SIGIA-L Mail Archives: SV: Real life examples - Was: SIGIA-L: w
SV: Real life examples - Was: SIGIA-L: www.ia<whatever>.org
From: Gunnar Langemark (gunnar.langemark_at_valtech.dk)
Date: Thu May 03 2001 - 05:31:42 EDT
Thank you for your reply Anne.
I can see that we do not agree on the useful-ness of sharing examples.
> 1 - My employer will not allow this, for the very good reason that...
> 2 - these deliverables are trade secrets.
That was my first concern. However some examples may not be problematic in
that way.
> 3 - shouldn't we be talking about process, not necessarily
> deliverables?
IMO one doesn't preclude the other. The examples of deliverables would work
as a point of departure for discussions about the work process. It would be
at a more informed level - since I sense that we are not always talking
about the same thing. In this group there is a lot of effort being put into
explaining in words what could be shown in visuals.
> It seems to me that the IA process is a stable entity, not
> changing across
> projects or organizations.
That may be so in your organisation. If You are content with status quo in
your organization You don't need to take part in this.
> Deliverables and timelines are necessarily
> flexible, since every project is different.
I believe that also the process kan change according to the nature of the
customer, the project, the technology and so on.
For example: If you work on a larger content management based system there
will be more emphasis on defining the elements of possible content. If you
work on a 're-launch' of existing content the emphasis will be on
reorganising rather than on innovation.
> Seems to me that the point of sharing deliverables has been to
> reverse-engineer a process from them. Is there a way to just
> address the
> process itself? And shouldn't any centralized site for IA
> work towards this,
> instead of acting as a deliverables bank?
Your point is good - but I interpret this differently. I believe that
talking process without any concrete deliverables is too academic - and will
generate a lot of noise in the form of discussions of definitions of terms
for instance.
In my experience a 'map' can be a 'hierachical content map', a 'navigational
structure', a set of 'functions' or 'use cases' and probably much more. A
lot of misunderstanding happens when the maps go out in the organisation -
and there is nobody around to explain them. I would like to know more about
how others convey the needed information in ways that are easier to
understand for those of the users who are not information architects.
Gunnar
===========================================================================
List archives are available at:
http://www.listquest.com/computers/tier2/computer_misc.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo_at_asis.org with the
appropriate command from the list below in the body of the message:
subscribe sigia-l
subscribe sigia-l-digest
unsubscribe sigia-l
unsubscribe sigia-l-digest
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:54:38 EST
|
