While I was off tailing after eight-year-old twins at the beach, Paula Thornton engaged a few folks behind the scenes for some more discussion about the "big picture." One of the resources she pointed folks to was a draft document Challis Hodge did in the spring called (PDF). In it, he makes some of the same great points that have appeared on his weblog and on a variety of lists, such as:

We talk about making things more usable, about creating brand loyalty, about making the world a better place. We struggle with ROI models, case studies and methods to communicate our value. Still we find ourselves in the same situation, having the same discussion. We just don't get why business doesn't understand.

The harsh reality is we designers simply don't get business.

and

Designers can and should bring a strategic perspective and a set of unique skills capable of simplifying complexity, taming technology and yes&making the world a better place. Before we can even begin we must recognize that the problem is not that business doesn't understand design. The problem is that businesses have no incentive to focus significant resources on the strategic benefits design can bring.

and finally

Quite simply, we need an umbrella organization for design advocacy. An organization that is capable of waging a serious and professional marketing and development campaign. An organization that is capable of driving political, social and cultural change.

I'm a bit bummed that someone who has such a great handle on the big picture (as Paula would say) has decided instead to focus on the roots of his elm tree instead of the canopy--as he's mentioned, he's focusing on a home for interaction designers these days.

I understand the attraction. I've often thought that had I started out as a user-interface programmer, I'd still be programming. Instead, I started out coding signal processing algorithms in Fortran for a subcontractor to the NSA. I came close again ten years later, when I was at MAYA, where I coded interface prototypes in Visual Basic. There is a lot that's interesting in interface/interaction development! But I had grown tired of Pittsburgh (again) just as the web became something one could make money working on. Anyways, I digress.

I get why interaction designers want their own space. Same reasons essentially that led to AIfIA. Ah well, I wish them luck! In the meantime, I'll continue to dabble in discussions about a potential "interfaith council" of sorts. For today, I want to explore a bit what this council/institute/association might actually do, given that I do not think that preaching to the choir is the big focus.

Here are some potential priorities that I "borrowed" from an existing association (it's usually easier to edit than create).

Priorities:

• Be the watchdog for good government concerning [ED/UX/ID] companies. Keep Congress informed about industry issues and concerns.
• Be a resource for members and government officials in economic analysis and advocacy of less government intrusion in the marketplace.
• Reduce unnecessary regulation. Support policies that allow for technological advances while preserving the integrity of [ED/UX/ID] products.
• Provide members with communications and programs that assist them in their information and training efforts.
• Assist members in generic marketing, research and promotion programs to stimulate incremental sales.
• Promote and defend the image of [ED/UX/ID] products. Serve as an authority on [ED/UX/ID] issues. Defuse controversy and unwarranted criticism of the industry and its products. Promote the industry's positions and messages.

Do you have an idea which organization has these as its priorities? Did you guess this one?

My point isn't really that we should adopt their priorities or that our products are that similar. It's actually that we would be well served by doing a lot more looking outward to see how we can learn from others who have already solved similar problems, rather than our intensive navel-gazing about how our field is "the" answer or "the" umbrella discipline. Whitney Quesenbery (who really should write something on this subject for public consumption...hint hint) came up with the similarity of some of our discussions to that of the Kilkenny cats.

I continue to believe that none of the existing organizations (or the new interaction design organization) has the resources or the clout to do this on their own. I continue to hope that we'll see some kind of multi-disciplinary forum--our "interfaith council"--where we can find our common positions. Lyle's metaphor (described here) is the call: a rising tide raises all boats.

06:01 PM | linkme | home