[Sigia-l] at what point does IA et al. become meaningless?

[Skot Nelson]

On Aug-17-2005, at 3:30 PM, Stew Dean wrote:

>> I actually find this 'IA vision' role the most interesting.  I  
>> have had positions where my scope was core IA deliverables, but I  
>> find that I prefer positions like my current job where I use my IA  
>> slant to shape the strategy and long term thought leadership for  
>> an entire program rather than just on individual projects.
>
> Exactly what I find.  I recently saw a job listed for 'Business  
> Analyst' and upon reading the job specification realised it's  
> exactly the same role as a good IA - that is shaping the scope,  
> taking on business needs, defining the business logic and writing  
> use cases.
>
Sure. I've long thought this - in my early years, I was essentially  
designing entire business processes - moving an entire industry  
online for the first time. My title at the time was marketing  
coordiator - my resume lists me as a Business Analyst, which was a  
much more accurate description of what I did.

Things have changed - these first mover opportunities are few and far  
between.

My general view is that the IA role is one of the more sensible  
project leads on projects of a certain scope. It probably comes as no  
surprise though - in my experience, Creative Directors think they are  
the ideal lead and, of course, if a dedicated project manager is  
assigned they tend to be the most obvious lead.

I think that smaller projects often forget that these don't  
necessarily have to be 'jobs' but instead are 'roles.' They also, in  
my experience, tend to forget that these roles are not all well  
served by the same person. Conflicts exist between the roles.

I wonder if IA's risk getting tarred with the "everybody wants to  
strategize, nobody wants to execute" brush though? Why not just let  
programmers do it?

The latter is what happens in my current shop, with predictably  
disastrous results from a user perspective.
--
Skot Nelson
skot at penguinstorm.com