Industry

Information Architecture

Client

Content Strategy

Information Architecture Lens

Information Architecture in Practice: The 8 Lenses

📌 Mark,"Information Architecture Lenses" refers to just eight cards, but in reality, the set contains 51 lenses organized into eight categories. The Information Architecture Lenses card deck, created by Dan Brown, is a tool to "question" the structure of a website or system. Each card or lens offers a perspective that helps reveal strengths, weaknesses, or risks that might be overlooked. The cards are grouped according to the evaluation goals. This tool provides a systematic way to assess and critique information architecture by "viewing the structure from multiple angles" rather than judging based on a single feeling or perspective. The entire set is divided into 8 groups as follows: 1. How to classify - The aspect of content categorisation looks at how we group content into different categories and how well the concepts are translated into categories. Are similar contents grouped in the same way, and does each menu have a clear purpose? 2. How to engage - The aspect of drawing users in, looking at how the structure builds confidence, a sense of ownership, and a safe space for users to participate. 3. How to explain - The aspect of explaining the structure. Consider how we will describe and communicate the structure to our colleagues, how difficult it is to create the structure, and what the relationship between the content is like. 4. How to flex - The aspect of flexibility and scalability. Consider how much the structure can expand or contract, whether it sufficiently covers the domain's scope, and if it can handle content that changes over time or seasons. 5. How to guide - User navigation perspective: How does the structure help users reach their goals? Does it convey context well? Is there a way out when users get lost? Does it help users discover new things? 6. How to include - Inclusivity and ethics perspective: Does the structure have barriers that make it inaccessible to certain groups? Who benefits the most, and is there any hidden bias? 7. How to manage - Long-term maintenance perspective. Consider how the structure will be maintained and preserved over time. This is the group that this work has chosen to focus on, which includes Content Types, Metadata Feasibility, Precedence, Slow Change, and Stability. 8. How to present - The aspect of display on the screen, considering how the structure is transformed into a user interface. Is it easy for users to scan for information? How clear are the labels in conveying meaning?

IA Lenses card deck by Dan Brown.

The key point is that the lens is a tool for "asking questions," not a checklist that needs to be fully answered.

Its goal is to prompt us to think from angles we might have overlooked. Therefore, it is not necessary to use every card, and we should select clear evidence instead of trying to fill every slot just to make it look complete. From our IA class by Lief Erickson, we got a case study in "How to Manage" group with Genetec, as a case study does not focus directly on aesthetics or ease of use, but rather on the question of how maintainable the structure is in the long term through five lenses: 1. Content Types 2. Metadata Feasibility 3. Precedence 4. Slow Change 5. Stability A clear example is the use of the Content Types lens on the Genetec TechDoc Hub, which reveals strengths such as the website using a variety of templates that are clear and purposeful, including Product Tiles, Feature Cards, and KBA/Security Updates, making each type of content predictable. However, the same lens also uncovers a significant weakness known as the "upside down hierarchy," where marketing content like Feature Cards is prominently displayed with videos and images, while more urgent Security Updates are reduced to plain text links. A direct recommendation is to use visual badges to elevate the visual importance of critical technical content. This example clearly reflects the value of the How to Manage group, as the issues revealed by the lens are not immediately visible to users but are structural problems that affect the long-term maintenance and reliability of the information. What to remember is that the analysis involves breaking down each lens into three parts: strengths that indicate what the structure does well, weaknesses that the lens reveals as risks or problems, and recommendations that directly address those weaknesses.