Like almost nothing I’ve done, a model that I put in my first book Designing for Interaction showing the overlapping disciplines of user experience/experience design has been referenced repeatedly in various places. The problem is I was never very happy with the diagram. For one thing, it’s missing architecture in there, which is becoming increasing important. So I redrew it:
Click for a larger image or download the pdf.
It’s still not perfect: it’s missing Sound Design and Ergonomics/Human Factors, and the way the circles had to overlap downplays Visual Design. But I like it better, as it shows some of the products of the overlapping disciplines, and also includes content in there too. HCI is partially out of the circle because of its different (non-design) traditions and methodologies, and also because of its focus on pure research. Industrial design (and, in truth, architecture should do this too), pokes out of the circle because it has involvement in areas that do not directly involve the user, such as manufacturing (or in the case of architecture, building) specifications.
This diagram also begs the question: what is user experience design by itself, those areas that aren’t filled up with other bubbles? I tried to answer some of that in an earlier post, but the short answer is: not much, aside from coordination between the various disciplines, or what used to be called creative direction. It’s about the joining of the different disciplines, and not particularly a discipline in and of itself. While the best designers have an awareness of the disciplines that surround and overlap theirs, to be considered an experience designer would necessarily require management and coordination between the disciplines to ensure holistic products. This is an essential skill for making the best products, of course, but I would guess this is often a temporary role that designers move into during key points in the design process from a starting point of one of the other disciplines. Without the “raw materials” of the disciplines that make up UX, UX would be empty indeed.
11 Comments
Nice update, Dan! I love that the new diagram clarifies the nature of work happening in the overlaps. I do agree that Architecture should move mostly or partially outside the UX realm, like HCI, and that I miss seeing Human Factors Engineering mapped on there. It should overlap with Industrial Design and IxD since its founded on physical ergonomics principles.
But mostly I love that you have dealt at least verbally with what UX “is” in the spaces that remain outside the specific disciplines. To me, it really is starting to seem that UX is a directorial role, and not a specific discipline. Funnily enough, I just read this blog post, courtesy of @devinsandberg/@bryanzmijewski: which is titled “User Experience Design Does Not Exist”. Food for thought….
Cheers,
Liz
Er, I messed up including the link to that blog post. It’s: http://tinyurl.com/6pupr6.
–Liz
I think sound design is comparable to visual design (in the sense that it deserves equal representation). I’m not sure how you’d lay out that in relationship to the other items though. I feel Ergonomics can fit closer to Industrial Design and Architecture.
Maybe overlapping circles have outgrown their usefulness for this representation (given how much richer it’s become)?
Great article and interesting diagram, Dan.
Thanks.
Stu.
First, what a great effort to even define the space the way you did and it is definitely without a doubt one of the most thorough I have seen to date.
1. Why is architecture completely in the UX circle and Industrial Design lingering outside? Also, if you are going to include the engineering portions for Ind. Des. why not for architecture (civil) and for software (EECS)?
2. Where is service design?
3. Visual design like Ind Des definitely has non-UX components. I mean is a Poster or billboard UX? I mean if Content creation is 1/2 in and 1/2 out and “graphics” are part of content creation then visual design should probably have an even more significant proportion out of the circle then in.
To me Visual Design, Ind. Design, Sound Design (nice catch @livlab and large segments of Architecture should all be grouped together as form giving disciplines.
Other elements that are missing are around marketing and business, as often “marketing” is the story giver to the products and services we design/create which directly impacts the outcomes. And business goals, and economics in general are a huge collection of tools and services that impact design as well.
I think the challenge to a diagram like this is that it also needs depth. I’m not sure exactly how that would work, but it would be an interesting exercise for someone for sure.
But the main thing is that this is the best diagram I have seen thus far.
Thanx Dan!!!
–dave
Thought provoking diagram Dan - It made me wonder what the multi-venn for service design might look like. I’ve put some thoughts (no conclusions!) on my blog:
http://tinyurl.com/disciplineofservicedesign
I’d also re-ask @davidmalouf question - where do you put service on your drawing? How much do you add before you just end up trying to draw a diagram of creativity?
Maybe @livlab is right and we’re in too deep for circles!
I have used the original a great deal to teach my students, so it’s great to see an update here. For me “art’ is missing in there somewhere. I know it’s about User Experience Design but there are definitely interesting interaction design elements in a lot of interactive artworks (like the Myron Kruger one you mention in DGI) as well as the art experience aspect of any interface design. Games probably have a place too, but it’s getting pretty crowded already!
A very interesting diagram, Dan.
I feel that the exclusion of mechanical and electrical engineering would be nice since this diagram is already tougher to absorb than the earlier one (which was easy to focus upon)with the inclusion of more disciplines in it.
How about Psychology?
Great visual Dan! id love to see this as a poster
Great diagram. I’ve always felt that the best UX design is more of a catalyst than a primary source; the cross-roads of the group brain as it were. It does beg the question, to what degree should UX be involved in concepting/ideation and establishing design parameters? I have a strong opinion on this, but I’m biased. Would like to get other people’s thoughts.
4 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
[...] The Disciplines of User Experience "…what is user experience design by itself, those areas that aren’t filled up with other bubbles? I tried to answer some of that in an earlier post, but the short answer is: not much, aside from coordination between the various disciplines, or what used to be called creative direction. It’s about the joining of the different disciplines, and not particularly a discipline in and of itself… Without the “raw materials” of the disciplines that make up UX, UX would be empty indeed." Some nice thoughts, clearly delineated, from Dan. (tags: userexperience ux design diagram visualisation practice ) [...]
[...] great chart by Dan Saffer that identifies and describes the relationships between various design [...]
[...] The Disciplines of User Experience It’s about the joining of the different disciplines, and not particularly a discipline in and of itself. No Comments Leave a Commenttrackback addressThere was an error with your comment, please try again. name (required)email (will not be published) (required)url [...]
[...] représentation par Dan Saffer des métiers du design et leurs relations entre [...]