Shifting gear: a process to accessibility guidelines

SHIFTING GEAR
A process to accessibility
guidelines
Design for
Government,
Final report
Aalto University
May 2014
Sasha Kazantsev
Lilli M. Mäkelä,
Eeva-Maria Piiparinen
Bárbara Paz Rebolledo Bustamante
Nina Wester
Team Accessibility &
Communications

A process to accessibility guidelinesSHIFTING GEAR 6 June 2014 | Public 2

CONTENT
INTRODUCTION
Shifting Gear in a nutshell .................................................................................................................................... 3
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Stage O. Briefing ................................................................................................................................................... 4
Stage 1. Planning ................................................................................................................................................... 10
Stage 2. Piloting and prototyping .................................................................................................................. 12
Stage 3. System image ....................................................................................................................................... 17
Stage 4. Wrap up & concept presentation .................................................................................................. 20
BOTTOM LINE.
Possible future ..................................................................................................................................................... 21
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................................................................... 24
APPENDIX........................................................................................................................................................ 25


Current ministry guidelines are widely
misread on various stages of building
process. In the end final user may
get hurt and businesses might lose
money on unnecessary municipal
restrictions. To guarantee the new
guidelines to be as clear as possible
Challenge
ministry may focus on two simulta-
neous processes: development of the
guideline per se and reinforcing part-
nership network via the dialog with
the actors. There is a need of not only
ministry reaching out to the publics,
but general common understanding
in between process participants. The
actors will avoid fear of change, if it is
clear why the change is suggested.
This is important since to proceed
Current regulations &
guidelines
INTRODUCTION
Shifting Gear in a nutshell
The Ministry of the Environment guidelines on safety and accessibility of built environment
will be updated soon. What new could they bring in along the update? Shifting Gear is
a project aiming to assist The Ministry of the Environment in supplying guidelines
with material thatopens up the need behind the regulations. Provided with the ‘why’
in the regulations, planners will have a better chance to empathize with the final user.
This concept proposal focuses on changing the process of guideline development,
opening it up to more active citizen participation.
any projects need internal ministry
approval, and this approval is only
granted when support of the publics
is evident. Many of the problems of
current regulations are already well
known in within the Ministry and the
work on improving the situation is
going to take place. The idea is to
create guidelines that are elaborate
enough to be understood without a
need for further interpretation.
Regulations are provided along with
guidelines, that are meant to open up
the text of the law, without bonding
the reader with any particular details.
At the moment, regulations are
guidelines (R&G) are being devel-
oped inseparably and therefore both
end up in the same paper in solid text
without any visual or semantic differ-
ence. As a result many of the building
process stakeholders confuse guide-
lines for part of the law which create
tension to further work of the Ministry
with the topic. The potential of guide-
lines as a proactive tool that prevents
undesired construction fails is yet to
be realized. The process of guideline
development begins with obtaining
opinions of the publics about the
change in the certain guideline or
regulation and further moves on to
drafting a proposal. The draft is being
sent of for evaluation and after the
feedback is collected, another draft
is being put up. At the moment the
Ministry’s Communication depart-
ment organize workshops that
involve most active representatives of
various stakeholder groups. However
most of the communication on the
guideline process happens online via
email.
‘Shifting Gear’
concept
The project you find described below
is a concept of the possible commu-
nication strategy that allows The
Ministry of Environment to produce
valid guidelines independently from
regulation writing process. Proposal
embraces the idea of creating a long
term strategic partnership the wider
groups of actors. Particular attention
in the project was paid to quick
prototyping of solutions and rendering
systematic vision of the field. Tradi-
tional process of communication
that Ministry executes is missing
the link in between the government
and publics. The Ministry of Environ-
ment is seen as a main client in this
concept proposal. Information input
and output from the Ministry itself
were chosen as points of intervention
with the major intention of suggesting
an alternative to monologue style
of legislative affairs. Alongside with
this procedural change in within the
Ministry is being suggested.


DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
It happens seldom that projects dealing with such important phenomenons have an open
task. We were offered the topic of communication around the concept of accessibility.
Other than the direction we were not facing any restrictions and were particularly
encouraged to look into the field and define the need for the change on our own.
Our earliest brief was containing of the following bullet point listing, that has
later gained accents, but remained targeted towards the client.
First brief
Stage 0. Briefing
Scale of the change opportunities for the project include
the following directions:
• Comprehensive data exchange
• New communication tool
• Penetrative involvement of accessibility in the concept of building
planning. Making space for the work of regulations throughout
the building process
• Locate gatekeepers of law/need interpretation
Main target of the project
Renovation of Regulations & Guidelines
Team resource
10 weeks, 5 designers who work in the fields of media, graphic,
industrial, spacial and service design and an approximate
production budget of 150 €.
Client’s expectation of the end result
• Better Communication
• Differentiate regulations & guidelines
Problem areas:
• Lack of visual accessibility issues communication in various stages
of building process
• Communication is not considering use case and often is ignored
when people are stressed


Looking into the system of building
construction helped us identify the
key communication phases. What we
were to discover is that there was no
sufficient dialog in between the public
and the ministry. As well the returning
link from construction and planning
professionals with The Ministry was
at times obscure. This way commu-
nications coming from the ministry is
linear. It is a monologue. What if it is
a dialog, we wondered? On the other
hand, the product of the ministry are
reg and guidelines, that both today
Targeted brief
are being perceived as bonding. A
new set of guidelines is released
every 10 years today along with each
new set of regulations, which also
calls for the obvious process. What
if we could separate regulations and
guidelines on the creation process
level and break the link of percep-
tion? Could in this case the guide-
lines react on changes sooner and be
released more often?
1.
This is how the ministry impact is realized today.
First the regulations are done for construction
companies, they build the building and public
receives it as a final user.


After we saw these opportunities unfold (which we talk about further in this
chapter), we ended up with the two-folded project objective:
Working with the ministry we should aim to initiate separating making
processes of regulations and guidelines from each other and ensuring
a dialogue in between the process actors and the government.
2 .
3 .


Today the demand for accessible
dwelling in Finland is growing
rapidly. The population is getting
older and ensuring level of acces-
sibility in building stock is seen as
a task for the government. The goal
of The Ministry of Environment is to
create regulations that ensure a safe
built environment and provide equal
accessibility rights for all groups of
citizens.
Safety and accessibility regula-
tions are the current tool used by the
Ministry to make an impact on the
built environment. The nature of
regulations is reactive, meaning that
as any other law they are created
to be used by lawyers should the
misfortune happen for the law to be
broken. This dictates the way the
Project background
content of regulations is shaped. Law
must be flexible and regulations give
a lot of space for interpretation. The
law must be fair and clear. Regula-
tions derive from the law. Guidelines
give space for interpretation and add
up to the minimum level of accessi-
bility secured by legislation.
There are currently at least three
kinds of guideline interpretations that
are being regularly used by profes-
sionals: a Ministry version, a munici-
pality interpretation and a RT -kortti,
which is a commercially available
guideline providing minimal solutions
for requirements of safety and acces-
sibility.
4.
This is how the processes go in construction
now, with an image showing people included in
different stages and never meeting all together.
Our challenge here is to establish communication
among all the actors. The most beneficial part is
to open up the process of guideline development
for public participation.


5.
People participating in the process understand
the role of R&G differently. What you see here is
the regulations coming from ministry, municipality,
NGO’s and commercial producers.
Opportunity 1:
Establishing
dialogue
Before any development takes place
in the Ministry, opinions from the
publics and experts are collected. All
groups must be involved at this initial
process.
Once properly running dialog
system provides trust and support
of the wide audience. Transpar-
ently shared access to the dialog will
ensure that none of the interested
groups have been forgotten. Trans-
parency and early reach are as well
important to establish the hospitable
media context for the project. At the
moment connection in between the
construction companies and public
media is a lot stronger than the
Ministry has, therefore any misunder-
standing may end up being broad-
casted.
Asking people to look for their
own solutions lets them experi-
ence the practice that ministry goes
through and understand the topic
better. And when public wishes are
clearly displayed, the work of the
Ministry becomes a lot easier.
Opportunity 2:
Guideline
development
The processes of developing guide-
lines and regulations should split in
order to meet different categories of
readers. New guidelines are written
to facilitate the planners on their way
to obtaining the building permit from
the municipality. At this moment
municipalities has done a lot of work
interpreting ministry guidelines.
Incorporating this resource into the
single block of common guidelines
can create a great income and signifi-
cantly release financial tension on the
Ministry.
Opportunity 3:
Integration with
the traditional way
of working in
the ministry
The key contact people usually
become recognized as communi-
cation nodes rather naturally. More
of them are going to come evident
through the dialog activities. There
is a vast potential for the Ministry in
recognizing workshop and dialog
participants and partners, rather than
contributors. The knowledge and
executive resource shared among the
network is massive.
Involving traditional methods of
ministry work is important to be able
to reach maximum possible support.
Many participants in the support
network are more used to deal with
common planning tools (such as
post-it brainstorming sessions).
For some, in fact, even a written
feedback might be a challenge in
expressing the valid opinion. Due
to this workshop activities could be
emphasized and taken to another
level in within the Ministry.


Opportunity 4:
Finding compromise
through planned
process iterations
It is nearly impossible to reach the
absolute consensus on such compli-
cated topic as accessibility of build-
ings. A suitable compromise,
however, is always possible. It means
that the project should repeat the
process of collecting feedback few
times and constantly update publics
with the news. Amount of repetitions
largely depends on complexity of the
topic and can not be generalized.
Opportunity 5:
Widening up the
concept of accesibility
towards inclusion
In the beginning of the course, we
were encouraged to think about
mainstreaming accessibility, make it
an issue that touches all. We thought
about things such as love, all kinds
of wheels; mums with prams, people
with bikes, old people, wheelchair
users, people with heavy grocery
bags or not so much upper body
strenght etc. Could the surround-
ings/built environment actually be
more friendly and inviting to us all?
We played with words, such as love &
wheels, mennään, easy - iisi…
The outcome was a name for the
sticker campaign pilot: #IISIMENO
(fin. for ‘easy going’). It can be easily
applied for other areas and uses,
such as a neighbourhood e.g. iis
arabia, iisitoukola, iisikamppi, iisikallio
and so on. The phrasing refers to a
common act and objective rather
than pointing the obvious issues
right away.
Here is what Isto Vanhamäki has
written about the semiotics of the
words related to accessibility in his
paper Esteettömyys yhä tärkeämpää
luontomatkailun kehittämisessä /
Obstacle free movement is increas-
ingly important in developing
nature tourism (Find original text in
Appendix).
“In the Finnish language, the
word accessibility is often trans-
lated with esteettömyys. The literal
meaning of that word is ‘obstacle
free’. The word ‘accessibility’ is posi-
tive, because it has the promise of
access to something. Esteettömyys
on the other hand contains the word
este, obstacle that has a negative
meaning, though the word
refers to something positive. Another
possible word to be used in the
Finnish language is saavutettavuus
which is closer to accessibility. The
problem is that saavutettavuus can
also be understood as something
being for example technically acces-
sible for the user. With the word
esteettömyys one can better illustrate
the removal of barriers.
When accessibility is considered
in Nature tourism it is of paramount
importance to remember that acces-
sibility affects all nature lovers, not
just the ones sitting in a wheel-
chair, as one might easily think.
The concept of obstacle free move-
ment and accessibility are not being
used in Finnish research to describe
tourism that is suitable for all. There-
fore it is justified to use of the word
accessibility in alongside with the
term ‘matkailua kaikille’ which is the
translation of ‘tourism for all’.
- - -
‘Tourism for all’ has a more positive
tone than ‘obstacle free’. It does not
limit the concept to concern specific
groups. However, it is possible to see
that ‘obstacle free’ is used as a tool
to implement tourism for all, in which
case the use for the word is justified.
At the same time the negative conno-
tation of the ‘obstacle free’ concept is
less apparent and it’s obstacle
relieving effect emphasized.”


When we in the beginning moved to the planning stage we imagined the process of our
proposal to be linear with stages following one another in time. So we assumed that first
your reach for the better connection to the process stakeholders, and when this one is well
established you move on to the guideline implementation. This picture of the process was
yet to be broken in the future, however, it gave us a good rapid start into the conversation.
Stage 1. Planning
In our initial practical work we have
roughly followed the course struc-
ture: starting with system thinking
and later elaborating on it with the
research and data analysis. However
the approach we took to the project
was slightly reversed. As the actual
building process communication has
a lot of complications and very many
aspects, we have jumped into proto-
typing solutions as early as in the
problem definition stage. Trying to
cluster opportunities as they are seen
above, we have been isolating areas
of work on the go.
Plenty of project twists came
from the interviews we did early on
with various stakeholders. Each
group we have spoken to was adding
complication to the system, yet at the
same time narrowing our brief to the
crystal form.
Our research was divided in three
categories:
1. Regulations and guidelines
2. Feedback tools and processes
3. The Ministry’s inner processes
1. Regulations and guidelines
The interviews for this part were done
with Erja Väyrynen, Niina Kilpeläinen,
Martin Poganitsch and 3 other archi-
tects from Schauman Arkkitehdit. The
interviewees were given the task to
read out loud the regulation and
guideline: 2 The prevention of falling
and misstepping, and talk about
how they interpret it. They were also
asked to talk about how they use the
different design tools (Regulations
and guidelines, Municipal Guidelines,
RT-kortti and guides made by acces-
sibility activist) in their work.


2. Feedback tools and
processes
This part of the research was
conducted as semi-structured inter-
views that lasted about 40 minutes
per person. The people interviewed
for this category were Tarja Posti,
Heli Rantanen and Jaana Hyvärinen.
They were asked about the need and
use of feedback tools and the ulti-
mate purpose of interaction between
citizens and establishment. The inte
view also contained a part where a
map of Helsinki city feedback loops
was discussed and redefined.
5.
Regulation and guideline: 2 The prevention of
falling and misstepping.
6.
The interviewees were asked to talk about how
they use the different design rules and guidelines
in their work.
7.
This is the first draft of the feedback loop map. It
was used to initiate conversation, find loopholes in
the system, correct mistakes in our research and
to find the right people to connect with.
3. The Ministry’s inner
processes
We felt it was important to get more
familiar with The Ministry’s inner
processes. For that purpose we
invited Erja Väyrynen to join us in a
semi-structured interview followed
by a game interview. More about the
game interview in chapter 2. Piloting
and prototyping.


Stage 2. Piloting and
prototyping
Prototyping dialogue
methods
Inclusive dialogue with wide
audience: perception
comparison interviews
In order to see how different actors
approach regulations and guide-
lines we have picked the most
typical example and asked people to
read it aloud and explain what they
read. Predictably each reader has a
personal interpretation of the text,
however further comparison shows
the most obvious places for further
improvement. This method provides
a great opportunity to connect all the
actors in the building process around
one particular topic. If for example
these interviews are filmed, they
can have a great role in increasing
empathy between the different
interest groups. In this way ministry
workers can actually witness the kind
of reaction their work might call for.
In our work the interviews were also
used to review the process along
the way. Myths were debunked, the
links between different actors were
confirmed and new links were discov-
ered.
Making opinions and problematic visible to everyone and openly asking for possible solu-
tions resolves in deeper trust from the final users of both guidelines and built environment
itself. Opening up the process allows to build partnership with people seen as the nodes
to the communities. Partnership, rather than consultancy is important when guidelines
are shifting from only suggesting the minimal frame to actually opening the mindset of the
planner towards new concepts of the space usage.
Dialogue to publics: #IISIMENO
We tested our feedback tool with a
sticker campaign that was meant to
include and activate citizens. The
sticker campaign #iisimeno (easy
going) is a prototype of a communi-
cation tool that we used to test,how
citizen participation could be carried
out on a grass root level. It is aimed
at sustaining dialogue between
government and citizen, boosting
the inclusion of the publics in legis-
lative system. We had the privilege
7.
NO, CHANGE and YES stickers
8.
Poster
to test it with people from Loppukiri
and Merenpisara with encouraging
results. Loppukiri is a senior dwelling
association in Arabia, Helsinki and
Merenpisara is a MS dwelling asso-
ciation.
The idea in brief was to organize a
small a sticker campaign to promote
accessibility in the built environment
with stickers that had traffic light
color coding: Red for ‘no, this does
not work, because...’, Green for ‘yes,
this works, because...’ and Yellow for
‘change, here I would suggest...’


We explained the people of Loppukiri
and Merenpisara that we wanted to
hear their opinion about accessibility
and that this could be a new way to
communicate about this issue to the
government and municipality. We
moved around in the neighborhood
of Arabia and observed accessi-
bility spots related to moving around:
stairs, roads, ramps, doors, railings
and elevators. The participants could
mark a spot with the sticker and
together we learned how to publish a
photo of the sticker to social media,
using twitter and instagram. The data
generated during the workshop can
immediately be accessed online,
which allows discussion to grow over
it or be supported by it. Iisimeno can
be found at instagram.com/iisimeno.
During the 5 hours of doing the iisi-
meno sticker campaign, we had
about 15 people joining us, coming
and going at their own pace. The
participants marked 15 accessibility
spots. The aim was for each partici-
pant to mark one spot, the goal was
achieved.
Working with these seniors and
wheelchair users showed us that
there is a need and desire to be
heard. With a combination of modern
technology, virtual communities and
very traditional presence, there is
a lot to learn from these end users.
Iisimeno revealed a true need for a
wider range of channels to commu-
nicate about issues close to people’s
everyday lives. The sticker campaign
is a miniature of what can be accom-
plished with more resources if it
would be widened out to a larger
public.
The benefit of iisimeno is three
folded: designers and end-users
get to meet each other, the end users
get to voice out their opinions and
lastly the Ministry will get a look on
how end-users and designers work
together. The next step would be
for the Ministry to get involved in
the two-way communication plat-
form, whichever form it would take.
As a follow up to iisimeno, the results
will be shown to the participants in a
brochure, poster and presentation in
June 2014.
9.
IISIMENO in social media.


Talking inside the government
roadmap process visualisation
A metaphor of a roadmap can be
used within the ministry and munic-
ipalities for conversations about
development process. It is impor-
tant to let actors see that the process
of change has it’s reasons and also
an end. A blank roadmap similar to
those in the board games is an easily
understood metaphor; it embeds step
by step principles and the concept
of time, as well as it invites actors to
place themselves in particular spots
in the project plan and reflect on it.
A blank map can be filled during a
conversation and later transferred
into qualitative conclusions. The
bigger process diagram on the back
of this paper is largely a result of the
road map interview session with the
Ministry partner.
The development process was
studied using a game. In the game
the player moves on the gameboard
and explains what happens on every
step. The interviewer observes and
asks the player to elaborate when
needed. The idea of playing the game
is to find out what a game board
(i.e. governmental decision making
process) consist of in it’s entity. In the
course of the game the player will
establish who of the other birds and
pigs (i.e. actors in the process) will
join the player and how they will
contribute to and benefit from the
game. It is important to find out what
stages require which players to join
in and what their needs and agendas
are. The player is also asked to point
out the lava sections (i.e. threats and
risks) in the game. The interviewer
will try to discover the milestones
and rewards along the way towards
the finish line. Finally there is also
a finnish line with a compelling end
result of the game.
The function of this type of inter-
view is to dig deeper into the govern-
mental decision making process
and to establish milestones and a
compelling future that motivates all
actors. This process visualisation
method has it’s background in back-
casting. ‘Game interviewing’ can be
seen as a further development of
backcasting and something that was
first tested during this course. The
interview lasted 1.5 hours.
9.
We worked with Erja Väyrynen to get more insight
of the Ministry’s inner process. On the photo Erja
is being interviewed with the Roadmap
board.


Prototyping layout &
content update
9.
Cutting up the original regulations and guidelines
and taping them back together again. We did our
own R’n’G jam, rearranging the guideline layout
physically by cutting out and and placing back the
elements in the way that allows you to read easily.
This mock-up helped us to continue our work. It
gave us new material for the interviews and for the
graphic design to begin.
Legal Jam: Physical document layout redesign according to
the common readers’ logic
This method came from Legal Jam
organized by Stefania Passera,
who is a Doctoral Researcher in
Aalto University, basing her study on
the way lawyers use visual commu-
nication in their papers. It became
apparent that even during the 30min
session and with very limited under-
standing of the paper contact one
can suggest a lot more clear struc-
ture to the guideline, that makes the
point of its suggestive nature very
clear.
Storytelling in the guideline: making an accent on the reasons
behind the laws


In order to develop guideline for
better understanding you need to
consider reordering the layout and
content revision. Today guidelines
address what you do, how you do
it and do not mention why is it so.
To include the “why’s” (the actual
reasons) into the guideline, we
suggest tangible storytelling method.
Which will allow the professional
to decide themselves upon better
building solutions. We got the “why’s”
from dialog with professionals and
publics.
Final outcome
When we put all those proposals
together our first prototype of the
guideline was ready. New regulations
are going to be in a separate book,
and to accompany them this proto-
type can be used as a base for the
guideline, where each of the regula-
tion explanations is presented as an
individual paper card.


Stage 3. System image
Defining actors and connec-
tions: metaball metaphor
It was nearly impossible to present
our case using most traditional visual
mapping methods. Showing data
flow across the field using only the
arrows and icons was not an honest
solution. What was born out of a long
struggle is a metaball visual meta-
phor, that connects the stakeholders
on the diagram into a communication
cloud, in which link and distance of
the actor can have various degree of
being pronounced visually. It is not
extremely mathematically factual
in our examples, however it has a
great potential as a hybrid diagram
method.


Simultaneous processes: loop
of finding compromise
As we have already mentioned,
through the process interviews
with the government representatives
we have grown to realize, that in the
real scenarios all the tasks are being
processed simultaneously. In fact
the processes depend on your situ-
ation at work where you begin and
how you continue. The processes
we suggest are blending into what is
already working in the ministry, which
is workshops. Today the workshops
with all of the stakeholders are
happening to plan the ministry
papers. In order to reach a compro-
mise between all of the interested
parties, you need to repeat each of
the processes few times.


Finding compromise means getting
an agreement among the interested
parties about what do you take in
consideration from the data you
collected and where you apply it. In
our experience: Content from guide-
line reasons goes from #iisimeno,
layout suggestion come from the
perception comparison and the
roadmap method is connected to
planning. Note that the only thing
that iterates is a guideline not the law,
so we can release new guidelines
more frequently. Findingcompromise
might be a complex project in itself
and it can be developer further as a
specific physical place within the
ministry, where workshops and
communication takes place.


Stage 4. Wrap up & concept
presentation
Making hard to grasp
a concept on an art
poster
The deeper we have dived into the
system, the more complex our story
have become. At some point we have
settled for an idea that only providing
the ministry with a good looking
report and a slideshow will make not
enough input.
Our challenge was to leave The
Ministry of Environment with and
engaging and easy to follow manual
to our concept proposal, therefore
we have laid out and printed a fold-
able poster-manual. You may find it
attached as a pdf file to this report.


BOTTOM LINE.
New regulations &
guidelines
The regulations are going to be
provided separately in a compact
list, that will not be calling for any
ambiguity or misinterpretation. New
guidelines will be developed inde-
pendently via process specifically put
up for it. New guidelines will contain
regulation as a title, human-centered
stories explaining why exactly is this
regulation relevant and an example
on how can this regulation be put to
life to meet minimal requirements of
safety and accessibility.
Quality guideline is created as a
result of communication in between
all the stakeholders. Municipality
input is now not targeted on creating
own interpretation, but on working
with the Ministry on the common
paper instead. This allows construc-
tion businesses to gain permissions
easier across the land, using similar
decisions.
How things could be
The heart of the shift towards princi-
pally new guidelines is a procedural
alteration. The legislative process of
making regulation will remain tradi-
tional, whereas guideline develop-
ment goes through a significant
change. This is important in order to
facilitate planners in communicating
with a municipal Building Control
Department. New guidelines are the
bridge tool in between the munic-
ipality and the architect, clearly
defining the reasons behind the regu-
lations.
As the real life situations always
change and our environment must
reflect the pace of modern life, flex-
ible communication tools are needed
to track the changes in the society
and supply the guidelines with valid
examples. The aim here is to reach a
level of a dialog in relationship with
other partners and the public.
Possible future


Step by step development: each of the pilots work independently
9.
The ideas we have tested here can be imple-
mented in various places: this came up in our
expert interviews, as well as our own observa-
tions.
However we have been developing
the system as a holistic approach to
the problematic today, separate parts
of it could be as well implemented
as individual projects. One will inflect
the need to pull another, however
the emphasis might fall on a single
change, depending on the situation in
The Ministry of Environment.
FInding resources: connecting
on this project with municipali-
ties and other ministries
It became entirely apparent that The
Ministry of Environment has nearly
no financial or executive resource to
update its own processes soon and
fully. However the way out of the situ-
ation could be found in the problem
itself.
It is evident that the work on inter-
preting the regulation is happening in
every municipality of the country. It
is done by entire municipal offices as
well as by single activists and moder-
ators.
What if The Ministry could provide
a healthy application for those to do
it in collaboration? What if the dialog
tool, involving publics will be the
project for few ministries at the same
time?


Things to change next time
As time was of the essence in this
course, we did the research and
prototyping in a swift pace not
worrying that much about overlap-
ping or constraining ourselves to
proceed in a linear manner. This
gave us the freedom to absorb a
lot of ideas, information and influ-
ences from the lectures, research and
prototyping. It seemed to work quite
well in spite of the chaotic nature of
this approach!
If this exercise was to be repeated,
it would benefit from a meticulous
Place for a designer in
the process
There is always a place for an
improvement. But are we the best
people to make an improvement? It
became rather transparent to us, that
design practices have a very direct
and tangible application in the work
of the public sector. It is, however, as
Marco Steinberg was saying many
times, is a promise we as designers
must keep up to. Design tech-
niques were developed to facilitate
a lot less rigid processes. Govern-
mental routine has a lot of underwater
stones, that can make an unprepared
designer very uncomfortable with the
Follow up
The concept presented here took
shape within three weeks, which
makes optimistic about the future
of this approach, once Ministry
resources and dedication is put into it.
The actors who played an essential
part of this outcome are all part
of the new network that has emerged
from this course. We want to continue
working with them in one way or
another.
research plan alongside a crea-
tive set of tools and methods. It is
vital to save some some space in
time management and budget for
discovery and new innovations, in
order to receive results that go above
and beyond the original brief.
work. However what was an amazing
practice is the networking in within
the class and particularly within the
group. Day to day support of like-
wise minded people was important
to carry on through the stone walls of
legislative reality.
About DfG class
The class has encouraged students to
pursue careers in public design. It has
showed that it is possible to work as a
designer in this field, but that it is also
hard work. We have been introduced
to national and international actors
and it has opened a lot of new paths
to follow. Is it a path worth pursuing?
The need for more public design.
During this class there was a seminar
organized by the Ministry of Finance
and the need for more pracademics
was repeatedly brought up in relation
to the collaboration between operative
work, the academic research world
and governmental decision making.
The term ‘pracademic’ was intro-
duced to us in the seminar ‘Research
and knowledge management in the
development of the state administra-
tion’ by professor Geert Bouckaert,
The University of Leuven, Belgium.
In his lecture ‘The Dissemination of
Scientific
Knowledge in Reforming Public
Administration – an International
Perspective’, he spoke about the
importance of having people who
can mediate between academics
and practitioners; people who have
the skill to understand academic and
practical work.
The need for more knowledge in
HCD came also up in a lecture By
Maijaliisa Junnila from THL (National
Institute for Health and Welfare). The
lecture ‘Legislative proposal impact
assessment - Case SOTE reform
(Social welfare and health care reform)
’ (Speakers: Leading expert Maijal-
iisa Junnilainen, THL and Research
Professor Sakari Hänninen, THL)
brought up the problematics of
having too little resources devoted to
researching and tracking the reform
process. The Social welfare and
health care reform in Finland is and
will still be a hot topic for the years to
come. It is important to have a enough
resources available for monitoring,
analyzing and steering the reform.
THL would benefit from having a
team of pracademics helping it to
steer the reform and mapping out
the process.
Public design is the spot where
designers can make a contribution
to society working as professional
data processors and -visualizers,
intermediaries, HCD experts and
executives just to mention a few
positions. There is a real need for
designers who have the desire to
enter and be instrumental in societal
work.
SEMINAR DETAILS: 7.5.2014
Seminar: Tutkimus ja tiedolla
johtaminen valtionhallinnon kehittä-
misessä (Research and knowledge
management in the development
of the state administration). The
seminar was organized by Valtionva-
rainministeriö (Ministry of Finance).


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you!
This project was a journey full of support and insightful meetings. We would love to express the
deepest gratitude to the Seungho Lee, Hella Hernberg and Juha Kronqvist, who have made it
possible for us to meet and work together. The effort that they put into the Design for Government
class will reflect in the work of many of us.
We would also like to thank our partners on the project inside and outside the University,
who shared their time and expertise:
Erja Väyrynen, The Ministry of The Environment
Tarja Posti, Helsinki Public Works Department
Heli Rantanen, Helsinki City Executive Office
Niina Kilpeläinen, The Threshold Association Kynnys ry
All the people from Loppukiri and Merenpisara
Martin Poganitsch, Schauman Arkkitehdit
Leealaura Leskelä, Director of The Finnish Centre for Easy to Read
Jaana Hyvärinen, Aalto University School of Art and Design
Stefania Passera, Aalto University School of Art and Design (Legal Jam)
Antti Raike, Aalto University, Senior Advisor in accessibility, Student Services, Doctor of Arts
Esteve Pannetier, Guest Lecturer & Mentor at Aalto Design Factory
Maria Laisi, Aalto University School of Art and Design, MA student


APPENDIX
TITLE PAGE
(SIZE 680 x 480,
SIZE OF THE FOLDED HAND-OUT
170 x 240)
SHIFTING GEAR
A CASE STUDY
Ministry of Environment guidelines on safety and accessibility of built environment
will be updated soon. What new could they bring to the system? Shifting Gear is
project aiming to assist ministry in supplying guidelines with material that opens up
the need behind the regulations. Provided with the ‘why’s of regulations planners will
have a better chance to empathize final user. Concept proposal focuses on changing
the process of guidelines development, opening it up to active citizen participation.
Esteettömyyden
käsite
Suomen kielessä käytetään englan-
ninkielisestä accessibility-termistä
usein sanaa esteettömyys. Accessi-
bility on positiivinen sana, koska se
lupaa pääsyä jonnekin. Esteettömyys
puolestaan sisältää sanan este, joka
on negatiivinen vaikka käsitteellä
kokonaisuudessaan kuvataankin
positiivista sisältöä. Toinen mahdoll-
inen sana, jota esteettömyydestä
voisi suomeksi käyttää on saavutet-
tavuus. Saavutettavuudella voidaan
kuitenkin ymmärtää hyvin monen-
laisia asioita, kuten esimerkiksi, että
jokin asia on ylipäätään teknisesti
käyttäjän saavutettavissa. Sanalla
esteettömyys voidaankin paremmin
havainnollistaa esteiden poistamista.
Luontomatkailun esteettömyyttä
pohdittaessa on ensiarvoisen tärkeää
muistaa, että esteettömyys koskettaa
kaikkia luonnossa liikkujia, ei vain
pyörätuolissa istuvia, kuten helposti
ajatellaan. Käsitteitä esteettömyys
ja saavutettavuus ei ole suomenk-
ielisessä tutkimuksessa juurikaan
käytetty kuvaamaan kaikille sovel-
tuvaa matkailua. Näin ollen esteet-
tömyys-käsitteen rinnalla on
perusteltua käyttää matkailua kaikille
-termiä joka on käännös englannink-
ielisestä tourism for all ilmaisusta.
”Matkailua kaikille” on sävyltään
positiivisempi käsite kuin
esteettömyys, eikä se rajaa käsi-
teltävää asiaa vain erityisryhmiin.
Voitaisiinkin nähdä, että esteet-
tömyyttä käytetään kaikille sovel-
tuvan matkailun toteuttamisen
työkaluna, jolloin esteettömyys-käsit-
teen käyttö tässä tarkoituksessa on
perusteltua. Samalla esteetömyys-
käsitteen negatiivinen leima jää
enemmän taka-alalle ja esteitä
poistava vaikutus korostuu.
SOURCE:
Metlan työraportteja 52: 51–56 Isto
Vanhamäki: Esteettömyys yhä
tärkeämpää luontomatkailun kehit-
tämisessä
LINK TO PDF:
http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/working-
papers/2007/mwp052-06.pdf
SHIFTING-GEAR-
POSTER.PDF
A print quality pdf of the double-
side poster we have produced as
tangible outcome of the project can
be found together with this report. In
case the file is missing do not hesi-
tate to contact either of us via emails
provided and get hold of your digital
or paper copy.
CONTACT INFO
Team Accessibility &
Communications:
• Sasha Kazantsev,
mail@sashakzantsev.com
• Lilli M. Mäkelä,
lilli.m.makela@gmail.com
• Eeva-Maria Piiparinen,
eevamaria.piiparinen@gmail.com
• Bárbara Paz Rebolledo
Bustamante,
barbararebolledo@gmail.com
• Nina Wester,
nina.wester@gmail.com.
Ministry of Finance
Seminar
Seminar: Tutkimus ja tiedolla
johtaminen valtionhallinnon kehit-
tämisessä (Research and knowledge
management in the development of
the state administration). The seminar
was organized by Valtionvarainminis-
teriö (Ministry of Finance).
7.5.2014

Shifting gear: a process to accessibility guidelines

Shifting gear: a process to accessibility guidelines

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Shifting gear: a process to accessibility guidelines

Similar to Shifting gear: a process to accessibility guidelines (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Shifting gear: a process to accessibility guidelines