Value-sensitive design methodology
for information systems
Ton Monasso MSc
10 November 2008
Workshop on Philosophy and Engineering
London

Background
 Wide support for idea of value-laden ‘systems’
 But… description and design lack methodological support
 Framework from institutional economics may provide help
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
1

Background
 Central questions:
1. How useful is Groenewegen’s framework in the analysis
of and design for values for sociotechnical systems aimed
at the exchange of information through ICT systems in
the public domain?
2. In which directions can the framework be improved in the
context of designing for values?
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
2

Background
 Conclusion: the framework provides an interesting start, but
needs to be more fine-grained and could be extended with
‘patterns’ of recurring interactions
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
3

Contents
 Introduction of Groenewegen’s framework
 Design cycle: from design choices to values and back
 Groenewegen’s framework and the design cycle
 Case study: application onto simplified example
 Reflections on the framework
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
4

A first glimpse on Groenewegen’s framework (2005)
Informal institutions Technology
Formal institutions
Institutional arrangements
Interactions by actors
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
5

From design choices to values… and back…
• Iterative cycle
• Two starting points Design
choice
Cascading
Adjustment
effect
Outcome
Assessment
(values)
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
6

Groenewegen’s framework and the design cycle
Informal institutions Technology
Cascading
Formal institutions effects
Adjustments to
design choices
Institutional arrangements
Interactions by actors Outcomes
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
7

Case study (simplified example): situation
Police School Youth care
National Referral Index
for Children at Risk
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
8

Case study (simplified example): situation
Police School Youth care
National Referral Index
for Children at Risk
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
9

Design
choice
Cascading
Adjustment
effect
Outcome
Assessment
(values)
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
10

Case study: design choice
Informal institutions Technology
Goal-binding of data
Formal institutions
collection for police
Institutional arrangements
Interactions by actors
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
11

Design
choice
Cascading
Adjustment
effect
Outcome
Assessment
(values)
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
12

Case study: cascading effect
Informal institutions Technology
Formal institutions
Police does not
participate in risk Institutional arrangements
signalling system
Interactions by actors
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
13

Case study: cascading effect
Informal institutions Technology
Formal institutions
Institutional arrangements
Police information on
children at risk Interactions by actors
- not shared or
- shared informally
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
14

Design
choice
Cascading
Adjustment
effect
Outcome
Assessment
(values)
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
15

Case study: outcome
Value Remarks
Privacy (moral autonomy, absence of Disconnected domains/moral
information abuse) autonomy: a new start
Succesful development of children Lower likelihood of early intervention
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
16

Design
choice
Cascading
Adjustment
effect
Outcome
Assessment
(values)
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
17

Design
choice
Cascading
Adjustment
effect
Outcome
Assessment
(values)
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
18

Case study: adjustments
Informal institutions Technology
Risk signalling by
police officers allowed,
but needs to be logged
Formal institutions
in criminal file and the
offence needs to be
severe
Institutional arrangements
Interactions by actors
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
19

Case study: adjustments
Automatic logging
Informal institutions Technology
‘Business rules’ that
decide right to
exchange information
Formal institutions
Institutional arrangements
Interactions by actors
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
20

Did we answer our question? Usefulness
 How useful is Groenewegen’s framework in the analysis of
and design for values for sociotechnical systems aimed at
the exchange of information through ICT systems in the
public domain?
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
21

Did we answer our question? Recommendations
Pros
 Identification of relevant categories
 Layered thinking
 Relevance
Cons Recommendations
 Rigour  Identify ‘patterns’ of recurring
 Low explanatory power interactions and define general
 Technology seen as strategies, based on theory
homogeneous: not decomposed  Use the framework recursively
at an equal level  Detail technology
 Informal institutions can hardly be  Remove informal institutions or
used in design develop a distinction in
explanatory and design
frameworks
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
22

Questions and the search for answers
ton.monasso@capgemini.com
© 2008 Capgemini / Ton Monasso
23