Comments on Zen and the Art of IA

Monica Pavon — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:03:14 GMT

It’s a quite useful review and it goes straight to the point. Too bad I can’t finde the book here (Chile).

Terry Bleizeffer — Thu, 31 May 2007 11:32:07 GMT

I reviewed this book on my blog as well:
http://uxsoapbox.blogspot.com/2007/05/book-reviewdesignin…

I agree with Clifton about the book – I ended my review with ”...overall I thought it was an excellent book, especially for people who are trying to go from beginner to intermediate in their design skills. It’s well-written and engaging, and that counts for a lot.”

Clifton Evans — Mon, 21 May 2007 16:00:10 GMT

Thank you all for your comments, all good discussion and feedback.

All appologies if the zen aspect seems to be the forefront, I’m not an avid practitioner, or even a slight one. My knowledge on the reality of the subject is limited to the osmosis of growing up within the reasonably eastern populous of vancouver.

Here’s an article on the same stuff from fast company. They are flogging the notion of one page designs, dashboarding, minimalization, that type of thing. Worth it for the comparability.

http://blog.fastcompany.com/experts/pscrivens/2007/05/the…

Thanks again
Clifton Evans

Jamie Owen — Thu, 17 May 2007 17:50:59 GMT

“I can only surmise that Hoekman recommends a focus on activity because that is the most conscious of the interactive processes.”

I’d further this thought and suggest that by one’s being involved in the activity, he/she allows the elements of that activity to be blended into his or her own experiences and understandings. Perhaps it is the most conscious of the interactive processes, but it also provides the most value. For example, if you and I were both working on the same design team, you would interpret and digest the expereience of the activity differently that I would. (I know this as being labeled “scripting” and/or “schema.”) Then next time we are on a design team together or we are working on a similar project, we now have a more robust degree of experience to draw upon—experience and utility unique to each of us. (For example, as you wrote, we remember the story of activity from “Designing the Obvious,” not all the discrete concepts that were tied into it along the way: we experienced the same story but you remember some details, I remember others.)

Or using the glasses example, we understand the glasses-lost-in-a-bag scenario (scripting), we know what to expect from a search, and we anticipate one of two outcomes. But the next time you and I search for missing glasses, we may go about it differently. You may look systematically through the regions of your bag, I may dig around randomly; you may then decide to establish a permanent pocket or location for the glasses, I may continue to carelessly toss them in the bag. The point is we take what we’ve experienced and used it in ways relative to our own particular tastes, styles, habits, personalities, etc. The ‘activity’ mentioned in the quote embodies a degree of engagement unique to each of us.

It allows us to continually make the experience our own, fold it into who we are, and then use it or call it up the next time we encounter a new but similar experience…which we then make our own, fold it into who we are, and use it, etc. etc. THAT’S the Zen.

Adam Greenfield — Thu, 17 May 2007 10:30:10 GMT

“Zen is the art of practicing meditation in everything you do and existing solely in a mental space.”

Not to quibble, but as a thirteen-year practitioner of the form (at least in one of its variants), I have to disagree rather sharply with your definition. It has nothing to do with “existing solely in a mental space” and rather more to do with existing fully in everything you do, whether that’s chopping wood, carrying water, singing a song or developing a Web site.

Patrick C. Walsh — Wed, 16 May 2007 12:08:18 GMT

Robert: Thanks. Your sales figures have just increased by one

Robert Hoekman, Jr. — Fri, 11 May 2007 18:04:44 GMT

Clifton: Thanks very much for your incredibly kind review. I really identify with the connection between Zen and the topics in the book. In fact, “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenence” is one of my all-time favorite books. I think there’s a lot of untapped opportunities to achieve Flow (very similar to Zen) in web application design, and it’s something I spend a lot of time researching and working towards.

Patrick: Funny you should mention poka-yoke. There’s a whole chapter in “Designing the Obvious” devoted to the subject of handling and preventing errors, and poka-yoke is discussed in depth. I think you’ll really enjoy it.

Jeff Seager — Wed, 09 May 2007 17:39:57 GMT

Excellent review, and I loved the extended analogy about finding your glasses! Your understanding of zen also is quite good, Clifton, which I always appreciate in any context.
To paraphrase Robert M. Pirsig, author of “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance,” I’ll let other people worry about saving the world (with web apps or the Next Big Thing); I have a website to fix.
Good web design creates a functional synergy between content and structure. Great web design strips away anything that breaks that synergy. The best way to emphasize that on the web is to do it zealously, consistently and cheerfully. Cheers to you and to Robert Hoekman, Jr. for the reminders!

Patrick C. Walsh — Wed, 09 May 2007 17:40:08 GMT

Nice to hear a reference to ‘5S’ and kaizen as I have worked in the auto industry for many years before ‘graduating’ to IA. I think that there are many concepts developed in this sector that are transferable to other areas e.g. agile development, concurrent engineering, 7 muda (wastes), poke-yoke (idiot proofing) processes etc.
Keeping stuff fairly minimal is important when I browse the web. I find that sites that have too much going on give me an instant mental headache and I tend to hit the back button immediately.
Thanks for the review…next stop Amazon

Stefan Freimark — Wed, 09 May 2007 06:56:48 GMT

Nice review, thanks!