It is well known that there is often more money in
selling tech products to corporates than to individual
It is also often true that the buyers at corporations
are not the users. They are usually looking to buy a
product that satisfies a check-list of requirements.
The usable (but poorly designed) product that
satisfies this list will be given more or less equal
weight to a well-designed product. The poorly
designed product will win a deal, if marketed well
One may argue that productivity costs will make users
revolt. Not really. A usable product (but poorly
designed) will be accepted by such users, as it
fulfills the basic needs, plus a collective revolt is
hard to put together. Also, users don't know how
things could be improved.
Given that, high-tech companies are often likely to
give more importance to engineers than to interaction
designers. In such companies, it is more advisable to
combine the role of designer with product manager.
Such a designer is further strengthened if he/she has
a technical background.
Consumer products are a separate topic. Here,
interaction designers play a more important role.
In my opinion, a "pure" designer should stay clear of
non-consumer tech companies.
So...thoughts?...does a "pure" ID have a place in a
tech company that sells to the corporate market?