Methods & Techniques in Participatory Design Tone Bratteteig

Transcription

1 Methods & Techniques in Participatory Design Tone Bratteteig Department of Informatics, University of Oslo Inf /9/2017

2 methods & techniques for design of IT application area what kind of systems is the method applicable for? perspective / world view e.g., PD guidelines techniques tools principles for organization Bratteteig et al 2012 Andersen et al

3 Participatory Design (PD) basics future users of technical solutions should have a say in the design of those solutions 1) providing knowledge that will improve the design 2) ease the introduction of the new technology 3) inmluence future working conditions / changes that will affect them having a say is more than having your voice heard the organization of the design process should facilitate user participation throughout the process emphasizing mutual learning (problem setting and solving) co-construction of the new solution in its real context 4

4 a tiny bit of history the roots: industrial democracy 1960s & -70s work environment s psycho-social aspects Human Factors =/= Taylor s scientimic management socio-technical systems (Mumford: ETHICS, Checkland: SSM) work environment protection (legislation) the automation of work skills (upskilling, deskilling) / autonomy & control a critical view: technology is not neutral alternative technological solutions Scandinavian approaches: collaboration with trade unions Kristen Nygaard 5

5 a tiny bit of history: PD as a critical position Results are all action carried out by the MWU*, centrally and locally, which on the basis of activities and insight gained within the project are aiming at giving the MWU and its members increased inmluence on the planning, control and data processing of the Mirms. (Nygaard & Bergo 1975: 7) * MWU = Iron and Metal Workers Union Kristen Nygaard 6

6 a tiny bit of history: talking about politics politics the political system: government, society, economy the activity through which people make, preserve, and emend the general rules under which they live (Heywood 2000) taking sides (stakeholders, interest groups) power: the ability to achieve a desired outcome in democracies: resolving conmlict (compromise, negotiation) 7

7 a tiny bit of history: talking about power power: the ability to achieve a desired outcome in democracies: resolving conmlict (compromise, negotiation) power over: getting a person to do something that s/he would otherwise not do power to: capacity, potential, ability Hanna Pitkin forms of power: - power/knowledge (Foucault) - authority from position - trust, loyalty - organizational structures - control of resources - agenda control - - non-decision making (Borum & Enderud) technology is not neutral (Marcuse, Foucault ++) do categories have politics? (Winograd / Suchman, Winner) sorting things out (Bowker& Star) 8

8 PD basics future users of technical solutions should have a say in the design of those solutions 1) providing knowledge that will improve the design 2) ease the introduction of the new technology 3) inmluence future working conditions / changes that will affect them having a say is more than having your voice heard the organization of the design process should facilitate user participation throughout the process emphasizing mutual learning (problem setting and solving) co-construction of the new solution in its real context 9

9 design use design task deliverable buy use use in activities throw away use context time 10

10 PD basics having a say having a voice having a say power mutual learning two-way learning developing technical imagination co-realization based on different expertise (speak their own language) intertwining analysis & design - model power - agenda control - problem setting - levels of in^luence - tacit knowledge - prototyping Bratteteig et al

11 why & how include users in design designers immerse in use context humancentred design participatory design user design & innovation users as inspiration user experience usercentred design user-driven design designers active inspiration investigation cooperation community users active Sampsa Hyysala: Aalto 12

12 !! planning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!inves'gate!the!!!!!problem!situa'on!!! see3move3see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!mutual!learning!!!!!test!&!evaluate!!!!!!!!!inves.gate!prac.ces!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! use-oriented design!!!!!!!!!problem!solving!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!problem!definion!!!!!materialize,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!iden5y!needs!&!!!!!!!concre.ze!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!wishes!!!!!!!!!!!!concre'ze!!!!!!!!!evalua'on!criteria!!!!!!!requirements!spec.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 13

13 STEPS Software Technology for Evolutionary Participatory Systems development Christiane Floyd et al 14

14 MUST Concepts Vision Phases Technology usage Standard system Etcetera Principles Coherent vision Genuine user participation First hand experience with users practices Anchoring visions Participatory Design Project Techniques and tools Observation Diagnostic mapping Dead Sea scrolls Hearing etcetra Project organisation Project establishment Strategic alignment Ethnographic analyses Visions development Keld Bødker, Finn Kensing, Jesper Simonsen 15

15 MUST Concepts Vision Phases Technology usage Standard system Etcetera Visions Principles Coherent vision Cooperative Users Genuine user participation Experiments and Practice First hand experience with Interventions users practices Anchoring visions Technology CESD Developers Practices Participatory Design Project Design Techniques and tools Observation Diagnostic mapping Dead Sea scrolls Hearing etcetra Project organisation Analysis Computer Project establishment Supported Supported Management Strategic alignment Work Ethnographic analyses Visions development Realisation Keld Bødker, Finn Kensing, Jesper Simonsen Project Bratteteig Assignment et al

16 dimensions of design of IT Andersen et al 1986 visions existing visions existing change analysis design evaluation planning realization regulation remlection performance management product process 17

17 tools & techniques document analysis interviews observations future workshop thinking aloud workshops (various kinds) scenarios cartographies prototypes brainstorming storyboard role play probes walk through Bratteteig et al

18 future workshop 2-day 1-day 1/2 day Phase schedule schedule schedule Preparation phase 1 h ½ h 1/2 h Designing the room, introducing the Theme and working method Critique phase 4 h 2 ½ h 1 h Creating a richer; common image Of the problematic situation Fantasy phase 6 h 2 h 1 ½ h Generating visions of an improved Situation without restrictions Realization phase 4 h 2 h 1 ½ h Bringing the visions down to earth and Developing a plan Follow-Up Phase Jungk & Müller,

19 A Participatory Design practice entails tools and techniques that combine telling, making and enacting. (Brandt et al 2012, p. 165) make participatory prototyping mock-ups paper prototypes probes means of exploring experience emotions ambiguous generative tools ambiguity and creativity tell enact telling about existing practices introducing change perspectives telling about needs and dreams balance between what is and what could be inspiration from theatre techniques scenarios performances with props, mock-ups & prototypes developing knowledge through practice 20

20 research approaches Kalleberg: four elements of research 1. asking 2. collecting 3. analyzing / theorizing 4. answering basically two types of questions I. descriptive / explanatory a. identify something b. documenting c. comparing d. explaining II. normative / evaluative a. constructive (what can X do to improve Y) b. variation (good & bad examples) c. intervention (Action Research) d. imagination (experiments) 21

21 research questions (cont) II. normative / evaluative a. constructive - what can X do to improve Y b. variation - good example - bad example c. intervention - Action Research d. imagination - experiments - what can IT do to improve situation - best practice (use of IT or design of IT) - problems (use of IT or design of IT) - solving a problem where IT is part of the solution - experimenting with the technology 22

22 Maja van der Velden, Margaret Sommervold research questions (cont) II. normative / evaluative a. constructive - what can X do to improve Y b. variation - good example - bad example c. intervention - Action Research d. imagination - experiments Suhas Joshi Espen Johnsen m.^l. - what can IT do to improve situation 23

23 Sturla Bakke Anita Woll - what can IT do to improve situation - best practice (use of IT or design of IT) - problems (use of IT or design of IT) 24

24 Karoline Stark Research questions (cont) II. - what can IT do to improve situation - best practice (use of IT or design of IT) - problems (use of IT or design of IT) - solving a problem where IT is part of the solution - experimenting with the technology 25

25 UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Research questions (cont) Designing for Intellectual Disability Combining User-Centered Design and Research through Design - what can IT Peter Havgar Peter Havgar Design, Use, Interaction at the Department of informatics solving a problem where IT is part of the solution - experimenting with the technology 26

26 ''' '''' 27 the project solving a problem where IT is part of the solution 27 experimenting with the technology

27 ! Suhas Joshi - experimenting with the technology 28

28 Doverse"elserD! DDD Tone!Bratteteig,!inf1510:!18.!mars!2013! - experimenting with the technology 29

29 - experimenting with the technology 30

30 but PD is also research on design & making Frayling: research on making as research for, by and through design where 1) research for design refers to research about design processes, how they are carried out and what are their results 2) research by design refers to making an artifact where the thinking is embodied in the artifact 3) research through design refers to research into materials and forms, exploring possibilities PD can include all three types of research 31

31 types of research in design & making Frayling: research on making as research for, by and through design where 1) research for design refers to research about design processes, how they are carried out and what are their results - study 2) research design practices by design refers to describe making an artifact - study where use practices the thinking is embodied & analyze in the artifact 3) research through design refers good/bad to research examples into materials and forms, exploring possibilities 32

32 types of research in design & making Frayling: research on making as research for, by and through design where 2) research by design refers to making an artifact where the thinking is embodied in the artifact - implementing 3) research through an idea design refers to research into - materializing materials a concept and forms, / an exploring idea possibilities constructing & imagining questions + intervention 33

33 types of research in design & making Frayling: research on making as research for, by and through design where 3) research through design refers to research into materials and forms, exploring possibilities - expand the idea space - stretch the material imagination questions + in construction & intervention 34

34 The role of the artifact in the research research for, by and through design 1) research for design - study design practices - study use practices 2) research by design - implementing an idea - materializing a concept / an idea 3) research through design - expand the idea space - stretch the material design - function & form - concept & materialization 35

35 Design as research research in design two hats: research: produce knowledge many of the same activities design: produce artifacts the same activity, two hats design as intervention solve a real problem with the (future) users making is in their context part of design as imagination asking & explore possible futures answering develop technology critique on the shop Mloor 36

36 Design research be clear & remlect relative to the Mield Zimmerman et al: design research implies designing but design is not always research. Research has to be process with a certain degree of systematic rigor, have an aim and be well documented result in an invention: it should produce a novel result that advances the Mield be of relevance to the Mield rather than be valid: it should move the Mield towards a preferred state be extensible so that others can build on it 37