Just like a good design is all about the fine details, so too it is the same for the design of an over all user experience.   The critical elements usually come from those small details of the communications and interaction with the audience.

If you start to get these wrong, then people do start to question if you really are that genuine with your UX approach.

Generally people are forgiving, so you can make a few mistakes, just don’t make too many as one day you will wake up and your loyal audience will be gone.

Take the following two examples, both sites usually present reasonable customer experiences, sometimes the details are lacking.

Twitter

A few weeks back Twitter started providing a list of recommended people you could follow. Not such a bad idea, you would think.  Only issue is the algorithm appears to be:

• Selecting people who have a lot of followers in common with the people you’re following
• People who are popular with retweets from your followers.
• Sharing a large common pool of followers.

Now that doesn’t seem so bad, does it.  Well there is no consideration for:

• People that had private accounts.
• People with private accounts not following you.
• People you have blocked.
• Conversely people that have blocked you.
• For lists that you maybe following.
• Any filtering to remove tweets from various people.
• What if people didn’t want to have suggestions thrust upon them.

This is a classic case of missing the finer details of the problem.  Just look at the title, suggesting – “who to follow”, like can’t make that decision myself.

It’s not just a simple issue, as is the case with most social media systems, the relationships between people are not just black and white.   It’s about people, communication, likes, dislikes, emotion; and we know these can be a little complex.

Common sense dictates, in this area it pays to focus on the details and map the paths people have already shown you, don’t ignore them and rush into coding a service, stop and think about it.

Book Depository

I love Book Depository; they have replaced Amazon as my main supplier of books.   The entire experience with Book Depository is a good one.  The service is fast, internationally focused; reasonably priced and they have a good range of books.

However they could do with tweaking of their email marketing, seems their attention to details is a little lacking.

A recent email newsletter they send out is promoting books for summer reading.  Yes very appropriate for the northern hemisphere.  But the kicker is I live in the southern hemisphere.

Now Book Depository has all my details, including my street address. So they can workout that it’s now winter.

Not a big deal you may say.   Well I think it is, why should I put up with this sloppy marketing.

What would it have taken to segment the customer lists into the southern and northern hemispheres.   That way the marketing could have been customised.

The newsletter would have had a personal touch for me and me alone.  It would give the impression that Book Depository does care about it’s international customers.

Again the devil is in the details. The better customer experience is presented when you focus on those fine details.

I’m sure that I’m not alone here, I bet others have had similar experiences where the fine details of the customer experience has let them down.

Lately  there has been a resurgence in the discussion over using design for the greater good. From using design principles at the boardroom table, to solving third world problems with better interaction design.  Who are we really kidding!

While the concepts are very noble and I can see how it can be done. There really needs to be a dose of reality in all this.

The overriding principle is that we can change the world through design. We do this by influencing everything we design.  Such that we are producing high quality products that take into account sustainability, inclusivity and still focus on the business and audiences at hand.

Yes I know this isn’t impossible and is a great idea.

Still let’s just stop and think about this.   I don’t know about you, but I don’t think the scope of the clients I deal with day to day are really going to have any influence on a large scale.

Sure I work hard and consider all the angles that I can for my clients.   But realistically their budgets and scope of their business just doesn’t allow for much alurtistic design.

Now I would just love to follow these outstanding principles if the opportunity arises.

I  would also love to see a dose of realism thrown into this mix.   It’s all very well and good, for a group of luminaries working on top end projects to spout on about these principles.  Frankly I don’t believe the web sites, we are all designing and building on a daily basis, here at the other end of the specrum are going to make any real difference.

What do you think, can our design make a difference anymore?  Can we change the world one design at a time.

Over the years I have found that web awards tend to fall into three types:

• The mindless handout of awards to favour colleagues.
• Awards for the prettiest or most unusable but funky hip design.
• An award that is a true test and representation of the best in the industry.

What I find that you are really  looking for is a web award competition that acts as a yard stick to measure your skills that is judged by your peers in the web industry, not advertising executives.

Something that congratulates the web designers and developers that are following web standards and producing sites that are accessible and inline with the latest in best practices.

That means something. It should be hard won, against the best that the Australia web industry has to offer.   With lots of meaningful categories that complement the sites you develop.

An award that will give you that recognition for all those late nights, un-billable hours and murderous deadlines.

You know it would be perfect if it was also a value asset that would promote you and your clients business as well.

Maybe I’m just dreaming.

…However this is what the Australian Web Awards, now in its 5 year of handing out awards, has been doing.

Now I have been involved with the Australian Web Awards committee now for two years. This is  a completely volunteer run event.  In a way it’s totally about giving back to the community.  It was amazing last year to see the high quality of the submissions to the Web Awards.   Also of interest was the outstanding effort  of entries that made it through the judging and vetting process to the finals.

Last year, I was expecting the East Coast to be dominate in the awards and produce an overall winner.  However it seems the East Coast doesn’t have what it takes, and the the West Coast was triumphant.

Which is a strange outcome given there where very few Western Australian judges.  I do wonder if the East Coast really does have  what it takes.

Nominations for the Australian Web Awards are open now, yes right now! They close on the 8 July 2010. No extensions.   I would be thinking about getting your entry in now.

The bottom line is if you think some of the web sites, produced over the last financial year are good enough to stand up with the best in Australia, then you should be entering the Australian Web Awards.

Do you have what it takes. I’m sure you do!

There seems to be a bit of a trend at the moment, within developmental circles to just add a  few wireframes and develop a prototype or two, and then you can declare you are across the user experience design process.

The thing is User Experience is a lot more than just a few simple techniques, it’s an entire collaborative design process, in a way it’s not just a single methodology at all.

This lack of being a single methodology may be part of the issue.

For too long in developmental circles,  the promise of the perfect project was always dangled as the golden prize for simply following a given methodology step by step.  UX does in a way, pull the rug out from under that old school attitude.

Limiting the Scope

It is easy to understand that the adoption of wireframes can aid in design,  and that prototypes assist in the development process and  can act as an additional communication tool.   This is true.

However  when theses techniques are only applied to staged design approach they just capturing the design alternatives, by an iterative  prototyping process.  This is all they do, they don’t provide anything more.

To consider that these techniques alone take into account the entire User Experience design process is just flawed.

If one just applied these two design techniques, then the entire aspect of the “user” can still be very easily  forgotten.

The adding in of new software tool that allows for wireframes and collaborative client signoff  is providing a greater scope than before, but it’s still not UX design.

Wireframes should be tested with the users, as should the prototype. However in reality it’s just too easy to only reference the client and their response to your design.

Remember the Users

One must remember that User Experience is about the experience of the users.

Not the designers, developers or the client.

Yes I know it’s an obvious thing, but sometimes we  forget this in an effort to find a single methodical solution we can trust.

The core of any user experience process is the design with the users, for the users. It’s about the conversation with the users:

• The collection of the user research.
• The non bias user testing, with users, without leading scenario presentation and questioning.
• The interviewing of users, and the collecting of their user stories.
• The analysis of their previous trails through a web site and general web analytics.
• The previous experiences and expectations of the users, the mapping of their mental models.

I can understand that championing of the user and business goals, wants, and previous experiences can be  difficult to comes to terms with.

This is especially  true when you are used to the straight forward cycle of business requirements and client input, and a few intrative cycles.

Also the direct involvement with selected users, for a development team maybe difficult. However this is where User Experience professionals can help, as they can bridge that User, Business and Developer gap.

Still the application of the user research and it’s confirmation via user testing is the critical aspect of the entire user experience process. It has to be done.

It’s not a simple matter of plugging in a few new techniques.  You have to consider the user, talk to the user, “be the user”, develop and design with the user in a collaborative effort.  This is the user experience process.

No matter how much we want to avoid it, we have to engage with the users, anything else is not working with the UX design process.

I have noticed over the years that the quality of the comment spammers has been improving. It is to be expect really, as the tools to combat spammers step up and gets better so the spammers will improve their scripts and tools.  Not that I like it.

Over the years you get to see the general type of spam:

• Simple link list comment spam.
• Comments made up of paragraphs that at first glance appear to make sense and are full of link bait.
• Generic comments on how good the post or site is.

But Wait… there is More…

Well now there is a new kid, (well for me).   This one is going to be a little bit of a pain – The Real Duplicate Comment.

Basically the comment is well structured, it even makes sense, in fact it’s on topic. So often a fair amount of thought has gone into the comment – well at least a few minutes.

The IP addresses are random, as are the email addresses.   The URLs (no follows are on by default on this blog) go to spammy web sites, you know the type.

The only way you get to know that it’s not a real comment is that it’s often duplicated within 24-48s of posting by an exact copy of the original comment from an different commenter.

Currently my only solution is to mark them both as spam when the duplicate comment turns up.

I would be interested to know if others have encountered similar comment spam.

Let’s get some reality on the web accessibility debate.

We all know about WCAG 1, we have all at least had a look at the associated checklists.  If you are lucky you may have glanced at WCAG 2.

We all have been developing and designing our sites with semantic content, in compliance with W3C guidelines, using progressive enhancement for the interactive components, unobtrusive Javascript, and graceful degradation of the pages for legacy browsers.   Maybe used some of the attributes of ARIA. Sure that’s a no brainer.

We know that doing this will solve most of the accessibility issues.

So much so that one would think that the cause for accessibility and universal design was over.  Right?

No – wrong.

We are not Assistive Technology users

If we set aside the fact that we still have people in Australia building non standards based sites with tables for layout and inline javascript.

We as a community (edit – able bodied) in general are just paying lip service to accessibility.  We have become complacent. We are engaging in a mindless tokenistic effort with accessibility.  Do we really care…

Often the real answer is No.  At least now we are being honest.

Think about it when was the last time you included a round of accessibility testing in a quote.   Or for that matter when was the last time you even considered it, or even raised the topic.

To often if the client does bring up accessibility in early discussions, we will just ignore it.  Pretend it isn’t an issue.

Even government agencies, local, state and federally, have been dodging accessibility issues.  I have seen it personally, straight faced lies, or statements of avoidance veiled in bureaucratic misunderstanding.   The mindless ticking off on the WCAG 1 checklist, just to get the KPI achieved, too often by a junior staff member who doesn’t really have any interest in accessibility or the like anyway.

This has to stop.

Yes some of us are doing something, but in reality is it enough.

Are we calling our fellow peers to task when the accessibility on their web site is just not up to scratch?  We used to do this with  web standards.  Why not accessibility?

Maybe we need to remind people that ensuring a web site is accessible in Australia is a legal requirement.

Losing our way.

Still with accessibility we have gone very quiet.  Even silent.  Why?

Simple we have become our clients, we are now just playing the same lip service, tokenism game that our clients are often playing.   Yes in public we (they) will state that we care about accessibility.   But in reality we (edit – as able bodied designers and developers) don’t have to use assistive technology (AT), we don’t have a disability, in general we can see and use the web as it was intended.  We are a million miles from the practical world of using AT.

The old UX catch call is never truer here – we are not the users.   The disparity between us and the people we are really working for, with accessibility, is sometimes just too great for us to even get a idea of what it is like, no matter how many videos of people using assitive technology we see.

Why we are doing nothing.

In a lot of cases we have the tools with the standard issue Web Technology to make the entire web accessible. We have had them for over 4 years now.  Still a lot of sites fail all but a basic Jaws reading test.  Why?

We know why, we just don’t talk about it, it’s the elephant in the room:

• Money

  Money is the primary issue.  It’s always  comes down to money, it costs for testing, it costs for recruiting, it costs to find the best solution.

• No ROI

  From the clients view there is a perception that there is no return on investment.  The AT audience is just too small and they are seen as being just on welfare and not having any disposable income at all.

• Lack of Skills

  There is a lack of skills or documented solutions for all but the common accessibility issues.  Yes lots of people around the world have found solutions to most of the problems.   However if you want to solve it locally you have to reinvent the solution again or call in an overseas or interstate high paid consultant.

• Social Value

  In reality there is no socially inspired public relations value in accessibility.  A business can be seen to get more value out of sponsoring a guide dog than making their web site accessible.

• Why Bother

  Although the Australia Human Rights Commission hasn’t been sitting on it’s hands on these issues. There is a general public and web industry perception that they have. So if the legislator isn’t bothered with enforcing compliance why should anyone else care.

• Lack of Tools

  There is no sure-fire tool that we can automatically measure accessibility of a site.  It takes real testing and a compliance checklist to ensure a site is accessibility to a wide spectrum of the community.   It’s much easier to just lie on the checklist, after all who is going to check.  Yes I have seen this being done time after time.

What can we do.

It’s a sad really.  In a way we shouldn’t have even got to this state.

It’s as if the hard battle for accessibility has only been won on the popularist visually impaired front.  Leaving the cognitive, motor control, hearing and the like issues out in the cold.

Now I don’t have a solution, however this is something I have been thinking about a great deal.

I’m certain what every we have to do, isn’t going to be one simple solution.  On a side note: don’t look to HMTL5, that’s not going to be the magical panacea.  I except  the answer will be in a multiple pronged approach:

• Kill off Accessibility

  In some ways even considering accessibility as a separate item is the wrong approach. We really need to be considering the ideals of universal design, in which everything is designed for everyone.   Let’s just for a minute forget about accessibility as a separate issue. We need to design and develop for people using AT just like we do for any other usability issue.  This is where  Inclusive Design comes in.

• No more checklists

  Lets be honest the WCAG checklists  don’t work. We don’t have HTML or CSS checklists.   Why should we have accessibility ones.   Checklists are just too open to management and insecure web team members abusing them and warping the real results.  After all who is going to challenge or randomly audit them – senior management, I don’t think so.

• Merge the Guidelines

  Over time it would be idea to merge WCAG in the core of HTML and CSS guidelines such that it is just second nature to the recommended implementation examples with HTML or CSS.   Okay this is a really long term solution considering we are just getting into HTML5.

• Ninja Accessibility

  Being realistic we aren’t going to get all those ideas of the ground tomorrow.  However we can take advantage of the aging baby boomer population in the west.  This generation of older adults, will start to have a lot of leverage and will also start to encounter  a number of minor web accessibility issues.  Via overcoming these issues by stealth, ninja like, one is able to introduce an inclusive design mind set to the client, via an area they can relate to.

• Accessibility Patterns

  This is one that I touched on above.  Wouldn’t it be nice if there was a centralised library of accessibility solutions, a bit like a UI pattern library like Yahoo User Interface Library or  the Yahoo Design Pattern Library.  That way designers and developers could just look for a solution to a problem or just consider the overall UI recommended in terms of an inclusive design.    Either way it would be a win, win situation.

  Now there are lots of very smart accessibility design practitioners across the world.  I know a good number of them have encountered most of the common issues and then some more.  Some have published these issues and the work arounds as they discover them.  Some have just listed the issue and test results, leaving the solution as a guarded revenue stream.  And others are just too busy to really contribute.

  We need to harness this information and store it somewhere centrally.   As a community resource.   Think about it, think about the differences that developmental patterns and UI design patterns have made to the developmental process. No more reinventing the wheel (or widget) .  They have allowed the adoption of a landscape where good practices are now the norm.

  What we need to do is foster the accessibility community to build accessibility patterns as solutions to common problems.   Such that any designer or developer can drop the solution in place and be confident of the out come.   Yes this does need some altruistic contributions back to the community by accessibility solution specialists.  However just consider the overall result in the longer term.

In a way I have dream that in the next five years we can turn this around and have  accessibility issues approached in the same way we now do for web standards.

However in order to do this we need to start today, and make real changes in what we do.

Are you with me!

It’s an interesting point is the ability to code in CSS, HTML and JavaScript a skill that is relevant to the User Experience practitioner.  Or should that be left to the developers and designers.

Why ask?  Well I’m at a crossroads.

You see the nature of the local industry here is such that there just isn’t a constant stream of User Experience work at commercially viable rates.  So a I have been supplementing my UX work with a little front end design and development from time to time.

Not a bad thing really I enjoy the work. Especially when I get designed into a corner and have to try and make it all work with css/html, the challenge can be very rewarding.

Times a Changing

However recently I have noticed things are starting to change locally.  I also seem to be making a few changes around here of late, maybe I’ll just getting bored, or it’s a mid life crisis (nah, too old for that beastie).

Maybe it’s time to drop the frontend development work and finally do what I have been trying to do for the last 4-5 years, focus on UX and IA type work and nothing else. Afterall UX isn’t about the implementation, it’s about the planning and initial design only.

Mind you on the other side of the coin.   Frontend development and design skills are very handy with prototyping in html and the like.   It’s just something as you don’t have to sub contract out.   You can just do it yourself.   Even better for doing the odd hack or patch between user testing sessions on a prototype.

Also, I’m told, that people with both UX skills and frontend development are rare these days.  Now I don’t really have any idea on this one. To me they don’t seem to be that rare.   Maybe it’s just different in the US or something.

Would be nice to retain the skills, seeing as I have come so far with them, and invested a lot of time and money developing them.  But again its another skill set to keep upto date, another pile of reading to do.   Hard choice.

Guess I’m being a little conservative here, but when you have a family it’s not just you that is going to suffer if you make the wrong choice.

It’s UX or Nothing

No matter what I decide, I’m no longer taking on any more new clients for  front end development work.  It’s all going to be UX and IA and the like. Lets see how this all goes. Brave move in a way, as I’ll be turning away paying work I can very easily do.

So if you are have work in the User Experience, Information Architecture, Usability or  Accessibility areas, then we need to chat.

Still I ask you, do you think it is time to drop the front end skills and move on, or are they at least a handy prototyping skill?  What do you think?

Look around the web, you’ll find them all over the place. MS-Word and PDF forms that you have to download and complete.  I would be forgiven for thinking that we have not progressed on the web since 1995.

I know I’m not perfect I have been party to this crime against UX as well.

We know they are bad, so why are we still using them.

Let’s Consider

You’re feel inspired to join a professional association.  The website seems pretty good, it lists all the benefits. There is a professional air about it.   You can see that some of your respected peers are already members.

The annual fees aren’t that much either, well within your budget.  You can see at a glance you’ll have no problem with your experience with the membership criteria.

The entire progression through the site has been seamless, almost as if the site was personally responding to your needs and wants alone. It’s been a pleasure considering joining this association.

So finally you press on the “Join Now” button.

The perfect reality is shattered. One brief sentence destroys it all -

“To Join simply download, complete and fax back to us the following PDF document”

This is not a little speed hump in the process.

Its a 10 foot wall!  This is a user experience disaster.

Completing a Form

Just consider what you have to do to complete the form:

1. Often the PDF form can’t be filled out online, or it just doesn’t quite work right.
2. Download the form.
3. You print it off.
4. Find a Pen, that works.
5. Fill it in.
6. Find a Fax machine or scan it.
7. Fax it, ensuring the fax has been sent.
8. Remember to collect your copy of the fax.

Yeap, it’s just way to hard.   Now consider, if we want people to complete the form why are we making it difficult.  Why indeed.

Pros

• Sometimes we don’t want a Form online.

  Over the years I have run into a good number of  agencies and corporations who deliberately go out of their way to make it difficult to complete certain forms.  They rely on the fact people don’t like to fill in manual forms to restrict the number they get. In a way they are burying the form and the associated process online so you will not complete it.

• Writing outside the fields

  A manual form can allow for those incidences that an online form designer didn’t consider.  You can write outside the fields, in the margins and the like.   You may have a small comment box online, but on a manual form it can be limitless.

• Easier to update

  Sure, you just have to update the link for the downloadable form.  However what happens if you don’t have the master document. Do you have to build the form from scratch just for a “simple update”.

• Easier to publish

  Yes the process of publishing a MS-Word or PDF form is an simple, one.  Just upload the form and link to it.   But consider the time taken building the form and getting it looking the way you want it.   These are the hidden costs.

• No special software or skills required

  No special software is required.  Most businesses have a MS-Office installed. Hence building a form in MS-Word isn’t that greater task.   No real specialised skills like “web design” are required.  It doesn’t take that long to build them either as all the pesky interaction component has been removed.

Cons

• People are lazy

  We known that people are naturally lazy, they aren’t going to want to fill in a manual form at all.   Maybe it reminds them of an endless victoria bureaucracy of hideous  forms.

• Easy to add a CMS form

  With a lot of CMS these days there are modules or plugins that allow the admin person, with no special design skills, to easily put together a form.  These forms often have all the interactive elements such as error messaging and the like.   All they need is to be styled correctly in the first instance.  They also usually come with default styles anyway.

• Electonic records

  Provision of an electronic record, whether or not it is in a database allows for easier access to the information, and an increase aspect of data manipulation now or in the future.

• Data validation

  You can ensure with filters, and data validation that the data you get from an online form is pure and the best it can be.   This is very hard to do with a manual form.

• No double entry

  It’s simple with a manual form you have to enter the data, manually type it into a computer system or at the very least scan it and use an OCR package on the result.   This all takes time and resources.   Also what do you do with that extra long comment that is too big to be collected and entered into the database.

• Easy to development a custom form

  Years ago designing and developing a form for a developer was a long process.   But today with frameworks, form generators, specialised form tags and the like it is possible to build a form in a tenth of the time.   This really eliminates the complaint of it taking too long doesn’t it.

• Cost effective user experience

  Overall if you look the process, sure building a PDF or MS-Word form may appear initially to be cost effective, but if you consider that it’s just not going to be what people are expecting.   You are going to loose potential transactions with an manual form.  They have started the process in the online world of the web, they expect to complete it there simply and efficiently.

Next time a client sends you a PDF form or worse a MS-Word document to be placed on a site as a form. Stop.

Have a chat with the client, discuss their real needs and the purpose of the form.   If they really honestly want people to complete the form then realistically it has to be online.

Social networking sites like Facebook and the like were fun when they started.   You could be ensured of a reasonable degree of trust with them.

I don’t know if you have noticed lately, but Facebook have been slowly but surely selling off your privacy, and rights  to the information you put on their site. They are doing this by just changing their Terms and Conditions from time to time.   The changes have been slow and almost calculated.

Upload a photo to Facebook and they own rights to it, or can reuse or sell it as they want.   They also tried to take control of any posts or articles submitted to Facebook as well.

Now with more privacy concerns, it has come the time to take a serious look to social networking services, as Nathanael Boehm suggests, and our business relationship with them.

Responsibility as the Gatekeepers

I know to some sections of the community  think that Facebook is the web and nothing else,  just like with google is the browser.

For us in the technological driving seat, we know that the web is much more than this walled garden.   Just like AOL and other closed sites (requiring a password to see the content) Facebook is just a sub section of the greater content of the open web.

As the gatekeepers of this knowledge we really must use it wisely when directing clients and the general public.   When we advise people on how to use web, we have to be constantly thinking of the bigger picture.

It maybe that we see a certain social networking site as the latest and greatest crazy.   We may see it as a great place for gathering business leads, or maintaining a community.   Still remember  we are not our clients users.  Our experience is not their experience.

Lessons to Learn

We tend to live in a rarefied bubble of the advancing technology of the web industry.   This is not the real world, as I’m often reminded when conducting user testing.

We need to remember:

• Not everyone is on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, FourSquare or the like.
• Not everyone has access to various social networking site at their main point of access.
• Not everyone wants to be on a social networking site.

Sure, yes we all know that.   So why do we:

• Setup links to events on a closed systems (like Facebook).
• Setup links of feeds or photo galleries on a closed system.
• Post information and articles for customers on a closed systems.
• Use a comment system or publication system that is invite only or closed system (like Dribble, FriendFeed).

Not the greatest experience in the world  - you read about this great article, but the link is to a closed site.  There is a must attend event, but it’s on a closed site for members only.   You don’t have the time to muck around signing up.  So you move on, frustrated.

Sound familiar, it should that’s how some people react.

So when you next organise an event, post an article, link to a video, upload photos, or recommend the like to a client.   How about doing it on the normal Open Web, and linking that to your social networking site of choice.

Towards the Open Web

It’s simple.  use the web that isn’t behind a closed wall.  The web that isn’t controlled by someone else’s Terms and Conditions, that are forever changing.

Use the  Open Web that is going to reach all the people, use the web as it was originally intended.   If I suggested you use AOL as the basis for a client business web site years ago, you would all have laughed at me.  So why use Facebook?

There are alternatives.   I shouldn’t have to point you to them, but they do exist, ones that  don’t make you sell your soul to use them.

More importantly when we recommend the use of social media in a business promotional strategy, make sure the client and you are fully aware of the relevant Terms and Conditions.

You also really need to have a handle on their audience, will the audience to interested in the online social network for the client or not. Winging it on your gut instinct or the clients say so just isn’t going to cut it in today’s business world.

It’s not hard, use the Open Web first over the Closed Web of the walled gardens.  What about you, Closed or Open Web?

Over the last few years I have really  come to question the point of various web industry professional associations.

Yes, it’s all about member benefits, relevancy, and value for money.   What I also look for is the chances to network, face to face or online, ways to enhance my professional development (offline and online).  Also the validation that you are following industry best practice as well.

Still the most important requirement is a sense of  community and belonging.

However when this sense community is hard to find, as it is really a localised clique or just doesn’t seem to be the right mix to be relevant.  It’s at this point that the time that the money you are shelling out for these organisations just seems a little pointless.

Within the web industry in Australia and beyond there are a number of organisations that  have over lapping spheres of influences that cross into the realm of the web industry.   Granted now I have not joined and used all their services, however I have had a very close look at most of them.

• Australian Computer Society  (ACS)

  I joined the ACS when I used to work in the IT industry (that was a lifetime ago),  and they were relevant then.   However over the years they have become an ageing IT managers club.   The seminars and conferences are just no longer relevant.  It’s either I don’t fit in the IT industry or the ACS isn’t relevant anymore.

  Currently even the networking at local ACS meetings involves the same people month after month. There is just no value it with this group as a whole when then can’t seem to understand the concept of usability, user experience design or the like.

  The only reason I continue with the membership is it’s now a lot harder to rejoin the ACS than it was when I first joined. However if I breakaway why would I rejoin.

  I have even considered maybe volunteering for the local committee and trying to make a change from within.   But it seems pointless, overall the ACS just doesn’t seem to be that open to people from the web industry.   Guess the dinosaurs just don’t get this web thing.

• Australia Web Industry Association (AWIA)

  I have soft spot for AWIA as I have served on the committee, and have been a member for a number of years. So okay I’m bias.

  AWIA is very web industry specific, they aim to represent and promote the web industry in Australia.  Considering the small number of active volunteers AWIA has achieved some amazing things.

  The problem is that although AWIA has run some very successful events like conferences, seminars, and a national web awards, there is still a air  that they are Perth centric, despite efforts to change this.

  Like most young associations it has a good sense of community, with a hard working team of tireless volunteers.

  This is the heart of AWIA’s problems, the team of volunteers.  You see there is a point that every professional association gets to when the volunteers can no longer do everything without regional branches or a paid admin support team.   AWIA is at that point.

• Web Industry Professionals Association (WIPA)

  If I was living in Sydney I would be a member of WIPA, not AWIA.   Basically WIPA is the same as AWIA, except they are based out of Sydney.

  WIPA is facing the same issues that AWIA is, volunteer burnout.  There is nothing wrong with WIPA at all, it is supporting, representing the promoting the web industry just like AWIA.

  In fact, maybe AWIA and WIPA should be considering, egos of both committees aside,  merging and making a solid, unstoppable, truly national professional association for the Australian web industry and the  benefit of members.

• Australian Interactive Media Industry Association (AIMIA)

  Okay a disclaimer on this one, I’m not a member of AIMIA.

  The scope of AIMIA is focusing on anyone working in the media industry, that’s marketing, advert production, interactive promotion, and the web.

  My issue is that AIMIA is like the ACS, the web is just a minor slice of what they are looking at.  Granted it’s a larger slice and of more relevance that with ACS.

  Sure they run a good deal of events, on the east coast.   An Australian awards competition, with a low regard from web standards and best practice.

  However living in Perth, does AIMIA has any relevance, is there any benefit from AIMIA that will help me in Perth. There also doesn’t even appear to be  an online community that I can see.

• Computer Human Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG)

  You know when you get an organisation that you just wish they would be relevant.   You know that the overall subject matter is one that is close to what you are professionally interested in.

  Well that is what it is like with CHISIG, from what I can see CHISIG is just there to support a series of regional annual conferences which really just has focus a little too much in the theoretical world of academia for my liking.

  This is a real pity as I can envision CHISIG becoming a very important organisation in the future.  Locally CHISIG run the annual conference OZCHI.

• Information Architecture Institute (IAI)

  The IAI is focused on the promotion, best practice and use of Information Architecture, the membership is mostly US focused as all these like overseas associations tend to be.

  The major benefits for members are a a closed email list, a mentoring program, the Journal of Information Architecture, and an annual conference (in the US, so that’s not going to happen any day soon is it).

  In general the IAI has provided a considerably high level of interesting resources and benefits for a low fee of US$75.

• Interactive Design Association (IxDA)

  The IxDA is a very interesting association, again like the IAI its very US centric, but with volunteers from around the global, local chapters are very quickly popping up all over the place.  It’s centred around a mailing list. The cost of membership is free.  The IxDA also runs an annual conference in the US – Interaction.

  Not really much of a professional association at the moment as a support group for people interested in Interactive Design.   However, things are changing with the IxDA. One to watch.

• Usability Professionals Association (UPA)

  If I wasn’t involved with the local UPA chapter (in formation) I really don’t think I would bother with the UPA.   I just seem to have lost interest in the UPA.   Yes I’m still passionate about usability, but just not the UPA.

  There is no online community, no mailing list.  There is however a quarterly magazine and number of online resources limited to members.

  The usability and findability of the information on the UPA website really is a distraction from the overall benefits as well.  Mind you the membership fee is only US$100, so the resources are reasonable for the price.

  The UPA just don’t seem to be living in the same world as we are in Australia.  Even their policy for chapter formation is just unrealistic for regional centres like Perth.

  At present I’m hoping the UPA can see the error of it’s ways and move forward and improve.

• Internet Industry Association (IIA)

  The history of the IIA is they formed mainly out of the need to lobby the Australia government in relation to issues effecting ISPs.   This greatly effects their policy and direction, making then somewhat relevant to the web industry.

  However they are not focusing on the coal face of the our industry but the service providers.

• Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA)

  The AIIA does have a local Perth branch, and they do run regular events.  However the event prices and membership fees (staring at $600 per business) indicate that they are focusing on the top end of town.

  The AIIA runs some amazing events, that are a very good networking resource, even an ICT awards competition, in a way they are like the ACS for business.   The relevancy of their professional development benefits, and the like, are just a little low for the web industry, mind you it’s higher than the ACS.

• Web Standards Group (WSG)

  A number of years back the WSG was up and coming, with local branches around Australia and regular seminars and meet-ups.

  However as volunteer numbers have waned over the years and so has the local involvement, despite membership being free.

  The WSG is now mainly an online community, with adhoc meetups on the east coast, however it still should be considered as it promotes an idea of web standards and best practice for web design and development. Which is a good thing.

I know there are a lot more like associations than the ones listed above, some are very much developer or designer specific, some not.   If you like list any extras in the comments below.

So are  these associations still relevant?  Would you consider joining or should we put them on notice.   Or maybe I’m just missing something, you tell me?