Yes, this is my point. That good design done w/o any type of research is rare. To think that it happens simply by chance is IMHO shortsighted and naive. Furthermore, why take the risk? Why wouldn't you inform your design by some research?
Speaking for myself and Messagefirst, every time we've done some research, typically based on ethnographic methods, our designs have turned out that much more informed, innovative, and intuitive. We have done some good designs based simply on pre-existing knowledge, but they're not nearly as good as those that are informed through research. I hardly think this is an anomaly. On Nov 27, 2007, at 2:24 PM, Jeff White wrote: > But that doesn't mean that *no* user centered research was conducted > - it just means they didn't use personas. Which I think is Todd's > point here...good design is much more probable when some sort of > user centered research (especially when designing for an audience > other than yourself) is conducted. Cheers! Todd Zaki Warfel President, Design Researcher Messagefirst | Designing Information. Beautifully. ---------------------------------- Contact Info Voice: (215) 825-7423 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://toddwarfel.com ---------------------------------- In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not. ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
