I agree that UX in general has been ineffective in articulating what design is. The original post makes assumptions and uses terminology in such a way that alone indicate this.
I don't believe the dichotomy between understanding people or designing exists. Design is the process - good design is hopefully the output - and understanding users is a function of good user research, usability testing, or whatever part of the design process is currently being worked. I'm having trouble with the distinction between "BIG D" design and UX/UCD. Possibly this is partly a function of a separate problem in the (small ux) ux community - the proliferation of job titles that essentially boil down to similar things. Certainly I agree that design in not antithetical to agile. It fits into an agile process, although the designer is gonna need to be well in front of an agile sprint - figuring out the design and making sure they can articulate the design to engineers. I think there's a lot of common ground here - it's just a matter of level-setting ux and engineers on process and terminology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45169 ________________________________________________________________ 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
