[Sigia-l] Re: Sigia-l digest, Vol 1 #580 - 18 msgs

[Gino Zahnd]

Hi Dave,

I was the first interaction designer hired at Method, under Ted, in 
1999. I can say, first hand, that the balance of ID vs. visual design 
is really healthy - at least it was when I was there.  If you've ever 
used anything they produce, it's easy to see that they take great pain 
in information organization and interaction design, which, at least 
while I was there, always came before visual design.

I also think that a company with Method's clout _can_ be that specific 
in a job ad.  There are enough of IDs in the area that know who Method 
is, and there are enough of us with design knowledge to be able to 
slide into their Swiss-centric design culture without having to be 
trained in it upon arrival.

And sure, Swiss design and type is learnable after being hired, but why 
not first go out big, and see whether or not there's the perfect fit?  
(And I'm sure there is.)

A huge part of being in the client services world, like Method, is that 
you have to able to clearly communicate complex ideas to people who 
don't necessarily understand how we arrive at the findings and 
decisions that we do.  A huge catalyst (I'm convinced, after working at 
Method) of communicating those ideas is the _visual_design_ of 
Information Architecture and Interaction Design documents.  
(Breathe...) And, that said, I'm also convinced that using Swiss design 
principals as a general rule of thumb in information design, always 
helps clear up that communication.  Sure, you can throw up some garbage 
in Visio, or you can create a document that is crystal clear, 
beautiful, and falls right into a visual language that can be 
associated with everything that comes out of that firm.

Oh, and there was always a 'healthy' level of turmoil between designers 
and me at Method.  ;)

So, who designed documentum.com, and why can't I find screenshots of 
their products... ?



>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> From: "David Heller" <hippiefunk at hotmail.com>
> To: "sigia-l" <sigia-l at mail.asis.org>
> Subject: RE: [Sigia-l] JOB: Senior Interaction Designer
> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:57:34 -0700
>
>
> Chad, isn't that the cart leading the horse or some other bad metaphor
> of putting something as a requirement too early?
>
> 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.
>
> Also, it sounds to me what you are talking about is not language but
> style. Its like saying I don't think using Sarcasm is appropriate for
> this form of discourse. Why not just let whoever is interested learn
> this for themselves?
>
> 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.
>
> Now, If I needed the job, I would probably just say, Oh yea! He's that
> guy b/c I just researched him before I sent my cover letter and re-did
> my wireframe portfolio to meet my new understandng of what you expect
> from an applicant. Or I might say, wow! These folks are way too
> interested in the visual for me to think that they are going to
> interaction design seriously, maybe I should move on.
>
> 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? 2. How can a company search for good communicators w/o being
> too specific? 3. What is learnable after hiring, vs. preferred after 
> the
> fact? 4. What level of turmoil is appropriate between various team
> members to encourage innovation (if at all)?
>
> --  dave