Productive-interface engineering

16 Nov 2005 - 6:30am
8 years ago
1 reply
546 reads
Dave Malouf
2005

http://www.pradeephenry.com/index.html

I came across this site from http://interaction-design.org/ and it meantions
in passing this "innovative" idea called "Pi Engineering" or
Productive-Interface Engineering.

Unlike most designer sites that give away some aspect of what the heck their
process means, this site doesn't say a word about it except to say that we
should concentrate less on testing and more on designing, and there is some
reference to building out the architecture before the screens. It also says
that this is a business-driven approach instead of a user-centered approach
and sounds like it is bemoaning classic UCD processes.

I'm personally very intrigued if this is a spin on an old pony that I can
use to better upsell in my very business-driven organization, or not.

Anyone have more information about this?

Thanx!

-- dave

David Heller
Vice President, IxDA
dave (at) ixda (dot) <mailto:dave at interactiondesigners (dot) com> org
http://ixda.org <http://ixda.org/>
http://synapticburn.com/

AIM: bolinhanyc // Y!: dave_ux // MSN: hippiefunk at hotmail.com // Google
Talk: dheller at gmail.com

Comments

22 Nov 2005 - 10:50am
Doug Anderson
2004

Hi David, et al.,

Apologies for the delay in responding, have been kinda busy.

My take on the site you referenced is that the promoter has a fairly firm grasp of the obvious and is spinning UCD as though its proponents lack the same grasp.

I gave his spiel (about business vs. users as drivers of design) only a quick read but his point seems to be that users are not the only stakeholders. Well, doh! I suspect that most of us who have been in the design space for more than one project already realize that.

This is not the first such tenuous claim to a revolutionary insight that I've seen used to promote a consultancy. Such claims do not necessarily indicate that the proponent is second-cousin to a snake-oil salesman. Neither do such claims impress me favorably. Differentiating upon a specious claim to superiority of insight is less impressive (to me, anyway) than differentiating upon real-world accomplishments with solid clients. The former attempts to generate relative superiority by diminishing the "control group" and the latter demonstrates actual strength.

My 1-cent worth (maybe),
Doug Anderson

Opinions expressed are necessarily mine, not necessarily those of the Mayo Foundation.

Original message:
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 06:30:23 -0500
From: "David Heller" <dave at synapticburn.com>
Subject: [IxDA Discuss] Productive-interface engineering
To: <discuss at ixdg.org>
Message-ID: <000b01c5eaa1$232c7ec0$6501a8c0 at DT>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

http://www.pradeephenry.com/index.html

I came across this site from http://interaction-design.org/ and it meantions
in passing this "innovative" idea called "Pi Engineering" or
Productive-Interface Engineering.

Unlike most designer sites that give away some aspect of what the heck their
process means, this site doesn't say a word about it except to say that we
should concentrate less on testing and more on designing, and there is some
reference to building out the architecture before the screens. It also says
that this is a business-driven approach instead of a user-centered approach
and sounds like it is bemoaning classic UCD processes.

I'm personally very intrigued if this is a spin on an old pony that I can
use to better upsell in my very business-driven organization, or not.

Anyone have more information about this?

Thanx!

-- dave

David Heller
Vice President, IxDA
dave (at) ixda (dot) <mailto:dave at interactiondesigners (dot) com> org
http://ixda.org <http://ixda.org/>
http://synapticburn.com/

Syndicate content Get the feed