Info 202 F12

Question 1

As a retail complex responsible for organizing and selling physical resources-- groceries-- Andronico's employs several methods aimed at facilitating and shaping the "resource retrieval" process. A few of their organizational principles could be identified as useful for the customers. For example, by placing in the same aisle items that are used together, like pasta and pasta sauce, or "baking needs" and "flour & sugar", the store helps customers identify and retrieve resources they will probably need to purchase together. Another organizational principle that benefits customers involves placement based upon the size of items (an intrinsic physical property). Andronico's places bulk items near the exits and checkout counters, so customers don't have to carry large purchases very far. Also, by grouping together categories of foods, like produce, snacks, or pharmaceuticals, the store makes it easier for shoppers to find resources that would logically fall into these categories. 

Andronico's also employs organizational principles that benefit their own goals. For example, by placing items like candy, gum, and magazines near the checkout counters, the store captures impulse purchases. By placing milk at the back of the store, customers who are just stopping in to pick up milk will have to walk past all the other items on sale in order to complete their errand-- increasing chances that they might notice something else that they need. Both these are instances of organizing based on user behavioral patterns. The store also furthers its own interests by grouping items stored in similar packaging-- like cereal or canned goods. This way, the organization of physical objects becomes easier since the items are shaped similarly. Finally, Andronico's considers temperature needs in the placement of goods, by placing items like ice cream, dairy, and yogurt in the same aisle (which, I'm assuming, consists of refrigerated shelves). This prevents rapid deterioration of the products being organized, allowing the retailer ample time to sell them.

Question 2

Amazon's directory uses one very obvious principle for organization: the resources are divided by type of media (books, kindle, movies, and games are separate categories). There are also some categories based on the topic, or subject matter under which the resources fall, for example, home and garden, or sports and outdoors. Another principle employed in Amazon's directory is that items related to each other in terms of purpose or use: all items related to Kindle products (Kindle, Kindle accessories, and Kindle books for example) are under one category.

The order of the main categories (Amazon Cloud Drive, Kindle, Books, etc) and the subcategories within seem to follow an ambiguous organization scheme. The reason for their arrangement is not immediately clear, though I postulate that it could either be related to popularity of the subcategories or be specifically tailored to fit my history of accessing resources on Amazon. Also tailored to user centric organizational principles is the "your recent history" section, which displays specific resources that I have recently viewed while logged into my Amazon account. 

Question 3

There are multiple similarities in principles employed by Andronico's and Amazon to organize the "resources" they offer to customers. Both make use of behavioral (usage-based) patterns to organize some of their resources. As mentioned in questions one and two, Andronico's puts pasta and pasta sauce-- items typically used together-- in the same aisle while Amazon places Kindle, Kindle accessories, and Kindle books--also items typically used together-- under the same category. 

Also common in the two institutions' organizational principles is the use of subject matter organization. Resources that fall under "baby needs" are grouped into the same aisle, items categorized as "pet needs" are also displayed together. Similarly, Amazon groups their resources by subject matter: Resources related to home, garden, and tools are in one category, sports and outdoors is another category, and automotive and industrial a third. These resources are organized by the "subject" they are categorized under.

Despite the similarities, the fact is that Andronico's employs an organizational system for physical products, whereas Amazon is attempting to organize digital resources, some of which are digital records of physical resources. This intrinsic difference in the nature of the resources being organized gives rise to contrasting approaches in the two organizational systems. First and most obvious is the fact that digital resources can be classified in multiple categories at the same time; so, Amazon has the luxury of classifying MP3s under "MP3s and Cloud Player" as well as under "Movies, Music, and Downloads," which, incidentally, makes it easier for a variety of users to access the resources they are seeking. Depending on what the user is thinking at the time, and which connections his/her cognitive process creates, they will be able to access MP3s from two possible categories. In comparison, physical resources, specifically the various grocery items that Andronico's offer, cannot exist simultaneously on two separate shelves (categories), in which case the shopper is forced to track down an employee to point him/her in the right direction towards a desired resource.

One principle that I am grappling with is the idea of a logical hierarchy versus faceted classification. On one hand, one could argue that the Amazon directory we are considering sets up a logical hierarchy-- the user must first identify the category under which the resource you are seeking exists, then identify the sub-category, and so forth. However, the "search" feature allows the user to search for title, ISBN, author, etc, and thus facilitates a search experience that could be classified more accurately as faceted classification, in which various characteristics of a resource can be sought or evaluated in any order. 

Now let's apply this to Andronico's. On one hand, the physicality of the resources requires that a customer must first identify the section of the store, then the aisle, then the shelf, and then the item they are seeking. However, I could argue that once I identify an area from which I can visually scope out a range of items that fall under the category of my intended resource (let's say I'm looking for "cereal") I can then stand back and visually assess any number of characteristics of the resources in my viewing radius-- brand, name, calories, price, etc-- in any order I choose. So, I would argue that it is up for debate whether either of these institutions should be classified as solely having a logical hierarchy or faceted classification system of organization.

Finally, though the resources differ, as do the organizational systems, Amazon and Andronico's are both creating organizational systems based on one key goal: to connect customers with their goods with the purpose of making a profit. It is due to this that both institutions aim for effective organizational methods that make for easy and purposeful retrieval.

Question 4

As touched upon in earlier questions, we could call the principle of co-locating groceries that are used together and also the principle of grouping use-related products (e.g. Kindle and Kindle accessories) as usage-based organization. Second, the act of putting all types of produce together or all types of cereal in the same aisle is subject-based organization, which can also be seen in the categories on the Amazon directory. Third, one could compare the grouping of cold-storage items at Andronico's to the grouping of types of media (physical books vs. Kindle books) as organization based on intrinsic physical properties. Though Andronico's and Amazon have different resources, the broader organizational principles both employ are comparable.