[Sigia-l] Programming IAs was: Little things an IA MUST know/do

[Todd R.Warfel]

On Thursday, April 24, 2003, at 05:19 PM, Listera wrote:

> It's not, (especially) if they are solely concerned with what their 
> blinders
> allow them to see.

Where did this come from?

So, are you saying that telling them to focus on the product should be 
enough? A simply yes, or no would suffice.

>> Employee: What's my role in this whole cycle?
>> Employer: Well, you're suppose to focus on the product.
>> Employee: What part?
>> Employer: The product. Didn't you hear me the first time?
>
> Let me feel it, I can't see. Does it have a tail? Big floppy things? 
> What's
> that sharp, long thing? Ohh, it's an elephant! No wonder.

What?

Can we have a relevant discussion here? Am I talking to myself?

> One of the reasons why enlightened companies rotate their staff (like
> sending their engineers on sales calls, manning their support lines 
> with
> marketing people, etc) is precisely for this reason: to get a sense of 
> the
> product they are selling...

Which is exactly what I've been saying all along - to get the sense of, 
the feel for, an appreciation for.

A Xerox salesman doesn't have to know how to repair every part in a 
copier to make him a better salesman. But if he has an understanding of 
the complexity of the machines, why they need maintained so that the 
customer won't run into expensive repairs and can communicate that - 
that can make him a better sales person. Making him to go to copier 
repair school will make a copier repair person out of him, not a better 
sales person.

You don't have to, shouldn't have to, and can't do it all.

Which is exactly why I come back to my original statement that 
designers don't have to know how to code an environment, but should be 
familiar with it's constraints and strengths - if they have an 
appreciation, they'll be a better designer. That doesn't mean they need 
to know, or should know C++ or Java.

> The point is for BOTH of them to focus on the product, yes the 
> product, not
> just on their (often historically but artificially demarcated) niches, 
> but
> on the totality of the product.

A focus by definition is targeted at a specific section. It's a focus. 
The broad vision looks at the product as a whole. It sounds as if 
you're trying to be too idealistic and not realistic here. Unless I'm 
misunderstanding you.

> You can palpably see this when comparing a cheap PC clone vs. an Apple
> product that does the same thing: various team members focusing on a 
> product
> -- 'traditional' across boundaries -- not just parts assembled.

Okay, now you lost me.

>
> Ziya
> Nullius in Verba

Cheers!

Todd R. Warfel

_//message first [method second]
-=========================-
User Experience Consultant
message first
[P] (607) 339-9640
[E] twarfel at messagefirst.com
[w] http://messagefirst.com
-=========================-

In theory, theory and practice are the same,
but in practice, they're not.