From Valley firms ditch desks to cut costs
"Freeing workers from their cubicles has been touted for at least two decades as a way to cut corporate real estate costs. Now, spurred by the sluggish economy and new technology, some of Silicon Valley's biggest firms seem to be taking the advice seriously....
The noise of shared work spaces bothers many people, while others regard offices as status symbols. Some can't get any work done without a regular place to sit."
I've sat in open spaces, and cubes. I've never have had the pleasure of an office, but I can easily imagine the productivity it would provide... if I was an individual contributor. As it is, I'm a manager, and I don't sit at my desk much. When I do, I love eavesdropping on the conversations around me. Tom Wailes, who sits next to me, and I have poked a hole in between our cubes, and have dozens of impromptu conferences a day about what's going on in Search.
But if I was trying to do an architecture, or design an interface, this open and communal enviroment would be hell. As it is if I have to write a presentation, or do some thinking, I have to go home, find a conference room or take a walk on the nearby hill. Only part of design is collabortive; the other part is interanl. how can a space support both?
Open spaces encourage collaboration, but they smoother thinking. Perhaps it's cube culture that has led us to a culture of copying... altavista copies google copies google copies microsoft copies aol copies yahoo.... expedia copies yahoo travel copies travelocity copies expedia... wells fargo copies bank of america copies wachovia copies wells fargo.... I'm sure you have your nemesis who you copy (instructed to, perhaps, but still.)
Perhaps simply finding a place quiet to sit and think a few days in a row would allow someone to come up with more original ideas. Then again, it also might only foster self-referential product design.
At least this article concentrates on the reality of seating arrangements-- it's about cost reduction, not about creativity enhancement. I guess I wonder what that easily measured savings in floorspace and electricity costs them in a loss in strategic advantage?
From The Bottom-line of Prototyping and Usability Testing:
"The main reason why user-centred design techniques aren't used in practice is that they are believed to be uneconomical, time consuming and altogether a luxury, which can be done without. But sticking to the waterfall model is like peeing in your pants. It will get back at you with expensive changes during development and major costs on re-engineering the product after launching. "
... then don't do that.
"An Anti Pattern is a pattern that tells how to go from a problem to a bad solution"
I learned a lot of things at the summit, from the esoteric to the remarkably practical. Running the gamut of this range was John's talk, Zen and the Art of Deliverables (pdf)
On the practical side, he said "To do a good site map, I need four days of hard thinking and a day to draw it out. I can't always convince the project manager to give me four days to think, but I can often convince people it takes five days to make a site map."
hmm....
If you ever thought the project manager was just the guy who kept coming up to you to say "Are ya done yet", read Role of project management in design . Good stuff. and reminds us that usability and IA is often practiced by non-specialists, and that is not neccessarily a bad thing. Quite the opposite.... as long as *somebody* is doing it products will keep getting better.
Despite Janice's apparent inability to count, Groundwork for Project Success is a terrific article. Damn, that girl writes real good.
"Why Projects Go Awry
If you've been working on the Web for any length of time, you've either experienced or witnessed some real train wrecks. Here are the top ten ways that projects fail:
any proposals for number ten?
Stages in the Design Process is not a bad outline of approaching a technology problem. However it would have been nice if they included why each stage was necessary and what advantage it gave.
Good post by kevin on Fury.com on the endless urge to redesign.
"Last night I went to the monthly UI/IA cocktail hour, a gathering of information architects and people in associated positions or bents. We did a lot of talking about the iterative cycle and how in reality it's not "iterate, iterate, iterate" but "iterate, obliterate, iterate." "
This diagram of an iterative process caught my eye. The presence of "focus groups" definitely scared me, but the basis is strong...
It's from a talk on rapid application development, and I'm pleasently surprised how similar this is to our processes. Another paper on
Dynamic Systems Development Method explains that DSDM is based on nine fundamental principles starting with:
"Active user involvement is imperative. DSDM sees itself as a user-centred approach. Active involvement by the user community throughout the development project is therefore seen as crucial."
Excellent!
Did this "methodology of the week" survive? Is it in practice somewhere? if it is, how is it working out for you?
Part project management, part IA and part usability,The Visual Learner's Guide to Managing Web Projects in a nice simple intro to the real secret of successful web sites: plan it before you build it.
Guess what-- it's free.
Download the PDF and go kill a few trees on the company dime-- you'll earn it back for them with what you learn. Hey! be sure to check out page 55. #'s!
A collection of articles and specs on the fine art of requirements gathering: INCOSE Requirements Working Group
