Dave, seems like we are talking past each other. I am NOT talking
about UX/Agile methods here either.
As to reality - my fellow team members and I must have been dreaming
shuffling through volumes of UI-related research, UI evaluations,
usability reports, UI improvement recommendations etc. that went
nowhere and gather dust in some cubicles... again - it's no like the
work was bad... it just .. err... did not work??? IMHO - due to
the nature of many tech SW firms they needed a complete, fast and
affordable process, not just bits and pieces of good work or volumes
of exhaustive research that arrive when all release dates are past
due...
I think that it's been already said enough that RED (at least in my
understanding) is not rejecting any established design methods be it
research, user interviews, persona creation etc., etc. RED team
approaches it all from a specific angle, like: what do we know about
this particular domain, problem, design challenge? how much research
is needed? do we really need to conduct 25 (50, 100?) interviews ,
would 12 enough? 8? 6? In what form these findings should be
presented to client? is it 100 page report? is it 1 page diagram? a
flash movie? In what format this particular client will be able to
understand presented information easier, share among themselves? Same
for persona creation - how deep, how detailed etc.... These are
expert judgement decisions made in a context of a particular client/
project guided by this single goal: to produce a final (acceptable-
good-great) implementable design - and i repeat - on time, on budget.
As to being dramatic - well, sorry... I am a bit passionate about all
this because it's hard to hear red-faced engineering and biz managers
slamming UI design practices as "not working", "we don't know what to
do with this paper" kind of comments year over year... May be they
are all niche managers from niche companies like McAfee and Applied
Materials?... don't know ...
On Jan 29, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Dave Malouf wrote:
Yury, I've been reading your messages and it is great that "you get
it", but pppplease!!!!!
We are NOT talking about UX/Agile methods here that many in the
valley are moving towards and please don't put out overly dramatic
generalizations or sub-positions that have no basis in reality. MOST
design works in the Valley are still heavily invested in standard UX
methods if they have ANY design at all. There are few name-orgs that
are using RED as their sole or even primary mode of operating from
what I've seen.
Further, it is just really unclear what RED is beyond experienced
designers using their experience to short-cut the rest of the system.
A valid practice, but really far from a method that one can profess as
profound.
So I stand by my "niche" sentiment since there are so few people
who can even call themselves experienced enough for such a method.
With over 15 years of IxD work under my belt, i would only do
"genius" design when I had to, but would still always choose a
truer UCD process that employed context-based research over using
2ndary sources and my gut. And further as a designer, i find it hard
to not have a strong ideation and strategy setting part of the
framework and methods that I use regardless of ability to do
research.
-- dave
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=37626
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
