Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [agile-usability] Agile vs. Creativity

Expand Messages
  • George Dinwiddie
    ... It sounds like moving to larger batches, and away from agility. ... Can the designers not be creative in the presence of another human? Do the designs (or
    Message 1 of 118 , Nov 14, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Cindy Lu wrote:
      > We had a team discussion last week about how we can better support
      > products in creative designs (visual and interactions).
      >
      > Currently, the designers provide design iterations on daily basis.
      > However, we found two issues for some designs:
      > 1. The number of iterations becomes endless (almost)
      > 2. At the end, the final design is still not very satisfying
      >
      > We brainstormed some ideas to make the delivery better:
      > 1. Write a visual design brief and review it with key stakeholders
      > 2. Discuss among graphic designers and user experience designers to
      > make sure we are on the same page
      > 3. Give the graphic designer(s) 2-3 days to create several design options
      > 4. Review the designs among graphic designers and user experience designers
      > 5. Revise the designs
      > 6. Present the designs to stakeholders
      >
      > This means, the initial creative design will take about 5 days to
      > present the draft design options.

      It sounds like moving to larger batches, and away from agility.

      > Designers need some time and space for creativity. Daily iteration
      > sometimes forces the designs to spend time on quality instead of
      > creativity.

      Can the designers not be creative in the presence of another human? Do
      the designs (or the documentation of them) have to be "quality" to show
      to others?

      It sounds to me as if the designers are trying to communicate to the
      stakeholders via documents, rather than face to face. What would happen
      if a designer and a stakeholder sat down together, so they could discuss
      what's liked, and not liked, about a design /as it's being sketched/?

      - George

      --
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
      Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
      Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    • mark schraad
      I ve been called pedantic on occasion. I m ok with that ; )
      Message 118 of 118 , Dec 10, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I've been called pedantic on occasion. I'm ok with that ; )

        On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Jeff Patton <jpatton@...> wrote:
         

        On Dec 6, 2009, at 12:22 AM, mark schraad wrote:

        Jeff,


        I run with a few definitions of design. When Alan Cooper (I can hear the cackles rise) came to talk with us a while back he spoke of differentiating the design of code (structure), from the design of the application, which is of course much different that designing labels and graphics for functionality.

        For me separating different kinds of design starts to get a bit tedious.  When you think about it, it's like night and day - which although you can tell me to the second when sunrise or sunset is, it's a pretty academic discussion when it's still light outside.  OK, bad metaphor - my point is that all design decision run together.  They just do.  Giving precise definitions for one type or another doesn't seem to help people make better decisions in practice. 

        Reading "the oatmeal" has put me in a strange mood.  Yes I am the mother-f**ing pterodactyl: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/ptero



      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.