The IA Portfolio Dilemma 07-13-2007
Having recently listened to the NYC CHI talk on UX career paths, I heard some interesting revelations on the perceptions of IA portfolios and gauging ability.
The greatest issue with IA portfolios seems to be that an IA can do many different things and as such their deliverables can be an assortment of artifacts. We see everything from a swath of wireframes to requirements documents and sitemaps, possibly personas or interaction flows–all of which are not necessarily glitzy. There is no one set of expected portfolio elements.
In fields such as graphic design, industrial design, as well as writing there are those portfolio pieces which are a given that they will be shown by any prospective candidate. Not to mention the context is often simpler to grasp for those fields. Attempting to briefly describe the interaction flow of a financial application to a layman can be complicated, unless reduced to simple constructs, at which point a fair amount of relevance is lost.
Kevin Kearney, of Razorfish, spoke of this portfolio issue in terms of hiring, stating that many times it is kind of a toss up and that you hope you make the right choice. But how you make that choice has a lot to do with seeing how a person performs, not necessarily just by looking at previous work. While probably not sitting a person down and asking them to design an application, at the least discovering how they tackle the common design challenges that arrive daily. This is even a time to determine how they work collaboratively, as a great part of designing is the discussion and how well someone handles that.
Similarly, members of the IxDA mailing list have spoken of this matter too. Noting the fact that a lot of great candidates may be passed over as a flashy portfolio is needed to even be considered.
What matters most is very simple, how a person thinks. They need to have the desire to learn, to be annoyed by things and have the drive to want to solve problems.