While contemplating how far south a recent project has gone (even before it begins development), my mind caught hold of a question...
What are we driven by?
Really, what truly drives the work of interaction designers? What are we after? The answer to that question is complex and multifaceted, so I wont attempt to pen a complete exposition on the subject. however I do have a few thoughts I'd like to submit.
User Needs First and foremost, the user needs must come into play before a single sketch is drawn or a line of code is written. If what we are building is not useful, relevant, usable, and/or enjoyable, then stop the project be fore it starts. In order to ensure this, User and task must be deeply understood.
Business Objectives User needs and business objectives should ideally have allot of overlap. Why? Because businesses exist to meet customers needs/wants. By allowing ourselves to be fluent in our clients' or employers' business objectives we get a better feel for what we are trying to accomplish and place ourselves in a unique position to advise when projects start to compromise those objectives.
Creative Direction For marketing/advertising orienting projects. The creative direction can often give us a solid trajectory from which we can ensure that there is balance of cool and usable/useful.
Technical Parameters I used to call this one, "Technical constraints" but that just sounds so negative. We need to remember that the concepts and models we create will need to be implemented and that often times the parameters in which the technology will do what we want it to do may not allow for some other elements.
By taking direction from these four aspects, We are more likely to help create a successful experience.
some time ago, I read a really thought-provoking article about digital convergence. It contains an exciting perspective on where things are going.
while thinking about the concept of two totally "unrelated" things converging I was reminded of tiesto's "Adagio for strings" as a great example of digitial and classical music converging.
A recent lecture I attended discussed some of the "fun" dynamics that exist in the professional world of experience design. I was reminded of several factors in my current situation that I find... shall we say... less that savory.
As I let these issues bother more and more over the last few days I had a re-realization of how I have effectively coped with culture in the past (apologies in advance to all vegetarians/vegans).
Forget the fat & focus on the meat.
In essence, this is all about forgetting (or choosing not to focus on) the politics, personal pet peeves, immaturity of others, etc... and focusing on two main objectives, which are:
Consistently deliver unquestionably exceptional work
Do everything in my power to support and encourage objective #1 in everyone I work with.
By maintaining this line of thinking/attitude, I've been able to keep moving and even deliver some of my best work even in the midst of the worst environments.
In saying this, I acknowledge that there are some situations in which one's ability to effectively accomplish these two objectives is hindered by the situation itself. In these cases, I follow a completely different coping mechanism...
LEAVE THE ORGANIZATION
Any organizational structure, whether formal or cultural, which consistently inhibits your ability to contribute despite efforts to rectify the situation is not a structure you want to be a part of.
I frequently find myself frustrated that visual designers do not adhere more strictly to the wires I create. It’s difficult for me to see a layout I’ve put my heart, soul and countless hours into seemingly be ignored. However, a project I’m currently engaged in is helping me gain empathy for designers and understand that they may not be ignoring my wires. Rather, I’m learning, more than ever, that good design is an almost ever-moving, highly iterative process
I’m currently working on a project to redesign my personal website – matthewjdoty.com. In doing this, I have to fill roles that have normally been filled by others in my professional life, namely, visual designer.
As I step back and watch my process, it seems to have started as many of my projects do, with user analysis, a sitemap, flows and wires. However as I have begun the process of creating comps and trying to strictly execute based on my wires, my designs have changed significantly.
Have ignored my wires? No. So what is going on?
Inspiration does not stop as soon as the wires are complete. Quite the opposite… Translating wires into comps can produce a superior layout and ultimately a superior user experience. The designs I’ve “comped out”, although inspired by my wires, are better than my wires.
I’ve often preached the balance of business objectives, user needs, and technical constraints. From now on, I’m going to be adding creative innovation to that balance.
As a User Experience community, we often wonder how to best communicate with others when we’re left out of meetings, ignored and/or generally not treated with the greatest ammount of respect.
In response to this, I’d like to recommend each of you checking out Crucial Conversations. This is a set of resources (book/site/web seminars/etc) focused on how to communicate effectively when emotions are high, stakes are high, and opinions differ. Additionally, there are free web seminars we can access.
WARNING: This may seem like another one of those Matt Foley type of self help deals, but it’s not. Its really useful.
In my previous job, I discovered Crucial Conversations and was able to use the skills in some of my strategy discussions with senior marketing managers and the president of one of the universities I was working with (which got pretty heated at times).
OK so I'm getting a little frustrated with a project that is asking me to produce wires without providing any clear direction as to what the requirements are. I'm also getting the impression that this is not the first time this type of thing has been done at my company.
I've always done wires when we had a good idea what the user, tech and functional requirements were. However I'm curious to see if any of you have a different idea.
While I think it is ideal that a project complete has proper user research, an a solid concept before I begin creating wireframes, I have had enough experience to know that it does not always happen that way.
The process of wireframing however, can help a client, project team, and developers realize form a solid concept.
The project I’m working on right now is a great example. Because of time constraints, I was given a very loose, high-level direction in the form of a statement of work (SOW) and told to create wires. As a result, I have to essentially pull the site layout, structure and interactions out of the least attractive portion of my person.
The process goes a little something like this
I create wires and specifications,
The team reviews and we all make recommendations for change.
I then make the changes as the other project members revise and refine the vision and concept for the site we’re building.
We then all sit down for another round of review/refinement.
While It’s not what I would prefer, I do see allot of good that can come out of doing things this way.
