Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Monimos Aalto Service Factory 22.10.2010

522

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
522
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 1 Co-designing a social media service for civic participation Case Monimos Oct 22, 2010 Teemu Ropponen // SOMUS-project Aalto University School of Science and Technology Department of Media Technology
  • 2. Case Monimos • Can social media help immigrants in participating in the society and in collaboration with public sector? • Shared case study of two research projects – Somus: Social media for citizens and public sector collaboration – EPACE: Exchanging good practices for the promotion of an active citizenship in the EU, (Ministry of Justice) • ...in collaboration with the network of multicultural associations in Helsinki capital area (Moniheli)
  • 3. 3 Background: Social media Social media Content Communities and networks Web 2.0 technologies Fun FreeEasy
  • 4. Three views to participation • Goal: Civic participation – deliberative process (public discussion), open and accessible to the public – involving citizens in processes that deal with their everyday life and environment • Process: Participatory design – users participate actively as members of the design team – integrates the knowledge of different stakeholders in a common design space • Result: Social media – Process, not just tools, content, technology (Erkkola 2008) – Produsage: open participation, fluid hierarchy, unfinished artefacts, common property (Bruns 2008)
  • 5. 5 Monimos design process • Community-driven participatory design • “Monimos team”: 10 immigrants, 2 Moniheli employees, EPACE and Somus researchers/developers • Working methods – 8 monthly workshops (face-to-face/online) – Open online collaboration: discussion + voting of service ideas, features, layout, service name
  • 6. 6 The Monimos project Needs, problems, ideas Workshops Service concept Owela discussion, Moniheli workshop Service pilot Online test, further development 2009 2010 Design and development w/ Monimos team Workshops + Owela Public service Continuous development
  • 7. Open co-design in http://owela.vtt.fi/immigrantmedia
  • 8. www.monimos.fi 8
  • 9. Monimos value proposition “Monimos is a virtual meeting place for internationally minded people and associations in Finland to enjoy diversity and promote active citizenship” 9
  • 10. Meaning that Monimos… • Is a positive meeting place for developing associational democracy through – Knowledge sharing and problem solving – Citizen participation and deliberation – Combining fun and utility • Networks the associations and people who share the same interests and helps empower them to act on important issues • Combines physical and online spaces as well as bottom- up/top-down approaches  Monimos is a vehicle for encouraging collective action 10
  • 11. 11 Issues/findings • Which roles of individuals are present in people’s decision-making? • Who owns the project? Researchers, participants, (funders)? • Democracy, or co-owning, can hinder visionary work • Decisions & design drivers need to be reminded often, to avoid repetitive discussions
  • 12. Combining Online & Face-to-face : Monimos Club yesterday 12
  • 13. Challenges & success factors • ”yet another website” • will it gain enough user base to fly • Integration/immigration hot subject?? • From talk to action?! • Communities tend to end up meeting F2F!  • Top-down vs. bottom-up • Can gov agencies follow and utilize the service • Ownership of the service & vision • Co-design has created a driving force – will it last? 13
  • 14. 14 Conclusions • Open process needs A LOT of meta-level communication and crystallization, as well as clear decision-making guidelines • Social media- & produsage-like process – already starting from the design phase – needs to be taken into account in tool, method and process selection & design • Community-driven design is difficult FOR ALL PARTIES, agreement on open process necessary
  • 15. 15 Thanks! • Questions? • We dare you to participate! – http://www.monimos.fi – http://somus.vtt.fi • Contact: – Teemu.Ropponen@tkk.fi, Pirjo.Nakki@vtt.fi

×