Ali,

I sympathize.  What Jay recommends is excellent advice for grappling with
any overly strong and unreflective group, but there are more specific
approaches that work best with engineers and similar personality types.
Occasionally there are even advantages in having such a group.

There are two issues with engineer-driven environments.

   - *Persuasion.*  Building relationships and a business case is helpful.
   Focus on using data that appeals to the scientific part of their brains.
   Their logic and vanity will both appreciate that. I find any relevant
   neuroscience data very helpful, as well as analysis that incorporates
   different user types, including their type.  So, have a smart engineer
   persona and what works for them (probably what they're recommending), and
   then explain the other types and needs, and how your approach meets them
   all.
   - *Development style. * More and more engineering-driven places are using
   Agile and Agile-esque approaches such as Scrum for development. This can
   make it challenging to meet big-picture needs such as UX & IA.  It is indeed
   possible, however.

   First, establish public best practices and "what works" tips, and where
   possible train all teams in the basics.

   Second, establish UX as part of an integration team, and let them track
   all the separate project streams in one place, to see overlap and conflict.

   Lastly - and this isn't necessary, it just helps me personally - remember
   that Agile & Scrum are basically the creative process writ large, applied to
   technical development. The very act of working this way makes engineers and
   developers more accessible to alternative approaches - and makes the design
   people more immediately aware of dev needs, too.

I said it could help at times, too.  I worked at Texas Instruments for a
while, and it's a very engineer-driven environment. However, the audience
was just over 80% engineer as well.  So we could turn to our own engineers
as well as user engineers for research and testing, and happily design
primarily *to* engineers, which is a rare joy in UX.  The focus is clear and
there's very little confusion as to what works and what doesn't, although
there are a few differences with the rest of the world. (For example, for
something like training informaiton, engineers prefer one long page that's
well-anchored internally, rather than multiple pages to keep most content
above the fold.)

So, those are my comments on dealing with the engineering mind set. Hope
they're useful to you!

bests,
Alex O'Neal
ux manager/social network analyst

--
The best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago. The next best time is
now.
________________________________________________________________
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