IFIP 2013: Capability Sensitive Design

1,110 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,110
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
577
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

IFIP 2013: Capability Sensitive Design

  1. 1. Towards Applications ofCapability Sensitive Design ofTechnologiesMira Slavova, Elmarie Venter, Gugulethu BaduzaSAP Mobile Empowerment, Pretoria, South AfricaIFIP 9.4, Ocho Rios, Jamaica19- 22 May 2013
  2. 2. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 2Background• Human development as apluralist phenomenon• Capability: freedom toachieve valuedfunctionings• ICT4D: technology ascapability extension(Prinsloo et al., 2012)
  3. 3. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 3CA use in ICT4D narratives• Sen (2004) identifies 3 narratives:• Description• CA captures existing information use and technology context in the form of a descriptiveexercise• Prediction• CA is used in order to design and plan ICT4D interventions suited to the capturedcontext• Evaluation• CA is used for evaluation of capability expansions achieved through introduction of newICTs
  4. 4. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 4Strengths and WeaknessesWeaknesses• (Heeks & Molla, 2009; Zheng & Stahl, 2011)• Technology as value-neutral resource.Simplistic view of technology.• Assumed individual agency. Reluctance totheorize how it may be restricted.• Limited use in practice and no consistentapproach for impact assessment• Applications require:• Interpretation• definition of valued aspects of freedom• understanding of the potential freedomsNOT chosen, as well as the actualfreedoms chosen.Strengths• Focus on individual differences• Understanding of choice:• realised functionings: actual use of ICTs• unrealised functionings:freedoms/constraints preventingcapability development• “Degrees of empowerment”• (Alsop & Heinsohn, 2005; Kleine et al., 2012)• dimensions of choice• Empowerment: intersection of agency(i.e. “the capacity to make meaningfulchoices”) and existing opportunitystructures
  5. 5. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 5Design Thinking Process• Innovation consultancies: IDEO, Intuit, etc.• d.school, Stanford University, CA• D-School, HPI, Potsdam, Germany
  6. 6. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 6Design Thinking Process(Thoring and Muller, 2011)
  7. 7. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 7Knowledge in Design Thinking(Thoring and Muller, 2011)
  8. 8. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 8POV Syntax[USER] needs to[USER NEED] because[SURPRISING INSIGHT]A teenage girl needs more nutritious food because vitamins are vital to goodhealth.A teenage girl with a bleak outlook needs to feel socially accepted when eatinghealthy food, because to her a social risk is more dangerous than a health risk.
  9. 9. Aligning Capability Approach and Design Thinking
  10. 10. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 10THEORIZING THE DESIGN PROCESSDesign Thinking is about the creation of, as well as adaptive use of a body-of-behaviours and values. This goal stands in sharp contrast to, while complimentaryto, the predominant disciplinary model based on the creation and validation of abody-of-knowledge. (Plattner et al., 2010)• as a body of research behaviours for innovation, DT can be aligned with thebody-of-knowledge derived through the CA• CA can serve as a useful framework for scoping out the problem space for thedesign of transformative ICTs.• DT operationalizes the translation of the problem space into the solution space• Insights captured via CA are transformed into well-defined ‘point of view’ problemstatements.• iterative alignment of both spaces
  11. 11. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 11Capability Sensitive DesignCA can serve:• as a framework for exploringthe socio-technical problemspace• a framework for exploring thesolution space, with asensitivity towards individuals’capabilities.(Thoring and Muller, 2011)
  12. 12. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 12Example: Shanti, a housewife from Hyderabad, India(Brown & Wyatt, 2010)Capabilities:• Walking access to near-by treatment plant• Can afford to pay 10 rupees for 5 gallons• Can carry 3 gallon containers on her head,rather than 5 gallon jerrycansConstraints:• Does not require 5 gallons of water every day• Considers it profligate to pay 10 rupees for 5gallons of water every dayFunctioning: continuously chooses to drinkuntreated waterPoV: Shanti needs a drinking water procurementsolution which will allow her not to be profligate,while staying within her budget and physi cal ability
  13. 13. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 13Example: Capability Sensitive Design ofEducation Services in SAEmpathize:Context andEducationResearchDefine:User + Needs+ InsightIdeate:IdeaGenerationand SelectionPrototype:Proof ofConceptTest:PilotPhase 1: May- Sept,2012Phase 2: Sept- Dec,2012Phase 3:Jan- Dec, 2013Design ThinkingCapability Approach(A.Sen)
  14. 14. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 14PHASE 1: Understand: Context Research May- Sept, 2012 Survey, FGDs Capability Approach (A. Sen) Culture/ Traditions Democracy Education Environment Health/ Nutrition Media Money matters Technology Work/ UnemploymentICTEDUGovernmentContextResearchersEducationalExpertsTechnologyExpertsTransform-ation ExpertsEducators& learnersCommunity
  15. 15. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 15PHASE 2: Empathize: Education Research Oct- Dec, 2012 15 schools Thabazimbi, Limpopo Wellington, Western Cape uMthwalume, KZN Randfontein, Gauteng Bushbuckridge, Mpumalanga Observe Interview (FDGs, expertinterviews)) Storytelling (learners,parents, teachers, schoolmanagement) Synthesis
  16. 16. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 16PHASE 3: Design Thinking: Technology Development Jan- Dec, 2013 Steps:Idea generation and selectionProof of conceptPilot
  17. 17. © 2012 SAP AG. All rights reserved. 17Design Thinking is just thinking?
  18. 18. Thank you!

×