Web Design Ghetto?
June 29, 2004 | 
49 Comments
In doing a bit of research on job titles, in anticipation of making a change to mine, (as it doesn’t accurately describe what I do) I came across a very interesting article by Bob Baxley called Introducing Interaction Design.
Now, “Interaction Designer” doesn’t really work for me, but it seems like a viable title, and I enjoyed the post. But what really struck my interest was this comment from Adam Korman. He says:
Although the idea of Interaction Designer as a job role/title gained currency during the dot-com boom, ID is certainly not tied to the platform of a browser (or even the Internet). As far as I’m concerned, browser-based interfaces are, for the most part, an unfortunate sidetrack in the progression of software design. While browser-based interfaces are an important topic, to tie this whole series of articles to this facet of Interaction Design is A Bad Idea. I would hate to see an important series of articles about Interaction Design only help to marginalize the profession into the ghetto of “web design.”
“The ghetto of web design?” That, my friends, made me laugh my ass off. I guess it’s funny because it’s true. Upon further thought, it’s also the crux of my whole issue with grey areas, job titles and what the hell it is I do.
I’ve calling myself a Web designer and developer for years and I’m realizing that by doing so I’m really misrepresenting most of the core of what I do. While I do work mainly on Web sites and applications (for display in a browser) I’m not really a “Web Designer and Developer” any more.
Let’s face it, not only are Web Designers not sexy any more, they’re seen as amateurish in many circles. It’s really kind of silly, but it’s a fact.
(Never mind that the Web is, as a medium, just like Mr. Baxley says, “the Web is not only one of the most important of those mediums but also one of the most misunderstood.”)
I’m not sure why the simple combination of the words “Web” and “Designer” isn’t a good one any more. Maybe it’s because when combined they become quite narrow and limiting? Maybe it’s the fact that every Tom, Sally, Dick and Harry with access to Flash and Dreamweaver calls themselves a Web designer?
Your guess is a good, if not better than mine, I mean come on, it took me years to realize “Web design” was no longer cool. What I do know (now) is that, for me, Web design is only a slice of what I do.
I’m gettin’ out of the ghetto yo!
Filed under: Web Design
Comments
1. Ian Gordon said:
Quite an interesting read. I would say that the roles have changed throughout the past 4 years. I think we are seeing a shift in what traditional web design or web creation (coding, designing, managing) has brought us as webmasters. Tomorrow, we will see yet another change, it is how we view the change and how we move with the change, that will determine, how successful and “cool” we are.
Personally, I have never had a problem with my job title, I create web content, I manage my website and I am happy. I think alot of people place too much emphasis on what is less important. We need to focus on content and presentation, with that of course comes usability and accessibily but, those terms are just more jargon added to the mix.
Posted on June 29, 2004 10:20 AM | #
2. Keith said:
Ian – No doubt. Trust me, if it were up to me I’d just stick with Web designer and developer. It’s just that, more and more, people get the wrong idea of what I do when I use those titles.
To be quite honest, I’m pretty sure there isn’t a perfect title for what I do yet. Maybe there will never be. I’m pretty sure many of us who’ve been in the industry for a long time have this same problem.
One day I hope to be a Creative Director. Until then, I just need something a bit more fitting.
Posted on June 29, 2004 10:26 AM | #
3. andrew said:
One of the most difficult aspects with misleading titles are companies/corporations with little technically-literate management. I have worked for companies where the Creative Director had no experience with any markup or programming language ever, nor had he/she ever been involved in anything past print layouts as far as usability is concerned.
It seems that the negative ‘Web Designer’ stigma has pigeon-holed many who have much more broad-reaching skill sets into limited roles, simply because of the generally accepted belief that Designers design, Developers develop, and Directors direct. Whereas we are all quite well aware that a Director who understands development, design, and usability through experience is a much more valuable asset to a company.
Posted on June 29, 2004 10:52 AM | #
4. Paul G said:
Personally, I’m thinking of trading the no-longer-sexy “Web Designer” for something more aproppos. My options so far:
Although, “Creative Director” does have a nice ring to it…
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:00 AM | #
5. Joel LaTondress said:
“Web design ghetto” - fo’ shizzle. Web Developer definitely can be a misleading title, but I think that it goes without saying these days that one “web developer” will have experience with usability, accessibility, ia, etc.
If ever trapped in the ghetto, avoid catching AIDS (Application Interface Developed S***ty).
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:15 AM | #
6. jason stanfill said:
I use Web Designer/Developer to try to convey that I do soup to nuts, html, css, php, mysql, server admin type of stuff, but I am not sure that most people get that.
I really hate when people say you make websites, so does my 13 year old, but what are going to do. The people that can’t tell the difference between a well formed xhtml document and a jumble of front page mess will never quite get it whatever you call it.
But, when you finally figure it out be sure to let us know, because I am sure many people will change their titles accordingly.
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:15 AM | #
7. ChrisR said:
I haven’t seen a perfect title either. Maybe User Experience Architect, or User Experience Engineer. The problem I see with some of the non Information Architect titles is that no one know what you are talking about. Seems like IA is one of the few widely acceptable.
I agree with Ian, there’s a shift. There’s a move from “Web Designer” the guy/gal that did it all, to many specialized areas: Usability Experts, Persuasion Architects, Web Copywriters, Findability Experts, and Interface Designers. It’s pretty exciting. I prefer the title User Experience Architect, which I suspect will be shortened to Experience architect. So what will this person do? See Peter Morville’s recent article if you haven’t already. I think of the person in this title as a director. A person knowledgable about findability and getting people to the site effectively (search engine optimization and *marketing*), and once folks get to a site they need to be *sold* (persuation architecture, is it in their language, are calls to action in the right place, does the site communicate it’s value effectively), usability (what’s preventing folks from getting to the information they want, what is annoying users), interface design (is the site accessible, is it standards compliant, is the pallete appropriate), and the Experience Architect should know how to monitor, measure, and use an iterative approach to improve the site.
The Experience Architect may be hands on enough to do part or all of these jobs, but he/she may also be a director, directing the work of specialists concentrating on each of these areas. And, I imagine that different Experience Architects would also have leanings toward different specialties.
Overall, the Experience Architect is the new Web Developer, someone who’s on top of the Web based interactive design game and can put all the pieces togther and is familiar enough with the development process and all it’s aspects (PDF) to make the correct desicions to propel a project forward with cutting edge effectiveness.
I’d bet there are more areas of specialization that I’m not familiar with. I love learning about this stuff.
Ciao.
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:19 AM | #
8. Keith said:
ChrisR – Both the titles you mention: User Experience Architect and Engineer are ones I’m leaning toward.
You know something like Web Director would be appropriate as well. I thought about Web Producer, but that has a special conotation here in the NW that doesn’t fit (because of Microsoft) and “Director” wouldn’t fly here at the hospital because it implies a certain level of “status” that I don’t have – even though it’s probably pretty close.
See? It’s tricky, tricky, tricky…
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:37 AM | #
9. Chris said:
“In the Ghetto…” (WAV file)
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:49 AM | #
10. Robert Lofthouse said:
We use the term “web developer/designer” because that’s what the general public is familiar with.
Imagine a scene:
A potential client walks up to you at a conference, he’s the owner of a large business that is looking to go international via the web. You get talking and he asks you what you do.
You: “I’m a user experience architect”
Him: “Sounds interesting..”
You: “Yeah, I deal with all aspects of internet technology”
Him: “ok… say, you don’t know any web designers do you?”
People are just used to that term, therefore confusing them with pretentious titles is not the way to go.
However, using those kind of titles is fine within your own business (as long as you state you’re a web design company) - I certainly wouldn’t recommend it to freelancers though.
I stick with “the webfather” to be honest.
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:50 AM | #
11. Elaine said:
there are still some of us out here doing it all (or darn close); my title is “Web Manager” and while I didn’t like it at first, it’s grown on me…all-encompassing enough to hold a multitude of sins (design, development, usability, big-picture, day-to-day maintenance, etc.) while giving the non-technical folks a sense of what I’m responsible for.
i.e., if it’s on the Web (and non-instructional), I’m your gal.
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:50 AM | #
12. Sean King said:
True enough. That name has been co-opted by any and every person with an ounce of web skill, and thoroughly commodifying the rest of the web community.
However…
I think most web professionals are not in a situation, with large web teams or departments, that afford specialization into specific roles and titles. Instead, most of us are forced to adopt multiple disciplines into a single role such as little and big IA, interaction diagrams and functional specs for web applications, code and build websites, and of course graphic design. All of which are design on some level. All of which pertain to the web.
When the dust settles, you are left with an amalgam that is still best described as “Web Designer”.
Web Designer is still what I go by in my job today. Recently when my boss asked me to explain what I do, I said “I design products for use on the web”. That’s it. It may be ghetto, but its what I do.
So how about instead of trying to find a new name to better explain what we do, we start a reclamation project for the term “Web Designer”. Lets take back the name that was disingenuously stolen from our field, and stand tall again. Reclaim the name and give it back its proper meaning, instead of relying on BS titles that are cool.
Posted on June 29, 2004 11:51 AM | #
13. Keith said:
Robert – True. I’d never tell a friend on someone in the general public I was an “interaction designer” for example. I’d just say Web designer.
Sean – You make a good point. I guess where I see a problem is when someone equates “Web designer” with “Graphic Designer for the Web” – it happens quite often it seems and it really, really, REALLY understates and de-values what most Web designers actually do.
Zeldman said in a rare post today:
This kind of thinking sums up what I’m talking about and if I can label myself with a bullshit title that represents me more as the “thinker” I am – I’m going to take it.
The “title” isn’t the problem, just an interesting symptom for us to talk about and get all worked up over! ;) As evidenced in the comment from my post about “Web design ghetto” – even in professional circles (IA, UX) the terms Web and design are seemingly some kind of joke.
The Web doesn’t get the respect it deserves…maybe some day.
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:08 PM | #
14. Michael Almond said:
My mother continues, to this very day, to ask me “Now what is it you actually do mookie? I tell my friends you are a “Web designer”…is this correct?
My response is also the same: “Mummsy, that will do just fine, but I actually do a lot more than create pretty Web sites.”
Given that a Yale Medical School Educated Psychoanalyist (sorry, Training Analyst) can’t seem to open an attactment to an email, no matter who many times her husband or son walk her through the process, I feel this definition will do.
But face it, “cool” is the least of the problems. Saying you are a “Web designer” in the last few years is tantamount to saying you are an “Actor” in L.A. The first reponse you get seems to be the same:
“Oh, what restaurant do you work in?”
Well, Thank you for a humorous and relevant posting as always. But on the serious side, those who have survived the boom and bust have had to expand their knowledge or focus areas; or have great talent, experience and/or reputations in related job roles/positions, etc., before the Web came along.
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:21 PM | #
15. DaveP said:
Hi all,
Sorry, personal website’s not up yet so I’m an anonomous coward for the time being…
It’s probably been suggested before, but what web designers/developers really need is an association to designate a certain level of competancy and professionalism. Accountants have one, doctors have one, lawyers have one, engineers have one. Why don’t we?
Sure it’ll be a bit of a p.i.t.a, but there’s a good reason why nobody hires a doctor who doesn’t have “MD” after his/her name, or an accountant without “CGA” or “CMA” after theirs.
Keith, people like yourself - the voices of the standards advocating community are in a good posistion to spearhead such a project an reclaim the ghetto titles of web designer and developer.
Speaking for myself, I’d be able to actively contribute to such a venture should the right “voices” join the fray. I’m sure there are many others that share my viewpoint.
Let’s stop confusing everyone who’s less technically literate and make it easy for them to hire developers that know their stuff.
I know I’m sick of being compared to some CEO’s 16yr old… (she also drives a car, just like Mario Andretti) - aren’t you?
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:21 PM | #
16. Ian Gordon said:
I like the post Paul G made:
It is very catchy.
But on a serious note, I think that the web will get the respect it deserves as we move forward as a more and more technologically based society. I think when appliances have their own IP Addresses and you can order food from your refridgerator, then people will begin to realize, people like us are all-powerful. They will understand, or at least begin to, that we make the web move and breathe life into it and are not just “hired hands” as Zeldman says.
Webmasters Unite, I propose the million-webmaster march…make our cause heard :-D
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:24 PM | #
17. Paul G said:
FWIW, my official job title at work is “Website Coordinator”, which I feel fits the job pretty well.
Unfortunately, I don’t think there’s really any 2-3 word job title that can encompass all the stuff I know how to do.
The problem with “Web Designer” is that is has been used by so many with such wildly varying skill sets that it has lost any real meaning.
There are high barriers of education, experience, and accreditation required to obtain the title of “Neurosurgeon”, and not many people attain it, so there is a strong association between the job title and the skills possesed by someone who holds it.
Anyone with a copy of Frontpage can call themselves “Web Designer”, and many have. Therefore, the title is almost worthless for conveying any idea of your experience, training, or expertise.
It may be time for an accrediting body that can verify a certain level of skills for “Web Designer”. Maybe this would generate a new title, “Accredited Web Designer”. If there was a respected governing body to lend some weight to the implications of the title, it might actually become useful for conveying exactly what it is that we do.
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:34 PM | #
18. Paul G said:
Dammit if Dave didn’t make my point before I could finish typing it…
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:37 PM | #
19. Richard@Home said:
I’ve already got into this discussion ( ErisFree )
You call yourself what your audience can understand.
Web Developer, Geek, Web Enabler, The IT Guy, Web Designer, IT Internet co-ordinator, Man-In-Charge-Of-That-Web-Thing.
It doesnt matter. If your talking to someone ‘in the business’ they KNOW whats involved when you tell them your an ‘internet application developer’. If they arent in the business then just a simple ‘I make websites’ will do.
I cant help but think this ‘I need a new name for what I do’ trend is tied into the fact that web development is hitting a bit of a transient period: Designers are writing code, devlopers are making pretty GUI’s and everyone seems to be looking for some big words that look good on a CV.
I’m sticking with ‘Man-In-Charge-Of-That-Web-Thing’ for now ;-)
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:38 PM | #
20. ChrisR said:
I just took a look at the Our Approach section of the Semantic Studios site and noticed they break down their consulting business is a good deal of detail, with AI and UX as two different fields. Let me quote:
*Information Architecture
Structure, Organization, Navigation, Search, Sitemaps, Metadata, Controlled Vocabularies, Indexes, Taxonomies, Thesauri
*User Experience
Strategy, User-Centered Design, Competitive Advantage, Interface, Infrastructure, Interdisciplinary Collaboration, Usability, Findability
A little off topic but interesting. But, what I have noticed is that some web development companies are using terms like User Experience Designer. For example, at a recent UIE conference I met the “Director of User Experience” of Zentropy Partners, a large firm that has offices around the world. And, for what it’s worth, I’ve seen some Guru’s using the title, like Nielson.
It looks like it’s may turn out to be a great title if you are looking for a job with a company that knows who they are highering and why, but as discussed above, if you’re looking to freelance the name is not meaningful enough yet to folks who don’t know much about Web development. I don’t like the designer monikor either–sounds like a graphics designer. It’s familar to folks but it’s not accurate, and it seems like it’s not good for getting jobs at smarter companies.
Looks like depending on the kind of client/employer you are looking for you’ll need a different kind of title.
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:42 PM | #
21. ChrisR said:
I know it’s Nielson related again, but this kinda drives home the point of this title emerging as a standard: User Expereince 2004 (Las Vagas, Amsterdam).
I really need to get back to work now… ;)
Posted on June 29, 2004 12:47 PM | #
22. Sean King said:
Keith-
I agree that the title has a bad connotation, or is misrepresented in today’s workplace, but I’ll hold that Web Designer is still the best descriptor out there for the many that fall into the grey area you describe (but I am sorry about the BS comment, that was out of line).
But gaining respect as a “thinking” designer is a whole other problem. One that I find the best way to combat by educating clients in the user experience process and how that is applied to their project.
I go through this with nearly every project I do for the intranet inside my company. The business owners come in with a grand plan for a website. After listening to them talk, I then press the pause button, and deliberately take everyone through the steps of designing a website. Afterwards we spend some time defining the strategic pieces (Audience, Site Objectives, User Needs) specific to their project using the enthusiasm and ideas they brought in the beginning. By the time our first meeting is over, the client is almost always surprised that there is more to the site then they have thought of, and I get a little respect.
Not a surefire solution (as is evidenced by Zeldman’s post) but 8 times out of 10 will get you the respect from your client that you’re not just the guy installing the carpet or painting the walls on their website.
Posted on June 29, 2004 01:13 PM | #
23. Rob Cameron said:
Great article! I was planning on writing an entry like this myself pretty soon.
No one has brought up my personal favorite term – “Webmaster”. I suppose this could have the “negative” connotation of “the guy who keeps the server running” rather that someone that’s actually prototyping sites, IA, layout design and coding, etc. (in addition to keeping the server running). I do all that at my current job and I’m “just” the Webmaster. But back in the day if you got the title “master” you were the top dog! The Master Blacksmith, Master Craftsman … I like the old guild type job titles. It has the benefit that even Joe Schmoe on the street is probably familiar with the term, but you don’t get the “Oh yeah, my newphew is a web designer” response.
Most companies are also familiar with this title. I work at a pretty old fashioned company, so if I came in here claiming to be an “Interation Designer” they’d just laugh at me. My boss was a recruiter during the dot com era and to him that’s just a fancy, dot-comish title for a web designer. (He actually worked at a company that had a job position called “Java Guru”!) And putting that on a resume sounds, to me, like someone trying really hard to impress a prospective employeer with a fancy title for their previous position. Kinda like a “Petroleum Distribution Agent.” :)
Posted on June 29, 2004 01:17 PM | #
24. Keith said:
Sean – Don’t apologize for the BS stuff – that was really funny! ANYway. Web designer, even on it’s best day doesn’t take into account the User Experience, Development, Content and Information Architecture stuff that takes up much more of my time collectively than design. But I get what you are saying.
Even after I do get my title changed, I’ll still talk about “Web design” and “Web designers” in that very general way that refers to a shit-load of Web professionals…It’s just easier.
Posted on June 29, 2004 01:33 PM | #
25. Robert Lofthouse said:
I always liked the title “web architect”, however, I would expect someone with that title to be more of a consultant, someone who controls how the information will flow on the web site - same for “user experience architect”.
It’s a case of figuring out what is above developer and architect, but incorporates both.
Posted on June 29, 2004 05:17 PM | #
26. Egor Kloos said:
Currently I’m working at a Dutch web company as a “Web Application Developer”. And apparently everybody that is not sales, management or administration has the same title. The only problem is, nobody seems to know what the hell it’s supposed to mean. So if someone askes me what I do for a living I just say, “I’m a Designer”. “Of What?”, they cry. “I design websites”. It’s pretty vague but people seem te be able to live with that answer.
Oh btw. I was never sexy, so I’m not sad to hear the news that ‘web design’ is no longer sexy. I was once a Interaction Designer but that job title didn’t make any real sense. I understand Andy korman’s point of view. I have always been more like an art director than anything else. Eventhough I come from graphic design which is completly different from art direction I do feel that it fits my work a bit better. I’ll just ignore the fact I also do a fair bit of front-end development, because nobody seems to understand what that is. Never mind what the title stands for. The more I think about it the more I realise that my current title is’t so weird after all.
Posted on June 30, 2004 02:20 AM | #
27. Farhan said:
Glad to see I’m not the only one trying to come to grips with what to call myself professionally!
Presently I’m referred to as the Internet Manager, but this is because I manage the team. Not so much the Internet.
I think I prefer Web Engineer. From Dictionary.com:
I think that’s what we all do. Some of us are more technical, some of us are more strategic, user focused. But at the end of the day we’re all trying to efficiently manage an enterprise using our various skills.
I understand why some may feel a title is not as important as the work that gets produced. But for the evolution of the way web sites are developed I think its integral to have a clear title for what we do.
Posted on June 30, 2004 02:34 AM | #
28. Andy Budd said:
Hi Keith,
I’ve been thinking about the issue of titles quite a bit of late. In fact it’s on my blog post todo list.
My title is that of Senior Web Designer, however I do much more than simply “design” (in the visual sense anyway) websites. I’d say my job is probably quite similar to yours, although with a little less focus on IA.
I recently met somebody who used to work for a large agency as a “User Experience Designer”. Speaking to them, their role sounded very similar to mine, so that’s the title I’m warming to at the moment.
Posted on June 30, 2004 04:08 AM | #
29. heath weaver said:
My Lawyer (see http://www.wbmny.com/blog/archives/000076.html for explanation) has a sexy title: Lawyer
My friend in New York has a sexy title: Investment Banker
My Belgian friend has a sexy title: Software Engineer
Each of them spent lots and lots of money to get their sexy titles. However if going back to NYU isn’t an option for you then try the following:
Don’t worry about anyone ever understanding what you do, only the people in a similar job can understand (no one really knows what the people do with the aforementioned titles, after all they aren’t Native American names or they would be something like:
Sits-in-front-of-computer-reviewing-incorporation-documents-so-big-chief-can-take-credit-for-hours
Creates-merger-presentations-so-big-chief-can-take-credit-for-work
Writing-code-so-big-chief-has-someone-to-blame-mistakes-on
Just use keywords that stick out to average people, like engineer or analyst, then your time explaining what you do as a sales opportunity.
Posted on June 30, 2004 05:15 AM | #
30. Robert Lofthouse said:
Wouldn’t both “user experience architect” and “user experience designer” both give off the wrong impression about what you do?
I would expect someone with those titles to not only work with the web, but also anything from software development to interfaces of ATM machines.
Someone who has the title “information architect” deserves it, because they could not only work with the web, but also print media etc.
As fancy as we want our titles to be and no matter how many hats we wear during a job, we shouldn’t forget that the medium we work with is the web.
Just like software development/design/analysis, shouldn’t the title incorporate web into it?
Web site User Experience Designer is a little long-winded, so maybe it could be shortened.
Posted on June 30, 2004 05:16 AM | #
31. Cody Lindley said:
Keith
I recently have been thinking along these lines myself after writing this article detailing the factors that go into website usability (broad perspective article). I’m not really sure exactly what I do, specifically that is. I wear to many hats and this can’t be a good thing in the long run. I want to focus on one thing, but the position I hold requires to know a little, to a lot, about so much. Often refer to myself as a “Web Technical Lead” instead of a web developer or designer. I am anticipating your conclusion on this matter so I might find a title that separates me from a kid with a computer and a copy of FrontPage.
Posted on June 30, 2004 09:10 AM | #
32. Brian said:
When I was hired full-time after being an Intern here for a few years, they first gave me Corporate Web Technician. Which didn’t bother me, since I finally had a title. When I wad promoted to my current job, my boss first wanted to give me “Webmaster.” I told him that I didn’t like that name and that when I think of webmaster, I think of all the teenage girls who have an N’Sync “website” and call themselves webmasters.
Everyone who can use Frontpage or some other waste-filled, dumbed-down WYSIWYG editor likes to call themselves that. He settled on Corporate Web Administrator, and I like that. I don’t just do one thing, I have my hands in everything web-related here from Intranet to External Sites to Server administration.
Posted on June 30, 2004 09:18 AM | #
33. Al Abut said:
Sean King: “So how about instead of trying to find a new name to better explain what we do, we start a reclamation project for the term ‘Web Designer’.”
I totally agree. I don’t know if you were consciously referring to the ALA article renouncing the shame, but I’ve proudly had a link to it on my site for quite a while now. That was the first page I wrote when I remade the site in 2002, ripping off a mild rant on the state of web design at the time and encouraged by an article in the same vein. I credit that ALA piece with helping to hold this web designer’s head high and avoiding the pretentiousness of clunky artificial job titles. You really shouldn’t be calling yourself an IA or ID or UCD or whatever else unless that’s all you do day in and out, otherwise they’re all aspects of web design and development. I don’t don’t call myself a Usability Engineer because I don’t have an HCI degree and run a usability lab. Just because I eat Chinese food doesn’t mean I’m Chinese.
After all, when seen in another light, this is a sign of the industry maturing. Is it that bad to have a legion of kids fawning over our creations and aping them in their spare time, hoping to make a living doing the same? Many other professions have similar admirers - writing, acting, rocket science - without diluting the nobility or worth of the discipline as a whole. A journalist worth their salt wouldn’t be offended or feel threatened when the host at a cocktail party mentions that their 8th grader writes for the school newspaper. In fact, you’d kind of encourage them along, no?
This all just means we’re not the only cool kids at the internet party anymore - others have discovered this fun blend of art and science - and the only solution is to compete with the newbies and keep up the mad skills.
Posted on June 30, 2004 09:19 AM | #
34. Keith said:
Robert (#30) – You’re right and I’ve considered the same thing. Simply adding ‘Web” to that title would be much more accurate but then I’d get:
Lead Web User Experience Architect
Seems a bit wordy. But then again, I know a few Web Information Architects….
I guess what I’m possibly doing is ditching the word “Web” for the word “User”. Even though most of my work is Web, I guess I’d rather concentrate on the user than the medium – even if I do usually stick to Web. Does that make sense?
None of the titles out there are 100% accurate, so I need to compromise. Being a Web professional is all about compromise, so hey, it’s nothing new! ;)
Posted on June 30, 2004 09:59 AM | #
35. ChrisR said:
Another broad more sweeping title, along the lines of the one I currently work under: Director of Web Development, or Web Development Director
Posted on June 30, 2004 10:15 AM | #
36. Robert Lofthouse said:
The ever changing “about the author” column is quite amusing lol.
Posted on June 30, 2004 12:01 PM | #
37. Sean King said:
Al - I couldn’t agree more. I wasn’t consciously referring to that ALA article, but it is absolutely what I am talking about (I’ll be adding a link from my site as well!).
Consider this:
When someone asks a computer programmer what they do, most reply “I’m a computer programmer”. Then, if the other party is still interested, they ask “What type of programming?” or “What kind of programming?”. In the space of the next few words, you get a real good idea exactly what type of programmer they are, and how diverse (“PHP and MySQL and other server-side languages” or “C++ mostly, though I’m learning C# and Java” or “Originally COBOL, C, but I’m really spending most my time with .NET and Java web services”). The type of programming really fleshes out what they do and their capabilities. But on the surface they aren’t Extreme Programmers, or Code Architects, they’re just programmers.
Now I realize this is not a perfect comparison but if we pull out our IA hats, this is common classification and taxonomy at work. Overarching field (Computer Programming) leading into specialties (languages, types of programming), of which the programmer often knows or practices more than one. So, using the same methods, can’t we apply this framework to the Web Design field?
Posted on June 30, 2004 12:05 PM | #
38. Keith said:
Robert – Yeah, just click “refesh” every few minutes as I struggle with it! ;) I think I’ve got it nailed…for now.
Posted on June 30, 2004 12:06 PM | #
39. Bob Baxley said:
It comes down to this: when you fill out the “occupation” line on your child’s birth certificate, what are you going to put? The line’s only an inch long so you don’t exactly have room for a job description like User Interface/Experience Architect.
You’ve got to get it down to something short and professional; something like doctor, lawyer, teacher, writer, engineer.
For me, it’s got to be Designer. Nothing more, nothing less.
I am a Designer in the same way that my friends are Engineers or Architects or Scientists. And while I’m disappointed at the number of non-designers and hacks out there using the title, I’m not going to let them push me away from my association with the multi-century, grand tradition of DESIGN.
Posted on June 30, 2004 01:26 PM | #
40. Keith said:
Bob – You know, that is a great way to look at it. I guess I’m still “finding myself” professionally – even after all this time. Maybe “designer” suits me, regardless of my actual job title. If I can accept that, the title is pretty much irrelevant, right?
Thanks for the great comment.
Posted on June 30, 2004 05:04 PM | #
41. Bob Baxley said:
Keith – I’m glad my comment resonated for you. I think we all tend to lose site of the fact that we’re designers first and a particular type of designer second. I found the following quote pretty inspirational on this front:
“…design, stripped to its essence, can be defined as the human capacity to shape and make our environment in ways without precedent in nature, to serve our needs and give meaning to our lives.” :: John Heskett :: Toothpicks & Logos: Design in Everyday
If anyone ever tells you design isn’t sexy or important or difficult you should respond by telling them that design may well be the most human of all activities.
Posted on June 30, 2004 10:39 PM | #
42. Keith Bell said:
The debate on what we in our business do and what we should call ourselves could run and run, but I think Bob (comments 39 and 41) has hit the nail on the head. While some may fear that all the 13-year-olds with FrontPage (the really classy ones have Dreamweaver) have cheapened the currency of “web designer” as a title, it does not change the fact that for many of us, this is exactly what we are. (And we are professionals, while they are 13-year-olds.) Many of the other titles that have come along – “user experience architect” and the like – as well as sounding rather pompous and grandiose (perhaps in some cases invented as a reaction to the “anyone can be a web designer” notion) are too narrow in their scope to embrace what many of us do. On most projects I undertake, I am the project manager, information architect, user experience designer, usability analyst, accessibility champion, graphic/layout designer, HTML/CSS coder, CGI hacker, coffee-maker, chief cook and bottle-washer!
Bob’s comments are reminders of the heritage of design as a respected occupation, and one that is not limited to the graphic or visual fields. The Compact Oxford Dictionary defines design as “a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of something before it is built or made; the art or action of producing such a plan or drawing”. I spent a good part of my life in electronics design for military/aerospace systems, where the job did not have too much to do with how the product looked, but had everything to do with its function and workings.
Perhaps Bob’s approach of simply calling himself a “designer” is sufficient, though I understand the need people feel to qualify the term by prepending it with “web”, and perhaps adding “and developer” or something similar to convey that we actually build web sites as well as laying out the plans for them.
So, Keith, what’s it to be in future in the “About the Author” column? Are we sticking with “web designer and developer”?
Posted on July 1, 2004 01:50 AM | #
43. Robert Lofthouse said:
Web professional sounds good, one that I think Keith should stick with. However, if Keithy boy decides to have a kid (not sure if you do, or can) then putting a simple “designer” title on the birth certificate would be ok.
In response to Bob’s comments:
Fair enough, but most of those jobs go by that title anyways and always have done. Saying that you’re a “designer” or “developer” other than on a birth certificate or forms where haste is needed is too general. It would confuse people and in the end “designer of what” or “developer of what” would come up.
Web professional suits me, because that’s what I am. I design, develop and structure the web. I barely spend any time working with print media and all the graphics work I do is either art in my spare time or for a web project.
If I was hiring a graphic designer for a web project and they came up to me and said “i’m a designer”, my first question would be - “of what?”
There is a reason we prefix “software/print/web” onto the start of our titles.
The title “web professional” wouldn’t suit everyone, because there’s a lot of people working on the web that ARE solely designers/developers.
So, for those that do solely design on the web - use web designer. Those that solely do development on the web - use wev developer. Finally, those that do everything use web professional.
Posted on July 1, 2004 03:26 AM | #
44. Spoilt Victorian Child said:
As an accredited sexy person, this troubles me greatly. However, I can see three possible answers:
Posted on July 1, 2004 06:26 AM | #
45. Sean King said:
After all that discussion, Sally at the Daily Div has changed my mind.
Posted on July 1, 2004 09:14 PM | #
46. Robert Lofthouse said:
I agree, I love the title Web Professional. If you are in a similar position to Keith (like I am), then that’s the title I would recommend.
Posted on July 2, 2004 03:16 AM | #
47. ChrisR said:
Web Professional does sound good to my ears. It’s very general though. I’m still leaning towards User Experience Architect, or something along those lines, and the reason is that it’s starting to be used more and more from what I can see and I sense it emerging as a standard, so if that is the case, that’s going to be hard to fight. Another positive is that all of the “facets” of Web development seem to fall under that title. The downside as discussed is that there isn’t any mention of Web in the title. I’m wondering what we could learn from other young industries of the past and how the titles in those industries evolved.
Posted on July 2, 2004 11:21 AM | #
48. LazyJim said:
In response to heath weaver, comment 29…
In many other careers you apply to fill a position at some companies, when one of them employs you, whatever that position is called becomes your job title. You needn’t think about it again until you want to move to another employer, and then you may not want/need/have the same title, whatever it is you actually do.
A free-lancer (as a lot of web designers/developers are), your title is more important in getting you work.
In other words, some of you might just be worried about how to introduce yourselves at parties, whereas the rest of us are worried about potential clients not considering hiring us as they don’t know that we do what they need!
Posted on July 2, 2004 07:00 PM | #
49. LazyJim said:
As for actual titles…
First I wanted to repeat what someone said above: “I am anticipating your conclusion on this matter so I might find a title that separates me from a kid with a computer and a copy of FrontPage.”
That’s been on my mind from the very start. In addition many outsiders confuse ‘designer’ with ‘stylist’, ‘web designer’ with ‘graphic designer’ and ‘web developer’ with ‘programming geek who would be over-kill for our humble project’.
Then I was thinking about the title “Web Site Director” because we have the over all vision of web site projects and we do direct project toward success, we also act as (or are) the ‘creative director’ a lot of the time.
Designers direct the project from a state of need to a state of fulfillment, but then why not stick to the word ‘design’ as it is the correct title for that role. As the hero of these comments, Bob Baxely, says:
“For me, it’s got to be Designer. Nothing more, nothing less.
I am a Designer in the same way that my friends are Engineers or Architects or Scientists. And while I’m disappointed at the number of non-designers and hacks out there using the title, I’m not going to let them push me away from my association with the multi-century, grand tradition of DESIGN.”
I am a designer too, and while I’d like to do exactly as Bob says, but it’s difficult in real life when my job title is often what forms potential clients’ first impressions of me. A lot of people conjure up images of flamboyant stylists when they hear ‘designer’ or weedy geeks when they hear ‘web’ or ‘web developer’ - I don’t want to be associated with either image!
At the end of the day though, I’ll keep the Web Designer/Developer title. For all the reasons above, and because calling myself something else would proably just make me harder to find.
I might add the word ‘proffessional’ in front when ever I can though!
Posted on July 2, 2004 07:28 PM | #
Comments are now closed