Hi Terry,
I'm not currently working on this issue. Having published a fairly definitive case history in information design with a colleague, Phil Fisher, back in 1990. We have since moved on to other things.
The point of our case history was to demonstrate something that many information designers knew from their practice, namely that there was a strong relationship between particular information design methods and productivity and that this was borne out by the evidence.. I say *particular* information design methods because many people who have read and cited the paper, including some usability gurus, mistakenly take the paper as a demonstration of their own field's success at improving productivity. That is not the case, as a careful reading of the paper will show.
What it does demonstrate is that by following a systematic set of information design methods in a defined sequence leads to productivity improvements in the specialised field of insurance. The users of the documents were insurance agents, actuaries, assessors, and administrators in the insurance industry, not customers, who were only required to sign in agreement at the end of the process. This has not prevented usability and plain language specialists, among other, claiming that the work showed how their field has improved productivity. Usability and plain language played a very small part in the overall process which, without the other parts, would not have led to productivity improvements on the scale we reported.
The paper was written against a background of the prevailing economic thinking of the time:
> [T]he average output of an American information worker has not budged since the early 1960s—despite huge growth in both the number of information workers and the average technology investment sitting on each one’s desk. …[C]omputers have so far failed to boost productivity even on the most generous measure, output per worker. Including capital costs, as any truly accurate measure should, would make the picture look even worse. (The Economist, p13, 16 June 1990).
>
Broadly it demonstrated that improvements in productivity in information intensive industries was not due to information technology per se, but depended on the information design process that was used to develop the human interface for that technology, whether it was via computers or more traditional technologies such as paper.
At that time human computer interaction (HCI) specialists had a lot to do to catch up with information designers. We used to joke that they didn't call it a *Terminal* for nothing.
Now, I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing you are interested in, but it might be helpful.
PS we will be reissuing this classic case history soon, as part of our ongoing publishing program. Subscribe to our newsletter to find out when.
Fisher, P. and Sless, D. (1990). Information design methods and productivity in the insurance industry. Information Design Journal, 6(2), pp 103-129.
Warm Regards to all,
David
--
blog: http://communication.org.au/blog/
web: http://communication.org.au
Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA
CEO • Communication Research Institute •
• helping people communicate with people •
Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795
Phone: +61 (0)3 9005 5903
Skype: davidsless
60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|