I recently had the chance to make my way through the book Information Ecologies: Using Technology With Heart written by Bonnie Nardi and Vicky O’Day, both of whom are researchers interested in technology and people. I had seen the book referenced before, but never had the chance to sift through it. Looking back, it would have been a good resource for my thesis paper. This post is mainly a summary of the text, and in the next I’ll post my thoughts on its significance.

Theme
Information Ecologies is about changing people’s perspectives on technology. In particular, the concern relates to how technology is used in a local setting and how it impacts the ways in which we live, die, work, and play. Their goal is to create a balanced discussion about technology that allows people to be informed and actively engaged in settings that include technology.

Problem
The authors’ reason for writing this book is that current discussions regarding technology lack a balanced perspective, resigning people to a mindset that all that happens is simply inevitable. The consequence of this can be seen in three ways: the rapid pace of technology leads to an inability for humans to keep up, increased automation leads to a loss of human skill and judgment in technology, and mechanical efficiency as benchmarks for performance end up ignoring the richness of a full human being. These are all symptoms of technologies being deployed that lack “human heart.”

The authors attribute this partly to public discourse about technology. They see the language and metaphors used as limited and unbalanced. With this in mind, they look at current metaphors used and their shortcomings:

Technology as a Tool

• Metaphor: Something that fits the human hand and mind of individuals.
• Thinking about technology as a tool is useful when designing for human capabilities and cognitive needs, but it doesn’t take into account the social, organizational, or political setting in which it is used.

Technology as a Text

• Metaphor: A form that holds meaning and communicates something depending on its situation.
• It is useful for discussion about meaning and the roles of designers, implementors, users, etc… But it doesn’t take into account judgment creativity and values when people choose to act.

Technology as a System

• Metaphor: Phenomena of immense scope.
• It is the broadest perspective, but it can be overwhelming and wash out distinctions and details.

Argument
The authors present a fourth metaphor, an ecology, as their core argument:

Technology as an ecology

• Metaphor: A living system that includes complex relationships, diversity, co-evolution, keystone species, and locality.
• Takes into account the broader context but also includes the detailed complexity.

They see the metaphor of a living system as being more useful in discussion people’s relationship to technology–and it makes sense since people themselves are living things. Part of their motivation in using this metaphor is the association with something that is long lasting, changing, and requires the engagement and participation of those affected by it. In essence it says: people and their complexities matter.

Definitions

• Information Ecologies: local habitations in which we can reflect on appropriate uses of technology in light of our local practices, goals, and values. It is a complex system of part and relationships. It exhibits diversity and experiences continual evolution. Different parts of an ecology coevolve, changing together according to the relationships in the system. Several keystone species necessary to the survival of the ecology are present. Information ecologies have a sense of locality.
• Local habitations: Settings in which we as individuals have an active role, a unique and valualbe local perspective, and a say in what happens. Ex. Workplaces, houses, libraries, hospitals, community centers, churches, clubs, and civic organizations.

Take-away
Sometimes it was difficult to figure out who this book would be useful for beyond researchers looking for alternative frameworks regarding technology, but they give three main pieces advice for those looking to “evolve information technology.”

• Work from core values: understand what people care about and the emotions of people using technology.
• Pay Attention: Stay curious, wonder about things, and engage people in discussion.
• Ask Strategic questions: ask a full-range of open-ended “why” questions that relate to the particularities of a local setting.

I’ll close with a quote from the book that I found particularly interesting regarding the value of real examples in anthropological research and discussion:

Real examples show diversity and interconnections that summaries often conceal. When people give general accounts of how things work to outsiders, they usually leave out what is locally unimportant or little valued. But sometimes these hidden details, seen from different perspectives, emerge as crucial to the workings of an ecology (85)

Probably the least exciting part, but most crucial part of any field is the salaries that people get doing it. Higher salaries means that more people are interested and that people who practice are most likely valued more. I think it’s an interesting metric to gauge design and specifically interaction design’s place in our culture, especially considering that some form of what we do qualifies as one of the best careers of 2008.

As the end of the master’s program approaches, it’s more relevant than ever for all of us second year students. That being said, I came across two documents, one from Carnegie Mellon and one from the Institute of Design in Chicago that polled some graduates:

IIT puts the median at $80-$90k, CMU gives a conservative $66k, and US News has some pretty high numbers, except for Pittsburgh. Of course, these should all be taken cautiously, considering the number of people who responded, the various levels of experience that people might have, and what the job actually is.

Also, pulled these from the IxDA discussion list:
AIGA Design Salaries Website
AIGA Survey of Design Salaries 2007
Information Architecture Institute Salary Survey 2006
Usability Professionals’ Assocation Salary Survey 2005
Jakob Nielson’s Salary Trends for Usability Professionals 2006
Peak Usability Salary Survey 2002, 2004

The types of work and titles are questionable… but if anyone has any other sources, I’d like to hear about em.

I wanted to get a post in before the year ended, but it looks like I’ll have to settle for the first day of the new year. Instead of giving a large summary of things, I’m just going to link to some recent links that I have found interesting and might say something about the future.

Technology
Regardless of people’s view of technology in the world, designers should always have a good sense of what is happening and what will happen with the potential materials of their products. It gives us more resources to solve problems, but also more ways to screw up. BBC has a pair of lists one that is looks back at technology with impact, and one that looks forward at technologies on the rise. It’ll be interesting to see whatever happens with WIMAX, especially with regards to services that aren’t just about getting entertainment to people at higher bandwidths and with higher resolution.

Ideas and People
To do anything worthwhile with the technology, not only is there a need for people to design successful products, but there is also a need for someone to monetize it and distribute it to others.

From the always-interesting Springwise, they posted the top ten telecom and mobile business ideas of 2007 . With all the mobile stuff I’ve been involved with, it’s a nice look at some ideas people have had and developed into businesses of some sort.

There’s also a great interview with Trent Reznor by Wired in either text or audio. Most of it is him describing the ARG (Alternative Reality Game) that he developed with 42 entertainment for the release of his previous album. I think what’s great about it is not only his realization that he needs to keep up with new generations of listeners, but the fact that he understands what is going and is passionate about doing things right for his audience. I see parallels with what interaction or experience designers do, in that the value is no longer only in the traditional product (in this case the music tracks), but the entire experience surrounding it. I think if anyone wants to be ahead of the game, they either have to distribute media in ways that are faster and more convenient than the illegal channels or they have to approach their product with the assumption that the media is free and they need to build something else related to it that will bring in profits.

On the opposite ends of creation for profit is an audio interview with Tony Dunne and Fiona Raby by Core77, which many people probably came across through the experientia blog. It’s great hearing them talk about what they do, and it makes me want to grab their books.

Usability/User Experience Specialist
Despite the awkward title and contradictory descriptions, its probably a good thing that the type of work we do is on the list of Best Careers of 2008 (hopefully much longer too, eh?). The link comes from the IxDA discussion list, and even just browsing I could tell it created quite a stir, especially with the nearly six-figure salary they tacked on. Although there references are all about HCI and Human Factors, I think the day in the life description sounds a bit more like design.

Knowing
A final link, again to BBC, is a nice little list about 100 things we didn’t know last year. Reminds me that even with the catastrophes that mark time, there is also progress in our generation of knowledge as a society, even if its only random tidbits of info.