Scott Jenson
I feel like such an old man, yelling about the problems with the label "UX/UI designer" but every time I post, I get people agreeing it's totally awful and how much confusion it creates.
So I'm encouraged to continue as if it's so bad, then why in hell do we keep using it?
#UX #UI #Design #UXDesign
Jan D
@scottjenson dunno, maybe we should bring the "Interaction Designer" back? (I liked 'interaction' better than the vague and hard-to-defend 'experience' anyway)
Dawn Ahukanna
Paraphrasing Grady Booch architecture and design quote - “All UI is UX but not all UX is UI”
Scott Jenson
@jon_newby I don't see it that way. I want there to be a single term, e.g. UX designer, but with the understanding that there are MANY skills (not just UI) that are required to do the job. It's much better (and easier) to say there is one discipline (with many skills required to do it well, e.g. user testing, research, visual design, prototyping, etc) Using the term UX/UI does two things: 1) Obscures the other skills needed and 2) confuses the hell out of stakeholders.
jon_newby
@scottjenson it's easier to get sign off for the position from upper management. Whereas separating UX and UI into two different roles seems more expensive on the surface, and probably involves evangelism to justify hiring two people, when one 'can' do 'both'. #unicornsRequired
Scott Jenson
@simulo I'm not fixed on an exact title, I'm more about having a single word/phrase for it with the understanding there are many skills necessary (e.g. researchers, visual designers, prototypers, etc). As the design team grows, it makes sense to expand to specialists.
Scott Jenson
@jon_newby That role has ALWAYS worked along side others, this isn't anything new. The only difference was that this role (for 30 years now) has been called a "Visual designer". It's when it pushed so hard to be called a UI designer (which used to be UX) that the confusion started. Then to make things worse, it was COMBINED to be a UX/UI designer and many now think all designers are pixel people.
jon_newby
@scottjenson interesting, what do you think about the specialised UI designer role? I guess a requirement for the role would be that it sits alongside a UX designer and/or UX researcher.
Scott Jenson
@garrett Fair enough, I'm just trying to stop a recent trend to use the term "UX/UI Designer" which isn't accurate, and more importantly, just confuses people. To make things worse, most organizations that use the term for recruitment usually mean "pixel person"
Garrett LeSage
@scottjenson "Jack of All Trades Software Designer" 🫣
Garrett LeSage
@scottjenson I just say "Designer" when it's obvious that I'm working in the realm of software. Otherwise "Software Designer".
I've been all across the board with different types of design, so limiting it to UI, UX, icon, visual, web, etc. is absurd... as is listing them all out.
But I don't need to advertise myself for work; I have a relatively stable job and have worked in a niche (FOSS) for quite some time, so I don't have to.
However, my approach definitely wouldn't work for everyone. 🫤
Garrett LeSage
@scottjenson Yeah, totally. It's even worse when you get hired as a UI/UX Designer, with decades of portfolio work to show for it — and are then told to make websites and stickers instead. (This even happened to me. 🙄)
"Software Interaction and Visual Designer" is at least a bit more encompassing, I guess, and doesn't rely on acronyms.
Dawn Ahukanna
“Been all across the board with different types of design, so limiting to UI, UX, icon, visual, web, etc. is absurd... as is listing them all out.” - it’s not about listing but having ontology/classification system defined, shared & understood.(DSU)
Biology has organism, species & genus structure. Chemistry has the periodic table of elements. Physics & maths have theories, equations and proofs.
What would ontology for Designer practices and patterns look like - DSU?
Scott Jenson
@dahukanna @garrett It doesn't need to be that complicated. There is one discipline: UX design. A startup makes its first hire a UX designer. As the team grows, they hire specialists, e.g. a user researcher, a visual designer, and a prototyper to fill out the team. As these skills aren't locked behind a single type, it's possible for one person to do many of them.
This is just like the term programmer which can literally do everything, but as the team grows, branches out to e.g front/back end
cuan_knaggs
@scottjenson when i see UX/UI designer i tend to think of it the same way as full stack developer or unicorn. an impossibility used by business to justify hiring one person instead of a team
clacke
@scottjenson Thank you for all the clarifications in this thread.
For me the term "UX/UI" was an improvement, because it was acknowledging that you don't just need a pixel person, you need someone trained in usability as well. Most projects I've worked didn't even have a pixel person, much less someone who understands human/machine interaction.
But you're coming from a perspective where the usability experts and interaction designers already existed and were watered down into this shapeless UI/UX role.
I 100% believe that the focus should be on interaction and usability first, and visual design being a subordinate activity that flows from there.
Scott Jenson
@clacke fair enough but as the term actually encompasses two different skill sets it's a bit of a "particle/wave" kind of concept and ends up just being confusing. The fact that many startups actually do think the term means "pixel person" is the user testing that proves this design has failed
clacke
@scottjenson I didn't know people were treating the word like that, but I trust your observation. If that's the case the term needs to be retired.
I can't help but wonder though if the same companies wouldn't advertise for a "usability expert" and still have them mostly design logos.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.