Comments on: Why I’m Not Calling Myself an Information Architect Anymore

By: Lyle Kantrovich

Lyle Kantrovich — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

David, I also didn't want to claim to be an "IA" -- although I do some of the same things IA's do. That's why I selected the title I did: User Experience Architect. See a description here: http://crocolyle.blogspot.com/2002_05_05_crocolyle_archive.html#76253186

By: David

David — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I wonder whether *any* IAs actually do *all* of the things it is claimed IAs do!

I’m pretty sure most of the IAs I know don’t have any experience with facets, categories and meta-data beyond constructing a site map or carrying out a few random card sorts every now and again.

And I know that most people I talk to smirk when I say I’m a “Customer Experience Architect”.

Such is life… one day we will all be web designers again and that will be the end of it!

Cheers, d

By: Greg

Greg — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What is with everyone beating the dead “identity” horse? Really, is it relevant what we call ourselves? By and large, most of us have responsibilites that dictate we take care of certain tasks and roles, usually moving through most of the IA, ID, UCD, etc. fields that we spend so much time discussing. I don’t care what we call ourselves…I may have at one point, but it seems so trivial now. The fact is, these different fields are the ROYGBIV color spectrum of a development cycle. Each is a crucial part of the whole, blending ever so delicately from one “color” to the next. Let’s stop worrying so much about what we call ourselves and move on to the work we actually do and how we do it better!

By: David Fiorito

David Fiorito — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

When I took on my latest job as Information Architect, I found that I was called upon to do IA (labeling, taxonomy, meta-data, etc.), UX (site flows and pathing), UE (usability testing and heuristic evaluations), and UI (page layout and prototyping) work.

So what am I? I prefer the title Information Architect because, in a literal sense, that is what I do. I craft the information presented by the business for presentation to the employees and customers of the business. I am essentialy an architect.

I guess what I am saying is that, as I see it, the title of Information Architect evokes the image of a professional that crafts an information space and a traditional architect crafts living space.

I see no problem with it.

Cheers,

Dave Fiorito

By: RuthK

RuthK — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I agree with David. If you look at titles for other types of roles, such as Producer, Project Manager, and Product Manager, they encompass many responsibilities and skill sets. The problems I have had with titles is that they’re often too limiting. Even Information Architect, one of the more general titles for the discipline, has been too limiting. What do you call an IA generalist (as David has described above) who also does requirements, copy writing, and project management? Maybe all it comes down to is how to represent all this stuff on a resume. It usually doesn’t matter what your title is while you’re working within an organization.

By: matt

matt — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

haha and also - the tao that can be described is not the tao, right... two quotes: "Even the finest teaching is not the Tao itself. Even the finest name is insufficient to define it. Without words, the Tao can be experienced, and without a name, it can be known." http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/gthursby/taoism/ttcstan3.htm#1 and finally: "Names is for tombstones, baby" -Mr Big, james Bond: "Live and Let Die" http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Land/8672/lald/tomb.wav

By: Gene

Gene — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I’ve always thought the “architecture” portion of “information architecture” was a bit of pompous inflation, especially when used in reference to the LIS-IA school. I mean, “information organization” and “information classification” work just as well, and are probably more descriptive.

(But I think I’m coming around to Matt’s POV that “architecture” is a useful term when we talk about the coordinating functions of Big IA.)

Anyway, I see what we do as information product design. I like that term because a) it’s simple and (I think) easy to understand, and b) it focuses on things we can control (the product and the information it delivers) rather than things we can’t (e.g. user experiences).

By: Madonnalisa

Madonnalisa — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

iOMAR

That’w what I’m calling the work that my group does. I wanted to avoid IA at all costs since it was so associated with websites only.

It’s definitely a big dose of the user-centered
LIS-IA…

information organization
information management
information access
information retrieval

and we do not have a mascot named Omar…yet!

By: brandy

brandy — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

why a name is important?

Something for a company to put on a job list for one thing. I am tired of all these ass backwards job descriptions with the wrong title, or a weird title.

Designer can often mean production design.

It helps when it comes to getting a paycheck, title = money in a lot of classical work environments. I am aware though that web dev isn’t exactly a classical environment

It gives some people a sense of worth, and I don’t think there is anything wrong with that. People like to know what’s expected of them.

By: Betsy Martens

Betsy Martens — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

As someone pointed out already, this is perhaps mostly a question of self-identification. After listing all my diverse “hats” on a business card, then (joyfully) feeling empowered to lump them all under “information architect,” I now have settled on a tag line to do the job. My business is information design (encompassing more than Web stuff), I use the title “information architect,” and the tagline reads: “Content and the space it occupies.” So much better than a big stack of hats.