joe gannon — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:58:03 GMT

I think the goal of IA has always been to make information usable and create a real experience. But I also do agree that the role of the IA seems to have evolved. However the industry seems to have been splintered into many different camps. There are those who just make mockups in Visio, others do HTML prototypes, some test, others don’t. The documentation process seems in many cases to either over document or under document. And the worst part of this whole thing is when projects are done with little or no usability process. And if you see how the market is going, most positions now expect programming expertise on top of UX.

joe gannon — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:44:55 GMT

I agree with the merits of the article. I feel there are 2 reasons for why content is given so little attention:

1. The current approach is the easiest way to get a project done on-time and on budget. Remember that projects are awarded based on the bottom line… and how quickly you can get things done. The content isn’t repurposed since the development team says “we can have them fit the content in later. We got the wireframes and the templates done.” That way, the project is done on time. Remember if there are 4 bids, and your bid adds an extra week or more money for a content expert, will the client pay? Likely not, unless you can sell them on your services. Or more likely the company goes with the bid that’s lower and is 2 weeks shorter. The way I see it, companies in general place little value in content. Just consider that web content strategists seem to only work at agencies, not in corp. comm. This is because it can save money. On the other hand, an ad agency is all about copy. That’s what sells products, As a result, the copywriter is brought in early on.

Analyzing content and writing it doesn’t happen overnight. It takes time. I have always felt there is a missing piece to the puzzle in the design process. I call it a content architect. The person who organizes the content and writes it. Granted, this does take more time. But it better helps the stakeholders understand the content value. Sadly, such a role never exists on most projects.

2. Lack of perceived value in content. OK so we know its a recession. Yet there are still jobs for designers, programmers but take a look at web content jobs. Very little. It’s always been that way though. Until companies can be convinced that content is what can aid the user experience, this will continue to happen. Instead, they rely on existing staff to write copy.

The only way to do that is to teach and educate. One of the biggest cracks I see is for large scale CMS implementations. Typically, most times I see that the technical experts are hired to do the implementation, but there is little in the way of content analysis. For example, things like content reuse. Also I think it is strange that the IA seems to be the first point of contact usually, even though the site is all about content. To me, the content expert should be given a chance to identify all content from various sources and work with the IA.

Also, I don’t think it makes sense to have an IA write the copy. They have enough to worry about getting the wireframes done. To me that’s shortchanging the project and the user. I agree that its better to have copy, but just feel there is a better way to do it. I will admit though I did write copy on projects, but I have a writing background. Unless you’re an IA who has developed copy and understands the fine nuances of content usability, don’t make them do it. Doing so can cause more problems in the long run.

Boxes and Arrows: Comments by joe gannon