Que Multimedia, Part 3, Beyond Typography

As you might expect, I have a suggestion or two. Firstly, I would confirm my standing as a heretic by questioning the hegemony of typography. Put five designers in front of lattes and the one thing they will all agree on with mumbled nods is the importance of Typography. Of course I would too, but this reflexive assent masks a larger problem in how design is practiced and taught. The design profession has been so deeply fractured in the last 15 years typography has remained one of the few common links between this new multiplicity of practitioners. Well, for better or worse, the aesthetics of desktop and browser based applications use type in extremely limited ways that are an intersection between common system installed fonts and informative hierarchies. And common system fonts, consider Arial, Impact and Papyrus for a moment, leave much to be desired. However this is the palette of many desktop and browser based applications. Often the more complex issues in these engagements are how to assemble, change and order vast amounts of information. Designers bring a vastly different focus to these activities than most developers. The developer concentrates on a micro level of specific code interactions to construct a working system while a user experience designer connects the user to a much more general picture. Factors that might be involved include business problems, a users cognitive interest/abilities and the the capabilities of the developers systems. There are user research activity models, interface and task modeling considerations that have little to do with what anyone would describe as sophisticated print typography. Yet notions of hierarchy and the effect of symbols and composition are elemental to forming easily navigated tasks. So mere type skills will not be adequate; understanding interaction from a standpoint of task and capability is the core activity. This means that the designer must have a comprehension of the basics of digital design history as well as what is current, and this is equally as trend driven as any part of print culture, in development terms. I see this as the formation of the question, not an answer. What we do know is that the answer is a moving target, obfuscated by the claims of those who market digital culture. But the challenge to answer it is as real as any aspirations we have as providers of both sensible and innovative solutions.

Que Multimedia: Part 2, A Dilemma:

I share the responsibilities of hiring decisions for a small consultancy and being a design educator. Hiring new staff gives me one perspective on the state of education, and designing and delivering classes another. Our consultancy delivers user experience design for applications; the participation of any kind of designer in these tasks is a relatively new thing, and is too often seen with some suspicion by both developers and financial officers in the organizations we consult with. The ability to convey the passion that is required for the work is an asset, and one beyond any discussion of teaching methodologies. That said, I see it as vitally important work that is rooted in a strong understanding of typographic hierarchies, information design and the mechanisms of interactivity. Experience in the former role tells me that hiring a design graduate with less than 3 to 5 years experience is usually a mistake. Surprisingly, I have had better luck with geeky film or architecture grads. They tend to have stronger conceptual abilities. We can deduce that design programs are non-functional in developing graduates capable of exploring and understanding these tasks. This is a simple and troubling assumption, particularly as I am complicit in the activity of educating them. The organizers of the Schools of Thought conference have recognized a broader problem, inclusive of this issue, and have organized their spring conference around it. http://superstove.blogs.com/schoolsofthoughts3/portal/index.html My question is this. Is it presumptuous to expect Design Schools to graduate students with even a roadmap of the skills of information design, interactivity and typography? The problem lies less with graduate programs - where students should have some breadth of experience - but is pronounced in undergraduate education. I hear no end of lip service; these are core values all lay claim too; yet the results are a vision of the emperors new clothes.

CHI2 Town Panel

On April 5 I was invited by Brian Maggi to speak with Mark FelcanSmith [Allstate] Frank Gruger [Motorola] & Jason Kunesh [Orbitz], at the Depaul Center at 1 East Jackson. Frank & Brian recorded the event for a podcast - I think elaborate mixing & sweetening is occurring as you read this.

Pre-talk dinner at the Exchequer loosened tongues & elicited shared histories with several of us having journeyed to the West Coast and/or back, and this became one of the first topics of the panel in terms of the opportunities available both here & there. My comments centered on the differences in the kinds of business endeavors which predicated a much more conservative environment here.

I find far less frivolous business ventures here - no pets.com or flash in the pan outfits like Friendster. What Chicago has is brick & mortar businesses who tend to be in a discovery phase with User Experience Design & HCI concerns; this means that there is vast opportunity. The logical corollary is a requirement for significant education; the panel agreed that IT departments were very much the gatekeepers here, and tended to be suspicious of anyone from outside their world-view. Luckily for us, there are many supportive currents in the media, both tech & general, that are helping open these doors.

Brian moderated, goaded & cajoled with great skill, keeping the conversation flowing. The structure of the event was simple Q & A, but as the panelists had many years of experience between them, stories & opinions were anything but lacking.

Adam Steele - in a moment of brilliant academic scheduling - brought his DePaul class. There were a couple of questions regarding what to show in an interview - I think the first one was whether you should show a book. YES, definitely was the resounding answer.

But what kind of book? The answer from the panel was unanimous - all of us wanted to see evidence of process. I recall it was Mark FelcanSmith who said show how you got there. I reinforced his comment by saying that I would rather see the process steps of three examples - problem statements, concept, iterations, solutions, results - than 15 unconnected finished pieces.

If you actually make it to an interview, then it gives both of you something worthwhile to talk about. How you developed an idea leas to methodology discussions of how you approach the stages of a process & how you deal with collaborative environments. UXD or HCI work is a team event - particularly as a junior, you are not likely to be handed a problem and told to come back with a solution in two days.

There will be Business Analysts, Developers, Senior designers & Clients working together to solve what is usually a complex series of problems. Work needs to be produced in a way that allows for comment, technical realities or epiphanies or creative market approaches. So the ability to work in stages is crucial.

Many other questions were asked & answered - I will link in the podcast when it appears. Thanks to Brian & the other panelists for an enjoyable evening & freely sharing their stories.

Technorati

  • --