Jim, its funny that you wrote this now. When I was speaking to my students today, I didn't use the same phrase you did, but I said I was really having trouble with the conversation b/c there was definitely a "you are from Mars, i am from Venus" dynamic going on here.
your descriptions are getting clearer which is hopeful to the conversation. I'm glad we are getting a chance to push you to try and translate what you do, think so that it can be articulated among the tribe. I still find it very problematic that your rhetoric is basically saying, "I can't tell you what the Matrix is, i can only show you." For someone such as much from Venus, this is very difficult to swallow, but I'm seeing more glimpses through the dense fog here among the 2nd planet. I did say some stuff that I didn't see responses to that I'd like to understand more of. 1st, when I say "just", that isn't to devalue it, but to express a simplification, or a sense of "Oh! this isn't as complicated as I thought it is." But obviously, you responded by thinking that it is indeed very complex, but still with no way of expressing that complexity other than to say, a) it is complex; b) i can't explain how; and c) only experience can guide you. 2nd I asked about the 3 phases and I tried to reflect that in my understanding of them they sound like standard (is that better than "just") design practice found at most every studio I've worked in or had as a consultant, except there were 2 or three distinct deliverables or action or thought processes missing. a) a distinct iterative ideation process (usually filled with sketching, separate from model prototypes in the Buxton sense of it); and b) a foundation of articulated strategy which is bound in narrative (much like Liz is alluding to with scenario development, but there are other methods to developing narratives). Again, in the midst of a pretty standard ID education system that does teach thinking, judgetment, creativity skills over standard rote methodologies, I get what you are saying. So the I'm left thinknig that the rapid had specific requirements that envalue the expert, and the expert needs a system around it to build a team with (thus the apprenticeship model of education). lastly, in design scenarios where the projects are longer (on end of months or years) these methods are not quite as practical, but the standard (from my minds eye) design practices still apply and can be easily expanded upon and even useful for adding more observed experiences to use as a muscle tool for when the rapid is required again. Or are you saying that rapid is always in play and if it isn't rapid it is just plain wasteful and possibly detrimental to the results/outcomes of the projects? -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=37626 ________________________________________________________________ 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
