[Sigia-l] Finding the viz/interaction balance was JOB: Senior Interaction Designer

[Chad Jennings]

Thank you for the supportive words Cheryl. David, I do think you have 
made sweeping generalizations about my practice and design philosophy 
based on a single sentence taken out of context of a more comprehensive 
list of requirements.  That said, my responses attempt to target the 
the broader issues you surfaced in the final paragraph of your post.

David Heller wrote:
> What I mean to say is that your design team is Swiss/German in spirit,
> but should your Interaction Design team? Where would the balance come
> from? Where would innovation come from if everyone thought the same.

+ that modernist spirit, a shared company vision one might say, 
actually serves to provide a balance between the disciplines. A company 
vision seldom has served to temper innovation. Modernism is not owned 
by the visual arts. In fact I would argue that user-centered design is 
quite informed by this modernist spirit. i.e. "emphasize function. 
provide for specific needs. focus on the masses not the genius designer 
or engineer."   We may share a vision, but that does not mean we think 
the same. As aspiration... the Bauhaus was an example of highly 
innovative ideas blossoming from a shared vision.


> Also, wouldn't be a lot more valuable to have someone who understood
> Cooper than this graphic designer? Shows me that "interaction design" 
> is
> subordinate to Visual design in your firm (at least in the SF office).
> Why shouldn't the visual designers meet the interaction designers'
> language set? By trying to create a place for "translation", you create
> a crucible for new ideas.

+ There will always be a place for "translation" between disciplines, 
which as you mention can lead to beneficial creative friction. Just 
because an Interaction designer is asked to understand and speak the 
language of another discipline, whether it be the language of graphic 
design or technology, does not mean that they do not have a language of 
their own. In a sense a successful interaction designer/IA must be 
multilingual. Would you say that by learning to speak Spanish and 
German that I have now made English subordinate to these languages. no. 
I have simply broken down a language barrier and opened up a 
communication channel. Actually, visual designers are asked to be 
familiar with Cooper and Norman when applying for a job with us.  For 
an experienced interaction designer we assume a level of familiarity 
with the ideologues of HCI.  Again, though the sentence you refer to is 
taken highly out of context of the broader job description.

> I realize that was a bit flamey, but I'm more interested in the 
> concepts
> that you are presenting than their actual application in method
> particularly:
> 1. Where is the balance between visual and interaction
> designers?

First, it is important to have both (i would add technology as well) 
involved in project kick-off and requirements gathering. Whereas the 
interaction team is gathering user and stakeholder needs, the visual 
design team is gathering the branding and business needs. We then 
deliver a shared creative brief/ reqs doc which outlines scope, initial 
user or research framework, as well as brand overview. Next we set up a 
project room which is devoted to the project. This is the project home. 
One wall will may filled with post-its illustrating mental models and 
tasks while mood boards illustrating brand translations hang on the 
opposite wall. It isn't always a collaborative paradise, budgets seldom 
allow  for visual designers to tag along on contextual interviews and 
processes don't always overlap, but it is an environment that in a 
sense forces collaboration. This becomes even more evident when 
wireframes hang next to its visual design translation for the core team 
to discuss and review anytime they enter the project room.


> 2. How can a company search for good communicators w/o being
> too specific?

Good communicators know how to tell a story. They know how to place 
complex data and problems in the context of a narrative. They can tell 
the story and reasoning behind a design. The why, not only the what.  
Much can be garnered by how potential employees talk about their work, 
history, and relationships. What stories do they bring to the table?

> 3. What is learnable after hiring, vs. preferred after the
> fact?

See Listera's post. I agree. Tools (software and even some interaction 
approaches, such as personas) are easy to learn after the fact. I'd say 
story telling, work ethic, and that innate ability to find patterns in 
mass of data are harder to learn.


> 4. What level of turmoil is appropriate between various team
> members to encourage innovation (if at all)?

It lies at the crux between "constructive" criticism and plain 
criticism. Creative friction is only possible if the team members all 
agree on the larger vision. Whether this be a company vision or project 
end goal and/or business objective. Without that understanding and 
"center" the balance can tip from creative friction to a point where 
individual egos overcome and trump the end goal or vision.

- Chad