Looks like a fairly standard approach.

I split design in to Concept and Detail and use an overlapped
iterative approach to phases - no water fall or throwing things over
the wall.

I also use a task based process rather than a goal based, this is an
evolution from goal based and attempts to define the users by what
they do, not what car they drive (as can happen with badly created
personas). In all cases tasks, users etc I try to keep as real as
possible.

Stewart Dean


2008/5/1 chadvavra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I haven't, but I did recently come up with a distilled philosophy.
>
>  "To create a human connection in technological products with usable
>  form and content by understanding business and user desires, needs,
>  and motivations. "
>
>  My company uses a version called,
>
>  "Discover, Design, Develop, Deploy"
>
>  but I I worry sometimes as Design is so early and so not what is
>  traditionally "design".
>
>
>  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>  Posted from the new ixda.org
>  http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=28587
>
>
>
>
>  ________________________________________________________________
>  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
>



-- 
Stewart Dean
________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to