thank you, I will go through them.

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

I still don't understand. I was more thinking in terms of disorganized
and unfocused but I was not sure if that was actually what you meant?

>One of the original definitions of an IA was someone who "makes the
complex >clear."

That sounds excellent. I just need to tap into the artifacts you exposed
in order to understand how much clear that makes.

>If I were interviewing an IA, I would want to look specifically at ways
>that they have addressed these issues.

That is why I'm here. Not to interview of course but to tap into the way
the discipline addresses these issues amongst others.

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

Excellent and thanks you because people have been avoiding the answer.

>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.

I'm really sorry if that was the premise I led you to perceive but that
was not in my mind. What was in my mind was exactly the kind of answer
you gave. 

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

You have not given examples, but stated your success without further
explanation. I was not interested on your track record at the present
moment.

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

Probably Arthur C. Clark can answer that question to you according to
his view. But that was not what I was asserting. Science is not about
technology but understanding. 

>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?"

No more, in situation X where the objective is Y, according to studies F
is more effective the P. Decompose the objective into smaller objectives
each facing different facets of the problems that IA intends to tackle.
The decomposition could be something like the following:

Within the scope of visual design objective Y1 was tackled by F1 because
F1 in situation X1 has shown better results compared to F1' and F2''.

Y = Y1 + Y2 + ... + Yk
X = X1 + X2 + ... + Xn
F = F1(X1) 0 F2(X2) O .... O Fn(Xn)


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

Thank you, but the list alone does not actually provide a framework of
comparison. Is there any paper about this? Is this a proper list for the
kinds of discussions and problem analysis that I'm interested in?

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

Ok.

Thanks for your time,

Best regards,

Nuno Lopes