Tag Archives: usability

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 4)

Posted on by acrystelle
Reply

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

  1. The (potential) role of information architecture principles and practices for digital libraries;
  2. Understanding the information environment as a key enabler of information architecture implementation, and
  3. 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 1)

Posted on by acrystelle
2

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

Posted on by acrystelle
1

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: -

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

Information needs and/or requirements influence or define: -

  1. context (in which information is required to be sought and retrieved to perform tasks)
  2. content (of the technical library collection)
  3. 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.

(Recent) Noteworthy Reads

Posted on by acrystelle
2

In anticipation of the upcoming ‘blog every day of June’ challenge, I thought I’d keep aside some post ideas for now. Goodness knows I’ll need them! So for this PLN project update, I’ll share some recent reads which have prompted thought and (quite) a bit of pondering.

1. iLibrarian – 18 Usability Resources for Librarians

This could not have arrived at a better time. I’ve just started a project at work, re-designing the library’s intranet site – properly cataloguing items in the CMS (for improved control and transparency of content and to increase flexibility for discovery and retrieval), implementing (much needed) functionality to assist efficiency at both library and user ends, and creating a virtual ‘space’ for library users who I may not come into contact face-to-face. I’ve bookmarked a few of these resources already and no doubt I’ll need to refer to them often.

Usability is in a librarian’s or information professional’s ‘DNA’, however I think we tend to rely too much on our judgement or instinct and sometimes forget about involving and asking the users what they think their needs are and what tasks the library needs to support.

2. David Lee King – Skyping from my Car (and other Wow moments)

Hopefully I’ll get a chance to share some of my ‘wow’ moments during ‘blog every day of June’. There’s been a few, especially throughout my ‘PLN’ development and learning about a new world – library and information science. ‘Wow’ moments also exist in the smaller and simpler things in life…..have you had a ‘wow’ moment recently?

3. Alexandra Samuel – Who would you be without the internet?

Now this one really got the brain ticking over. Alexandra shares his reflection with this thoughtful post and an exercise I also hope to do next month. On a serious note though, who would you be without the internet? What profession would you have chosen? What would your work day be like without it?

4. elearnspace – The Problem with Literature Reviews

A somewhat strong view by George Siemens on the value (and problem) with a standard research practice. I have to say, I tend to agree with a response by Jenny Connected. Siemens brings up valid points, and probably some everyone has thought of but hasn’t raised, afraid of the backlash they may bring. A risky post by Siemens, yet no doubt has me thinking about how I may approach literature reviews in my future research.

5. Gigaom (Dawn Foster) via iLibrarian – 5 Tips for Better Performance Reviews

Again, this post is timely. My annual review is coming up next month. I don’t know whether I’d like to ‘brag to my manager’, but perhaps some circumstances requires it (to a reasonable extent). I have the view of ‘actions speak louder than words’. One tip I’ll definitely take on is making sure I keep a record of my achievements. I’ve also implemented reflective practice into my project work as a way of justifying and demonstrating my thought processes for decisions I make and to show continual development of my expertise.

PLN Participation Update

# of Tweets for fortnight 124

# of Followers gained 4

# of Mentions 105

# of People I started following  2

# of Blogs/Feeds added 1