Transforming Contexts: UC DAAP talk, May 8, 2009
•
15 likes•1,341 views
Design Research - Techniques for Transforming the Context. While the processes and perspectives collectively referred to as “design thinking” have evolved progressively in the last 10 years, research methodology has not demonstrably changed in the same period. Design research has continued to add new methods to its roster of adopted tools, but do methods and tools collectively contribute to a new whole greater than the sum of the methods? We can observe a movement toward design contexts for organizational and social setting, which have been framed as Design 3.0 and now Design 4.0, by NextD. One way to understand the difference in design applications is by reconsidering the way we understand and make sense of design opportunities in this perspective. What are the appropriate research methodologies that account for observations about the targets of Design 3.0? These might include the larger system within which a service is conceived, the organizational context, social systems with multiple stakeholders, large-scale information ecologies with multiple emergent participants. We continue to study pieces of the problem, with user research, ethnography, participatory design research, smart sampling, trend analysis. But why have we not adopted methods from other disciplines that also contribute within the systems we intend to transform? Peter will present models and perspectives relating research methods and sensemaking approaches that bring the power of contextual understanding and collaborative problem solving to these organizational and social frames of design.
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (8)
Similar to Transforming Contexts: UC DAAP talk, May 8, 2009
Similar to Transforming Contexts: UC DAAP talk, May 8, 2009 (20)
More from Peter Jones
More from Peter Jones (19)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Transforming Contexts: UC DAAP talk, May 8, 2009
- 1. Design Research for large-scale sensemaking Transforming the Context. Peter Jones, PH.D. Redesign Research designdialogues.com
- 2. DESIGN THINKING HAS EVOLVED IN JUST 10 YEARS FROM things TO experiences TO transformations
- 3. DESIGN RESEARCH has largely been missing from DESIGN THINKING
- 4. OBJECT OF DESIGN RESEARCH Understand the human, social, activity, technological & cognitive factors in a domain we intend to design for.
- 5. WE ARE TALKING IN NEW WAYS CREATING A NEW LANGUAGE FOR DESIGN & TRANSFORMATION.
- 10. WHAT DO WE REALLY MEAN BY transformation ?
- 11. Is this what we mean?
- 12. Is this what we mean? Greeks & Turks in Cyprus healing their 50 year old dividing line
- 13. Is this what we mean? Obama campaign’s radically effective social media strategy
- 15. TRANSFORMATION Transforma*on occurs in the world as an outcome of projects we can control and events we cannot. We only set the stage and hope the play takes over. & “MATTERS OF CONCERN” Philosopher Bruno Latour suggests a change of design focus from “matters of fact” to “matters of concern.”
- 16. MATTERS OF CONCERN Transforma*on addresses the need for profound inten*onal change created by and for: Organiza*ons & their workforces Social problems & the communi*es impacted by them Infrastructures & communi*es Systems & ci*zens concerned with them Environments & ecosystems
- 17. HOW DO WE DESIGN & RESEARCH FOR transforma)on ?
- 18. DESIGN RESEARCH LAGS DESIGN. It always does. Yes, but what about … The rise of ethnography in design ? Mixed methods in user experience? Blending of field & lab methods? IDEO, Maya, nForm – Method cards?
- 20. THESE METHODS ALL STILL ADDRESS FROM things TO experiences. NOT transforma)ons
- 21. WHY IS CONTEXT CRITICAL? In transformaSon, the risks are extremely high if we intervene (DESIGN) without understanding the domain, the situaSon, the world being designed for. Sensemaking Making differences
- 22. Where is context? INSTRUMENTAL CONTEXT 22
- 23. What we “see,” What we decide, How we validate knowledge, Almost entirely dependent on contexts.
- 24. Questions by context How do I make sense of this field? Where are the next opportuni*es? What are the unexpected challenges? Who is emerging as new compe**on? How do I make sense of this organizaSon? How do we enhance performance? Are we aligned to strategy — or not? What can we do MUCH beSer here? How? How do I make sense of this process? What new ideas are innova*ve? What can we learn from the whole ac*vity? How do people collaborate here? How do I make sense of this project? How can you help me achieve? How are my aspira*ons met in life? What are the gaps and bridges to my goals? How do I make sense of this thing? How do I interact with this thing? What other tools do I need? How much *me do I have before I leave? 24
- 26. Complexity by context. TransformaSonal Change MulS‐organizaSonal complexity Strategic CooperaSon Methods must Months – Years duraSon suffice the variety in a context to afford Leading and Belonging understanding. Complexity NavigaSon MulSdisciplinary CollaboraSon Weeks – Months duraSon PracSces Professional development Learning and Engagement Week – Month duraSon Work AcSvity Learning & Doing Tasks Decisions and Risks Day – Week duraSon SituaSonal Interpersonal Immediate duraSon 26
- 27. Methods are merely reflections of our perspective on inquiry. They are choices about how we plan to observe & communicate.
- 28. Methods by context. TransformaSonal Systemic Change MulS‐organizaSonal complexity Strategic CooperaSon I Months – Years duraSon Methods by OrganizaSonal Change context Complexity NavigaSon MulSdisciplinary CollaboraSon Weeks – Months duraSon O PracSces Professional development Learning and Engagement Week – Month duraSon Work AcSvity Learning & Doing Tasks Decisions and Risks W Day – Week duraSon Human Centered Research Interpersonal H Immediate duraSon 28
- 29. So how might we scale Thinking Observing Designing Between contexts ?
- 30. Consider the context of design practice. NextD D1.0 D2.0 D3.0 D4.0
- 31. Copyright 2009
- 32. Copyright 2009
- 33. 33 Copyright 2009
- 34. Copyright 2009
- 35. What does this mean? How do we adapt designing? How do we adapt design research? Understand Implement Problem & Sustain Formulate SoluSon
- 36. Sensemaking Changemaking “Strange” making Sensemaking D1 D2 D3 D4 OBJECTS PRODUCTS/SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS PROBLEM SYSTEMS Increased complexity requires that more of the design engagement is spent sensemaking Cannot design or act unSl we understand what dynamic systems we’re changing Tools for sensemaking differ as problem complexity increases: Ashby’s Law of Requisite Variety: Variety of the transforming system must match the variety of possible condi*ons of the changed system.
- 37. D3 and D4 are Wicked Problems Sensemaking Changemaking “Strange” making Sensemaking D1 D2 D3 D4 OBJECTS PRODUCTS/SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS PROBLEM SYSTEMS Wicked Problems (Rijel and Webber, 1973) are ill‐defined, evolving, mulS‐factored situaSons There is no definite formula*on of a wicked problem. Wicked problems have no stopping rules (you don’t know when you’re done). There is no immediate and no ul*mate test of a solu*on to a wicked problem. Wicked problems do not have an enumerable set of poten*al solu*ons. Every wicked problem is essen*ally unique. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another [wicked] problem.
- 38. By now it should be no surprise that we need new ways of sensemaking. We need contextual methods & ways of creating knowledge … For design.
- 40. Where do we locate healthcare? CONTEXT of SERVICE 40
- 41. How people make sense. IdenSty Profession, Roles, Individual differences, Pre‐understanding, Membership, Social networks Making Sense of their Situa)on What’s next? Experience Bridge to goals Cogni*on Goals Emo*on Aspira*on Desire Outcomes Percep*on Learning Goals Help Sensa*on Decisions Values Constraints & gaps Understanding What’s really important to our Cultural belonging customers? Past horizon, Culture, Tradi*ons, Na*onality, Values, Societal norms Human sensemaker Making sense of our situaSon
- 42. D1.0 We’ve all heard about EMRs & the millions they will save on care $. VA’s VistA system is free, to any health provider in the world. This is how it looks at a VA clinic.
- 43. Today’s EMR systems are so bad … D1.0 Good D1.0 only would make a huge difference. “Though nobody can give me the specifics, it is rumored that our contract with Epic (and all EMR vendors) includes language forbidding screen sharing. I honestly think they do this to protect what they consider to be trade secrets as if these screens are wonderful works of innovation! It's kind of sad when you think about it. I have shown Epic and McKesson apps to about a half dozen UX pros here in town. Without fail their first reaction is to laugh. Every single one. They can't help it. When I was interviewing at _____ and they showed me their OR charting app, I laughed. Though we could argue for a methodological approach to evaluating the UI of these apps, maybe just getting past the quot;laugh testquot; would be a good start.”
- 44. What kind of problem is the integrated workflow of EMR? D2.0 Service, system, or organization? Today it is treated as system (D2.0) 2 4 Paper EMR EMR 1 EMR EMR Online 3
- 45. Research Methods for D2.0 systems D2.0 Such a wide range that most UX researchers do not consider that they are not generalizable to all problems.
- 46. Research Methods for D2.0 systems D2.0 Such a wide range that most UX researchers do not consider that they are not generalizable to all problems.
- 47. How does the organization change to D3.0 fully integrate the new EMR? Are people still expected to conform to the dictates of poorly designed data services & user interfaces? What is possible for a large healthcare system if we re-framed the EMR design problem as truly organizational?
- 48. What are some of the ways we make D3.0 sense of the organizational context for the EMR intervention? R3.0 AcSvity‐Centered Design Understanding Ethnography Ac*vity analysis Lifecycle modeling Genera)ng concepts Ideal ac*vity scenarios Par*cipatory design Organiza)onal research User needs analysis Evalua)on Total user experience evalua*on Compara*ve best prac*ces Program evalua*on
- 49. Scaling to the problem system, the situation is (always) socially distributed . D3.0 D4.0 Here framed as Transforming Care. Often requires we design to lifecycles. No known Symptoms ConfirmaSon In the OR Chronic Illness Illness & Exam (Now PaSent) & Hospital Management Referral Inter‐ ConSnuity Primary Tests venSon Care Drugs consult Learning Self‐ EvaluaSng Undergoing Self‐ about evaluaSon treatment Care care CondiSon Health Personal Becoming The Sharp End Everyday health Consumer Diagnosis very PaSent of Care “Living with”
- 50. Researching all contexts in one problem D3.0 D4.0 Healthcare Professions Constraints, Structures, Rules, Inst. drivers, Mission Standards Medical Disciplines: Emergency, Clinical, Specialty, Pediatric, Medical, Surgical, … InsStuSonal Context: Hospital & Unit AcSvity: Pa*ent Care, Inhibitors Enablers Admin, Educa*on Tasks w/ EMR Admit, Prep, Surgery, Post‐op, Diagnos*cs, Therapy, … Info Services: EMR System, Intranet, Internet, Library, ... InformaSon ArSfact: EMR Data, Chart, Care Plan, Notes, ... Scheduling, Admin PaSent Mo*va*ons, Needs, Career
- 51. What design research methods are D3.0 D4.0 considered when we frame a situation as a D4.0 problem? In this frame, we see a fusion of research & design method. Large-scale sensemaking requires the diversity & participation of stakeholders to the problem. We do not “do design” as usual. We step into the realm of 3rd Phase Science (G. de Zeeuw, 2001). We interact with what we observe, we change ourselves as we intervene.
- 52. Sensemaking Changemaking Communities Org leaders Action teams Process leads Project Teams Funders Individual Stakeholders & User s Institutions Everyone Community leaders “Strange” making Sensemaking OBJECTS SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS PROBLEM SYSTEMS D1 D2 D3 D4 1. As problem complexity increases, we lose ability to understand factors influencing design. 2. Increasing the probability that we design the wrong THING or intervention. 3. Higher probability that we miss critical interactions among factors and stakeholders Requiring us to collaborate, early, with all necessary stakeholders of the problem.
- 53. Sensemaking Changemaking Humanistic Social values New situational ethics User Patient lifeworld Practice values Instrumental Experience Equality / Justice Customer focus Care “Strange” making Sensemaking OBJECTS SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS PROBLEM SYSTEMS D1 D2 D3 D4 Finally, we cannot just treat the context shift as a problem of scale Or a problem of design process, or of methodology. We must understand & design to the normative values differences that require a clear centering for each context.
- 54. Back to Transformation … What are WE able to change, when Change is owned by stakeholders?
- 55. A Topography of Design Research. Dialogic Design Liz Sanders (2006) Design Research Quarterly.
- 56. A Topography of Dialogic CollaboraSve Design Methods. Strategic Structured Dialogic Design CharreSes Scenario building Simplex Visual Sensemaking Democratic Town Hall sessions Future Search World Café Open Space Generative Socra*c inquiry Nominal Group User co‐design Technique Brainstorming Open Guided Structured
- 57. As we scale up problem context We must scale ourselves up also - new perspectives, new skills, networks Before we can help those who want to create lasting positive transformation.
- 58. Thank you. Questions, dialogue? redesignresearch.com designdialogues.com nextexts.com