[Sigia-l] Information Architecture 3.0

[Peter Morville]

In the example, I used "information architecture" and "interaction design" -
the disciplines not the roles - so I'm not sure the right answer has much to
do with job titles. But, in any case, that point was more snarky side dish
than serious main course, so I'm perfectly happy to let it go.


Peter Morville
President, Semantic Studios
http://semanticstudios.com/
http://findability.org/

 


-----Original Message-----
From: Anne Hjortshoj [mailto:anne.hj at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 11:56 AM
To: Peter Morville
Cc: sigia-l at asis.org
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Information Architecture 3.0

I guess I wasn't clear enough in my explanation.

Inforamation architect encompasses ID duties, and vice versa (I think). But
"information architect" is the more popular job title.
Therefore it's more valuable on AdWords.

To say that the AdWords results pay any attention to how the role is being
sliced by people on SigIA ... it doesn't seem to make sense, does it?

-A


On 11/30/06, Peter Morville <morville at semanticstudios.com> wrote:
> I agree that most information architects practice interaction design 
> as an integral part of their work.
>
> But isn't the inverse true? Don't most interaction designers practice 
> information architecture?
>
> And, what's your explanation for information architecture's higher 
> cost per click and number of clicks per day? Thanks!
>
>
> Peter Morville
> President, Semantic Studios
> http://semanticstudios.com/
> http://findability.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Anne Hjortshoj [mailto:anne.hj at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 11:39 AM
> To: Peter Morville
> Cc: sigia-l at asis.org
> Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Information Architecture 3.0
>
>
> Interesting blog entry ... but I have to challenge this:
>
> ------------------
> I joined IxDA just in time for a celebration of the total absence of 
> information architects from Designing Interactions by Bill Moggridge ...
> And, if I were feeling snarky, I might argue this is a manifestation 
> of the semantic envy of designers who would be architects of which Tog 
> wrote or that we're witnessing a classic case of the younger sister 
> competing for resources and attention. After all, there's a reason why 
> "information architecture" is five times more valuable than 
> "interaction design" in the eyes of Google AdWords.
> -----------------
>
> In my experience, interaction design usually falls to people with the I.A.
> job title. Therefore the AdWords results don't really support your 
> claim, because "information architecture" usually includes 
> "interaction design" by default.
>
> It's possible to slice roles and descriptions a number of ways, but in 
> the real world, most I.A.s are also tasked with interaction design, 
> even if it's not implicit in their job title. I can't think of a 
> single working I.A. I've met/hung out with in the last several years who
assumes otherwise.
>
> -Anne
>
>
> On 11/30/06, Peter Morville < morville at semanticstudios.com 
> <mailto:morville at semanticstudios.com> > wrote:
>
>         In response to recent attacks, I've captured some thoughts 
> about the future
>         of IA as a role, discipline, and community:
>
>         http://semanticstudios.com/publications/semantics/000149.php
>
>
>