Why Seeing is More Important Than Looking.

One of the easiest information design processes to follow, for me, has been Dan Roam's method. It seems that Roam wholeheartedly believes that his <6><6> Rule coupled with his SQVID is all anyone needs to produce an effective design that is clear, concise, and sparks new ideas. In The Back of the Napkin, Roam goes over how the whole process is really just four different steps: Look, See, Imagine, and Show. Of course these steps have many moving parts underneath to make the method work. It all has to work together to be effective, but if I had to choose only one step to highlight as the most important then that would have to the See[ing] step.

But aren't "looking" and "seeing" the same? My thoughts exactly. But Roam makes a clear and important distinction between the two: "looking is about collecting the raw visual information ... seeing is about selecting what's important" (67). This step of seeing is something that we subconsciously do everyday. Our surroundings offer so much stimulation that in order to not become paralyzed with indecision, our brains filter out what it deems to be unnecessary. In reality, there is a lot we never see, but this is also what allows us to make sense of the world around us.

Roam's 6 Ws breakdown how we actually see, the 6 Ws being: Who/What?, How many?, Where?, When?, How?, and Why? Once we answer these questions, we can be confident in our mental image of the client, the goal, and possible solutions. But what really makes this step so crucial is the following: since this step is the active process of filtering out irrelevant info, and because what is "irrelevant" can change, this means that we can continually update what we see. That is why Roam's illustration for the process has an arrow pointing back from SEE to LOOK. After we select the important info, we can look at it again and see if there is something that is missing or not.

If I had to edit Roam's process I think I would add an arrow that link SHOW with LOOK, and include a bubble that says "INPUT." This would be the step that follows someone showing their visual to someone else, and reflecting on the input that they give. I know that Roam acknowledges that the process is usually very circular, with SHOW normally leading back to LOOK, this seems to be talking about the person who made the visual. I want to make a distinct step to allow for outside input which then would allow for the return to the LOOK step to be based on outside information.

A scenario where this could be used is if I was an employee at a company at a growing that is struggling to keep up with its own growth. If I were tasked with finding a way a solution and then presenting it to my superiors, my first step would be to employ Roam's 6 Ws. I would get a clear image of who our customers are, What product we are providing, How much of this we are producing, Where do all the employees lie in the corporate hierarchy, When can we expect to match the pace of the growth, How can we improve our business model to match the growth, and Why is it ultimately necessary to change our current model? Once I have all of this information, I could then tailor my visual(s) to the executives based on their preference (are they all about the numbers or more big-picture people?) 

Works Cited

Roam, Dan. The Back of the Napkin: Expanded Edition. Penguin, 2009.