[IxDA Discuss] "Human Factors" angle on our field
dnp607
dnp607 at pacbell.net
Fri May 11 15:10:28 PDT 2007
>> Has anyone else noticed this?
Yes, definitely. My background somewhat mirrors Barbara's - BS in
Industrial Design and HF/E Masters. I concur with her conclusions.
The landscape is changing quickly. Several students at my institution
are using HF/E to hone, focus and differentiate their visual design
skills from the pack. These visually trained designers are changing
the way HF/E is taught and bridging the gap between engineering/
psychology/CHI and ID. For instance, Ergonomics is now being taught
by the head of ID... Our electives now include an array of courses
from ID. I hear the same from friends in other institutions.
>> How have you handled the "translation," when you need to
>> communicate with or assess someone who lives in that
>> universe?
If it helps, I can tell you how my current job has dealt with it: I
was hired to be a conduit to both worlds, and spend much of my days
translating verbal and written research (traditional HF/E) into (or
enhanced by) visual design. Also, I help HF/E people to understand
the visual process, and act as a tool for them to better express
their ideas. So, I guess the answer to your question "How have you
handled the translation" - they hired me to help.
>> Have you hired any folks like this to do design, or worked on
>> a team with them - and has it been a success? Any "bilingual" HF/IxD
>> people able to help me out here?
I think it is a bad idea to hire a traditionally trained HF/E person
to do design, unless they have skills or education in design.
Traditional HF/E education is meant to supplement or enhance the
design cycle, but should not be tasked with completing full design
cycles. There is a visualization and creativity gap (in my opinion).
We have a team now in which HF/E people are asked to complete nearly
full design cycles - in the past, this meant reading and writing long
reports and literally spelling out everything in excruciating detail-
the results were academic, unrealistic and ill communicated. Now,
they can visualize their ideas more thoroughly, and benefit from the
creative process - which is infinitely quicker and more powerful.
Example: I was in a meeting some months ago with HF/E folks designing
an interface and some hardware. The conversation almost immediately
broke down when trying to describe how to achieve a particular task
through a complex interface. Out came the dry-erase markers, and we
sketched and thought our way through it. Now, I receive at least
three emails a week from my HF/E team that includes (admittedly
rough) sketches! And they're getting better... Also, they now have an
understanding for composition, and a better grasp of creative grammar
and process. The HF/E team is beginning to understand the underlying
rules and power of the ideation process.
>> Any "bilingual" HF/IxD people able to help me out here?
If there's something specific you're having trouble translating, I'd
be glad to help more if I can.
Best Regards,
-Dan
--------------------------------------------
Dan Peknik
NASA Ames Research Center
San Jose State University
--------------------------------------------
On May 11, 2007, at 11:25 AM, Barbara Ballard wrote:
> On 5/11/07, Billie Mandel <Billie.Mandel at openwave.com> wrote:
>> So what about those Human Factors folk? The ones who have a Human
>> Factors degree or professional membership, and who AREN'T also
>> participating in the IxD or IA-centered organizations. My
>> observation
>> del giorno: they seem to speak a different language, even when
>> they're
>> talking about the same core set of tasks (i.e. creating/evaluating
>> software/web sites to make sure they are efficient, easy, or fun for
>> people to use).
>>
>>
>>
>> Has anyone else noticed this? How have you handled the
>> "translation,"
>> when you need to communicate with or assess someone who lives in that
>> universe? Have you hired any folks like this to do design, or
>> worked on
>> a team with them - and has it been a success? Any "bilingual" HF/IxD
>> people able to help me out here?
>
> I have training in HF, but I got a minor in industrial design. And
> there was an interesting schism between the two.
>
> In my experience, HF folks will be good at usability testing and
> similar activities. They are also grounded in human performance from
> an academic perspective and will have a much better chance at
> predicting user behavior than an equivalently experienced designer, at
> least until they have some number of years of experience.
>
> HF folks come in a number of flavors: CHI-focused,
> engineering-focused, psychology-focused. The last tends to be focused
> on research, the others tend to be a mix of research and "design"
> oriented. That's "design" as in "figure out a good way to solve this
> problem"; I've not seen a single class in ideation in engineering
> school.
>
> FYI, a number of the more senior Sprint UX folks are HF trained. As
> time went on, the UX team specialized, with a research group (largely
> with market research training and similar), a "design" group (with
> visual and interaction design training), and a set of "generalists",
> typically with HF training, who ended up owning the UX for the
> products under their responsibility. They've reorganized, and of
> course this is an over-generalization, but it gets you an idea.
>
>
>
> --
> Barbara Ballard
> barbara at littlespringsdesign.com 1-785-838-3003
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
More information about the discuss
mailing list