Daren Brabham Stakeholder Engagement Conference 2010

1,239 views

Published on

This presentation was given by Daren Brabham on March 3, 2010, as part of the Stakeholder Engagement 2010 virtual conference. The presentation was titled "Integrating Previously Uninvolved Stakeholders in an Online Public Participation Program: The Next Stop Design Case," and focused on preliminary findings from the first round of Next Stop Design (www.nextstopdesign.com).

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

Daren Brabham Stakeholder Engagement Conference 2010

  1. 1. Integrating Previously Uninvolved Stakeholders in an Online Public Participation Program The Next Stop Design Case Daren C. Brabham with Thomas W. Sanchez Keith Bartholomew
  2. 2. Outline <ul><li>The origins of crowdsourcing </li></ul><ul><li>Toward a typology of crowdsourcing </li></ul><ul><li>Crowdsourcing public participation in planning </li></ul><ul><li>A tour of Next Stop Design </li></ul><ul><li>Outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Future Plans </li></ul><ul><li>Q & A </li></ul>Me.
  3. 3. A Boy and His Shirts
  4. 4. A Struggle Over the Term <ul><li>Challenges “in the form of an open call” </li></ul><ul><li>“ An online, distributed problem solving and production model” </li></ul><ul><li>Like anything in Wired , “crowdsourcing” was an instant buzzword </li></ul><ul><li>Old wine in new bottles? </li></ul><ul><li>A bloated concept makes for unclear research </li></ul>
  5. 5. Toward a Typology <ul><li>Toward a typology of crowdsourcing approaches </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge Discovery </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Broadcast Search </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Peer-Vetted Creative Production </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distributed Human Intelligence Tasking </li></ul></ul><ul><li>And what about open source, commons-based peer production, distributed computing, etc.? </li></ul>
  6. 6. Knowledge Discovery <ul><li>Online communities challenged to uncover existing knowledge in the network </li></ul><ul><li>Amplify discovery capabilities of an organization with limited resources </li></ul><ul><li>Example: Peer-to-Patent </li></ul>
  7. 7. Knowledge Discovery
  8. 8. Knowledge Discovery <ul><li>Similar in spirit to what Yochai Benkler calls “commons-based peer production,” but not the same </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Commons-based peer production (e.g., Wikipedia) lacks a centralized set of tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A knowledge management and coordination process </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Broadcast Search <ul><li>Online communities challenged to find solutions to difficult problems </li></ul><ul><li>Casting a wide net finds the “lone gunman” – the genius able to solve the problem </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: InnoCentive, Goldcorp Challenge </li></ul>
  10. 10. Broadcast Search
  11. 11. Peer-Vetted Creative Production <ul><li>Online communities challenged to develop and choose solutions to ideation problems </li></ul><ul><li>Inviting a lot of input—diverse input—brings in many (different) ideas. And people “find the best stuff” </li></ul><ul><li>Best idea is the one the market will support </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: Threadless, user-generated ads </li></ul>
  12. 12. Peer-Vetted Creative Production
  13. 13. Peer-Vetted Creative Production
  14. 14. Distributed Human Intelligence Tasking <ul><li>Online communities tasked to perform simple tasks that computers cannot do well </li></ul><ul><li>Decomposing a problem/task requiring human intelligence into smaller pieces and distributing it is faster, better </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: Amazon Mechanical Turk, Subvert & Profit </li></ul>
  15. 15. Distributed Human Intelligence Tasking
  16. 16. Distributed Human Intelligence Tasking <ul><li>Similar to distributed computing projects like SETI@Home, Rosetta@Home, etc. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Distributed computing lacks human intelligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use of “spare cycles” is similar, though </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Bored at work? Make $0.03 clicking on things </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Complicates the idea of separate work, play, and “down” time </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Why Does All of This Work? <ul><li>Collective intelligence: we are smarter than me </li></ul><ul><li>Crowd wisdom </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Aggregating individual input is sometimes better than averaging ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The Web coordinates effort </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Speed, reach, asynchrony, anonymity, convergence </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Crowds are motivated </li></ul><ul><ul><li>money, reputation, portfolio building, enjoyment, friends </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Review: 4 Types, 4 Features <ul><li>4 types: knowledge discovery, broadcast search, peer-vetted creative production, distributed human intelligence tasking </li></ul><ul><li>4 core features: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hierarchical task management by an organization (the “crowdsourcer”) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Crowdsourcer understands motivations of “crowds” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Crowdsourcing leverages human intelligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Depends on the Web </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Urban Planning & Public Participation <ul><li>Urban planning central to many of today’s biggest social and environmental problems </li></ul><ul><li>Urban planning uses public participation programs </li></ul><ul><li>Traditional public participation methods have limitations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interpersonal dynamics, special interest groups, logistics, skewed demographics, one-way comm. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Purpose is similar to peer-vetted creative production (ideation, market support) </li></ul>
  20. 20. Next Stop Design <ul><li>Federal Transit Administration grant for “Innovations in Public Participation” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In cooperation with the Utah Transit Authority </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Peer-vetted creative production approach </li></ul><ul><li>Bus stop design contest </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Why bus stops? Common, complex, contained </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Next Stop Design
  22. 27. Variety of Designs
  23. 28. Winners <ul><li>1 st – “Folding Bus Stop” – 3.30 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Thessaloniki, Greece </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2 nd – “Stop to Move” – 3.05 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mumbai, India </li></ul></ul><ul><li>3 rd – “Smart Stop” – 2.89 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sioux Falls, South Dakota </li></ul></ul>
  24. 29. Final Breakdown <ul><li>29,855 visits </li></ul><ul><li>316,141 page views (10.6 pages/visit) </li></ul><ul><li>3,187 registered users </li></ul><ul><li>260 bus stop designs </li></ul><ul><li>11,058 votes cast </li></ul>
  25. 30. Final Breakdown <ul><li>Countries/territories visiting: 127 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Top: US, UK, India, Greece, Canada </li></ul></ul><ul><li>U.S. states visiting: 50, plus D.C. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Top: NY, CA, UT, TX, LA </li></ul></ul>
  26. 31. Final Breakdown <ul><li>Users were riders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>48% rode bus “more than once a week” or “every day” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>57% rode bus at least once a week </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Users were new to the process </li></ul><ul><ul><li>68.5% had never attended a public meeting </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Diverse ages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>13-85 years old </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>9% teens, 49% 20s, 21% 30s, 21% 40+ </li></ul></ul>
  27. 32. Outcomes <ul><li>Crowdsourcing has potential for public participation in urban planning. Model needs refinement. </li></ul><ul><li>Replicated some of the limitations of traditional public participation methods </li></ul><ul><li>Cheaters – 20 cheaters, 27.6% of votes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Accountability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Keep current score unknown </li></ul></ul>
  28. 33. Findings So Far <ul><li>Building online community is challenging </li></ul><ul><li>Motivations are complex </li></ul><ul><li>Amateur – Professional Tension </li></ul><ul><li>Global – Local Tension </li></ul>
  29. 34. Future Plans <ul><li>Continued interviews with participants </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Motivations for participation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perceptions of the project as effective for government </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How they found out about the site </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ Expert” panel review of the winners </li></ul><ul><li>Code common themes in designs </li></ul><ul><li>Phase 2 – design a plan, not a structure </li></ul><ul><li>Publish source code, create toolkit </li></ul>
  30. 35. Thank You <ul><li>Questions? </li></ul>

×