[Sigia-l] RE: The Need for a Definition of I/A - real world example (was "f irst principles")

[Matthew Rehkopf]

Richard wrote:
"...we have a lot of people involved in various aspects of 
"creating websites" - Information Architecture (whatever that is), 
Interaction Design, Graphic Design, Usability, etc ... and the interaction 
between some of these roles (I/A and I/D in particular) needs some 
improvement. With a clearer definition of the roles and responsibilities 
(based on sound understanding of the discipline) I think things could be 
so much better."

Richard's comments here point to a couple good points relevant to these
discussions about defining IA as well as its role within organizations. And,
actually, they seem quite simple.

"a lot of people involved in various aspects" is a team. We all work on
teams. In order for a team to function properly and efficiently, roles need
to be defined so that *everyone understands what everyone else is supposed
to do*. This is the heart of this issue. When arguing this point I often use
a hockey team as an example (based-on a retired hockey coach who became a
CEO). On a hockey team, everyone knows their position. The success of the
team depends on everyone playing their positions. Imagine a team of all
forwards, or all goalies. Roles are defined so that the team can *operate*
successfully and accomplish its goals. Without defined roles, the team just
struggles through projects. 

This same team concept also sheds light on the DefineTheDamnThing
conversation. Role definitions are contextual to the environment. Forwards
on the Red Wings play differently than forwards on the Aves; they know they
are supposed to score goals, but specifics are defined by the coaches of the
teams. What job does not vary based on company? As mentioned here, I agree
that sharing how we *actually* work within our teams would help to define
the discipline as a whole.

Sorry, I will share my role specifics next time. :-)

Matthew Rehkopf
Information Architect
Thread Inc.