Let's Talk About Sitemaps

This week's assignment, we were to read about specific theories and their many components when it comes to seeing a project through. I chose sitemaps for the flowchart-like appeal when assigning tasks, and its straightforward approach in being proactive when it comes to laying out the expectations for other team members. Since I'm not generally a person who like hidden agendas, this is one of the theories I could relate to. 

Creating a sitemap is the first and most important step in the information design process. Without it, there isn’t a way to make order out of the chaos that always ensues when working on an interdepartmental project. Although there’s always a common goal, not everyone’s job is the same when it comes to seeing a fully fleshed out idea grow into a new reality. In order to do that, a sitemap should be in place before any work- individually or collectively- is assigned. 

But what exactly is a sitemap and why is it so important? 

A sitemap is a tool used to help the team figure out the entire website, with all its main sections, pages, and sublevel pages¹. Having this type of flowchart allows all the people involved in the project the ability to plan accordingly by knowing what their goal is, the timeframe in which it needs to be accomplished and the expected outcome. In short, it is a way to keep order in a situation that could become extremely chaotic without a guideline being implemented from the beginning. 

In digging further into this topic, I decided that I can't say I would change anything about it. Nor would I remove any steps, since each project's guidelines require different needs to be met and results to be achieved. For example, if the team is creating software for the special needs population- to include those with visual impairments- it would require a different set of guidelines to be met not only with the State Board of Education but in keeping with the Federal IDEA law as well, especially if being used in an academic setting. Conversely, designing educational programs for general education students is less strident, in one area, but no less important across the board.

 However, when looked at together, it is apparent that both groups of students have the need to be educated, but it must be done differently in order to achieve the goals listed on the student with an individualized educational plan (IEP) in place. Again, one goal is not more important than the other; just different in how they have to be handled. I would think the same reasoning would be used in any other field of commerce as well, especially if the same information design team is being used for competing companies. 

In conclusion, I am a firm believer that a person can’t rise to the occasion if they aren’t fully aware of what the goal is. Therefore, having a sitemap (or flowchart) would be valuable because it sets the expectations from the beginning, gives an idea of what the timeline would be, and gives signposts in case a contingency plan or extension is needed in order to complete the project. By giving the team the entire picture and scope of the situation, it also allows them to take ownership of their part in the development process. It’s said that an architect is only as good as his contractor, and the contractor is only as good as their interior designer, etc. This way of thinking also holds true when it comes to information design. Each person on the team holds the key to making the project as good as it can be before its release date. 

So in my opinion, having a blueprint before the project even starts is a way to not only get the project done mostly on schedule, but to avoid the ‘I didn’t know that’ implications later on if there are issues. 

1. Baer, Kim, and Jill Vacarra. Information Design Workbook : Graphic approaches, solutions, and inspiration + 30 case studies, Quarto Publishing Group USA, 2008. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/empire-ebooks/detail.action?docID=3399804.
   Created from empire-ebooks on 2023-02-23 19:07:09.

User-Based or Human-Centered Design.... A Comparative Essay

In thinking about the topic this week, I examined two principles in Information Design: User-based and Human-centered information design. Now whereas it seems like the two terms are synonymous, their approaches are significantly different. At base, both have public consumption in mind. However, whereas the user-design model is much more generic in its approach, human design is more specific.

First a disclaimer… 

I see the merit in both approaches, although my core values due to my own personal experiences make me lean more toward the human design methodology. The user-based information design model is more Socretial in its approach, where the need for a product will drive its meaning towards a specific population. This need can include subcategories such as: lifestyle, economic disposition, profession, etc. In my opinion, it’s more generalized- a sort of one size fits all- mentality, and for large-scale services, it works. In a lot of ways, its value is also based on cost. Certain organizations and corporations are good for this, where negating the consumer experience entirely and only addressing any major concerns due to declining sales, poor reviews, or a potential uprising/riot are the only way they see or acknowledge an issue.

The problem is in the solely scientific approach used to gauge public opinion. As Nathan Shedroff said when he spoke in an interview with Singularity University in 2018, "Design is a set of processes that accentuate qualitative values paired with traditional business tools that measure quantifiable results, then you have a complete picture of opportunity, customer need, and how you can build better products and services [...] which has been missing from most companies." So by taking a somewhat scientific approach in asking key questions such as: What are the needs, processes, limitations and ultimately I'm sure, risk assessments, they manage to leave themselves room for improvement to see what works, what doesn't, what to try and what to discontinue. By setting those priorities in order, they give themselves a foundation, no matter how short-lived (or long-term) it might be. This is where human-centered design actually has an edge, since their core value is to get the product to the people thus creating a partnership of sorts with their target market.

Maya Angelou once said, ‘People will often forget what you said, but they will always remember how you made them feel'. This is the human-design approach in a nutshell. The primary goal seems to be to market a product made for the people with the public’s input. The term coined by the late, Michael Coolley, helps not only to save money where production is concerned, but gives the public a personal stake in the success of a product or service. A partnership between the consumer and the inventor(s) builds a level of trust because they are being heard in what they see, need, what they think, how useful the product will be, and a reliability in that the customer is not wasting their money by buying something they thought was for one purpose, but not even close to what is expected of the product.

One of the companies famous for this kind of approach was Daymond John’s FUBU Corporation, which catered to the hip-hop community in a way companies like Nike and Adidas didn’t regardless of the popularity of their products. The creation of that company spawned other companies such as Phat Farm and later Roc-A-Wear and Sean John, which gave inner city kids a way to see people who grew up in their own neighborhoods- or those like them- being successful in their own rights, and the people of those neighborhoods gladly helped to make the brands what they all have become today. This one-hand-washes-the-other mentality gives a much needed control over where a customer spends their money, or expounds their energy when the need arises, especially when it comes to advertising. No doubt, word of mouth can sink an empire faster than any product war ever could. So consumer input is invaluable, particularly when used as a preventive measure for minor glitches as opposed to an economic fire extinguisher because the problems are blazing out of control.

In conclusion, there are many companies who use one business model over the other. And whereas there isn’t one approach that’s better than the other, I think combining the science behind the user-based approach and the empathy used to make the human-centered approach my favorite between the two, would give any company an edge in the competitive corporate sector. Number one, it would keep costs down, and secondly, it would give consumers a way to voice their opinions about the product before they hit the assembly lines, thereby keeping costs and public discontent to a minimum. Believe it or not, the only company I’ve seen successfully combine both the user-based scientific methodology as well as the human-centered services approach to providing information to the public- whether affected directly by a developmental disability or not- has been Autism Speaks, which helps parents such as myself find creative solutions to problems often based on medical and behavioral research, while informing others about events or services available in other areas of care. I hope other companies/corporations catch on and begin to implement these two ideologies to really make the difference they often laud as their core reason for existing beyond the boardroom and their bottom line.   

"TEDxTaipei 2011 - Nathan Shedroff." YouTube, uploaded by TEDx Talks, 11 May 2011 ,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9srqfiug8A. 

Singularity University 2018- Nathan Shedroff "Design Strategy" YouTube, uploaded by Singularity University https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erc-pUYHbKI