Take Two
On re-defining the meaning of Interaction Design
I started this semester by defining the term, Interaction Design, as a newbie in the hardcore design world. On revisiting my first post for this class, I realize how far I have come in just about three months in terms of my understanding of the subject and as a designer. My introductory post clearly demonstrated the heavy influence of my architectural background while trying to define of Interaction Design (IxD). In that, I had expressed that architecture has imbibed in me,
the responsibility of conceiving spaces that add value to human experience with a sense of orientation, navigation, and way finding within spaces. I believe that the relationship between architecture and interaction design is undeniable. Having worked majorly on the physical built-environment, I feel though the thought processes between these two realms is nearly indistinguishable, a lot has to be explored in the digital environment.
While I still strongly believe in these interspersed boundaries between the two fields, throughout these months, I got a chance to dig deep and expand beyond my general idea of it. We touched upon nearly all the aspects of design, learnt everything there is know about it; ranging from old school ideas to the latest advents. I had a hunch that the depth of this field is immense and that notion had questioned the inner architect in me whether I was equipped enough enter this territory. But I feel a little less scared today owing to the spectrum of knowledge I gained in this class. I still have a long road ahead of me, but, my stake as a designer has moved far ahead from once believing interactions (in my first post) as,
being only between humans to now additionally being between human and a faux entity proficient at responding back.
My perception of IxD has advanced much further where I am more sensitive towards these relationships. IxD is no longer just about human-to-human or human-to-machine interactions, but also the facilitation between various values, technologies, services, and environments involved to produce the experience possible. It was hard for me to explain about what I was studying in order to break their preconceived notion of designing for interactions being related and confined to web design, design for screens, apps or other media. Today, I have a more established definition for this difference between interaction design and design for interactions. I understand that it is not just about pushing pixels and creating visually appealing media, but, more importantly what and how it conveys the meaning. It is a craft of observing, listening, communicating, trying, learning, reflecting, making, failing early and retrying. The process is iterative and constantly evolving and sometimes wicked. It is an effort of making non-intuitive, intuitive. It is, in fact, a way to build life and everything within this umbrella.
Through these months, I was able to establish and translate my deep love for designing for people at urban scale to designing for services. It is unbelievable how in such a short span, the amazing articulation of events by Prof.molly w steenson changed me as a person and a designer. I can’t thank her enough for helping me travel this path so smoothly.
