Boxes And Arrows : The Design Behind the Design

Article Idea:

Information architecture as an alignment discipline

suggested by Austin Govella on 2007/05/30

(Brief snippets from the post linked above.) People want to understand the direct value information architecture provides to an organization. Inevitably, the worth of a thing comes down to the value it provides others, and it’s always easier to value the tangible over the intangible. For Information Architecture, people inevitably value the deliverables: our wireframes, site maps, etc. The real difficulty comes from assuming IA has a direct value contribution to an organization, that there’s something — no matter how intangible — that IA owns, and the value of that commodity, only owned by IA, can only be captured by hiring some information architects. But, deep down, we all know that’s a bunch of crap. .... In every organization, these diverse disciplines bring a special perspective to every issue. If all of these perspectives work together to accomplish the organization’s total vision, then we’d have the perfect, ideal, utopian organization where information architecture would provide no additional value. Information architecture, like business analysis and enterprise architecture, is a discipline of framing and alignment that ensures an organization’s parts work together. .... IA has no value of its own. IA has the ability to help organizations recover the value they lose in the gaps between where the organization wants to go, and where it’s headed. This isn’t something IAs should be worried about. Business Analysis and Enterprise Architecture are in the same boat. However, when selling our value in a world that prefers to think about “owned” contributions to a product or service, it can be difficult to value ourselves honestly on their terms. Like anything, it’s a matter of education, a matter framing. And like any change it requires that you not only identify the gap, but also that you be willing to work to close it.