Re: The difference between designers and developers

In his obviously insane rant Anthony Colfelt said:

(notation for the humor impaired -- JUST KIDDING )

I think Anthony's comments are right on the money. All design is a
"best-informed guess" proposition among professionally mature people. One
can always "spot the looney" (the "green" designer) by their adherence to
being doctrinaire positions on small issues -- ask me how I know...

"Okay, how do you know Peter?"

Well, I'll answer that: I know because I was once a doctrinaire greeny,
that's why.

It seems that the easiest way for a designer to burn out is to latch onto
the doctrine that is taught in school and sweat and burn with the "idiotic"
and "untasteful" beliefs and attitudes of the "others" (typically our
colleagues.

What they don't tell you in school is that one positions oneself much
better if one can establish a role as "teacher" wherein one simply asks
questions. Questioning is essential. The questioning should be based on the
doctrine and should challenge the oftentimes design-illiterate (spoken in a
non-judgmental way here) -teams, who simply need to be challenged as to
their assumptions and beliefs. If you're young, it may be difficult to
establish this role, however one will never up her credibility or leverage
on the design problem by "high-minded critique" of team personalities and
decisions.

It is also the case that even with a room full of the very best designers,
no system will be complete. Design is in part and "emergent phenomenon."
The system is "final" only for today, until all those cases that the design
team could not possibly have anticipated come to fruition when the rubber
meets the road with _real_ users (who defy singular definition). One can
only hope to approximate more or less accurately the needs of the first and
most-often-anticipated users of the system (and even then you'll be "wrong"
in some sense).

We must get used to this posture of constant refinement. Key phrase:
"Successive approximations to the goal."

> No, that's not what I am saying. I am saying that even with the
> best research, you as the designer of a system are interpreting
> that research and making an educated guess at how it should be
> designed to accommodate your audience. Without a shred of doubt,
> having research is far superior to not.



> How else would we make any decisions at all that weren't purely
> based on conjecture and personal experience?

> What I am saying is that even with research behind you, you're
> still making a best guess, and the only way you'll ever truly
> have hard facts and conclusive proof that something is right, is
> once you've seen it tested with a successful conclusion.

> How good your guess was, is the measure of how good a designer of
> a system you and your team are.

Anthony Colfelt
  Senior Designer | BBCi Development & Services
    6th Floor | Bush House - NW | Strand | London WC2B 4PH
      PH: 0207 557 3471 | MOB: 0779 617 4878
        [email protected]

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): [email protected]
           SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES:  http://lists.syntagm.co.uk
            (or send email to mailto:[email protected])
    --------------------------------------------------------------