Conference tnpubs::i-exchange

    I agree with you Joan.  The implication of the 4-D model is that one 
    is finished with one phase before entering the next.  In reality, the 
    process of creating user information, whether it be documentation or 
    training, is an iterative process.  We are constantly refining based 
    on prototypes and reviews.  
    
    We may be able to put a stake in the ground and say that we have a
    design from which we are going to develop a deliverable.  However, during
    the development, you may decide that the design doesn't work and change
    it on the fly.   Of course, this new design will need to be tested and
    reviewed.                                            

    
    Sarah

    
    I totally agree with 9 and 9.1.  I never understood how you could 
    separate design from development.  They go hand-in-hand due to the 
    iterative nature of product and product doc development process.
    
    donna
    

>>    I agree with you Joan.  The implication of the 4-D model is that one 
>>    is finished with one phase before entering the next. 

	Not really. In the old ESDP version of 4D, the develop stage
	included several cycles of refining and modifying the prototype.
	In no way does it imply that your design is complete.

Joan,

In a recent study we learned that best writers, course developers and 
instructional designers do not follow the traditional linear Defined, Design,
Develop, and Deliver models that have been promoted in Digital and other places
in the past few decades.

The results showed that in complex environments such as Digital a number of 
factors interact and create unique design situations. Among these factors 
are subject matter, client, time, budget, audience, market requirements, 
tools, and deliverables. Design situations set the conditions within which 
design activities are performed and decisions are made.

Experienced practitioners enter the situation, constantly assess its 
evolving requirements, and shape their response to it. 

Experienced practitioners are engaged in a set of non-linear, cyclical 
activities called orientation, solidification, and implementation. This 
iterative engagement allows these masters of work-arounds to operate within 
a dynamic, changing context of requirements, working in real time with 
available (often incomplete) information to develop a solution that will 
satisfy multiple, diverse interests. 

In orientation the designer is in a questioning and information gathering 
mode seeking to understand the design situation. In solidification the 
designer is in creating mode, generating, narrowing and settling upon the 
guiding design ideas. In implementation the designer is in an actualizing 
mode, translating design ideas into representations or working artifacts 
that demonstrate design decisions concretely. Representation can include 
such things as concept memos, napkin sketches, content outlines, algorithms, 
storyboards, templates, formal specification. Working artifacts can include 
such things as chapter drafts, a help routine, a video rough cut, or a 
lecture dry run. In this sense, every concrete artifact is provisional, 
up to and including a finished product that is awaiting sign-off.

The results of the study clearly confirm your perception of how the work is 
really done.

Reza

Thanks Reza!

Ok, so now that we have data to back up our beliefs about how work is actually
done, what do we do so that our processes (ABM, etc) match the real model
instead of an imposed one? What do we do to ensure that any new processes that
come into being are based on how work is done instead of how some would like us
to do our 

cheers,

joan

re .4, .5:

does sound like an interesting study.  Can you provide the source?  Who conducted the study, where, when...?


Pilar.

Design practices report can be copied from:

CUPTAY::DISK$USER4:[CLIENT$PUBLIC]DES_RPRT.PS

Reza