Classifying Information Architects
Hot on the heels of Classifying Experiences, I thought I’d tackle a less challenging but possibly more volatile subject: Information Architects.
Yes. There are many different types of IAs doing a wide range of things. At the IA Summit, I was amazed by just how many similar, but completely different types of projects are being worked on:
- People specializing in nothing but Search
- Developing controlled vocabularies for enterprise knowledge management systems
- Integrating various knowledge management systems, post acquisition
- IA in the real world, designing for experiences
- IA for legal systems, where documentation is more important than the system being documented
- IA for large complex applications
- And yes, IA for small web apps
But, this is about classifying IAs (not the projects).
Attending SXSW and IA Summit back to back confirmed what I’ve observed online.
Peter Merholz referenced (a part of) this in his closing pleniary: there are the classic ‘fuddy duddy’, Library and Information Sciences Content IAs, and there are the West Coast, ‘hipster’ Application IAs. There’s also a newer breed of (mostly application-oriented) IAs growing out of the web design world. So, three pockets of people. Why is this worth mentioning? Except for the group in the middle, those at the extremes are unaware of each other, or what each group has to offer the other. Let me explain, by way of anecdote.
In 2002, Dan Brown wrote about Page Description Diagrams. At the time, we (Bright Corner) thought it was a great idea. We tried it on a project, with fair results. Another tool in the toolbox. Fast forward to SXSW 2005. As Information Architect on the Design Eye for the Idea Guy panel, D. Keith Robinson uses PDDs as a deliverable. Within weeks, the web design and development community is buzzing about PDDs. Suddenly they are exceedingly popular—something everyone wants to know more about. Many of these people give credit to Robinson for such a great idea. Few of them now using or talking about PDDS have ever heard of Dan Brown.
Let’s swing to the other end of the spectrum. At the IA Summit, I spoke with several very talented LIS / Content IAs who know very little about what the Web2.0 meme really entails, why Ruby on Rails is the greatest thing since sliced bread, or what great sites like TechCrunch and Ajaxian have to offer us.
And yes, there are plenty of people in the middle. Obviously Keith was reading Dan, and I saw a lot of faces at both conferences—Kevin Cheng, Thomas Vander Wal, Luke Wroblewsky, the Adaptive Path folks. But, I’d like to see more awareness/communication – more people crossing over, not necessarily in practice, but certainly in knowledge sharing.
So, here it is:
(By the way, for this model, I’m aiming for the middle, say 85% of us, and I’ve exempted the roles of Enterprise IA and Technical IA – those are very different.)
Thoughts?
Comments closed for this post.
On Apr 5, 04:54 AM Wade Winningham said
Is there a classification for an IA who’s not solely an IA? A Part-Time IA? What about an Accidental IA who would be someone who accidentally developed the IA for a project and didn’t even know they did?
On Apr 5, 11:15 AM Stephen said
Hmm… getting personal here? Short answer, YES: “Interaction Designer/Developer”
I think a lot of Bright Corner folks are in the left/center categories. While some of us have been exposed to the classic LIS IA (far right side) at Sapient, etc. our focus has historically been Content IA for relatively small projects, and IA/interaction design for small to medium sized applications. Moving to the other extreme (“develop a controlled vocabulary to conect millions of documents across hundreds or thousands of servers”) is where the accidental IA would not happen. Except in the form of a business analyst, or some other similar role.
On Apr 5, 07:47 PM Austin Govella said
This is really cool, but I think you’re off. Now I haven’t yet read your following entries, but I think the bottom four contrasts are way off.
And, for Stephen, where I’m working now, a BA wouldn’t get aywhere near enterprise business taxonomies. And they seem pretty typical of a lot of the large organizations.
On Apr 6, 07:00 AM Stephen said
Austin, you comment that “the bottom four contrasts are way off.” Could you explain? In retrospect, I can see where iRise has more to do with apps, which would doesn’t have much to do with LIS type IA, but I feel strongly about the other example contrasts; though I don’t mind being proven wrong!
My purpose in writing this is to pop these bubbles, so we can all learn from each other. It’s certainly not to create any divides. The contrasts are meant to be presented as evidence of a problem. I had never heard of iRise or Axure before the IA Summit, but my group IS pretty evangelistic about rapid prototyping; we’ve developed our own apps for this using .Net libraries, Ruby on Rails, CSS/XHTML, blogging engines, etc. (and keeping an eye on emerging hosted web services for building apps/forms). Similarly, I work with some very talented IAs who’ve done some phenomenal IA work for high profile clients. But I was shocked by the blank stares I got when I mention Clay Shirky’s “Ontology is overrated” and Don Norman’s “Activity Centered Design” – two of the mostly widely talked about essays (in certain IA circles) from the past year.
There are real pockets of people who’ve never heard of each other, but should be talking.
On Apr 6, 10:31 AM Austin Govella said
One thought that is beginning to crystallize is that your distinctions have more to do with the size of an organization than the type of information architect. If a West Coast Hipster gets a new job as a Noveau Digital or a Content IA, then their skills—for the most part—transfer with little down time.
I defnitely agree on getting the pockets talking. If this is useful for that, then rock on. I was commenting more on the “types of IAs” as a more general categorization.
In terms of the prototyping, though, James Melzer, what you would call a Content IA, makes his own taxonomy mgmt tools in ColdFusion.
(And to semanticaally picky, prototyping with Rails might be better as prototyping with application frameworks.)
On Apr 6, 11:08 AM Austin Govella said
So other than the West Coast Hipsters throwing a kegger, how do we get the Content and Nouveau IAs talking?
On Apr 6, 12:05 PM Stephen said
Ah, now this gets useful.
We’ve seen a real community of web designers and developers hungry for this type of information (or eager to share this type of information) through the formation of Refresh. We had no idea how many people would be interested in this little get together, but apparently a lot of people are eager for this type of ‘community’ as indicated by the turnout and the explosion of refresh groups in different cities.
From my perspective, a lot of the headaches and frustrations people encounter can be traced back to departmental silos. When different disciplines understand the value each other has to offer, that’s where exciting things happen. Barcamp is a great example of designers and developers bridging the divide to do some great things together. While I’ve followed the web sites and RSS feeds of several big IAs, it wasn’t until a few days ago that I joined SIGIA and the IAI message boards. Now I need the rest of my team to do the same… Let the conversations begin!
On a less aspirational note..
I see some problems with my ‘classifaction’ in that it is rooted in the ‘IA = online’ view. It doesn’t hold up when you talk about cross-channel IA (structuring physical environments or processes).
As far as size or organization goes, I think the two are linked. The size of the organization/project requires a different set of skills, hence a different type of IA. But that is neither here not there. I really do just want to see more people calling themselves the same thing to recognize the diversity of the IA field and what else it out there. And what can be learned from each other.
On Apr 11, 09:12 AM Austin Govella said
You mention getting the conversation started. I’m working on a knowledge sharing/talent development initiative for my company (a large, global, geographically disparate consulting company).
My whole focus is on getting the conversation started, but how do you get Enterprise Architects talking with javascript developers? I steadfastly believe the two have ideas to share and teach each other, but I can’t understand why they’d both particiapte in or monitor the same conversations.
Is it just a personality thing?
On Apr 11, 12:17 PM Dan Brown said
Seriously? Who hasn’t heard of me?