Featured
Goodbye (Sort of)
Thanks for popping in. My apologies for the mess — font mayhem, layout hand-grenade, etc. — but you’ve caught me mid-move.
After a bit too much tinkering with this (no-longer-supported) theme, I’ve decided it’s time for a fresh start. A new house and a new information architecture. Seriously.
So no, this isn’t an “under construction” message — because you’re not meant to do that. It’s more of a polite “yes, I can see the burning skip fire too — thank you for noticing.”
Anyway, feel free to have a look around — just know that some of it may collapse if you click too hard.
Cheers.
P.S.
The address isn’t changing, and you can always send mail (and cash gifts) to jason@jh-01.com
IA 4 AI // Thought Experiments / 01

Earlier this month I asked ChapGPT:
[Some context: I’ve been trying to teach ChatGPT my Information Architecture Design framework for about the last 9 months. The aim is threefold: 1. Come to better understand these technologies by playing around with them, 2. By teaching it my IA theory, be forced to firm up the theory itself, and 3. Explore / experiment with potential applications of the two working together]
It replied in a somewhat measured tone “Yes – in theory”, and then in its most upbeat voice, throwing all caution to the wind, it continued, “Let me break down how”
I honestly can’t say if the response is profoundly insightful or total garbage, but either way, as an interactive thought experiment, I think there’s something to take out of it for anyone in our field.
Have a look:
www.jh-01.com/Downloads/IA_4_AI_Thought_Experiments_01.pdf
(Some definitions, descriptions and further reading about my IA Design work are provided at the end of the document)
UX South Africa Conference – 2025

Q and A at the end of my presentation
The slides for my talk, “Extending the Concept of Information Architecture in Design” presented at UXSA 2025, are now available.


Get the Slide Deck
(19 MB .pdf file. Sorry about that)
Notes about the slide deck:
+ It’s been slightly tidied up
+ There are references and a bibliography
+ Slides only, at this time
+ Watch this space for a video
– – –
Huge thanks to the UX South Africa organisers, especially Igy (aka Ighsaan Robinson), and of course all those who attended.
– – –
Credits:
Between the 20th of February and 20th of March 2025 I delivered three lectures as part of Dan Klyn’s IA course provided by the University of Michigan’s iSchool. This presentation was largely based on the first of those three lectures. That lecture is available on YouTube.
Slides 38 onwards to 52 are wholly new.
Edit Undo Interview
Back in August 2022, I was interviewed by Edit Undo: “a podcast about all things creative [where] co-hosts Alfi, and Stephanie chat to some fascinating people [like me] in the creative world about their learnings, adventures and their creative craft.”

We chatted for about an hour and a half about practice and discipline in Design, about information architecture (IA), addiction, Nietzsche, and sense- and meaning-making in IA, Design and in life. I’ve got to commend Stephanie de Beer and Alfi Oloo for being so casually good at what they do.
Some highlights:
04:12 – How Terence Fenn got me (back) into academia in 2009
29:54 – Information Architecture as Meaning-Making
40:29 – How socio-cultural meanings are sustained or transformed in and by design
48:38 – How meaning-in-life is eroded in addiction
A few thoughts on Edit Undo:
I like that although Edit Undo covers the creative arts in general, their individual points of departure appear to be digital design. Both have worked as UX designers. Steph still so, and Alfi started out in UX. But beyond the obvious, I struggle to put my finger on exactly what it was about that, that resonated with me…
Perhaps it was their modest charm in demonstrating an authentic curiosity towards the things said by someone from the same industry but a fair bit older. Or maybe it was their openness to new and alternative takes on things which the industry so frequently is disinterested in. For certain, the depth at which they wanted to understand things, over arriving at a hasty judgement of whether or not to agree, was remarkable. The two are great.
Credits:
Edit Undo came to hear about me while interviewing Terence Fenn a few weeks earlier for their show. Their discussion about the evolution of design from artistry to ethnography is really good.
Contribution to ‘Product’ at the FADA Gallery.

I was invited to share the outcomes of my dissertation at the FADA Gallery exhibition: ‘Product’, in April 2022. The gallery is housed at the University of Johannesburg in the Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture building.
From the invitation:
“An exhibition of work…from the departments of Multimedia and Industrial Design exploring the reframing of design and designerly engagement with the social, technological, and material worlds.”
I have prepared a making of – document (.pdf 11 MB) for the purposes of recording my process, the experience, the work produced for the show, and for sharing it with you.


2017 – 2021 (A Temperamental Journey)
“A ‘temperamental journey’ was the phrase used…to describe those strange runaways and adventures prompted by arrogance, rebellion or despair”
Hesse, Hermann.(1973) Autobiographical Writings. Jonathan Cape, London, pp. 52-53
The Lost Information Architecture
Last year I was unable to complete the chapter I was meant to contribute to the collection Advances in Information Architecture: The Academics / Practitioners Roundtable 2014–2019 (published earlier this year). This was partly because I lacked the resources to divide my brain between the book chapter and finishing my dissertation. I think I was also unable to commit to saying anything of great importance in the chapter until I was clear and confident in what I’d done for my Masters research study. In which case, why write the chapter?
Regardless, there was some writing I’d done for the chapter which I could share, so I put it online as an essay called Thoughts on Information Architecture as it Relates to Design: The Lost IA (DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14131.04642). Three significant contributions from the essay (amongst other things said) include:
One, that a designerly IA, associated largely with web design in the late 1990s, was ‘lost’ in the wake of what came to be the dominant conceptualisation of IA (related to digital design) being the Library and Information Science (LIS) IA of Rosenfeld and Morville’s Information Architecture for the World Wide Web (aka Polar Bear IA; aka Classical IA).
Two, that although Classical IA enjoys the benefits of loosely being considered a form of Design, it is not. By way of an argument, I map Classical IA back to Information Science using the M3 Model recommended by Flavia Lacerda and Mamede Lima-Marques (also see). I chose to use the M3 Model because it has served as the conceptual framework for discussing IA, in disciplinary terms, throughout the history of the Academics / Practitioners Roundtable workshops and in Advances in Information Architecture.
And three, the ‘lost IA’ is mapped to a diagrammatic representation (see below) of a description of composition and architectonic in relation to design objects provided by Nelson & Stolterman in The Design Way (2012). I deviated from continuing use of the M3 Model because in the form given, it is unable to capture what praxis means in Design or Design’s particular intellectual culture (as described by Nigel Cross in Designerly Ways of Knowing, 2006, p. 2), being distinct to that found in the sciences (and humanities).
Visualisation of Nelson and Stolterman’s discussion of ‘compositional wholes’ (The Design Way. 2012, p160)
About the diagram: (Quoting from the essay)
“…[T]he area in pink is that area where the Lost IA operated. IA deliverables such as sitemaps, task flows and wireframes represented the conceptualisation of substance (i.), that is content and functionality, and intrinsic ordering system (ii.), being the structure”.
“Utility…[is] not mentioned in the quote by Nelson and Stolterman…but warrants inclusion…because structure doesn’t actually exist in IA during the process of designing, accept [eish!] conceptually. Otherwise, articulation of structure is always retrospective. Structure is an emergent quality, inseparable from those things which both define it, through the negative, and through which it speaks, such as interface, content or technology.
And yet, without its constant consideration through the design process as the single and only compositional force, anything of experiential value cannot manifest. There is literally no aspect of digital design, or UX, which does not touch or is not touched by the compositional structure [iii.]. If there is, then the design has not been compositionally resolved.”
Abundance by Design
Presentation for UX South Africa, on November 4th, 2020.
Building upon a rethinking of complexity, a lack of appropriate design skills is identified as the primary limitation to ideating effective solutions in and for complexity. In this scenario, scarcity prevails. New theory and practice in information architecture is argued to provide such skills when conducted in design, as a form of design.
This is a radical shift in how IA is usually considered in UX, and beyond, and is long overdue. Because of the near pervasive lack of these skills, a variety of assumptions and myths have come to constrain the otherwise natural abundance to be found in acts of designing.
Despite the importance and need for these new skills, they require enactment with an awareness of a far more troubling form of scarcity. This is the artificial scarcity born of the commodification of the web over the last two decades which has vastly undermined the otherwise inherent abundance and potential of the technology.
In both cases, the young field of UX is challenged to question certain fundamental, and fundamentally flawed, beliefs regarding what is and is not possible by design.
View or download the presentation (3.25 meg .pdf)
Re: The Future of Information Architecture.
On the 17th of September 2019 the Information Architecture Institute (IAI) communicated the board’s decision to dissolve the organisation. The communication was entitled: 09/17/2019 – Decision – The future of the IAI and may be found, for now, at:
https://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=fc57fa0bc131f42aa1b0a2495&id=d0329ea976
The IAI was registered as a 501 c (6) nonprofit organization in the state of Michigan in the USA. Such entities are organised to support trade and commerce interests related to a profession or practice and are not-for-profit. It is important to note that the closing of the IAI is the closing of an entity which I believe many people, both within and beyond the practice, have come to consider as being representative of more than just trade and commerce related to the practice.
The dissolution of the Institute is by no means, nor should it imply, the dissolution of the practice (if that is even possible) or the field (which may be argued not to actually exist at this time or at least to be in its infancy). Nevertheless, a void now exists in a place that IA held in the world. Mature, transparent, representative and just consideration needs to be given to what could or should replace the IAI, if anything at all.
– – –
With all due respect to the founding mothers and fathers of the practice of Information Architecture as represented, by-and-large by the IA Institute, they happened upon something far greater in context, relevance, importance and meaning than had initially been conceived.
The recognition that both the theory and practices of multiple disciplines are more or less tacitly at play and in evidence in the practice of IA is gaining momentum within the IA community and is supported by research-led efforts taking place within academic, educational and applied spaces by an increasing number of people from around the world.
We are at an inflection point in the development of a practice which stands more to benefit by expanding its current framing than not, despite real evidence and cogent argumentation that the frame of the practice is in truth broader, regardless of the opinions of the practice’s community, their volume, reach or indeed their silence on the matter.
If we can rise above matters of community, there is a higher calling than the benefits to be gained by the practice.
The world is being swept forward uncontrollably into a future which in all likelihood will be heavily determined, in the main, by the values and interests of commerce and technology. IA, in its current framing, is contributing an extremely small part of what it could contribute to ensuring that our global, socio-technological futures are based in values and interests of a higher-order than those contained within commerce and technology. That is to say, human goodness. We are also at an inflection point in the development of humankind where commerce and technology, left to their own devices, could easily result in equivalent experiences as those which emerged from the last Industrial Revolution where some of the greatest atrocities in human history, including but not limited to colonisation, may be found.
A field can contain multiple types of practice based on multiple interpretations of the meaning of the field. In fact, it is not uncommon for multiple interpretations and practices to be at odds with one another within the same field. This adds credibility to a field, is a sign of its maturity and should be encouraged in the appropriate forums and formats with the appropriate protocols and controls.
– – –
Times such as these are precarious for young fields such as IA where power positions within the community of practice will inevitably be at play in the consideration of the future of the practice and field. Neither purposely hidden power agendas nor historical or cultural assumption should dictate future definitions of purpose, promise or value related to the practice of IA in the consideration of a replacement entity.
These issues should however not imply the need for consensus on one or an other epistemological (disciplinary, theoretical or philosophical) position or underpinning. The same applies to matters of praxiology related to practice, profession and even the important issues related to markets, trade, commerce and people’s livelihoods. On the contrary, and in an effort to mature the field, a form of entity, related entities or invented entity is required which can singularly contain a multiplicity of positions and the inclusion of new positions which will inevitably emerge if we are successful.
In other words, we require an entity for the field and not the practice.
– – –
As applied here, the term ‘field’ should be understood to include:
- Discipline, practice and education
- The community of the field of which the community of practice is a part
- Spaces of and for the storing and growing of the various forms of value created by the field, not limited to practice or practitioners, for the field and the world in general.
‘Field’ should be understood as representing the interests, needs and values of all stakeholders (internal and external to the field as well as those directly or indirectly impacted by the field) rather than its ‘shareholders’.
At the level implied herein, ‘field’ should pursue an authentic agenda of global, cultural and social inclusion without fear or favour towards any majority, if it is to possess any integrity what’s so ever. To be precise: the purpose, promise and values of the field should not be a matter of numbers or place but rather one of just and fair futures where the wellbeing of the overall ecosystem should take centre stage.
– – –
It is my firm belief that a hundred years from now IA will be understood to have been a defining field of the 21st Century for its contribution to the betterment of life on earth. The field as it stands today is a very long way off achieving this purpose, nevertheless, it yet remains within our ability.
End note
The reasons for the dissolution of the IA Institute still need to be understood both broadly and deeply, its lessons, meaning and cautions for the future documented for reasons of historical record and the value therein, for those who will live on while we have have passed on. This may require many years of fact finding and reflection as it calls for the larger creation of a record of the field as a whole. Regardless, both must be done but at this moment the needs of the future should take priority.

Hello. I'm Jason Hobbs, a designer, academic, teacher and speaker living mostly in Johannesburg, SA. This site is about my work and the things I do related to design. Have a read, 



