[Sigia-l] the lesser importance of home pages -> moresplashpagefun?

[Listera]

Stewart Dean:

> Engineering is important to a real world architecture project and it's
> important to building a web site or delivering,

Nobody's said engineering (or accounting, for that matter) is not important
to the process. There is, however, a huge difference between being a part of
and leading the process.

> for example well constructed content  can make a site much more usable and
> vastly improve the user experience.

Problem is, a well engineered/constructed/delivered/etc site can still be a
horrible user experience. Therein lies the crux of the matter. Role players
can make or break their own parts. But even if/when they perform their roles
brilliantly, there's absolutely no guarantee that the overall UX will
succeed. The originator/conductor of UX process in its entirety is the
Designer, as I described it.
  
> Are trying to tell me that you don't think that content does not affect the
> structure of a site?

I'll try this one more time. I'm saying that every part of a process
ultimately affects the whole. Content, technology, graphics, hosting, IA,
interaction and so on. But the integrated coordination of it all (the art
and science of balancing the needs of the owner and the user) is the
Designer's domain.

> Let's use a real world example, when you build a building then you have
> architects and project managers. The same is true when you build a web site.

Hopefully, either as owner or user, you won't want your building to be
designed by a general contractor, plumber or electrician, but by an
architect, the "conductor" in this process.

> On a film you have a director and a producer

(Incidentally, I come from a film background, with an MFA in it, as well as
years of study of civil engineering and architecture.)

Most people who even care about any of this, could tell you who directed a
movie. But only a scant few who produced it. While producers (and DPs or
editors or casting directors or writers, etc) are important to film making,
the one person who has by far the most impact on a film (the "conductor"
here if you will) is the director, after he's hired. Very few things happen
on a film without the director's involvement/consent/direction. In the end,
a film lives or dies on the competence of the director.

> I have seen folks merge the PM and IA role, I've done it myself, but in my
> experience the results are much better if the roles are separated.

Again, your assumption here (PM vs. IA) is not something I even worry about.
In my world, IA is part of Design, PM is not, though certainly not
unimportant.

> In short the best results are achieved by a team...
 
> How it shouldn't be is one person doing multiple roles to a so-so level,

It'd be silly to tell, say, Jonathan Ive that he shouldn't involve himself
with the totality and design integrity of the a product like the iPod but
let the 78 people of various backgrounds on his team "design" it. Good
design doesn't come out of committees and not without strong, strategic
leaders. Which is not to say good design can be *implemented* without a good
team. Design is a holistic process of solving problems, artificial titles
and turfs do nothing but impede the process.

Since we don't seem agree on this, I'll leave it at that.

----
Ziya

"Innovate as a last resort."