Information Architecture

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 4)

Author: acrystelle

The Information Architecture and Digital Libraries series is now up to Part 4. The previous three posts have discussed: -

The (potential) role of information architecture principles and practices for digital libraries;
Understanding the information environment as a key enabler of information architecture implementation, and
Defining findability, its role in information architecture and practices involved in making content ‘findable’.

Discussion of key concepts and principles continue to be situated within an information setting involving an engineering technical library at an airline using a company intranet to deliver an online information service.

In this post, the concept of ‘usability’ is defined and separated from the concept of ‘findability’.

On a side note, let’s break up the term ‘usability’, it can have more than one meaning for digital libraries. Okay, so ‘usability’ would mean ‘able to be used’. But what is ‘able to be used’ for a digital library? The content? User interface? I would argue that it would mean both. A digital library needs to consider the format of the content being made available online (or on an intranet), as well as interface used to retrieve from the library collection.

Most of the information architecture literature concerning usability is focused on a website’s (or intranet) ability to be used. Little discussion is evident regarding the concept being applied to a digital library setting.

Usability is, of course, user-centric, and like ‘findability’ requires a comprehensive understanding of the information environment. For the most part, this will include the context and users - their information seeking behaviour, experience with using the intranet, tasks required to be completed with the information, and preferences (and operational requirements) for ways in which to search and retrieve information. Usability of an information architecture, or digital library is then defined by the user/s, and each situation will be different to the next.

According to Jeffcoat, King and Jannik (2005), usability is a “measure of success a user achieves when utilising a product or system” (p. 236). Usability is not an absolute concept, and may also be defined by the extent to which a website (or intranet) is 1) easy to learn; 2) efficient to use; 3) memorable; 4) error (in)frequent, and 5) achieves satisfaction of the user (Jeffcoat King & Jannik, 2005, p. 236). What is not discussed is defining a measure for ‘easy’. What is ‘easy’? What makes an architecture ‘efficient’? And how is satisfaction achieved amongst the system’s users? Answers to these questions are, and will be, subjective.

The concept of usability is often discussed interchangeably with findability. A separation between the two terms is required to understand the role of each in information architecture practice and implementation. Design of an information architecture, its structure, organisation of content and navigation facility, comes from effective content collection development and management. That is, the content of the digital library collection is relevant, accurate and applicable to the airline’s information environment and aircraft fleet, as well as each technical document’s description is complete and recorded in a consistent manner. It becomes clear, as shown in the diagram below, that usability is not only dependent on the findability of content, but is also defined by how the content metadata is used to develop a usable interface from which to search and retrieve technical data and documentation from the digital library’s intranet site.

Distinguishing the concept of usability from findability….

Focus: efficient, ease to use search and retrieval.

Orientataion: experience and user.

Achieved by: building on the established and maintained findability of library content, organising content and designing navigation in a way which effectively responds to user information seeking behaviour and operational requirements for task completion.

Jeffcoat King, H. & Jannik, Catherine. M. (2005). Redesigning for usability: Information architecture and usability testing for Georgia Tech Library’s website. OCLC Systems & Services, 21(3), 235-243.

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 3)

Author: acrystelle

“Information Architecture and Digital Libraries Part 2” discussed the importance of understanding the information environment when delivering an information service in a digital space. Information needs inform the three focus areas - context, content and users - of defining an approach to information architecture design for a digital library.

Information architecture is most concerned with increasing ‘findability’ of content within a shared, information space. (Batley, 2007, p. 3)…….What is findability?

You know what? I can’t define ‘findability’. In fact, I don’t think I’ve seen a definition. Where ‘findability’ is discussed in the literature, I’ve found only descriptions and discussions about what may make up or determine it. How can I discuss something I cannot define (yet)?

Okay, I’ll take a slight side step and let you in on some feedback I’ve received for my paper. Attempting to identify relationships between key concepts of information architecture into an over arching framework was, in the marker’s words, brave. Certainly brave to do so in under 3000 words. If my framework is it be solid, for lack of a better word, or well developed, I need definitions of key concepts. With this said, I don’t think my thinking around key information architecture concepts are completely lost or illogical. What I’m trying to achieve is to separate the key concepts in a way which defines each of their roles as they contribute to information architecture practice and design. To discuss key concepts separately is definitely a challenge…..and I do love challenges.

So here goes….

Findability

Findability. If I break down the term I would think it to mean that content is able to be found within a system. The focus here then is to provide or enable this ability. An understanding of the information environment will ultimately determine what makes content findable. Measuring or evaluating how findable content is, will be different in each scenario. A definition for findabiity will be dependent on the context in which the library is situated - expectations of the system, technology used and available in the organisation, (in the case of an engineering technical library) operational and regulatory requirements and business objectives - as well as the content the library holds in the collection and how it is managed and maintained (Morville & Rosenfeld, 2007, p. 25). Findability is then firstly achieved with an appropriate response to the library’s information environment. Secondly, findability is achieved with organising, classifying and describing content - effectively, content management practices.

Content management involved in library management and information architecture practices, underpin the entire library system architecture (Batley, 2007, p. 145). Core concepts involved in content management, more like content maintenance, are: -

Indexes and indexing
Classification
Cataloguing
User-centred design

(Batley, 2007, p. 4-9).

The diagram below depicts the relationship between understanding the information environment (which informs the focus and approach) and content management practices to achieve findability.

Metadata

Establishing findability requires identifying how each item or document type can be distinguished from another. Findability lies in the ‘groundwork’ of library processes and practices. That is, the library content’s metadata. For an engineering technical (digital) library, appropriate and consistent selection of metadata used to catalogue each technical document increases control and improves management of the collection (Batley, 2007, p. 143). As metadata is usually associated with resource discovery and retrieval, there is no doubt of the direct influence metadata selected for resource description has on the possible ways in which the resource can be searched within the digital library system (Batley, 2007, p. 144).

I can now start to see the concept of findability take some shape….

Focus: resource discovery and retrieval.

Orientation: context and content.

Achieved by: library’s understanding of and response to the information environment, in the form of appropriate content management processes and practices.

Morville, P. & Rosenfeld, L. (2007). Information Architecture for the World Wide Web (3rd ed.). CA, USA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.

Batley, S. (2007). The I in information architecture: the challenge of content management. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 59(2), 139-151.

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 2)

Author: acrystelle

For a library that delivers an information service in a digital space firstly requires a comprehensive understanding of the information environment in which it’s situated. It is important to identify information needs from both the user and organisational perspectives. In the case of an engineering technical library, there are also operational requirements to meet and industry regulations to satisfy, with regards to the library’s content - its use, maintenance and access to the collection.

An approach from the ‘bottom up’ looks at the tasks library users are required to complete as part of their job, as well as the series and patterns of activities undertaken to meet information needs. Morville and Rosenfeld (2007, p. 35) identify four common information needs: -

“known item” seeking - the user knows exactly what they’re looking for
“exploratory seeking - the user knows a few attributes of what they need, so a few search results will suffice
exhaustive search - the user requires a complete listing on a particular attribute or combination of attributes
“re-finding” - placing the search result aside, like a “saved search”, so the user may quickly return to the document

I, myself, have found definition of these information needs useful as I work to re-design an intranet site for my engineering technical library. Any ideal functionality will not happen all at once. I’ve had to break up the improvements into a series of “phases”, focusing on what is critically important to deliver first.

A ‘top-down’ approach to identifying information needs looks at organisational objectives and operational requirements, as they too, impact on what the digital library (engineering technical library, for example) holds in its collection, who will use the information and how the information should be managed and maintained.

Understanding the information environment then informs the approach taken to the information architecture design process, and develops the focus through which the digital library must take in order to effectively integrate information architecture practices into ‘every day’ processes and service orientation. According to Morville and Rosenfeld (2007), there are three areas of focus for information architecture methodology (p. 24-25).

Context - organisational objectives, operational requirements, resources, technology, politics, culture, industry regulations
Content - existing structure, document and data types, content diversity, volume
Users - audience, tasks, needs, information seeking behaviours, experience with technology and existing system

One may argue that the “context” is the information environment. However I would argue that an information environment cannot be without the content it requires, nor the users who need to interact with the system to search and retrieve information. An approach (or focus) is largely driven by context, yes, but I see all three impacting on each other. Aviation industry regulations (context) wouldn’t be be without the information needs of users and organisations, and there would be no focus or objective of a digital (engineering technical) library’s collection without the governing industry regulations or the users who require access to the collection. In order to satisfy the demands and expectations with the context, an information architecture need evolve around user (and organisation) situation, be task-based and ‘searching behaviour’ (user) focused (Kirby, 2006, p. 11).

I shall leave you with a diagram which depicts how I see the information environment. I’ve attempted to identify the relationship between information needs and the focus areas required to proceed with an information architecture approach to delivering a digital library service.

As always I welcome any feedback, thoughts, further ideas. The paper I’ve written (for assessment in my Masters course) is but my first attempt at understanding information architecture key concepts and principles. Please let me know if you think I’ve missed anything. I’ve developed an interest in information architecture and only wish to further my understanding.

Kirby, E. (2006). Improving intranet usability at AXA. Knowledge Management Review, 9(4), 10-11.

Morville, P. & Rosenfeld, L. (2007). Information Architecture for the World Wide Web (3rd ed.). CA, USA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 1)

Author: acrystelle

For my last assignment for the semester, I had chosen to look at information architecture for digital libraries. I suggested a framework, defining each element’s role, relationships between them and arranging them in a way that constitutes a “big picture” of information architecture principles and practice.

In a series of posts, I will share my views of information architecture key concepts and principles. I certainly don’t have all the answers (though I make every effort to try!), but the framework I suggest is an attempt to explain each concept as they contribute to the final outcome and ‘state’ of information architecture design.

Information architecture practice is relevant to a digital library as they share a common goal - both are concerned with achieving findability (Batley, 2007, p. 3). Concepts and principles of information architecture need a slightly different approach in their application, primarily because digital libraries not only have a user interface, but also have a collection (of mostly external content) to effectively manage, organise and structure in a way that makes findability efficient for the library user. An example is the engineering technical library I work in. Content is not generated internally, it is gathered from many vendors, all with various ways to describe and label technical data and documentation.

The role of information architecture is to enable access to content with a systematic approach to interface design, organised and structured in a way which facilitates the user’s quest for required technical data or documentation (Toms, 2002, p. 855). Designing functionality, enabling access, starts with identifying and understanding information needs from both the user and organisational perspectives. In the case of my engineering technical library, practices and processes also need to satisfy industry regulations which govern the use, collection, management and access to technical data and documentation, and meet operational requirements which dictate how technical data and documentation needs to be accessed.

Given the scope of information architecture being applicable to “shared environments”, the practice may therefore lend itself to designing a digital space which delivers an information service, such as a digital library via a company intranet. Intranet users are highly critical of poor usability (White, 2002, p. 47). Integration of information architecture practice into the effective management of a digital library (achieve findability and usability) can only mean benefits in the form of increased productivity. The effects may not be realised directly, but if I can design the technical library’s intranet site in a way that improves usability and decreases the time it takes for library users to search and retrieve information, the ‘flow on’ effects can potentially be seen in other operations and objectives, such as ‘on time performance’. The goal of the technical library is to provide effective access to the library collection, through an intranet, providing a user experience which enables efficient search, navigation and retrieval of information. Information architecture practice can certainly assist with achieving this goal.

Batley, S. (2007). The I in information architecture: the challenge of content management. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 59(2), 139-151.

Toms, Elaine. G. (2002). Information interaction: Providing a framework for information architecture. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(10), 855-862.

White, M. (2002). Information architecture and usability. EContent, 25(4), 46-47.

Defining an IA Framework

Author: acrystelle

I’m going to admit it. I’m struggling with my last (ish) assessment piece for the semester. The reason why is while I have drawn a conceptual framework, I cannot seem to come up with a logical structure in which I can present it in the form of a journal article.

I am looking at information architecture - key concepts and principles, from which I have identified from the literature; have visually arranged them in a way which makes sense, in order to address and achieve objectives of user and organisational information requirements, in a digital (technical) library context. I seek to apply my framework to the unique information environment that is aviation, or more specifically, aircraft engineering technical data. Guided by the literature, I will seek to define the role of the elements (concepts and principles) in the conceptual framework, and apply them within the parameters which define the information environment and requirements - industry regulations. I will also examine the industry regulations (which govern the management of engineering (approved) technical data) by giving my ‘two cents worth’ discussion about how they may be out of date with the methods and technologies currently used for managing and maintaining engineering technical data.

So I’m going to attempt now to briefly outline my conceptual framework. Hopefully by doing this will provide a brief outline for when I (hopefully) write a draft tomorrow.

Information architecture begins with identifying information needs or requirements. What feeds into these are: -

the tasks required to be performed by users of the information
information seeking behaviour of the individual user
organisational/ departmental objectives
operational requirements, satisfying regulations governing the use of technical data

Information needs and/or requirements influence or define: -

context (in which information is required to be sought and retrieved to perform tasks)
content (of the technical library collection)
users (who uses the information)

These three areas form the focus of information architecture methodology.

Information architecture methodology then involves: -

analysis - tasks, content, information needs
curation (of content)
content management

Practices that support the methodology include: -

classification
indexing
controlled vocabulary/taxonomy
metadata

These methodologies and practices seek to achieve: -

findability, and
usability

Findability is what information architecture is most concerned about when designing “shared information spaces”. Yet there appears to be little distinction between this concept and ‘usability’. By using the three focus areas of information architecture methodology, I propose that findability is context and/or content oriented, where as usability is more experience-oriented.

The product of, or combined might of the two - findability and usability - defines and produces the resulting ‘functionality’ of a website, or in this case, a digital library.

Another key concept I’ve seen about the literature is ‘access’ and ‘accessibility’. It tends to be used interchangeably with ‘functionality’ or ‘findability’, yet once again I see a distinction. What determines the accessibility of information is made up of the product of ‘functionality’ combined with the channel/format/medium through which the information is delivered. This is where my conceptual framework links up with identifying information needs. By providing the necessary access to engineering technical data, the library can address (information needs and requirements), satisfy (industry regulations) and achieve (organisational objectives).

I certainly welcome any feedback or comments regarding my thinking around information architecture. Hopefully by roughly placing my framework into words, I should be able to come up with a paper that is logically structured and presents these ideas so they may be understood.

References

Batley. S. (2007) The I in information architecture: the challenge of content management. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives. Vol 59, No. 2, pp 139-151.

Batley. S. (2007) Information Architecture for Information Professionals. Chandos Publishing: UK.

Morville. P. & Rosenfeld. L. (2007) Information Architecture for the World Wide Web. 3rd Edition. O’Reilly: USA.

Is Information Architecture for me? Some exploring…

Author: acrystelle

A recent topic in my LIS masters studies introduced me to Information Architecture. It’s not that I didn’t know it existed, but finally a name (other than appearing out of place to my colleagues with the “librarian” label) to an information practice I could potentially do in the corporate information environment. Or more to the point, is information architecture a good fit to my career aspirations, qualifications and professional interests? I explored the concept and practice a little further, here’s what I found out….

According to the Information Architecture Institute, ‘Information Architecture’ is defined as

“the structural design of shared information environments; the art and science of organising and labeling websites, intranets, online communities and software to support usability, and a practice focused on bringing principles of design and architecture to the digital landscape”

….And as stated by the Queensland Government

“is the means of providing a structured description of an enterprise’s information, the relationship of this information to business requirements and processes, applications and technology, and the processes and rules which govern it”

From here, I went on to discover a couple of professional associations for Information Architects.

Information Architecture Institute - a multi-national organisation that “supports individuals and organizations specialising in the design and construction of shared information environments”.

I’ve already subscribed to the e-newsletter, the job board e-newsletter and the Aus/NZ events e-newsletter. The website has some great resources to begin exploring with recommended reading lists, notes on tools used and information about courses.

Information Architecture Institute Australia - founded in 2008 to support information architects working in Australia and “to further the profession in Australia”. The website also has tools and resources to check out.

On recommendation by the guest lecturer, I’ve started to follow leaders in the profession on Twitter, such as Donna Spencer, Louis Resenfeld and Jared Spool.

So, what do Information Architects do? I found a few job descriptions and have compiled a list of common tasks and responsibilities: -

Awareness of the latest tools, techniques and proceedings in the field of User Experience and use and implement them where appropriate
Participate in user studies to understand user behaviors/preferences and build, from this understanding, informed user interface solutions
Organise and lead workshops and reviews with stakeholders and project members
Interpret user requirements, business requirements and technical enablers and constraints and translate these into functional specifications and User Experience solutions
Create and manage detailed wireframes, site maps, schematics, process maps, feature lists, visual specification, data flows and other artifacts to describe the intended user experience.
Lead or participate in immersive user research, concept testing, and usability testing
Work with Quality Assurance to ensure that delivered features match IA-specified system functionality
Content analysis and modelling
Develop thorough, realistic plans that support organisational objectives
Work with customers to understand their business models and goals and help define strategy, content, and features for design of their web site
Define site architecture and navigation that serves as a blueprint of the site upon which all other aspects are built

So now I’m thinking, okay, how do I become an Information Architect? Again, from job descriptions, below is a list of common requirements: -

Qualifications in Graphic/Visual Arts, Library and Information Science, Computer Science, Marketing
Strong knowledge and mastery of principles in web design
Strong knowledge of user interface design processes and methodology
Communication skills
Detail-oriented
Knowledge of related software such as Illustrator, Visio, Photoshop, SQL Server, Dreamweaver
Ability to conduct user profiling and user needs analysis
Keep up to date on emerging technology and usability research
Tagging, taxonomies, metadata frameworks
5 + years experience

Final words….

I’ve enjoyed exploring the practice of information architecture and wish to do so further by collecting job advertisements which may help inform my professional development planning and activities; learn and play with common tools and software used by an information architect, and keep myself informed of current practices and trends by casting my personal learning environment a little wider.

I’ll leave you with some resources (in addition to those linked throughout) - what I’ve used for this post as well as some recommended by me for some background reading.

Michigan State University. Careers - Digital and Technical.
User Intelligence.
guardian.co.uk. What is Information Architecture.
UxBooth. Complete Beginners Guide to Information Architecture.
Information Architecture Institute Job Board

To be continued….

Information Architecture

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 4)

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 3)

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 2)

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 1)

Defining an IA Framework

Is Information Architecture for me? Some exploring…

About Alisa

Subscribe to Flight Path

Recent Posts

Follow me on Twitter

Categories

Information Architecture

About Alisa

Subscribe to Flight Path

Recent Posts

Follow me on Twitter

Categories

Tags