[Sigia-l] validating an IA?

[Stewart Dean]

>From: Eric Scheid <eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au>
>To: sigia l <sigia-l at asis.org>
>Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] validating an IA?
>Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 15:58:14 +1000
>
>On 26/3/06 6:30 PM, "Eric Scheid" <eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au> wrote:
>
> > closed card sort
>
>Some don't like closed card sorts...
>
>     http://tinyurl.com/pc49z
>
> >   Recently I had cause to use a closed card sorting with the
> >   objective of Œvalidating¹ a proposed Information Architecture
> >   model (and some labelling). Argh. I think I will do what I can
> >   to avoid that approach in the future.
>
> >   And while I¹m at it - what are your thoughts on card sorting
> >   for IA validation?
> >
> >   Ah! and one more. Comparative testing. Does anyone have war stories
> >   on testing two distinctly different IA models? How did that go? Did
> >   you test the two models on all of your users, or have two groups of
> >   users and test one on each?
>
>Good questions, particularly since I've seen two recent RFPs where
>"validating an IA" was a key activity/requirement. Are you finding that
>clients are asking for validation of IA designs more and more? Is 
>validation
>the new ROI?

I realy hope not.  Validation of an IA, as the article points out, is best 
done using prototyping or even actual use. Words on cards are just too 
abstract to get anything meaningful from.  My personal view is that most 
websites are about tasks not information first (the informatoin supports a 
series of often overlapping task that continue beyond the interactive 
project)  so I would not recommend card sorting as part of a process unless 
it was to test a hypothesis. The only time I have used card sorting was to 
discover client scope, and then it wasnt really card sorting but the 
creation of a scope map with bits of paper.

So, really, validating IA using card sorting sounds like working out who has 
won 100m sprint by giving someone the names of the runners.

Stew Dean