On Thursday July 20 (11:30 – 12:30), Peter Morville will speak at the Library of Congress about his book, “Ambient Findability,” a history of how people search for information, and how they now find their way through a world of information overload.
Although I am slammed at work, I’m hoping to attend.
Tags: [Library of Congress, Peter Morville, Ambient Findability, Washington, DC, Partial Recall]
On Saturday May 20, the local chapter of DC information architects got together to recap topics that were addressed and discussed at the 2006 IA Summit. This was a long time coming for me. I’ve been meaning to attend these local meetings, but life has, of course, gotten in the way.
Livia Labate has provided a wealth of useful material, including MP3 recordings of the local DC event, as well as links to material that was presented at the Summit.
Anyway, the following is a brief summary of my notes. Certainly these notes do not codify the entirety of the redux – just my own brain dump based on notes taken at the event. The topics to be addressed are listed below (those in bold are the ones we had time to discuss):
Dan Brown facilitated the DC-IA redux, and one of the things he discussed centered around the format of the Summit. He mentioned that in the past, there was a greater selection of things to attend and a greater variety of topics. On the other hand, he mentioned that there were better opportunities to connect with people outside of sessions this past year. He asked for input on how to create a culture that would both maximize connections outside of sessions and make good use in-session time.
James Melzer addressed the topic of tagging, focusing primarily on using the bookmark tool del.icio.us.
Some discussion revolved around making a distinction between a group versus a crowd. A group, James indicated, is intentional, known, and planned. In contrast, a crowd is unknown and not planned. Del.icio.us embraces both, and James noted that sometimes crowds become groups in Del.icio.us because is sometimes ends up being the same people who are the forefront of tagging, and their aggregate work sets trends for other users.
Nathan Curtis discussed wireframes. Apparently, Nathan worked at K12 for a few months just before I arrived. I’ve heard very good things about him – in particular, how he shared some of his wireframing techniques with current K12 IAs.
Nathan explained that there was a discussion of using different wireframing techniques/tools, including:
Nathan mentioned that IAs need to struggle with representing interactions over time. With the advent of RIAs such as Flash and Ajax, IAs need to be able to communicate how information is to be presented, but how user behaviors will affect the feedback and visual representation of a web application. Nathan mentioned Bill Scott at Yahoo! and how he uses interaction storyboards, complete with interaction matrices to document all behavior changes for a given interaction type.
One technique Nathan mentioned was to segment the “modules” that comprise a wireframe. In other words, reusable widgets can be saved as components to be used over and over again. In addition, Nathan commented on Kevin Cheng’s use of comics to communicate HCI usability issues with stakeholders.
Nathan briefly discussed how new technologies are affecting the profession. For instance, Laszlo and Adobe Flex make it easier to move from a rapid prototype to a working solution. The web metaphor is moving away from “pages” to “mashups,” so IAs need to be able to embrace change and add new skill sets to accomodate for this change.
The group also discussed game design and the use of incentives as a way to interact with the user.
Olga Howard took some more time to cover the distinction of “crowd” versus “group.” With regard to tagging in Del.icio.us, the group discussed how there may be a flurry of different tags used to classify objects, but over time, the number of tags flattens to an accepted assortment.
Next, the discussion turned to Morville’s championing of “findability.” The basic questions to ask include:
Since I have not been able to attend the IA Summit yet, I found this redux to be pretty informative. In addition to getting useful information, I enjoyed spending time with other like-minded individuals who have a passion for creating usable intuitive products.
Tags: [dc-ia, dcia, Livia Labate, Partial Recall, brownorama, James Melzer, information architecture, iasummit, wireframes]
Enterprise Information Architecture (EIA) refers to the process of making information easy to access throughout a discrete entity – in this case, an organization. According to Wikipedia, Information Architecture is, in part, defined simply as “the practice of structuring information (knowledge or data).” Note that this simplified definition makes no reference to the Web or information systems of any kind, a la Richard Saul Wurman.
This post attempts to rethink EIA and argues that information architecture need not be constrained to designing structures and managing content as it relates to the Web or for any electronic system for that matter. Instead, I argue that an enterprise information architect might also be called, as Thomas Davenport coins it, an “Information Ecologist.” In addition to the commonly defined responsibilities of the iA (little ‘i’), the EIA or IE adds the following skillsets/responsibilies to his or her repertoire:
The end result is that not all information finds its way into a web-based system. Some information may be best kept in other formats. However, an IE‘s responsibility is to structure information so that it is valued as a resource on par with human capital, physical capital, and the like. Although information systems are best suited for information management and information findability, the IE must map all information in order to have a comprehensive inventory.
I’ve been at my new job for close to three weeks now and during the first week I was inserted into a project. Without getting into specifics, K12 develops both digital (online) and “hardcopy” products for specific educational market segments. Their current CMS is the backbone of their production efforts.
I am enjoying taking this on as my first project, in part because it forces me to understand the business of K12 and its workflows. I’ve been able to interview different stakeholders and users, thereby forcing myself out of seclusion and getting to know my colleagues. In the process, however, I’ve been faced with the dilemma: What exactly is a CMS and what is the hand-off between system processes and people processes?
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the Information Architecture (IA) Summit (As an aside, I hope to attend next year – although it’s hard to be participatory now that I’m a relatively new parent), and subsequently, two of the many sessions that interested me: in this case, the session on Enterprise Information Architecture, along with Dan Brown’s [slides], really got me thinking about the definition of who and what information architecture is.
Today I started a new job as an Information Architect at K12, Inc. My philosophy has always been that job satisfaction is based on the following formula: 50% the people you work with and 50% the actual work you do. I really enjoyed the people I worked with while contracting with the NIH, but after completing a graduate degree in Information Management, I wanted to move in a direction that was more in line with my interests. I’m also amazed that my degree in education will prove useful.
Some crazy developments occurred over the last few weeks – the realization that the new commute will be horrendous, along with a very generous counter-offer to stay. However, in the end I think this was the right decision. Just don’t ask about the commute (just kidding)!
Tags: [ia, ux, usability, information architecture, k12, information management, job, employment]
It seems that for the last few years I have been involved with usability testing in some shape or form, although I suppose it could be debated if there were any “usability tests” at all. These “tests” were more heuristic, always informal in nature and continue to this day – in no way did they involve the scientific measurement of users and their interactions with the system in question. There are a few explanations why the testing has been so informal…
First, you cannot force end-users to evaluate the system unless they are paid, bribed, or are already convinced of the benefits of the system. Sure, ideally it would be great to enlist a bunch of excited users to test the system and provide feedback, but often there are constraints. In my experience, the constraint has always been money, time, and prestige. There’s little money devoted to formal testing with end users. End users do not have the time for testing. A majority of the primary users of web-based systems I supported were scientists or Ph.D.s who were not open to testing the system. Still, even when end-users were kind enough to participate in beta testing, the focus was often on what the paid software testers reviewed – does the system work, are there bugs, etc. There was no systematic review concerning how usable the system was and how long it took for end users to accomplish needed tasks without giving up. In addition, the beta testers often did not fully represent the types of users of the system.
Concepts such as “information architecture” and “user experience” have been all but void in my work environments. Places that I’ve worked at have never even heard of these concepts, much less valued the user experience enough to hire an employee to meet these needs. Traditional “testing” usually involved making sure the software worked as advertised with as few bugs as possible. The usability of a system was never a consideration. Just pay a contractor to provide some training sessions and throw in a user’s guide.
I believe as software development processes have matured, more consideration has taken place to the user experience, particularly as the trend has moved from client/server-orientated solutions to web-based solutions. After all, a heightened user experience and the greater usability of a website translates into a larger customer base, with a greater possibility for increased revenue. A number of people (such as here, here, and here) have discussed the power of a well-designed web presence from a ROI perspective. In fact, Jakob Nielsen indicates that,
“Development projects should spend 10% of their budget on usability. Following a usability redesign, websites increase desired metrics by 135% on average; intranets improve slightly less.”
Which brings us back to the need for usability testing. What would the Internet World look like if all software development teams included information architects, user experience professionals, and the like? Well, for one, there would be much more usable and user-friendly sites.
A wise client would award an incentive-based contract to a contracting team. Can you imagine a contract that paid for ROI milestones? Project managers would need to do a lot of up-front work with their clients, not only to determine the nitty gritty requirements, but to determine the strategic objectives for the design of any solution. It is only by determining an organization’s strategic objectives that software development teams can build a solution that can meet the needs of their clients and all stakeholders. So to the bigwigs out there with the purse strings, demand that any software project plan include sufficient funding for proper business analysts, information architects, and user experience professionals, including funds for usability testing. A few bucks now will save you money, it will increase brand loyalty, and it will increase satisfaction among your end users.
Tags: [ROI, IA, UX, information architect, usability, user experience, human factors, HCI, human computer interaction, Internet, web design, Jakob Nielsen]
John Battelle recently asked readers to come up with a tagline for the next Web 2.0 conference. This will be the third such conference.
Year One included the tagline “The Web Is a Platform” to which Battelle remarks,
“That felt spot on, because the idea of the web as a place you could build on the work of others was a pretty new idea.”
Year Two included the tagline “Revving the Web” to which Battelle remarks,
“…because it was all about the services and businesses and opportunities that arose from the Web – all of which taken together made the web more robust and more exciting.”
For November’s conference, Battelle suggests the tagline “Disruption” by indicating,
“…the year the Web – in all its forms – really flexes its muscle and begins to seriously turn the soil of the global economy in deep and permanent ways. Think of the disruptions in the media and entertainment industries – probably the deepest disruptions so far. But we’re only in the first inning or so of the disruptions in the mobile and communications space (how excited do YOU think AT&T is about Google offering free Wifi, for example? Or eBay buying Skype?). And the disruptions of search and clickstreams on commerce is only now beginning, and the same is true for the massive IT industry (Microsoft Live, anyone?). And the disruption on our cultural life – in government, for example (can you say warrantless wiretaps meets the Database of Intentions?) – is only beginning to dawn on all of us.”
James Melzer, fellow CLIS graduate, spoke to my grad school class last week regarding Enterprise Information Architecture. James has a great complement to Lou Rosenfeld’s original.
I was a little stuck on James’ use of content/document/record, but I realize I do not have the library background that he does for discerning these document types. Of note is that James indicates that good IA precedes good CM development. Consequently, his diagram seeks to convey the relationship between the two.
My argument would be that we must broaden the definition of Information Architecture, because IA is not simply used as a precurser to CM or other types of information system development, but also for KM development. Unfortunately, not all knowledge is captured in a system electronically. Isn’t a part of the job of an Information Architect to also perform information audits to determine where both information and knowledge stores reside, particularly if they are not captured electronically or if there’s unnecessary redundancy?
Tags: [James Melzer, IA, CM, KM, IM, information management, information architecture, knowledge management, content management, UMCP, CLIS]
Yesterday, Dan Brown, User Experience Lead with Computech, came to my “User Interactions with Information Systems” class to discuss “A Day in the Life of…” Dan offers over a decade of related experience and has his hands in many things, including:
The remainder of this post outlines my interpretation of some of the ideas Dan discussed. Please see Dan’s post to view source materials and documentation from yesterday’s presentation.
For my graduate school class, I must work with a group to evaluate a web site or an information system (or compare multiple ones) for usability issues. Any ideas?
So far, my group has talked about the following:
(and usability of sites and their implementation of XML feeds);
Certainly we can think outside the box and look at the usability of non-web systems (e.g., Bank of America ATM vs. Chevy Chase ATM), but it might be best to focus on web-based products. Your thoughts?
Tags: [usability, information architecture, blog, rss, Google, Google Maps, Yahoo, Xanga, RSSOwl, Sage, NetNewsWire, Blogger, del.icio.us, Rojo, Safari, Furl, CiteULike]
I will receive my MIM degree after completing a summer class that lasts for 6 weeks. “User Interactions With Information Systems” is a course that greatly interests me. I certainly hope that I will have work opportunities in the future that embrace practices related to this course.
Vera Rhoads, the instructor, seems plugged-in with the IA community. She will be enlisting some guest speakers, including the following:
Vera also hinted at the possibility of getting Louis Rosenfeld to stop by the class, but I’m not too optimistic about that – considering he will be coming to the DC area in mid September to host a seminar.
Tags: [Thomas Vander Wal, Dan Brown, James Melzer, Louis Rosenfeld, Lou Rosenfeld, Folksonomy, Infocloud, personal infocloud, usability, information architecture]
I recently read related posts on Dan Brown’s Green Onions and Brad Hill’s Unofficial Google Weblog regarding the buzz about the supposed demise of “folders” on personal computers. Dan discusses this buzz – that people may be moving away from classifying electronic information based on a hierarchical “folder” framework, instead complementing this habit by applying the concept of attributing “labels” (often more than one) to this information. Dan appears not to buy into this theory, instead arguing that the the concept of folders (or a hierarchical structure of organization on personal computers) may not become obsolete because the “human mind loves part-whole organization.” I agree.
I cannot imagine a world without folders. Folders make my world a bit smaller and more manageable – a starting point, if you will. If I had to rely solely on a search mechanism I might very well be in trouble because sometimes I just cannot think of the correct meta-information to locate what I’m looking for. Since I am a visual person, I often need a visual cue to get me started on my quest. I can often define my specific search strategy only after I have seen the top one of two tiers of folders on my computer’s file system. Unfortunately, while search tools are doing a better job locating information based on meta-information, there is still a gap. Let me explain…
Want to send me a link? Tag it "for:robfay" in del.icio.us
Subscribe to My Feed
AIM: heyrobfay