I use the term "Functional Architect". The issue is that for many larger projects (with 100 people over years), there are actually 3 distinct jobs with different skillsets.
There is the "designer" who works with product management & marketing to help PM figure out what they want, and the focus is around requirements. There is the "designer" who works with developers on actual screens, graphics, layout, control selection, and detailed interaction design. Then there is a third area somewhere in between that deals with high level design which I call "functional architecture". This need appears, in my experience, only with really large projects because of the need to analyze the cohesive whole rather than fleshing out single areas. I use the "architect" metaphor because almost all software companies understand it, even if some "agile" ones may disagree with it. There is an parallel between a technical architect and a functional one. The former tries to figure "how to build it right" especially for cross-cutting concerns and sometimes leaves the coding to a developer. The latter figures out "how to make it work right for users, businesses, etc.." for the whole product suite, and leaves the exact screen/flow designs to a "designer". Difference with a "strategist" though, is that an architect has skin on the game and needs to see things all the way through to implementation. (Again, I'm talking about the metaphor, that people commonly accept, not how y'all are doing your jobs). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=34155 ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
