Mark Hurst’s latest column, Usability Professionals Must Disappear, is fresh fresh air.
Somehow “user experience practitioner” doesn’t roll off the tongue so easily. Hence the inevitable effort for UX-types to name what it is they do: at conferences and in newsletters, for years, I’ve seen the endless discussions. Should it be “usability professional”? “Information designer”? “Interaction architect”? Some other permutation?… Here’s my proposal - easy to pronounce, easy to understand, just two easy words: “Who cares?”
Thank you Mark.
Mark goes on to explain how these endless, self-indulgent “what should we call ourselves” discussions may serve the people in the profession well, but it only serves to confuse co-workers and clients — the very people the “user-centered interaction usability architects” need to work with in order to achieve true success.
Mark’s article reminds me of companies that are obsessed with process, not the end product. In the end, it doesn’t matter what you call yourself, what other people call you, or how detailed and meticulous the prescribed proprietary process is. What really matters is achieving the desired results. Yes, a solid, proven process can help get you there, but going through the pre-defined paces is not how you should judge the success of a project.
BTW… For more job title masturbation, see this page from the original 37signals Manifesto. Yes, those are all real job titles from our competitors back in 1999.
Read this article for interesting contrast.
"Interaction Architect" is also difficult to articulate. Phrases that won't roll off the tongue often stop in the throat.
Both articles make good points.
However the best points in Marks article are about listening and avoiding posturing.
Anytime someone reccommends not caring to careful consideration losses any argument in my opinion.
So far, Tog's article has only been good to stir up the waters (again). And as much as I think waters need to be stirred now and again, Tog's underlying premise is faulty.
Mark's apparent premise is not. This is something that has been commentsed upon heavily since Tog put his crap out there for all to see. Girlwonder, Croc o' Lyle, experiencedesign group, and even moi.
And for more masterbatory job title fun...
love the links to molly's stuff! especially the job title generator. great stuff.
-mark
the title's i've used over the years either make fun of titles and their (non)purpose (like "web ninja!") or just give a general idea what i do (like "[name],creative lead").
i always find it funny talking to people i know in huge corps that are always vying for better titles, because based on the name their role is called, they get different pay (even if their role doesn't change). silly semantics.
back in the late 90's, during the Big Internet Extravaganza, I was actually given the title "Interactivist"....it was mortifying.
Making up excuses for not having business cards at meetings became an interesting diversion.
If an application is designed well, the reward for users is that they will learn it faster, accomplish their daily tasks more easily, and have fewer questions for the help desk. As a developer of a well-designed application, your returns on that investment are more upgrade revenue, reduced tech support, better reviews, less documentation, and higher customer satisfaction. The rewards of building a good-looking Aqua application are worth taking the extra time.
Good reading
4480 Very well said chappy.
7531
butalbital
butalbital apap
buy butalbital
butalbital fioricet
butalbital apap caffeine
acetaminophen butalbital caffeine codeine
cheap butalbital
acetaminophen and butalbital
butalbital acetaminophen and caffeine
butalbital medication pain
butalbital order
butalbital buy online
butalbital caffeine
aspirin butalbital caffeine
butalbital cheap online
butalbital codeine
butalbital effects side
butalbital online
aspirin butalbital caffeine codeine
apap butalbital caffeine tab
apap butalbital cafe
aspirin butalbital
butalbital information
ac butalbital
apap butalbital cafe cod
butalbital cod