IA Summit 2005: Montreal Design Patterns for Enterprise UI Architectures | IA Summit 2005: Montreal Karl Mochel | Oracle Corporation |

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Approach Take an overview of three architectures Discuss issues in evolution of a Marketing application Comment on the evolution of enterprise information architecture

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Introduction Enterprise applications are transactional systems Two flavors: Self-service and Professional Can easily have hundreds of pages Processes are often convoluted and indeterminate

IA Summit 2005: Montreal PTA - Persistent Tab Architecture Objects: Complex, but with little external relationships Tasks: Tend to be object-centric Good for applications whose objects are naturally siloed

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Current State of the Industry

IA Summit 2005: Montreal TLA – Tabless Architecture Objects: Simple, Hub and Spoke Tasks: –Generally simple, without long processes that drill down several levels –Checklists Good for applications with short-term processes and internalized structures

IA Summit 2005: Montreal CTA – Contextual Tab Architecture Objects: Single primary object with relationships to many other objects Tasks: Complex and part of a larger process Good for complex applications that have a monolithic object with long-term processes and externalized structure

IA Summit 2005: Montreal The Then > values in the database Information architecture directly reflects objects in database Functionality is derived from direct actions against objects Views and actions are tactical

IA Summit 2005: Montreal A Detailed Marketing Example

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Structural Issues Structure confuses relationships of objects –Hierarchy of significant objects not apparent –Business processes not apparent –Attributes of every type of object are visible –Each tab aggregates every instance of each object type Campaigns ProgramsSchedules Events Plan > Implement > Execute > Track

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Real Estate Issues 1024 x 768

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Flow Issues Assumes important actions are tactical updates Requires steps to find and verify actions’ appropriateness

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Design Approaches -Remove chafe -Make decision-making accessible -Shift architectural weight off tabs into virtual structures -Normalize primary objects: Programs, Campaigns, Activities, Schedules -Move to contextual architecture

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Restructuring Marketing…Visually

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Architectural Shift OldNew

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Effect Programs, Campaigns, Schedules, and Events are templates User can make decisions about elements in comparison and in context Processes are reflected using tabs Navigation paths are perceived to be shorter Reduction in architectural weight Reduction in perceived page count

IA Summit 2005: Montreal The Now > data in context Information architecture reflects business processes Additional functionality has been added to evaluate and act on state of processes Strategic views with tactical actions

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Information Flow Decisions are enabled (darkest blue) Easy access to updates enabled Secondary emphasis on creating and evaluating relationships between objects (light blue)

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Issues With Current Architectures Lack of a holistic view into the state of the process –Current –Trends Strategic Planning and Editing still decoupled

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Design Approaches Design visualizations that enable planning and decision making Collapse architectural space around the visualization space Enable aggregate actions

IA Summit 2005: Montreal The Future > usable information Visualization provides views based on business decisions, architecture supports. Interactive visualization provides basis for evaluating and acting on relationships between processes Addition of strategic actions

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Knowledge Flow Strategic actions are now enabled (darkest blue) Updates happen in concert (light blue)

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Enabling Visualization

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Conclusion Enterprise UI architecture is still immature Keep in mind… –The users questions, not their tasks –Whether it is appropriate to split an application into multiple spaces –Different dimensions around which to structure the IA –Planning, decision making, and comparison activities can be well served by visualization –Look for an ontology of taxonomies that can provide a language to depict different applications spaces similarly but with the flexibility needed to present each spaces unique structures –Information architecture issues have many solutions

IA Summit 2005: Montreal Q & A Q&A