Design principles: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|design|}}
{{a|design|}}In {{Author|Don Norman}}’s terms<ref>{{Br|The Design of Everyday Things}}</ref> design is comprised of [[affordance]]s, [[signifier]]s, [[mapping]] and [[feedback]], a taxonomy of which the design of legal products seems utterly ignorant.
In {{Author|Don Norman}}’s terms<ref>{{Br|The Design of Everyday Things}}</ref> design is comprised of [[affordance]]s, [[signifier]]s, [[mapping]] and [[feedback]], a taxonomy of which the design of legal products seems utterly ignorant.
*[[Know your purpose]]
*[[Know your purpose]]
*[[Assume there will be accidents]]: The role of the risk manager is to know where the risks are concentrated, not to be satisfied there are no risks. If your [[RAG status]] has been uniformly green at every [[opco]] for the last ten years you should [[get your coat]]. Because either there ''is no'' [[risk]], so what are you even doing chairing an [[opco]], or you are flat-out delusional, so someone ''else'' is needed.   
*[[Assume there will be accidents]]: The role of the risk manager is to know where the risks are concentrated, not to be satisfied there are no risks. If your [[RAG status]] has been uniformly green at every [[opco]] for the last ten years you should [[get your coat]]. Because either there ''is no'' [[risk]], so what are you even doing chairing an [[opco]], or you are flat-out delusional, so someone ''else'' is needed.   

Revision as of 11:51, 8 March 2021

The design of organisations and products
Index: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

In Don Norman’s terms[1] design is comprised of affordances, signifiers, mapping and feedback, a taxonomy of which the design of legal products seems utterly ignorant.

Antifragile

See also

References