Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Paul Bryan

Paul Bryan — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 06:30:40 GMT

This article really strikes home. “Understanding Comics” is one of my favorite books on media and perception. I remember my first week at Sapient as an Information Architect in 1999, having arrived from a corporate setting. There was a Vitamin Shoppe deliverable on the table in the kitchen, and it made extensive use of comic-based user scenarios. I thought, “We’re not in Kansas anymore, Toto!” I saw a lot more creative web work in the ensuing projects, with new thinking about everyday life tasks. After the bubble burst and 9/11, and starting my own company, it seems that a seriousness set in, that unless you’re working with a media or creative company, it’s all button-down standard IA deliverables, in shades of gray. I frankly don’t think I would have the nerve to propose or submit deliverables that use comics, unless the project sponsor was a think-outside-the-box communicator. So I’d be interested, Rebekah, if you would post a comment about which types of clients you think this approach would be most appropriate for.

Paul Bryan — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 15:29:01 GMT

Thanks for your article, Frances. I was mostly familiar with Section 508 accessibility guidelines (http://www.section508.gov/) but you updated and expanded my arsenal, not only on the assessment side, but on the design side as well.

Paul Bryan — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:04:02 GMT

Thanks for this thoughtful article, David. I agree with the foundations you listed, but was left wondering why you didn’t include a foundation for “goal,” i.e. why I undertook the design, and why anyone else would undertake the steps of the interaction. Fully understanding the context and mechanics of relevant goals seems fundamental to any interaction design, and constrains all of the other foundations you describe. Unless by foundations you mean the components of the interaction itself, or the philosophy of the art apart from the science.

/pb

Paul Bryan — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 19:20:05 GMT

Thanks for this book review. It made me want to go and buy the book as a resource. However, I’m waiting for the companion volume: “Failed Projects.” I’d write it, but I don’t have any relevant experience…

Back in the dotcom heyday in the agency world there was a real spirit of openness that I had not experienced in my previous corporate work environments. The “post mortems” were brilliantly illuminating, because they were full of information you could really use. Unlike information that will be useful the next time I invent the Ipod… It’s what I loved about Guy Kiyosaki’s book “Before You Quit Your Job” (which my wife was unpleasantly surprised to see me reading 4 years after starting my consulting practice). It’s the failures that make it interesting. I’m not talking about failures like “I was too lazy to research new ways to solve this problem” or “It was the client’s fault.” But reality-show scenarios about ambitious attempts that have resulted in failure, like, “The project had 6 IA’s and 10 graphic designers, and the comps were lapping the wireframes, so we ended up having to do rework that cost us 2 weeks we didn’t have.” Or, “We did user testing to improve usability of the prototype, but we should have done in-store ethnography, because the sales associates have a handwritten notebook that nobody told us about that easily trumped the online system, and we ended up with less than 20% user adoption the first 90 days after launch.” Or “We decided to implement SAP, Omniture, and Documentum at the same time. We never knew what hit us.” Stories of pain that teach a lesson, so they don’t have to be repeated.

Of course there are liability issues and very few books have the candor of a closed meeting. Maybe something like a UX version of PostSecret (http://postsecret.blogspot.com/) would do the trick. Imagine the postcard secret: “I was the client partner on a big e-commerce project. I ignored the timelines the track leads gave me. I just filled in the number the client gave me and worked backwards from there.”