But… is it just me, or is a Unicorn just a horse with a horn
stuck to its head?
Surely a better comparison to draw would be to mythological
Sphinx, with the body of a lion, wings of a bird and head of a man? Also I
think there are some scales on there, somewhere. Anyway. My point is that a
true UX all-rounder is an amalgamation of many things in equal measure. They
are not just a UI Designer with some Axure experience. They are not a UX
Designer who knows a bit of HTML/CSS. They are not just a horse with a
horn.
I know what you will say - the point of the analogy is that
the Unicorn, like a multi-disciplinary designer, is hard to find. It’s elusive
nature means it camps out in the woods and only appears to those who know what
they’re looking for.
But, from my experience, these Unicorns (or Sphinxes) are
rearing their heads more and more frequently as designers are up-skilling and
taking on more responsibility on projects. I have personally noted an increase
in this type of profile over the last year or so.
Would you identify with the Unicorn, or the Sphinx? Which UX
creature are you?
Please contact me and let me know!
I would say that they are more like a Liger. They are real but rare and impressive when found!
ReplyDeleteA very amusing read Samantha!
I think we are seeing more and more people claiming to be UX Unicorns because UX Design has so many more functions than 5 or 10 years ago. Previously it was Web Design, so I think people are looking for a better way to classify the work the do and the knowledge they have gained. Technically the UX Unicorn should not exist, but be something you aim towards (uxunicorn.com).
ReplyDeleteHi Edwards, I like that... something to aim towards. Will check out that site!
DeleteI think of myself as more of a UX Narwhal, not as mythical but still has a horn...
ReplyDeleteHa ha ha! Oh dear. The Narwhal is a proud beast, ruler of the sea!
DeleteThis has more to do with companies wanting to create intellectual property for sfinancial peculation, therefore financially justifying 'development roles'. It's a direct result of the industrial revolution models of production carrying on into the communications revolution. You'll find that actual design or communications companies don't need to justify their business structures with industrial speculation models.
ReplyDeleteAs Richard Barbrook said, "They are attempting to recreate a techie priesthood, by reinventing Latin."
Code is not relevant to design, it gets in the way, and should be considered only after a good design has been found. We are no longer limited by our materials and processes.