> This is a lightly-edited version of a short talk I gave at the IA Roundtable at the 2017 IA Summit in Vancouver, BC. ## Introduction At the IA Roundtable two years ago, in the heat of some discussion around defining the damn thing, I said: “At REI, IA is whatever I say it is.” I don’t know what prompted me to say that, but I do clearly recall saying it because I was immediately mortified by the arrogance of what I had said, and simultaneously relieved by the truth of it. After all, who else at REI is going to define IA but me? Nobody at REI but me has made an effort to understand it. Part of my work on a day to day basis is to discover the boundaries of IA, to articulate to my managers and my peers why what I do is different from UX or content strategy, and to carve out the work that must have information architecture principles applied consciously. Part of my job is defining my job. But why do I have to spend so much time on defining my role at my company? Why can’t I explain what I do simply and clearly? If I were a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker, I’d be able to easily define what I do. I’d be able to tell my mother or my dinner guests what I do without their eyes glazing over. Did you know there’s a class of things called “undecidable problems”? Turing’s “halting problem” is an example: given an input and a description of a software program, it’s impossible to know whether the program will stop eventually or will run forever. Is it possible that defining information architecture is an undecidable problem? ## Wittgenstein and words that are undefinable According to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations), in the book Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein argued that some words can never be defined. Or, rather, there are some words we are able to use successfully even without a clear definition. So let’s think about the word family, for example. A family is a group of people who are related by blood or marriage, unless they’re related by adoption, or they’re only related by choosing to be together. They live together, or maybe they don’t. They all know each other or they’ve just met or they’ve never met. My family is who I choose to be my family, and also people I didn’t choose. Maybe they’re not even human people. There is no fixed boundary for the concept of “family”, and yet I know who my family is. *My family is whoever I say it is*. ## Definitions of IA Okay, so what about the definition of information architecture? Here’s a definition from Dan Ramsden >“The intentional arrangement of things and their parts to make meaningful, resilient and useful places for experiences to happen in.” When I read this, my heart sings. Bang! Spot on. This is undoubtedly true. But is it meaningful to anyone who hasn’t studied IA? It doesn’t tell you anything about the materials, processes, medium, or result of IA. The definition could apply equally well to a car maker or a building architect or a UX designer as to an IA. Here, on the other hand, is the definition of a butcher: > One who slaughters and dresses animals for food or market. Damn… that’s a good damn definition. Clean. Simple. Good. In her article “[Selling IA](https://abbytheia.com/2014/08/07/selling-ia/), Abby Covert presents six definitions of IA, each tuned to a different audience. Let’s look at the first one, intended for “your cab driver, bartender, hotel bellhop or fellow human in an elevator or other short interaction >“Information Architectures are structures that we use to make sure that the information people need is easy to find and to understand. So when you use a website, a mobile application or go into a store and you can find what you need and everything makes sense, that means the information architecture is doing its job.” Yeah. Right on. This totally makes sense. At least, it does to me with my Masters in Information Management and some years as a practitioner. Because I think I understand what information is, and what an information structure is. But does my bartender understand that? My mom would be happy to hear that I’m making websites easier to use, but would she really understand what I do from this? It also makes sense that Abby lists five other definitions of IA in that article and that there’s a need for all of them. I’m not kidding; this is correct and essential and true. Abby nails it. Now, let’s look at the definition of a baker: >One that bakes bread, cakes, or pastries, especially commercially. Bread, cakes, pastries … damn… those are some simple, clear… delicious concepts. How does the Polar Bear book define IA? >1. The structural design of shared information environments >2. The synthesis of organization, labeling, search, and navigation systems within digital, physical, and cross-channel ecosystems >3. The art and science of shaping information products and experiences to support usability, findability, and understanding >4. An emerging discipline and community of practice focused on bringing principles of design and architecture to the digital landscape They have a four-part definition, followed by my favorite paragraph, maybe ever: >Were you expecting a single definition? Something short and sweet? A few words that succinctly capture the essence and expanse of the field of information architecture? Keep dreaming!” Bravo, gentlemen. Bravo. The Polar Bear book acknowledges the nearly impossible task of concocting a simple and clear definition of information architecture out of concepts that are inherently complex and fuzzy, and it spends many pages doing the essential work of explicating those fuzzy concepts. Just for contrast: >candlemaker: someone who makes candles. Son of a... that’s pretty damned short and sweet. ## Conclusion So, am I saying that these roundtables *`[`where we try to define IA `]`* are a waste of time? Of course not. Defining IA is a hard problem. It may be an impossible one. It needs this is kind of sustained effort at understanding. I'm tying to understand what I'm trying to get out of this process. I crave a simple definition of IA that I can use with my managers, my peers, and my friends and family. But maybe I'll never get one of those. How do I function, then? How do I tell people what I do and make sure they understand it? How do I explain IA to the dog? Is a definition even what I'm looking for? Is there something besides a definition that would work? The word “family” is undefinable, and yet we have no problem using and understanding the concept. We build our understanding of the word family over our years of using it and experiencing what family is. Maybe we need to be okay with smaller, more local and personal definitions of IA. I can define IA at REI because my definition can include the tangible materials and outcomes that are understood within the company. I build a shared understanding of of IA with my community. I wish I had a definition as simple and clear as that of a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker, but maybe I never will, and maybe I need to be okay with that. --- **Relates to**: [[information architecture|IA]] , [[Information Architecture Definitions]]