Rashmi Sinha
ABSTRACT
To create user-centered information architectures (IA), designers need a structured methodology that allows them to move rapidly from initial exploration of domain, to designing and testing information architecture. Additionally, in rapidly changing domains, design needs to flexibly incorporate future additions and evolutions. Finally, IA design should also take into account business concerns and goals. This paper describes Rapid Information Architecture Prototyping, a three-stage methodology for creating and testing IA based on user and business requirements. First, stakeholder analysis is used to understand business and organizational context, while free-listing exercises are used to explore the domain. Next, results of free-listing are used in an open card-sorting to understand user mental models and generate prototype IAs. Finally, closed card-sorting is used to evaluate and choose between candidate structures. The last two stages can be used in an iterative manner to design and test prototype IAs. The results yield a future-oriented IA that can flexibly incorporate future changes to site content and functionality, and provide design direction for years to come.
References
- Boutelle, J., Sinha, R., Swearingen, K., Cornett, L., & Dan, I. Rapid User Mental Modeling at eBay.com: A Case Study. Information Architecture Summit, March 2004.Google Scholar
- Boutelle, J. Understanding Organizational Stakeholders for Design Success. Boxes and Arrows, May 6th, 2004. <Available at <http://www.boxesandarrows.com>>.Google Scholar
- Dong, J., Martin, S., & Waldo, P. A User Input and Analysis Tool for Information Architecture. Proc. CHI 2001. Demonstration Session, pp. 23 -- 24. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Freeman, R.E. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman. (1984).Google Scholar
- Freeman, R.E. Divergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 233--236. (1999).Google Scholar
- Hahsler, M. and Simon, B. User-Centered Navigation Re-Design for Web-based Information Systems. Proc. Sixth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) 2000.Google Scholar
- Medin, D. L., Lynch, E. B., Coley, J. D, & Atran, S. Categorization and reasoning among tree experts: Do all roads lead to Rome? Cognitive Psychology, 32, 49--96. (1997).Google Scholar
- Mitchell R., Agle B., Wood D., Toward a theory of stakeholder salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review,Vol. 22,No. 4,853--886Google Scholar
- Nielsen, J., and Sano, D. SunWeb: User interface design for Sun Microsystem's internal web. Proc. 2nd World Wide Web Conference 1994, 547--557.Google Scholar
- Romney, A.K. and D'Andrade, R. Cognitive Aspects of English Kin Terms. Amer. Anthropologist 66:3, 146--170. (1964).Google Scholar
- Rosenfeld, Louis, and Morville, Peter. Information Architecture for the World Wide Web, 2nd Edition. O'Reilly & Associates, Inc., Sebastopol, CA, 2002. Google Scholar
- Schenkman, B. N. Perceived Similarities and Preferences for Consumer Electronics Products. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 6 (2), 2002, 125--131. Google Scholar
- Sinha, R. Beyond Card-Sorting: Free-Listing Methods to Explore User Categorizations. Boxes and Arrows, Feb. 24th, 2003. Available at <http://www.boxesandarrows.com>Google Scholar
- Toms, M., Cummings-Hill, M., Curry, D. and Cone, S. Using Cluster Analysis for Deriving Menu Structures for Automotive Mobile Multimedia Applications. Human Factors in Automotive Design, Society of Automotive Engineers, 2001.Google Scholar
- Vredenburg, K., Mao, J., Smith, P. and Carey, T. A Survey of User-Centered Design Practice, Proc. CHI 2002, 471 -- 478. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Varvasovszky Z. and Burgha R. How to do (or not to do) a stakeholder analysis. Health Policy and Planning 15(3):338--345.Google Scholar
- Weller, S. and Romney, A. Systematic Data Collection: Qualitative Research Methods, Series 10. Sage Publications, California, 1988.Google Scholar
Comments