Collective and cumulative - some strategies of everyday design-in-use

1,237 views

Published on

Inuse project seminar 16.05.2011

Published in: Design
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,237
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
759
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Collective and cumulative - some strategies of everyday design-in-use

  1. 1. Collective and cumulative, somestrategies of every day design-in- use Andrea Botero / Aalto University School of Art and Design / DOM
  2. 2. Design
  3. 3. "... design is not the creation ofdiscrete, intrinsically meaningfulobjects, but the cultural production ofnew forms of practice…"Suchman, L; Blomber, J; Orr E; Randall, T (1999) ReconstructingTechnologies as social practice in The American Behavioral Scientist,Vol43 No 3, pp 392.
  4. 4. PROCESS - ACTIVITY• Solution oriented: work through (in imagination) an intervention in the world• Use representations of the world to assess the ways in which the contemplated intervention would change the world and to negotiate a shared vision (stories, drawings, models, simulations, sketches, prototypes)• Iterate the process, often numerous times, before the design settles into some form• “look at the whole, pay attention to the details” (EM)
  5. 5. In-use(2 POV)
  6. 6. • Studying people and use situations to inform design process• Recognize that a variety of people, through their everyday activities, are already engaged in continuous and dynamic processes related to – learning, – creative appropriation, – domestication, – shaping of technology, etc That can be interesting from a design pov
  7. 7. Initial questions
  8. 8. – Who is really designing with whom and with what resources is this been achieved? (UCD, PD, )– What it is that is being designed? (or what is possible to design) (UX, IXD)– How design work dynamically shifts and drifts from some actors to others -including the artefacts themselves. (Agency, Teams )– How design decisions are allocated, delegated (or denied) amongst participants (Agency, collaboration, communication)– (Relationship of all these to broader discussion on “innovation”)
  9. 9. – Who is really designing with whom and with what resources is this been achieved? (UCD, PD, )– What it is that is being designed? (or what is possible to design) (UX, IXD)– How design work dynamically shifts and drifts from some actors to others -including the artefacts themselves. (Teams, agency) social production, collective action, Life projects, etc– (Fromdesign POV: logics, problems, possibilities?) How design decisions are allocated, delegated (or denied) amongst participants (Agency, collaboration, communication)– (Relationship of all these to broader discussion on “innovation”)
  10. 10. – Who is really designing with whom and with what resources is thislabour and its resulting Different divisions of been achieved? (UCD, PD, ) consequences?– What it is that is being designed? (or what is possible to design) (UX, IXD)– How design work dynamically shifts and drifts from some actors to others -including the artefacts themselves. (Teams, agency)– How design decisions are allocated, delegated (or denied) amongst participants (Agency, collaboration, communication)– (Relationship of all these to broader discussion on “innovation”)
  11. 11. TRENDS/ FADS• co-creation• crowdsourcing• open innovation• user innovation• (even) social innovationCLAIMS: new configurations in productive/creative activities (democratization)
  12. 12. In design?• UCD, PD, co-design, etc have been creating debates (and interventions) about new designer/ user relationships at least since the 70’s – Contributions to the understanding of the landscape available for current design practice are potentially relevant to many issues beyond;
  13. 13. However…Design research has been mostly concentrating on:
  14. 14. 1• Who should take part, when?ASSUMPTIONS: – design work is carried out largely by teams, and it is organized around a project – It is possible to find the perfect configuration for the team, you just need to try hard enough
  15. 15. 2• What roles suit everyone better, and which new ones should be tried? (specially designers)ASSUMPTIONS: – new roles are enough (change in attitude and few new techniques) – once we find the right method(s) exercising the right kind of role would be straightforward
  16. 16. 3• Product centricASSUMPTIONS: – Innovation as technical endeavor (practices?) – “Firms” as legitimate articulators / locus
  17. 17. • To much focus on WHO we are (Designer? User? Producer?) and less efforts in understanding WHAT is everybody doing and with what resulting consequences.• A lot of efforts concentrated in the fuzzy front end• risk of turning efforts into an issue of mere commodification of user involvement
  18. 18. Engeström, Y. (2008). From Teams to Knots: Studies ofCollaboration and Learning at Work (1st ed.). CambridgeUniversity Press.
  19. 19. Need better understanding• It is not enough to say that “everyone designs” but how? To what extent? What?• Dynamics of collective and collaborative endeavors (from a design POV), in contemporary conditions (firms/organizations? solo/teams/something else?)• The role and contribution of design activities (and not just of “designers” or “users”)
  20. 20. • Look before, after and to the sides of the concept design stage (fuzzy front end)• Take seriously design-in-use (identified as key component but remains largely under supported and under developed)
  21. 21. 2 cases• Both are areas where some examples of “users” initiate development (marginally)• Picture is more complex than producer-user and designer-user (government, civic sector, etc)• New media as component in re- configuring the “sector”
  22. 22. 1. A collective project of communal senior living based on neighborliness, self-help and open decision process (http://aktiviisetseniorit.fi).(ADIK Project – Emerging Digital Practices of Communities. TEKES)
  23. 23. -Articulation between several “projects”-Success of a failure-Choices, material maters (e.g Limits of CMS, no place forrelationships)
  24. 24. Scenarios“seeding”prototypebased onexistingcomponent /DW Beta
  25. 25. 2. Emerging urban forms of civic participation (activists, government, average citizen, etc). Sharing knowledge about the city(ICING Project Innovative cities for the next generation)
  26. 26. - role of digital technologies (location-based services) infacilitating citizen participation in issues related to theurban environment and in building new relationships to thecity administration- Issue reporting vs issue sharing- Active citizenship? (different actors imagine new forms ofcitizenship)
  27. 27. A UM Pointdocumentsquestionabledecisions ofsome fellowcitizens (UMv1.0 - mobileUI). A UM Topic gathering contributions for new skating park locations. The UI features a map view populated by UM Points (UM v 1.0)
  28. 28. • Interesting and crucial co-design opportunities happened in design-in-use (many opportunities for collaboration and collective action) – Cumulative (Design Space) – Collective (hybrid)
  29. 29. Design-in-use realities• Ad-hoc/mundane: does not necessarily involve reflection as sometimes it can be side project or a distraction from the real “project”• Can easily settle down for some solution, sometimes the first one, which addresses the concern enough• Full consideration of the consequences of design decisions, and the benefits that arise from exploring a design space more thoroughly are not by default present.• Not straightforward to document for sharing and learning, for collaboration (explicitly)
  30. 30. Design space (fairly common termused – by different disciplines-rarelydefined) – the space of possibilities for realizing a design, which extends beyond the concept design stage into the design- in-use activities of people • 1) a design space is always actively co-constructed and explored by multiple actors through their social interactions with and through technologies and • 2) the participating actors, resources, conditions and supporting strategies frame the design space available
  31. 31. Design Space, some examples
  32. 32. In design-in-use• Effectiveness/ quality / success of designs is highly dependant on the “design space” that a collective sees (imagine and/or available)• Design interventions affect the design space (expand or contract it)
  33. 33. • Recognize mundane everyday designs and the opportunities for collaboration that they entail• Weaving together of project at design time and projects at use time
  34. 34. KNOTWORKING• In-between infras (rehearse collective and cumulative “rapid prototyping”) this has implications for the capabilities of the actors involved to initiate innovations and understand the broader design spaces that are available to them• Negotiation, scaffolding and seeding strategies
  35. 35. Some implications for design (professionla9• Better ways to make the “design space” more visible/accessible to all involved• Identifying (and increasing) design capabilities; not only identifying needs (REF: SEN)• If there are new roles perhaps midwifing could be good new benchmark ;-)
  36. 36. graciasAndrea Boteroandrea.botero@aalto.fi

×