[Sigia-l] Making assumptions

[Jonathan Baker-Bates]

On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 19:44 -0400, Ziya Oz wrote: 
> Jonathan Baker-Bates:
> 
> > I've been thinking about research and design recently, and have had an
> > idea I'd like to pursue. But I thought I'd ask for a sanity check on it
> > here first.
> 
> It's insane. :)
> 

Ah, good!

> Question yourself. Early and often.
> You can not and should not design in spite of yourself.
> 

That much I have concluded. 

> 
> If aggregating 'research' results could produce good design, my sig below
> would be wrong. It isn't.

Basically, I'm looking for ways to be the difference maker I want to be,
but without being seen as a dangerous nutcase. I want to have my cake
and eat it.

So, perhaps the most important part of this plan is the fact that you
could never conclusively prove or disprove an assumption. I realise this
might appear somewhat Machiavellian, but the "design assumptions"
approach should allow me the flexibility I want while having the
protection (and to be fair, the direction) of research findings behind
me. The difference between this and the usual method of simply doing
research, picking the bones out of what you find (and being bound by
that), is that the results can be interpreted in a controlled manner.
For example, one of many things that I want to get out of this is a
demonstration of the power of context. Customers might be fixated with
price in one context, but willing to disregard it in another. I would
expect both to be revealed by research findings. This would then leave
me some latitude to do the right thing by my own judgement. 

Of course, this may see me roasted in the fires of UCD hell. But that's
a risk I'm willing to take.

> As a designer you are the difference maker. Act like one. :)

I fully intend to do just that. The trouble is I am no longer a
consultant, so life is a little different now ;-)

Jonathan