[Sigia-l] Information Architecture 3.0

[Peter Boersma]

Recently, Olly Wright wrote:
> The risk that by heading too far away from core-ia, many of us
> could cease to be IAs at all. This would result in a fragmentation of
> the discipline, to the detriment of us all. Whilst I understand the
> fear, my personal opinion is that this is really no risk at all,
> since it is upon the foundation of IA, its practices, approach and
> mindset, that our value as big-ias is predicated. IA is the
> foundation from which we are able to go out into the business world
> at large and speak with relevance, authority and value.

Olly, I thought I knew you better!
What if, in this line of reasoning, you replaced Information Architecture
(IA) with Interaction Design (IxD)?

Don't you think that IxDs have a similar foundation, set of practices,
approach and mindset?
Don't you think there are Big IxDs?
Shouldn't IxDs careful to head too far away from their core-IxD practice and
cease to be IxD's at all?

Some people may get sick if me pointing at my T-model posting from 2004
(http://www.peterboersma.com/blog/2004/11/t-model-big-ia-is-now-ux.html),
but for this occasion I would like to go beyond pointing at it, and quote
some relevant parts (the posting's illustrations may help get the point
accross better):

"The model showed a big "T", with the vertical line representing the field
of IA with varying degrees of depth, while the horizontal line represented
the width of related fields around us. We decided to call it the T-model.
[..]
Related fields, placed in the horizontal line of the T-model, have interests
that overlap with our shallow subjects. Examples are interaction design,
usability, information design, visual design, accessibility, copywriting,
business modeling, markting and computer science. Big IA's know a little bit
of all these fields to allow them to play the role of conductor.

Now, what if we look at this model from the perspective of, say, an
Interaction Designer (IxD)? I am sure the subscribers to the IxD mailinglist
have little IxD's and Big IxD's amongst them. They have their own T-model,
with the vertical line standing next to "our" vertical line, but their
horizontal line overlaps with ours! And the same is true for usability
specialists, copywriters, information designers, etc.
[..]
Why would Information Architects be the ones to claim the "Big" label,
effectively placing the related fields below IA instead of at its side. Do
we posses a special skill that practitioners in the other fields don't? What
is that skill? Is it related to one of the deep subjects or one of the
shallow subjects? I cannot tell and I think it is wrong."

And I still think it is wrong for IAs to claim that their profession makes
the more suitable to grow into an overarching role, and they are the ones to
"speak with relevance, authority and value".

Peter
--
Peter Boersma | Senior Experience Designer | Info.nl
http://www.peterboersma.com/blog | http://www.info.nl