November 19th, 2002

AIfIA Debate Via Sigia-l

My career as an IA started with a lecture from Moses himself.

Richard Saul Wurman came to the Fashion Institute of Technology in 1998 to give a presentation on the past, present and future of information architecture. After the lecture, me and my newly acquainted crew from Organic-NY headed back to the office with a passionate drive to better our work in the interactive space.

I mention this because I find it extremely interesting to see Wurman’s vision of IA evolving before our very eyes. Yes, Wurman did proclaim that (paraphrasing):

"A new breed of workers called information architects would take on the challenge of handling the tsunami of information crashing upon our shores."

But Wurman himself was, and still is, much more than what our community has tried so desperately to establish over the past few years as the definition of ‘information architect’ proper (i.e. one who improves search/findability, through labeling, categorization, thesauri development; a librarian extraordinaire).

Wurman envisioned information architecture as a design solution in the information age; an intrinsic quality of the design process itself. Sure, that can be translated into the library science model of IA that we accept now, but is that definition due to the evolution of the work or to the ‘leadership’ of our community?

It’s not an easy question to answer, but a valid one to ask none the less.

So what will be the agenda of AIfIA moving forward concerning the role/responsibilities of IA’s in the workplace? How will IA be positioned regarding return on investment? Where will the line be drawn in reference to IA’s estranged cousins (UX and the ID’s)? Should there really be one professional stance as IA/ID graduate programs come to fruition?

If Wurman really is the father of IA, as Christina suggested by quoting him, let’s respect his vision (pre-internet/hyperlink), build upon our evolution and seriously think about the future of our profession. I do hope AIfIA provides an open and collaborative think tank and doesn’t turn into Derek’s worst nightmare.


One Response to “AIfIA Debate Via Sigia-l”  

  1. 1 Tom Alison

    You need egomaniacs to get anywhere…

    The whole AIfIA debate is interesting but I think it’s moot. I don’t think any ho-hum professional organization is going to make even a ripple in advancing the awareness of information design, or influencing anything that has anything to do with the information technology industry at all.

    If you look at anybody who’s made an impact in the industry, take a close look at what they’re like: eccentric, self-aggrandizing individuals who attract attention to their cause because they are in love with themselves and love being heard. And they also sometimes happen to be geniuses.

    Take Richard Saul Wurman. Sure he did a ton for IA. And I think he’s very smart. But people paid attention to him because they couldn’t not pay attention to him. First of all, check out what he wears. Sick! Then, look at how he operates. His TED conference was part revolutionary, but largely self-seeking and cultish.

    How about Steve Jobs? Smart? Yes. Motivated? Yes. A genius? Maybe. An egomaniac? Definitely. Would Apple have soared without him? No. It was his ego and need to tell people all about what he could do that made people pay attention to Apple.

    How about Jakob Nielsen? Again, he’s smart, he’s motivated, but I don’t think he’d get as much attention were it not for his constant need to throw himself at you every chance he gets.

    Steve Ballmer and Microsoft? Idiots? Yes. Egomaniacs? Of course! But they certainly have much more influence than the Association of Shareware Professionals. Maybe Linux and the open source movement would get a boost if Linus Torvalds was a maniac like Gates, instead of being such a wuss.

    My point is, any organization or advocacy group is going to be ineffective at communicating and influencing unless they have a superstar. And if they have a superstar, they’re screwed anyway because then it’s no longer about the group. Just look at the Jackson 5

    (Originally posted as an apperceptive.com/uxDesign team post at 11:39pm on 11/19/2002, it has been attached as a comment for archiving purposes)