Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Matter
Proceedings of DRS 2014: Designs Big Debates.
Design Research Society Biennial International Conference
16-19 June 2014, Ume, Sweden.
Edited by: Youn-kyung Lim, Kristina Niedderer, Johan Redstrm,
Erik Stolterman and Anna Valtonen
Published by: Ume Institute of Design, Ume University
Ume, Sweden
Copyright 2014 by the Design Research Society,
Ume Institute of Design, and the authors
No part of this document may be used or reproduced in any
manner without written permission from the publisher, except in the
content of reviews and for educational purposes.
Every reasonable attempt has been made to identify owners of
copyright. Errors or omissions will be corrected in subsequent
editions.
This proceedings was produced as part of the Design Research
Society Biennial International Conference 2014 held at Ume
Institute of Design, Ume, Sweden from 16-19 June 2014.
Proceedings PDF available at http://www.drs2014.org/en/
programme/proceedings/
ISBN 978-91-7601-068-6
For printed and bound copy, please contact
Ume Institute of Design, Ume University
SE-901 87 Ume, Sweden
DesignResearchSociety
Table of Contents
Editorial
................................................................................................... 1
........................................................................
Reviewers List
Designing experiences
............................................................................................ 5
........................ 7
Mattias Arvola
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Experience Design Framework for securing Large Scale Information and Communication Systems
. 31
56
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
...
84
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Alexandra Abalada
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Mapping Innovation
The Chef as Designer: Classifying the Techniques that Chefs use in Creating Innovative Dishes
. . 127
Design Wizard: Tools to Accelerate the Outline of Innovation Process Regarding Co-Design
Structure and Project Scope
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
............................................................................
195
Bryan Howell
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Sune Gudiksen
Social Sustainability
Users, Stakeholders and researchers: Dilemmas of Research as Practice and the Role of Design
Thinking in the Case Study of a Rehabilitation Living Lab
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
Poldma Tiiu, Labb Delphine, Bertin Sylvain, Kehayia Eva, Swaine Bonnie, Ahmed Sara,
Archambault Philippe, Le Dorze Guylaine, Fung Joyce, Lamontagne Anouk
Incorporating Queer Understandings of Sex and Gender in Design Research and Practice
........
234
Isabel Prochner
Altering expectations: how design ctions and backcasting can leverage sustainable lifestyles
. . . . . . 243
Promoting Sustainability
Evolving a design driven `hybrid' research approach to inform and advance sustainable outcomes
in the built environment sector
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
268
Young-ae Hahn
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
Joanna Boehenrt
Usability
Examining Intuitive Navigation in Airports
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
Chajoong Kim
Dening the experiential aspects of passengers' comfort in the aircraft interior - an empirical
study
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
.................................................................................
335
A Design Process based on Field Research: An Adjustable Desk for Children in Rural India
. . . . . . 346
User-centred Design
Transforming User Information into User Knowledge: A Multiple Case Study
Isil Oygur
ii
....................
360
Adaptable interface model for intuitively learnable interfaces: an approach to address diversity in
older users' capabilities
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374
Research-based design and research through design: a case study of the improvement in the user
experience of an autism caregiver using ICT.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
Chun-Meng Cheng, Hsien-Hui Tang, Miao-En Chien, Ni-Miao Lin, Mike Y. Chen
Visual Communication
Graphic design: focus on nine professional reections?
............................................
401
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411
Soojin Jun
..............................................................
425
Joanna Boehnert
Design Transformation
A framework for design and assessment of products in developing countries
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452
Andrew Morrison
Change through Service Design Service Prototyping as a Tool for Learning and Transformation
469
Textile Design
An aesthetic approach to the use of textiles in architecture
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
The Design Alphabet for Textiles as applied Method at the Frontiers of Textile Design Research
. . 500
Isabel Rosa Mueggler, Andrea Weber Marin, Franoise Adler, Janine Haeberle, Kim Poldner
. 514
...........................
530
.....................................................
546
Nicola St John
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560
Ramia Maz
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 572
iii
Social Implication Design (SID) A design method to exploit the unique value of the artefact to
counteract social problems
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584
. . . . . . . 599
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609
The Reappearing Computer: the past and future of computing in design research
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633
Archaeology of the Future. Reconsidering the Place and Nature of Trend Forecasting in Design
Discourse
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645
Elisabeth Petermann
Tool complexes of innovation: Spaces for explorative innovation in four manufacturing industrial
companies
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 663
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 695
Aseem Inam
Cultural Development
Design as Rhetoric in the Discourse of Resonance
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 718
Veronika Kelly
Making the Case: collaborative concept development of products and services for a new design
museum
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 728
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 744
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757
iv
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 782
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820
Wonjun Lee, Yeoreum Lee, Jong-bum Woo, Jinmin Seok, Ingeon Shin, Youn-kyung Lim
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847
The Use of Grounded Theory Approach in User Experience Based Design Research: A study on
"Automobile Modication" in Turkey
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 899
Collaborative Design
Ecotone: A Model for Art / Science Collaboration
.................................................
910
An automatic open-source analysis method for video and audio recordings of co-design processes
. 921
...............................................................
932
. 940
. . . . . . . 951
Robb Mitchell
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967
Critical Design
Privilege and Oppression: Towards an Intersectional Critical Design
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991
Mads Folkmann
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003
Mads Folkmann
Design Issues 1
Hacking delivery systems: exploring design tools for user-led innovation in urban infrastructures
1015
.....................
1030
Ufuk Ulusan
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039
Design Issues 2
The Rhetoric of Design for Debate: triggering conversation with an uncanny enough artefact
1049
. . 1062
Lois Frankel
..
1071
Design Issues 3
Designers in complex problem solving: the contribution of Systems Thinking
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1085
Staging the Interaction Explorative Interventions for Engaging Citizens in the Development of
Public Knowledge Institutions
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109
Anne Louise Bang, Silje Alberthe Kamille Friis, Anne Katrine Gtzsche Gelting
Bombs Away: visual thinking and students' engagement in design studios contexts
Marianella Chamorro-Koc, Andrew Scott, Gretchen Coombs
vi
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122
Locating the Emerging Design Identity of Students Through Visual and Textual Reection
......
1135
Colin M. Gray
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1157
Envisioning a Better Design Education: How Language Can Invite or Discourage Collaboration
1168
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1178
Nicole Lotz, Helen Sharp, Mark Woodroe, Richard Blyth, Dono Rajah, Turugare
Ranganai
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1191
Nicole Koltick
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1204
Complexity in Design Driven Innovation: Case Study of Knowledge Transfer Flow in Subsea
Seismic Sensor Technology and Design Education
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1218
Design Assessment
Designed Research: Publishing Designs as Scholarship
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1229
Cheryl Ball
Using a visually-based assignment to reinforce and assess design history knowledge and
understanding
......................................................................................
1244
Alethea Blackler
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1260
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1274
The learning needs of small and medium-sized enterprises for design led innovation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1288
From BoP to ToP and Vice Versa Daily Practices in Settings with Limited Resources to Inspire
Designers
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1301
vii
. . . . . 1316
Learning from Students: Reections from Personal Magazines in Basic Design Course
. . . . . . . . . . 1331
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1353
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1369
Yuma Sakae, Shuji Kanazawa, Hiroki Tabata, Shuji Takano, Koichiro Sato, Yoshiyuki
Matsuoka
Towards a framework of design principles: Classifying system features, behaviours and types
. . . . 1381
Design Practices 1
Research-led practice in design research used to best demonstrate design theories
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1395
............................
1412
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1423
Frederick M.C. van Amstel, Vedran Zerjav, Timo Hartmann, Mascha C. van der Voort,
Geert P.M.R. Dewulf
Design Practices 2
Exploring Open Design for the application of Citizen Science; a toolkit methodology
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1437
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1452
Owain Pedgley
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1465
....................
1482
Service Innovation and Welfare Technology for Sustainable Home Medication: Insights from
Social Practice Theory
.............................................................................
1492
The design of accessible self service products, systems and services: teaching inclusive design
...
1503
viii
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1519
Supporting the designers to build empathy with people with Parkinson's disease: the role of a
hand tremor simulating device and of user research with end-users
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1526
Laura Bo, Monica Milani, Marco Fontana, Gastone Pietro Papini Rosati
.......................................................................
1535
Design Approaches for a RCT Complex Intervention: A Stroke Rehabilitation Case Study
......
1548
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1558
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1571
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1582
.................................
1599
Mengting Zhang
.........
1612
How to Introduce Experiential User Data: The Use of Information in Architects' Design Process
1626
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1638
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1655
Thierry Lagrange
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1667
Design Values
Can a Light Switch Be Beautiful? Aesthetic Appreciation of Products as Means
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1681
. . . . . . . . . . 1693
Daniela Rothkegel
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1707
Poster Abstracts
Author Index
.....................................................................................
1733
.........................................................................................
1741
ix
Welcome! We hope that you will enjoy browsing the proceedings which have been
compiled for all participants of the DRS2014 conference as well as for the wider design
community as a record and as a means to gain an overview of the different themes,
sessions and paper presentations.
The Design Research Society Conferences are held biennially to further and promote
design research internationally. They are intended to bring together design researchers
from communities in design and further afield to engender debates that break new
ground. DRS 2014 has focused on exploring the future directions, challenges and
opportunities of design and design research and their role for our future world.
We believe there is a shared discourse in design: one that includes all areas of design
research, and that is of vital importance for our understanding and development of the
foundations of design. This discourse is something we share and cultivate over long
periods of time, as it tells stories of past, present and future trajectories of design and its
role in society. With an ever-increasing demand for academic specialization and increasing
numbers of highly specialized conferences, there is a bigger need than ever for a venue
where the design research community can address significant challenges that cut across
domains and big issues that will influence the way our field, as a whole, develops.
The main purpose of the DRS 2014 conference is to foster and support a shared design
discourse. By focusing on key big issues in design, the conference seeks to create a forum
where the questions that have the potential to change the way we think and do design its philosophy, theory, practise, methodology, education, profession and history - will be
discussed and debated.
Since 2006, the DRS Special Interest Groups have become one of the main tools of the
DRS to drive debates and cultivate continuity. They are developed through DRS member
initiative and currently include the Experiential Knowledge SIG (EKSIG), the Special
Interest Group for Objects, Practices, Experiences, Networks(OPENSIG), the Design
Pedagogy Special Interest Group (PedSIG), the Special Interest Group on Wellbeing and
Happiness (SIGWELL), and theInclusive Design Special Interest Group (Inclusive SIG),
with a further SIG on Sustainability to be launched at the DRS2014 conference.
In addition to the SIG themes, a number of other themes have emerged prominently at
this years DRS conference. These include a concern about designing for society and
culture; design for people; emotion and affective design; design thinking and design
ethics; as well as design methods and design research methods, to name but some.
This was the first DRS conference that was reviewed by full papers only. The conference
received over 260 paper submissions. All papers were reviewed by double blind review
process through our international review panel, comprising 230 reviewers and 24
programme committee members. Following the review process, 132 papers were invited
for paper presentation and 25 for poster presentations. The submission response, as well
as the review results, speak well of the health of research in the expanded design field, and
of the enthusiasm of researchers both from the academy and from professional practice.
A word of thanks
Many people around the world have co-operated in planning and organising this
conference. Our thanks go to our local organising committee at Ume Institute of Design
who have helped with the organisation on the ground. Thanks also to the DRS Council for
their support, and in particular Peter Lloyd who acted as our main point of contact and
assisted in sorting out a wide range of organisational challenges and decisions.
Thanks are also due to our many international reviewers and our programme committee
members. Many have freely given advice and support at every stage in the conferences
development and have provided extensive explanatory notes and advice on improving the
papers. Further, thanks to all the session chairs, for taking on this task and for managing
their sessions.
Finally, our most sincere thanks to all of the authors who submitted papers and kept their
sense of humour throughout the process. Their contributions are the lifeblood of the
conference.
Youn-kyung Lim and Kristina Niedderer (Papers Chairs),
Johan Redstrm, Erik Stolterman and Anna Valtonen (General Chairs)
Welcome! We hope that you will enjoy browsing the proceedings which have been
compiled for all participants of the DRS2014 conference as well as for the wider design
community as a record and as a means to gain an overview of the different themes,
sessions and paper presentations.
The Design Research Society Conferences are held biennially to further and promote
design research internationally. They are intended to bring together design researchers
from communities in design and further afield to engender debates that break new
ground. DRS 2014 has focused on exploring the future directions, challenges and
opportunities of design and design research and their role for our future world.
We believe there is a shared discourse in design: one that includes all areas of design
research, and that is of vital importance for our understanding and development of the
foundations of design. This discourse is something we share and cultivate over long
periods of time, as it tells stories of past, present and future trajectories of design and its
role in society. With an ever-increasing demand for academic specialization and increasing
numbers of highly specialized conferences, there is a bigger need than ever for a venue
where the design research community can address significant challenges that cut across
domains and big issues that will influence the way our field, as a whole, develops.
The main purpose of the DRS 2014 conference is to foster and support a shared design
discourse. By focusing on key big issues in design, the conference seeks to create a forum
where the questions that have the potential to change the way we think and do design its philosophy, theory, practise, methodology, education, profession and history - will be
discussed and debated.
Since 2006, the DRS Special Interest Groups have become one of the main tools of the
DRS to drive debates and cultivate continuity. They are developed through DRS member
initiative and currently include the Experiential Knowledge SIG (EKSIG), the Special
Interest Group for Objects, Practices, Experiences, Networks(OPENSIG), the Design
Pedagogy Special Interest Group (PedSIG), the Special Interest Group on Wellbeing and
Happiness (SIGWELL), and theInclusive Design Special Interest Group (Inclusive SIG),
with a further SIG on Sustainability to be launched at the DRS2014 conference.
In addition to the SIG themes, a number of other themes have emerged prominently at
this years DRS conference. These include a concern about designing for society and
culture; design for people; emotion and affective design; design thinking and design
ethics; as well as design methods and design research methods, to name but some.
This was the first DRS conference that was reviewed by full papers only. The conference
received over 260 paper submissions. All papers were reviewed by double blind review
process through our international review panel, comprising 230 reviewers and 24
programme committee members. Following the review process, 132 papers were invited
for paper presentation and 25 for poster presentations. The submission response, as well
as the review results, speak well of the health of research in the expanded design field, and
of the enthusiasm of researchers both from the academy and from professional practice.
Paper Programme
Committee
Alethea Blackler
Erik Bohemia PEDSIG: Design Pedagogy & Education SIG
Rebecca Cain SIGWELL: Design for Health, Wellbeing and Happiness
Lin-Lin Chen
Anna Croon Fors
Hua Dong Inclusive SIG
Haakon Faste
Tom Fischer OPEN SIG: Objects, Practices, Experiences, Networks SIG
Bruce Hanington
Paul Hekkert
Ilpo Koskinen
Jonas Lwgren
Maarit Mkel
Nithikul Nimkulrat EKSIG: Experiential Knowledge Special Interest Group
Arlene Oak
M P Ranjan
Debra Satterfield
Pieter Jan Stappers
Mike Tovey PEDSIG: Design Pedagogy & Education SIG
Brynjulf Tellefsen
Rhoda Trimmingham Sustainability SIG
Mikael Wiberg
John Zimmerman
Abstract
In this paper we present the detailed design decision-making that went into the
deployment phase of a project exploring Third Wave HCI [5] through batch-produced
devices. Building on the studios design-led methodologies, we produced multiple sets of
Indoor Weather Stations (IWS), research devices that explore the microclimate of the
home, and deployed them to 22 households over the course of a year to gather
polyphonic feedback from participants [2]. This project built upon our previous work of
gathering polyphonic views of devices deployed to one or few households [6], but in order
to scale our practice for multiple deployments, we had to develop new methods.
We have documented the design and rationale of the IWS and the outcome of the field
study elsewhere [2]. Here, we focus on the design involved in the recruitment of
participants, deployment of devices and the methods of gathering feedback. Designing the
supporting artefacts for projects such as this everything that goes alongside the main
research object demands almost as much attention as designing the object itself.
Our usual fieldwork practice is to make numerous visits in person to participants in order
gain insight into the impacts and effects of our devices. However with the scale of this
project, it was not possible to pay multiple visits to all our volunteer households in the
same way that we do when a single device is deployed. Instead, we designed new
methods for this batch-deployment that we term Deployment Probes, using Cultural Probe
[4] sensibilities and approaches to develop methods to gather polyphonic feedback and
insights from such a large number of participants.
By adopting a visual paper, a paper format which focuses on image, we present material
design decisions in a way that is difficult to achieve in writing, and offer an alternative to
other written accounts of this project [1, 2]. Images require interpretation, so we rely on
readers to interrogate those used here. Granted this, we believe the photographs and
quotes included here effectively reveal our novel methods of recruiting, deploying and
gathering feedback at a large scale.
Keywords
Design Process; practice-based research; photo essay; visual paper; annotations; design
interventions;
899
Designing recruitment
Figure 1: Our intention was to recruit people who lived close to our studio in order to
quickly resolve maintenance issues, so we designed methods to reach out through
existing local networks formed around public and digital spaces. Posters were designed to
offer just enough detail about the project to tantalize prospective participants. These were
placed in local parks, cafes, corner shops and main streets. Similar adverts were
published on local blogs and forums.
900
Figure 2: Cultural Probes [4] were designed to introduce participants to both the context
of the research (the microclimate of the home) and the style of research activities later
used during deployment. We distributed probe packs at group events to 31 prospective
volunteers. As with many recruitment exercises, there was a decline of interest and we
received 22 completed packs from participants who were enthused by the events.
901
Handover considerations
Figure 3: Traditionally, our studio deploys research prototypes in-situ. While we were able
to deliver some of the IWS to people's homes individually, this was not practical for all of
the devices. So we arranged group events to fit participants availability and designed the
packaging and technical materials to enable participants to transport devices home and
install them independently. The packaging also considered the experience of un-boxing
the devices, clearly presenting the artefacts and technical materials upon opening.
902
Deployment Probes
Figure 4: Probe-like activities were designed to be distributed over the course of the field
trial. Significant Moment Forms, bound in the style of a notepad, provided a semistructured format for participants to conveniently record glimpses of their experiences
throughout deployment. Returned forms, sent back to the studio in prepaid envelopes,
provided prompts to open conversations with participants later in the project.
903
904
905
906
Participant-Led Evaluation
907
Conclusion
Often in our papers we focus on the overall evaluative picture of a research study and
rarely have the space to reveal the nuances of our design process. By adopting a visual
format we offer insight into the materiality of our work. The intention here is two-fold. First,
our objective is to reveal the designed, but often unreported, materials of our projects, the
supporting artefacts. We do this in order to demonstrate the level of design detail and
decision-making that goes into the production of these items. Artefacts such as the
posters and adverts for recruitment, manuals and quick start guides, on-line materials to
offer technical and community support, as well as materials for participant feedback all
help scaffold a legible and unproblematic participant experience and enable participant
feedback through multiple forms.
Second is to demonstrate how Cultural Probe methods were useful in scaling our
evaluative practices. Deployment probes were designed specifically to gather glimpses
into the lives of our participants with our deployed devices. We were unable to visit all of
our volunteers extensively, but these probes allowed us to shape our understanding of
how the devices were being used, encouraged polyphonic accounts and created
opportunities for our participants to self-report. We also found value in enabling
participants to give ongoing and reflective feedback about devices, the nuances of which
is sometimes not captured in a site visit. Deployment probes complimented our usual
fieldwork practice of visiting participants in person by offering valuable prompts during
home visits and group events.
We believe design can offer a valuable approach to methods of recruiting, deploying and
gathering fieldwork that is both human and scalable. We hope that the visual format of this
paper goes some way to revealing the details and nuances of this approach.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the European Research Council's advanced investigator
award no. 226528. Third Wave HCI. Thanks to our colleagues Kirsten Boehner, John
Bowers, Bill Gaver, Mark Hauenstein, Sarah Pennington and Alex Wilkie.
References
1. Bowers, J. 2012. The Logic of Annotated Portfolios: Communicating the Value of
Research Through Design. In Proc. DIS12. 68-77.
2. William W. Gaver, John Bowers, Kirsten Boehner, Andy Boucher, David W.T. Cameron,
Mark Hauenstein, Nadine Jarvis, and Sarah Pennington. 2013. Indoor weather stations:
investigating a ludic approach to environmental HCI through batch prototyping. In Proc. of
CHI 2013. 3451-3460.
3. William Gaver. 2007. Cultural commentators: Non-native interpretations as resources
for polyphonic assessment. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2007, 292-305.
3. William W. Gaver, Andrew Boucher, Sarah Pennington, and Brendan Walker. 2004.
Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions 11, 5 (September 2004), 53-56.
5. Harrison, S., Tatar, D., and Sengers, P. 2007. The Three Paradigms of HCI. In Proc. of
alt.chi 2007. 1--18.
6. Nadine Jarvis, David Cameron, and Andy Boucher. 2012. Attention to detail:
annotations of a design process. In Proc. of NordiCHI 2012. 11-20.
908
909
Abstract
This paper uses the case study of Ecotone, a project that sought to bring disparate
groups of people (artists, scientists, ranchers) together for shared discourse and
potential action around agricultural environmental stress in southern Alberta, Canada.
We explore this project from the perspective of an artist and designer.
We examine a
framework that values space, time and the pairing of people from different disciplines to
encourage meaningful collaboration and interaction.
Environmentalism and climate change are divisive topics, particularly in Alberta where
the controversial oil and gas industry has made it Canadas wealthiest province,
resulting in both environmental indifference as well as extensive protests locally and
from abroad. It is well acknowledged there is a need for better communication about the
environment for real progress in protecting our resources to begin.
Ecotone begins this conversation by inviting artists and designers to respond to the
science and pragmatic realities of land stewardship.
Keywords
Collaboration; art; science; ranching; information visualization
Ecotone is a multidisciplinary environmental project that began in the foothills of
southern Alberta. Its aim was to bring scientists, artists and ranchers together to explore
shared environmental concerns. Based on the success of this collaboration, a new
project has emerged that reaches beyond our local concerns to the challenge of using
information visualization to communicate climate change data for all of Alberta.
Francesca Samsel points out that collaboration outside of our spheres is required to
handle the complexity and breadth of knowledge today, and that the scientist benefits
from intuitive thinking and the artist from a scientific approach. (2013, p. 5) In this
project we used ethnographic research methods to explore the merging of our spheres
of knowledge, and that building trusting relationships between collaborators is critical to
a multidisciplinary approach.
Ecotone Background
Southern Alberta, Canada is a vast area of clean water, clean air, a major sink of biotic
carbon, and an important contiguous habitat for wildlife. Important industries include
farming, ranching, tourism, recreation, hunting, and fishing. The communities of southern
Alberta include many small, family-oriented pockets of farmers and ranchers that have
always strived to be good stewards of the land. The extremely short history of
agricultural ownership (Alberta was established as a province of Canada in 1905) makes
910
it easy to review land practices, and also to acknowledge the growing environmental
stresses. Oil and gas exploration and production, urban sprawl and recreational activity
provide benefit to the provincial economy, yet they also bring significant liabilities such
as land and water disturbance, habitat fragmentation, and invasive weed infestations
(SFS, 2013).
Artist
What degree of artistic license
do I have over the scientific
and ranching data?
Am I expected to become
an illustrator?
Scientist
What degree of influence do I
have over the representation
of my data?
Rancher
How will my work be
represented by art?
Do scientists want to
tell me how to do my
job?
Ecotone Model
Even though there was a certain lack of faith between the 3 groups, there was also a
strong willingness to pursue the project. The overarching desire for action about
environmental threats was greater than the mistrust. The researchers carefully crafted
three distinct events, each of which allowed a particular group to be the expert
Symposium (scientist), Residency (rancher), Exhibition (artist). These events spanned
the course of three years.
911
At each stage of the Ecotone project participants were encouraged to pair with someone
from another group. This pairing allowed for a more intimate, trusting relationship and
opened the conversation to questions that may not have been asked in a larger setting.
In addition, the concerns or research interests of each person became the focus of
conversation. In a pairing, each person feels more responsibility to contribute, to probe,
to explore.
As Laurel Richardson says, Science is one lens; creative arts another. We see more
deeply using two lenses (2000, p. 937) We found that it was not only seeing through the
lenses, but trusting what we saw, and what others were seeing, that gave strength to the
project.
Symposium
The Ecotone symposium began with evening presentations by climate-change scientist
Dr. Henry Janzen and contemporary art curator Ryan Doherty, both speaking about
shared practice between art and science. It should be noted that discussion was
strained: the disparate groups of scientists, ranchers and artists found little in common,
and there was even a sense of suspicion amongst the groups. Why are we here? What
is the purpose? Are there areas of overlap in our professional practice? The ranchers felt
that this might be a covert attempt for scientists to tell them how to do their job. Artists
were left uneasy because they were unsure if they were being asked to become
illustrators, or were they being invited to interpret scientific data in their own
way? Tensions between the groups arose, but there was sufficient interest in the
potential of the project to push beyond the stress and discover what might be gained.
912
The second day of the symposium revolved around a walking tour of a 60-year old
grazing experiment, situated in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains. This day-long tour,
which taught participants how to assess the health of native grasslands, and thus the
sustainability of our rangeland use practices, traveled through four distinct fields that had
experienced various levels of cattle grazing. Though measurement and trained
observation, researchers have come to understand how the health of the land can either
be enhanced or negatively affected by grazing practices, and this perspective was
imparted to the tour participants using powerful visual and hands-on methods. This
scientific information was not only important to share with the ranching/rural community,
but also within close urban communities because the foothills grasslands are a shared
resource of immense value tied to human and environmental health. Responsible
stewardship protects and sustains western Canadas primary watershed, local
agriculture and rural communities.
This day proved to be transformative. As people walked between four different sections
of land, space was opened for dialogue (Fig 1). People began to share their particular
expertise, and relationships between disciplines emerged. The more we walked, the
wider the dialogue became. Our understanding of land practice expanded and we heard
about other threats: oil and gas explorations disrupting wildlife corridors, urban
encroachment, the disconnect between food producer and consumer, and, of course,
the ever-present issue of water quality.
Ranchers from the area slowly started to engage with others about the reality of working
on the land, and it became evident that all shared a respect for hard work and pragmatic
solutions. The interactions were rich and profound in ways unanticipated by the project
913
design, such as the discovery of new perspectives and ideas within our individual work
(Fig 2).
The weekend ended with a shared meal enjoyed in an atmosphere completely different
than the night before. Tensions had dissolved. Where people had been wary and
distrustful, they were now enthusiastic and open. Relationships were forged and
research ideas abounded, such as an oral history project with ranch women, a photobased experiment with wildlife and a water investigation in the springs of the foothills.
These ideas were born out of intersection of interests, and as people made space to
listen to others, shared concerns became clear.
914
Think about how to express the connection between long-term experiences in the
landscape and cognitive or behavioral patterns.
What will you do with the information you received during Ecotone?
I will never look at the fields of Alberta (or indeed in the world) with the same
eyes again.
A workshop like this is a great affirmation / reinforcement to me as a landowner
how precious our land is!
I will be digesting this information and landscape for a long time.
I will plant an urban garden and produce some of my own food.
I appreciated the optimism of the scientists.
I will contemplate how my discipline (science) can relate to others and to build
their connections.
Artist Residencies
To facilitate deeper understanding of land concerns, ranchers were asked to host artists
over the spring and summer of 2012. Five ranching families participated and hosted a
total 13 artists for weeklong stays. There was no expectation from the organizers about
what might happen over the course of the week, and each residency was guided by the
participants. Some artists rolled up their sleeves and engaged in the work of the rancher,
others had very little communication and chose instead to make their own connections to
the land. Whatever the approach, the guiding principle at this stage was immersion in
ranch practice and the ranchers expertise would always be available.
The pairing of artist /rancher proved to be one of the strengths of the Ecotone
model. Armed with the scientific knowledge that had been gained in the symposium,
land and animal stewardship were seen in a new light. Artist Glen MacKinnon reflects
on his experience:
During the symposium I was paired with a scientist, and the knowledge that I
gained that day still affects my work, 3 years later. During the residency, the pairing
I had with a rancher gave me a profound sense of responsibility in how I live my life
as an inhabitant of the world. It moves beyond my work and into the way I think
about food, urban vs. rural, landscape, stewardship, climate, consumption life.
Exhibition
The residencies gave birth to projects that challenged and surprised audiences. Artists
worked with a variety of ideas including agricultural sustainability, invasive plant species,
water concerns and oil and gas exploration / production and the deep commitment to the
land that both ranchers and scientists had demonstrated. Exhibited at the Southern
Alberta Art Gallery (Lethbridge, Alberta) in 2012 and at the Nickle Arts Gallery (Calgary,
Alberta) in 2013, the work was seen by both the rural community (a first-time art gallery
visit for many ranchers) and urban audiences. Most artworks generated discussion
among viewers. Consider the large-scale 5-minute video loop (Fig 3) that Mary
Kavanagh presented: shot on an abattoir floor, it shows the last few moments of a
heifers life.
915
Facing Io focuses on the few moments before the kill, when man and animal face
each other. The man is crouched, steadfast, waiting; the heifer is anxious, curious,
trapped. It is the dance before death, a timeless exchange between hunter and
hunted, one in which we are all complicit.
The exhibitions raised the level of public engagement, and audiences questioned rural
land use, water quality and conservation, the threat of oil and gas exploration, and
animal welfare. Ecotone became an active entity in connecting the communities, both
urban and rural. Curator Ryan Doherty opened the exhibition with these statements:
From urban encroachment to resource extraction, the multiplicity of responses
offered by the many other artists included in this exhibition speak to the enormous
complexities at play in our local environment. In light of this, one cannot help but
consider the bewildering reality of these same problems magnified and multiplied on
a global platform. And yet, as projects like Ecotone are increasingly cultivated in
communities around the world - sharing stories, perspectives, ideas and actions
there is a renewed sense of optimism and the promise of a future more accountable
than our past.
916
After Ecotone
Following Ecotone, participants recognized the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary
approach and were extremely eager for projects that would further investigate
environmental issues through multidisciplinary collaboration. There was a pervasive
desire to share what they learned about land use, water, sustainability, and stewardship
in Alberta with the broader public. Recognizing the opportunity to engage larger
audiences through digital interaction, graphic designer Christine Clark sought out
climatologist Dr. Stefan W. Kienzle to create an information visualization on climate
change in Alberta.
From here, a new collaborative project was established between Kienzle and Clark as
they attempt to disseminate 60 years of climate change data for over 6,834 locations
across Alberta through a series of information visualizations. They were specifically
interested in exploring methods for overcoming three key challenges in visualizing and
disseminating the data:
1. Data Literacy: the audiences ability to decode the visual representations and
fully comprehend the information being presented.
2. Information Apathy: the barrage of information and calls-to-action in our society
have made many reticent to engage with infovis.
3. Bias: people often have pre-existing ideas about a topic, which affects the way
they look at and understand an infovis.
Bringing together their resources and expertise, scientist and designer seek to explore
the extent that infovis can overcome these challenges and evoke meaningful
understanding, connection, and responsibility for our environment in a broad public
audience. The area of overlap of these two disciplines (the boundaries that Fischer says
are the locus of production of new knowledge) is where the information visualizations
take shape.
At the outset of this pairing, both parties were extremely enthusiastic about the new
opportunities that would be opened up through the collaboration. For Clark, who initially
had little understanding about climate science, it was not just the access to data, but
also to the expert with intimate knowledge of the data and the topic it represented. For
917
Kienzle, the visualizations would be a valuable resource for students to learn about
climate science as well as a way to share his research with a larger audience. The
dialogue between the collaborators became honest and open, allowing for them to talk
through similar uncertainties to those found between participants in the Ecotone
symposium regarding their role in the collaboration:
Designer
Scientist
In response, Kienzle and Clark looked to the Ecotone model to navigate territory that
was unknown to both of them. Just as the scientists, ranchers, and artists needed time
to build comfort and trust over the day of walking, Here / Now / Look / See encouraged
both members to establish a productive working relationship over a six-month period.
During this time there were intermittent periods of close collaboration as the project
moved through the phases of concept development, creation, refinement, and
exhibition/public release.
To determine the lead expert for the various phases of the project as per the Ecotone
model, the researchers examined the nature of expertise in context with infovis. It
resulted in the expert roles unfolding in a way that was less distinct than those of
Ecotone with Kienzle and Clark both contributing throughout all phases, Kienzle as the
expert of the content (the data and climatology) and Clark the expert of the design and
audience. Having Clark lead the project in relation to the audience was based the
distinction between specialist tacit knowledge, which involves advanced practical
competence gained through immersion in a specialist domain, and ubiquitous tacit
knowledge, which can be acquired by almost anyone through everyday experiences.
While expertise on subjects like climate science and design is typically gained as
specialist tacit knowledge, expertise of a target audience usually takes the form of
ubiquitous tacit knowledge through immersion in the target group (Ross, 2013). In this
case, audience expertise required knowledge of the general public who are non-experts
of climate science, making Clark closest to this perspective and therefore the expert.
Positioning the designer of the infovis as the expert of the audience then allows the
designers experience of learning the content to inform the design of the visualization. By
acknowledging these points of expertise in a collaboration, each member is able to
contribute in meaningful and fulfilling ways while also trusting the others contributions to
accomplish their mutual goal. For Kienzle and Clark, they were acutely aware that while
they would each provide their individual expertise, the outcome would reside in the
converging space between them.
918
recently said during a video interview, how can we see not to confirm, but to see to
learn? (Brown, 2013). Climate change is a divisive topic, particularly in Alberta where
the controversial oil and gas industry has made it Canadas wealthiest province,
resulting in both environmental indifference as well as extensive protests locally and
from abroad. It is well acknowledged there is a need for scientists to better communicate
with the public about the science of climate change for real progress in mitigating the
effects to begin. Through this design and science collaboration, Kienzle and Clark hope
to contribute to this discourse.
Conclusion
While Ecotone began with a small group of artists and scientists, it has grown over the
years to include hundreds of ranchers, landowners, water researchers, cultural
geographers, historians, as well as designers, and it has also engaged the urban and
rural populations of southern Alberta in dialogue. The model of engagement, which
promotes the pairing of participants, values extended time to foster relationships, and
allows the expertise of each partner to meet in the space that divides them, has proven
to be one that inspires new knowledge, projects and research, four of which have been
presented in this paper. The common thread throughout Ecotone was the desire to form
a connection to the land and water, and in particular, an interest in nurturing a
relationship to the stewards of that land. The interest in deep understanding of land use
practice is shared amongst rural and urban populations. And as the project continues,
the questions multiply. Who is responsible for keeping our land and water safe? What
role does government play in regulatory policy? How can our community connect and
support a healthy, sustainable environment?
References
Brown, K. (Producer). (2013, May 9). The Art of Data Visualization | Off Book [Video].
Retrieved from http://youtu.be/DM5sF4NzCYk
Fischer, G. (2004). Social Creativity: Turning Barriers into Opportunities for Collaborative
Design. Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference (Pdc04), July, 152161. Retrieved October 25, 2013, from
http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/~gerhard/papers/pd04-final-submit.pdf
Mahy, I., & Zahedi, M. (2010). When artists and designers inspired collective intelligence
practices: Two case studies of cooperation, interdisciplinarity, and innovation
projects. In Proceedings from the International DRS (Design Research Society)
Conference on Design & Complexity. Retrieved October 05, 2013, from
http://www.drs2010.umontreal.ca/data/PDF/078.pdf
919
Pierce, J., William, O., & Blevis, E. (2008). Energy Aware Dwelling: A Critical Survey of
Interaction Design for Eco-Visualizations. Proceedings of the 20th Australasian
Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Designing for Habitus and Habitat.
doi: 10.1145/1517744.1517746
Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2008). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research
[Third Edition]. doi: http://perma.cc/0sy4fdzyChw
Ross, P. (2011). Is there an expertise of production? The case of new media producers.
New Media & Society, 13(6), 912-928. doi: 10.1177/1461444810385393
Tanyoung, K., & Carl, D. (2010). Speculative Visualization: A New Rhetoric for
Communicating Public Concerns. Proceedings of Design Research Society
(DRS) International Conference Design and Complexity. doi:
http://perma.cc/0uPZJukpt57
Leanne Elias
Leanne Elias is an Associate Professor of New Media in the Faculty of Fine Arts in
Lethbridge, Alberta. Her research includes exploring the interdisciplinary nature of New
Media and has worked with art, education, management, and science in various
research projects.
Christine Clark
Christine Clark is a MFA New Media Candidate (14) at the University of Lethbridge.
Her graduate research explores knowledge mobilization through new media, information
visualization, and speculative design. Prior to beginning this degree, Clark was a
principle of Chris Clark Creative.
920
Abstract
In co-design of several persons utilizing different materials together, capturing movement
and position information of the hands as well as the speaking patterns of the designers
provide answers to research questions related to social aspects of the co-design situation.
Special motion-capture devices exist for precise movement tracking. They are, however,
typically expensive and may restrict the movement of the designers. Recording the design
sessions with a simple web camera offers a low-cost way to obtain the hand locations
accurately enough but exploring the videos manually is a time-consuming and error-prone
task. In this paper, we propose an inexpensive and automatic method to acquire
information on the position of the hands and on the use of voice of the co-designers. We
are offering our Matlab code as open source for other researchers and designers to use in
their work and to amend.
Keywords
Co-design processes; Audio and video analysis; Hand tracking; Bayesian modeling;
Open-source
Collaborative designing can be defined as a process of actively communicating and
working together in order to jointly establish design goals, search through design problem
spaces, determine design constraints, and construct a design solution (Hennessy &
Murphy, 1999; Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, Lahti, Muukkonen & Hakkarainen, 2000). Some
researchers, such as Perry and Sanderson (1998) and Valkenburg and Dorst (1998) ,
have specifically analyzed design processes with respect to teamwork. Also, many
cognitive theories are emphasizing the socially distributed nature of cognition (Hutchins,
1995) and the role of social collaboration in modern designing (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1996).
Social collaboration appears to have a particularly important role during the conceptual
phase of designing. An important aspect of collaborative designing is working with shared
design objects: through visual representations, conceptual models, tools, and concrete
materials (Norman, 1993).
In co-design, capturing movement and position information of the hands as well as the
speaking patterns of the designers provide answers to research questions related to
social aspects of the co-design situation (Castelli, Happe, Frith & Frith, 2000). Obtaining
body movements and speaking patterns is important also because in order to produce
and to interpret recognizable accountable actions, co-participants orient to the details
constituting the local order of talk and action and mutually display their orientations in their
921
conduct (Mondada 2006, p. 118). Hence, hand movements may correlate with the object
being designed. Furthermore, the recent findings reporting the importance of mirror
neurons in social situations and the effects of embodied elements in the cognitive
performance of humans suggest that movement and position information may reveal
significant aspects of design work (Kaplan & Iacoboni, 2006).
Traditionally, movement and position is measured with extremely high accuracy using
professional motion-capture devices. In addition to their high cost, these devices restrict
movement and the use of space, and may thus be non-optimal in co-design situations. On
the other hand, recording the design sessions with a simple web camera offers a low-cost
way to obtain the hand locations but exploring the videos manually is a time-consuming
and error-prone task.
We are proposing an inexpensive and automatic method to acquire information on the
position of the hands of the co-designers with respect to each other and with respect to a
common frame, and the use of voice of the co-designers. This method is based on simple
and inexpensive off-the-shelf devices: a single video camera, individual microphones and
recorders for each designer, and self-made markers to attach around the wrist. As a
result, the method outputs the relative and/or absolute hand coordinates in the time
resolution of the used camera, e.g. 30 measurements per second, and the voice patterns
in the time resolution of e.g. half-a-second. The hand coordinates and voice patterns can
easily be synchronized. Compared with 'traditional' video analysis approach in which the
videos are annotated manually, the presented method thus gives more accurate results
and lessens the manual work. The output of the method can naturally be used together
with the traditional tools giving additional information to the analysis.
The algorithms are realized in Matlab environment and they provide simple and
easy-to-modify plots of hand locations and use of voice of each co-designer. We are
offering our code as open source for other researchers and designers to use in their work
and to amend. We propose that this type of open source possibility may provide
researchers with a fast method to process large amounts of video and voice data
automatically. This paper presents the algorithms in a detailed level as well as gives some
illustrative results.
922
tracked object are being searched in the vicinity of the object location in the previous
frame. Using temporal information for hand tracking seems sound; with a typical frame
rate of 30 fps, the hand does not move awfully many pixels between subsequent frames.
Tracking has been studied for long (see, for instance, (Bar-Shalom, 1990)) .
The chosen framework for tracking the hands is probabilistic, specifically Bayesian. With
Bayesian methodology, the two assumptions used in solving the tracking problems the
proximity of the markers in the appearance space and world space can be nicely and
intuitively incorporated. Furthermore, Bayesian approach results in a modular method in
which the appearance model or the location model can be easily altered independently of
each other. Similar approach was used in (Toivanen & Lampinen, 2011). Bayesian
tracking is also a widely studied topic (Arulampalam, Maskell, Gordon & Clapp , 2002) . In
high-dimensional spaces, it leads to a computationally demanding problems which can be
solved with e.g. Kalman filters (Kalman, 1960) or particle filters (Doucet, De Freitas &
Gordon, 2001). It is to be noted that we are not making a 'traditional' statistical inference
here but building a probabilistic model to solve the tracking problem.
To alleviate the problem, the test subjects wear specific markers on their hands. The
markers should be such that they differ from their surroundings as much as possible so
that they are easy to track. The measure of 'differing' depends on the used appearance
model. For instance, if the appearance model is based on the shape of the marker, its
shape should be specific. The algorithm presented in this paper utilizes only the color of
the markers so they should differ from the color of the worktable, color of the sleeves and
also color of the markers of the other test subjects if their hands are to cross. Our test
co-design process groups comprised of three persons so three different marker colors
were used red, green and blue. Color has been often used in tracking (Perez, Hue,
Vermaak & Gangnet , 2002; Simon, Behnke, & Rojas , 2001) .
We used two different kinds of markers; printable paper markers and colorful small balls.
The markers are to be attached around wrists, akin to a bracelet. The paper markers
consist of smallish colorful spheres (or ovals, actually). The ball markers are joined
together with a string and they can easily be either printed with a 3d printer or purchased
from a hobby shop. Using balls has the advantage of being visible to basically each
direction due to their three-dimensionality a paper marker in a hand directing straight to
the camera is invisible to it. Because the balls' color differ from white probably more than
from the skin color, it is advisable to have a white paper strip between the balls and the
skin. Figure 1 gives an example of both kinds of markers. Our algorithm treats each
marker independently, that is, no correlation is assumed between different markers. This
assumption seems fare as the hands typically move rather independently. Nevertheless,
should such assumptions be added to the model, it is possible due to its modular nature.
923
Fig 1: An example of a video frame captured at a co-design process. Persons have paper
markers and ball markers on their hands.
Let us introduce the Bayes' formula (Duda, Hart & Stork, 2000) . By denoting observed
data with D and the parameters of the model by we have
p( | D) p( D | ) p()
(1)
924
up to and including time t , or more precisely, the color values in the videos as we are
using color as the appearance model. The color values at location x are denoted as
C ( x) . The dimension of this vector depends on the used color space which can be the
conventional three-dimensional RGB space or, for instance, the two-dimensional
hue-saturation space of the HSV color system. The posterior is thus the distribution of
xt given the color values at that location, C (xt ) . We also have dependence of the
past data. Basically, we have the color information of all the locations in the past frames
available but for simplicity, only the color values of the tracked points will be used. Also the
world coordinates of the tracked points in the past frames will be utilized so the posterior
probability is p(xt|x1 : t1 , C( x 1: t )) . The likelihood is independent on the world
coordinates and the prior probability is independent on the color values so we get
p( xt | x1 :t 1 ,C ( x(1 :t ) )) p( C ( xt ) | C ( x1 : t1 )) p ( xt | x 1 :t 1)
(2)
Next, in order to implement equation (2) we must choose some actual distributions and
their parameters so that the mode of the posterior would (ideally) be at the marker
location. A natural and commonly used choice is Gaussian distribution, denoted here as
N , which we use for both the distributions (likelihood and prior). Gaussian distribution
contains two parameters: the expected value and covariance matrix. The expected value
of the likelihood distribution is the mean value of the previous tracked points in the used
color space ( E[C ( x1 : t1 )] ). The covariance is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal
elements are the variances of the tracked points in each dimension of the color space (
V c [C( x1 :t 1)] ) which makes the appearance model flexible as it automatically
captures the variability in each dimension. The expected value of the prior distribution is
the previous marker location plus a previous rate multiplied by a coefficient (
xt 1+ d xt 1 , where d xt 1= xt 1x t2 , [0,1] ), and the covariance is a
diagonal matrix with constant elements ( V x ). Hence, we have
(3)
In an ideal situation, the marker in the next frame is found at the prior mean. Parameter
controls the effect of kinematics of the hand. With =1 , the hand is assumed to
follow its tangential motion forever whereas with =0 the hand is assumed to stay
motionless all the time. In the experiments, an intermediate value =0.5 was used
which takes the hand motion into account to some extent. The size of the search space
around the prior mean is controlled by the (diagonal) covariance matrix V x . Having too
large search space results in fallacious local maxima in the posterior distribution which
might result in a lost track. Then again, a prior distribution too tight results in the posterior
mode always coinciding with the prior mode making the appearance model irrelevant and
in a realistic case where the marker is not exactly at the prior mean this also leads to a
false track. Hence, choosing the value in V x = I 2 , where I 2 is a
two-dimensional diagonal matrix, controls the balance between relying on the appearance
model and relying on the kinematic model. As the posterior distribution is two-dimensional
and has only as many values as there are pixels in the images, it is possible to simply
925
table the values of the posterior distribution in each pixel of the current frame and take the
maximum of the posterior to be used in the distribution of the next frame. In order to save
computation time, the posterior can be evaluated only in the vicinity of the prior mean (say
3std ). The parameters of the likelihood can be updated recursively so that the past
data needs not to be stored. The covariance elements in the first frame must be set
manually.
The actual algorithm for tracking one marker is depicted in Algorithm 1. In the beginning,
the track must be initialized manually. Also, sometimes a hand is in occlusion, that is,
invisible to the camera (for example under a table) in which cases the track must be
manually put 'on hold' and aid manually to the correct location when the hand becomes
visible again. In addition, the tracking may go wrong despite the marker being visible. This
might happen when the hand accelerates heavily, being something which the prior model
does not take into account. In such cases, the track must also be manually corrected.
Hence, what we have done is really an interactive algorithm which processes the videos
real-time and illustrates the results and which offers the possibility to any time correct the
tracks. We have observed that exploring a video file takes approximately twice as long as
the duration of the video which is still much more efficient than manually writing down the
hand locations in e.g. each second.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Algorithm 1. The algorithm for tracking a marker in a video.
1: Set the constant prior variance and the initial likelihood variance.
2: t=1 . Initialize the track manually (by clicking the marker with mouse).
3: t=t+1 .
4: Evaluate posterior (3) for each pixel xt which is close to the prior mean.
5: Pick xt which maximizes the posterior.
6: Update E[C ( x1 : t1 )] and V c [C( x1 :t 1)] recursively.
7: Go to step 3.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
926
average equally rarely in each person unless someone has a cough or tends to breath
loudly through nose making the comparison of results fair.
_______________________________________________________________________
Algorithm 2 The algorithm for computing the time indices of talking from audio files.
Steps 2 - 5 are performed individually for each person.
1: Synchronize test persons audio tracks
2: Divide audio track into small blocks (half-a-second)
3: Compute audio power (rms value) in each block
4: Set a threshold (e.g. to the average power of the audio track)
5: For each block: If power > threshold the person is talking during the block
_______________________________________________________________________
Results
This Section presents an example of using the presented algorithms in a real situation
where three persons were designing and preparing an object by hand. The used video
resolution was 480640 and frame rate was 30 fps. The constant variance of the prior
distribution was set to 5. The color space of the appearance model was the hue-saturation
subspace of HSV color system and the initial variance of the likelihood was 0.01 in both
dimensions.
Fig. 2. Few samples of a co-design process and tracked markers at different time indices.
Six representative samples of the session at different time indices are illustrated in Figure
2, together with the locations of the markers found by the algorithm. In Figure 3, the hand
locations as well as verbalities are plotted against a one-minute time frame. In order to
synchronize the video and audio recordings, hands were clapped above the table
producing an audible sound in each microphone and a visible signal in the camera. The
threshold of step 4 in Algorithm 2 is set to 1.5 times the average of each person's power
values.
927
Figure 3. Few samples of a co-design process and tracked markers at different time
indices. The colors correspond to each other and the markers in Figure 2. In the bottom
panel, the dots mark a high root-mean-square value for a corresponding half-a-second
long audio clip indicating that the person is talking or, e.g., laughing at the time instance.
Conclusions
This paper has presented two algorithms to be used in analyzing video and audio
recordings captured during a co-design process. We propose that these algorithms may
provide answers to research questions related to social aspects of the co-design situation.
The algorithms are easy to implement and require no expensive equipment. The results of
our method can be used either alone or they can be used to assist a more traditional
video analysis tool. For instance, our method could be used to extract periods where e.g.
no one is talking, designers are moving hands more than in average, or designers hands
intersect each others' hands. In a study consisting of many groups the presented method
could be used to filter out the most interesting groups in terms of e.g. hand movements to
be analyzed in other tools.
The algorithm for analyzing video data aims to track the hands of each designer. As
opposed to traditional motion-capture devices, our algorithm needs only an inexpensive
web camera and markers which the designers are assumed to have in their hands. The
markers can for instance be colorful paper strips or small balls. The tracking algorithm
utilizes Bayesian methodology. The likelihood is based on the color values and the prior
distribution on the location and rate of the marker in the previous frame. The mode of the
posterior distribution is used to recursively update the parameters of the likelihood
928
distribution. The method contains only two fixed parameters: the elements in the constant
covariance matrix of the prior distribution (presumably same variance in both direction)
and the elements in the initial covariance of the likelihood model (also presumably same
initial variance in each direction). Of these, the latter has a minor effect on the
performance as the variances should be automatically settled after some amount of time
but the former is essential as it weights the appearance and shape models. Our
implementation of the algorithm is an interactive method, offering a possibility to correct
the tracks that get lost due to occlusion or poor performance of the algorithm. The
experiments revealed that red markers get lost least amount of time so if there is no
danger of hands getting crossed it might be advisable to use only red markers for all the
designers unless the table color is close to red, of course. The user should anyway
choose such marker colors that best stand out from their surrounding. The modularity of
the framework allows for easy modification of either models to, for instance, take into
account also the shape of the marker.
With a 'perfect' appearance model the temporal knowledge about the marker would be
irrelevant as each video frame could be considered as an independent still image in which
the marker would always be correctly located, independently of the marker locations in
past video frames. In practice, our probabilistic appearance model (likelihood) matches
the marker in each pixel of the video frame with some probability which may not be
highest at the correct location so the temporal knowledge (prior) about the marker location
in previous frames is used to filter out the false positives this is the essence of tracking.
When re-initializing a track after occlusion say, the hand emerges after being outside the
image area the temporal knowledge is absent as we lack the information about the hand
movements during the occlusion (when the hand was outside the image area). As the
color based model of the presented method is obviously too generic to be used for
locating the marker over the whole image (for instance, for a green marker the track might
be re-initialized in someone's green shirt) the user is asked to manually give the location
information. However, we are currently working on a better appearance model which
would hopefully be reliable enough to be used for re-initialization of tracks (or at least for
giving the user a considerable candidate location to be accepted or manually corrected).
Also, the method could automatically infer the occlusion from the likelihood values so that
the only required user-interaction would ideally be the initialization of the tracks in the
first frame.
The algorithm for analyzing audio data splits each audio signal into small blocks whose
audio power values, being the root-mean-square value of the block, are computed. The
person is inferred to talk whenever the power exceeds a threshold which can be obtained
automatically. By synchronizing the audio and video data with a hand clap in the
beginning of the session, the hand movements and use of voice can be compared at any
time instance. Our implementation offers a simple interface to investigate these at a time
interval chosen by the user, as in Figure 3. The algorithms are implemented in Matlab and
the code is published on-line as open source at
http://www.aivotyolaboratorio.fi/resources/toolbox-for-design-analysis/.
929
References
Arulampalam, M. S., Maskell, S., Gordon, N. and Clapp, T. (2002). A tutorial on particle
filters for online nonlinear/non-gaussian bayesian tracking. Signal Processing, IEEE
Transactions on 50(2), 174188.
Bar-Shalom, Y. (1990). Multitarget-multisensor tracking: advanced applications, Norwood,
MA, Artech House 1.
Castelli, F., Happe, F., Frith, U. and Frith, C. (2000). Movement and mind: a functional
imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns,
Neuroimage 12(3), 314325.
Doucet, A., De Freitas, N. and Gordon, N. (2001). An introduction to sequential monte
carlo methods, in Sequential Monte Carlo methods in practice, Springer, pp. 314.
Duda, R. O., Hart, P. E. and Stork, D. G. (2000). Pattern classification.
Hennessy, S. and Murphy, P. (1999). The potential for collaborative problem solving in
design and technology, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 9(1),
136.
Hutchins, E. (1995), Cognition in the Wild, Vol. 262082314, MIT press Cambridge, MA. 7.
Kalman, R. E. (1960). A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems, Journal
of basic Engineering 82(1), 3545.
Kaplan, J. T. and Iacoboni, M. (2006). Getting a grip on other minds: Mirror neurons,
intention understanding, and cognitive empathy, Social neuroscience 1(3-4), 175183.
Mondada, L. (2006). Participants online analysis and multimodal practices: Projecting the
end of the turn and the closing of the sequence. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 117129 .
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1996). The knowledge-creating company: How japanese
companies create the dynamics of innovation, Long Range Planning 29(4).
Norman, D. A. (1993), Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age
of the machine, Basic Books.
Perez, P., Hue, C., Vermaak, J. and Gangnet, M. (2002). Color-based probabilistic
tracking, in Computer vision ECCV 2002, Springer, pp. 661675.
Perry, M. and Sanderson, D. (1998). Coordinating joint design work: the role of
communication and artefacts. Design studies, (19)3, Elsevier, pp. 273-288.
Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Lahti, H., Muukkonen, H. and Hakkarainen, K. (2000).
Collaborative designing in a networked learning environment, in Collaborative design,
Springer, pp. 411420.
Simon, M., Behnke, S. and Rojas, R. (2001). Robust real time color tracking, in RoboCup
2000: Robot Soccer World Cup IV, Springer, pp. 239248.
Toivanen, M., Lampinen, J. (2011). Incremental object matching and detection with
Bayesian methods and particle filters. Computer Vision, IET, 5(4), pp. 201-210
930
Valkenburg, R. and Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams, Design
studies 19(3), 249271.
Miika Toivanen
Dr. tech. Miika Toivanen has experience on computer vision, applied mathematics,
computational modeling and theoretical physics. His aim as a researcher is to utilize his
knowledge in practical problems.
Minna Huotilainen
Research professor Minna Huotilainen works at the Finnish Institute of Occupational
Health, Brain at Work Research Centre, focusing on work-related neuroscience. Her
interests include cognitive processes such as perception, memory, and attention, and the
cognitive effects of sleep, work fatigue, attentive problems, and embodied cognition.
Huageng Chi
Huageng Chi's research at Finnish Institute of Occupational Health include eye tracking
glass design, multimodal user input and data visualization, and applications of computer
vision techniques in a number of research projects. He received master degree in Signal
processing in Telecommunications from Helsinki University of Technology, and worked
previously at VTT Technical Research Center of Finland.
Pirita SeitamaaHakkarainen
Professor of Craft Studies. She has built her research program on the development and
application of cognitive theories of design processes. Her main interest is to analyse
expertise in design, the nature of the design process and the role of the external
representations such as drawings.
931
Abstract
Over the past 13 years, the authors have established an international network of partner universities who are committed to co-operate in trans-disciplinary and locally distributed ways by using
modern information and communication technologies and, hence, crossing cultural and disciplinary boundaries. The projects always originate from industrial tasks, tackle challenges that are
complex in nature and that cannot be solved by mono-disciplinary teams alone. The paper describes the pedagogic background of this setting as well as the structure of the course. Due to
the fact that the entire design process is based on electronic communication, the decision making process is accessible for subsequent analyses of the digital data bases generated throughout the multi-disciplinary process. This allows to better understand the characteristics and differences of successful and effective processes vs. miscarried and failing ones.
Keywords
Trans-Disciplinary Design Education; International and Trans-Cultural Cooperation; Dynamic Knowledge
Databases
Introduction
The efficacy of project-based learning in design education has gained broad acceptance. Moreover, when project-based learning is performed in teams, it mirrors professional design practice
more closely, and offers an attractive proposition to educational institutions to produce highly
employable graduates. Therefore, most state of the art design curricula employ project-based
learning principles within the context of student teams.
Innovative curricula designers clearly recognize the significance of interdisciplinary practice and
organize student teams in such a way that the different functions associated with key disciplines
of design projects are represented. However, the reality is that the majority of students usually
belong to a single educational discipline, and some are simply asked to wear another disciplines hat for the duration of projects. There have been very few consistent attempts at recruiting students who actually belong to different educational disciplines so that a true inter- or even
trans-disciplinary make-up is achieved. We use the terminology based on the US American
Academy of Sciences definition: Interdisciplinary research is a mode of research by teams or individuals that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from
two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to
solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or area of research practice.
Project Oriented Learning Environment (POLE) is one such educational paradigm. This paper
describes the POLE platform, discusses insights gained during the more than ten years of its
existence and the resulting methodological improvements and presents key findings of POLEs
assessments. Finally, the recently implemented web-accessible data base (Libraries for Advanced Knowledge Environments, LAKE) is described which allows the analysis of the decision
making process of internationally distributed (student) teams. This is based on the recordings of
the teams' meetings by video conference and their processing by speech recognition software.
With these two columns POLE puts emphasis on the design process as well as on the final
product.
932
Pedagogic Background
There have been many attempts to establish the theory of design education (Eris, 2006; Dym,
2005; Haselrigg, 1999). But nonetheless, we recognize a pluralist paradigm in this field. One
such paradigm is the "distributed trans-disciplinary project-based design methodology" that is
gaining growing acceptance (Eris, 2005). Nowadays, students are not only increasingly challenged within their specific core disciplines, they are also supposed to develop the necessary
skills to apply this particular knowledge in practice. Ideally, this goes hand in hand with mature
understanding displayed by the individual of a social, cultural, and economic environment. The
practical application of theoretical knowledge can, thus, only be implemented successfully, if
these three basic elements are taken into account (Faste, 1993). It is in this field where the Project Oriented Learning Environment (POLE) has its position, i.e. where knowledge and skills are
combined to accumulate professional competence.
In addition to students disciplinary knowledge, the ability to work efficiently within multicultural
environments has become increasingly important. Universities are, therefore, looking to expand
and deepen this particular aspect in order to provide the necessary expertise in this field. This
has led universities to becoming more proactive with regards to networking and offering collaborative courses.
POLE sees itself as a learning system cooperating within a network of universities and industry
partners. It does so within a reflexive context, taking into account the various cultures involved
in order to create new methods of resolution regarding teaching and learning. The students are
at the core of this concept, and are given the option to develop process-oriented expert
knowledge through trans-disciplinary teamwork. Simultaneously, they learn to work independently and to deal with current problem cases through the use of modern information and
communication tools. In the course of this joint activity, it has become apparent that this complementary aspect has gained in importance.
The rapid technological development and the need to cope with an increasing amount of information generate a challenging situation for both: professional courses at universities and industry. University teachers and researchers have to constantly update their knowledge on newly
available technologies and products. The same happens to professionals working in industry.
The research done at universities increasingly necessitates the support of industry, not just financially, but also to test ideas in practice. Conversely, industries can also benefit from receiving creative concepts originating from unbiased out-of-the-box ideas and having the opportunity
to present their strategies to students, who will be future professional employees and probably
work in their design teams. Therefore, the potential which a collaborative networked learning
environment can offer to both, universities and industry is obvious.
Design innovation, which essentially means the definition, development and creation of new
concepts and their successful launching to the market, is the driving factor for a powerful, competitive economy and the prosperity of society (Feyerabend, 1975; Freire, 1985; Pugh, 1996,
Pohl, 2006; Klein, 2010). Therefore, the education of creative individuals at universities and the
continuous professional development of architects, engineers, industrial designers, etc. in the
wide field of design innovation are of central importance. POLE's philosophy is committed to
fostering trans-disciplinary design thinking and creating awareness for sustainable solutions that
are not only economically viable, environmentally sound and socially equitable today, but also
allow future generations to do the same.
933
POLE courses generally last for one academic semester. Originally, they used to start with a
physical kick-off week at the site of the industry partner. However, this experience has shown,
that the students were usually overwhelmed and could not react appropriately to the inputs received. Therefore, the new structure (see Figure 2) initiates the project with a virtual session by
video conference in which the students and their coaches introduce themselves, get a rough
introduction into the task and are asked to start their disciplinary analysis and research phase.
After two weeks the students then physically come together for team building and trust building
934
exercises. The new scheme has shown to be very successful in so far as the students arrive
prepared and already full of questions. The main task during the kick-off phase is to define a
meaningful process planning per team with a shared goal statement and milestones as a deliverable. This physical gathering has proven to be eminently valuable because it is this phase that
creates the "glue" and the commitment to be able to work together afterwards in a distributed
fashion using video conferencing tools.
"SnowDive": Design of Novel Sports Equipment for Use in Snow and Sand
"Architecture and the Body": Planning of a Sports
"CanPlus": Novel Packaging Systems (Nestl)
"Driven Driver": Navigation System for the Car of the Future (Volkswagen)
"High Light": Controllable Head Torch for Mountaineers (Mammut Sports)
"Move!": Multi-Sensory System, Recording Sports Activities (Actismile)
On Track: Novel Ticketing System for Swiss Transportation Company
ConSenses: Interactive Communication Systems for Cars (Continental Automotive)
Catch Up!: The Future of Digital News (NZZ Media Group)
Think 2025: Concept Analyses for Interaction in 2025 (AUDI AG)
The assessment methodology that was used to monitor and measure key aspects of student
experience relied on a mixed set of techniques:
935
Throughout the course, students appreciated the interdisciplinary and international nature of the teamwork which POLE promotes.
Students appreciation of the realistic nature of projects increased after the projects end.
Communication and interdisciplinary teamwork were clearly perceived to be two major
learning outcomes.
Distributed students spent slightly more time on group work than individual work when
compared to local students although both groups spent about the same amount of total
time per week.
In retrospect, the personal log-book proved to be an invaluable source of experienced
knowledge.
The co-location of the kick-off week is of central importance to the team performance.
Re-evaluation of video-taped team and/or review sessions proved to be a welcome
source for a better process understanding and for personal awareness.
936
Figure 3. Structure of Knowledge Data Base: A Web Application allows access to Data Base.
937
from the engineering disciplines) who wish to start "doing something" rather than taking ambiguity as an opportunity to explore a broader spectrum of options. Another challenge arises when
the team members were taught different methodologies at their home universities to tackle a
problem. The pros and cons have to be discussed and a selection or compromise have to be
found; this process forces the students to clearly formulate and defend "their method" and by
doing so becoming more aware of its relativity and own idiosyncrasies. A further important aspect is the a-synchronous mode of working due to time zone differences. This forces students to
formulate their ideas and contributions in writing rather than discussing them real time with the
other team members. This situation necessitates a much clearer formulation of ones own
thoughts - especially when team colleagues from another discipline must understand the contribution. What might have been self-explanatory in one's own discipline, needs a more detailed
description in a multi-disciplinary context in which the respect for and the integration of the other
profession is a key for success. It is POLE's belief that in particular this aspect - despite of often
being considered an irritation and extra work - reflects the real life co-operation scenarios in
design studios and engineering firms in which the graduates will be employed in the future - or,
as it has been the case, that POLE graduates establish start-up companies across cultural and
disciplinary borders.
References
Dym, C., Agogino, A., Eris, O., Frey, D., Leifer, L. (2005). Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and
Learning, International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol.1, 103-120.
Eris, O., Holliger, C., Elspass, W., Leifer, L., (2005). Toward a Theory of Distributed Interdisciplinary
Project-based Design Education, Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design
ICED 2005, Melbourne.
Eris, O. (2006). Insisting on Truth at the Expense of Conceptualization: Can Engineering Portfolios
Help?, International Journal of Engineering Education, Volume 22, No. 3, 551-559.
Faste, R., Roth, B., Wilde, D. J. (1993). Integrating Creativity into the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum, Proceedings, Innovations in Engineering Design Education, ASME, 93-98.
Feyerabend, P. (1975). Wider den Methodenzwang, Suhrkamp (stw 597), Frankfurt am Main. English
Translation: Against Method, publ. Humanities Press 1975.
Freire, P. (1985). The Politics of Education: Culture, Power and Liberation, Granby, Mass, Bergin &
Garvey Publishers.
Hazelrigg, G. A. (1999). An Axiomatic Framework for Engineering Design, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 121, 342-347.
Klein, J.T. (2010) A taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity, in: The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity, R.
Frodeman, J. Thompson Klein, and C. Mitcham, Editors, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 15-30.
Pohl, C., Hirsch Hadorn, G. (2006). Gestaltungsprinzipien fr die transdisziplinre Forschung - Ein Beitrag des td-net, Mnchen: oekom.
Pugh, S. (1996). Concept Selection: A Method that Works, in: Creating Innovative Products Using Total
Design, D. Clausing and R. Andrade (editors.), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Smith, K. A. (2004). Teamwork and Project Management, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Wood, W. H. (2004). Decision-Based Design: A Vehicle for Curriculum Integration, International Journal
of Engineering Education, Vol. 20, No. 3, 433-439.
Christoph Holliger
Professor of physics with research activities in the medical sciences; has been engaged in educational
research at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland over the past 20 years.
Roberto Iiguez Flores
Director de la Divisin de Arquitectura y Diseo, Tecnolgico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey,
Campus Guadalajara, Mexico.
Juan Claudio Monterrubio Soto
Director de Investigacin y Desarrollo Tecnolgico, Tecnolgico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey,
Campus Guadalajara, Mexico.
938
Corresponding author:
Dr. Christoph Holliger
Professor of Physics (and by courtesy of the Arts)
University of Applied Sciences and Arts North Western Switzerland
Klosterzelgstrasse 2, CH-5210 Windisch, Switzerland
Phone: 0041 56 202 7335
christoph.holliger@fhnw.ch
939
Abstract
This paper focuses on the post-industrial society and the changing object of design. Postindustrial design will be realized through the digitalization of the physical world and the
advent of digital fabrication tools such as 3D printing that bridge the gap between digital
design and physical goods. In post-industrial design professional designers will be
concerned with designing toolkits and incomplete designs rather than fully determined
products. The consumer will be adapting the incomplete design to his or her needs and
desires in some way or another. This adaptation could be done with minimal involvement
as well as by intensive participation.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the changing relation between consumer and
designer in a post-industrial society by examining the object of design. We exemplify the
new object of design by examining several consumer products that possess some
property of post-industrial design. Based on our research we propose four ways, or tactics,
for designers to deal with heterogeneous consumer needs and preferences, two of which
are unique to post-industrial design. We end this paper by briefly discussing the
implications to design practice and design education.
Keywords
Post-Industrial Society; Democratization; Design Practice; Object of Design; Prosumer;
3D Printing
The industrial designer was born out of the industrial revolution and the designers aim is
to design products that can be produced in mass and target a mass market. The
interaction designer was born out of the advent of computers and the digitalization of
information and communication. The rise of smart devices and the Internet lead to a new
professional practice focusing on human-computer interaction. Throughout the years
design as a field and professional practice has changed due to technological
advancements, social and environmental changes, and therefore the object of design has
changed. In the 20th century it has evolved from designing mass-produced products, to
product interactions, to product experiences to product service systems.
The post-industrial society (Bell, 1976; Hunt, 2005) will have its affects on the object of
design and what designers design will change compared to what they designed in the
industrial society. Post-industrial design will be realized through the digitalization of the
physical world (Gershenfeld, 2005) and the advent of digital fabrication tools that bridge
the gap between digital design and physical goods. The development of digitalization of
information leads to easy distribution and sharing of information. Products have become
data and are thus as easy to share as a text document. 3D printing is emerging for
producing end-use products through increased performance and accessibility and this
leads to on-demand production of individualized products. Flexible manufacturing
technologies allow distributed manufacturing of products and an increased possibility to
adapt to local needs. Furthermore, new design tools in the form of software enable a
larger audience to engage in digital design.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the changing relation between consumer and
designer in a post-industrial society by examining the object of design. We exemplify the
new object of design and based on our research we propose four ways, or tactics, to
940
mediate between consumer and designer, two of which are unique to post-industrial
design. These tactics will guide us in discussing the implications to design practice and
design education. In this paper we will use designer to indicate the professional designer
and consumer and layperson to refer to the person who is not trained or experienced as a
designer, but engages in design activities.
This paper is structured as follows; first we will look how the role of the industrial designer
has developed in the industrial society and discuss the characteristics of post-industrial
design. We analyze examples of a new object of design from todays design practice
where the designer has adopted a new role. We present a model that depicts the relation
between consumer and designer in post-industrial design based on designers versus
consumers influence and value to the consumer. We end this paper by discussing the
implications to the role of the professional designer and give an outlook on the future of
design practice as well as design education.
941
942
943
positioning of these tentacles randomly vary and therefore the final shape emerges from
the computer-generated process. This process is developed by the professional designer
and to an extent controlled by the designer without any consumer involvement. These
lampshades are then produced by 3D printing.
Each example that we have discussed exemplifies post-industrial design in some way or
another. The images of the designs (1a, 2, 3 and 4) only depict one instance of the design,
but as one can see in Figure 1b there are many instances. This pluralism is characteristic
of post-industrial design and therefore depicting a post-industrial design in a single image
is not representative of the many possibilities it consists of.
Figure 1 Breeding Table no.68 (1a) and multiple instances (1b), Suuz 3D printed ring (2),
SketchChair (3) and Lampadina Mutanta lamp (4)
Defining Tactics
Tactics is used in this paper as ways for designers to deal with heterogeneous consumer
needs and preferences. The consumer is involved, from committing to a choice to active
participation, and tactics deal with the tension between consumer and designer. The
relationship between the consumer and designer is a service relationship; typically the
designer is in service by developing meaningful products for the consumer whereas the
consumer is being served (Nelson & Stolterman, 2012, p.41). The products that are
developed are meaningful to the consumer and they have value, therefore they are willing
to purchase and use them. In post-industrial design, the consumer is no longer just being
served, but acts as an active participant in the design process. From our research, we see
that the role of the consumer can be fulfilled in different ways and therefore we propose
four tactics, namely choice, customization, appropriation and emergence.
944
Tactic Choice
Choice is the tactic that forms the basis of industrial design and mass consumption and it
appeals to the consumer by providing alternatives. The designer aims to satisfy a variety
of consumers and therefore a variety of consumer needs and preferences while
maintaining full control over the designed objects. In the industrial society a consumer has
the choice between a black, white or blue toaster. Each design has been fully defined and
even produced and the consumer can simply accept or reject the solutions. A certain
amount of choice is meaningful to the consumer; one can choose a more preferred
solution over a less preferred solution, for instance in terms of aesthetics or functionality.
Too little choice might not be satisfactory to a group of consumers while offering too much
choice could have a range of negative effects such as postponing purchasing decisions
and confusion (Schwartz, 2004).
In post-industrial design the tactic choice is still a viable way to satisfy the consumer as
can be seen from the example of the Breeding Tables. The uniqueness of the tables is
however created in a different way than would be done in industrial design. There is
certain randomness in the designs and the use of an algorithm allows the designer to
generate many instances within the same design family. The designer is able to create
many instances so that each single consumer can have a different table in terms of
aesthetics. An advantage for the manufacturer is that the tables can be produced ondemand, which means that they can be produced according to real markets needs rather
than based on anticipated sales. The tactic choice puts the designer in the driving seat
and the consumer is the passive receiver of a design. This relation works to a certain
extent and especially for certain product categories such as standardized components.
However, when we look at more personal and expressive products the higher involvement
of the consumer might be beneficial for consumer, designer and manufacturer.
Tactic Customization
Customization is concerned with differentiating a product from a generic group of products
(Tsigkas & Papantoniou, 2009). This tactic requires an increasing involvement of the
consumer and allows the consumer to alter proposed solutions to fit his or her preferences.
The designer retains most of the control over the solution and the possibility for
customization, however, the consumer becomes involved and thereby creating something
more valuable to them. The tactic customization creates value in the industrial society
since differentiation is difficult to establish in the industrial manufacturing system. Apart
from hand-made luxury products, the automotive industry where a consumer can choose
engine type, colour, fabric colour and pattern and so on is a example of customization on
a large scale. Customization is deterministic and often deals with the configuration of
prefabricated modules or the arrangement of predetermined options.
Post-industrial design makes customization almost effortless to realize due to the use of
digital fabrication technologies such as 3D printing. Companies that offer custom 3D
printed products such as jewellery are widely available by now. Customization invites the
consumer into the design process and gives room for the consumer to express, often
aesthetic, preferences. Customization is based on the idea that a unique product is more
valuable to a consumer than a standardized product. Industrial manufacturing systems are
designed to deliver high volumes of the same products while digital fabrication
technologies enable one-off production and this could make customization a commodity.
Tactic Appropriation
The tactic appropriation is concerned with contextualizing a design to a particular context,
user situation or desire. The involvement of the consumer is more substantial compared to
customization and the outcome is less determined on forehand by a designer. The
concept of appropriation has been used in architecture where the designer appropriates a
building to a specific site with contextual needs and demands. The context informs the
945
Tactic Emergence
The tactic emergence can be seen as an explorative process that has a direction, but not
a determined end point. A designer would define a set of rules or conditions and the
design becomes known3 from the context. The consumer could be involved and steer
the emergence in one way or another. Emergence is present in the natural world where
organisms grow, evolve and adapt over time to a particular environment. In the man-made
world, algorithms can have emergent qualities where they describe a set of rules and the
process of applying these rules will lead to an outcome. A example of emergence is the
use of databases in web design where information can be retrieved for each visitor
thereby creating a unique experience depending on ones input or situation.
Emergence can also be found in the analogue world and it could be seen as form finding
rather than form giving. Form finding is not an entirely new concept; the craftsperson was
already concerned with finding the form within a material. The structure of natural
materials, such as wood, dictate to an extent what a craftsperson makes from it. In the
post-industrial society the focus shifts from the designer as form giver to the designer
enabling form finding. The form emerges rather than being given in advance. In the post3
Merriam-Webster
dictionary,
www.merriam-webster.com
946
industrial process, the form emerges like it does when a craftsperson is working, however,
the difference is in the way it is achieved. Post-industrial design finds form through
computation and code whereas the craftsperson works by hand. The post-industrial
designer does not define a final shape of a product, but one formulates rules that generate
a final shape. This process can take place with or without consumer involvement.
The project Future Factories could have emergent qualities when the Lampadina Mutanta
(Figure 1-4) would focus on adapting the tentacles to the usage, environment or another
external influence. In this way, a lampshade could be generated that fits a consumers
context, preferences and usage in a way that is both surprising as well as appropriate,
without a designer determining it completely in advance. The tactic emergence inclines
towards a more natural rather than mechanical way of designing objects. It opens up to
notions of ambiguity such as randomness and mutation compared to strict control of the
whole object by the designer.
947
948
decision-making material for the consumers that will ensure that the consumers can feel a
higher level of participation but still create products of professional quality. This is a big
change from the current designer-centric thinking, and one that will require immense
changes for how we educate designers for the future. Are we ready for it?
References
Bell, D. (1976). The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social
Forecasting (p. 616). Basic Books.
Cruickshank, L., & Evans, M. (2008). Media Communication, Consumption and Use: The
Changing Role of the Designer. Undisciplined! Proceedings of the Design Research
Society Conference 2008. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Hallam University.
Davis, S. M. (1987). Future Perfect: Tenth Anniversary Edition (p. 272). Basic Books.
Dean, L. T., & Atkinson, P. (2003). Future Factories (pp. 120). Huddersfield.
Fischer, G., & Scharff, E. (2000). Meta-Design: Design for Designers. Proceedings of the
3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 396405). Brooklyn, New
York: ACM.
Forty, A. (1986). Objects of Desire: Design and Society Since 1750 (p. 256). Thames &
Hudson.
Franke, N., & Piller, F. T. (2002). Configuration Toolkits for Mass Customization: Setting a
Research Agenda (Vol. 33).
Garud, R., Jain, S., & Tuertscher, P. (2008). Incomplete by Design and Designing for
Incompleteness. Organization Studies, 29(3), 351371.
doi:10.1177/0170840607088018
Gershenfeld, N. (2005). FAB: The Coming Revolution On Your Desktop - From Personal
Computers to Personal Fabrication (1st editio., p. 278). New York: Basic Books.
Hunt, J. (2005). A Manifesto for Postindustrial Design. I.D. Magazine, (December).
IaaC, & Rodrigo Rubio Architect. (2012). Endesa Pavilion (p. 24). Barcelona, Spain.
Retrieved from www.iaac.net
Kalay, Y. E. (1999). Performance-based design. Automation in Construction, 8(4), 395
409. doi:10.1016/S0926-5805(98)00086-7
Moran, T. (2002). Everyday Adaptive Design. London, UK: Designing Interactive Systems
2002 keynote.
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The Design Way: Intentional Change in a
Unpredictable World (2nd ed., p. 296). The MIT Press.
Sanders, E. B.-N. (2006). Scaffolds for Building Everyday Creativity. In J. Frascara (Ed.),
Design for Effective Communications: Creating Contexts for Clarity and Meaning.
New York: Allworth Press.
949
Saul, G., Lau, M., Mitani, J., & Igarashi, T. (2011). SketchChair: An All-in-one Chair
Design System for End Users. TEI 11 Fifth International Conference on Tangible,
Embedded and Embodied Interaction (pp. 7380). ACM.
Schwartz, B. (2004). Missed Opportunities. The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less.
How the Culture of Abundance Robs Us of Satisfaction (1st ed., pp. 117146). New
York, NY: Harper Perennial.
Tseng, M. M., & Jiao, J. (2001). Mass Customization. Handbook of Industrial Engineering,
Technology and Operation Management (3rd ed., p. 685). New York, NY: Wiley.
Tsigkas, A., & Papantoniou, A. (2009). Theorizing a New Agenda on Mass Customization.
In J. Suominen, F. Piller, M. Ruohonen, M. Tseng, & S. Jacobson (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Mass Customization and
Personalization MCPC2009 (pp. 5562). Helsinki: Aalto University School of Art and
Design.
Valtonen, A. (2007). Redefining Industrial Design: Changes in the Design Practice in
Finland. Redefining Industrial Design. University of Arts and Design Helsinki,
Helsinki.
Von Hippel, E. (2001). PERSPECTIVE: User toolkits for innovation. Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 18(4), 247257. Retrieved from
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1016/S0737-6782(01)00090-X
Wakkary, R., & Maestri, L. (2008). Aspects of Everyday Design: Resourcefulness,
Adaptation, and Emergence. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction,
24(5), 478491. doi:10.1080/10447310802142276
Guido Hermans
Guido Hermans is a PhD student in industrial design at Ume Institute of Design and he
has a background in industrial design from Delft University of Technology. His research
focuses on 3D printing, mass customization and the implications on the role of the
professional designer. It investigates how involving the layman in the design of everyday
products will change the role of the designer and in his research he aims to develop new
methods and tools for designers to be able to design for adaptability. Areas that are of
interest are computational design, toolkits, democratization of technology and 3D printing.
Anna Valtonen
Professor Anna Valtonen in currently Dean of Aalto University School of Arts, Design and
Architecture in Finland. Her research interests are in design & society, its history and
future, and on the role of designers within. Previously Valtonen has been the Rector of
Ume Institute of Design (UID), Ume University, in Sweden. She has also worked
extensively within industry, and holds many positions of trust within universities,
organizations and corporations.
950
Abstract
This paper identifies a key mechanism and its constituent qualities, for facilitating mutual
understandings of risk. The focus of participatory workshops has expanded towards
addressing broader questions of strategy, business models and other organizational and
inter-organisational issues. To develop effective partnerships across the boundaries
separating companies, it is necessary for those involved to gain mutual understandings
despite the challenging paradoxical, abstract and sensitive aspects of discussing risks.
A richer understanding of design facilitation practice is offered through drawing together
the following experimentation with industrialists in innovation workshops and interactive
interventions in artistic cultural venues: 1) a large revolving door sculpture Blender. 2) a
series of interventions utilising audiovisual transmissions to enable one person to act as a
proxy for absent others, 4) a table top tool kits for discussing business relationship issues
and 5) a number of bespoke interactive sculpture-like artifacts for provoking insights
concerning business dilemmas.
Analysis of the cases reveals an underlying theme of breakdowns or ruptures as central to
facilitating mutual understandings of risk. Such breakdowns are shown to be made of, and
valuable due to two main qualities: co-created facilitation and perspective plurality.
Keywords
Risk; Facilitation; Participatory Design; Participatory Innovation
951
interconnected world. Collaboration can offer a route to reduce uncertainties, but requires
a mutual understanding of risk as perceived by all parties involved. Risk, though, is
difficult to discuss owing to its paradoxical, abstract and fluid nature and the potential
vulnerability both commercial and personal involved in disclosing stances towards
uncertainties.
These uncertainties concerning undesirables are difficult to address and discuss precisely
for the same reason that Rumsfeld's formulation was lampooned - they concern a
paradoxical need to know about not knowing what is not known: When there is a risk,
there must be something that is unknown or has an unknown outcome. Therefore,
knowledge about risk is knowledge about lack of knowledge. (Hannson 2012).
952
Participatory Innovation
Building upon the field of Participatory Design, one approach to innovation that appears to
requiree particular attention to risk is that of Participatory Innovation (Buur & Matthews,
2008). As a research field, Participatory Innovation (PI) strives to bring together a marketorientated combination of Design Anthropology and Participatory Design (ibid). However,
as an innovation practice, the most salient aspect of PI is the staging of multi-stakeholder
workshops that bring representatives of more than one organisation, and usually different
departments and disciplines from larger organisations, together with customers, users and
other interested parties (Buur and Larsen, 2010). Even PI projects with a strongly
ethnographic component can be seen as gathering material for some form of multistakeholder project workshop (Jaffari, 2012; Boer, 2012). The etymology of stakeholder one with a stake marks vividly how all such participants in a PI project can be seen as
being defined by what they have to gain or lose through their involvement. One could get
carried away and also point to how a constellation of people holding sharp pointy stakes
are all armed, thus given the capability of harming one or more fellow participants or
possibly even themselves. Loading such colourful meanings onto and through objects is
an important quality that Participatory Innovation has drawn from Participatory Design's
use of props and other "things to think" with (Brandt & Grunnet, 2000). However, PI can
be characterised as being distinct from PD through its implicit emphasis on the risks of
innovation, as opposed to the rewards. Facilitating users in design development can be
953
954
Dynamics of risk
A further difficulty in facilitating mutual understanding of risk is its fluid, ever-changing
nature. Perspectives of risk vary from moment to moment in a single participant, as both
they and the world change. A collaborative endeavor is particularly dynamic in this regard,
especially if one accepts the proposition that it is less accurate to use the noun form in
discussing organisational relationships. According to Stacey's theory of complex process
of relating, all professional relationships are fluid in nature - it is through unfolding
collaborative processes of relating that they are formed and maintained (2001). Innovation
projects involving multiple stakeholders require, and often initiate, such fluidity. This is not
only amongst participants meeting face-to-face in a workshop but also a vast web of
dynamic relations with and among colleagues and other stakeholders, and possibly even
competitors that are not present.
955
(figure 1) are described in (Mitchell 2009). The emergent properties of this interactive
installation fostered situations of interdependency and indeterminacy amongst participants,
many of whom chose to take physical risks for themselves and impose risks upon other
participants through boisterous behaviour. This hazardous exuberance was but one
example of how participants appropriated the contraption for playful and communicative
purposes unforeseen by the author.
In (Mitchell, et al 2011) we present how a situation of high interdependency was
engendered by deploying audiovisual transmission equipment to allow a human proxy or
cyranoid to relay the words of an absent controller (figure 2).
In (Heinemann et. al 2009) we describe a technique of using a bricolage toolkit to enable
workshop participants to make a static three-dimensional map of relationships in an
abstract business landscape or value network. (Allee 2000). From a provided collection
of diverse objects, participants choose various items as nodes and connectors to
represent inter and intra organisational relationships. Analysis shows how physical
objects come to be assigned with more abstract labels through processes of proposing,
negotiating and eventually agreeing or disagreeing on a representation. Paradoxically, the
moments when participants most risk misunderstanding or even causing offence are
found to result in more detailed explications, and richer exchanges of perspectives.
Further analysis in (Buur et. al 2013) demonstrates how the success of this toolkit is
based on how it encourages participants to explore and exchange perspectives
concerning business concepts, by providing a common helicopter view to participants.
Figure 2: Signals are transmitted by the cameras and microphones on the hat of the cyranoid (left
centre) to allow participants in a remote control room to participate in social occasions via this
proxy.
956
Figure 3: Industrials share a joke whilst making a tangible map of organisational relations.
Figure 4: Workshop participants act out spatial relations of the different actors in and
around an online booking system
In (Mitchell et al. 2013) we argue that unpredictable physical materials are particularly
suitable for fostering a hard to grasp, abstract aspect of innovation related risks - the
if/then causalities of business. Surprise and uncertainty evoked by the use of what we
term kinetic materials in workshops are shown to facilitate fresh exchanges of
perspectives which appear particularly suitable in relation to the fluid and unstable nature
of business collaborations. The most influential example of a kinetic tool kit is our pinball
ramp which provokes discussion of how different actions may influence customers'
choices (figure 5). Marbles rolling down a ramp represents customers. They ricochet off
adjustable obstacles on their route towards different receptacles representing e.g.
957
customers that buy and customers that don't. The set allows participants to quickly
evaluate different strategies and it sparks animated discussions, thanks to the partly
unpredictable behavior of the rolling marbles (Mitchell & Buur 2010).
Welcoming Breakdowns
Based upon a cross comparison of the workshop cases with the social contraptions, we
show below that various forms of breakdown are central to facilitating shared
understandings of risk. The underlying influence of breakdown or ruptures in the
alignment between participants found in the empirical material is in line with many other
design research approaches. However, this paper identifies a particularly valuable set of
qualities, namely: active breakdowns, co-created experiences and plurality of perspectives.
These qualities are valuable both as possible tactics for provoking breakdowns, but they
also each bring other benefits for facilitating shared understandings of risk.
Breakdowns in Alignment
From one perspective, the examined activities can all be seen as concerned with
attempting to create alignment between participants, whether this be synchronising their
movements in space as with the physical Blender, synchronising conversational channels,
as with the cyranoids or aligning understandings of innovation landscapes and business
958
dilemmas in the workshop activities. However, closer inspection reveals that breakdowns
in alignment create fertile conditions for shared sense-making and co-creation concerning
risk.
These ruptures occur in a wide variety of forms and degrees of severity, The most explicit
examples being with the kinetic materials since we argue that Oops! moments lead to
new concepts and stronger shared experiences. In the table top mapping innovation
workshops analysis, we showed disalignment leads to richer discussions: participants only
take the time to explicate to each other what a particular object might communicate in
situations when there is disagreement.
The embodied staging of business landscapes show how a breaking of workshop
participant togetherness through becoming physically isolated within an activity provokes
reconsideration of a business direction. Deploying Cyranoids was seen to create a
breakdown in how people consider human agency and identity: the thoughts of one
person being uttered by another played with the separation of people, minds and bodies.
This quality can be seen as particularly apt for provoking exchange concerning risks,
because a wish to avoid breakdowns or disruptions of various kinds can be seen as an
aspect of many risk-related decisions in the world of design and business. Breakdowns
are central for facilitating shared understandings of risk because they cause a shift in
participants' attention away from the known and towards the uncertain. The common
experience of uncertainty serves to legitimise risk as a topic given that it provokes or
highlights aspects of risk that are present in the facilitation situation itself.
959
The Oops! moments ruptures in our kinetic material workshops have become, in a sense,
monumentalised (to a very modest degree) by that paper's highlighting them as the standout, brief seconds of many activities. The social catalyst effects of the Blender can also
be considered as abnormalities and ruptures of typical gallery behaviour; in other words, a
breakdown of the individual inclinations and social norms that inhibit social interaction.
Co-created Facilitation
Another promising quality for facilitating shared understandings of risk is how breakdowns
in the presented papers often occur in what can be described as participant co-created
situations. The less control a facilitator exerts (if indeed there is a human facilitator)
appears to alter the character of breakdowns so that they are more unexpected.
Although not seen as creative output in the traditional sense, the Blender revolving (or not)
as the result of participant actions means the movement of the sculpture can be seen as
co-created in that it emerges from the actions and/or active passivity of multiple
participants. The utterances of the Cyranoids are a provoking form of co-constructed
dialogue, involving the unusual combination of one persons' words with prosody, body
language and other nonverbal communication of their proxy. Given the attention that an
obvious Cyranoid attracts in a group situation, one could argue that, in providing a focal
point, a Cyranoid is almost akin to being a co-created facilitator. Our analysis of workshop
tangible mapping activities showed how workshop participants progressively co-construct
their shared representations of current and possible business landscapes. This is in
contrast to more kinetic material where the insightful improvised responses to the
unplanned breakdowns of a shared collaborative creative activity are largely the result of
an individual participant's wit.
An element of co-creation of the situation is also beneficial, for it distributes responsibility
for facilitating the sensitive topic. Here, we view responsibility not so much in the sense
of blame avoidance, even though this is an aspect of risk management strategies worthy
of special attention in facilitation rather, responsibility is viewed in the sense of
harnessing the attention of participants themselves to their fellow participants' sensitivities
and vulnerabilities concerning risks.
960
Within Design Research, one of the most influential proponents of co-creation is Liz
Sanders. She argues how using tangible design materials helps understanding users
since these materials allow exploring what participants do, say, and make (2002).
Comparing the artistic contraptions with the innovation workshop analysis allows for
proposing an extension to Sanders model. Namely that for facilitating shared
understandings of risk, it is valuable to see what participants make for each other and do
to each other.
The great utility this has for facilitating shared understandings of risk can be explained
through reference to Boholm and Corvellec's 'relational theory of risk' (2011). They argue
that risk should be considered as being comprised of three elements: 1) an object 'at risk'
(by object they mean in the most general sense - material or immaterial, cultural or
behavioural, someone or something) ; 2) a 'risk object' (again in the most general sense of
object) that poses a possible harm and; 3) a perceived linkage between these elements.
Risks then can be considered relationally as:"linking two objects, a risk object and an risk
object at risk, in a causal and contingent way so that the risk object is considered, in some
way and under certain circumstances, to threaten the valued object at risk" (ibid: 176).
This explication of risk as a network of relations shows how any single phenomenon can
simultaneously be regarded as a risk object, as an object at risk, or as having nothing to
do with risk, by observers operating under different assumptions" (ibid: 181-2).
A workshop situation where roles and influences are blurred can bring home to
participants how, on various levels, they can all potentially regard themselves and every
fellow participant as both at risk from, and posing risks to one and all. On the individual
level, every participant may potentially pose some form of modestly scaled social,
emotional or reputational risk to one another; participants and their actions can all
themselves be viewed as being at risk, risk objects or unconnected to risk. This has useful
parallels with the different perceptions present when diverse stakeholders come together
in Participatory Innovation workshops.
Co-created facilitation experiences have value also in that they can provoke participants
to act and view from a plurality of perspectives, as in rotating roles between facilitator and
facilitated. This valuable quality of experiencing multiple viewpoints manifests itself in
other ways. This brings other benefits for facilitating shared understandings of risk as
discussed below.
Plurality of Perspectives
Prompting participants to experience a multiplicity of differing perspectives makes a
situation more prone to breakdowns, as it increases self and mutual uncertainty
concerning roles in the immediate here and now, but also considering a situation from
many vantage points can reveal inconsistencies in how a situation is viewed. This quality
also offers the additional benefits for facilitating shared understandings of risk provoking
mutual engagement and new insights in a manner that supports facilitating shared
understandings of risk.
961
A tangible mapping activity provides at least one, and often many different vantage points
on organisational landscapes. The value of this multiplicity of viewpoints is echoed by how
participants seemingly most comfortable and most adept at manipulating the Blender were
those who spent some time observing the interactions of others with and through the
sculpture, as well as experimenting themselves. The cyranoids also draw value from
affording a combination of inside-outside views of a different sort, through a very literal
exchange of vantage points enabled by the cyranoids audiovisual equipment.
The impossibility of a single participant independently gaining a complete picture of what
is happening is also valuable for building mutual engagement between participants - a
quality characterised by Wenger as drawing upon both "what we know, what we do, as
well as our ability to connect meaningfully to what we don't know and don't do... the
contributions and knowledge of others" (Wenger, 1998:76).
Even activities such as Pinball, that seemingly provided a common helicopter view to all
participants, can also provoke mutual engagement directly concerning different
perspectives of that tangible tool kit's behaviour. Complex rapid movement such as
ricocheting marbles, participants without prompting exchange their incomplete
observations concerning the effects of particular obstacles on the routes of the balls.
The tangible tool kits can be seen not only as enabling a helicopter view, but in their
general ease of making adjustments to representations of business landscapes might be
considered more properly as affording a god's eye view. The value of experiencing such
a combination of diverse viewpoints and making activities has been strongly argued in
educational theory:
perspective-taking and object construction go hand in hand. The ability to decenter,
by taking on another person's view coexists with the construction of a "god's eye
view". It is the dance between the two that spurs growth. Playing other and
playing god are equally useful to deepen our own connection with the
world.(Ackermann, 1996:30)
Experiencing multiple positions within a shared encounter can offer a means to support
emergent understandings of almost any facilitation related setting. As Klein said of
transdisciplinary working: "shared meanings, diagnoses, and objectives emerge where
individual interests and views are seen in different perspectives" (Klein 2004:251).
Combining these sorts of experience appear particularly relevant in connection to the topic
of risk as they help foster shared understandings of different facets of the phenomenon.
For instance, experiencing different first person perspectives can help bring an insight into
how an interlocutor may perceive how they might be harmed by a particular course of
action. Whereas more detached helicopter-like views help with generating insights on the
chances of an undesirable outcome.
962
probable number of personnel killed to achieve an objective. However, this venture can
still be high risk from the perspective of individual soldiers directly involved, in the line of
fire (Hansson 1996). Participatory Innovation can be seen as an attempt to usefully bring
together the perspectives from various front lines, whether of use or design, with more
strategic perspectives (Buur & Matthews 2008). Risk is a factor at all of these levels, and
in connecting or relating between levels. Complex collaborative experiences in workshops
offer a route to build understandings of such different levels, but more importantly enable
movement between them.
Looking to Hansson's military metaphor is particularly apt when considered in light of an
analysis of how innovation workshop participants narrate tangible representations of their
business landscapes. In (Heinemann et al. 2014) we showed how, despite offering a wide
variety of material, and irrespective of which tool kits were deployed, the overwhelming
metaphors that arose from the examined sessions were those concerned with domination
and physical power. This finding initially disappointed us as workshop organisers, as it
appears that these table-top tool kits of static materials led to much more predictable
results than we had hitherto realised or intended.
Bringing people together for novel embodied experiences, however, appears to increase
uncertainties, both individually and collectively, as there are so many more possible
actions for people to take. This is therefore highly appropriate for facilitating shared
understandings in relation to the uncertain topic of risk.
Conclusion
This paper has explained the need for design and innovation workshop organisers to
more explicitly address, and in a sense, exploit the phenomena of risk. Presenting
experimentation in Interactive Arts alongside that of Participatory Design and Participatory
Innovation reveals the central role that breakdowns can play in facilitating shared
understandings of risk. The breakdown qualities of enabling co-created experiences and
provoking a plurality of perspectives were identified as particularly appropriate for this
need.
References
Ackermann, E. (1996). Perspective-taking and object construction: two keys to learning.
Constructionism in practice: designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world,
Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 25-35.
Allee, V. (2000). Reconfiguring the value network. Journal of Business Strategy, 21,(4),
36-39.
Baskerville, R. L. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research.
Communications of the AIS, 2(3es), 4.
Bernstein, PL (2003). Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Boer, L. (2012). How Provotypes Challenge Stakeholder Conceptions in Innovation
Projects. PhD Dissertation, University of Southern Denmark
963
Boholm, ., & Corvellec, H. (2011). A relational theory of risk. Journal of Risk Research,
14(2), 175-190.
Bowers, J., & Pycock, J. (1994). Talking through design: requirements and resistance in
cooperative prototyping. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in
computing systems: celebrating interdependence. 299-305.
Brandt, E and Grunnet, C. (2000). Evoking the future: Drama and props in user centered
design. Participatory Design Conference. 11-20.
Bratteteig, T., Bdker, K., Dittrich, Y., Mogensen, P. H., & Simonsen, J. (2012). Organising
principles and general guidelines for Participatory Design projects. Routledge
Handbook of Participatory Design, 117.
Buur, J., Ankenbrand B., and Mitchell, R. Participatory Business Modeling, 9(1), 55-71
Buur J. and Larsen, H. (2010). The quality of conversations in participatory
innovation. CoDesign, 6(3), 121-138. 2010.
Buur, J. and Matthews, B (2008). Participatory innovation. International Journal of
Innovation Management, 12(03), 255-273.
Bdker, S and Grnbk, K.(1991) Cooperative prototyping: users and designers in
mutual activity. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,34(3), 453-478.
Bdker, S. (1991). Human activity and human-computer interaction. Through the
Interface: A Human Activity Approach to User Interface Design, 18-56.
Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2001). Design noir: The secret life of electronic objects. Springer.
Ehn P. and Kyng M. (1991). Cardboard Computers. In Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M.
(eds.). Design at Work:Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. 1991
Frens, J, and Hengeveld, B.(2013). To make is to grasp. Proceedings of IASDR 2013.
Hansson, S.O. (1996) What is philosophy of risk?. Theoria, 62(12), 169-186.
Hansson, S.O. (2012). Risk, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N.
Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/risk/>. Last
accessed 20th October 2013
Heinemann, T., Mitchell, R. & Buur, J. (2009), Co-constructing meaning in innovation
workshops, in MEI:31 Objet et Communication, Paris.
Heinemann, T., Landgrebe, J., Mitchell, R., & Buur, J. (2014). Narrating value networks
through tangible materials. TAMARA, Journal of Critical Organization Inquiry
(forthcoming).
Jaffari, S. (2012) Everyday Comfort Practice. A Design Ethnographic Approach to
Sustainable Indoor Climate, PhD Dissertation, University of Southern Denmark
Jerrard, R. N., Barnes, N., & Reid, A. (2008). Design, risk and new product development
in five small creative companies. International Journal of Design, 2(1), 21-30.
Kaminska, A. (2008). Towards an Urban Aesthetics. Public, (37).
Thompson Klein, J. (2004). Prospects for transdisciplinarity. Futures, 36(4), 515-526.
Kitchin, R. (2011). The programmable city. Environment and Planning B, 38(6), 945-951.
964
Kjeldskov, J., & Graham, C. (2003). A review of mobile HCI research methods. In Humancomputer interaction with mobile devices and services. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
317-335
Lanzara, G.F. (1983) The Design Process: Frames Metaphors, and Games. In: Briefs U.,
Ciborra C. and Schneider, L. (eds.) Systems design for, with, and by the users. NorthHolland, Amsterdam.
Light, A, and Akama, Y. (2012) The human touch: participatory practice and the role of
facilitation in designing with communities. Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design
Conference: Research Papers - Volume 1. 61-70.
May, T. (1998). Strategic ignorance: the new competitive high ground. Information
management & computer security, 6(3), 127-128.
Mitchell, R. (2009). Physical contraptions as social interaction catalysts. Proceedings of
the 3rd International Workshop on Physicality, Cambridge, UK, 37-42
Mitchell, R. & Buur, J. (2010) Tangible business model sketches to support participatory
innovation, ACM Proceedings of DESIRE10 - Creativity and Innovation in Design, pp.
29-33.
Mitchell, R., Caglio, A. & Buur, J. (2013) Oops! Moments: Kinetic Material in Participatory
Workshops. NORDES - Nordic Design Research Conference, Copenhagen/Malmo
Mitchell, R., Gillespie, A. and ONeill, B. (2011) Cyranic Contraptions: Using Personality
Surrogates to Explore Ontologically and Socially Dynamic Contexts. DESIRE '11 ACM Proceedings of the Second Conference on Creativity and Innovation in
Design,199210
Nickel, P. J. (2009). Trust, staking, and expectations. Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour, 39(3), 345-362.
Riege A. (2005). Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers
consider. Journal of knowledge management, 9(3), 18-35.
managers
must
Robertson, T., & Wagner, I. (2012). Engagement, representation and politics-inaction. Routledge Handbook of Participatory Design, 64-85.
Rumsfield, D (2002). Department of Defence News Briefing, Washington D.C.
February 2002
Sanders, E.B.N, (2002), From user-centered to participatory design approaches. Design
and the social sciences: Making connections, pp.1-8
Simonsen, J., & Robertson, T. (Eds.). (2012). Routledge Handbook of Participatory
design. Routledge.
Simonsen, J., (2009). A concern for engaged scholarship. Scandinavian Journal of
Information Systems, 21(2), 111-128.
Spolsky, J. (2001). User interface design for programmers. Apress.
Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine
communication. Cambridge University Press.
Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future
research. Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 115-131.
965
Robb Mitchell
Robb Mitchell fell into the cauldron of helping launch the Ministry of Sound at an
impressionable age. This sparked a longstanding interest in developing new connections
between social interaction, creativity and technology. Projects have included organising
festivals, deploying large scale mechanical contraptions for provoking cooperation
between strangers, a series of collaborations with psychologists exploring how
personalities can be "swapped" using radio transmitters, extreme interpersonal skills
training, facilitating art-tech and science communication discussion events and exploring
how interactive sculptures and other toolkits can inspire shared sense-making and fresh
perspectives for high-tech industrialists.
966
Beyond methods:
Co-creation from a practice-oriented perspective
Elisa Ruhl, Christian-Albrechts-Universitt, Department of Media Education/ Educational
Computer Sciences, Kiel
Christoph Richter, Christian-Albrechts-Universitt, Department of Media Education/
Educational Computer Sciences, Kiel
Julia Lembke, Christian-Albrechts-Universitt, Department of Media Education /
Educational Computer Sciences, Kiel
Heidrun Allert, Christian-Albrechts-Universitt, Department of Media Education /
Educational Computer Sciences, Kiel
Abstract
The co-experiences are booming. The trend of complex interdisciplinary projects makes
co-creation a more and more common way of working, but also changes the conditions for
co-creation. How these co-creation processes are structured and conceived is a longstanding debate in the field of design with a main focus on the chosen methods or the
underlying mind-set. However, co-creation could also be approached from a practiceoriented perspective, a view already hinted for in the existing literature.
To motivate a practice-oriented perspective on co-creation and to spot the added value of
it, critical-incidents of an on-going R&D-project are described and discussed against the
conceptual framework of practice theory. The analysis results in an understanding of cocreation as a texture of local and dynamic practices, which evolve independently from
methods, but depend on shared interpretative schemes and constant negotiations. A
practice-oriented perspective opens up a useful view for the analysis of the new cocreation processes and its problems. The results provide practitioners with good starting
points for the understanding and support of co-creation beyond defined methods, roles
and sessions.
Keywords
Practice; co-creation; participatory design; methods; mind-set
Introduction
The approach and need to involve users or stakeholders into the design process and
collective decision-making date back to 1960s public consultations and workshops in
community planning - and 1970s with participatory design in system development. Since
that time, the number of projects using participatory approaches in design, later called cocreation, grew and co-creation has become a common way of working for example in
design education, management and marketing, public services, as well as in
interdisciplinary research and development projects. While these projects follow the
overall definition of co-creation as any act of collective creativity that is experienced
jointly by two or more people (Sanders & Simons, 2009, p. 1), the circumstances and
conditions under which co-creation is applied have changed. For example, international
967
research and development projects are often challenged by large teams with different
disciplinary and cultural backgrounds, shifting roles and personnel, as well as the
distribution of work across space and time. This growth of scope, scale, and complexity in
co-creative processes does not only call for new tools and methods (cf. Sanders &
Stappers, 2008) but also raises questions about the conception of co-creation as such.
So far co-creation most often has been conceptualized either in terms of tools, techniques
and methods or as a particular mind-seta. In the first case, co-creation is basically
approached from an instrumental perspective in the sense that respective tools and
methods are understood as means at the designers disposal. The main intent hence is to
provide practitioners with a guiding toolkit. Respective practitioners guides (e.g. Muller et
al., 1993; Wilson, Beckker, Johnson & Johnson, 1997) often focus on overall, normative
frameworks, which support the practitioners in planning their processes with hints for
generative ways of involvements. In the second case, it has been suggested that
participation and co-creation are better to be understood as a mind-set and an attitude
about people (Sanders, 2002, p.1). Here it is assumed that a respective mind-set is more
fundamental and important than a set of methods or methodologies in that it provides an
overall compass for those engaged in co-creation (cf. Sanders & Simons, 2009).
However, while both perspectives shed light on important aspects of co-creation, as such
both of them do not lend themselves to a deeper understanding of co-creation as they
essentially render notions of method and mind-set unproblematic. If co-creation is
understood in terms of tools and methods, the question of how these methods are
introduced, collective interpreted and enacted becomes subordinate. Similarly, if cocreation is preconditioned by a particular mind-set, it is difficult to see how mind-sets
actually evolve and are challenged.
Against this background, the aim of this paper is to illustrate how a practice-oriented
perspective on collective activity, provides a more integrative account of co-creative
efforts, a perspective particular suited to depict the dynamics inherent in these processes.
The perspective we aim to develop is in line with calls for studies to explore in detail what
happens among the participants during collaborate session (Vaajakallio, 2009, p.1) and
echoes concerns about reductive accounts of methods (e.g. Fenwick, 2012). Additionally,
it mirrors a basic concern for the concept practice recurrently referred to but rarely
explicated by a variety of authors on co-creation such as Kuijer (2009), Muller et al. (1993),
Belotti, Shum, MacLean & Hammond (1995), or Sanders (2002, 2008, 2011).
To follow this trace of practice theory, the authors present a conceptual framework of a
practice-oriented view. To illustrate this framework, it is adapted to the R&D-project the
authors are participating in, which is aiming to develop an interactive learning environment
within a co-creative process. The case is analysed with the help of critical incidents. The
contextualized and interrelated incidents provide a design narrative of the history and
evolution of the co-creative process over time. Clusters of critical incidents are explained
with exemplary events and then discussed against the practice-oriented perspective. The
conclusions then sums up the added value of practice-oriented perspective and its
relations to the mind-set- and method-perspective and gives an outlook on practical
implications.
A practice-oriented perspective
Conceptual framework
Practices can be understood as all those actions (individual and collective) in and through
which humans appropriate and transform the historically given conditions they find
themselves in (cf. Hrning, 2004). Assuming this, [] practice is an analytic concept that
968
969
Research design
To ground/illustrate the practice-oriented perspective, we trace the moves and interactions
of an interdisciplinary team throughout the initial stages of the international R&D project
Idea Garden. We, as authors have been actively involved in this project and hence take
an inside perspective for this case study. The following description is therefore
necessarily fragmentary and subjective in the sense that we did not take part in all
discussions between partners. However, we think that an active inside perspective
provides into the way co-creation is enacted but also experienced (cf. Gherardi 2009 a,
p.117).
The sources of data derive from participant observation (e.g. Kawulich, 2005) as well as
documents created and circulated among the partners in the project. Data sources
included minutes and memos from meetings, the formal and informal communications like
skype meetings and email exchange as well as the artefacts created. This data was taken
to reconstruct the chronology of events (see figure 1).
In the multitude of the sequential events, critical incidents (CI) were identified. The critical
incident technique is a retrospective method, which allows to learn about participants
feelings, experience or stance towards special events and developments within in a
process and marks incidents or processes with their related context (c.f. Chell, 2004). For
our case, events were selected which became crucial (positively or negatively) for the
further development of the designed product or the co-designerly teamwork in the eyes of
one or more partners. So, these CI are for example incidents, the participants often
referred to in conversation and meetings or ideas/ artefacts, to which happened a reuptake during the process.
The CIs were assorted into the co-design chronology. By connecting the critical incidents
with their overall context and setting of the project, and focusing on the interrelations
between the CI, a design narrative (DN) of the general shape of the project process
evolves, which covers the history and evolution of the design over time. It does not stick to
detailed information, but tries to communicate compactly and effectively how a design
came into being (Hoadley 2002, p. 454). The DN is seen as a chance to make explicit
some oft he implicit knowledge (Hoadley 2002, p. 454) the participants used to
encourage the process and therefore differs from the official story depicted in figure 1
and enriches the main events with the trigger points for the evolution of the design (see
figure 2).
In analysing the main commonalities and differences between the incidents in their
relationship to the overall DNs plot, five different routes through the process evolved.
These routes or clusters of CI are illustrated with specific examples. These examples are
then discussed in light of the conceptual framework introduced before.
970
surfaces and natural user interfaces, information systems and semantic technologies) and
three practical partners (interface and product designer in an educational setting, a
company and a small agency). In the description of work, the designers are introduced in
the role of the potential user. They are mainly involved as experts for the everyday
practices, e.g. asked to come up with visions of possible future scenarios, and act as test
beds for evaluating the demonstrators in the practical use at their local work settings. The
project partners work in five different European countries, so to guarantee a close
relationship to the test beds, the research partners work in tandem constellations with
each one of the test beds.
For the workflow, all partners are envisaged as active partners for the development
process, taking the lead for various work packages based on their specified experience,
skills and interest. Additional to the design objective to come up with a demonstrator for
the environment, the partners pursue different research questions like the evolution of
work practices or the use of special interaction material.
The work process is structured by a series of consortium meetings, accompanied by
several virtual meetings as well as phone and email-correspondence. Because of the
distributed workplaces, the teams and tandems work mainly asynchronously. Figure 1
shows the milestones (Cultural probes, Future Workshop, Design Workshop and a
prototyping phase) and the overall directions taken to come up with the projects objective
of the implementation of a first prototype in the first year. This schematic illustration should
rather be understood as an overall orienting diagram through the significant phases than a
one-to-one rendering of the process.
As you can see in fig. 1, the considered project phase, which will be discussed in this
paper, is mainly concerned with co-discovering and co-defining tasks at the fuzzy frontend
and co-developing issues for the first prototype. For the following two years, two iterations
are planned, in which two further demonstrators will be evaluated.
Figure 1: Main steps and aims in the Co-design process of Idea Garden, based on the
double diamond in the co-design process by Pierri, 2012.
971
Figure 2: Design narrative, adding the chronology of events with critical incidents.
The design narrative depicts the different critical incidents like comments on ones own
role, statements to methods, ideas about pushing the process, comments on others work
as well as surprising proactive behaviour, which question and/ or extend the schematic
illustration of figure 1. Analysing the sequences and relations of the CI, five clusters positioning (yellow), co-creative methods (red), cross-fertilizes methods (dark blue) as well
as actions beyond the plan (green) and daily work (blue) are seen as relevant for the
evolution of the co-creative process, and will be explained in the following part.
1: Explicit Positioning
Before the participants really went into collective creativity interactions, they checked
mutually the respective positions of methods and mind-sets on the R&D-map. While the
application document for example was traversed with locale terms of co-creative
processes and methods as hints for the upcoming process, the partners made also
explicit statements to their self-perception for the upcoming process in the initial phase:
When in the first meeting, everyone stated to be a designer (interaction designer, software
designer, strategic designer etc.).
When the process went on, the statements to the self-perception of the partners came up
again and again. Dependent from the state of the process and the planned tasks, they
claimed later on not to be designers, but just users or changed from being designers to
being human guinea pigs.
972
2: Co-creation methods
For fostering the co-creative process, some methodical milestones like a future workshop,
collective mock-up sessions or cultural probes were planned. While e.g. working with
insight cards, collective model making or the collective discussion of usage scenarios in
preparation or during the future workshop stayed unquestioned and leaded to the
anticipated effects like elaborating a common sense, the conduction of other methods like
for example cultural probes for understanding the partners working practices, were
accompanied with some discussions and misunderstandings.
Effected by the initial statements to the self-perception of the partners (we are all
designers), cultural probes were planned to be done by everyone. When the cultural
probe kit was announced in the kick-off meeting, some partners asked, if this kind of
method would really gather information. They wondered, why not doing a questionnaire.
When the kit was sent out to all partners, some of them assumed to fill in a creativity test.
Also in the evaluation of the probes, which was planned to be done collectively with the
help of an exhibition of all sent data, misunderstandings on the roles and the meaning of
the method appeared: The participation was quite reserved, until a partner asked the
psychologist within the team to explain the right answers. The conducting team denied
this question, as they understood the cultural probes as kind of inspirational springboard
with no right answers.
3: Cross-fertilized methods
Beside co-creative methods, also rather classical research methods, the partners were
familiar with like interviews and field studies, accompanied the process. In some cases,
just proceeding methods were questioned with the suggestion of other methods, e.g.
interviews instead of application scenarios, or a planned body storming session was
replaced by conversations in an unspoken manner.
Not only as a spontaneous reaction, also planned cross-fertilized methods enriched the
course of possible actions. In this case, a field-study was conducted to have a closer look
on the practices at the practitioners site. This approach belongs most likely to a user-assubject mind-set, but over time, some interactions turned this method into a user-aspartner-approach: In the beginning of the project the practitioners made jokes about their
role as a test-bed in the sense of we are human guinea pigs. When the field-study
started, the researchers faced this understanding of the practitioners role with statement,
that they wanted to learn from the field. During the nonparticipant study, the test-bed and
the researchers got to used to each other. In this growing phase of trust, the practitioners
invited the researchers to give a workshop at their site. As a response to this invitation,
the researchers invited the students to evaluate and complete their presented research
insights. After reading the report of the field-study, the practitioner asked for further
discussions on that, to use the insights for his practical work.
4: Day-to-day business
Beside all these methodical approaches, which were mainly related to face-to-face
meetings, the day-to-day work was most present at the partners site. In this daily,
asynchronous workflow the ideas from the sessions are transformed and developed. For
ensuring that the progress of ideas stays transparent and the idea still refers to the
common ground, over time also day-to-day business like emailing, skyping and writing
word-documents were transformed or used to bring the user and the others on board. For
example, writing on deliverables has accompanied by a sequential workflow: When writing
of deliverables came closer, the leading partner often presented a draft outline in an open
word-document format to the others weeks before writing. Also during the writing process
973
and mainly before delivering, the partners often added comments and renewed the
version on the sharing platform. When writing about the practitioners workflows, the
practitioners always had to crosscheck the meaning.
But also failure of communication in everyday work influenced the process, e.g. when the
co-existence of three concurrency concepts were not discussed at all and all partners
went on with their work without an explicit decision.
5: Beyond the plan
While the approaches of co-creative day-to-day business slowed down but preserved the
co-creative motion, there also existed phases of no exchange and shared events. In our
case, especially the semester holiday time in spring and summer traversed by
asynchronous holidays, stop of the field studies and no duty of deliverables was
characterized by individual work and almost no exchange between the partners. Although
this situation led to a status of confusion sometimes, it finally provoked surprising, mainly
informal interactions.
In the design workshop, an idea had elaborated, which was fascinating for one of the
partners. This partners did not know in which way the idea would go into the concept for
the prototype, so this partner decided to develop this idea as a side project in his
institution. He asked selected persons to be involved in this side project, whose insights
were planned to be brought into the consortium again.
In the same phase, one of the practical partners submitted spontaneously a prototype for
the surrounding furniture of the planned environment. They transferred a prototype of a
current project to this project and tried to check the resonance within the consortium.
Discussion
The previous design narrative summed up selected collective moves and interactions in
the evolution of the design, which will now be discussed against the conceptual framework.
In general, it can be said, that the findings at large all describe a kind of collective
dialogue about the individual rules of co-creation. It can be seen as a collective search
and negotiation process on what is when, how and for what productive in the co-creative
work.
974
they refer to their local practices. Although the partners do not share a common ground of
appropriate behaviour in the beginning of the project, they have to start working with each
other. So the first moves can in a whole be understood as a way to jump into work and to
test, what appropriate behaviour in this new setting could be. Necessarily, the transfer of
local practices to new circumstances can lead to misunderstandings and mismatching.
The Cultural Probes are an example, how different methods, tasks and roles can be
understood against the background of ones own local practices: So for example, the open
and qualitative intention of the cultural probes was hard to understand from the
quantitative practices of the computer sciences discipline. Also misunderstandings of
methods, e.g. when the cultural probes were understood as creativity test or the
psychologist was expected to know the outcomes, the intention and roles within the
method were not shared.
So, to use a co-creative method seems to have a limited guarantee to really work cocreative. Although if the proceeding of the method as well as the relation to a co-creative
setting were quite clear to all participants, the value and respective roles within this
particular situation e.g. everyone is allowed to make sense of the data were not
shared against the background of a shared interpretative scheme.
d) All areas
If you assume from a practice-oriented perspective, that co-creation will become what you
actually do and which is decided to be appropriate co-creative behaviour from the group,
then it becomes clearer, why also cross-fertilized methods, everyday work or interactions
beyond the plan are parts of the co-creative process.
When the introduction of a side-project or the transfer of environmental furniture from
another project to Idea Garden (see cl. 5) were welcomed and included into the project,
these interactions were not anymore asked to be appropriate co-creative behaviour, but
had become a part of how Idea Garden conducts co-creation. Also when the crossfertilized methods like interviews were allowed to be done instead of typical co-creative
methods or the field-study became a success and help for both tandem partners (see cl.
975
4), the preliminary rule was set, that bringing in these methods can be a part of how Idea
Garden does co-creative research.
e) Dynamics
In understanding, that the proceeding in co-creation is negotiable matter, the dynamic
character of practices becomes visible. An example for the existence of dissonant resp.
dynamic practices, which provide a productive texture, are the different realized levels of
participation (Wright et al., 2008) in our project.
While the future-workshop for example was highly participative in the sense of codetermination till decisive power over the shared vision, the retranslating-tasks within the
deliverables were more stabilizing and used in the sense of involvement, consultation or
information. Sending the deliverable to the partners one day before submission would
refer to an informative approach, while asking the participants for feedback to the overall
outline weeks before, could be rather seen as an involvement approach (see cl. 4). The
highest level can be seen in the proactive behaviour within phases of big confusion and
lost motion or contact. Here, the partners were not only involved or asked, but they offered
their knowledge or skills actively.
Although these interactions follow different approaches and may be complementary, for
Idea Garden they stayed for so long unquestioned side to side and build a texture of coexisting, alternating and complementary ways to work together in a co-design project.
Conclusion
The preceding discussion depicted co-creation as a process enacted in a texture of sociomaterial practices, which entail a shared practical knowledge including knowledge about
roles, process, methods, decision- and meaning-making. Co-creation from this
perspective is not a set of methods or a certain mind-set, but a situated network of
connections-in-action, which evolve through joint interactions and collaborative moves.
From this perspective, methods and mind-set can be understood as a kind of resource,
which are interwoven with the enacted practices and whose meaning is just
understandable and made in the relation to the enacted practice.
With the practice-oriented perspective, the challenges of new generation of co-creation
projects, which were discussed in the introduction, could be identified and specified for our
case. In our project, the challenges of different cultures, new team partners, changing
roles and its depending misunderstandings could be explained with the co-occurrence of
different locale and dynamic practices with respective interpretative schemes. From a
practice-oriented view, the challenges of larger views across time and space (Sanders,
2008, p.13) were seen as trigger points for developing new practices to face them, e.g.
proactive interactions beyond the plan or participatory intercourse in working on
deliverables in daily work.
In comparing the findings with the mind-set and method perspective, the practice-oriented
perspective provided us with a widened view. This view allowed us to take more
interactions into account for the process of co-creation and detected co-creative behaviour
in unexpected areas. According to Vaajakallio (2009), it could be analysed what actually
happened among the participants during the [] sessions (Vaajakallio, 2009, p.1) and
between the sessions. In contrast to the method-driven perspective with its statement that
participation must be face-to-face (Sanders & Simons, 2009, p.1), our findings depict a
picture of co-creation as a whole process, also discussed by Gulari et al. (2011) and Luck,
who considers the human dimension of participatory design, which requires, that
participatory design is more than a collection of design methods (Luck, 2003, p.1).
976
Regarding the mind-set perspective, the findings in our case suggest, that having the
appropriate mind-set about co-creation (Sanders & Simons, 2009, p.1) to be successful
in co-creation should be rather restated, that enacting the appropriate mind-set is most
important. Only when mind-set and its implicit knowledge become visible, e.g. in
interactions, they are negotiable. These negotiations are seen as a big chance to find a
shared mind-set, which can act as a directing resource for practices.
The findings can be seen as encouragement for practitioners, to foster co-creation in
emerging situations without methodical frame or classical designer-user relationship. Its
also encouraging, that a strong participatory mind-set seems to be opportunistic, cutting
its way through participatory settings and non-participatory phases of a project. A
challenge for future co-creation is to widen the focus on just the users current and future
practices (e.g. with MakeTools) to the practices of all partners as an approach to a
processual understanding of co-creation, which accommodates the hybrid skills, blurring
roles and the overall we-paradigm of co-creation.
Acknowledgements
This research has been carried out in the IdeaGarden Project funded by the European
Unions Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2011 under grant agreement n
318552.
References
Bellotti, V., Shum, S. B., MacLean, A., & Hammond, N. (1995, May). Multidisciplinary
modelling in HCI design in theory and in practice. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI
conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 146-153). ACM Press/AddisonWesley Publishing Co..
Broudy, H. S. (1977). Types of knowledge and purposes of education. Schooling and the
acquisition of knowledge, 1-17.
Chell, E. (2004) Critical incident technique. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (eds.). Essential
Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organisation Studies (pp. 45-60). London, UK:Sage.
Ehn, P. (2008). Participation in design things. In Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary
Conference on Participatory Design 2008 (pp. 92-101). Indiana University.
Fenwick, T. (2012). Co-production in Practice A Sociomaterial Analysis. Professions &
Professionalism, 2(2).
Gherardi, S. (2009, a). Introduction: The Critical Power of the Practice Lens'. Management
learning, 40(2), 115-128.
Gherardi, S. (2009, b). Practice? Its a matter of taste!. Management Learning, 40(5), 535550.
Gulari, M. N., & Br, A. (2011). Towards an Evolutionary Understanding on the Success
of Participatory Design. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on
Engineering and Product Design Education E&PDE11 (pp. 721-726).
Hoadley, C. P. (2002, January). Creating context: Design-based research in creating and
understanding CSCL. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for
Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community (pp. 453-462). International
Society of the Learning Sciences.
977
Hrning, K.H. (2001). Experten des Alltags. [Experts of everyday]. Weilerswist: Velbrck.
Hrning K.H. (2004). Soziale Praxis zwischen Beharrung und Neuschpfung. Ein
Erkenntnis- und Theorieproblem. [Social practice between inertia and recreation. A
cognition and theory problem]. In: K.H., & J. Reuter (Hrsg.). Doing Culture: Neue
Positionen zum Verhltnis von Kultur und sozialer Praxis (S. 19- 39). Bielefeld: Transcript.
Kuijer, L., & de Jong, A. (2009, December). A practice oriented approach to user centered
sustainable design. In Ecodesign 2009 Conference. Saporo.
Kawulich, B. (2005). Participant Observation as a Data Collection Method. Forum
Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2). Retrieved
November 6, 2013, from
http://www.qualitativeresearch.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/466/996
Luck, R. (2003). Dialogue in participatory design. Design Studies, 24(6), 523-535.
Muller, M. J., Wildman, D. M., & White, E. A. (1993). Taxonomy of PD practices: A brief
practitioner's guide. Commun. ACM, 36(6), 26-28.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed
organizing. Organization science, 13(3), 249-273.
Pierri, P. (2012). Co-designing the healthcare: the importance of the design process.
MedLove human centered healthcare experience design: UX and healthcare summit.
Retrieved March 13, 2014, from http://medlove2012.blogspot.de/2012/11/co-designinghealthcare-importance-of.html.
Sanders, E. B. N., & Westerlund, B. (2011). Experiencing, exploring and experimenting in
and with co-design spaces. Nordes, (4).
Sanders, L., & Simons, G. (2009). A social vision for value co-creation in design. Open
Source Business Resource, (December 2009).
Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of
design. Co-design, 4(1), 5-18.
Sanders, L. (2008). ON MODELING An evolving map of design practice and design
research. interactions, 15(6), 13-17.
Sanders, E. B. N. (2002). From user-centered to participatory design approaches. Design
and the social sciences: Making connections, 1-8.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol.
5126). Basic books.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & education,
46(3), 223-234.
Wright, M. T., Block, M., & von Unger, H. (2007). Stufen der Partizipation in der
Gesundheitsfrderung. [Levels of participation in the healthcare support]. Ein Modell zur
Beurteilung von Beteiligung. Infodienst fr Gesundheitsfrderung, 3, 4-5.
978
Wilson, S., Bekker, M., Johnson, P., & Johnson, H. (1997, March). Helping and hindering
user involvementa tale of everyday design. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI
Conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 178-185). ACM.
Elisa Ruhl
Elisa Ruhl has a master degree in Design. She is a researcher at the Department of
Media Education/Educational Computer Sciences at the Christian-Albrechts-Universitt zu
Kiel and a part-time lecturer at the Muthesius Academy of Fine Arts in Kiel. Her current
research interest is on the intersection of scientific and artistic research with a special
focus on collaborative interdisciplinary design practices, e.g. co-creation and participatory
design. Since 2009, she was part of different co-creative camps and workshops in the
field of design, art and urban development.
Christoph Richter
Christoph Richter holds a Diploma in Psychology. He is a researcher at the Department of
Media Education/Educational Computer Sciences at the Christian-Albrechts-Universitt zu
Kiel and a part-time lecturer at the University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria. His
research focuses on the design-based research, (computer-supported) collaborative
learning and knowledge practices. His current research interest is on the genesis of
creative practices in design teams. Since 2002 he has been involved in a number of
national and international projects in the areas of technology-enhanced learning and
knowledge work.
Julia Lembke
Julia Lembke holds a Diploma in Pedagogy. She is a researcher at the Department of
Media Education/Educational Computer Science at the Christian-Albrechts-Universitt zu
Kiel. Her current research interest is on the genesis of learning practices in educational
settings. Furthermore she designs technology-enhanced learning scenarios to foster
cooperative and collaborative learning practices in the area of university education.
Heidrun Allert
Heidrun Allert is a full professor and the head of the department of Media
Education/Educational Computer Sciences at the Christian-Albrechts-Universitt zu Kiel.
Her current research interest is on the inquiry and support of knowledge practices as well
as the role of epistemic artefacts. Since 2000, she has been involved in a number of
national and international projects in the areas of technology-enhanced learning and
knowledge work. From 2004 to 2010 she was head of the department for "Engineering for
Computer-Based Learning and Communication and Knowledge Media at the FH
Obersterreich in Hagenberg/Austria.
979
Abstract
Though critical and speculative design have been increasingly relevant in discussing the social
and cultural role of design, there has been a distinct lack of both theory and praxis aimed at
questioning gender oppression. Departing from an intersectional feminist analysis of the
influences and origins of speculative and critical design, this essay questions the underlying
privilege that has been hindering the discussion on gender within the discipline and its role in
propagating oppression; it then goes on to propose the concept of a feminist speculative
design as an approach aimed at questioning the complex relationships between gender,
technology and social and cultural oppression.
Keywords
speculative design; gender studies; feminism; intersectionality
During the past few decades there has been a fundamental shift in the way we understand
design and its cultural relevance. From Ipads to smartphones, from automatic hoovers to
intelligent fridges, we now have increasingly complex objects governing essential parts of our
lives. In this world, where objects mediate most of our experiences, design has been gaining
increasing significance - highlighting the necessity for research on the roles that designed
objects have within society.
This increased interest in the sociological and cultural aspects of design has been a
fundamental catalyst for the development of design research and its many related fields - from
research through, for or about design (Frankel and Racine 2010) to constructive design
research (Koskinen et al. 2011). Prominent among these ever-evolving fields are speculative
and critical design, two closely related approaches to design practice (Auger 2013) that, usually
departing from prosaic observations of our everyday interactions with technology, aim to
provoke insightful analyses of the profound impact that designed objects have on our lives
(Dunne 1999; Dunne and Raby 2001). This essay focuses specifically on these two
approaches, questioning their shortcomings from an intersectional feminist perspective; it
challenges speculative and critical designs aspirations to sociological critique within the larger
framework of diverse oppressions in capitalist, heteronormative, sexist, racist and classist
societies. Though a deeper understanding of how the politics of oppression influence human
relationships with technology is essential to the development of a field that aims to be critical,
projects mentioning these oppressions are astoundingly rare. This flaw may be associated with
the fact that speculative and critical design have been, up until now, practiced and theorised
largely within the privileged walls of costly universities in developed countries (Prado de O.
Martins and Vieira de Oliveira 2014).
The primary focus of this essay is how gender is portrayed and approached in speculative and
critical design practices - an analysis that cannot be disengaged from the portrayals of other
forms of oppression. Thus, the previously mentioned intersectional feminist perspective
advocated here stems from two key beliefs: that taking up an apolitical position means
complying with and contributing to the status quo, and that oppressions (of gender, race or
class, among others) cannot be understood separately. Hence the importance of not only a
feminist perspective, but a feminist perspective firmly grounded in the idea of intersectionality
(Crenshaw 1989): as a strategy for understanding how oppression cannot be reduced to one
980
fundamental type, and that oppressions work together in producing injustice. (Collins 2000 p.
18). The essay thus proposes the idea of a feminist speculative design as a strategic approach
to addressing issues of systemic gender violence and discrimination within speculative and
critical design practices.
981
language illusion of choice, passivity, reinforces the status quo, easy pleasure and
conformist values, and fuelled by the capitalist system bear the unmistakable stamp of the
Frankfurt view of ideology.
The relationship between critical theory and SCD is further explored by Bardzell et al. (2012)
and Bowen (2010). By borrowing critical theorys approach to social and cultural change,
however, SCD risks to incur in the very same mistakes for which critical theory has already been
criticised: promoting elitist views of a better world that society should aspire towards (Bowen
2010, p.04). This tendency to elitism, well documented in the writings of critical theorists such as
Horkheimer and Adorno 1, seems to affect Dunnes ([1999] 2008, p.94, my emphasis) work as
well:
[...] this approach falls foul of a central contradiction of radical work, as Adorno demonstrated in
his contrasting of modern classical music and popular jazz. Because a mainstream film has to
be immediately graspable by a broad audience, the fact of achieving this diminishes its critical
potential.
Granted, any author undertaking the task of offering a critical view of the world incurs in the risk
of sounding and acting in a patronizing, classist manner. Ignoring issues of race, class or
gender when looking from a place of privilege is surprisingly easy, for that is the case with
privilege: it is privilege precisely because the very processes that confer privilege to one group
and not another group are often invisible to those on whom that privilege is conferred (Kimmel
2003, p.04). Geuss (1981, p. 82) writes that most criticism on the Frankfurt School was aimed at
the fact that it proposed a critical perspective on society "not because of the suffering it imposes
on some oppressed group but because it fails to satisfy the neurasthenic sensibilities of a
cultural elite. Pointedly, Bowen (2010, p.04) asks of both SCD and critical theory a better
world according to who? (sic).
Dunnes elitist views seem to be shared by colleagues in the field, as demonstrated in a
comment thread on MoMAs website for the Design and Violence exhibition2 . The blog post,
written by John Thackara, starts with a discussion on Burton Nittas project Republic of
Salivation. 3 The discussion in the comment section rapidly evolved to a criticism of SCDs selfcentered, privileged understanding of the world - a criticism promptly responded by designer
James Auger with the question What is this obsession with class systems? The UK may have
its financial problems but most of us stopped obsessing about these divides in the distant past. 4
This patronising, classist and self-centered attitude within SCD may be explained by its history
as a discipline theorised within the safe confines of developed, european countries and
practiced largely by a privileged and mostly white, male, middle class crowd. Exceptions to
SCDs narrow understanding of privilege politics are rather rare, though notable. Superflux, a
studio founded by designer Anab Jain is one such exception, undertaking a string of admirable
collaborative projects with small communities in Jains native India5 . The bottom-up
empowerment of communities seems to be one of the trademarks of Superfluxs projects, in
1 [...]
under the conditions of later capitalism and the impotence of the workers before the authoritarian state's
apparatus of oppression, truth has sought refuge among small groups of admirable men. (Horkheimer [1937] 1972,
pp. 237-238)
1 The consumers are the workers and employees, the farmers and lower middle class. Capitalist production so
confines them, body and soul, that they fall helpless victims to what is offered them. (Adorno and Horkheimer 1997,
p.133)
1the general intellectual level of the great masses is rapidly declining. (Horkheimer [1937] 1972, p.238)
2 http://designandviolence.moma.org/republic-of-salivation-michael-burton-and-michiko-nitta/
2014)
3http://www.burtonnitta.co.uk/repubicofsalivation.html
4 http://designandviolence.moma.org/republic-of-salivation-michael-burton-and-michiko-nitta/
2014)
5http://superflux.in/work/lilorann
982
stark contrast to the paternalist stance so common in SCD. Royal College of Art alum Sputniko
is one of the few practitioners in SCD who overtly tackles issues of gender, though sometimes
still under a definitely questionable perspective, as evidenced by her Menstruation Machine
project6. Sputniko describes the projects video as featuring
a Japanese transvestite boy Takashi, who one day chooses to wear 'Menstruation' in an
attempt to biologically dress up as a female, being unsatisfied by just aesthetically appearing
female.
Though the project might have promoted the discussion of a few issues related to gender, its
very description shows the lack of a basic understanding of gender and queer theory. Mistakes
such as the use of a derogatory term - transvestite - to refer to the character Takashi7 8 ; the
uncritical use of the concept of biologically dressing up as a gender - an affirmation that
unwittingly hints to the heated discussions on biological essentialism versus anti-essentialism
that have since decades divided theorists and activists in the feminist movement (Stone 2004);
or the very portrayal of a gender-nonconforming person (by a cissexual woman, nonetheless)
for shock value highlight the projects problematic approach to gender identity.
Though many discussions on the future of SCD have appeared recently, many of them seem to
ignore these problems entirely (Antonelli 2011, Stevenson-Keating 2011); resistance to SCDs
privileged ways is, however, bubbling: in February 2014 the aforementioned discussion on
MoMAs Design and Violence website spawned several response articles (Prado de O. Martins
and Vieira de Oliveira 2014; Revell 2014; Kiem 2014). Though SCDs future seems to be mostly
that of white, european, cissexual, heterosexual people, this reality might be rapidly changing a change of attitude that might just help build a more equal future.
8http://www.nlgja.org/files/NLGJAStylebook0712.pdf
983
a patriarchal, classist and racist society, is a discipline where the contribution of women has
seldom been recognized throughout its history. Buckley (1999, p.109) writes:
[...] the few women who make it into the literature of design are accounted for within the
framework of patriarchy: they are either defined by their gender as designers or users of
feminine products, or they are subsumed under the name of their husband, lover, father or
brother.
This historical silencing of women in design does not limit itself to its women practitioners either:
Buckley (ibid.) goes on to state that womens needs as consumers/users often remain
unaddressed. In the past few years this stance seems, fortunately, to be changing, with design
taking a keen interest in the needs of minorities. Efforts in this direction have been made by
Buchmller (2013) in design research, Bardzell in HCI (Bardzell and Bardzell 2001; Bardzell
2010) and Rothschild in design and architecture history (1999), for instance. The creation of the
International Gender Design Network by Uta Brandes and Simone Douglas 9; the development
of new fields such as inclusive design (Imrie and Hall 2001; Clarkson et al. 2003), of projects
like Tom Bielings Mobile Lorm Glove at the Design Research Lab10 or Marcelo and Andra
Jdices work at Vila Rosrio (Koskinen et al. pp.70-73) are all testimonies to a newfound
understanding of designs role in propagating and counteracting oppression. SCD, however,
remains a field where such initiatives still seem to remain few and far between.
Understanding privilege is essential in order to build a theoretical discourse capable of truly
overcoming injustice. The problem lies in how difficult it is for the privileged to understand their
own privilege, for privilege exists precisely because it is invisible to those who benefit from it. A
white, heterosexual man will never know the hardships through which others have to go
through. He will never be afraid of being raped while walking home alone at night; he will never
be afraid of not being hired for a job because of his skin color, he will never be afraid to
introduce a same-sex partner to his family. These privileges work silently for the benefit of those
who fit into the narrow standards of an excludent society, and to the disadvantage of those who
do not. When SCD ignores these issues it complies with oppression and works for a future of
inequality.
The recent wave of unnecessarily gendered products - such as the Bic for Her Pen11, the
Powerful Yogurt12 or the new, gender-segregated Kinder Surprise13 - doesnt help design culture
either. The misguided marketing strategies behind these products are fueled by packaging and
product designers eager to associate genders to colors, shapes and stereotypes. Dunne and
Raby (2001, p.58) claim that [...] all design is ideological, the design process is informed by
values based on a specific world view, or way of seeing and understanding reality. If all design
is ideological, what kind of ideology are we, as designers, propagating to the world when we
participate in the development of such products? By designing a world for exclusion and
discrimination [t]he systems and artefacts produced by technoscience are able to provide the
material foundations for gender inequality (Kirkup 2000, p.XIII).
As much as design can be a tool for oppression, it can also be an effective agent for social
change. SCD, as previously mentioned, tries to do this by using artefacts in order to incite
critical thought; the full accomplishment of this goal, however, seems to be hindered by the
issues of privilege previously discussed on this essay. Curiously, while SCDs roots in critical
theory may be a reason for its virtually nonexistent concern for issues such as gender or class
(Fraser 1985; Fleming 1989), both feminist theory and intersectionality also take inspiration from
9http://igdn.blogspot.com/
10http://www.design-research-lab.org/?projects=mobile-lorm-glove
11http://www.bicworld.com/us/products/details/420/
12http://powerful.yt/
13 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/kinder-surprise-in-stereotyping-row-over-pink-and-blue-
984
critical theory. These disciplines have, however, gone a step further by building their own
inclusive paradigms based on the initial propositions of critical theory, like queer theory (Turner
2000) or critical race theory (Collins 2000).
Intersectional feminism aims to to empower those that are subjected to discrimination by
understanding oppression as a highly individualized, unique experience; similarly SCD
questions traditional notions of the user as a mere average number and as a mere receptacle to
the actions defined by the designer, in a clear hierarchy of power. Instead, SCD proposes the
notion of [...] user as protagonist by embodying unusual psychological needs and desires [...].
Addressing issues of gender discrimination through an intersectional perspective is, thus, an
essential strategy to further develop SCDs original project.
985
after all, both results and propagators of matrixes of domination (Collins 2000, p.18). The
study of systemic inequalities cannot ignore the profound influence that the new behaviors and
rituals created or modified by the ubiquity of electronic artefacts have in gender roles. From
revenge-porn websites that publish unauthorized nudes complete with the victims home
addresses14 to hackers who install malicious programs on womens computers in order to spy
on them through their webcams15, the concerns that women have to face when using
technology are entirely different from those of men16 . Though a few scholars have been
developing research on how technology intersects with gender oppression (Kirkup 2000; Du
Preez 2009; Balsamo 1995), most of the outcome has been purely textual: there is a distinct
lack of tangible, non-theoretical perspectives in the field.
Feminist speculative design would focus on using artefacts to provoke reflection on the
privileges that give undue advantage to one part of the population while oppressing another.
Recently, the swiss womens organization Zrcher Frauenzentrale created a media campaign in
order to raise awareness to the issue of wage gap where men using an ATM received 20% less
than their desired sum17 that could be used as an interesting inspiration for feminist speculative
design projects. Objects discussing issues of gender-related internet privacy, questioning
meritocracy, addressing gender-based violence or deconstructing the male gaze (Mulvey 1997)
might also be some of the many possible paths for feminist speculative design projects. The
spontaneously dystopian nature of SCD is particularly suited for approaching such issues:
feminist speculative design could focus on questioning the already dystopian nature of the
present for minorities, and ask how their futures would be like; through the poetic, subjective
and abstract dimensions of the designed artefact, it would challenge observers to question their
own roles in maintaining social injustice.
Overcoming the academic nature of feminist theory and the elitism of SCD poses a challenge
that is inextricably associated with whether design can truly provoke social change. Embodying
critique in a physical artefact may indeed be an interesting strategy from the perspective of
feminist theory; the question as to how these objects are presented, however, remains. In order
to remain faithful to the essential premises of feminist speculative design, it would be essential
to avoid presenting these artefacts merely within academic settings, galleries or museums.
Feminist speculative design projects would, ideally, take up a life of their own; they would need
to be shared, commented upon, questioned and criticised in order to be culturally relevant.
Representation, another highly problematic issue in SCD, would also need to be carefully
addressed through an intersectional perspective: if a video or a photo series on a future
scenario only depicts white, european, middle class people, what does that say about the future
of minorities?
Granted, changing a society is not an easy nor brief task, for structures of oppression are
deeply ingrained into everything that surrounds us - from language to architecture. Departing
from the premise that a designed object can be capable of generating resounding and
immediate change within society would be naive at best. Change does, however, come in small
steps; it happens first in our insular realities to only later become palpable. Design alone is not
capable of changing society; nonetheless, as both a product and a producer of societal values it
could trigger visible cultural shifts when approached with an interdisciplinary and critical stance.
Artefacts that question oppression are able to produce small waves of change; it is these small
14 http://gawker.com/5961208/revenge+porn-troll-hunter-moore-wants-to-publish-your-nudes-alongside-directions-to-
15 http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/rat-breeders-meet-the-men-who-spy-on-women-through-their-webcams/
16 http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2013/nov/08/online-abuse-women-free-speech
(Accessed
17 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/11/equal-pay-day-commercial-prank-from-zurich-womens-
986
changes that feminist speculative design would concern itself with, for they are what could later
grow into a tangible shifts in society.
While feminist speculative design would certainly not be the only possible path into developing a
truly critical discourse within design, it has the potential to be an effective one. Whereas words
might be difficult to assimilate - especially words that incite us to leave our comfort zones -,
experiences are far more effective tools for provoking estrangement, discomfort and, ultimately,
reflection. The mediation of electronic objects on our daily interactions with other individuals is
built around a skeleton of complex hierarchies of power; it is the bone structure under the
attractive and glossy skin of technology that feminist speculative design could expose, reflect
upon and, hopefully, alter.
References
Adorno, T.W. & Horkheimer, M., 1997. Dialectic of Enlightenment, Verso.
Antonelli, P., 2011. States of Design 04: Critical Design. Domus, 949(July/August 2011).
Available at: https://www.domusweb.it/en/design/2011/08/31/states-of-design-04-criticaldesign.html [Accessed November 8, 2013].
Antonelli, P. & Museum of Modern Art (New York, N., Exhibition Safe: Design Takes on Risk
(2005 - 2006, New York, NY) eds., 2005. Safe design takes on risk; [on the occasion of the
exhibition SAFE: Design Takes On Risk, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, October 16,
2005 - January 2, 2006], New York, NY: Museum of Modern Art.
Auger, J., 2013. Speculative design: crafting the speculation. Digital Creativity, 24(1), pp.1135.
Bardzell, J. & Bardzell, S., 2013. What is Critical About Critical Design? In Proceedings of the
SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI 13. New York, NY, USA:
ACM, pp. 32973306. Available at: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2470654.2466451 [Accessed
March 9, 2014].
Bardzell, S. et al., 2012. Critical Design and Critical Theory: The Challenge of Designing for
Provocation. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference. DIS 12. New
York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 288297. Available at: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2317956.2318001
[Accessed March 10, 2014].
Bardzell, S., 2010. Feminist HCI: Taking Stock and Outlining an Agenda for Design. In
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI 10.
New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 13011310. Available at: http://doi.acm.org/
10.1145/1753326.1753521 [Accessed March 17, 2014].
Bardzell, S. & Bardzell, J., 2011. Towards a Feminist HCI Methodology: Social Science,
Feminism, and HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems. CHI 11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 675684. Available at: http://doi.acm.org/
10.1145/1978942.1979041 [Accessed March 17, 2014].
Berger, M.T. & Guidroz, K., 2009. The intersectional approach transforming the academy
through race, class, and gender, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Bowen, S., 2010. Critical Theory and Participatory Design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI 10. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: ACM.
987
Buckley, C., 1999. Made in Patriarchy: Theories of Women and Design - A Reworking. In J.
Rothschild & A. Cheng, eds. Design and feminism: re-visioning spaces, places, and everyday
things. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.
Clarkson, J. et al., 2003. Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population, Springer.
Collins, P., 2000. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of
Empowerment Rev. 10th anniversary ed.;2nd ed., New York: Routledge.
Crenshaw, K., 1991. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist
Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics. In K. Bartlett & R.
Kennedy, eds. Feminist legal theory: readings in law and gender. Boulder: Westview Press.
Cross, N., 2006. Designerly Ways of Knowing. In Designerly Ways of Knowing. Springer
London, pp. 113. Available at: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/1-84628-301-9_1
[Accessed November 8, 2013].
Dunne, A., 2008. Hertzian tales: electronic products, aesthetic experience, and critical design,
Cambridge, Mass.; London: MIT.
Dunne, A. & Raby, F., 2001. Design Noir: The Secret Life of Electronic Objects 1 edition.,
Birkhuser.
Dunne, A. & Raby, F., 2008. Fictional Functions and Functional Fictions. In C. Freyer, S. Noel, &
E. Rucki, eds. Digital by Design: Crafting Technology for Products and Environments. Thames &
Hudson, pp. 264267.
Dunne, A. and Raby, F., 2010. Dreaming objects. Science Poems-Foundations. Available at:
http://files.ok-do.eu/Science-Poems.pdf [Accessed February 26th 2014].
Fleming, M., 1989. The Gender of Critical Theory. Cultural Critique, (13), p.119.
Fraser, M., 2005. The cultural context of critical architecture. The Journal of Architecture, 10(3),
pp.317322.
Fraser, N., 1985. Whats Critical about Critical Theory? The Case of Habermas and Gender.
New German Critique, (35), p.97.
Gaver, W., 2012. What Should We Expect from Research Through Design? In Proceedings of
the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI 12. New York, NY,
USA: ACM, pp. 937946. Available at: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2207676.2208538 [Accessed
March 9, 2014].
Geuss, R., 1981. The Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School, Cambridge
University Press.
Held, D., 1980. Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas, University of California
Press.
Horkheimer, M., 1972. Traditional and Critical Theory. In Critical Theory: Selected Essays.
Continuum.
Imrie, R. & Hall, P., 2001. Inclusive design: designing and developing accessible environments,
New York: Spon Press.
988
Kiem, M., When the most radical thing you could do is just stop. Medium. Available at: https://
medium.com/@mattkiem [Accessed March 17, 2014].
Kimmel, M.S., 2003. Towards a Pedagogy of the Oppressor. In M. S. Kimmel & A. L. Ferber,
eds. Privilege: A Reader. Westview Press.
Kirkup, G., 2000. The gendered cyborg: a reader, London; New York: Routledge in association
with the Open University.
Koskinen, I.K. et al., 2011. Design research through practice from the lab, field, and showroom,
Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.
McCall, L., 2005. The Complexity of Intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), pp.17711800.
Mulvey, L., 1997. Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. In Feminisms: An Anthology of Literary
Theory and Criticism. Rutgers University Press.
Oudshoorn, N., Rommes, E. & Stienstra, M., 2004. Configuring the User as Everybody: Gender
and Design Cultures in Information and Communication Technologies. Science, Technology &
Human Values, 29(1), pp.3063.
Prado de O. Martins, L. & Vieira de Oliveira, P.J.S., Questioning the critical in Speculative &
Critical Design. Medium. Available at: https://medium.com/designing-the-future/5a355cac2ca4
[Accessed March 8, 2014].
Du Preez, A., 2009. Gendered bodies and new technologies: rethinking embodiment in a cyberera, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Revell, T., Designed conflict territories. openDemocracy. Available at: http://
www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/tobias-revell/designed-conflict-territories [Accessed
March 17, 2014].
Rothschild, J. & Cheng, A., 1999. Design and feminism: re-visioning spaces, places, and
everyday things, New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.
Serano, J., 2007. Whipping girl: a transsexual woman on sexism and the scapegoating of
femininity, Emeryville, CA: Seal Press.
Stevenson-Keating, P., 2011. A Critique on the Critical | Studio PSK. Available at: http://
pstevensonkeating.co.uk/a-critique-on-the-critical [Accessed November 8, 2013].
Stone, A., 2004. Essentialism and Anti-Essentialism in Feminist Philosophy. Journal of Moral
Philosophy, 1(2), pp.135153.
Thackara, J., Republic of Salivation (Michael Burton and Michiko Nitta). Design and Violence.
Available at: http://designandviolence.moma.org/republic-of-salivation-michael-burton-andmichiko-nitta/ [Accessed March 10, 2014].
Turner, W.B., 2000. A Genealogy of Queer Theory, Temple University Press.
989
Is a brazilian design researcher focusing on gender and speculative design. Her ongoing
doctoral research on gendered body extensions at the University of the Arts in Berlin is funded
by the brazilian Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento (CNPq).
990
Abstract
The paper is a meta-discursive contribution to the discussion of how design can be
understood as a medium of meaning formation and the questioning of meaning. Further,
the paper makes a plea for the role of the humanities in formulating relevant questions in
design through a conceptualization of the nature and scope of design. Three fundamental
approaches to understanding design from the perspective of the humanities will be
proposed: 1) The question of agency in design, i.e. what the role and agency of design
can be conceived as in human life, which can be addressed in the historical perspective of
design history, 2) the question of context in and of design, i.e. which contexts give
meaning to design, a question that calls for interpretive models of cultural analysis of the
circuit of design that acknowledge the phases and aspects of production, mediation and
consumption, and 3) the question of meaning constituents in design, where the paper
points to design philosophy as a framework for interests in aesthetic, ontological and
phenomenological concerns in design. In the methodology of the paper, approaches from
the humanities offer frameworks for understanding the role and nature of design in terms
of meaning formulation and cultural contexts and, thus, for contesting the what, how and
why of design.
Keywords
The humanities, cultural context, design history, design philosophy, meaning constituents
Introduction
Approaches to design from the humanities and from design practice often operate in
different theoretical and institutional settings. Design historians in university contexts may
claim design history as a discipline in its own right, a de-tooled instrumental use in a
practice-oriented educational setting (Fallan 2013). From the practice perspective, the
humanist concerns in questions of history, culture and meaning may seem abstract and
detached from the immediate matters of design practice and practice-based design
education, as the humanities often operate with a hermeneutical model of interpretation
where the topic of investigation is formulated and created as an analytical object,
detached from immediate concerns or questions of actuality.
In this paper I will make a plea for the role of humanities in relation to understanding
design as a medium of meaning formation and thus as a medium that questions meaning
and proposes models for engaging with the world. Some 20 years ago, Richard Buchanan
made an important statement about design in a humanist perspective as a liberal art of
technological culture, where design should point forward to a new attitude about the
appearance of products [...] and carry a deeper, integrative argument about the nature of
the artificial in human experience (Buchanan, 1992, p. 20). Buchanans aim was to claim
design as a field in its own right and not as an appendix to art or technology. Buchanan
spoke of design as a specific and contemporary human enterprise. Here, my approach is
991
to ask what we can learn from a humanist approach in relation to design. Thus, in an
overview, I will lay out different tracks along which questions in relation to design are
raised by the humanist investigation within design. My claim is not that knowledge from
the humanities will deliver or promote a comprehensive theory of contemporary design or
provide direct answers to urgent or emergent questions in design (e.g. how to create
better design in terms of ethics or sustainability or, even better, both in combination),
although that may happen, but rather that a humanist approach allows us to propose
relevant and appropriate frameworks for questioning and debating design.
992
In the following, I discuss these three entries to design which I consider central for a
humanist investigation of design; design history, cultural analysis of the circuit of design,
and the question of meaning. They all, in different ways, convey and employ methods of
interpretation, framing of experience and investigation of meaning. Further, in combining
these, we may raise a number of questions regarding the formative powers of design as
illustrated in a model that frames the big questions of the what, how and why of design
(figure 1). This model may be seen as the interpretive output of the article.
993
only in phases of production but also in the mediation in user manuals, magazines and
advertising.
The design historian Kjetil Fallan has asked design historians, To What Purpose and for
Whom Do We Write? (Fallan, 2013) as part of a discussion where he claims that design
history is often regarded as a secondary tool in the education of practitioners. Instead, so
the argument of Fallan, the discipline of design history should be de-tooled, abandoning
its Stockholm syndrome tendency to identify with the hostage takers. Fallan initiates a
central discussion about the purpose of writing design history, and part of his answer
derives from his habitus as a professional historian: A central element in writing design
history is the methodological reflection of the aims, means, and models of design history,
and this dimension may be lost if the discipline is not allowed to develop on its own terms
but is instead a servant to another purpose.
I wish to point the discussion of design history in another direction. Whether design history
is tooled or de-tooled, its perspective enables a deeper understanding of both design and
the wider contexts of design, as seen in a variety of historical settings. First of all, the
historical perspective allows for the basic understanding that design has changed in scope,
materials and shape; design has come a long way, from the early designs of the industrial
revolution to contemporary design developments in relation to digital technology, branding
and conceptual-immaterial solutions. Further, to be aware of design history is also to
acknowledge that we cannot simply project the present into the future (Rooden et al.,
2011) but instead rely on a much longer tradition.
Next, reflecting design history in terms of historiography, that is, in terms of different
models for conceiving and writing design history, may inform the emphasis of agency in
design, both in the context of design history and in the context of design itself. Design
history is itself a product of ways of looking at design, as stated so precisely by Richard
Buchanan: The history of design is not merely a history of objects. It is a history of the
changing views of subject matter [...]. One could go further and say that the history of
design history is a record of the design historians views regarding what they conceive to
be the subject matter of design (Buchanan, 1992, p. 19). Thus, design history has
changed from an emphasis on creative geniuses, as in the Pevserian conception, to a
focus on objects and their contexts (e.g. as objects of desire as proposed by Forty, 2005)
and on design as an agent in the social construction of meaning. Increasingly, the
complex context of design has come into view, and the debates have revolved around
questions of production, mediation, and consumption, as stated above.
In this way, much recent design history looks at the agency of design in terms of a
dialectics of design objects and their context; exemplary in this context is Gert Selles brief
design history Design im Alltag. Vom Thonetstuhl zum Mikrochip (2007), where Selle,
based on a selection of concrete design objects (highly profiled as well as more
anonymous examples), looks at design as a phenomenon of both visible and invisible
properties of agency and cultural meaning which must be comprehended:
Out of objects long only debated within the perspective of art history, comes a
problem of perception, research and interpretation in cultural studies. The gaze
that is originally focused on the visible will today have to comprehend the complex
structure of the invisible conditions, ends and effects of a form (Selle, 2007, p. 11).
For example, Selle demonstrates how an anonymous design, a white sheet of paper, is
material but also contains invisible, immaterial design aspects, ranging from its conception
to its ways of structuring its own use and of introducing and educating a culture of literacy.
The agency of design no longer hinges only on the object but also on its evocation of
meaning and effect.
994
Interestingly, it often seems difficult for the discipline of design history to go beyond the
concrete objects, that is, to incorporate newer design types such as interaction design,
corporate design, branding, service design, and conceptual design. It may seem that
some of the art history heritage, reflected in the drive to detect some kind of (stylistic)
development in the objects, continues to affect design history: If one has to go beyond the
object, the stricter discipline of design history must be left behind and perhaps reframed
and renamed, e.g. as Design Culture (cf. Julier 2008). Nevertheless, what remains as an
important heritage of design history is its ability to reflect design: to look not only at
changing agencies but also at the different conceptions of agency in design.
995
996
997
I will point out three parts of design philosophy that all raise important questions about
meaning constituents in design: aesthetics (as a question of sensual-conceptual meaning
components in design), ontology (what design is and what it is as agency), and
phenomenology (the question of design creates the constituents of human experience).
1) Aesthetics is an aspect of design that has long been claimed to constitute a central part
of design but which has not been fully theorized. Only recently have we seen the first full
treatment of design in the field of philosophical aesthetics with the release of the book
The Aesthetics of Design (Forsey, 2013). Roughly put, the question of aesthetics can be
addressed from two points of view: philosophy and design. Forseys book is an example
of the first approach; philosophers have made the move from a general concept of
philosophical aesthetics towards the field of design, which has been seen as a quasiartistic medium employing artistic means but also as a medium different from art, e.g. in
its basic element of functionality (see Steinbrenner & Nida-Rmelin, 2010). The second
approach has been more tentative, perhaps due to the differences in discourse between
the field of design (and design practice) and philosophical aesthetics. But with a glance to
newer aesthetic theory (Bhme, 2001 & 2013; Shusterman, 2000; Seel, 2000 & 2007), I
will point to the aspect of sensual and conceptual meaning components in design as
central for a design aesthetics that may illuminate the sensually effective elements of
design (the Greek aisthet meaning that which can be sensed), how design objects
relate to their idea or meaning content (which is a theme in art-oriented aesthetic theory,
e.g. Adorno, 1970), and, ultimately, how sensual and conceptual meaning content relate
to one another (cf. Folkmann, 2010).
2) Next, in relation to the question of the ontology of design, I will point primarily to the
wide scope of the question, which goes to the core of what design is. The question may
address the role of design (as method, objects, and phenomenon) in the modern world.
On this point, the role of the artificial has played a prominent role in the debate, from
Herbert Simons statements about design as the science of the artificial (Simon, 1996) to
Buchanans labeling of design as a liberal art of technological culture that creates new
modes of the artificial in human experience (see above) or Bruno Latours claim that
being is design. In Latours argument, design is nothing foundational, and in fact, it is
quite the opposite: Design changes and remediates what exists, which also enables it to
enter the inner definitions of things and make them open to improvement and change
(Latour, 2008). To follow Latour, design gives shape to human existence through
environments and artificiality in everything from chairs to climates; thus his Heideggerian
phrase in German, Dasein ist design, being is design. At the same time, to him, design is
less a matter of fact than a matter of concern, where the objects of design are open to
interpretation and open in meaning and, hence, open to new potential directions of
meaning. With this, Latour points to an apparent paradox: Design is a medium for an
immanent transcendence in the sense that it can be a medium of and a search for change
and the transcending element of the possible without leaving the immanent sphere of
reality.
Hence, a reflection of design ontology does not just address question of objects or things
or the fundamental question of what design is; it also examines how design constitutes a
mode of reality that is capable of affecting reality and changing our perception of it.
3) Finally, design phenomenology may designate an approach to design with the focus on
how design, in its many types appearance and its creation of the tactile and visual
surfaces of the modern world, affects and structures experience. In relation to this, a
versatile interest in the role of objects has emerged in the recent years; Actor-Network
Theory has claimed objects to possess active agency in networks with humans, e.g. in
guiding behavior (cf. Latour, 2005), and Material Culture Studies have pointed to the
steering role of the material environment with regard to the development of social forms
998
(Dant 1999, p. 12). These positions see themselves as part of the social sciences; in my
view, the question of the nature of experience plays a pivotal role for the humanities,
regardless which scientific traditions is providing the answers. Further, in a reversal of the
interest in the human subject in classic phenomenology, the philosopher Peter-Paul
Verbeek speaks of post-phenomenology as a way of pointing to and acknowledging the
role of the object in shaping the conditions of experience: Things and in our current
culture especially technological artifacts mediate how human beings are present in their
world and how the world is present to them [] (Verbeek, 2005, p. 235).
Still, we can look at the impact of design on the conditions of experience: We can look at
how we design things, and how we are designed by the things we design. This dual
perspective is suggested by Prasad Boradkar when he states that the title of his book
Designing Things refers to a reciprocity of agency and an ambiguity of designs locus of
action. People and things configure each other (Boradkar, 2010, p. 4). Further, the
philosopher Stphane Vial has proposed that we examine the effects of design in the
context of experience and thus look at design as more of an event than a being, more of
an impact than a thing, and more of an incidence than a property (Vial, 2010, p. 55-56).
The effects of design contribute to the creation of the space of experience, which is
mediated and structured by the actual objects of design. In his recent book Ltre et
lcran, being and the screen, Vial looks at the changes in our structures of perception
due to new digital media that, e.g., offer spaces of virtual perception (Vial, 2013).
To apply a phenomenological approach to design is to focus at the dual question of how
design, as a medium of meaning formation, both relates to and possibly changes the
constituents of experience.
Conclusion
To be informed about the questions in design and the debates that may arise from these
questions also implies knowing how these questions can be framed. In this paper, the
proposal has been that we can benefit from the framework of the humanities as we
formulate questions regarding agency, contexts, and meaning constituents and thus ask
questions about the what, how, and why of design.
In addition, an interpretive framework such as this one may be employed in design
criticism with the ambition of looking at the aims and scope of design. Often, design is
regarded optimistically as a device of progression for the common good; on this point,
Herbert Simon lurks in the background with his notion of design as a means of devising
courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones (Simon 1996,
111). This view of design is, however, not non-biased but ultimately reflects a Modernist
ideology of progression. On this point, approaches from the humanities offer tools for
casting a critical perspective on design, also on the Modernist ideology of progression.
Thus, our focus should not be only to ask what the questions of design might be; instead
we should also critically reflect the foundational ground of the questions that it seems
urgent to search for formulations for in our present time and, ultimately, to find possible
answers for.
References
Adorno, T. W. (1970). sthetische Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Attfield, J. (2000). Wild Things: The Material Culture of Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg.
999
1000
1001
Selle, G. (2007). Design im Alltag. Vom Thonetstuhl zum Mikrochip. Frankfurt am Main:
Campus.
Shusterman, R. (2000). Pragmatist Aesthetics: Living Beauty, Rethinking Art. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Simon, H. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Steinbrenner, J. (2010). Wann ist Design? Design zwischen Funktion und Kunst. In
Steinbrenner, J. & Nida-Rmelin, J. (eds.), sthetische Werte und Design (pp. 11-29).
Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.
Steinbrenner, J. & Nida-Rmelin, J. (eds.) (2010). sthetische Werte und Design. Hatje
Cantz.
Verbeek, P.-P. (2005). What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency,
and Design. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Vermaas, P. E.,et al. (eds.) (2009). Philosophy and Design: From Engineering to
Architecture. London: Springer.
Vial, S. (2010). Court trait du design. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Vial, S. (2013). Ltre et lcran. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Walker, J. A. (1989). Design History and the History of Design. London: Pluto Press.
1002
Abstract
The paper is a theoretical contribution to the discussion of projection in design and is,
beyond the paper, a part of a larger discussion of meaning creation in design. The paper
discusses the paradoxical situation in projecting the new and unknown as all projection
necessarily is bound to a starting point in the given. Nevertheless, design offers a series
of methods for projecting. The paper proposes five models in design that have attempted
at organizing experience in a new way and aimed at offering a projection into a future with
a concrete starting point and an abstract intention of carrying out an open exploration of
the possible. These are selected due to their potential for evoking something previously
unknown: (1) an exploration of design with artistic means, (2) an investigation of the
potential of form, (3) the possibilities of experimentation, (4) the role of scenarios, and (5)
the challenge of digital technology. In the discussion, a series of dichotomies are
employed, known versus unknown and closure versus openness, and related to questions
of linearity of prediction/anticipation on the one hand and the question of disrupting the
linearity on the other hand. In connecting the real and the speculative, design is a central
medium for future-oriented projection.
Keywords
Projection; design history; scenarios; experimentation; digital technology
Introduction
Design is often seen in a progressive perspective as a means of imagining some kind of
future state, e.g. in the image of something to be preferred (cf. Simon, 1996). Foremost,
however, the question is how an act of projection towards a future and towards the new
can be made. We may ask not only how design enables possibility (and thus unfolds a
wide field of meaning), but also how design can be attributed with a direction, a logic of
projection in the balance with the act of making possible.
This paper is an excerpt of a larger work (Folkmann, 2013) but looks in this context into
the dynamics of projecting toward the new and on concrete strategies in design doing this.
First, I will discuss how to project and provide the projection with a direction when all kinds
of projections base on the paradox that we cannot find the new and unknown on the basis
of something known. Next, I will discuss a variety of strategies in design to engage with
the unknown, (1) artistic exploration, (2) the potential of form, (3) experimentation, (4) the
use of scenarios, and (5) digital technology.
1003
conversely, if we seek the radically new, as in a transfiguration of the given, how can we
then think of a direction or a trajectory without being able to anticipate a destination?
(Grosz, 1999, p. 19).
Design, however, often aims at anticipating a destination (e.g., by offering a solution to a
problem), but the problem may be an element of fixation, as pointed out, for example, by
Cross (2007), if the goal becomes too deterministic. Thus, we must avoid determinism
and can aim at direction without destination, movement without prediction (Grosz 1999,
19), but we can also ask how we may keep the mind open to the entirely new, unexpected,
and unpredicted without losing our sense of direction. Hence the challenge is to do both:
keep the possible open and maintain a direction.
On this point it is vital to differentiate projection from prescription. Whereas prescription is
normative in goal and process, projection may contain direction but is open-ended in its
search for expression. On this point, Victor Margolin (2007) has made an important
distinction between predictive and prescriptive future scenarios where a predictive
scenario is based on what could happen and involved in gathering data and organizing it
into patterns that make reflection on future possibilities more plausible; in contrast,
prescriptive scenarios embody strongly articulated visions of what should happen (p. 5
6). In his discussion of how design may contribute to the construction of its audience, Carl
DiSalvo sets Margolins concept of prediction in relation to a tactic of projection with
proficient use of design to express the range and complexity of possible consequences in
an accessible and compelling manner (2009, p. 53). We can point to two central
elements of the tactics of projection. First, it is not marked by closure in trying to predict
how things should be in the future. And, second, the open-ended search for the possible
in design is led by an activity of making apparent, plausible, and persuasive (p. 55) by
the ability of design to evoke concrete representations and suppositions of the possible.
But how can we program the direction if we do not know even what possibilities will arise
and where we should search for them? This is, consequently, a matter of formulating the
search for a direction in the realm of the known versus the unknown: The closer the
possible gets to the known, the easier it is to program the direction toward it (as when the
framework for the design process is clearly stated, for example, as the creation of a new
chair), and the more the possible reaches out to something not yet known, the more
contingent it becomes. Of course, the division between known and unknown is never
clear-cut, as it also is a matter of defining frameworks for what is known and what is not.
In most cases, elements of both the known and the unknown will be present, as will
strategies of programming and contingency.
Often certain properties will be known, for example, the category of the object or product
(e.g., furniture design or a toothbrush), and explorative strategies will be employed in
order to find what initially is outside the property of the known, that is, to try to formulate
progressive approaches for seeking the contingent and the possible findings it offers. That
may occur as a strategy for seeking the new in the experimental exploration of details or
in the active reframing of the problem spaces, where the frame of reference may be
displaced. For example, developing a new toothbrush may be not so much about
combining different materials in a new way but more about transposing to a framework for
posing questions, that is, asking new questions about the culture of mouth hygiene.
1004
In her discussion of how to obtain the new and move beyond the paradox of searching for
something not yet known, Elisabeth Grosz, with inspiration from Henri Bergson and Gilles
Deleuze, proposes two different models for conceiving the new: that of the possible in
relation to the real and of the virtual in relation to the actual. For Grosz, the possible
stands in a position of identity and resemblance to the real, which in its act of realization
limits the sphere of the possible. According to this perspective, the possible is bound to
the real, and consequently, it cannot not produce anything new that transcends the given.
Where the possible is regarded as a mode of anticipatory resemblance of the real, by
contrast, the virtual never resembles the real that it actualizes (Grosz, 1999, p. 27).
Groszs statement is clear: While the concept of the possible doubles that of the real, the
virtual is the real of genuine production, innovation, and creativity. It is only actualization
that engenders the new (p. 27).
Grosz points to two different ways of conceiving the possible in relation to the given. The
first is given through the basic structural condition of possibility: that it relates to something,
the real, in the same manner that new design is always based on existing material. The
second way points to the pure transfiguring potential of the possible: It is a pure potential
of possibility that differs from the real but in principle can be actualized any time.
These two models need not be combined in a perfect synthesis, but together they point to
the paradox of formulating a logic of projecting: On the one hand, projecting should point
in the direction of something in order not to lose its direction, while on the other hand, it
should not be limited by the constraints of the existing in its search for the entirely new if
the goal is radical innovation. In the following, I will describe a series of approaches to
investigating how projecting might operate. I will reach back into design history in order to
find paradigmatic models of creating figurations through design.
Models of Projection
I will describe a series of models of design aimed at creating new paradigms of
experience, and they are selected due to their potential for evoking something previously
unknown even if they are not similar in extension or character. I move back into design
history and point out some exemplary turns and illustrative products that have all
attempted to organize experience in a new way and aimed at offering a projection into a
future with a concrete starting point and an abstract intention of carrying out an open
exploration of the possible. Here, projection has been engaged in its potential to point in
new directions and thus effect shifts of paradigm in experience. As a concluding element, I
point to digital technology which has proven to offer radical challenges to design.
I point to five models: (1) an exploration of design with artistic means, (2) an investigation
of the potential of form, (3) the possibilities of experimentation, (4) the role of scenarios,
and (5) the challenge of digital technology. The purpose of the following is not to offer an
alternative selection of the overwhelming material of design history, even if historical
studies will only gain in importance in the future, as historical material can offer a central
source of understanding how we arrived at the existing situation and, further, how we
project ourselves into the future. My aim is to employ a series of dichotomies, known
versus unknown and closure versus openness, and relate them to questions of linearity of
prediction/anticipation on the one hand and the question of disrupting the linearity on the
other hand. Thus, my goal is to outline several models of approaches to projection and the
conception of experience through design.
1005
1006
conception, the point was that function and form are organically interconnected and parts
of the same unit of expressing the spirit of the modern times. By contrast, matters of form
have also been articulated as relatively independent of the question of function. In
particular, this is expressed in the tendency toward styling in design, that is, when the
inner functional component of the product is considered a premise of the design, whereby
the product in question can differentiate itself from other products only by means of outer
appearance. This is indeed a factor for design objects that strive for visual appeal in a
competitive market. An early and essential example of this is the trend of American
streamlined design, which was propagated by Raymond Loewy among others. In the
design of logos and products for the world of growing consumption, such as toasters,
campers, and cars, the claim was the prerogative of sensuous, appealing form in a
combination of organic shapes and inspiration from the aesthetics of the industrial world,
for example, in the use of the principles of aerodynamics.
As a tendency, the dominance of form contains a clear statement of the means of design,
which are to increase their emphasis on parameters of beauty and appearance.
Likewise, the goal remains embedded in the same ambition of making things better at the
small scale of the product. With a keen awareness of the role of a catchy statement for
marketing purposes, Loewy said, for example, I can claim to have made the daily life of
the twentieth century more beautiful; and further, Design, vitalized and simplified, will
make the comforts of civilized life available to an ever-increasing number of Americans..
Thus, it may be that a design trend such as the streamlined design did not have a farreaching projection as in a concept of a utopia, but it did provide a clear sense of direction
in its exploration of the form language that reflected the modern age. On the level of form
and the concrete product, it thus explored the possibilities of experience based on the
conditions of modern life. Based on the concrete and properties of the known (e.g., a
toaster) and thus not the abstract of a vision residing in the unknown (e.g., a reversal of
consumer culture), it sought to employ form as a means of framing experience, that is, of
enabling new kinds of connection of sensual material (in the expression of form) and
conceptual meaning (in improving comfort and furthering the good life). Thus, working with
form can be a driver for direction; it takes its starting point in a steady line of anticipation
and prediction, as the desired solution is known in advance (e.g., an improved toaster);
however, it may suddenly prove to have an additional disruptive effect if the expression of
form radically challenges the customary appearance of things and, hence, their ability to fit
into the realm of experience. Working with the outer appearance of form can suddenly
lead in new directions and evoke new modes of experiencing the surroundings.
Experimentation
Experimental strategies in design play an important role in the development of design.
In this context, I mean experimental in the sense of design objects and design solutions
that are not primarily aimed at problem solution or seek to apply to a market but
investigate their own properties, that is, in what way they constitute design and what
design is. Among other examples, this approach is found in the critical design movement
and designers whose designs explore the ontology of design more than they aim at
problem solving. In design history, however, the employment of means of design in an
experimental setting reaches back to movements in the 1960s, such as the Italian
antidesign and radical design movements.
Consequently, experimental design is not necessarily in demand in industry, where the
focus is often on solving a problem and arriving at a solution that can be converted into a
product. Often, then, experiments take place outside industry: in schools or galleries and
1007
in the work of independent designers. Reasonably, the question can also be asked why
design should be experimental in its setting and questioning of things, and whether it
should perhaps just stick to its heritage of being applied art, that is, a way of employing
artistic means for a certain purpose. Indeed, should design not just be employed as a
means of creating the best possible solutions to the problems we are able to find and
state? And, consequently, should we not leave it to art, that is, the nonapplied or
beautiful arts (as in the classical tradition of les beaux arts), to pose the essential
questions about the being of things? The case is, however, that not only is there an
interface between design and art in the multiple phenomena of designart or crossovers,
where the zones of the purposeful and the purposeless interact to produce new art objects
attributed with a function or new design objects that explore the means and form language
of design but which would hardly stand the test of use.
Even more important, the self-questioning of design in design experiments is vital for the
development of design: Design experiments posit that design is not only a means of
reaching a goal, that is, solving the properly stated problem. In fact, on a fundamental
level, design is a central interface with reality, which lets design structure experience and
provide access to some parts of reality while leaving some elements invisible. To illustrate,
a project like Daniel Rozins circle mirror project explores the materialization of immaterial
technology when a large number of small metal plates respond to the input of a digital
camera and image processing, thus producing an analog output with a rough pixelation
that marks the transition from one medium and form of technology to another (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Circles Mirror, 2006, by Daniel Rozin. Nine hundred laminated circle prints,
motors, video camera, control electronics, custom software, microcontroller. Photo: David
Plakke.
Another example is Thomas Thwaitess design school project of attempting to make a DIY
toaster (Figure 2). Thwaites tried to build a toaster from scratch, including finding the raw
material for all the different components. Thus, the process of designing the toaster both
investigated and displayed the complexity of production as it became clear that even a
seemingly simple product such as a toaster is composed of a large number of complex
materials. Thwaitess project shows that even a simple product like a toaster is impossible
to design without taking a whole series of cultural prerequisites (e.g., the history of refining
materials and technology) into account. In this way, the DIY toaster makes visible that a
1008
toaster is not just an object of consumption but also the condensed expression of
development in culture and civilization.
1009
Figure 3: Energy as design material. The power aware cord lights up according to the
amount of energy surging through it. The cord is one of the results from the research
project Static! at the Interactive Institute in Sweden. Design: Sara Ilstedt Hjelm.
Consequently, design experimentation does not operate with prediction or anticipation but
with an open logic of searching, which can often produce disruptive results, as did the DIY
toaster. Design experimentation is about investigating the possible of design to the limits
of impossibility, challenging design by pushing it to its border, but doing this on the basis
of the objectas an emergence of possibilities explored in and through the concrete
object.
1010
In the historical inventory of approaches to design methods, Otl Aicher has challenged the
role and character of projection in trying to make its goal open to possibilities while at the
same time keeping the means concrete. In what I will call a progressive phenomenology,
Aicher sees design as a means whereby the human subject not only experiences the
world (hence, the classic theme of phenomenology) but also seeks to create the world, to
project, zu entwerfen. By designating a zone that is free from outside influences, the
human subject is defined as the starting point for creation through projective cognition.
Aicher speaks of creative making as an unfolding of the subject and as the extension of
the subject into the self-organized world (1991a, p. 190-191).
Aicher explores the potential of the interaction, that is, what happens when designing and
projecting are activated. Aicher balances on the cutting edge of accepting the world as it is
and assuming, with regard to the artificiality of the modern world, that the world that we
live in is the world as we made it (p. 185). Projecting means that the world is open to
intervention, which means taking responsibility for the way in which things function and
evolve. According to Aicher, design is a cultural and reflective activity that functions as a
medium for raising fundamental questions of human existence within the modern,
artificial world (1991b, p. 75).
Aichers projective tool is the model as a way to devise an openness toward the world, as
it provides access to reality through its constructive approach. To project is to open up
new spaces of thinking; to use the model is to focus the openness and give it direction
but still keep open the scope of possibility. The model states an open-ended hypothesis,
which is the opposite of asserting an idea of finalized truth and of stating scenarios with a
determinate extension. Thus, the model differs from the hypothesis based on presumption
as in the building of the scenario. Through the model and its projecting, a new space of
the possible comes into being; we transgress the limits of the given world in order to
reach new possibilities (Aicher 1991b, p. 29). This implies an experimental process,
where the feedback mechanism of trial and error is important. He points to design as a
process of constant comparisons and corrections, as projective thinking that throws
itself into the unknown (p. 28). Aicher prefers the concept of steering over planning as a
design methodology. Making plans means deploying an instrumental and abstract logic of
principles that misses the dynamics of reality; using a strategy of steering means using
thinking with feedback based on observant testing, sticking to the immediate (p. 138),
learning from feedback, and constituting a free space in the making. Furthermore, Aicher
notes that thinking in the sense of grasping (be-greifen) something is always a physical
act, where the hands are used as an active medium (p. 24). Aicher thus demonstrates
how the classic virtues of design, imagining through visualization, for example, in drawing
and shaping mock-ups, can be conceived within a larger framework of a philosophically
founded phenomenology of projecting through design.
Despite the historical bias of an optimist-modernist tendency, Aicher contributes to the
discussion of how to attribute direction to projection when the horizon of possibilities is to
be kept open all the way through the act of projecting.
Digital Technology
Modern technology has been a driver of design and, conversely, design has indicated new
directions for technology. Design and technology are inextricably interwoven, even to a
degree where design can be regarded as a contemporary art of technology (Buchanan
1992), that is, as a mediator and translator between culture and technology and, hence,
as a generator of a new culture of technology.
1011
1012
marketed as a consumer product like any other product. Conversely, however, this kind of
object has the potential to create new modes of representing and accessing reality. An
example might be the ways in which social relations are established and formulated (and
often purposely distorted) through social digital platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Of
course, material objects with a limited outer extension may also involve a complex
communication of imaginary meaning, but digital objects expand the dimension of
imaginary meaning by virtue and means of their inner potential of creating new models or
representations of reality. Still, the effects of digital objects are far from William Gibsons
dystopian vision of humans with technological implants that generate far-reaching
expansions of consciousness in integration with a wider network of consciousness, as
described in his 1984 breakthrough novel Neuromancer (where Gibson not only
anticipated the Internet but also invented the concept of cyberspace). But on a structural
level, the effect is similar: we meet a part of the world through digital technology, and with
its expanded internal extension, it has a vast influence on the way we meet the world, that
is, how experience is enabled, structured, and staged.
Conclusion
We cannot with any certainty predict or project the future but we can engage in design in
order look for ways of projecting and entering the future. In this regard, design is special,
not only for projecting the new but also for methodologies in doing this.
In its dynamic engagement in the real and the non-real, in the world of the realities and
the imaginary, in technology and the arts, in problem solving and in problem searching, in
bound contexts and in visual-tactile speculation, design is a central means of the modern
culture to search for a progressive engagement with the future, that brings with it the past,
takes its starting point in the present but ultimately searches for the not-yet-given of the
future.
References
Aicher, O. (1991a). die welt als entwurf. Berlin: Ernst und Sohn.
Aicher, O. (1991b). analog und digital. Berlin: Ernst und Sohn.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues 8(2), 5-21.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Basel: Birkhuser.
DiSalvo, C. (2009). Design and the Construction of Publics. Design Issues 25(1), 4863.
Folkmann, M.N. (2013). The Aesthetics of Imagination in Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Gropius, W. (1919). Bauhaus Manifest, accessed August 15, 2011,
http://www.kunstzitate.de/bildendekunst/manifeste/bauhaus_1919.htm.
1013
Grosz, E. (1999). Thinking the New: Futures Yet Unthought. In Grosz, E. (ed.),
Becomings: Explorations in Time, Memory and Futures (pp.15-28). Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
Halse, J. et al. (eds). (2010). Rehearsing the Future. Copenhagen: Danish School of
Design.
Jonas, W. (2001). A Scenario for Design. Design Issues 17(2), 6480.
Manzini, E. (2003). Scenarios of Sustainable Wellbeing. Design Philosophy Papers 1.
http://www.changedesign.org/Resources/Manzini/Manuscripts/Manziniscenarios.doc.
Margolin, V. (2007) Design, the Future and the Human Spirit. Design Issues 23(3), 4-15.
Selle, G. (2007). Design im Alltag. Vom Thonetstuhl zum Mikrochip. Frankfurt am Main:
Campus.
Simon, H. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
1014
Abstract
There is an emerging set of needs in our post-industrial society that require a contextual
sensitivity and local flexibility that traditional industrial infrastructures seem to lack. As a
response, distributed small-scale forms of production and collaborative services are being
developed, providing the foundations for more resilient and responsive infrastructures.
Using urban freight delivery services as a case, this paper presents a possible approach
to accessing and expressing the back end functioning of a large formal industrial urban
infrastructure in order to make it accessible to bottom-up innovation. The postal service
has been used as a test bed for two small hacking experiments using consumer and do-ityourself (DIY) electronics: a GPS and micro cameras. Data visualization and videos have
been produced in order to materialize and share knowledge about the infrastructure and
its qualities. By tracing its underlying functionalities, we aim to reveal otherwise hidden
opportunities for design intervention that could become the starting point for participatory
design processes aimed at bottom-up innovation in the context of industrial infrastructures.
As such, this project aims at adding to the tools and materials available for such design
practices.
Keywords
Infrastructures; Visualization; Co-Design; Service Design; Critical Practice
Introduction
As societal needs change over time, the structure and infrastructure of our cities have to
evolve to serve new functions. Be it railroads, electricity grids, or mobile communication
networks, such changes in the infrastructure of a city leaves both visible and invisible
traces of the development of what living and working in this city is, and have been, like.
What is less visible in everyday city life, however, is how these changes in the
infrastructure took place and, importantly, what is now needed to evolve them to serve
new needs.
Prevalent processes for developing infrastructures based on policy making, top-down
approaches and standardization criteria evolved as a response to industrialization and the
shift to mass production and consumption. Today, our post-industrial society is developing
a very different set of needs that often require a contextual sensitivity and local flexibility
that traditional industrial infrastructures seem to lack (Bell 1973; Graham & Marvin, 2001;
Hunt, 2005). As a response, distributed small-scale forms of production and collaborative
services are emerging, providing the foundations for more resilient and responsive
infrastructures (Biggs, Ryan, & Wiseman, 2010; Manzini, 2013; Townsend, Maguire,
Liebhold, & Crawford, 2011).
1015
Participatory design approaches focusing on working in the field, have developed new
competences and a variety of tools for how to design sustainable and inclusive systems of
product and services, as well as how to support their introduction (Binder et al., 2011;
Koskinen et al., 2011; Manzini et al., 2004). Further, besides designing such new
alternatives, designers have also started to think about how to overcome some of the
scalability and diffusion constraints exerted by the industrial regime they operate within
(Morelli 2007; Sanders & Stappers, 2008; Valtonen, 2010). New cross-fertilizations and
feedback mechanisms between top-down and bottom-up systems might be needed to
support their introduction to avoid systemic rebound effects and continued proliferation of
existing standards (Graham & Marvin, 2001; Johansson, Kisch, & Mirata, 2005; Meadows
& Wright, 2008; Norman, 2009).
To open up industrial infrastructures and make them receptive to bottom-up and social
innovation can be a way to leverage them towards more collaborative and adaptive forms
(Hill, 2012; Ratti & Townsend, 2011). Nevertheless, user-led innovation processes require
transparency a transparency that existing infrastructures typically do not have. Thus,
certain interventions might be necessary for this to become possible. For instance, there
are now examples of companies that provide people with the information needed to
understand how they work and the material necessary to be creative in order to open up
for co-creation of new concepts (Chesbrough, 2010). Except for interactions at the frontend and at predetermined access points, however, the ways urban infrastructures and
services operate are essentially invisible to most users. Their background functioning is
naturalized and taken for granted (Borgmann, 1987; Bowker & Star, 2000). Further, the
back-end information is privately held and deliberately not accessible for competition and
security reasons. These features make it difficult for people outside these systems to
understand and interpret them without some means to relate.
To open up such infrastructures for re-interpretation and design, we somehow need to
make them visible beyond the access points we currently interact with. To give
infrastructures a presence, to somehow make something expressing their functioning
available for design, is a necessary first step to allow judgment and participation (Dewey,
1954; Hallns & Redstrm, 2002; Nelson & Stolterman, 2003; Suchman, 2012). If we can
give them a more visible and tangible presence, the images of the infrastructure that
emerge can be turned into material for design, and appropriate tools and processes can
be crafted to allow designers and communities to understand existing configurations
(Boehner, Gaver, & Boucher, 2012; Mattelmki, 2005). Once the material and the tools
have been made present, we can stage participatory processes of experimentation and
fieldwork to understand, design and curate how to re-purpose infrastructures and
rehearse possible future solutions (Halse et al., 2010).
The purpose of this paper is to start looking into what a design practice addressing these
needs might be like. The aim is not to prove a concept or evaluate the quality of the
results, but to start to investigate the role of design in the democratization of large physical
infrastructures. The reason is simple yet important: essentially this is a kind of (industrial)
design current design practice is not really equipped for. In addition to the problematics of
being slightly at odds with our disciplines industrial roots and heritage, this is a kind of
design where we currently have no material to design with, where we face a diversity of
stakeholders far beyond simple dichotomies between producers and consumers, and
where the entire design process will have to happen in diverse societal contexts rather
than in the far more familiar design studio. The aim of these experiments is to explore the
first stage of this process, namely that of creating the material necessary for any kind of
1016
design process to begin. Thus, we will look for ways of providing an experience of the
back-end functioning of a delivery service, of identifying what kind of material they can
provide and of evaluating their possible use as design probes in participatory design. As
such, the work reported is only a first step towards a more developed participatory design
process.
Delivery Systems
Being one of the several freight distribution actors in the city, and probably one of the
most accessible, the postal service was selected as a target of our studies. In recent
years concerns about the social, environmental and economical impacts of urban freight
distribution have grown to expose the slow responsiveness to changes of current planning
methods (Lindholm & Behrends, 2012). Despite the higher level of efficiency offered by
single actors and services, their heterogeneity, conflicting and lack of data make shared
holistic solutions to city logistic hard to find and organize (Dablanc, 2007). The postal
infrastructure is part of the global logistic network and shares several features with other
logistic services. This makes it a good case study to understand how to open systems
explicitly set up for top-down control and in service for global economies, repurposing
them to serve the specific needs of cities and local communities.
With its internal innovation protocols and standardized supply services, the postal service
represents a typical example of an industrial infrastructure. As such, it shares many of the
evolution patterns and problems related to naturalization, reductionism, liberalization and
commoditization that have been extensively discussed in literature (Borgmann 1987;
Bowker & Star, 2000; Graham & Marvin, 2001). The derived demand, time and location
criteria at the base of its organization, are also at the root of many consequences of
logistic networks on the urban landscape, such as land consumption and traffic
congestions; splintering of communities and disembodiment of cities (Dablanc, 2007;
Graham & Marvin, 2001; Hesse & Rodrigue, 2004; Lyster, 2012)
Postal systems, like many other global logistic networks, are organized in more or less the
same way everywhere regardless of the city geography, regulations and social context
(Dablanc, 2007; Hesse 2002). Originally designed to serve and meet the primary needs of
supplying diverse communities at long distances, todays postal services have
incrementally developed more decentralized networks to provide more extensive pick-up
and distribution points to their customers. As part of this proximity strategy, tracking
services showing the different transitions at different delivery stages have been introduced,
e.g. showing when a package moves from a truck to a warehouse. Despite these
transaction points given by online services and front-end interactions, the entire back-end
of the delivery process and its performance are inaccessible from the external users
perspective.
Experiments
New mobile technologies and embedded systems could offer cities and companies new
possibilities for involvement and participation in the study and design of their services
(Schaffers, et al., 2012; Von Hippel, 2009. Hacking is not only a way to illegally obtain
information but also a source of innovation for companies. A famous example is Lego and
their Mindstorm. Once it was hacked, the company recognized the value of opening up
their innovation process as a general strategy to explore new market possibilities
(Chesbrough, 2010). Following this example, Ford is now inviting people to hack its cars
1017
to develop new possible mobility applications (OpenXC, n.d.). The number of examples of
bottom-up and crowd-source services and initiatives involving users in the exploration of
cities through sensors and devices is continuously growing. For instance, participatory
sensing has been used a tool for design of collaborative services and distributed
infrastructures (Burke et al., 2006; Shilton et al., 2008). Augmentations of infrastructures
through small tracking devices have been used to understand the functioning of large
urban infrastructures like waste removal, by enabling the system to produce information it
couldnt otherwise provide (Offenhuber et al., 2012). Finally, GPS tracking has been used
in a participatory process to reveal the functioning of informal recycling cooperatives and
favour their interoperability with public and private institutions (Offenhuber & Lee, 2012).
In the context of such developments, we have carried out two experiments. The initial
question that triggered them was extremely simple: how to open up an existing system
and understand what happens to parcels from the moment they are shipped to the
moment they are delivered? Not having access to the postal services sorting procedures,
datasets about vehicles locations or final destinations of mails shipped, we combined two
methods to access and expose their back-end functioning: augmentation and the do-ityourself practice of hacking. This approach has been necessary to be able to follow and
retrieve data about paths and locations of envelopes and parcels from their origins to
destinations; information the system is not providing to end-users.
Augmentation consists in adding information processing and ability to generate data to
objects and systems unable to produce them, providing enhanced possibilities for
experiences and interaction with their users (Kuniavsky, 2010). Hacking can be defined as
a practice aimed at opening a system, accessing it and learning how to master its
functioning and structures (cf. von Busch, 2009). Although hackers sometimes operate
close to what is illegal or even past that border breaking into forbidden or private networks,
hacking can also be a positive, provocative act made in order to build new things, moved
by curiosity and a desire to amplify the interaction with the world, without destructive intent
(Mitchell, 2005). In our case we clearly aim for the latter: the purpose here is to obtain new
perspectives on the existing in order to uncover new design opportunities. For instance, it
was not in the projects interest to reveal any sensitive information meant to be secret and
secured, but rather to use a kind of hacking to make sense of something that is already
partially visible and available.
We applied this method to the postal service in two experiments that provides information
at two different scales. The first experiment, From A to B, used a micro camera to record
and provide an experience of how the sorting process take place within the services
buildings and vehicles from the parcel perspective. The second one, 4mails, use a GPS
tracker to follow, in real time, the delivery paths in the city to identify facilities, locations
and timetables of the infrastructure network. The two experiments took place in two
different European cities. Since it is not in our interest to reveal any data in any way
sensitive to the service provider, the exact locations of the experiments and name of the
service provider are withheld.
From A to B
The first intervention From A to B involved installing a small outward facing pinhole
camera inside a cardboard box of 200mm x 230mm x 90 mm. The camera was modified
by adding a high capacity battery and was controlled through the Arduino chip, an opensource hardware platform (Figure 1). The camera was programmed to take a three
1018
second video snapshot including audio every minute. Additionally, tilt switches acting as
movement sensors had been connected to the camera, ensuring the camera would record
30-second videos any time movement was perceived (under the assumption that the
moments of movement were the most important and interesting of the mailing process).
Light sensors were used to prevent the system from draining battery power and saving
memory when it was not bright enough to record anything. The box was shipped four
times between April and June 2012 from a post office via ordinary mail. The first tree
attempts have been used to properly set up the device. Only the last attempt was
successful and able to record the entire trip and cover the entire door-to-door. This last
delivery took 24 hours
4Mails
A first attempt at this intervention was made in November 2011. The device was based on
a regular GPS logger with an extra external power supply. However, this solution did not
provide the desired results due to the inability to maintain continuous connection with
satellites. A second test was done using a relatively cheap and off-shelf device, a Garmin
tracker GTU 10, attached to four envelopes. This device is a high-sensitivity GPS (Global
Positioning System) assisted by cell tower triangulation for approximate location (A-GPS).
This is an important feature since envelopes spend most of the time indoors. Finally the
device had a battery life of approximately three days at a position-logging rate of 5
minutes, enough to cover the entire delivery and a real time tracking service via mobile
and desktop computer.
The second experiment took place in February 2012. One by one, the envelopes were
shipped to four different addresses in neighbourhoods located at four cardinal points in
the city. This was done to cover as much as possible the city area and to make them
arrive in different distribution nodes. Mail 1 and 4 have been shipped from mail drop boxes
within the city centre using ordinary mail, while mail 2 and 3 from our university building
via ordinary mail. The GPS logged its location every 5 minutes, offering an accurate detail
of the paths taken by the envelopes and the distances they travelled. The mails have
been shipped one after another and they all arrived at destination with no particular
problem. All the deliveries took between eighteen to twenty-four hours to reach their final
destinations. The data from the logger was retrieved through the Garmin web service.
1019
Unfortunately this service doesnt allow direct access to the GPS paths files. Once the
envelopes arrived at their destinations, their waypoints and time stamps had to be
transferred manually from the web service into an Excel file and then further into Google
Earth in order to visualize their path (Figure 2).
1020
precise technical description, we want to explore how to expose the delivery process in a
different way and if such an increased transparency could support actors outside the
infrastructure to generate ideas for new applications and interactions among communities
and distribution networks.
Results
The two experiments provided two different kinds of information. From A to B gave us an
insight of the internal mailing process, how it takes place and the work required to ship a
parcel. 4 Mails instead, provided us an idea of how the distribution network develops and
spread in the city, and its locations and timetables.
From A to B
Through the video, the different stages along the delivery process, from collection and
sorting to distribution, have been revealed to offer an account of how work gets done.
Organization and man-machine interaction becomes accessible, providing a way to
makes sense of a reality ignored by most. We identified twelve stages (Figure 3):
reception at post office (1); storage at the post office (2); transport at the main sorting
centre (3); reception at the sorting centre; sorting (5,6,7); collection (8); loading on truck
(9); distribution (10); transport mode change (11); final delivery. Only four out of these
twelve activities are perceivable by external users and only in two of them users had an
active role: at the beginning and the end.
1021
readability of addresses and zip-codes (6) and during trucks load and distribution
(9,11,12). The sorting of the parcels before final mailing seems to be the only fully
automated stage (7,8). Interiors and space organization within the sorting centre follows
specific tasks. From the footage we could identify five different environments: post office
and its storage space; storage space at the main sorting centre; sorting area; collection
and loading area. Each space is designed and planned to accommodate a specific
functions within the process and the use of certain machines. Finally we reflected on what
information could be usable for external users or small businesses. Our attention fell on
the storage areas in the post office, at the main warehouse, and in delivery trucks. All
these spaces appear to have potential latent space available (Figure 4).
4 Mails
Through the GPS study we have been able to follow the envelopes in real time and to
map the systems decentralized network. Here again the spatial organization of the
system follows specific functions. Locations of main nodes and sorting facilities in the city
have been identified, offering an idea of how the network is organized, how it operates
and how much space it consumes.
Large collection and sorting centres are connected to
industrial areas and main transport infrastructures, like airports and highways, while
smaller pick-up and distribution points are located in the main neighbourhoods (Figures 56).
1022
In the afternoon mails are collected and transported from the drop points to the main
sorting centre. Mail 2 and 3 were collected at 6:00 pm and reached the main sorting
centre 30 minutes later. Mail 1 and 4 were collected earlier in the morning at the university
and travelled all around the campus, presumably to collect all the other mails from
university, before reaching the same destination with an ad hoc service. Mail 1 reached
the main sorting centre at 3:25pm and mail 4 at 4:48 pm. Once sorted, they remain here
for 12-13 hours and then transported to secondary nodes and post terminals where they
are collected and distributed by postmen. All the deliveries took between eighteen and
twenty-four hours.
1023
For all the envelopes, the time spent in storage is on average way longer than the time
spent traveling; similarly, the distances travelled by each of them is usually much longer
than the actual distance from the drop location and final destination (Figure 7). In
particular, most of the time is spent in the main sorting centre, which operate according to
all the incoming and outgoing national and international parcels arriving by airplanes and
long distance trucks. An overview of all distances and travel times for each mail, including
a comparison with the shortest possible paths between start and destination point and
between the time traveling and time in storage, is available in the table below (Table 1).
The delivery time of the different envelopes differ independently of both the effective
distance between start and arrival point and in relation to the postman delivery plans and
protocols.
Reflection on results
The two hacks offer material for some comments and methodological considerations.
Although these are early experiments, the results we got seem to indicate a series of
promising features . First, they offered two different engaging ways to reveal and
understand the functioning of large, otherwise ungraspable urban logistic networks,
helping us define problems and opportunities. Second, they provided us the material to
think about alternative uses and interactions with the infrastructure, identifying possible
points in its network to jack in and build upon. Some methodological limits are also evident.
Engaging explorations
Our first observation, and probably the most important, is that our probes made us
playfully explore and tinker with the infrastructure, understanding the system and its
features: what it does, what it does for others and what it could possibly do. These
characteristics are extremely relevant for participation tools and to enable communities
outside the infrastructure to understand and engage with it, identifying possibilities for
collaboration and service innovation. The GPS data visualizations and the video footage
made the back-end information of postal infrastructure observable and reportable, offering
a complete narrative of the mail distribution journey. Creating the tools, mining your own
data and visualizing them provide a completely different experience from, e.g. simply
watching a data visualization video animation. People without a whole view of the system
like us had the means to relate to it and interpret it. Several qualities of the infrastructure
have been exposed, making it possible to reanimate and materialize the figure and the
logic behind its design and therefore relate to it. In particular what emerged is the image of
1024
an industrial infrastructure that is indeed efficient in performing its function, but designed
according to standardized location-activity criteria that might be out-dated in an age of
pervasive connectivity.
Concluding Remarks
Although our visualizations do not lead to any final solutions per se, the act of hacking
creates a space for another set of considerations in relation to existing field and co-design
methods and processes. In current product and service design development, it is difficult
for users and designer to explicitly address the organization and principles behind the
design of the institutions and infrastructures that govern and constrain the industrial
context in which they operate. Participatory processes have been mainly focusing their
attention on the front end of infrastructures and at the profound understanding of existing
configurations as a starting point for design. Transparency is given to emergent and
informal systems so that they can be formalized (Offenhuber et al., 2012; Offenhuber &
Lee, 2012). New interactions and systems of product services are generated the front end
of infrastructures, filling gaps and fulfilling equity and sustainability needs
industrial systems are not able to meet. Although this can represent a good tactic to
1025
research and promote alternative business models and socially sustainable solutions, it
might not represent a sustainable transition strategy in the long term.
By engaging users in the exploration of the underlying functioning of the infrastructure and
enabling their ability to think and prototype with it, experiments such as the ones
presented here could be part of a design approach intended to enact participation in the
design and evolution of large socio-technical systems. In our understanding, there are
significant opportunities and rich potential for design when it comes to materializing and
expressing the infra-structural. Working with making infrastructures more visible and into a
kind of material in the design process it might also be possible to generate ideas about
what strategies and tools would be required on behalf of industrial stakeholders in order to
become more sensitive to local needs and supportive to bottom up innovation.
This kind of hacking used here is not about destructive intrusions, but about learning, skill
development and empowerment. Still, they might also expose certain problems related to
prevalent modes of top-down control and restricted influence. Even simple hacks and
prototypes can illustrate how easy it to access aspects of a system not meant to be
publicly accessible in that way. This opens up a space for interesting speculative
questions: what more complicated hacks and design are possible, and can we even
imagine developing parasitic services that rely on existing networks without formal
agreements? In this scenario, service providers can either decide to keep their design and
innovation strategies internal, possibly putting even more effort on security and control, or
they could instead decide to take the lead in an open innovation process. Hacking and codesign approaches could then be encouraged through the release of specific toolkits and
platforms to harvest these ideas and understand how to innovate their business models
according to continuously evolving societal needs.
References
Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society. Business & Society Review, (5), 523.
Biggs, C., Ryan, C., & Wiseman, J. (2010). Distributed Systems: A design model for
sustainable and resilient infrastructure. Melbourne: Victorian eco-innovation lab/university
of Melbourne.
Binder, T., Brandt, E., Halse, J., Foverskov, M., Olander, S., & Yndigegn, S. (2011). Living
the (co-design) lab. Nordes, (4).
Boehner, K., Gaver, W., & Boucher, A. (2012). Probes. Inventive Methods: The
Happening of the Social, 185.
Borgmann, A. (1987). Technology and the character of contemporary life: A philosophical
inquiry. University of Chicago Press.
Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (2000). Sorting things out: Classification and its
consequences. The MIT Press.
Burke, J. A., Estrin, D., Hansen, M., Parker, A., Ramanathan, N., Reddy, S., & Srivastava,
M. B. (2006). Participatory sensing. World Sensor Web Workshop, 1-5.
Chesbrough, H. (2010). Open services innovation: Rethinking your business to grow and
compete in a new era. John Wiley & Sons.
1026
Dablanc, L. (2007). Goods transport in large european cities: Difficult to organize, difficult
to modernize. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(3), 280-285.
doi:10.1016/j.tra.2006.05.005
Dewey, J. (1954). Search for the great community. In The public and its problems: An
essay in political inquiry (pp. 143-184). Ohio: Swallow Press.
Graham, S., & Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering urbanism, networked infrastructures,
technological mobilities and the urban condition (Vol. 21). Taylor & Francis.
Hallns, L., & Redstrm, J. (2002). From use to presence: On the expressions and
aesthetics of everyday computational things. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human
Interaction (TOCHI), 9(2), 106-124.
Halse, J., Brandt, E., Clark, B., & Binder, T. (2010). Rehearsing the future. Danish Design
School Press.
Hesse, M. (2002). Shipping news: The implications of electronic commerce for logistics
and freight transport. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 36(3), 211-240.
Hesse, M., & Rodrigue, J. -P. (2004). The transport geography of logistics and freight
distribution. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(3), 171-184.
Hill, D. (2012). Dark matter and trojan horses: A strategic design vocabulary. Moscow:
Strelka Press.
Hodson, H. (2013). Hand-delivered parcels find their way to you via the crowd. New
Scientist, 218(2917), 17-18.
Hunt, J. (2005). A manifesto for postindustrial design. Mass production, as we know it, will
soon be extinct. ID-NEW YORK THEN CINCINNATI-DESIGN PUBLICATIONS THEN
F&W PUBLICATIONS INC-, 52(8), 120.
Johansson, A., Kisch, P., & Mirata, M. (2005). Distributed economies A new engine for
innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(10-11), 971-979.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.12.015
Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redstrom, J., & Wensveen, S. (2011). Design
research through practice: From the lab, field, and showroom. Morgan Kaufmann.
Kuniavsky, M. (2010). Smart things: Ubiquitous computing user experience design.
Morgan Kaufmann.
Lindholm, M., & Behrends, S. (2012). Challenges in urban freight transport planning - a
review in the baltic sea region. Journal of Transport Geography, 22, 129-136.
Lyster, C. (2012). Learning from FedEx: Lessons for the city. Journal of Landscape
Architecture, 7(1), 54-67. doi:10.1080/18626033.2012.693781
Manzini, E. (2013, February 06) Small, Local, Open and Connected: Resilient Systems
and Sustainable Qualities. Design observer. Retrieved October 21, 2013 from
http://changeobserver.designobserver.com/feature/small-local-open-and-connectedresilient-systems-and-sustainable-qualities/37670
1027
Manzini, E., Collina, L., & Evans, S. (2004). Solution oriented partnership. How to Design
Industrialized, Cranfield University, UK.
Mattelmki, T. (2005). Applying probes--from inspirational notes to collaborative insights.
CoDesign, 1(2), 83-102.
Meadows, D., & Wright, D. (2008). Thinking in systems. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Mitchell, W. J. (2005). Placing words. The MIT Press.
Morelli, N. (2007). Social innovation and new industrial contexts: Can designers
"industrialize" socially responsible solutions? Design Issues, 23(4).
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2003). The design way: Intentional change in an
unpredictable world: Foundations and fundamentals of design competence. Educational
Technology.
Norman, D. A. (2009). Designing the infrastructure. Interactions, 16(4), 66-69.
Offenhuber, D., & Lee, D. (2012). Putting the informal on the map: Tools for participatory
waste management. In Proceedings of the 12th participatory design conference:
Exploratory papers, workshop descriptions, industry cases-volume 2 (pp. 13-16).
Offenhuber, D., Lee, D., Wolf, M. I., Phithakkitnukoon, S., Biderman, A., & Ratti, C. (2012).
Putting matter in place: Measuring tradeoffs in waste disposal and recycling. Journal of
the American Planning Association, 78(2), 173-196.
OpenXC. (n.d.). http://openxcplatform.com/
Ratti, C., & Townsend, A. (2011). The social nexus. Scientific American, 305(3), 42-48.
Sanders, E. B. -N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of
design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5-18. doi:10.1080/15710880701875068
Schaffers, H., Ratti, C., & Komninos, N. (2012). Special issue on smart applications for
smart cities - new approaches to innovation: Guest editors' introduction. Journal of
Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 7(3), 9-10. doi:10.4067/S071818762012000300005
Shilton, K., Ramanathan, N., Reddy, S., Samanta, V., Burke, J., Estrin, D., Srivastava, M.
(2008). Participatory design of sensing networks: Strengths and challenges. In
Proceedings of the tenth anniversary conference on participatory design 2008 (pp. 282285).
Suchman, L. (2012). Configuration. Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social, 48.
Townsend, A., Maguire, R., Liebhold, M., & Crawford, M. (2011). A planet of civic
laboratories. The Future of Cities, Information, and Inclusion. Institute of the Future.
Valtonen, A. (2010). "Is Systemic Design the Next Big Thing for the Design Profession?.
In D. Durling, R. Bousbaci, L. Chen, P. Gauthier, T.Poldma, S. Roworth-Stokes, & E.
Stolterman, Proceedings of the 2010 DRS Conference, Design & Complexity (pp.1482).
Montreal.
1028
Von Busch, O. (2009). Engaged design and the practice of fashion hacking. Fashion
Practice.
Von Hippel, E. (2009). Democratizing innovation: The evolving phenomenon of user
innovation. International Journal of Innovation Science, 1(1), 29-40.
1029
Abstract
This paper reviews the assumption of design competence passing over a threshold and
eventually being equalized to come into being in every soul who gets exposed to
education offered by design institutions. Firstly, two distinct ways of viewing design as
areas of daily activities and expertise are discussed. Institutions role in design
competence is argued within the context of modern industrial view. Post-positivist
paradigm, philosophy of design and phenomenology are explored to lighten the
methodology used in this paper. Expertise both in a general way and in design is
explained. Finally to put back the skills that are diminished by the assumption stated
above, a model of design skills is suggested. Primary skills like systematic and conceptual
thinking which seem to occur in abstract mental channels are discussed as design
thinking abilities; while secondary skills like exposing, constructing and designating which
seem to occur in concrete physical channels are discussed as communicational abilities.
Keywords
design competence; design expertise; design skills; philosophy of design; phenomenology
This paper focuses on design skills that constitute design competence. The subject (the
acting person) oriented approach of this paper while decomposing design competence
into design skills turns this paper into a study that also focuses on the designer. The
designer is the core of the design activity that discerns, targets, attends, highlights,
formulates, defines, tackles, solves the problem, manages the process and generates the
results. Consequently the designer, in this paper, is seen as the most important aspect of
design process. Without him, needlessly to say, there will be no results generated and no
design process managed, but in the first place there will be no problem to refer at all. Yet,
until there becomes a designer formulating a phenomenon as a design problem, the
problem will not come into being and eventually will stay implicit. Treating an implicit
phenomenon as a design problem results in the emerging of implicit skills in the designer
himself. At this point, progress that the designer experiences while developing design
skills gains importance. There seem to be two distinct states of design skill groups; the
first one in which these skills are seen as primal and immature, and the second in which
they are seen as advanced and mature. These two states match with two distinct ways of
viewing design, i.e. the ones that highlight professional or amateur design abilities.
1030
of intended users. When skills like cooking delicious food, cleaning the curtains accurately,
having the gift of gab or riding the bicycle skillfully refer to social benefits more than the
subject himself; these skills get out of the daily context they are in and head for expertise
on different areas like cookery, dry cleaning, advocacy and juggling. For another area of
expertise, design, Cross (1990, p. 132) lists the core features of design ability as follows:
Resolving ill-defined problems, adopting solution-focusing strategies, employing
abductive/productive/appositional thinking and using non-verbal, graphic/spatial modeling
media. He also suggests a dualist structure for design skills: Nature and nurture of design
ability (Cross, 1990). The former refers to the innate skills while the latter implies the
group of skills that are to be developed during life.
1031
Methodology
Phenomenological approach has its place in this new paradigm and also in this paper. As
Dorst (2003, p. 5) states, positivism and phenomenology differ quite strongly in the way
subject (the acting person) and object (the outside world) are related. () In
phenomenology the person is not static, but a dynamic, emotive social being with a history
and an environment which heavily influences the persons construction of reality. And the
subject is influenced (and in the end formed) by what he/she perceives. This paper,
instead of evaluating individuals from a threshold and reducing their uniqueness, tries to
break up design competence into separate design skills and thus bring forth a subject
oriented view. Because this paper takes competence as an existing but implicit, hidden
and reduced phenomenon, it will try to brighten its shaded sides. Consequently, this
implicit and worth to be known phenomenon will be tried to be exposed by the
phenomenological approach. Phenomenon is the antonym of the word implicit (Heidegger,
1926/2011). Phenomenology determines this papers approach by its relations with soft
systems and post-positivist paradigm.
Philosophy of Design
Even if phenomenology is usually seen as a philosophical movement, it is more likely a
philosophical method. When a philosophical method is associated within design, a new
cross disciplinary area called philosophy of design emerges. In philosophy of design, a
common method is to take design in a philosophical way, which means applying the
rational reasoning of philosophy to design. Galle (2002, p. 216) argues as follows:
What the themes reviewed above have in common, is that they are all aspects of
design, and insights about them were obtained by rational reflection rather than
empirical observation () I would suggest that, as a major raison detre, [the
philosophy of design] serves the end of helping, guiding, suggesting how the
[designer] comes to understand what he is doing, and not simply how he comes to do
what he is doing... This coming to understand what one is doing, rather than just
understanding how to do it is an insight about design of the kind I have been talking
about, and which I believe can only be pursued by philosophical means, as offered by
the philosophy of design.
This disparity of how to do and what to do serves the originality of this paper, because this
paper aims to explore the nature of design knowledge by searching for design skills that
constitute design competence. This means that it will not generate a method to show how
to design, rather, a model to make a contribution to design knowledge. In this way, it will
not only conform with this disparity of how/what but also match with the ninth level which
was indicated by Love (2000) as the epistemology of design theory in his paper
suggesting ten levels for both theory and practice. This level is the one which contains
those analyses and discussions about the critical study of the nature, grounds, limits and
criteria or validity of design knowledge (Love, 2000, p. 306). This paper does not stand
on an empirical observation because of several studies which have already done that, and
also because of a limited number of studies having a philosophical approach on this
subject as this one.
1032
Phenomenological Approach
Phenomenological approach is not only argued within philosophy but also in informal
channels. Arguing about phenomenological epokhe 1, an example in Ekiszlk 2 is rather
explanatory. This example, which is written by a user with a nickname tadzio, can help us
to understand the phenomenological approach that guides this paper. It is as follows:
Lets say that you are to talk to a friend about an incident that happened a few days
ago. However, while talking, you sensed that something is wrong. You asked yourself
if you have made a mistake with what you have told. Then you gave a break. You
started to look over the things you have shared. You reviewed the relations between
your sentences and focused on the recourse of what you had experienced that day.
What had you done and what had happened to you then? Later, you noticed that
while you were speaking, somehow, probably due to absent mindedness, things you
have told relating to the things that had happened that day have entwined together
with some other things you had experienced long before as if they all had happened
at the same time. Thus, you apologized from your friend and started all over to tell the
essence of the matter. In this earthly example, there becomes a break phase followed
by a recourse one. Thanks to the recourse phase, you can obtain an appropriate
method to analyse and review your experiences. In order to adapt what is told here to
phenomenology, the break refers to phenomenological epokhe and recourse refers to
phenomenological reduction. Phenomenology firstly gives a break which weakens
the hegemony of the things we commend ourselves to. After the break, our attention
recourses from the experienced things to the one that experiences himself
(http://eksisozluk.com/entry/13400659).
So, in phenomenology, like experienced in this example, there generates an orientation to
the consciousness which enables to reach the core without any bias. As a result of finding
the existing arguments of design competence deficient and dogmatic, the main approach
of this paper contains the break along with the reasoning process and the recourse in the
designer himself. This will result in an essential change in the understanding of design
competence.
Expertise
Differences between experts and non-experts are reviewed in many researches including
Christiaans and Dorst (1992), Ho (2001), Kavakli and Gero (2002), Popovic (2004) and
Kruger and Cross (2006). In these studies the main factors that make people experts are
tried to be found. The fundamental difference between them is that the experts can
perform much better than non-experts in areas of planning and organizing. For instance,
Lawson and Dorst (2009, p. 13-14) state as follows: One of the key common
characteristics of generic expertise models suggests that experts do not necessarily do
the same things as novices. Whether we look at the playing of chess, the solving
mathematical problems or the flying of aeroplanes, we find it is not simply a case of
experts working faster, more effectively or better than novices. What we find is that they
operate differently. There appear scattered approaches in expertise as a general study
by the effects of various areas like music, sports, chess and literature. However these
approaches can be gathered around two main views. Ericsson and Lehmann (1996) state
that; the first one which was led by Galton (1869/1979) brings the innate skills fore and
capacities while the second and newer one, led by de Groot (1946/1978) and Chase and
1
Epokhe is a word derived from Ancient Greek meaning suspending judgments about something temporarily.
Ekiszlk is an informal, collaborative and hypertext Turkish online dictionary in which registered users
can contribute by adding information
1033
Simon (1973), emphasizes training and experience. These two views match with the
concept generated by Cross (1990) which mentions about the nature and nurture of
design ability. For the view which takes expertise within the context of innate skills,
experience and exercise are needed but not enough for expertise, since they have to be
built on the basis of innate abilities. On the other hand, according to the view that takes
expertise within the context of training and experience, almost anyone can be an expert
provided with appropriate training. Ericsson, Prietula and Cokely (2007, p. 2) supporting
the second view; state as follows: Consistently and overwhelmingly, the evidence
showed that experts are always made, not born. These conclusions are based on rigorous
research that looked at exceptional performance using scientific methods that are
verifiable and reproducible. This paper also stands near this view as enabling different
skill states on different subjects, without limiting any skill developments due to innate
abilities.
1034
1035
References
Broadbent, J. (2002). Generations in Design Methodology, Common Ground: Design
Research Society International Conference Papers. Ed. Durling, D.; Shackleten, J. UK.
Chase, W.G. & Simon, H.A. (1973). The minds eye in chess. Visual Information
Processing. Ed. W.G. Chase. 215-81. New York: Academic.
Christiaans, H. & Dorst, K. (1992). Cognitive Models in Industrial Design Engineering: a
protocol study, in D.L. Taylor & D.A. Stauffer (eds.) Design Theory and Methodology
DTM92, American Society of Mechanical Engineers. New York, USA.
Cross, N. (1990). The Nature and Nurture of Design Ability. Design Studies. 11. 127-140.
Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: an overview. Design Studies. 25. 427-441.
de Groot, A. (1946/1978). Thought and Choice and Chess. The Hague, Netherlands:
Mouton.
Dorst, K. (2003). The Problem of Design Problems. Expertise in Design. Design Thinking
Research Symposium 6. 17-19 November. University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
1036
1037
1038
Abstract
Is there a difference between design practice and design research practice? Building on
recent discussions within design research about whether the design practice which occurs
within design research is distinct and separate from the design practice which occurs
within the design profession, this paper presents a case where constructive design
practice was employed within a research project, using this example to study the nature of
the design process in research. Through a thorough analysis of the designs generated,
the motivations behind their development, their use as research tools, and the knowledge
they generated, we identified three ways in which the design process was altered when it
was imported into the research. First, the degree of development of the designs shifted
from fully functional to functional enough. Second, the designs were developed in order to
ask questions rather than trying to solve a problem. And finally, the failure of the design
was equally able to contribute to generating knowledge as its success. We argue that
these shifts in values clearly distinguish design research practice from professional design
practice, but come with very real consequences that challenge the core measures we use
to assess design.
Keywords
Research through Design; Design Practice; Design Research Practice
Introduction
In the seminal paper, Research in Art and Design by Frayling (1993), he proposes three
distinct categories for the type of research done under the heading of artistic and design
research; research into art and design, research through art and design, and research for
art and design. Looking specifically at the design aspect of each of these categories, it is
interesting to note how they break Design Research into three quite dissimilar areas of
research. Research into design describes design research where design is the subject of
inquiry. The design process is observed by the researcher, who generates knowledge
about this process without engaging with it. Research through design describes design
research in which the researcher engages in the design process as a method to research
their subject of inquiry. In taking a research through design approach to design research,
the researcher creates new knowledge within their subject of inquiry through the creation
of designed things. Finally, research for design describes design research where design
is the subject of inquiry and the method, with the end goal of the research being the
designed artefact itself (Johnson, 2010). There is much debate around these
categorizations, as well as misrepresentation of Fraylings original definitions of the types
of research that is conducted within art and design (Friedman, 2008); however, they serve
as useful guides to show how varied the work done under the heading of design research
really is.
There have been many papers written about how theory is generated from research
through design, and examples of the types of knowledge that design research can
1039
provide, however, a recent paper by Kuenen and Redstrm (2013) calls for detailed
accounts of the role design practice plays within design research. They make a distinction
between design practice and what they call design research practice, which they see as
a new kind of practice. Their argument is that the design practice which occurs within
design research is distinct and separate from the design practice which occurs within the
design profession. This is due to the differing intentions of academic research and the
design profession, where design researchers generally engage with design practice to
generate knowledge while design professionals often engage with design practice to solve
a set of problems.
So what does this new design research practice look like? This paper attempts to answer
Kuenen and Redstrms question by providing a specific example of research that has
been done where the researchers have engaged with design construction within their
research to generate knowledge, just as quantitative and qualitative methods are used as
means for generating knowledge within other fields, such as medicine and the social
sciences. Within this paper, we present research that has employed a research through
design approach to study a particular context, where design construction the act of
creating physical artefacts plays a central role in the research process. But how do we
generate knowledge through our designs? And what type of knowledge do we generate?
In this paper, we present a research project in which we have used multiple different
research methods to generate knowledge around the topic of the cancer patient
experience of radiotherapy. Using this project as an exemplar, we will discuss how and
why we employed design construction within our research in order to generate knowledge,
the specific knowledge generated through our designs, and finally, the consequences and
limitations of designing in this way within research. Furthermore, we highlight three
specific characteristics that distinguish design practice from design research practice,
suggesting that when design is imported into research it undergoes a value shift.
1040
differences between patient groups at the population level but cannot provide detailed
information at an individual level, while qualitative methods are much better at providing
rich detail about the experiences that take place at an individual or small community level
but are much more difficult to use for generating information about larger populations. We
decided to draw on the strengths of different research methods to generate a richer and
more holistic understanding of patient experience.
Design researchers often draw on method from other fields, especially those researchers
that are taking a grounded approach and focusing on real world problems (Zimmerman
and Forlizzi, 2008). Ethnography, a method with originated in the social sciences and
anthropology, is often employed to generate understanding of the context first and the
insights drawn from this understanding are used to drive the creation of design prototypes
(Koskinen et al., 2011). Within this research project, we utilized two different types of
methods to create understanding around the patient experience of radiotherapy
treatments; qualitative methods from the social sciences to observe patient interactions
and gather stories and specific details about their experiences, and quantitative methods
from medicine and nursing to analyse the prevalence of anxiety in this population and
correlate it to different aspects of the treatment process.
This research conducted via ethnographic fieldwork, patient questionnaires, and des ign
probe kits found that the fixation devices used in radiotherapy to immobilize and provide
reproducible patient positioning can trigger situational anxiety and claustrophobic
reactions in patients (Mullaney et al., 2011; Mullaney et al., 2012a). Furthermore, these
findings suggested that this anxiety can be partially attributed to the passive,
disempowered role that patients assume while in the treatment room, where they are
completely dependent upon the radiotherapy staff to manually push, pull, and lift them into
the correct treatment position (Mullaney et al., 2012b; Mullaney et al., 2014).
Taking Action
While the knowledge we generated about the patient experience through these different
methods helped us to understand the negative emotional impact of the medical
technologies within this environment, as designers, we were not satisfied with simply
understanding the situation; we desired to change this experience for the patient. We
wanted to challenge the existing patient experience by creating alternative experiences
and possible futures for the current radiotherapy treatment system. This active
participation in intentionally constructing the future is suggested to be what separates
design researchers from other researchers whose research is limited to an analysis of the
present and the past (Zimmerman and Forlizzi, 2008; Gaver, 2012).
Design has been defined as the process through which new things are created, (Telier et
al., 2011:51), and as a kind of making which requires the ability to put things together
and bring new things into being (Schn, 1987:41-42). While these definitions can be
applied to various aspects of the design process, what interested us is this idea of the
new; the emphasis on design being able to construct something that does not exist yet.
We decided to engage in a constructive design practice within our research project in
order to provoke change in the radiotherapy environment, through the introduction of new
artefacts, in order to observe what happens. We call these provocations design
interventions, with each intervention arising from a question that we had about the
anxiety caused by the fixation device within radiotherapy treatment.
Intervention 1
The first design that we constructed was driven directly from patient stories gathered from
the journals we distributed in the design probe kits. The patients were quite vocal about
their dislike for the bare ceiling of the treatment room and having nothing to look at during
treatment, and so we asked the question, would it be possible to decrease patient anxiety
1041
if the patients have something engaging and distracting to focus on during their
radiotherapy treatments?
The first intervention, implemented clinically, focuses upon providing self-selecting visual
and auditory stimuli to patients during their treatments. The design, Taklandskap, was a
touch screen interface that allowed patients to choose from a selection of nature videos
and relaxing music which were then projected onto the ceiling and played through the
sound system of the treatment room. The intention behind this design was twofold: to
actively engage the patients in curating their treatment experience, as well as to provide
them with visual and auditory stimuli to help them relax and focus during treatment. This
design, despite being a prototype, was installed within the clinical environment to assess
its impact (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Taklandskap touch screen interface and ceiling projection in the treatment room.
Because we were able to fully implement our design prototype within one of the treatment
rooms at the radiotherapy clinic we collaborate with, we were also able to conduct a
before/after comparison study through our qualitative and quantitative methods. While we
have not yet fully assessed the impact of this intervention upon patient anxiety levels,
other insights arose through the construction and implementation of this design.
The first insight our design generated was an understanding that Taklandskap would only
ever be able to mediate any anxiety cause by the fixation device, not eliminate it. This is
because the design does not act directly upon the source of the situational anxiety within
radiotherapy -- the fixation device. This insight led to the realization that if we wanted to
implement our designs within the clinical environment, we were very limited in what we
could actually change without disrupting treatment efficacy. Our second insight was that
the area of possible intervention within the healthcare environment is very small, with 95%
of the environment fixed and inaccessible to design intervention.
In order to act directly upon the anxiety-provoking fixation devices, we realized that the
next design step available to us within this research context would have to be developed
outside of the constraints of clinical implementation, with designs that exist solely as
exemplars of what could be, without the capability of assessing them through our other
measures. Understanding these constraints, we decided to create a second design which
directly addressed the role of the fixation device within the radiotherapy treatment
process.
Intervention 2
Since the fixation device is one of the main sources of treatment-related anxiety within
patients undergoing radiotherapy treatment, our second design was driven by our desire
1042
to alter the patient relationship with this technology. Drawing on our knowledge of the
positioning and immobilization process within radiotherapy (Mullaney et al., 2012b;
Mullaney et al, 2014), we hypothesized that it could be possible to remove the fixation
device from the radiotherapy treatment protocol if we were able to create a system that
allowed patients to become actively involved in their positioning process. Using the
skeletal and blob tracking capabilities of the Microsoft Kinect, we created software that
allows patients to visualize their body position in relation to the desired treatment position,
and provides visual cues for when the two are aligned (see Figure 2).
1043
Degree of Development
According to Koskinen et al. (2011), design construction within design research usually
takes the form of a prototype, a scenario, a mock-up, or a detailed concept, and this is
true of both of the interventions we present in this paper as well. The question is why are
designs within research not taken to the same level of refinement as those that are
developed within a professional context? We argue that there is a difference in the use
and evaluation of design that is developed within research, which deemphasizes certain
design values in order to emphasize new ones.
Design within research does not have a client, or manufacturing constraints, or a need to
be marketable. Its value is in its ability to generate knowledge, and therefore it is up to the
researcher to decide how far they must develop the design in order for it to be able to
accomplish this goal. The degree of development can differ from one design to the next
and from one research project to the next. For example, Taklandskap was developed to
the point where the software was functional enough to allow some level of patient
selection on a touch screen. If this prototype were to be developed into a marketable
product, it would require major redesign and development of the software to make it more
stable and versatile. In comparison, Taklandskap was developed much more thoroughly
than the Kinect prototype, because it was implemented within the radiotherapy clinic
which required that it be simple to use for the staff and not require direct oversight by the
designer. The change from being functional to functional enough is one of first value
changes in design construction as it transitions from a professional context to a research
context.
The consequence of this value shift is double-sided. On one hand, the shift to functionalenough allows design researchers more freedom to explore the possibilities of design
without having to consider real-world constraints, but on the flip-side, this means that
designs generated within research can be perceived as having little value in the real
world, making it difficult for individuals outside of the academic context to relate to the
design work being done within research.
1044
researchers focus on making the right thing. We agree that this is part of the difference in
the two design practices, but that there may be more to design construction within
research than just creating the right thing.
In our research, the designs we created were not intended to be solutions. We used them
as physical tools that could help us test our ideas and ask questions. For example, our
Kinect prototype arose from the research question, Can we remove the fixation device
from radiotherapy treatments if we provide patients with the ability to get themselves in the
correct position?, and we used it as a tool to help us understand the role of the fixation
device within the treatment process. Used in this way, the knowledge generated by the
Kinect prototype helped us reframe the research questions we were asking about patient
anxiety; from a singular focus on the fixation device to a deeper investigation into how
radiotherapy treatment is planned and delivered.
Designs generated within professional practice are often characterized by a problem solving and solution focused design process. In contrast, designs generated within
research can be characterized by their problem-finding and discovery-oriented nature.
The change in focus from problem-solving to problem-finding is the second value shift that
occurs when constructive design practice is implemented within a research context.
The impact of this shift is seen most clearly in the changes it evokes within the design
process. Instead of placing emphasis upon finding the best solution and culling all ideas
that are less than ideal, the design researcher can instead choose to explore many
different ideas. He may develop one idea to see what is learned, and then go in a
drastically different design direction with the next prototype, as evidenced by the two
interventions presented in this paper. As a result, refinement of a singular concept is
sacrificed for the ability to develop a much broader set of ideas.
Success or Failure
Using a problem-solving approach to develop our designs within this research project
would have generated drastically different results. Take for example, the problem of
patient anxiety caused by the fixation device. If we had chosen to focus on solving this
problem, we might have put all our effort into the redesign of the fixation device, or we
could have created a system similar to the Kinect prototype in an attempt to remove the
fixation device completely. If we had chosen to try to eliminate the fixation device and
design a new system which would cause less anxiety in the patient, the Kinect prototype
would have been seen as a complete failure because of its inability to replace the fixation
device and would have been summarily dismissed as a concept.
However, as a prototype implemented within a research context and used as a way to ask
questions about the patient experience, the perceived failure of this design to remove the
fixation device from radiotherapy treatment is irrelevant. Instead, this failure played a
crucial role in the generation of new knowledge. The Kinect prototypes inability to solve
the problem of anxiety caused by the fixation device came from our misunderstanding of
the role of the fixation device in the first place, which was made clear only through
reflecting upon the reasons for its failure.
The third value shift that we can see when design is practiced within research is that the
perceived failure of a design is as valuable as its success. Failure is no longer evaluated
by whether or not a design is successful in solving a problem, but by whether or not it is
able to generate new knowledge. The implications of this shift upon design research
practice are twofold: the generation of designs for research can be more open, and less
1045
grounded in directed user research; however it does require that their construction is very
intentional and focused upon a clear research question.
Implications
It is obvious that engaging with design practice within a research context changes the
shape and value of the design output, making it distinctly other from the designs
generated within professional design practice. The three value shifts that we call attention
to above are evidence of the idea that design research practice is markedly different from
design practice. However, if design research practice is different from design practice,
what are the consequences? And why is it important to differentiate between these
practices?
Kuenen and Redstrm (2013) suggest that design research practice addresses a different
set of questions, issues, and problems than those that are typically found in professional
design practice, however both are design practices and therefore also share very many
similarities. By elucidating some of the differences between the design practices done
within a design research context versus a professional context, this paper aims to build a
better understanding of the practice of constructive design research. We believe that this
distinction can be used to help the design research community reassess how research
through design projects are evaluated, discussed and disseminated.
Over the last few years, the design profession has raised concerns about design research
and its relevance to professional design practice (Stolterman, 2008). If the differences in
design practices outlined in this paper have played a role in this disconnect between
research and the profession, perhaps by acknowledging and articulating these differences
in practice we can begin to create a common language between design research and the
design profession that will facilitate better knowledge transfer between the two. Rogers
(2004) has suggested that in order for research to be better able to contribute to design
practice, we need to create new mechanisms of bi-directional knowledge transfer between
the two contexts, and create a more extensive design language - a lingua franca - that can
be used for both research and design.
This paper just touches the surface of this discussion. We have only draw on two design
examples within a research through design approach, and it would take an in depth
exploration of many more cases to strengthen our argument. Furthermore, we have only
looked at designs that have been created through constructive design research, and it
bears asking if all design practice used within research share these value shifts, or if this
is specific to constructive design research. While we do not have answers to these
questions, as design research practice struggles to differentiate itself from both design
practice and traditional research we suggest that these questions bear further
investigation.
Conclusions
In this paper, we have attempted to provide a detailed account of the role constructive
design practice plays within design research through an examination of a particular
research case, where the creation of design interventions played an active role in
knowledge generation. Furthermore, through an analysis of these designs and how they
generated this new knowledge creation, we identified three differences in values between
designs generated through design research practice and designs generated through
professional design practice: their degree of development, whether they ask a question or
solve a problem, and how the design is evaluated as a success or a failure. The shift in
values that occurs when constructive design practice is taken from a professional context
to a research context solidifies the idea that design research practice is indeed a distinct
1046
entity, unique from design practice, raising new questions about how we work and
communicate both within and between these two different design practices.
References
Eikeland, O. (2006). The Validity of Action Research Validity in Action Research. In
Nielsen & Svensson (Eds.) Action Research and Interactive Research. Maastricht:
Shaker.
Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Papers, 1,
1-5.
Friedman, K. (2008). Research into, by and for design. Journal of Visual Arts Practice,
7(2), 153160.
Gaver, W. (2012). What should we expect from research through design? In Proceedings
of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY:
ACM Press, 937-946.
Johnson, M. (2010). Embodied knowing through art. The Routledge Companion to
Research in the Arts, 141-151.
Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redstrm, J., & Wensveen, S. (2011) Design
Research Through Practice: From the Lab, Field, and Showroom. Morgan Kaufmann
Publishers.
Kuenen, C. & Redstrm, J. (2013). The wickedness of design research practices:
Methodological issues in bringing knowledge to expression through design. In:
Proceedings of the 5th International Association of Societies of Design Research
Conference 2013, IASDR'13: Consilience and Innovation in Design.
Mullaney, T., Nyholm, T., Edvardsson, D. (2011). Wellbeing in Healthcare Environments:
A Human-Centered Design Research Approach to Improving the Cancer Patient
Experience during Radiation Therapy. In Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on
Design 4 Health. Sheffield, UK.
Mullaney, T., Pettersson, H., Nyholm, T. (2012a). System, Site, Patient: A Three-Tiered
Methodological Approach to Constructing Holistic Understanding of the User through
Design Research. In Proceedings of the Design Research Society International
Conference. Bangkok, Thailand.
Mullaney, T., Pettersson, H., Nyholm, T., Stolterman, S. (2012b). Thinking Beyond the
Cure: A Case for Human-Centered Design in Cancer Care. International Journal of
Design, 6(3), 27-39.
Mullaney, T., Yttergren, B., Stolterman, E. (2014). Positional acts: using a Kinect sensor
to reconfigure patient roles within radiotherapy treatment. In Proceedings of the 8th
International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction (TEI '14).
ACM, New York, NY, USA, 93-96.
Rogers, Y. (2004). New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction. In B.
Cronin (Vol. Ed.), Annual review of information, science and technology, 38, 87-143.
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Schn, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for
Teaching and Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stolterman, E. (2008). The nature of design practice and implications for interaction
design research. International Journal of Design, 2(1), 55-65.
Telier, A., Binder, T., De Michelis, G., Ehn, P., Jacucci, G., & Wagner, I. (2011). Design
things. Boston: The MIT Press.
1047
Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., & Evenson, S. (2007). Research through design as a method
for interaction design research in HCI. CHI07 Proceedings. New York, NY: ACM Press,
493-502.
Zimmerman, J., & Forlizzi, J. (2008). The Role of Design Artifacts in Design Theory
Construction. Artifact: Journal of Virtual Design, 2(1), 41-45.
1048
Abstract
Design exploration research refers to various interaction design research practices that
explore tensions issued from the interplay of science, technology, culture and society. Most
of them explicitly trigger discussions and debates in the audience, for instance critical
design, which raised the interest of members of design research communities. However its
generalization suffers from a lack of shareable methodology. This paper aims at clarifying it
practically and theoretically.
We claim that these practices trigger peoples reactions using a specific narrative strategy
which provoke an uncanny feeling. By producing uncanny enough artefacts that embed a
subtle entanglement of familiarity and unfamiliarity, designers can elicit responses from
viewers. First, a review of literature on critical design texts presents the uncanny balance as
being a recurrent design principle for the creation of these artefacts. We then present an
exemplary case study produced by one of the authors, exploring communication
technologycalled Dog&Bone. Using classical rhetoric, we present a theoretical overview of
the project. The outcome consists of a conceptual framework based on the narrative
dimension of the uncanny plus the rhetorical dimension (composed of three elements:
legitimacy, emotions, argumentation). We conclude that Design is a form of communication
between designers and their audience.
Keywords
Debate; Uncanny; Rhetoric; Critical Design; Speculative Design
1049
often seeks to test ideas and to ask What if?but also to provoke, criticise, and
experiment to reveal alternatives to the expected and traditional, to transcend
accepted paradigms, to bring matters to a head, and to be proactive and societal
in its expression.
These approaches are good at problem-setting (Schn, 1983) and exploring possibilities
outside of current paradigms. It is a way to comment on a phenomenon by bringing forth an
artefact that often in itself, without overhead explanations, becomes a statement or a
contribution to an ongoing societal discussion. (Fallman, 2008, p.7)
While critical design has raised the interest of members of human-computer interaction (HCI)
and design research communities, its generalization suffers from a lack of shareable
methodology (S. Bardzell, Bardzell, Forlizzi, Zimmerman, & Antanitis, 2012). We aim at
clarifying the methods practically and theoretically.
In particular, we study how critical design challenges the audience, triggering questions,
discussions or even debates through design. We therefore focus on the specific relationship
between the designer, the audience and the artefact, or how to convert people from being
viewers to questioners. We contend that these triggering discussion practices produce what
we call uncanny enough artefacts. After the case study produced by one of the authors, we
will discuss how these practices imply a fully developed rhetorical strategy.
1050
other words, the uncanny is a way to touch the audience, to appeal to their feelings and to
engage them. He also refers to other domains: observational comedy, psychology, horror
films and illusion, for the insights they offer into the complex workings of human perception
and how it can be consciously manipulated to elicit reaction. (Auger, 2012, p.140) While
other authors use other words like strange, unfamiliar, etc., the uncanny seems to be a
recurring motive of critical design.
Freuds theory of the uncanny - unheimlich (Freud, 2004) - stems from his double analysis
of patients and literature. In his text, he studies first the way the literature of the fantastic
produces a narrative so that the readers (as well as the hero in the story) do not know if,
what they are told is the product of the feverish imagination of the hero, or if the hero is
indeed confronted by evil forces. This narrative strategy that strikes a balance between either
a natural or a supernatural explanation has been analysed by Todorov as the essence of the
Fantastic (Todorov, 1970). A number of figures are related to this; the double, the mirror,
all figures that introduce a doubt about the uniqueness of an experience, or a subject. This
pattern has more recently been considered as one of the major narrative potentials of
pervasive computing because it gives the possibility to endow every object with a double
meaning (Gents & Jutant, 2012). Since then, this term has also been popularized in the
area of super-realistic humanoid robotics. In all these instances, the uncanny is a complex
combination of familiarity and unfamiliarity, which unsettles the audiences emotions.
Engaging the audience with uncanny artefacts
Unfamiliarity is the starting point for the audiences experience. Actually, because design
explorations present perspectives that are fundamentally different from our everyday reality,
they always seem foreign at first. As Auger remarks,
Any experience that challenges a preconception will at first appear odd, but here
the detail and finish of the artefacts, combined with the short explanations
describing their functions and modes of interaction, entices the audience into
exploring the concept further. (Auger, 2012, p.145)
The goal is to help the audience consider something unconventionali.e. what could change
tomorrow, or some unfamiliar, incredible, controversial (yet probable) situation. But what are
the critical design strategies to engage the audience? According to Auger, a design
speculation requires a perceptual bridge between the audience and the concept. (Auger,
2012, p.140) In other words, designers must find ways to make these perspectives seem
probable. People have to believe that these scenarios could be theirs tomorrow. According
to critical designers theory, the apparent probability of what seemed improbable (and
unthought of) triggers an emotional state of uneasiness, verging towards interrogation. This
unsettled emotion is the tipping point of engagement to generate concern, thoughts,
questions and conversations or even debate.
The strange artefact also shows familiar features that make it more probableproviding a
perceptual bridge.
1051
1052
(p.35). Narration helps to bridge the foreign with familiarity (showing familiar places, actions,
etc.). It is also used for didactic purposes, for instance when introducing and explaining how
works a new technology. If people find a technology or a topic foreign, it is necessary to bring
a basic familiarity for the extrapolation to work. For this matter Auger proposes that
Inspiration and influence can be drawn from diverse fields such as observational comedy,
psychology, horror films and illusion, for the insights they offer into the complex workings of
human perception and how it can be consciously manipulated to elicit reaction. (Auger,
2012, p.140). Among other criteria previously presented, Auger proposes to rely on selfidentifiable aspects of daily life, to use details to stimulate audience imagination and to take
advantage of stereotypical or commonly held assumptions about a specific subject (like
myths or famous science fiction) (Auger, 2012, p.164). These elements are for instance used
to ground futuristic speculations into the present.
Scales of complexity among variety of media used
The criteria gathered above are often combined in order to arrange different scales of
complexity in the narration. It is a way to adapt to different contexts and audiences. Good
combinations allow the audience to encounter and learn more on the project through various
points of entry and different trajectories among the media used. This combination can play an
important role in bringing familiarity and bridging perception.
Aesthetic experience of encountering the artefact
Finally, the power of a live demo should not be underestimated. In fact, the audience
experience can be designed as a whole aesthetic experience, a global process or a
controlled situationas an installation, a user test, an event, or a workshop.
1053
project (Auger, 2012). He shows how over-unfamiliarity can be taken for provocation and
abort peoples reflection on the project topics.
Auger-Loizeaus Afterlife project provides an investigation of science and technology's roles
in the delicate topic of death, new forms of funerals and belief. It is a coffin able to recharge a
dry cell battery thanks to the material activity of deceased human body (decomposition)
based on microbial fuel cell technology. Its first exhibition took place at the New Yorks
Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) exhibition Design and the Elastic Mind (2007). It could be
considered a failure as the audience focused on the repelling part of the decomposition
process, and consequently the discussions did not reach the main topic. The designers
therefore organised a workshop with fifteen colleagues, asking them to produce a text
describing what use they would make of their Afterlife battery. For the Experimenta exhibition
in Lisbon (2009), their solutions allowed the audience to focus on how people would have a
last interaction with their relativesby providing energy in a specific, and personal context.
In addressing this problem we shifted the emphasis from the fuel cell and coffin to
the function of the battery. This effectively heightened the familiar aspect of the
uncanny experience. [] This encouraged the audience to reflect on how they
themselves might use the battery, countering the initial repulsion factor and
resulting in a form of desirable uncanny. (Auger, 2012).
Staging is part of the Aesthetic experience of encountering the artefact criteria, presented
earlier. It is all about focusing the attention on the right part of the project, allowing it to
generate more meaningful reactions. Here, most of the audience were willing to engage with
the question of technologically-mediated life after death.
In conclusion, a design exploration research project inherently proposes unfamiliar
alternatives. Still, making the strange probable is what triggers viewers engagement
(curiosity, concern, discussion and even debate). It is completed by using a perceptual
bridge, rooting the unfamiliar experience into familiarity. This is achieved by
the practice of design (in all its complex dimensions, materialized in artefacts);
crafting the narration (rhythm, plot, style);
mixing a variety of media;
proposing an aesthetic experience of encountering the artefact;
Managing this subtle balancewhat we call the uncanny enoughis the key to the
audiences experience. Things have to be not-quite-right; this awkwardness is a way into the
object, an invitation to explain why it is the way it is, why its not quite right (Dunne, 2009).
The following case-study was to test these hypotheses.
1054
1055
1056
Fig 1. Someof the descriptive materials created to show the project (20112013)
Project circulation and reception
In order to circulate the project we tried different settings. Dog&bone was exhibited at the
2012 International Biennale of Design in St.Etienne (France)part of an exhibition on
animals and technology called Les androdes rvent-ils de cochons lectriques? (Do
androids dream of electric pigs?). Small audience talk presentations allowed more proximity
with the spectators. The one to one interviews allowed to engage meaningful discussions,
debates, and even arguments (once).
A series of questions were used as a guide for informal discussions. The user tests were
documented and retrieved by video (available on the projects website). They show two dogs,
with a very different character, interacting with their owner. We collected expressions of
acceptance, interest, wonder, enthusiasm and one strong outrage from a professional dog
breeder.
During these experiments, we noticed that collecting meaningful reactions was dependant on
the context of mediation and the possibility for interaction with the audience. In other words,
1057
we had developed not only a narrative dimension but also a rhetorical dimension that
contributed to the strategy of the uncanny enough.
1058
with which they collaborate to produce and distribute their work. They often act as metalocutor that remediates, or frames, how a project is considered by the audience.
Teasing the audiences interests and feelings
The Dog&Bone experiment wants to focus on how to make absence more bearable. The
choice of a pet to carry affection is bound to elicit very positive feelings in the audience. But it
can also make them feel uncomfortable that the animal is being used as a tool. Or it makes
them laugh when the movie shows the tester running after the dog to continue his
conversation. The feelings are not here - as in a work of art - for themselves or for any
cathartic experience. They are here to start a discussion.
In rhetoric, the speaker has to stir and relate to peoples interests and feelings for the
discussion to start. First, the locutor has to establish a good relationship with his public. What
traditional rhetoric qualifies as captatio benevolentiae. She does that by respecting the
feelings and expectations of her audience. But then, to win her case, she needs to move the
audience. Rhetoric is born in the tribunal. Different emotionsanger, sadness, joy,need
to be elicited from the audience. Aristotle remarks that most of the time, this play on emotions
is what is going to win a case or lose it because, he notes, people do not have the time to
learn, or to follow complicated demonstrations, but they can still feel about a case and make
a decision on the basis of these feelings.
This echoes the definition of the uncanny given earlier, as well as the intentions of the
authors related in the literature review. The authors repeatedly caution that the audience
needs to be unsettled but not freaked out. They point out the necessary balance of positive
and negative emotions. The uncanny appears precisely as a way to touch the audience, to
appeal to their feelings.
Convincing the audience with argumentation
As said in the usecase description, the set of communication materialslogos, texts,
images, videos and the two objectscreated around Dog&Bones dog collar, is able to
articulate different scales of complexity. The discourse generated by the presence of the
different elements on their own or the one performed by the speaker is adaptable in different
situations (conferences, exhibitions, web, print) and audience. An audience of professional
engineers would not ask for the same kind of technical details as professional designers.
Another example of this rhetorical criteria is found in Auger-Loizeaus work.
for technological believability, the Audio Tooth Implant relies on a general public
awareness of hard and well-publicised facts, such as the miniaturisation of digital
technology and urban myths such as dental fillings acting as radio antenna and
picking up audio signals. These combine to give the concept a familiarity. It was
also necessary to provide a convincing description, in laymans terms, of the
technology involved. [] This description helped in convincing those with a good
understanding of electronic technology. (Auger, 2012, p.158)
The artefact is part of an argument and as such does not present so much a truth as a
probable explanation. The art of the rhetoric, as it is mostly remembered, is about the topics
1059
and stylistic flourish that the author is able to master to tell his case in original and appealing
ways. Stories, descriptions, metaphors, examples, are part of the argumentative process as
well as the aesthetic qualities of the objects. Designers do indeed put a lot of emphasis on
the quality and finishing of their productions.
The uncanny is not only triggering feelings of unease, it plays on peoples cognition too
because the outcome is not some aesthetic experience or cathartic experience. It is a means
to an end: that is the debate itself. It presents its case with a relation to what can or what
cannot be believed, what can or what cannot be done, what is technically feasible or not. To
do that the designers of uncanny objects make hypotheses about the technical literacies of
their audience. They need to have a fairly good idea of what is considered common
knowledge to be able to destabilise it.
Conclusion
The conceptual framework of critical design is not only based on the narrative dimension of
the uncanny but also on the three rhetorical dimensions (legitimacy, emotions,
argumentation) that are also ways of managing the balance of the uncanny enough. The
rhetorical dimension is a key element of the design for debate.
Design exploration research and more precisely, the design practices that trigger reactions,
discussions and even debates in the audience need methodological and rhetorical
clarification. In order to elicit the audience reaction, these practices use a specific narrative
strategy based on the psychological concept of the uncanny. Based on a literature review we
presented how these artefacts, subtly balanced between familiarity and unfamiliarity, provoke
an uncanny feeling. At that point, a case study of critical design, produced by one of the
authors, was presented in order to reflect on the research. We finally proposed a conceptual
frameworkbased on the narrative dimension of the uncanny plus the rhetorical one. This
allows us to frame more systematically the strategy for debate that is at work, in particular it
draws our attention on three main rhetorical aspects: the argumentation which is provided not
only by the artefact but also by all the documents that organise the reception of the artefact;
unsettling the audiences emotions is a cornerstone of this form of design, in particular
because it offers a shortcut to discuss the problems; and the argumentation used to assert
the artefact probability.
The limitations of the framework could be explored by evaluating if, and how much peoples
reactions are triggered (emotions, engagement, discussions). We also wonder if the notion
of debate is appropriate. It can be seen as the intent of these practices but does the debate
or even the discussion occur at this stage? Is a step missing to start a discussion? Are the
debates happening, but simply not captured by any media? The next step of this research
should examine the importance of the mediation of these projects (crafting the situation of
reception) as it seems primordial to gather meaningful audience reactions to start a
meaningful discussion.
As designers insist on getting forms of engagement, they therefore shift the attention from
winning a case (rhetorical framework) to discussing and debating options (communication
framework). We conclude that this specific relationship between artefacts and viewers makes
Design a form of communication between designers and their audience.
1060
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to give a warm thank you to their research collaborators: Pierrick
Thebault, Jeremy Boy, Remy Bourganel, Emmanuel Mah; The persons involved in the
Dog&bone project, including James Auger, Jimmy Loizeau, Nicolas Nova, Daniel Sciboz,
Daniel Pinkas, HEADGeneva Media Design program; And the anonymous DRS reviewers.
References
Aristotle, Rhys, R. W., Ingram, B., & Friedrich, S. (1954). Rhetoric. New York: Modern
Library. Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.mb.txt
Auger, J. H. (2012, September). Why Robot? Speculative design, the domestication of
technology and the considered future. The Royal College of Art.
Bardzell, S., Bardzell, J., Forlizzi, J., Zimmerman, J., & Antanitis, J. (2012). Critical design
and critical theory: the challenge of designing for provocation (pp. 288297). Presented
at the Multiple values selected, New York, New York, USA: ACM Request Permissions.
doi:10.1145/2317956.2318001
Bleecker, J. (2009). Design Fiction (pp. 149). Near Future Laboratory.
Bosch, T. (2012, 02 March). Sci-Fi Writer Bruce Sterling Explains the Intriguing New Concept
of Design Fiction. slate.com. Retrieved March 2013, from
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/03/02/bruce_sterling_on_design_fictions_.
html
Dunne, A. (1999). Hertzian tales: electronic products, aesthetic experience and critical
design. London: The Royal College of Art computer related design research studio.
Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2001). Design Noir: The Secret Life of Electronic Objects. August
Media.
Fallman, D. (2008). The interaction design research triangle of design practice, design
studies, and design exploration. Design Issues, 24(3), 418.
Freud, S. (2004). Das Unheimliche. In Fantastic Literature: A Critical Reader. Westport,
London: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Gents, A., & Jutant, C. (2012). The game mechanics of pervasive applications: visiting the
uncanny. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 18(1-2), 91108.
Kerridge, T. (2009). Does speculative design contribute to public engagement of science and
technology? (pp. 118). Presented at the Proceedings of the Swiss Design Network
Symposium, Lugano.
Kirby, D. (2010). The Future is Now: Diegetic Prototypes and the Role of Popular Films in
Generating Real-World Technological Development. Social Studies of Science, 40(1),
4170.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books.
Sterling, B. (2009). Design fiction. Interactions, 16(3). doi:10.1145/1516016.1516021
Todorov, T. (1970). Littrature fantastique. Potique (Collection) (Vol. 1). Seuil.
1061
Abstract
While basic design principles tend to be visually oriented, a user-centred design
perspective focuses on the product experience and hence is multi-sensory. Moreover, the
sensory qualities of products can relate to perceived product personalities. This paper
describes a pilot investigation in a design principles course. We used an existing product
personality tool for evaluating perceptions associated with a number of small mechanical
everyday products. Initially students explored links between visual qualities of products
and meanings and emotional responses derived from them. Subsequently, they observed
participants multi-sensory experiences with the same products with the objective of
understanding the differences in perception between purely visual experiences and other
sensory layers of human-object interactions. The paper concludes that tactile and auditory
sensory design attributes contribute additional and sometimes different meanings,
emotional responses, and interactions to everyday products, and possibly into whole
product categories. Product design educators can benefit from expanding their
introduction to form-giving from a strongly visually-oriented approach to a multi-layered
approach for detailing sensory characteristics of products, especially auditory and tactile
features.
Keywords
Multi-Sensory Experiences, Sensory Product Attributes, Product Personalities
This paper documents a pilot student investigation of the relationship between perceived
product personalities and sensory qualities designed into products. Patrick Jordan (2002)
notes that products are like living objects with which people have relationships. Other
design researchers have observed that people relate to certain products as if they were
human, for example, getting angry with them or being nice to them to get them to work
properly (Reeves and Nass, 1996). Given this phenomenon, designers should be able to
enhance the person-object relationship by intentionally incorporating sensory features into
products that may be perceived as having particular personalities. This project explored
existing product/user relationships to begin to understand how and when sensory features
contribute to perceived product personalities and user experiences, within the context of
teaching design principles. The objective of the study was to identify multi-sensory design
considerations for determining user-centred design features for different stages in humanproduct interactions.
The paper begins with a brief discussion of design principles introduced to product design
students, ranging from formal rules to user-centred considerations. It then discusses the
two phases of the students assignment; the first phase explored visual factors that
contribute to perceived product personalities and the second phase explored how
meanings, emotional responses and interactions based on visual perceptions can be
altered by additional sensory channels such as touch and sound.
1062
Context
Product designers have traditionally determined the visual and three-dimensional
attributes of products. In product design schools, there is an emphasis on form-giving,
according to fundamental principles governing visual and tangible properties (Gilles, 1991;
Pipes, 2009). Prescriptive design approaches, many originating with the Bauhaus, form
the basis for foundation design studios. Students also learn about user-centred issues in
separate ergonomics or human factors courses and user-centred design projects
(Courage and Baxter, 2005). There is a separation between the creative skill set and the
human-oriented approach. In the former case, a good designer applies the rules of
compositional unity and balance to achieve or disrupt a model of harmony (Jordan, 2002).
In the latter case, user studies provide feedback for refining and adjusting a products
formal properties to meet user requirements (Kuniasvsky, 2003).
Alternatively it could be argued that the visual and formal features of a product are part of
the same domain as user-centred product features such as affordances (Norman, 2004).
From that perspective user-oriented design adds more than formal attributes to design
detailing; it encompasses a broader range of subjective multi-sensory experiences.
According to Hekkert and Schifferstein (2007) product experiences consist of three
components:
The aesthetic response is characterized by feelings of (dis) pleasure that are based on the
sensory perception of the object; the object looks beautiful, feels pleasurable, or sounds
nice. In addition, people try to understand how a product must be operated or which
actions it affords, and people attribute all kinds of expressive, semantic, symbolic or other
connotative meanings to it. The interactions with a product can help a person to reach a
goal or can obstruct him or her in attaining that goal, and thereby lead to various
emotional responses.
In a user-centred design approach, the user should be involved from the products
inception (Courage and Baxter, 2005). This means that an understanding of users
requirements, ways of doing things, mental models, and contexts of use all come to play
in the design of the products. It makes sense to incorporate the users sensory
experiences into the process rather than collecting user/usability data and then turning to
principles of form-giving that are somehow detached from the components of the user
experience.
This study was conceived as a way for students to learn about the relationship between
the multi-sensory features of existing everyday products and users subjective
experiences. The intention was to engage undergraduate students in examining how
multi-sensory aesthetic, operational, and interactive components add to purely visual and
formal compositional principles in product design. With this approach, emerging designers
can develop a broader perspective about user-centred design features, especially for
products incorporating multisensory characteristics.
Seeing is Believing
This exploration took place as part of a new second year undergraduate industrial design
course entitled Sensory Aspects of Design, replacing a studio focused on traditional form
and colour principles. The exploratory study described below, took part in two phases.
Given that there is a strong focus on the visual characteristics of product design in the
design curriculum, Phase One began with an investigation into the messages product
appearances communicate. This investigation built on Patrick Jordans (2002) Product
Personality Assessment Questionnaire. The objective was to determine perceptions of
small mechanical everyday products within eight specific product categories: corkscrews,
1063
locks for lockers, handheld safety razors, multi-purpose Swiss army-type knives, hand
held juicers, desk lamps, tape dispensers, and staplers. There were eight teams with five
or six students and each team selected one product category. Within their chosen product
category each team studied three products varying from high design through to low
design. They were looking for links between visual qualities of products that users
associate with meanings and emotional responses to the products in that category. Each
team recruited a total of ten participants from the class to assess the traits of each of the
three objects in the teams product category. For example, the Lock Down Krew team
selected three different locks, as shown in Figure 1.
Figures 1 & 2: The 3 locks and set up for participant evaluation (credits: Booth-Dawson,
Mathew, Rakoff Bellman, Steindel, Zurowski)
Each participant evaluated the locks primarily through visual inspection, as shown in
Figure 2, filling out semantic differential scales derived from Patrick Jordans Product
Personality Assessment Questionnaires [5], as shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4 below:
1064
process, without prescriptive rules for interpreting form and colour features, stimulated
discussion and debate. In the case of team Tight-Squeeze, their hand-held juicer results
were revealing. For example, they associated the participants perceptions of narcissistic
and inflexible personality traits with the juicers downwards-thrusting ridged and pointed
central body element and its sharply angled asymmetrical legs as seen in Figures 4 and 5:
Figures 4 & 5: The Violent Juicy Salif (credits: Cross, Yonekawa, Natchetaia, Sudak, Zhu)
In addition, each team was required to develop a 5-minute role-playing enactment to
illustrate the aspects of the products qualities and/or features that might affect users
perceptions. Strangely, in the case of the Juicy Salif above, the enactment ended in the
death of a much simpler and sweeter juicer who could not stand up to the sharp, violent
masculine personality of Juicy. Playfulness aside, all of the student teams reported
significant qualitative realizations. For example, the Lock Down Krew reported:
1.
Similar products were compared yet vastly different personalities arose amongst
the same product category. This is not because of large differentiations (aside from colour)
but because of the magnitude of the sum of fine details, such as radii, finish, transitions,
and text. Most personality traits could be traced back to a supporting formal detail of the
lock.
2.
Our group was surprised to find that our predictions for the results of the testing
were far from the actual results. We would not have been able to perceive these results
without testing. It was reinforced that, despite what we think, we dont know what others
feel/think until we ask.
By the end of this phase, each product was assigned a personality profile based on the
visual perceptions of its formal features. The teams gave each product a name, ranging
from common names to movie star names, already associated with strong personality
types. The students had no idea if these personalities would hold true when participants
interacted with the products using other sensory channels. Would sweet Annie Edison, the
mini stapler or masculine, Viktor Iznakov, the powerful stapler maintain their attraction
when participants actually used them?
1065
Figures 6 & 7: eStapler online profiles for Annie & Viktor (credits: Barsalou, Chen,
Nyakairu, Wilcox, Wilson)
Interacting is Differentiating
In the second phase student teams focused on observing sensory and experiential
interactions between people and the chosen team products. The objective of this phase
was to analyze the multi-sensory experience of a product with respect to understanding if
the original product personality would change with more interactive sensory involvement,
based on the work of Fenko, Schifferstein, and Hekkert (2009). Their mission was to
determine:
How do sensory features and attributes affect product choice and multi-sensory
experience?
Do the previously determined product personalities persist?
Three participants tested each product. Each participant performed two tasks with each
product, in some cases choosing each of the three products in order of preference. Team
members observed, videotaped (with permission), and later analysed the interactions
each participant had with the product while completing the specified tasks. In their
analysis they looked at the number and kind of sensory interactions in relation to specific
product features and stages of use. For example, in the case of the eStapler team the two
simple tasks were to choose a stapler and staple some paper, which was repeated three
times, and to refill the staplers. The results of these observations led to Classifications
of Sensory Interactions, which some teams presented as storyboards of sensory
interactions (see Figure 8) and interpretations of the findings (see Figure 9).
Figures 8 & 9: Classification & Interpretation (Barsalou, Chen, Nyakairu, Wilcox, Wilson)
Overall, the teams found that the principal senses people engaged with while using the
products were visual and tactile, and secondarily, auditory. In fact, the senses could be
ordered as follows: the first experience of interaction is through the distant sense of vision,
1066
followed by the proximity sense of touch, and enhanced periodically during use by the
distant auditory sense. Most teams found discrepancies between their findings from
phase one and phase two. Moreover, design elements appealed to different sensory
modalities depending on stages of use. For example, the Lockdown Krew noted that,
when first seen, colour and formal novelty initially attracted their Phase 1 participants to
their lime green Olivia lock. However, the anticipated familiarity associated with the
users tactile and auditory experiences made their Gary lock the favourite when
participants engaged in sensory interactions with the locks in Phase 2, as noted in Figures
10 and 11:
Figures 10 & 11: Participants choices differed between Phases 1 & 2 (Barsalou, Chen,
Nyakairu, Wilcox, Wilson)
Overall, the discrepancies alerted the students to the value of user-centered and multisensory design approaches to design decision-making. Their insights are discussed in the
following section.
Discussion
Since this assignment was both introductory and experimental, it was not obvious whether
the results would show any differences between participants visual perceptions of
products and their perceptions after additional sensory interactions with them. However,
for most of the teams, once participants interacted with the products, the perceived
product personalities changed. The students began to recognize that user-centred design
is closely tied to ease of use. The users are influenced by their interactions with multimodal product features. As in human relations participants interactions became more
intimate, focused, and complex when they were required to complete tasks. While good
looks promise successful and engaging interactions, tactile and auditory product features
act as important mediators in the activities.
For example, the desk lamp team realized that the visual aspects of the product
personalities held true, but during interaction, certain sensory aspects of the lamps
started to contradict their personalities. A friendly lamp displayed tactile unfriendliness
during interaction due to poor button design and a sophisticated multi-element lamp
displayed primitive tactile operational features for adjusting its height. They concluded,
The functionality and usability started to influence the personalities more than their visual
qualities, supporting the notion of considering multi-sensory aspects as user-centred
design features.
The students began to consider visually oriented aesthetic product features as the most
determining factor in terms of shelf appeal. They began to recognize that multi-sensory
attributes that contribute to an engaging and successful operational experience are key
factors for a good user-centred product. In terms of it being a successful product,
1067
functionality and usability is incredibly important- HONESTY. One team summarized the
user-centred sensory contributions of sound and touch by saying, These functional and
usability factors need to incorporate secondary sensory aspects in order for it to become a
satisfying experience.
The students were also encouraged to consider the ordering of human-object interactions
with respect to sensory features, based on the work of Fenko, Schifferstein, and Hekkert
(2009). As a result several teams presented their findings in relation to stages of use,
similar to a task analysis breakdown, as can be seen in the knife interactions in Figures 12
& 13 following, where the sensory interactions are mapped onto each step in the task. As
the stages of use proceed, the dominant visual sense in stage one in Figure 12 gives way
to tactile interactions, which dominate in the rest of the stages, albeit to a lesser degree
(note grayed-out hand). These are further augmented by auditory feedback as the use
cycle progresses and in stage one in Figure 13, auditory engagement is more important
than the visual experience.
Figures 12 & 13: Mapping sensory interactions to task stages (credits: Arkuszewski, Choi,
Gilmour, Kurluk, Roberts)
By the end of phase two it became apparent that the overwhelming focus on the visual
aspects of form and colour phenomena in form-giving activities could contribute to
products that do not fully meet users needs, requirements, or optimal sensory experiences.
Taking a multi-sensory approach to the design of product features could result in a richer
multi-layered, and longer lasting product experience.
Nonetheless, this pilot study had several limitations. First, it was a simplified introduction
to basic design research for undergraduate students beginning to develop their
foundational industrial design knowledge. Second, it was the first assignment in a new
course with the objective of converting a studio-based approach to form and colour
principles into a reflective user-centred exploration of multi-sensory product features.
Third, the students were given a great deal of leeway in setting up their testing contexts to
allow for some creativity, which may have affected the test results. For example, some
teams came to the conclusion that the discrepancy between phases one and two were
due to the testing situation. For example, the Lockdown Krew were concerned that they
had influenced their participants in phase two:
Our question in phase 1 targeted visual aesthetic preference from a consumer perspective.
Personality is a factor that influences choice but it is mostly based on tastes.
Our user scenario was (unintentionally) a high-pressure situation.
We think the choice of lock was influenced by an observer expectancy effect [in which]
our test subjects wanted to perform well and meet our expectations.
The desire to perform well led our users to choose the lock with which they were most
familiar.
With different product choices and a different time frame, in-situ observations may have
been more appropriate. Since participants did not fill out a Product Personality
1068
Conclusion
This paper illustrates the potential usefulness of incorporating form and colour
characteristics within the larger context of a user-centred approach to design detailing in
foundation design studies. It reveals how students explored the dynamic nature of the
sensory relationship between a product and a user over time, as different sensory
experiences come to the fore in different stages of interaction. Product personalities are
first perceived through a visual sensory modality. Once the user engages tactile and
auditory senses in operational and interactive activities, his or her original visual
perceptions may change, altering the perceived personality of a product. This awareness
can sensitize student designers to the multi-layered aspect of sensory interactions with
products, with more than one sensory experience occurring, creating a richer or a more
complex (good or bad) experience for the users. Therefore, in this assignment, emerging
student designers learn that user-centred design is not separate from the aesthetic formal
and multi-sensory features of products. Well-designed multi-sensory and use-oriented
attributes of products can contribute to users perceptions and responses to those
products.
Product personality is only one tool for measuring assumptions, reactions, reiterations,
and contextual differences. In this case, it provides a lens that shows how sensory
engagement changes with stages of use. Multi-layered sensory interactions are necessary
considerations in the design of a product for long-term use. Product design educators can
benefit from expanding their introduction to form-giving from a strongly visually oriented
approach to a multi-layered approach to detailing multi-sensory characteristics of products,
especially auditory and tactile features.
The assignment described here was inspired by the work being undertaken at Delft
University of Technology in Multisensory Product Experience in Industrial Design
Engineering by Hekkert and Schifferstein and the work of Sensory Anthropologists David
Howes and Constance Classen at Concordia University. It sets the stage for future
investigations into the transformation of prescriptive design principles as well as the study
of the advantages and disadvantages of different sensory modalities in designing product
interactions. The long term goal is to sensitize emerging designers to integrate multisensory design elements that enhance pleasure, meaning, and operational aspects as
part of holistic, long term, evolving relationships between people and their everyday
products.
References
Courage, C. and Baxter, K. (2005). Understanding Your Users: A Practical Guide to user
requirements: Methods, Tools, & Techniques. San Francisco: Elsevier Inc.
1069
Fenko, A., Schifferstein, H. N.J., and Hekkert, P. (2009). Which Senses dominate at
different stages of product experience? In Proceedings of Undisciplined! Design Research
Society Conference 2008, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK, 16-19 July 2008.
Hekkert, P. and Schifferstein, H. N.J., (2007). Introducing Product Experience. In
Schifferstein, H. N.J. and Hekkert, P. (Eds.) Product Experience (pp. 1-8 ). Oxford:
Elsevier.
Gilles, W. (1991). Form Organization. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
Jordan, P. (2002) The Personalities of Products. In Green, W. S. and Jordan, P. (Eds.).
Pleasure with Products: Beyond Usability (pp. 19-47). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Kuniavsky, M. (2003) Observing the User Experience. San Francisco: Elsevier Inc.
Lauer, D. A. and Pentak, S. (2008) Design Basics 7th Ed., Boston: Thomson Higher
Education.
Norman, Donald. (2004). Emotional Design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New
York: Basic Books.
Pipes, A. (2009) Introduction to Design 2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education Inc.,
Reeves, B. and Nass, C. (1996) The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers,
Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places, Stanford: Center for the Study
of Language and Information.
Lois Frankel
Lois Frankel, Associate Professor in the School of Industrial Design at Carleton University,
studies the user-centred design of computer-enabled products. Her past experience as a
jewellery designer influenced her focus on wearable computing devices for health and
wellbeing. Her work with smart products for the Elderly/Vision Impaired includes design
research projects with the TAFETA (Technology Assisted Friendly Environments for the
Third Age) group at the Elisabeth Bruyere Health Centre in Ottawa and the Canadian
National Institute for the Blind.
Lois has been a Professor in the School of Industrial Design for twenty years and is a past
Director of the School. She is currently a PhD student at Concordia University, with the
generous support of a Doctoral Fellowship from SSHRC (the Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council). Her PhD research combines the disciplinary approaches
of Sensory Anthropology Research and Generative Design Processes in design research
for wearable technologies for mature adults. Her previous degrees include: Master of
Environmental Design (Industrial Design) from the University of Calgary, Meisterschulerin
from the Dsseldorf Art Academy, Germany, Bachelor of Fine Arts from the Nova Scotia
College of Art and Design, and Diploma in Crafts and Design from Sheridan College,
Ontario.
1070
Abstract
This paper reports on design work-in-progress that, to date, has focused on the
affiliation of medical identification jewellery with paramedics as the central user group.
In doing so, we use Suchmans notion of the affiliative object to reframe medical
identification jewellery as a compound epistemic object with affiliations to paramedics in
the province of Ontario, Canada. The paper begins by providing background including
the methods used to assess the use of medical identification jewellery. There follows a
section on how the findings from fieldwork were used to develop a first iteration of
design recommendations. A compliancy table then appends discussion of key findings
and design recommendations. Three design concepts were found to be particularly
successful in focus groups of participant paramedics. These were modified and
evaluated in response to the feedback obtained. One concept was ultimately rejected,
while the other two underwent redesign. The two successful concepts were developed
into high-fidelity prototypes. The design concepts presented here are observably
original and not copies of previous designs. As affiliative objects, they aim to facilitate
diagnostic work in emergency response. In doing so, they follow Lucy Suchmans
(2005: 381) injunction that the constitution of objects is a strategic resource in the
alignment of professional identities and organizational positionings.
Keywords
medical identification jewellery; user-centered design; objectualization; object-centered
socialities, epistemic objects; affiliative objects; boundary objects.
1
1071
The existing MedicAlert bracelet has, in many respects, retained similar functionality
and appearance since its creation in the mid-1950s. The original design was for a silver
bracelet with the medical condition of the wearer engraved upon it (MedicAlert
Foundation 2013. The early MedicAlert logo featured a Rod of Asclepius, an emblem of
the medical profession, flanked by the words Medic Alert. A central plaque bearing
this motif remains the hallmark of contemporary MedicAlert jewelry, and is closely
mimicked by other medical identification jewellery brands, such as Universal Medical ID
(2013). MedicAlerts trademark patient database and telephone hotline were established
internationally by 1964 (Stevenson 1964: 980).
Significantly, it has been a commonplace for wearers to personalize or otherwise
modify their bracelets in a manner that reduces access to medical information in favour
of fashion and style. A perfunctory survey of internet sites concerning MedicAlert
bracelet undertaken at the outset of this study revealed a range of modifications that
indicate a sharp division in intents and objectives. While some wearers seem focused
on concealing and otherwise modifying the bracelet in order to decrease or avoid
stigma, others are tattooing written instructions to service providers on strategic sites of
the body in order to guide first responders in emergency situations. The division in
intents and objectives recalls Graham Pullins (2009) study of the tension that currently
exists among design disciplines (e.g., fashion, industrial design, graphics, engineering)
involved in designing for disability. The exemplary case for Pullin is the modern day
transformation of eyeglasses from wholly functional medical assistive devices into
stylish eyewear. Eyewear thus functions as a kind of boundary object. Susan Leigh Star
and James R. Griesemer have described boundary objects as those that:
inhabit several intersecting social worldsand satisfy the informational
requirements of each of them. Boundary objects are objects which are both
plastic enough to adapt to local needs and the constraints of the several
parties employing them, yet robust enough to maintain a common identity
across sites (1989: 393).
However, eyewear is a special case in the history of the design of medical
assistive devices. Pullin shows this in comparisons with other medical appliances such
as hearing aids and prosthetic limbs that continue to achieve discretion for disabled
wearers through concealment. In view of all this, we decided to take a stepped
approach to problem-solving in the redesign of medical identification jewellery. In effect,
we reasoned, the redesign of the medic identification bracelet could begin by first
addressing the culture and organizational positionings of a segment of user concerns. A
table of compliance of successful design recommendations could be generated for
purposes of identifying indispensable design considerations for future iterations of a
more inclusive bracelet. In this regard, Lucy Suchman (2005) usefully observes that
objects demonstrate affiliative powers, particularly when occupying the role of an
epistemic object. She describes the process of transforming the Xerox 8200 copier,
initially a common workplace object, into a specifically scientific object by reworking its
boundaries among the various parties involved in research on the device. Our
recommendations for the redesign of medical identification jewellery are the first step
3
1073
Requirements
Use attention-getting design elements.
Recognizable
Accessible
Readable
Relevance of information
developed a form factor based on a hospital bracelet (Figure 1a); icons to indicate the
presence of medical information in a charm necklace concept (Figure 1b); two designs
employing a pharmaceutical capsule motif and EKG waveform (Figures 1c-d); a
singular, simple form based on the red blood cell (Figure 1e); and a Star of Life icon
with secondary visual cues of saturated colour (Figure 1f). Figures 1b, e, f were
designed with an intended purpose to house RFID tags, NFC tags, and QR codes,
respectively.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Participants reviewing the initial design concepts in the second round of focus
groups were unexpectedly unreceptive to design concepts that relied on digital
technology (i.e., RFID tags, NFC tags, and QR codes). They raised concerns about
efficacy and access to smartphones, computers and/or wireless internet in the field;
about the fiscal challenges of implementing new technologies for governmentsponsored emergency medical services; and about the privacy issues that may arise
regarding the use of a smartphone camera (as required for QR code scanning), or the
possible retention of patient data (as could occur with Internet-based solutions or NFC
tag readers). Furthermore, they pointed out that the use of such technologies would add
extra steps to field procedures that required nimbleness and speed of operation. One
participant asserted: The rule in fire and ambulance is the piece of equipment is going
to fail when you need it. Given such reticence and barring a massive shift in the
information transfer practices used in the pre-hospital care field in the province we put
to one side the digital consideration in favour of analog information storage methods.
The RFID pill concept, which received considerable positive feedback as a form, was
retained with revisions.
The paramedics in the second round of focus groups were overwhelmingly in
favour of design steps with the least number of steps between identification of the
medical identification jewellery and retrieval of information. They were particularly
supportive of a design concept with a flip mechanism, that is, where the information on
the device can be accessed in one step by flipping the text-bearing part of the device.
Several participants mentioned that this is how they access information on most current
medical identification jewellery, and commented that this is one existing design feature
that works effectively for them. As a result, we also set aside the charm necklace
concept, which required multiple steps of flipping through the various charms in order to
find the one that is relevant to the particular emergency.
Hospital band concept
The concept that received the most favorable response during the focus group process
was the hospital band design, shown in Figure 1a. This design received substantial
attention and commentary. All participants commented that the bracelet is instantly
recognizable. Immediately upon seeing the drawing, one participant stated, This I
already recognizeif I saw this, Id be like what is this? Another participant stated that
it was the only design that she would instinctively recognize as medical in nature. The
hospital band-like design appeared most likely to encourage paramedics to check for
information: several participants stated that if they see something that looks like a
hospital band, they will probably examine it. Participants also liked the perforated, foldover style band, which they felt provides an additional visual cue as to its medical
status. The band style was implemented specifically in response to the comments of
one first-round participant, who noted that the generic metal chains used on current
medical identification jewellery make that jewellery impossible to recognize if looked at
from the wrong angle. The use of a distinctive band, and especially one that is already
associated with medical information as in the case of the perforated hospital band,
8
1078
It can be assumed that the reader will be facing the wearer. The orientation of the text
(and bracelet itself) should be adjusted to accommodate left-handed wearers.
1
9
1079
pendant as a case for a micro USB key with the patients information stored on a text
file, and using the pendant as the basis for a scroll mechanism (such as is used in the
popular novelty banner pens). We decided to push matters further by producing a
conceptual model for the participants to examine and handle. Nevertheless, in the final
review of models and prototype, the idea lost instead of gained participant support.
Discussion and concluding remarks
In her paper Affiliative Objects (2005), Lucy Suchman proposes that our relations with
objects are relations of affiliation. Following Karin Knorr-Cetina (1997: 1), objects can
progressively displace persons as relationship partners and increasingly mediate
human relationships. Knorr-Cetina describes this as an objectualization of social
relations. At the same time, as Karen Barad (1998) has shown, objects have histories,
they resist and bite back. Hence, objects are not innocent but fraught with
significance for the relations they materialize (2005: 379).
In this paper we have studied medical identification jewellery in the context of
affiliative relations between paramedics and the people (i.e., patients) paramedics work
with when responding to emergency situations. The approach we have taken has been
to reconfigure and modify elements of design already in circulation. We have done so in
such a way as to understand the organizational positionings through which medical
identification jewellery can be made not as copies of earlier designs but as observably
original in relations of affiliation. As a first step, we offer below a Table of Compliance
(Table 2).
We have no doubt that the considerations listed in our Table of Compliance are
incomplete for the redesign of medical identification jewellery in general. We have
acknowledged, for example, the propensity of wearers to modify their medical
identification jewellery according to personal style. But this, we have noted, is at odds
with paramedics stipulations of visibility and recognizability. And our focus is on the
organizational positioning and user needs of paramedics. Medical identification
jewellery clearly holds multiple affiliations. At the same time, medical identification
jewellery bites back as it moves across boundaries in other social worlds (e.g., the
everyday life of the wearers).
Further to what John Law and Annemarie Mol (2002) have said, objects in
medicine by virtue of being medical are held together by affiliative practices. In her
work on atherosclerosis (2002), Mol persuasively argues that the multiple enactments of
a patients disease (via, for example, various clinical and test outcomes, and images)
are unified by certain practices, such as the adding-up of outcomes to support a
common object, the hierarchization of outcomes when they do not support a common
object, and the calibration of outcomes. At the same time, medical diagnosis and
treatment does not represent a single coordinated network and a single coherent
ontology. In a similar vein, we are arguing for a stepped approach to design work
whereby the design considerations of medical identification jewellery, if they are to fit
into the organizational positionings of first responder practices, must fit with and not
increase steps for field procedures that demand nimbleness and speed of operation.
10
1080
What we are highlighting here is the idea that the production of organizational order
through everyday practice has, as both a primary resource and an ongoing, practical
problem, the work of bringing various forms of occasioned instruction into productive
relation with specific circumstances of action (Suchman 2005: 388).
This is not to say that other organizational positionings do not matter. They do.
But they are discursively heterogeneous. We have adopted a way of thinking about the
design process in which iterations of designs are energetic entities that juxtapose,
distinguish, make and transform absences and presences. The iterations represent a
pattern of presences and absences. Future work remains to be done in our stepped
approach to design work that will enable coordination among various positionings and
allow our design for medical identification jewelry to take on the role of a boundary
object that is flexible enough to accommodate multiple affiliations. For the time being,
we offer a Table of Compliance (Table 2) to designers working on medical identification
jewellery based on the local organization positionings of paramedics working in the
province of Ontario, Canada.
Design consideration
Visible
Requirements
Use attention-getting design elements.
Recognizable
Accessible
Analog
Readable
11
1081
Relevance of information
12
1082
Bibliography
Ahlstrom, V., & Kudrick, B. (2007). Human Factors Criteria for Displays: A Human
Factors Design Standard Update of Chapter 5. Atlantic City: Federal Aviation
Administration, William J. Hughes Technical Center.
Barad, K. (1998). Getting Real: Technoscientific Practices and the Materialization
of Reality. Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 10(1), 88128.
Canadian Pharmacists Association. (2011). 2011 Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and
Specialties Ottawa: Canadian Pharmacists Association.
Carlile, P. R. (2002). A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary
Objects in New Product Development. Organization Science 13(4), 442-455.
Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ewenstein, B., & Whyte, J. (2009). Knowledge Practice in Design: The Role of Visual
Representations as Epistemic Objects. Organization Studies, 30(1), 7-30.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the
Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575-599.
Henderson, K. (1991). Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual
Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering.
Science, Technology & Human Values, 16(4), 448-473.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1997). Sociality with Objects: Social Relations in Postsocial
Mol, A. & Law, J. (2004_. Embodied Action, Enacted Bodies: The Example of
Hypoglycaemia. Body & Society, 10(2-3), 43-62.
Pullin, G. (2009). Design Meets Disability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rheinberger, H.-J. (1997). Toward a History of Epistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins
in the Test Tube. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Sapsed, J., & Salter, A. (2004). Postcards from the Edge: Local Communities, Global
Programs and Boundary Objects. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1515-1534.
Shotter, J. (2011). Reflections on Sociomateriality and Dialogicality in Organization
Studies: From Inter- to Intra-Thinking in Performing Practices. Perspectives on
Process Organization Studies (v.3). Retrieved from http://www.johnshotter.com/
mypapers/Intra-thinking.pdf
Star, S. L. (1989). The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Heterogenous ProblemSolving, Boundary Objects and Distributed Artificial Intelligence. In Distributed Artificial
Intelligence (v. 2), edited by M. Huhns and L. Gasser, 37-54. San Mateo, CA: Morgan
Kaufman.
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional Ecology, Translations and Boundary
Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeleys Museum of Vertebrate Zoology,
1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-420.
Stevenson, A. L. (1964). Thanks from Canadian Medic-Alert Foundation. Canadian
Medical Assocation Journal, 91(1), 980.
Strathern, M. 2004. Partial Connections. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Suchman, L. (2005). Affiliative Objects. Organization, 12(3), 379-399.
Universal Medical ID. (2013). Bracelets. Retrieved from
http://www.universalmedicalid.com/mkt_can/category_viewall.php?mastercategory=brac
elets.
Yakura, E. K. (2002). Charting Time: Timelines as Temporary Boundary Objects.
Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 956-970.
14
1084
Abstract
This paper, attempts to provide a useful perspective of Systems Thinkings contribution to
Designs theoretical grounding for both research and education. Useful in the sense that
it will equip design students and graduate professionals with a supportive and productive
way of thinking about Design. This is viewed against the trend of more and more
multidisciplinary design problems emerging where designers are asked to deal with the
complexity which is inherent in such problems. Thus this discourse is also framed in
understandings of interdisciplinarity and further, transdisciplinarity, to attempt to gain
some traction on these heterogeneous domains.
Such domains are subject to many attempts to provide them with a theoretical framework.
In this paper, it is suggested that Systems Thinking can contribute considerably to such a
framework. The world of Systems Thinking is not new to Design, but against the new
scenarios of increasing complexity, it is in a stronger position to demonstrate its potential
for Design. This paper will posit the enhancements to both the designers way of thinking
as well as the design tools that Systems Thinking could provide.
Hence, the papers main emphasis is on how and why the designer profile could be
positively influenced by Systems Thinking.
Keywords
Design Theory; Design Education; Systems Thinking; Interdisciplinarity; Transdisciplinarity
Introduction
The recent debates centred around Design Thinking (Jonas, 2011; Razzouk & Shute 2012)
have been in part provoked as a response to the changing nature of problems that Design
is called upon to assist with, such as questions of services, or sustainability. In addition,
Design is deploying its existing methodologies and tools in areas that were previously
closed to it, such as innovation management and strategy in businesses (Dunne & Martin,
2006; Martin, 2009).
A common feature of these new types of problems is their complexity. To deal with the
challenges of complex problem situations, new or revised theories and methods are
needed. Thus, as we have seen with Design Thinking, the concern with, and the actual
search for, the theoretical identity of various evolving knowledge domains is becoming
more and more noticeable. That identity either emerges as a need to ground new
practices, or from the need to be able to refer to theoretical frameworks to accommodate
evolving groupings of disciplines, such as in Service science. These emerging practices
and disciplines are often difficult to identify and define. For instance, Service Science calls
1085
for ways to deal with the complexity of modelling people, their knowledge, their activities
and their intentions p8 (Maglio, Srinivasan, Kreulen, & Spohrer, 2006)
There are, of course, those disciplines which traditionally existed under the term of
multidisciplinary (usually engineering departments); those that appeared in the middle of
the last century (e.g. Operational Research); and finally the ever increasing numbers of
newly emerged disciplines with multifaceted identities and varying characteristics (such as
Cognitive Systems Engineering, Human Computer Interaction, User Experience Design,
Service Science, etc.) that are variously labelled as multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary,
although transdisciplinary, in many cases, is also a justifiable characterisation (Klein,
2004).
A common characteristic of these knowledge domains is their human-centric character
and, as a consequence, their ill-structured nature which exacerbates the difficulty to
provide a robust, commonly accepted, definition. This has been well understood for some
time. Design as a discipline has all these characteristics and it is well documented that it is
a prime example of a human centric domain which is exceedingly rich and complex,
challenging continuously, as it evolves, the research and education world and naturally
defying definition as evidenced by many design thinkers and researchers (Findelli, 2001;
Love, 2002; Buchanan, 2004; Venable 2006; Jonas, 2007; Eckert et al. 2010; Burnette
2011; Galle, 2011).
When constructing an undergraduate curriculum on design, or attempting to equip
practitioners with tools of thinking and praxis, one comes up against a natural mix and
perhaps confusion of notions, concepts and general labels. Models are called theory (ies);
theoretical frameworks are called models; praxis, methods and methodologies are lumped
under design thinking, etc. That as an observation is not necessarily a bad thing, because
it is an indication that the Design recognizes and welcomes complexity and multi, inter, or
even transdisciplinarity. This makes design properly challenging, and leaves a great deal
of latitude and degrees of freedom.
For designers, however, there needs to be continual adaptation of theoretical frameworks
for renewed commitment and grounding. A practical question is what is required from the
designer profile to be able to accommodate and deal with increasing levels of complexity.
It is this question that we seek to examine and understand here. The paper attempts to
identify and understand the need for a theoretical commitment for Design given the
increasing levels of complexity it is called upon to deal with. It supports the hypothesis that
a theoretical view of Design driven by Systems Thinking contributes towards a useful
grounding for both Design itself as well as applications of design. More importantly, it puts
forward the hypothesis that structuring the profile of designers with the aid of Systems
Thinking improves the design praxis in terms of problem understanding as well as the
appropriateness and robustness of the outcomes of the design praxis.
This paper is organised as follows: the next section gives some background on the new
demands that are being placed upon design and briefly introduces Systems Thinking.
Then the following section describes and attempts to justify why the designer profile is
positively influenced by Systems Thinking. Further it speculates on using notions and
concepts from Systems Thinking, showing how they can go towards shaping theoretical
frameworks for contemporary design challenges. The last section presents discussion and
conclusions
Background
More than a quarter of a century ago, there was a definite change towards organising and
structuring the domain of human-centric design by offering frameworks to designers
1086
through methods and methodologies to approach design problems (Archer, 1979; Jones,
1970; Cross, Dorst & Roozenburg,1992). These were mainly to do with formalising the
various stages of the design life cycle, and supporting that endeavour mostly through
philosophical argument. This change, started by a number of researchers [see Bayarzit,
2004 for an overview] began a tide which continues to increase, as the need matures for
the establishment of theoretical backgrounds and identity of design. It is very timely that
such a challenging, and definitely extremely influential domain as design is thus
considered more and more as generic domain. In other words, philosophical arguments,
methods, methodologies, and techniques, imported from other well established
interdisciplinary areas such as structured Systems and Operational Research, etc.
pioneered by people like Herbert Simon (1969), seem to have gradually expanded and
developed further and become of the design world.
It has to be mentioned here that traditionally, engineering design, stemming as it does
from the less complex, not necessarily human centric engineering world, was well founded
and continues to be staunchly supported by the engineering research community (Dym,
2005). By contrast, in the domain of human centric design, the needs for grounding are
somehow very different. It must be acknowledged that in many cases there is a
considerable overlap, and that a useful index of that, is the level of acknowledged problem
complexity, and the permitted use of multi/trans-disciplinarity. Norman (2010) recognises
that complexity is not to be simplified, and notes The real problem is that we truly need to
have complexity in our lives. We seek rich, satisfying lives, and richness goes along with
complexity (p10).
At the same time, the emergence of the notion of transdisciplinarity is gaining substance.
As long ago as the early 1970s, the OECD (1972) noted that specialist and reductionist
tendencies in education at Universities were in need of counter balancing. Currently,
according to Klein (2004), there are two main traditions of transdiciplinarity. Building on
the vision of Piaget, Nicolescus 1996 Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity and his essay
New Vision of the World does not attempt a new discipline or superdiscipline. Rather,
Nicolescu calls transdisciplinarity the science and art of discovering bridges between
different areas of knowledge and different beings. The principal task is elaboration of a
new language, logic, and concepts to permit genuine dialogue.
The other tradition of Transdisciplinarity thinking is strongly related to research and
problem solving and dates from around 2000. It highlights the convergence of
transdisciplinarity, complexity, and trans-sectorality in a unique set of problems that do not
emanate from within science alone. It recognises that the problems of society are
increasingly complex and interdependent. Hence, they are not isolated to particular
sectors or disciplines, and they are not predictable. In fact, they are emergent
phenomena with non-linear dynamics, uncertainties, and high political stakes in decision
making, centred in complex heterogenous domains (Bruce, 2004). These domains are
those where there is interaction of humans with natural systems, such as the environment
and of human involvement with technological developments such as nuclear power. It has
also proved effective in fields where social, technical, and economic developments
interact with elements of value and culture, including aging, energy, health care, nutrition.
The multidimensionality of each of these subjects is now recognised. In the past they
were structured in terms of disciplinary and sectoral boundaries, however transdisciplinary
approaches have exposed the limits of segmented thinking and problem solving. (Klein,
2004).
Faced with this state of affairs, we observe changes in design praxis. Design praxis
follows, but also influences, changes in Design. For example, in traditional industrial
design, it can be said that the designer and the manufacturer did collaborate in as much
as they each performed a part of a process, with one carrying out design work and the
1087
other accepting or not the resultant designs. Nowadays, it is clear that in activities like
service design the nature of the design work is highly interactive. The designer plays the
role of a facilitator in co-designing between stakeholders (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka 2008;
Vosinakis, Koutsabasis, Stavrakis, Viorres, & Darzentas, 2008). The service thus
designed and produced is enriched by incorporating results from the involvement of the
various stakeholders who are collaborating to co-produce the outcome. In addition,
currently, the designing of a product may encompass much more than the artefact. It may
include related aspects such as its packaging and the way it will be distributed, which
reach back to influence the artefact at the heart of the design effort. It is also not
uncommon that these aspects become more important than the artefact in terms of
influence. In this way the usability of a product, becomes more important that the product
itself. This is because it is touching on the dynamics of the interaction between the user
and the product.
Systems as an approach appeared more than half a century ago, in response to the
failure of mechanistic thinking and vitalism to explain biological phenomena. A System' is
a complex and highly interconnected network of parts, which exhibit synergistic properties,
where the whole exceeds the sum of its parts. Systems is a typical paradigm of an
interdisciplinary domain, which in its trajectory through time and applications, has
amalgamated other domains such as Biology, Information Theory, Management,
General Systems Theory, Cybernetics amongst others.
Systems Thinking requires shifts from traditional classical decomposition or reductionist
ways of doing things. It looks at relationships (rather than unrelated objects), at
connectedness, at process (rather than structure), at the whole (rather than just its parts),
the patterns (rather than the contents) of a system, and context. It offers a perspective
which provides tools for understanding relationships between things and does not look for
a single answer to a problem within the confines of a single discipline (Moore & Kearsly,
1996/2005, Cameron & Mengler, 2009). While understanding the whole involves
understanding the parts, it also requires an examination of the inter-relations between the
parts. In this way, they present emergent properties, which cannot be deduced from their
component parts
A further important part of Systems Thinking is the understanding that living organisms
are considered as closed systems in terms of their organisation, while at the same time, in
terms of their energy, they are open systems, with incoming and outgoing energy and
matter. That is, they are not "idle" or "immobilized" in the immediate surroundings, and are
studied as a total entity.
Several groups of Design Researchers have shown interest in bringing Systems Thinking
to bear on their research, teaching and practice. (Jonas, 2007; Valtonen, 2010; Sevaldson,
2011). Some of this work is more related to organizational design, including complex
problem formulation and systems redesign (Pourdehnad et al, 2011; Nelson & Stolterman,
2002). Others working in the area of sustainable design and the need for whole system
design have found Systems Thinking approaches correspond to their needs (Charnley
and Lemon, 2011). Systems has been used in Engineering and Engineering Design for
many decades. However the real power of Systems Thinking is in dealing with the high
complexity of ill-structured problems. Those are traditionally the human centric ones. This
did not go unnoticed by the design community: Buchanan, in his 1992 paper, Wicked
Problems in Design Thinking was using Design to address intractable human centred
concerns.
1088
1089
cannot ignore complexity, but should actively seek complexity in its grounding and
application. Complexity should be understood as enriching the process of design and
leading it to consider larger variety in its definition and its understanding of the problem
space.
The designing of a new mobile phone; a self-service terminal; a simplified application form
in the context of Information Design; a service design in an accident and emergency
department of a regional hospital, and so many others, have been dealt and are being
dealt very often almost on a daily basis. What brings them as examples here is that they
can be used to demonstrate the importance of the claims made above. For instance a
mobile phone is expected to be attractive, useful, accessible, affordable or wanted by the
users irrespective of the cost for various reasons, for example its innovative features. If,
despite its complexity as a product / system, designers understand, define, and design its
components separately without talking to each other; i.e. the software developers make
sure that whatever is in the phone can be expressed in some way so it can be utilized, but
have not worked with the interaction designers to make sure that all required functionality
is there. As a result, the emergent properties of those subsystems which should have
been considered together will not be recognized and answered to. The same applies to
considerations such as the ergonomics and materials used, or the shape and size,
marketing, packaging, and image of the user, and so on. The above is also a useful
example to demonstrate that the service part of the holon to be designed is the real
complex problem and determines the success or failure of the artefact. If that artefact is
designed with reductionism adopted as the driving force, then it will probably be foreign to
the service it is supposed to offer.
It must be said again, that experienced and talented designers will have methods,
methodologies, and experience in their toolbox to deal with most of those issues when
doing design. The argument here is that there should be grounding knowledge which
provides methodologies with methods and techniques, and way of thinking which give in
the toolbox the power to conduct and direct groups of designers in their praxis towards
design solutions from the beginning.
Staying with the notion of complexity, it is also interesting here to introduce the concept of
variety from Cybernetics. In Cybernetics, variety it has been introduced to measure the
potential of a system to defend itself against external threats or interference in a sense
that only variety controls or defeats variety. Designers with the profile stated here will
accommodate and utilize complexity and variety in their praxis, as an example in a way
similar to what follows. Complexity will be welcome because of the richness it offers and
there is the understanding that the more complex a system appears to be the healthier it
is, because if studied properly, it can be seen that it offers more ways to deal with
problems than a less complex one. We could also add that complexity, if appropriately
accommodated, promotes simplicity, that is, complexity is not the opposite of simplicity,
and to that extent it supports the simpler use of a product.
A further example might be in the case of the design of self-services. Systems Thinking
designers will possess the knowledge to add in to their methods the determining of the
variety of demands, i.e. the types of different service demands. In other words they are
aware of the usefulness of knowing the different ways users will demand service. That
way, the designers will know the variety of services that should be provided and of course
what the self-service terminals such as ATMs should be able to deal with. The notion of
requisite variety for dealing with the demand, will lead the designers to those stakeholders
involved in the relevant subsystems (e.g. Service Design) for dealing with potential
problems, for example of accessibility (Darzentas & Darzentas, 2013).
1090
Designing an office interior will include the design of workstations, which could be seen as
a task of designing for a typical member of staff to be operational as possible and
accommodating all he needs for performing his assigned duties. Given the type of work,
the space available, regulations, the location of working places will also be high in the
agenda. However the design of a workstation for one person might not bring up some
emerging properties which will make the end result successful. That is, since in the office
there will be more than one member of staff, the design should be able to accommodate
conversation and collaboration. That need may considerably change the understanding
of the workstation requirement. Also knowledge about the requisite variety will aid the
designer to address accessibility issues in the station itself as well as in the location/
allocation of these stations in the office, so they can be used by people with special needs.
Such needs can radically change all of the thinking about the design and layout of the
workstations.
The example illustrates the importance of examining the whole problem/system from the
beginning. The emerging properties when seen during the understanding of the problem
they seem obvious, however it is fairly easy to miss them when the relevant subsystem is
not considered.
Summing up, the main aim of the introduction of Systems Thinking as a Design Thinking
support is to nurture the profile of designers with it in order to provide them with a very
valuable and useful way to deal with the human centric problems they face. These
designers can also be taught about and practice Systems Thinking methodologies such
Soft Systems Methodologies (SSM) (Checkland, 2000), Critical Systems (Flood &
Jackson, 1991) etc. However, this paper is not yet suggesting ways to teach designers, it
is presenting and attempting to justify the belief that Systems Thinking can aid the
grounding of the domain of design very usefully by providing a theoretical framework
which in turn can support designers and their way of thinking towards human centric
problems.
In the discussion and theses above about the domain of Systems Thinking and its
application to Design, a number of notions and concepts have been mentioned. They are
important and they stem out of their multi-inter-trans disciplinary world. They are not
though the only ones which can be very relevant and useful to Design Thinking and praxis,
but they are representative of the nature of Systems Thinking for the purpose of the paper.
These are:
Complexity (the nature of which has so far led to attempts for reductionism)
Emergent properties
Variety (requisite variety)
Self-reference
As far as the notion of self-reference is concerned, briefly this refers to the fact that
designers should be expected to know and feel that their self-reference as far the design
problem they are facing exists and influences the design and should be managed. This
can be achieved partly through co-design which naturally acknowledges also the selfreference of the stakeholders, in order to work towards a robust solution.
A final example which can be used to demonstrate the role and usefulness of some of the
above notions in a design problem is the design of the packaging of medicine and the
corresponding instructions. This can be seen as including an information design problem
where the instructions as far as their content, form and positioning have to be designed. If
this packaging problem is considered as a system and the designers involved resist
reductionism then the design problem will, in its rich Systemic view include all possible
subsystems such the type of medicine (including the degree of danger if used wrongly).
1091
This will lead to more appropriate definitions of the user groups (patients, carers, doctors,
pharmacists, manufacturers, etc.) and in turn will identify emerging needs of use. For
instance in the case of blood pressure pills that will emphasise aspects like the
ergonomics of the container, the size of lettering, a complex way of describing the use
by which is mean a model of information with an appropriate variety of ways to offer the
necessary explanations. We must not forget that here complexity is not the opposite of
simplicity, but they should work together in making life better by offering a rich adaptable
guidance for as many types of users as possible.
Conclusions
Our main thesis is that Complexity is recognised in Design and should be welcomed, and
that together with a number of aspects of Systems Thinking enhances the chances of
design praxis to succeed in producing a robust design solutions, and characterises and
enforces the profile of Designer in a positive way.
One might comment that the above begs the question as to why does one need new
theories to proceed, in such an obviously successful and leading domain as design, which
has evolved into a prominent leader amongst the newly and powerfully evolving multi /
inter / trans disciplinary domains. The answer might be a simple one, that is because of
the apparently very important role design is playing in that evolving world, and that it
seems to be a naturally mature hyper-domain able to accommodate and direct most of
them. Also because that maturity requires new leads and ways of thinking, through which
to evolve, understand, and solve a wider range of problems.
A theoretical identity supporting a domain could be a very important aspect of this
evolution, it could also be absolutely necessary for its survival. However it could also be
very damaging hence one must in most cases, introduce statements such as lack of
owned theory which could be a conscious decision or evolution. Here, very briefly, it is
stated that there is a generic domain, that of Systems Thinking, which can accommodate
theoretical needs of design, and complement others such as engineering, in supporting
designers to design. A main assumption made here is that design is human centric,
assuming that engineering is well founded. It is argued that Systems Thinking helps to
understand the problem in hand and to analyse it maintaining a very high level of
complexity.
Decorating the living room of a blind person, might sound provocative. One might also get
the answer that it is a problem like any other and the designers toolbox contains tools to
deal with it. Of course it does, the thesis here though is that another theoretical framework
might be useful in understanding, and ordering / optimising the actions, and of course do
what theories help one to do: to provoke, to explain, to define, to predict. In the case of
the decoration problem, it could translate to knowing that, for example, increasing the
requisite variety should be a high priority because probably autonomy will be very
important to the problem owner.
REFERENCES
Archer, B. (1979) Design as a discipline Design Studies 1(1) 7-20
Bayazit, N. (2004) Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research
Design Issues, Vol. 20, No 1, pp.16-30
1092
Bofylatos, S. Spyrou, T., Georgiadou, A., Darzentas,J S, & Darzentas, J.(2013) Designing
an intensive programme based on service design and design for sustainability, submitted
to DRS14
Bruce, A., Lyall, C., Tait, J. and Williams, R. (2004) Interdisciplinary integration in Europe:
the case of the Fifth Framework programme, Futures, 36: 4, pp. 457-470.
Buchanan, Richard, (1992) Wicked Problems in Design Thinking, Design Issues, vol. 8,
no. 2, pp. 5-21
Buchanan, R. (2004) Human-centered Design: Changing Perspective on Design
Education in the East and West. Design Issues, Vol. 20, No 1 pp. 30-39
Burnette, C. (2011, Feb 17) Theoretical Issues for Design Thinking retrieved 12 October
2013
http://independent.academia.edu/CharlesBurnette/Papers/432385/Theoretical_Issues_for
_Design_Thinking
Cameron, F. & Mengler, S. (2009) Complexity, Transdisciplinarity and Museum
Collections Documentation, Journal of Material Culture 14(2) 189-218
Charnley, F. & Lemon, M. (2011) Exploring the process of whole system design, Design
Studies, vol. 32, pp156-179
Checkland, P. (2000) Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective, Systems
Research 17, 11-58
Cross, N. Dorst, K. & Roozenburg, N. (1992) Research in Design Thinking, Delft
University Press
Darzentas, J. & Darzentas, J.S. (2013) On the role of systems thinking in design and its
application to public self services, Working Paper in RSD2, AHO, Norway.
Dunne, D. & Martin, R.(2006) Design Thinking and How It Will Change Management
Education: An Interview and Discussion Academy of Management Learning and
Education 5(4) 512-523
Dym, C.; Agogino, A.; Eris, O.; Frey, D.; & Leifer, L., (2005) Engineering Design Thinking,
Teaching, and Learning Mechanical Engineering Paper 22 retrieved 12 October 2012
http://digitalcommons.olin.edu/mech_eng_pub/22
Eckert, C.M., Blackwell, A.F., Bucciarelli, L.L. & Earl, C.F. (2010) Shared Conversations
Across Design Design Issues 26, No 3, pp. 27-39
Findeli, A. (2001) Rethinking Design Education for the 21st Century: Theoretical,
Methodological and Ethical Discussion Design Issues (Vol. 17, no1, pp. 5-17)
Flood, R.L., Jackson M.C. (1991) Creative problem solving: Total systems intervention,
Wiley
Friedman, K. (2003) Theory Construction in design research: criteria, approaches, and
methods Design Studies, 24, pp.507-522
Galle, P. (2011) Foundational and Instrumental Design Theory, Design Issues, Vol. 27, No
4 pp 81-94
1093
1094
John Darzentas:
Professor John Darzentas (BSc Athens, MSc Sussex, UK, PhD, London, UK) is Head of
the Department of Product and Systems Design Engineering (www.syros.aegean.gr) of
the University of the Aegean (www.aegean.gr).
He has held academic faculty positions in universities in the UK and in Greece, and
departmental headships, including Docent at the Abo Akademi, Turku, Finland, visiting
Professor in the Department of Economics, University of Athens, and others.
His research interests are wide ranging and include Systems Thinking and Systems
Design; Service Design; Information Systems Design; Intelligent Systems and Decision
Support Systems; Human Computer Interaction; Design for All; Learning Systems and
Technologies, and issues of Multi-Inter-Trans-Disciplinarity.
He is on the editorial board of a number of journals and has authored many papers
published in books, journals and conference proceedings. He has served as Scientific
Lead in many research programmes, funded both at national and European level. He is
invited expert / member of IFIP TC13 (International Federation of Information Processing
Technical Committee 13) on HCI.
A fuller Curriculum Vitae is available at http://www.syros.aegean.gr/users/idarz/cv_en.pdf
Jenny S. Darzentas
Dr Jenny S. Darzentas (BA, London, UK, PhD, City University, UK) works in the
Department of Product and Systems Design Engineering (www.syros.aegean.gr of the
University of the Aegean (www.syros.aegean.gr and lectures on Design for All;
Information Design; Interaction Design Communication Theory, Organisational Theory,
Behaviour and Service Design.
Her publications cover topics in Design and HCI (Human Computer Interaction), such as
user needs for information; accessibility practices and policies; and educational
requirements for Design for All. In addition, she has worked on many national and
European funded projects, on library and archival programmes; online learning; on issues
of accessibility; on personal profiles/device profiles aiming at seamless interactions, and
has published on these subjects.
Her current research interests focus on the questions about self service and accessibility,
and the contributions of frameworks and methodologies from Systems Thinking to Service
Design and its accessibility and to Information Design. A fuller Curriculum Vitae is
available at http://www.syros.aegean.gr/users/jennyd/cv_en.pdf
1095
Abstract
In this paper, six different classes of methods of exploratory interventions for engaging
citizens in the development process of public knowledge institutions will be presented.
The classification is based on twelve implemented and tested exploratory installations,
and can be used as inspiration for stakeholders in order to work systematically with the
stakeholder-citizens interaction. The discussion is centered on intertwining the physical
and the digital, and exemplified through the development process of a new culture house.
The contribution of this paper is the classification of methods that a) address the
unification of physical and digital spaces and b) stage the interaction between different
actors relevant for the development of the design process, through interactive tools that
can be a complement to using the traditional virtual 3D-models, physical architectural
models, or public hearings.
Keywords
Public engagement; Architecture; Interaction Design; Exploratory Installations;
Participation
Introduction
In recent years, there has been a growing understanding among both public and private
stakeholders of the importance to interact with and engage citizens in the development of
public buildings and spaces. Ideally, all public building projects should be initiated by
defining the future users, define how to communicate around the project, and to engage
the citizens. Though, most often the project is almost completed before the users gets
involved. In the development of public knowledge institutions, here defined as places
accessible to the community whose functions are to serve as repositories for and
disseminators of knowledge, such as libraries, museums, theatres, science centers and
culture houses, the purpose of engaging the citizens is firstly to make the public aware of
the project in order to create interest. Secondly, it is also about introducing a participatory
design process, where the citizens become co-creators, inform the architectural program
and city planning processes, and finally provide stakeholders with decision making
material.
Already some decades ago, Alexander stressed the importance of involving the citizens
and future users of the building in the development process, and developed a common
language (Alexander, 2005). Though, not many have taken up the mantle, and there is a
lack of best practice models (Dalsgaard & Eriksson, 2013). User centered design and
participatory design have been used in interaction design for decades. Though, voices
within the interaction design community are starting to rise to transfer this knowledge to
design projects of larger scale (Shapiro, 2005), extending the tradition of applying this
approach toprojects of smaller scale (Oostven & Besselar, 2004; Simonsen & Hertzum,
1096
2008). Large-scale projects are typically characterized by one or several of the following
factors: long time spans, large or diverse groups of users, and result in products that are
complex or extensive in scope. User involvement has had great influence in interaction
design, but has in recent years become an important factor also in architecture and urban
development (e.g. Sanders, 2010). An example of this is the development of the new main
public library in Aarhus in Denmark (Aarhus municipality, 2013), where the winner of the
architectural competition was appointed due to how they would involve the users in their
development process. This is in opposition to the tradition where projects of this nature
and scale more often are developed top-down, such as in for instance the Bibliotheque
National in Paris, France (McCrady, 1998).
The case in question in this paper has been initiated by the municipality of Lundby in cooperation with researchers in architecture and interaction design at Chalmers University of
Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden. The aim of the project is to develop methods and
tools for stakeholders to create engagement from the citizens around the planning and
development of a new cultural house.
The prototypes are intended to stage the interaction between the citizens and the
stakeholders in the development process. The concept of staging is used here as a
unifying synonym to bringing out, presenting, showing, and performing. Staging also
refers directly to putting something on the stage, using the theatre stage as conceptual
metaphor (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Ricouer, 1978). This conceptual metaphor includes
and induces other usable metaphors, such as roles, actors, audiences, storytelling, play,
and set. All of these are viable concepts in the use of interaction design as a method in
participatory design processes.
This paper aims for public institutions, private interests, researchers and practitioners, to
explore methods for how to work with citizen engagement in large-scale development
projects using interactive tools. In this paper we offer an analysis of twelve different
implemented prototypes for a case centered on the development of a new cultural house.
The prototypes serve as examples and shape the foundation for a classification system
that can be used by stakeholders, researchers and designers in the development of public
knowledge institutions. The purpose of this approach is to contribute to existing methods
for engaging the citizens, and to provide the stakeholders with a classification of methods
that can be used in order to work systematically with the stakeholder- citizens interaction.
The contribution of this paper is twofold. Firstly, we offer a case description of the
development of a new cultural house with twelve alternative ways to create citizen
engagement through intertwining the physical and the digital space. The second
contribution is a classification system, where six types of methods for how to
systematically engage citizens in large scale development projects are identified and
described. Though, this is based primarily on experiences from this project, it is our hope
that this can inform and inspire other stakeholders involved in similar projects.
1097
1098
development of this new cultural house. The outcome, so far, has been twelve different
prototypes, all tested in the municipality. Based on analysis from these experiments, a
model describing six categories of methods of exploratory interventions mixing the digital
and the physical in order to stimulate involvement in the development of public knowledge
institutions will be presented, see Table 1.
The twelve exploratory interventions are used as exemplars of the six different categories,
which differ in purpose, concept and method. A common concept for all six classes of
methods presented is that they a) address the unification (co-existence) of physical and
digital spaces and b) stage the interaction between different actors relevant for the
development of the design process (citizens, stakeholders, planners, decision makers,
and designers).
The six classes of methods are labeled A-F and are presented below in close connection
to examples. The examples are small projects developed by groups of Master students in
interaction design at The University in close co-operation with actors in The District.
The classification is summarized in this table:
Class
A
B
Purpose
Create new experiences
Content and community
building
Inform design process
Target
Culture house visitors
Local citizens
C
D
Interface
Visitors / culture house
Citizens / culture
activities
Citizens / culture
house program
Visitors / content
Local citizens
Local citizens
Culture house visitors
1099
The E-Motion Wall is a large screen (2x3 m) installation where multiple users in front of
the screen leave traces in the form of shadows in different colors (Fig. A1). These
shadows stay on the screen even after a user has left the space in front of the screen.
The shadows interact with each other, erasing, mixing and enhancing the shadows.
Different sounds also appear in this playful interaction.
Chimecloud is an evocative, responsive auditory and visual installation aiming to make
users actively take part in the creation of soundscapes using their body and movements in
interaction with the space surrounding them (Fig. A2). It takes its idea from nature, where
the wind is the main element creating natural soundscapes. Chimecloud is using this as a
metaphor, making peoples presence and movement matter and bringing the space to live.
The 2x3 m installation hangs from the ceiling and consists of a Kinect camera, and 36
servos connected to 216 aluminum tubes that play notes according to peoples
movements.
B) VIRTUAL (MOBILE) SPACES
Purpose: To strengthen and develop local cultural networks and communities.
Concept: To create an interface between citizens and local culture activities.
Method: To introduce virtual spaces that is filled with cultural content, as activities and/or
results of cultural activities.
Examples:
Virtual Rooms is a mobile application for integrating virtual and physical space in a cultural
context (Figure B1). Artistic content in digital form, such as visual art, music and texts, are
connected to certain physical spaces in District. The concept is to make these physical
spaces important in relation to the cultural content of The Culture House and to enrich
public spaces with cultural content through virtual spaces. The implemented project focus
on visual art, showing the potential to overcome some of the limitations of the physical art
gallery as well as the web based art gallery. This project is a direct contribution to the
stakeholders need of a Virtual Culture House that in the future also could complement or
even replace some of the parts of the planned physical culture house.
The Culture House App addresses the problem highlighted by the stakeholders at Lundby,
that culture houses in general lack in reaching out to the public and in communicating with
members of the public (Figure B2). In order to solve this, a concept of a service with
connected avatars was created. The service holds data about culture houses as well as
conversations about the culture houses and their offerings. The avatars work as an
interface between citizens and local culture activities that allow the members of the public
to take part of the information as well as participate in conversations. A prototype of the
service and one avatar, in the form of an iPhone application, was created to demonstrate
the concept. The resulting prototype was received as an important contribution to the
1100
Virtual Culture House as a means to strengthen and develop local cultural networks and
communities.
C) DESIGN PROCESS CONTRIBUTIONS
Purpose: To inform the design process
Concept: To create an interface between citizens and the programme of the cultural
house.
Method: Through data gathering
Examples:
My Culture Now (MCN) is a project with three tracks, that each addresses different
aspects of engaging the citizens in the public space development process. MCN includes:
A website where the collected data informs the design process and the program
development of the culture house (Fig. C1), an interactive installation to create cultural
expression of the citizens (Fig. C2), and a gallery showing these cultural expressions and
promoting the culture house. The need for user involvement has been a key point for the
My Culture Now project team as The District sought out an Interaction Design perspective
to implement the idea of a virtual culture house that would precede and contribute to the
physical one.
D) EDUTAINMENT INSTALLATIONS
Purpose: To inform citizens of the content
Concept: To create an interface between visitors and content
Method: Interactive media installations
Examples:
1101
The Gate is a concept connected to the library activities of the culture house (Fig. D1).
The concept is to make books alive by transforming the content into interactive media
installations that can be explored by the visitors to the culture house. The idea is to inform
the citizens, evoke interest in book reading and enhance the library.
Live Tree is an interface between the visitors and the content of the culture house (Fig.
D2). The project aims to introduce a novel experience in public space to represent the
content and activities of the culture house and to encourage human-human social
interaction. The work suggests a design approach to embed information into architectural
elements as a design material that can facilitate rich information processing, thus
increased efficiency and overall public space experiences.
Culture will find you use the bus stop as interface for connecting creators of content with
new audiences. The project is a service for bridging the gap between the digital and
physical world in the context of cultural expressions. The service allows artists to share
their creations not only in the crowded digital space, but also in the public bus stop. The
project suggests an interface between creators of the content and citizens, aiming to help
promote the cultural house and local artistic expressions and activities reach a broader
audience, people that otherwise would not visit the culture house.
The Invisible Showroom is a prototype of projection mapping as a tool for exhibiting art
(Fig. E1). Projection mapping involves hand-held projectors that can show digital content
mapped onto a physical environment, used in exhibitions and public performances. The
idea of is to stage artistic work and content related to culture in a flexible and exciting way.
The prototype shows how visual art can be displayed in physical public space, such as the
culture house, without using a traditional gallery space.
Digital Window aims to create a connection between the virtual and physical space (Fig.
E2). By tracking a user looking at a screen, showing a 3D environment, the projection of
the 3D environment adapts to the position of the user enabling a spatial 3D effect as if the
user was looking through a window. The content of the 3D environment is provided by
visual artists that upload their work to a server, which is connected to the Digital Window.
This window is meant to be a part of the actual faade of the culture house, so that people
outside the building can get an experience of looking into the digital space of the culture
1102
house. This installation can be realized already in the early phases, in order to create
interest among the citizens and to support cultural activities that can become part of the
culture house in the future.
F) SOCIAL INSTALLATIONS
Purpose: To share experiences and support community building
Concept: To create an interface between visitors
Method: To stage interventions, installations and spaces that trigger social interaction
through exploration
Examples:
1103
playfulness that has come to life through the installations has been highly appreciated.
The stakeholders believe that these types of methods will inspire and involve the citizens
in a completely different way than the questionnaire and one way media communication
they have used so far. The exploratory installations developed in this project have
provided the stakeholders with new means, arguments and ideas to share with other
decision makers.
1104
leaving a shadow on the wall, adding an event in an app or the creating of piece of art, as
well as on the level of engaging oneself in social interactions tied to the place, , or by
piquing the curiosity of fellow visitors by moving about the cultural house while interacting
with the walls or ceiling.
Discussion
Planning for and building a public knowledge institution is not only a large-scale
development project, it is also a project in need of citizen and stakeholder involvement as
design inspiration for developing the city, the identity of the organization and institution,
new services, roles, and use, meanwhile developing and building the new house and city
area. There are many issues facing public knowledge institutions when interactive
technologies challenge their fundamental roles and practices, and have forced a shift of
focus from their collections towards visitors and experiences. The case presented here
offers examples of how these challenges can be explored and addressed in the
development process through explorative interaction involvement initiatives. What is
promoted here is not that all future public knowledge institutions should have a Backa
orchestra installation or a virtual cultural house, but rather to see the possibilities there are
in creating exploratory interventions in order to engage citizens in the development
process, and to inform the stakeholders and the design process.
1105
Opening the public knowledge institutions to noise, clutter, and aesthetics differing from
what people are used to, or to what might seem as pointless activities, can be a challenge
or even provocation to many people. Though, the effects of seeing the public knowledge
institution in a different light might seem to prove worthwhile, and opens for dialogue
between the different stakeholders.
The model for exploratory interventions presented in this paper should be seen as a
complement to other methods. It has its strength in containing methods to support the
citizens in seeking their attention, stimulate through novel experiences, introduce
elements of learning, give them influence and the possibility to act and interact, in line with
the AELIA model (Delman & Nielsen, 2009). Elements of exploratory games can be found
in the model for exploratory interventions, and can be extended further by an increased
focus on game design and role playing in the design of the interventions (Brandt, 2006;
Lssing et al, 2007).Though, the different categories of exploratory interventions are more
flexible and reach a wider audience than exploratory games, as they are more directed
towards the public space rather than invited guests or staged sessions, and are not in
need of a moderator. The interventions can be used as interactive elements in the
exploratory games and in other methods.
Conclusion
In this paper, a model for exploratory interventions that intertwine the digital and the
physical in order to stimulate citizen engagement in the development of public knowledge
institutions have been proposed. Twelve different implemented interventions are classified
into six different categories of methods that can be used for enhancing citizen and
stakeholder involvement in the development of public knowledge institutions. The
interventions have been used in a case where a new cultural house is about to be
developed. The model is a complement to traditional methods for stakeholders to engage
citizens, and introduces interaction design into the planning process, the dialogue and the
actual building. By introducing a practice-based classification of methods we have given
structure to the use of interaction design and exploratory interventions in the development
of public knowledge institutions.
1106
References
Aarhus municipality. Web resource Retrieved: 3 March 2014:
http://www.urbanmediaspace.dk/en.
Alexander, C. (2005) The Nature of Order, Book three, A vision of the living world.
California, USA.
Al-Kodmany, K. (1999) Using visualization techniques for enhancing public participation in
planning and design: process, implementation, and evaluation, Landscape and Urban
Planning. 45: 37-45
Brandt E. (2006) Designing exploratory design games: a framework for participation in
Participatory Design?. In Proceedings of PDC '06, Vol. 1. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 5766.
Bratteteig T. & Wagner I.(2012) Disentangling power and decision-making in participatory
design. In Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers Volume 1 (PDC '12) Vol. 1. ACM, NY, USA, (2012) 41-50.
Buchanan, R. (2001) Design Research And The New Learning. In Design Issues Vol. 17,
No. 4, Pages 3-23.
Dalsgaard P & Eriksson E. (2013) Large-Scale Participation: A Case Study of a
Participatory Approach to Developing a New Public Library In proceedings of CHI. Paris,
France. ACM Press.
Delman, T. F. & Nielsen, R.(2009): The AELIA-model involving users in urban
development. In proceedings of U-Drive:IT. Aalborg, Denmark.
Lakoff G. & Johnson M. (1980) Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language. The Journal
of Philosophy. Vol. 77, No. 8 (Aug., 1980), pp. 453-486
Lssing, T., Nielsen, R., Lykke-Olesen, A. and Delman, T. F. (2007) The Harbour Game.
(In: Borries, Friederich von; Steffen P. Walz og Matthias Bttger eds.), Space Time Play Computer Games, Architecture and Urbanism: the next level, Birkhuser, (2007).
McCrady, E. (1998) Bibliothque Nationale: A Building Hostile to Preservation and Access.
In Abbey Newsletter, vol. 22, No. 4, Abbey Publications 1998.
Oostveen, A. & van den Besselar, P. (2004) From small scale to large scale user
participation: a case study of participatory design in e-government systems. Proc. PDC
2004. ACM Press, 173-182.
Ricoeur P. (1978) The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-Disciplinary Studies in the Creation of
Meaning in Language, trans. Czerny R. McLaughlin K. & Costello, S. J., Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
Sanders L. Exploring co-creation on a large scale. In Designing for, with and from User
Experience, StudioLab Press (2010).
Simonsen, J. & Hertzum, M. (2008) Participative Design and the Challenges of LargeScale systems: Extending the Iterative PD Approach. Proc. PDC08. ACM Press,1-10
1107
Shapiro D. (2005) Participatory design: the will to succeed. Proc. CC '05, ACM Pres, 2938.
Underkoffler J. and Ishii H. (1999) Urp: a luminous-tangible workbench for urban planning
and design. In Proceedings of CHI '99. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 386-393
Eva Eriksson
PhD in Interaction design, now working as a lecturer at Chalmers University of
Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden. She has ten years of experience from developing
methods and designing multi-scaled interaction design in public contexts, such as
developing public knowledge institutions. She teaches interaction design methodology
and is one of the founders of Gothenburg Working Group for Interaction Design and
Children, IDAC, www.idac.se.
Josef Widestrm
Josef Widestrm is working as a lecturer at Chalmers University of Technology, teaching
in interaction design and visualization. He is also working on a PhD thesis in Digital
Representation, focusing on the relations between physical and digital spaces from a
design perspective. He has been involved in research projects at Chalmers and University
of Gothenburg since 1999, contributing with an expertise in visualization and digital
representation. He was the manager of Chalmers VR CUBE for five years, being involved
in more than 20 different research projects. Josef Widestrm is an architect by education,
with a M.Arch from Chalmers in 1998.
1108
Abstract
This paper set out to investigate how design students learn from visualising theory in
design education. The exploration rests on the assumption that the application of tools
and techniques from design practice supports design students with an entrance to the
theoretical part of the field.
The paper is based on teaching experiences from an MA course in design methodology
where we use visualisation as a tool to discuss, explore and understand design theory. To
throw light on the question, student evaluations and feedback has been included together
with a classification of the material from one visualisation exercise. In addition, theories for
how to understand designerly ways of knowing and constructing knowledge have been
applied as tools to think with in the discussion.
The educational approach where design students read, analyse, and visualise theory,
appears to be beneficial to the students learning process for a number of reasons, which
will be discussed in the paper. The main findings indicate that visualising theory is
beneficial because it applies a type of practice that the students are familiar with, and
supports the construction of new knowledge, by allowing the students to express
information and concepts in ways that are personally meaningful to them.
Keywords
Visualisation, designerly knowing, design education, design methodology
Introduction
The use of visualisation as a design tool has been discussed in various ways within the
field of design research and in textbooks. During many years design researchers have
studied, discussed and acknowledged sketching and drawing as a tool for reflection as
well as designing in various ways (see for example Schn, 1983; Cross, 1995; Lawson &
Dorst, 2009; Goldschmidt 1991, 2013). Visualisation has also been the subject or included
in textbooks across different design domains, see for example Buxton (2007) on user
experience, Olofsson and Sjlen (2005) on product design or Gaimster (2011) on Fashion
design) Also method card collections usually include methods where visualisation plays a
central role (IDEO, 2002; DSKD, 2011). Additionally visualisation has been discussed as
an assisting tool in communicating design and design processes (see for example Roam
(2009) on visual thinking in business innovation, Sibbett (2010) on visualisation as
meeting facilitation and Rohde (2013) on visual note taking). Thus, there is a large and
diverse body of knowledge and a vast amount of literature, which is concerned with
visualisation as a communicative or reflective tool in the design process.
1
1109
In this paper we are specifically concerned with visualisation as a reflective tool but we
take a slightly different perspective than most of the cited literature since our aim is to
discuss visualisation as a teaching approach in theoretical courses in the design
education. We use this study to claim that there is an educational potential in using a
designerly approach when teaching theory in design schools. Therefore, instead of
exploring visualisation as a design tool, we discuss ways in which visualisation can be
integrated as a tool for exploring and learning theory in design education.
In recent years at Design School Kolding in Denmark we have applied visualisation
exercises in various cross-disciplinary courses at all levels as a tool to discuss, explore
and understand design theory. Back in 2009 one of the authors introduced students to the
use of visualisation as a tool for dialogue when reading and making sense of theory
(Gelting, 2009). We decided to further explore the integration of visualisation using
examples from an MA course on Design Methodology. The exploration rests on the
assumption that the application of tools and techniques from design practice supports
design students with an entrance to the theoretical part of the field and holds the promise
of improving the students learning outcome. Feedback and evaluation by the students
indicate that they do indeed experience that the visualisation approach helps them
engage with theory at a new level, and in this way supports the learning process.
We use the paper to reflect on the teaching approaches and learning outcome of the
course. During the three times that we have run the program, we have received positive
feedback and evaluation from the students, indicating that applying visualisation as a tool
for exploring and making sense of theory provide them with the ability to grasp and
discuss theoretical concepts see different perspectives and being able to address them
together. We use a combination of structured reading assignments, group work and
visualisation exercises. What we would like to focus on in this article is the visualisation
exercises, how and why that helps the students process the readings. The overall
question, which is explored in this paper, is therefore: How do design students learn from
visualising theory in design education? The overall purpose is to gain a better
understanding of why it works well to use visualisations as a pedagogical tool and how
does it work?
Before we lay out the theoretical foundation we introduce the case, which we build upon,
namely the course in design methodology, and the empirical data produced by collecting
and clustering the visualisations from the first exercise in the 2013 course.
2
1110
We are a group of three teachers/researchers, who develop and run the course together.
The course was offered for the first time in September 2011. In September 2012 and 2013
we had the opportunity to refine the course, building on experiences from the previous
year(s). The course is a 2-week course. Teaching is 4 days a week from 9.00 to 2.15.
The students pass this course by attending a minimum 75% of the time. Therefore the
learning impact cannot be measured in terms of exam grades or by analysing written
assignments but is related to an expected learning outcome for the students. The
expected learning outcome is to be able to discuss design process and method from a
historical perspective and to possess knowledge on how the field of design relates to
methodological research and approaches of other disciplines. It is also important that the
students gain an overview of the most important design theorists design methodological
stance and to be able to use this knowledge to understand contemporary prevailing
approaches. Last but not least the students must be able to reflect on design methodology
in relation to design practice.
The pedagogical key elements in the course are: group work, a process of structured
reading assignments and visualisation as a tool to think with. As a preparation for the
group work we provide the students with a short introduction to the selected literature and
an assignment, which guides them in the subsequent reading process. Each assignment
encourages the students to reflect on structure as well as content in selected text(s). The
expected outcome is a written summary and a visualisation. The visualisation is expected
to communicate the main points in the text(s) using drawing and short statements. Over
the years we have learned that the visualisation appear to serve the purpose of further
understanding and remembering the theory if it is hand-drawn and in poster size.
The 2013 course consisted of three assignments. Each assignment had a specific goal: 1)
to understand a single text in-depth, 2) to conduct a comparative analysis of two texts,
and 3) to understand design methodology in a historical context. The group size was two
to four students to increase the likelihood of everyone in the group participating actively.
The students read in groups, they explored, discussed and solved the assignment
together. One full day was allocated for each assignment. Subsequently we arranged
discussions and presentations in smaller groups. This was an alternative to plenum
discussions, which we reduced to a minimum in order to let each student be as active as
possible.
3
1111
Figure 1: These posters exemplify the mainly text based visualisations (photos: S. A. K.
Friis).
The smallest group of visualisations is mainly text based (5 out of 26). As Figure 1 shows
the text often appears in an organised and structured way, which resembles bullet points
organised in diagrams. The diagrammatic character indicates an order or a system of
reading and understanding the visualisation. This type of word-based visualisation
presents the main points of the text. The reader gets a clear view of the relation between
the main points due to the way they are structured and organised on the poster. This type
of visualisation appears close to an objective depiction of the text, bringing forth key terms
and concepts.
4
1112
5
1113
6
1114
7
1115
have a shared understanding or are there things, which we have understood differently?
Not until you make the visualisation, do you really understand it [the text] (09.2013). Two
students described what happened when they were comparing visualisations of the same
text: It was fun there were two groups that had read and visualised the same text. But
the visualisations made them see that they had understood the text quite differently. The
visualisations acted as drivers for a rich discussion, which gave room to new perspectives
(09.2013).
The first reading assignment was followed by knowledge sharing in groups of 2-3 pairs of
students. We asked the students to use the visualisations disseminating the generated
knowledge to fellow students (Figure 4). Afterwards we had a short plenum discussion,
which included a brief feedback on the use of the visualisations. Several of the students
mentioned that the visualisations helped in their understanding of the texts presented by
fellow students. It was also mentioned that it was easier to remember the main point of the
texts when they were accompanied by a visualisation. Finally the visualisations served as
a starting point for discussing diverging understandings of the same text.
Theoretical Foundation
The next section seeks to provide a theoretical foundation for the further discussion of the
research question: How do design students learn from visualising theory in design
education? Design students are special in the sense that they are trained to use the
power of conjecture (Lawson, 2006) for instance through sketching and visualising
possible solutions (Schn, 1983; Cross, 1995). This is an important factor when trying to
understand how MA design students in their final year learn from visualising theory the
training of the students cannot be separated from the teaching methodology that we apply
and investigate. We therefore find it appropriate and worthwhile to use design theory
with a special attention to designerly ways of knowing since the visualisation approach
to exploring, discussing, and understanding design methodology is applied in the context
of design education. Thus, the present paper builds on theory from the field of design, and
particularly the designerly ways of exploring and knowing as described by Cross (2007),
Lawson (2006), Schn (1983), Goldschmidt (1991) and Kolko (2010). While the
visualisation approach to exploring and understanding theory might also be fruitful in other
disciplines, it is not part of this investigation.
8
1116
Reflective Practice
Looking at design as a unique way of thinking and acting, Schn (1983) has provided
significant insights into how this takes place in practice. Schn explains how the
architect/designer uses a complex combination of different materials, medium and
language to engage in the creative process. This process creates unintended
consequences that feed back into the process and creates a new understanding of the
project and process. He shapes the situation, in accordance with his initial appreciation of
it, the situation talks-back, and he responds to the situations back-talk (Schn, 1983:
79). This process Schn names as having a conversation with the materials of the
situation. Just like Cross, Schn understands the designers approach from a
constructivist perspective knowledge is being formed in the individual human being
when new information meets existing knowledge generated from previous experience
The solution is not simply lying there among the data, like the dog among the spots in the
well known perceptual puzzle; it has to be actively constructed by the designers own
efforts (Cross, 2007: 24).
9
1117
being either internal and personal or collaborative and external, Goldschmidt points out
the cognitive operations supported by different types of sketches.
Discussion
In this section theory from the previous section is applied to analyse and discuss the main
question of how and why design students learn from visualising theory in design education.
As a part of this we address the role that the type of visualisation plays for the individual
understanding of the text and the role that the visualisations play in the presentations of
the texts to fellow students.
Lawsons findings concerning how scientists and designers prefer to work (2006) is
relevant to the present study, since design students are asked to use both approaches:
firstly, they analyse the text, using a series of guiding questions in relation to content and
structure, and render the significant points in a summary. This is a straight forward
understanding exercise, making the strange familiar in a quite objective way. Secondly,
the students are asked to visualise the text, to synthesise their findings in a hand-drawn
illustration. This is a transformation exercise, making the familiar strange in a subjective
way, allowing the students to reflect while constructing, and bring forth something of them
selves in the illustration of the text. However, depending on the type of visualisation that
the students make, the activity can be placed on scales between subjective and
objective, concrete or abstract, and diagrammatic and narrative the transformation
being more evident in the subjective, concrete, and narrative representation than
visualizations at the opposite end of the spectrums. This relates well to Goldschmidts
findings of different types of sketches supporting different types of cognitive operation,
which is further addressed later in the discussion.
In the present case, the situation can be said to be opposite to the one depicted by Cross
when suggesting that constructive thinking has been neglected in culture. Master students
in their final year are familiar with using drawings, models, and sketches in their everyday
work whereas reading and analysing theory is something, which they in general are less
comfortable with. However, Crosss point about the different cognitive abilities is still of
interest to the present study where the educational approach encourages students to
switch between these different cognitive modes. By visualising the text that they have
read and analysed, the students thus apply an approach, which Cross would refer to as a
designerly way of knowing: making their mode of problem solving solution focused,
making their mode of thinking constructive, using codes to translate abstract
requirements into concrete objects, and using these codes to both read and write in
object languages.
The students in doing a visualisation transformation or synthesis of the text goes into a
dialogue with the text in a tangible way. Thus, they create a situation where the
visualization talks back to them and force them into a conversation with the text (Schn,
1983). The material nature of the handmade visualisation invites the students to physically
explore the text. Rather than designing beautiful visualisations meant for broader
knowledge dissemination the students use visualization as a tool to think with. Thus, these
may not reflect the actual drawing skills design students on MA level are supposed to
possess.
Comparing Goldschmidts findings to the classification presented in section 3, they seem
to be in accordance: Some students use seeing as visualisations where they create a
poster, which is narrative and metaphorical (Figure 2) and some students use seeing that
sketching were they use a diagrammatic and analytical way of visualising the text (Figure
1). Some students use the visualisations to move between the different ways of reflecting
upon the text and getting an understanding of it (Figure 3). Pulling thoughts from a tacit
state to an explicit state. In coming courses it may be interesting to increase the attention
to the type of visualisations the students come up with or be more precise when giving the
10
1118
Conclusion
The present paper set out to investigate how design students learn from visualising theory
in design education. To throw light on the question, student evaluations and feedback has
been included together with a classification of the first visualisation exercise in the 2013
course program. In addition, theories for how to understand designerly ways of knowing
and constructing knowledge have been applied as tools to think with in the analysis and
discussion.
The research is still in its early phases and the findings are tentative. However, we argue
that our experiments with integrating visualisation as a tool for exploring and making
sense of theory can be of value to design education as a whole. In a time where many
design schools move from arts and crafts based approaches only to also include more
11
1119
academic ways of learning, and where the production of theory is increasing, it seems
appropriate to think of ways in which we might tailor theory based programs to design
students.
The main findings is that yes visualising theory is beneficial to MA design students,
because it applies a type of practice that they are familiar with, and supports the
construction of new knowledge, by allowing the students to express information and
concepts in ways that are personally meaningful. Getting it out, putting it on paper,
enables students within the groups to make sense of and synthesise new meanings
together. When sharing with other groups and seeing their visualisations, the student
groups as a whole, support each other in creating an overview.
A downside might be that some groups have misunderstood a text or they might only
show a fraction of a theory in the visualisation, leading to the fact that other students, who
have not read the text themselves, are cheated on important information or directly
misled. When running a course for this many students, and presentations are run in
smaller groups, the teachers cannot be present everywhere at the same time. However,
the fact that several groups read the same texts and get a chance to present to each other
and discuss perspectives might in part make up for this.
Further Work
Would visualisation work as an educational lever within other educations as well? It is a
good question whether the visualisation approach to text reading can be transferred to
other disciplines and fields and it might be a subject for further research. As mentioned
above Lawson argues that design students are trained to use their powers of conjecture to
find solutions and for example a biology student might not be able to benefit from the
visualisation exercise in the same manner as the design student in his/her final year. But
all the same, thinking about Crosss argument, that numeracy, literacy, and nonverbal
models and codes are all innate human cognitive abilities all of which can be developed
from lower to higher levels, one would think that the visualisation approach to text reading
can be transferred to other disciplines and fields. With the proper introduction, the above
mentioned biology student might be able to benefit from the visualisation exercise by
getting some training in visualisation and applying it to theory understanding.
However, we are teachers and researchers at a design school and it would be appropriate
to consider further research worth to discuss within the community of design research and
from which the design students could benefit. In this paper we have started to identify
different categories of and approaches to visualising. Studying in-depth the roles the
different types of visualizations play in teaching design theory might be a fruitful and highly
interesting subject for further research.
References
Buxton, B. (2007). Sketching User experiences Getting the design right and the right
design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, Elsevier.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Basel: Birkhuser Verlag AG, pp. 17-31.
Cross, N. (1995). Discovering Design Ability. In: Buchanan, R. & Margolin, V. (eds.).
Discovering Design. Explorations in Design Studies, pp. 105-120. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press.
Gelting, A. (2009). Kursusbeskrivelse Designmetode, (Course description Design
methods, in Danish), Fakultetet for Undervisning og Forskning (Cross Disciplinary Faculty),
Design School Kolding.
12
1120
13
1121
Abstract
In design studio, sketching or visual thinking is part of processes that assist students to
achieve final design solutions. At QUTs First and Third Year industrial design studio
classes we engage in a variety of teaching pedagogies from which we identify Concept
Bombs as an instrumental in the development of students visual thinking and reflective
design process, and also as a vehicle to foster positive student engagement. Our
formula: Concept Bombs are 20 minute design tasks focusing on rapid development of
initial concept designs and free-hand sketching. Our experience and surveys tell us that
students value intensive studio activities especially when combined with timely
assessment and feedback. While conventional longer-duration design projects are
essential for allowing students to engage with the full depth and complexity of the design
process, short and intensive design activities introduce variety to the learning experience
and enhance student engagement. This paper presents a comparative analysis of First
and Third Year students Concept Bomb sketches to describe the types of design
knowledge embedded in them, a discussion of limitations and opportunities of this
pedagogical technique, as well as considerations for future development of studio based
tasks of this kind as design pedagogies in the midst of current university education trends.
Keywords
Visual thinking, Design sketches, Design studio, Student engagement
In any design studio on any given day, someone will always be working with pens, pencils
and paper. Whether its a mock-up, mood board or concept, sketching is the quickest way
to produce visual representations of ideas. Sketching constitutes a natural thinking
process in design; it is part of a process in which final design drawings are approached
through a series of drawings (sketches); it is the designers dialogue with his/her ideas
(Cross, 1999). Sketching as concept development technique and the ability to visually
communicate ideas is a fundamental skill and essential in design practice.
In traditional design education, sketching is part of design studio pedagogies. It is through
the iterative practice of sketching that design students learn about design visual thinking;
that is, the process by which visual elementscodes, symbols, and other
representational formsare integrated into the tangible forms (whether drawings,
prototypes, etc.). This pedagogical approach, adopted from the Architectural design studio
tradition, is also present in other disciplines: Engineering, Games Design, Fashion,
Filmmaking, etc.
1
1122
3
1124
Fig 1 Segments from a novice (left) and expert (right) designer sketches
One conclusion emerging from the analysis of these drawings established that novices
visual thinking demonstrate an emphasis on features, functions and mechanisms of the
product being designed, while the experts visual thinking demonstrate understanding of
principles of use and of the functionality of the product. This type of analysis mostly
focuses on the action of sketching and visual thinking and not the specific type of
knowledge embedded in the sketches themselves. It adds to the extant theory postulating
that drawing and re-interpretation support different kinds of cognitive activities in design.
So we ask: could this approach be instrumental in design pedagogy to understand
students learning? What types of knowledge/thinking processes are manifested in design
sketching during Concept Bombs tasks? and why is this important to understand in the
shifting context of educational delivery systems (blended learning environments) and an
outcome-focused approach to education.
work. Sometimes time is provided to review the work of other studio groups who have
been working in parallel. Teaching staff review the work simultaneously and the group
reassembles for a brief public critique of each presentation. Figure 2 shows an example of
a First Year design Concept Bomb and the design brief.
Fig 2 A First Year students Concept Bomb (left) and the Concept Bomb design brief
(right)
Concept Bombs in First Year design studios are employed for two different purposes: (a)
to pace tasks and projects within the semester; and (b) to give students the opportunity
to refine their understanding of sketching for rapid ideation in a supervised setting. There
are four characteristics:
Pace and focus: Three to four Concepts Bombs in a semester help punctuate the
semester experience within or in between larger projects. As some First Year students
experience difficulty maintaining engagement and motivation throughout long design
projects, Concept Bombs provide a change of pace. The briefs are object oriented with
topics based on familiar daily experience that dont require research. Students apply the
foundational design knowledge and methods they have been learning in class.
Rapid feedback: Concept Bombs enhance learning by closing the feedback loop. As
there is little pause between doing the sketches and getting feedback and assessment
they provide instant gratification' to students. Staff moderated peer feedback also
encourages student engagement with assessment criteria and promotes peer learning.
Ideation technique: Concept Bombs are about using sketching as a rapid ideation tool.
Given the same project brief as homework students would likely spend four or five times
as long on it. Left to their own devices novice designers tend to draw slowly and carefully
investing too much time on too-few sketches without necessarily engaging in deep
ideation. Forcing students to practice rapid sketching forces them to streamline their
technique and see the value of sketching without the formality of formal project
presentation. Doing this within a supportive studio context within the framework of an
imminent deadline encourages useful engagement with relevant skills. Students learn that
5
1126
fast sketching is a means to become more efficient and explore more ideas in a shorter
time.
Repetition: Repetition is a key part of Concept Bombs both in the development of
sketching skills and in managing performance pressure for students. Since Concept
Bombs are effectively an examination of sorts students might be forgive for feeling
considerable pressure to perform. This is managed in two ways. Firstly the assessment
weighting for Concept Bomb assessment within the unit is quite lowrarely more than
20%. Secondly this mark is derived from the best three out of four (or best two out of
three) Concept Bomb submissions. The consequences of poor performance in any single
Concept Bomb is thus quite low and the addition of a spare gives students a safety
margin that moderates the pressure they feel on any single exercise. The outcome is that
students report high levels of engagement and enjoyment with Concept Bomb activities.
Third Year Concept Bombs are also short 20 minute design tasks but they form part of a
larger project and prompt students to explore particular aspects of the main semester
project. Three design briefs take place one after the other during a single intensive design
studio session with minimum time allowed in between for pin-up of the work. This
experience is repeated at key stages of the semester project. Design briefs are delivered
to students by including a user scenario to help contextualise particular design problems.
The expected outcome is blue-sky design propositions which form the basis for later indepth exploration. At the end of the third task, students review each others work and
indicate, on a feedback label that accompanies each submission, the best of the three
designs from each student. In some projects it has been possible to engage industry
collaborators in the feedback phase which gives students real world input via informal
conversation on the merits and limitations of their ideas. Figures 3 and 4 show examples
of Third Year students Concept Bomb sketches and the associated design brief.
CONCEPT BOMB #1: Collecting information on the go
Your client is a high-tech product developer and is planning the
next generation of wearable devices the techno-savvy group of
users. This market niche is comprised of people who collect
information on the go in their lives with the goal of selling this
information to specialised wholesalers information distributors.
The interactive designed object should:
be wearable,
Fig 3 A Third Year design students Concept Bomb sketch (left) and the design brief
6
1127
Fig 4 A Third Year design students Concept Bomb sketch provided by industry
collaborator
Concept Bombs in third year design studios are employed for two different purposes: (a)
to encourage focus on particular areas of the project that are of pedagogical interest, and
(b) to give students the opportunity to enhance their sketching techniques and visual
thinking skills. The application of Concept Bombs in Third Year shows four characteristics:
Pace and focus: Concept Bomb briefs focus on particular aspects of a project that
otherwise students would not explore at first. Such areas are usually related to new
theory being presented to them. In order to bring all elements together in a concise
format for students, Concept Bomb tasks use scenarios to introduce a design problem,
illustrate a user situation and the context of use. Design requirements are presented
as a set of problem boundaries.
Rapid Feedback: The tight loop between the sketching activity and feedback allows
students to quickly learn from the experience and bring their learning into the initial
stage of the semester design project. Peer feedback plays a more important role with
these students as there is no formal assessment attached to the task. Peer feedback
becomes a vehicle for students to expose their ideas and be competitive, be aware of
how effective they are at communicating their design ideas, appreciate differences
between what they think is their best concept design versus what other people
perceive is the best, push themselves out of their comfort zone and think about design
aspects they would not consider otherwise.
Ideation technique: As in First Year, Third Year Concept Bombs cultivate student
sketching as a rapid ideation tool however here there is a higher expectation of
.design resolution and effective visual communication
Repetition: Repetition of Concept Bomb activity within same studio session allows
students to quickly gain confidence from Concept Bomb task one to task three.
Usually by Concept Bomb three students are working at that most confident and
effective level.
There are evident differences between outcomes from the two students cohorts. It is
interesting to observe that beyond the quality and detail of the design development
observed in the sketches, there are different types of experiential knowledge embedded in
the visuals. Input from a Second Year unit, Culture and Design, seems to contribute to
Third Year students design thinking when addressing the Concept Bomb briefs, as in this
unit students explore how culture influences product design and how people interact and
7
1128
Knowledge
Context-ofuse
Subcategories
Features with indication of
usage
Individual experience within
context
Episodic data
Principle-based concept
Codes
FE
Description-based concept
DBC
Intended use
IU
Situation
ST
IEC
ED
PBC
The segment showing the earpiece with an annotation (capture a photo) is coded DBC
Descriptive based conceptas it only represents what it is, but does not provide more
references as to the purpose or context of use.
Pace and
Focus
Rapid
Feedback
Staff-moderated peer
assessment (formative and
summative).
Instant gratification.
Ideation
Technique
Repetition
Best-three-out-of-four
assessment reduces student
stress.
Table 2 Comparison of characteristics of Concept Bombs in First and Third Year design
studios
9
1130
The literature indicates that the notion of students engagement is one with many
meanings (Bryson; 2007), usually referring to: behaviours in the classroom, staff-student
interaction, cooperation among students, and a dynamic relationship between learner and
environment (Chamorro-Koc & Scott, 2012). In our experience student engagement tends
to be viewed as a reflection of learning processes and it is a crucial means of an
educational process that establishes the foundations for successful later year studies
(Krausse & Coates, 2008). As a pedagogical tool to support for students engagement,
Table 2 shows differences between First and Third Year students in each of the four
identified Concept Bomb characteristics. Pace grows in intensity, focus changes from
object to context, feedback shifts from individual gratification to peer pressure through
formative assessment, ideation moves from the facilitation of fast exploration of ideas to
the facilitation of fast exchange of ideas.
As a pedagogical tool to understand how design students conceptualise their design
propositions, the analysis of students Concept Bomb sketches reveal that their work
moves from basic descriptions of features or functions to descriptions of context and
practices. This could be a reflection of students enhanced understanding of social issues
learned through the Second Year Design and Culture unit. For example, hand gestures
showed in Figure 5 indicate a Gen Y form of gestural communication. In this case, this
Concept Bomb reveals the learning from socio cultural issues previously learned from
case studies, and shows how a student might design an object with social considerations
in mind.
Discussion
Design studio is the context were learning emerges through action; it is distinguished by
emphasis on project-based work, learning through praxis, learning through workshop, and
learning through first hand observation (ALTC, 2011). With the aim to assist students
connecting theory and the application of design principles to design projects, Concept
Bombs are employed as one of the design studio pedagogies in Industrial Design
education at the School of Design at QUT. Besides the importance of industrial design
students enhancing their visual design thinking and communication techniques from the
pedagogical point of view, the practice of fast sketching is critical for novice designers to
become more effective at exploring more ideas in a shorter time, which is a valuable skill
as a practicing designer.
The comparison between First and Third Year design students Concept Bomb sketches
has shown some of the aspects that contribute to promote visual thinking and reflective
process. In this sense, Concept Bomb tasks in design studio environments is a strategy
that assist students learning processes of conceptualising and producing designs.
Understanding the type of experiential knowledge embedded in students design work at
different stages of their education is important to inform design pedagogies and to devise
strategies to attain and support learning objectives.
The analysis and comparison of visuals show that Concept Bomb sketches convey some
references to socio cultural considerations. This suggests that the use Concept Bomb
tasks can provide insights into how our students generation designs for society and for
the future, and therefore, it can help identify emerging challenges for design education.
Although we have indicated instances where this kind of content is observed in our
10
1131
students Concept Bombs, this aspect has not been fully addressed in our study. Further
research into this aspect and students design processes; require involving observational
studies and retrospective interviews to uncover the various experiential and conceptual
considerations informing students design decisions during Concept Bombs activities.
Conclusion
This paper has described Concept Bomb approaches in design studio that promote
students engagement and visual thinking skills. These practices are adaptable to the
differing needs of students and curriculum demands of different levels and of study.
In the shifting context of educational delivery systems, for example, blended learning
environments, we wonder how could this type of experience take place in future university
contexts? What can be done through virtual design studios? In a virtual studio, the
dynamic of Concept Bombs would certainly change but benefits may remain if the
immediacy of the experience can be duplicated. The process would probably not be as
effective since part of the success is due to peer proximity, short timed duration and
immediate feedback, all which would be relatively compromised in an online scenario
unless teams of students are co-located.
References
Australian Learning and Teaching Council (2011). The Studio Teaching Project report.
University of New South Wales, University of Queensland, RMIT University, University of
Tasmania. Retrieved October 12, 2013, from Studio Teaching Project. Web site
http://www.studioteaching.org/index.php
Breslin, M. & Buchanan, R. (2008). On the Case Study Method of Research and Teaching
in Design. Design Issues, 24(1), 36-40.
Brocato K. (2009). Studio Based Learning: Proposing, Critiquing, Iterating Our Way to
Person-Centeredness for Better Classroom Management. Theory Into Practice, 48(2),
138-146.
Broadfoot, O. & Bennett, R. (2003). Design Studios: Online? Comparing traditional faceto-face Design Studio education with modern internet-based design studios. Retrieved
October 8, 2013 from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.124.3548
Cartier, P. (2011). Most valuable aspects of educational expectations of the students in
design education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2187-2191.
Chamorro-Koc, M., Popovic, V., Emmison, M. (2008) Using visual representation of
concepts to explore users and designers' concepts of everyday products. Design Studies,
29(2), 142-159.
Chamorro-Koc, M., Davis, R. & Popovic, V. (2009). Experiential Knowledge representation
and the design of product usability. In Niedderer, K, Reilly, L., Roworth-Stokes, S., &
Smith, C. (Eds), Proceedings of EKSIG 2009: Experiential Knowledge, Method &
Methodology, (pp. 41-55) London, UK: London Metropolitan University, 19 June 2009,
11
1132
Chamorro-Koc, M. & Scott A. (2012). First year ID studio-based teaching pedagogies and
studentsengagement. In: ID Educators Network (IDEN) Journal, Editors B. Pandolfo & M.
Park, Issue 1, 2012, Sydney.
Cross, N. (1982). Designerly way of knowing. Design Studies, 3 (4) 221227.
Cross, N. (1998). Natural intelligence in design. Design Studies, 20(1) 2539.
Do, E. Y. L., & Gross, M. D. (1996). Drawing as a means to design reasoning. Artificial
Intelligence in Design 96 Workshop on Visual Representation, Reasoning and Interaction
in Design. Retrieved October 18 2013, from University of Washington Web site:
http://depts.washington.edu/dmgftp/publications/pdfs/aid96-mdg.pdf
Dutton, T. (1987). Design and Studio Pedagogy. Journal of Architectural Education, 41(1),
16-25.
Dorta, T., Perez, E., & Lesage, A. (2008). The ideation gap: hybrid tools, design flow and
practice. Design Studies, 29 (2), 121-141.
Dutton, T. A. (1987). Design and Studio Pedagogy. Journal of Architectural Education,
41(1), 16-25
Gross M. & Do Y. L. (1997). The Design Studio Approach: Learning Design in Architecture
Education. In J. Kolodner & M. Guzdial (Eds.) Proceedings from Design Education
Workshop Retrieved 20 October from University of Washington Web site:
http://depts.washington.edu/dmgftp/publications/pdfs/edutech97-eyd.pdf
Krause, K. & Coates, H. (2008). Students engagement in first-year university.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493505
Kvan, T. (2001). The pedagogy of virtual design studios. Automation in Construction, 10
(3), 345-353
Oxman, R. (2004). Think-maps: teaching design thinking in design education. Design
Studies, 25(1), 6391.
Oxman, R. (1999). Educating the designerly thinker. Design Studies 20(2), 105122.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner how professionals think in action. New
York: Basic Books.
Schn, D. A., & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing.
Design studies, 13(2), 135-156.
Taboada, M. & Coombs, G. (2013). Liminal moments: designing, thinking and learning. In
Reitan, Janne Beate, Digranes, Ingvild, & Nielsen, Liv Merete (Eds.) DRS Cumulus 2013:
Design Learning for Tomorrow Design Education from Kindergarten to PhD, 1417 May Oslo.
Marianella Chamorro-Koc
A Senior Lecturer in Industrial Design, she currently teaches at Queensland University of
Technology (QUT) and has taught at the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru. Her
research work is located within the areas of design, product usability, experiential
knowledge and context of use. Dr Chamorro-Kocs research aims to identify the
contextual aspects shaping peoples interactions with products - technologies - systems,
12
1133
the experiential knowledge embedded in those interactions, and their influence in peoples
practices of everyday life. She is a member of Design Research Society (DRS) and
Design Institute of Australia (DIA), and a researcher at the Peoples and Systems Lab
(PAS Lab) at QUT.
Andrew Scott
Andrew Scott has been practicing and teaching industrial design for two decades. His
experience as a design consultant has included work in industrial design, ergonomics,
corporate identity and entertainment concepts for clients such as World Expo 88, the Civil
Aviation Authority, Spectra Lighting and other businesses in the Brisbane area. He is
Head of Studies for the School of Design, Queensland University of Technology and
teaches predominantly in the first year of the Industrial Design Course. In 2010 he
received the Australian Learning and Teaching Councils award for Teaching Excellence
for his teaching pedagogies. Andrew completed his masters (research) in touch screen
interface design and his PhD research focuses on product attachment and personal
identity. Other interests include product aesthetics, graphical literacy and information
design.
Gretchen Coombs
A lecturer in research methods and cultural theory in the School of Design, Creative
Industry Faculty, Queensland University of Technology. Her interests include art and
design criticism/activism, specifically recent practices that challenge social structures
within urban contexts. Her doctoral research involved artists, design collectives, critics and
scholars who are immersed in new ways of practicing art that intervenes in social and
ecological processes and which find creative solutions to complex urban challenges.
Gretchens ethnographic research provided deep insights into understanding the socially
engaged art - or "social practices" - in San Francisco, practices that draw on the Bay
Areas legacy of progressive politics and vanguard art practices. She continues to publish
articles and give guest lectures on socially engaged art and design.
13
1134
Abstract
Reflective activities have the potential to encourage students to develop critical skills and
awareness of mental models. In this study, I address the emerging identity of early design
students as they externalize their evolving conceptions of design through visual and
textual reflection. Forty-three students in an introductory human-computer interaction (HCI)
course completed weekly textual reflections on a course blog, and completed visual
reflections at the conclusion of each of three projects. The weekly blog reflections were
intended to document their experience as a developing designer, while the visual
reflections represented their personal conception of design within HCItheir rendering of
the whole game. Through this process of reflection, students externalized their
transformation as designers, including an awareness of the pedagogical, social, and
cultural factors shaping them, and a growing sense of their personal and professional
design identity. Through interviews and additional analysis of eight of these students, a
disjuncture was found between conceptions of design in visual and textual reflections, with
visual reflections forming a professional, generic design identity, and textual reflections
more congruent with the students personal identity. Issues relating to lack of
representational skill and how these forms of reflection externalize a students evolving
design philosophy are addressed.
Keywords
Reflection; Sketching; Designerly Identity; Design pedagogy; Human-Computer
Interaction (HCI)
Reflection and reflective practice have been at the centre of understanding how design
education encourages professional action since Donald Schn wrote his classic text
describing the interactions between Petra and Quist (1983). While this form of verbal
dialogue in the studio between a professor and student, the social milieu of the studio at
large (Webster, 2008), and informal interactions between students (Gray, 2013a; 2013b)
encourage the development of these metacognitive abilities, less attention has
traditionally been paid to formal modes of reflection. In this work, I describe the use of
textual and visual reflection as tools to externalize the emerging design identity of early
design students, as they move from doing to becoming (Carspecken & Cordeiro, 1995) a
designer.
Review of Literature
While little research has been done to represent the shifting identity of students within
design education, there is relevant work surrounding how designers build their own sense
of identity in relation to their personal design philosophy, form representational skill to use
sketching as a communicative act of reasoning, and externalize their tacit assumptions
about design through reflection.
1135
Reflection in Education
Rogers (2001) recognizes the substantial role reflection can play in developing critical
skills and awareness in a higher education context, making the claim: [p]erhaps no other
concept offers higher education as much potential for engendering lasting and effective
change in the lives of students as that of reflection (p. 55). While Schn (1983,1987)
modeled reflection primarily through verbal interaction in a desk crit, other forms of
reflection might encourage other forms of evaluation to occur, moving the locus of
interaction out of the classroom into a more regular, self-initiated act. Some research
within traditional design education suggests using reflection as a way of articulating tacit
knowledge (Ellmers, Bennett, & Brown, 2009) and revealing connections between difficult
concepts (Ockerse, 2012). Within emergent design fields such as human-computer
interaction (HCI), reflection has also been used in a more formal way to document
changes in conceptions of design over time (Siegel & Stolterman, 2008), and more
recently, to frame the role of visual reflection in externalizing a students mental model of
design within a specific disciplinary framing (Gray & Siegel, 2013).
Design Philosophy
In relation to developing an understanding of ones own identity, reflection allows a
student to gain awareness of what they are doing and how they project their future as a
process of becoming (Carspecken & Cordeiro, 1995). Within design, Nelson and
Stolterman (2012) address this process in similar terms, using the concept of ones
individual design philosophy as one of the ways in which this becoming process might be
explored. It is through this lens of the developing design studentas they understand
their own design philosophy and how that philosophy is enacted through their evolving
identitythat reflection might play a role in formalizing and externalizing conceptions of
design over time.
Purpose of Research
This study addresses the turbulent period as an early design student is initiated into new
patterns of thinking within the context of an emergent design discipline. While previous
work in this area has relied only on textual reflection (Siegel & Stolterman, 2008) or visual
reflection (Gray & Siegel, 2013) as a way of ascertaining tacit beliefs about design, this
work extends this line of inquiry regarding reflection to more accurately identify the
evolving design student. In this paper, I describe the actions of design students in an
introductory HCI course as they reflect in textual and visual form and externalize their
conceptions of design.
1136
Method
This study was framed by a formal artifact analysis of blog postings and reflection
sketches, which led to a multiple case study design of a selection of the total cases (Yin,
2009).
Participants
The participants for this study were first year graduate students in a Human-Computer
Interaction (HCI) program that emphasized a design approach. All students were enrolled
in a required early design experience course, in which they were required to complete
reflection in various forms during the one-semester course.
Forty-three students were enrolled in this early design course during the Fall 2012
semester, including strong representation of females (n=17) and international students
(n=16). Additionally, three of the students had taken the course previously as an
undergraduate student. The 43 participants were reduced to eight, with care taken to
maintain a balance of international representation, gender, educational background, and
overall academic progress in the course. The eight cases (summarized in Table 1)
included three international students and two females.
Data Collection
Blog Posts
Students were required to post on a course blog (Figure 1) about their experiences as a
developing designer. In addition to a space for students to reflect, the professor and
mentors also used the blog to reflect, share resources, and answer questions about
projects. The professor included the following prompt in the syllabus describing these
reflections:
Write a reflection this week [] and every week thereafter! You are expected to
write at least one weekly reflection. A reflection describes your feelings and
thoughts. Again, just be yourself. These are not published essays. Treat them like
casual comments, as if you were writing an email to a friend or colleague.
In all, students made 513 posts on the blog with 909 comments. As noted in the prompt
above, students were required to post at least one reflection post each week. Ethics
approval was obtained for analysis of all reflection materials, and efforts were taken to
protect the identity of participants through assigned pseudonyms.
1137
Figure 1. Course blog, with sections for the professor (left), projects and mentors (center),
and students by group (right).
1138
Interviews
Based on factors identified above, eight cases (Table 1) were selected from the 43 total
cases for further data collection and analysis. All sketches and blog posts for these
students were subjected to a close reading, and key themes and issues discussed each
week were summarized. The reflection sketches were associated with the blog to
contextualize the creation of the sketch in relation to the textual reflection. Comparisons
were made between these reflections to identify ideas presented in only one of the
reflection mediums, and overall development noted in both forms of reflection during the
semester.
Name
Country of
Origin
Educational
Background
Sketches
(by project)
Posts
Comments
Thomas
United States
Philosophy
17
Jack
United States
Journalism
1,2
11
56
Naveen
India
Engineering
1,2,3
12
Isabella
Mexico
Computer Science
1,2,3
17
29
Parker
United States
Computer Science
1,2,3
10
Mei-Xing
China
Telecommunications
1,3
16
46
Adrian
United States
Education
2,3
15
28
Zachary
United States
Political Science
1,3
17
27
Findings
To understand the relationship of the experiences of the selected eight students, a
narrative of all cases will be reported in three segments, representing the period in which
each sketch used in this study was created. While there are numerous ways in which this
evidence might be presented, a chronological approach has been shown to be effective in
previous reports (Gray & Siegel, 2013), highlighting common challenges across multiple
students in the course. Additionally, comprehensive data is not available for all
participants due to lapses in participation on the blog or missing sketches, complicating a
case-centric reporting of data. A representative sample of sketches and quotations from
blog entries and/or the interview support a narrative that describes the evolution of design
thinking of these students and their overall experience of the pedagogy. All quotations
from the reflection blog are indicated by week (e.g., W1), while other non-annotated
quotations are from the interview.
1139
Zachary felt he was more text-based at heart and had to force himself to think in visual
terms. He explained that his first sketch felt square (in terms of the use of boxes for
representation) based on his background in information architecture and formal workflows.
Like Mei-Xing, Zachary saw the different modes of reflection as discrete, unrelated
activities at this point in the semester. The sketch was more of a formal deliverable for
the class, while the blog was a more natural way to reflect. This first sketch was similar to
many of his colleagues at this stage, focusing on a linear understanding of the design
process, with minimal iteration and a focus on representation of design activities rather
than the designer.
1140
Jack remarked that the first sketch was what he envisioned as a design process based
on what he thought the professor was looking for, and like others, didnt think of this as his
design process. Unlike some of the other students, Jack relied on journaling to reconcile
his feelings: "if I don't journal, I'm likely to explode. I need to cognitively offload"; he
explained that "I can already feel my brain beginning to rewire" (W2). While his blog
reflections offered a rich insight into his evolution of thinking in the first few weeks, such
as his shift in belief that "it's not the destination, it's the quest" (W3), his sketches still
represented a largely linear process.
Thomas had taken the class before, including participating in both of these forms of
reflection. Although he brought in prior experience reflecting, he noted that he has never
been good at reflection assignments (W1/2), and early on, located a "struggle between
[his] personal life and work life" (W3). He also explained that reflecting in this way felt
forcedhaving to reflect and that it was more natural for him to reflect in more informal
ways like Facebook or talking face-to-face; but Thomas also agreed that it was valuable
once he sat down and did it.
1141
1142
Parker came into the program with an expectation of failure: "I wholly expect everyone to
fail miserably out of the gate and I welcome it" (W2). Early on he experienced "hectic
schedules and lots of designing in circles" (W3), although this was not represented in his
linear sketch. Even though the assignment called for a physical sketch, he chose a
flowchart format because he liked this organizational paradigm. In reflecting on these
actions in the interview, he thought the design process seemed like a flowchart, and that
it was not appropriate to bring his process into his personal life; Parker explicitly noted that
he was actively trying to limit how much the design experience was affecting him
personally, developing a barrier between his personal and design lives.
Adrian talked substantially on the blog about the importance of group work and the
camaraderie he experienced with his colleagues (W3), but there was no such indication of
group work in his sketch. Interestingly, there was no presence of a designer in his sketch,
although he was actively discussing his personal experience and shift in identity on the
blog. This was likely due to a lack of skill in sketching, as he explained in the interview that
he was trying to articulate his feelings and experiences in a richer way at this point, but
didnt understand how to visually represent his process.
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
Parker did not actively reflect in this part of the semester, and his sketch represents few
changes from the previous version. His understanding of HCI and design were limited to
relatively few design activities, with a lack of designer presence and highly linear view.
As the semester progressed, Adrian became more obsessed with the challenges ahead,
wondering in his blog post, What if I fail? (W4). Although this concern was apparent in
textual form, his sketch merely included more arrows of iteration, not representing his
deep concern. It is unclear whether this was a representational issue, or whether an
awareness of how his design identity was changing was not yet clear.
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
Discussion
In triangulating the student experience across several sources of data, additional cues to
their development and shift in identity become visible. While some of the transformations
unique to HCI are already known (Gray, in press; Siegel & Stolterman, 2008), this
evolution of identity provides a fuller picture of how this transformation is felt from a
student perspective. This transformation manifests through the reflection modes chosen
for this course, each of which present a different portrait of what change is being felt. The
contribution of this work is in highlighting the disjuncture between these forms of reflective
representation, understanding some issues surrounding representational skill, and how
the act of reflecting in this way can encourage active awareness of identity.
1153
Conclusion
In this work, I have extended existing knowledge regarding barriers early design students
go through as they evolve into a richer understanding of design (Siegel & Stolterman,
2008) and how visual reflection might play a role in evaluating change in thinking about
design over time (Gray & Siegel, 2013). This paper addresses the developing identity of
early design students through multiple forms of reflection, using these reflections as a way
to understand how these students increase in design ability.
1154
While the visual and textual reflections used in this study were not the only mechanisms
used for metacognitive activity by students, they do appear to be helpful tools in building
knowledge of ones own identity, and tracking changes in that identity over time. In
addition, multiple forms of representation appear to promote a fuller explication of identity,
enhancing skills in textual and visual representation in the process.
References
Carspecken, P. F., & Cordeiro, P. A. (1995). Being, doing, and becoming: Textual
interpretations of social identity and a case study. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(1), 87-109.
Do, E. Y. L., & Gross, M. D. (1996). Drawing as a means to design reasoning. In Artificial
Intelligence in Design 96 Workshop on Visual Representation, Reasoning and Interaction
in Design, Stanford University.
Ellmers, G., Bennett, S. J., & Brown, I. M. (2009). Graphic design pedagogy: Employing
reflection to support the articulation of knowledge and learning from the design experience.
Proc. EKSIG: Experiential Knowledge, Method Methodology, 66-81.
Gray, C. M. (2013a). Emergent critique in informal design talk: Reflections of surface,
pedagogical, and epistemological features in an HCI studio. In Critique 2013: An
international conference reflecting on creative practice in art, architecture, and design (pp.
341-355). Adelaide, South Australia: University of South Australia.
Gray, C. M. (2013b). Factors that shape design thinking. Design and Technology
Education, 18(3), 8-20.
Gray, C. M. (in press). Evolution of design competence in UX practice. In CHI14:
Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. New
York, NY: ACM Press
Gray, C. M., & Siegel, M. A. (2013). Sketching design thinking: Representations of design
in education and practice . In DRS // CUMULUS 2013. 2nd international conference for
design education researchers (pp. 2008-2031). Oslo, Norway: HiOA
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Expertise in design. In Design expertise (pp. 81-112).
Oxford: Architectural Press.
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an
unpredictable world (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ockerse, T. (2012). Learn from the coredesign from the core. Visible Language, 46(1/2),
80-93.
Rogers, R. (2001). Reflection in higher education: A concept analysis. Innovative Higher
Education, 26(1), 37-57.
Perkins, D. N. (2010). Making learning whole: How seven principles of teaching can
transform education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New
York, NY: Basic Books
1155
Schn, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for
teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Siegel, M. A., & Stolterman, E. (2008). Metamorphosis: Transforming non-designers into
designers. In Undisciplined! Proceedings of the Design Research Society Conference
2008 (pp. 378:1-13). Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Hallam University.
Verstijnen, I. M., van Leeuwen, C., Goldschmidt, G., Hamel, R., & Hennessey, J. M.
(1998). Sketching and creative discovery. Design Studies, 19(4), 519-546.
Webster, H. (2008). Architectural education after Schn: Cracks, blurs, boundaries and
beyond. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 3(2), 63-74.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles, CA: Sage
Publications.
Colin M. Gray
Colin is a Ph.D. Candidate in Instructional Systems Technology at Indiana University. His
research focuses on the role of student experience in informing a critical design pedagogy,
and the ways in which the pedagogy and underlying studio environment inform the
development of design thinking. He has worked professionally as a graphic designer, web
developer, and trainer, and previously completed an M.A. in graphic design from
Savannah College of Art & Design and a M.Ed. in educational technology from University
of South Carolina.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported in part by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant Award no.
1115532. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the entire research team or the NSF.
1156
Abstract
Design work can be driven from a variety of intentions, e.g. to serve users, to generate
profit, to explore a new concept, or to trigger reflection and debate. However, it is not
always clear how such intentions can be addressed concretely in education, and in
specific design domains, such as interaction design, they might easily get lost among
course content related to specific methods and technologies. In this paper, we discuss
how we have addressed design intentions in our advanced course in interaction design,
and also what we see as its main qualities in relation to more conventional course
structure in this area.
Keywords
Interaction Design; Design Education; Design Intentions.
Introduction
The acknowledgement of design judgment as a main trait of skillful designers is now
broadly established (see e.g. Nelson & Stolterman, 2003), and also regarded as a skill
which can and should be practiced in design education. In design schools, this skill is
taught for instance through design critique sessions (e.g. Reimer & Douglas, 2003),
through critical analysis of existing products and experiences (e.g. Bardzell, 2011), by
practicing methods for understanding people and usage (e.g. Dourish & Button, 1998),
and through reflective design work using various tools and materials (Schn, 1983). A
common aspect for almost all works in this area at some level concerns
methodological issues, and how to practically develop more grounded and reflective
approaches to design practice.
In this paper, we describe how we have addressed this challenge within our teaching
practice, by placing an increased focus on higher level intentions as a general theme in
one of our master level courses in interaction design. We will also reflect on our
experiences from running this course over a period of three years, along with the values
and challenges that emerged in our specific context, which in essence is a small studiobased design course taught in a school of engineering. While the foundations underlying
this work may already be embedded in knowledge practices, either on the web, in
established design practice, or within other similar courses, we recognize a need to
engage more specifically with these topics in relation to teaching and education within the
design research community.
Background
There are many different frameworks and taxonomies for how design work could be
understood from a more methodological perspective. As an example from the domain of
interaction design, Dan Saffer (2009) has argued that there are five major approaches to
designing products: user centred-, activity centred-, data-driven-, systems-, and what is
sometimes referred to as genius design. These approaches should not be seen as
mutually exclusive, but rather serve the purpose of bringing light to the general
observation that successful design work can be executed in different ways. Depending on
the task, some approaches may be more suitable in a particular situation. A dilemma that
1157
Saffer puts forward, is that user-centred design methods (UCD), which has been the most
actively proposed in HCI and interaction design education, may not always be the most
successful method when it comes to real product design cases. A secondary role of the
framework could also be to emphasise that user involvement can never substitute the
judgments and activities performed by skilled designers. Therefore, Saffers taxonomy
includes different methodological approaches, with UCD as one of many.
While the focus on methodological approaches is relevant to all design work, we will here
instead discuss design judgment within a landscape of different underlying purposes on a
more conceptual level, and how we have addressed this in our own educational practice.
A variety of models elaborate on what aspects might be considered from a certain
perspective, e.g. in terms of action and experience (Fernaeus, Tholander, & Jonsson,
2008), or from a perspective of materiality or form-giving (Vallgrda 2013; Gross, Bardzell,
& Bardzell, 2013). Other higher-level discussions has concerned the characterisation of
design itself, e.g. as the merging of Art, Science and Technology of Bauhaus (Findeli,
2001), or Nigel Cross definition of design as Discipline, as opposed to Science (Cross,
2001).
The work presented in this paper is heavily inspired by the four fields of design
articulated in an online article by Bruce and Stephanie Tharp (2009). This framework took
its starting point specifically in the profession of industrial design, but has in our case been
implemented for education in interaction design. The four fields comprises a taxonomy
for design work focused on different types of higher-level purposes, or intentions:
While these different intentions typically overlap in parts, the main argument put forward
by Tharp & Tharp was that articulating them could help designers seeing how intentions
might interplay with and sometimes even contradict one another. Thereby they could
guide discussions and potentially help judging the outcome of a design, although a
taxonomy such as this will naturally only articulate partial understandings of certain
relationships.
The framework was also used to acknowledge the growing terminology of approaches
used within the design field. As put by Tharp & Tharp (2009):
Just try and make sense of the range of the terms floating around out there: usercentered design, eco-design, design for the other 90%, universal design,
sustainable design, interrogative design, task-centered design, reflective design,
design for well-being, critical design, speculative design, speculative re-design,
emotional design, socially-responsible design, green design, conceptual design,
concept design, slow design, dissident design, inclusive design, radical design,
design for need, environmental design, contextual design, and transformative
design. (page 1)
All these terms refer to aspects of importance to design practice, but that go beyond both
the type of product being produced (e.g. mobile, tangible, graphic), as well as specific
design methods. In addition, the academic discourse has been concerned with similar
terms as tools for understanding and shaping design practice, with concepts such as ludic
design (Gaver et al, 2004), design for ambiguity (Gaver, Beaver, & Benford, 2003),
translucency (Dourish & Button, 1998), seamfulness (Chalmers & Galani, 2004), among
others. It has even been argued that the development of such concepts, so called strong
concepts, is one of the main contributions of design-based research (Hk & Lwgren
2013).
With this as a starting point, we wanted to explore how the four fields could be used to
1158
guide interaction design projects in a master level course at our university. We will give a
brief overview of the content and structure of the course, how we have implemented
themes and assignments, and a short analysis of how these have played out in practice
during the three years we have implemented this setup. We end with a brief discussion
based on reflections and learnings from these experiences, in relation to our expectations
and experiences from similar courses that use a more methodological course focus.
1159
Figure 1. Conceptual designs on the experimental theme, from left to right: Strike a Pose Visitors are encourage to imitate dancers and thereby explore their own body image in a
playful manner. Design that attempts to catch bypassers attention and spur a curiosity to
visit the museum. Image recognition used in an app to identify artifacts and access richer
descriptions and other media connected to the artifact.
This rather specific brief worked well in this case, since the personnel at the museum
wanted input on what might be possible or not, rather than a solution. The students were
therefore not pressured to develop something fully working, but rather to explore
possibilities. The topic of dance in itself also seemed to force the students outside of their
own comfort zones and encouraged them to work hands-on with technologies that they
were less familiar with from beforehand. Resulting in a range of novel scenarios and
setups, including interaction contexts such as the street outside of the museum, visitors
waiting in line for the toilets, and the use of a medical stethoscope as an interaction device.
In addition, the students explored various ways of interacting in an exhibition space,
ranging from mobile applications to physical exhibits, combining experiences from other
museums and applying it to the topic of dance.
The staff at the museum, who had initially expected to see a presentation of eight different
types of mobile app-based solutions, were excited by the results, and are now considering
to implement several of the designs in some form. But the main outcome of the process
was to open up a design space, explore possibilities, and for all the involved partners to
learn something, which is also from an academic perspective an important purpose of
design work at large.
Commercial Design
Commercial design refers to design aimed at the real economic market. Economy is an
important component of any design work, so what the commercial intention adds is
1160
primarily that the design itself gets grounded much more concretely on what might be
desirable on a market, as well as, how the business model of that product would take form
and in turn shape the design. The goal is thereby to create attractive, useful, and well
functioning products, but with design judgements focusing primarily on potentials for
commercial profit. In interaction design specifically, business models are often very deeply
intertwined with the design of the interactive product itself, as shown in examples such as
streaming media services, ad-sponsored mobile applications, open hardware licensing,
and a broad range of electronic currencies and interactive payment systems. Investigating
how such systems and models work is therefore a very relevant topic for interaction
design students.
In our course, we have let this theme stay as an open brief, placing much focus on the
process of ideation, discussion, and grounding design choices in existing use practices.
The general task has been to come up with a concept for an interactive product or service
that would have a potential of becoming a commercial success. The students are also
asked to make the business model a part of the interaction design and to deliver a
finished design (see figure 2), personas, realistic scenarios for interaction, and a
proposed plan for bringing the product to market. Core to this design challenge is to
develop concepts that are well grounded, in technological realities, be it in research or
what exists on the market.
Figure 2. Screen designs of commercial design concepts, from left to right: A concept that
aims to help customers at a furniture store figure out what furniture would fit in their car.
Tool for turning blogs into physical books. Conceptual design for families to stay in touch
and privately share pictures and videos.
Our impression is that this has been a tough challenge for the students, but they have
also shown much enthusiasm, and some have continued working on their ideas after the
project ended. The serious focus on business models and who might be ready to pay for a
particular product or service highlights the complex realities of interaction business. Being
able to discuss different types of business models and how each of them relate to
interaction design, is a topic that in our experience is often overlooked in ordinary
interaction design education. Ironically, this is core to any successful commercially viable
interaction design work, independent of other higher level intentions. Even systems
designed within other themes, also in research, have been brought to discussion here,
highlighting how the fields often overlap in interesting ways.
Responsible design
The concept of responsible design refers to design that place ethical and humanitarian
aspects at the forefront. May it be to design for people who are ignored by the market,
environmentally friendly products, or otherwise to counteract different types of social or
physical suffering (see e.g. Papanek 1972). While commercial products can and should
take such aspects into accounts, the orientation is different as the main measure for
success is here not framed in economical terms. Rather it is framed in terms of other
values, more in line with what has been referred to as worth (Cockton, 2006) or what
Batya Friedman refers to value in value-sensitive design.
1161
Figure 3. Example screen designs from four passed projects, from left to right: Two
concepts exploring novel ways for foreigners to use public transport. Two solutions for
families with children and teenagers who alternate living with separated parents.
On this theme we let students select and redesign an existing system of their own choice,
and which they would argue being irresponsibly designed in its current form. The
definition of responsibility is then left open for the students to discuss, define and motivate,
with grounding in literature. Making students start with the existing situation to improve on
also reflects a typical interaction design practice, where you would only rarely start out
completely from scratch and spend a large part of the process at the ideation stage. This
have also resulted in a very broad variety of projects, ranging from adapting existing
services for people with special needs, to cater for more sustainable solutions, to
improving poorly working systems in general. This way, the brief also opened up for more
general discussions regarding different interpretations and perspectives on what is
actually meant by responsibility in design, and how it can be practically addressed.
In previous years we have given more narrow design briefs, e.g. to let students design
tools to help foreigners finding their ways through the public transport system in our city,
another year the brief concerned tools for children to manage the situation of living at
alternate places due to separated parents (see figure 3). What we valued in these two
design briefs were that they took a perspective of responsible design that focused on
ordinary issues where interaction design might actually enhance a currently complex
situation. In other projects in similar courses we explored more complex issues, e.g.
designing for alone-coming teenage refugees, which as such brought in a series of higher
level humanitarian and political matters that are difficult to address through the design of
interactive systems alone. Although these projects have been extremely interesting, we
found that the open briefs on this theme seems more beneficial in terms of keeping the
discussion focused on the overarching theme of responsible design.
1162
examples presented in academia (e.g. Purpura, Schwanda, Williams, Stubler, & Sengers,
2011). Since this type of projects tend to achieve a very broad visibility and popularity, it is
reasonable to argue that educated interaction designers should have an informed
relationship towards these types of designs, even if it might not represent what most
designers get to work with for a living, or what most people will actually get to interact with.
Understanding the value of these designs requires an understanding of intentions as
beyond use and user experience.
However, although some of our students have been seriously excited about this theme, it
has also been the part of the course that most have struggled the hardest with. Parts of
this difficulty could be due to the brief, which we have let stay fairly general and open, i.e.
to articulate and re-think existing norms in interaction design, questioning some what is
might otherwise be taken for granted. This sometimes resulted in design ideas that were
found extremely interesting among the teachers, but that the students themselves
dispelled as silly and irrelevant even before they started the actual design. Our students
all have an engineering background, and working on a design challenge without a given
problem to solve require a slight shift in mindset from what they are used to, which might
also affect this experience.
Figure 4. Snapshots from three discursive design videos, from left to right: A concept that
applies current business models with augmented reality glasses and critiques how it could
intercept our perception of the world. Conceptual design playing with gender roles and lets
girls drink and select clothes for their boyfriends in a game like and social media inspired
fashion. A physical matching game based on ambiguous design terminology.
Parts of the difficulties that we have experienced could also be that we on this theme have
let the students present their designs in the format of video (see Figure 4 for some
snapshots), which in itself has been a new medium of expression to some of the students.
Perhaps influenced by the format, many groups chose to present scenarios of what could
go wrong, using the storytelling genre of dystopian science fiction. Although this is indeed
a perfect way of bringing up discursive matters in the field, our experience has been that
the actual interaction designs sometimes lacked a clear focus in favour of higher-level
narratives. In other cases, the students focused entirely on the humorous aspects of their
scenarios, using irony to the point that the discursive message became difficult for an
outside person to decode. In some cases the students were even reluctant to include their
videos in their public online portfolios, which was a requirement for passing the course.
Although mixing the theme of discursive design with video scenarios was successful in
most cases, it also added extra layers of complexity as it takes time, skill and effort to
make a video. To us, the most interesting part of this theme has concerned discussions
around existing examples and literature, and to engage students with strong engineering
identities in reflections around more conceptual artistic values.
Discussion
The work presented here is heavily influenced by the four fields of design, as defined and
proposed by Tharp and Tharp (2009). There are surely many other concepts that also
could be valuable for the purpose of articulating the intentions in educational contexts
1163
such as ours. For instance, in our specific case it might be relevant to place more
emphasis on topics and terminologies that are specific to the area of interaction design.
However, we find that the four fields have worked as a solid enough base for structuring
our course.
In our experience, the four fields have shown to at least to some extent help design
students to better understand and focus their projects (Tharp & Tharp 2009). First,
commercial profit, as an intention commonly overlooked in academic design contexts,
proved to spur deep discussions and thereby ensure quality of education in terms of the
broad spectrum of issues and solutions connected to designing something commercially
viable. Second, by shifting the intentions towards responsible design, students were given
the opportunity to discuss and engage with what it really means to be responsible in
design projects, discussions that have often turned out incredibly interesting. Third, the
theme of experimental design have proven to be a fruitful tool to trigger deep
technological engagement and playful exploration among all students. Rather than
working with tools that they already know, which easily gets the case when asking
students to deliver working prototypes, the experimental theme invited students to
discover possibilities that they might not know of yet. Interestingly, the theme of discursive
design has turned out as one of the more problematic themes in the context of our
education. Surely, producing a clever and to the point discursive design can be difficult,
and the process may not be as straightforward as to have commercial, responsible or
experimental intentions. Yet, since it is such an important field in research and art
contexts, and also in terms keeping a reflective stance towards innovation, we will
continue our struggle on this topic with our students.
Most clearly, the framework has been effective in structuring our education so that it
ensures a broader range of design challenges. Without such a structure, our design briefs
and projects have previously tended to get defined in a more ad hoc fashion, based on
what seem relevant in terms of scope, technology, and ongoing research projects. While
that in itself is not necessarily a problem, it might result in student projects unintentionally
ending up very similar in character, with the risk of missing important points for
discussions or aspects of value in a design. The structure of the four fields has also
worked as a useful frame for engaging collaborations between students, researchers and
partners in industry, as we now know well beforehand what types of projects and
perspectives we are looking for.
Apart from being a help in structuring the course as such and to provide a rich variety of
projects, we feel that the four themes help channelling student focus to concentrate on
what is most important for a given design brief. The structure also ensures that several
groups work on different projects but with similar higher-level intentions, thereby also
facilitating a breadth within each theme as students get to dig deeper into the different
problems and areas for investigation.
Another experience from this thematic format has to do with the structure of intellectual
discussions in the classroom. Seeing that interaction design can be driven by different
high-level intentions means that students need to acknowledge that success can be
measured in several different ways, and that a design task is not always as
straightforward as solving a technical or conceptual problem. This brings up interesting
questions to discussion, regarding what we value and take for granted as desired, good
quality, or successful in a specific design process.
The extent to which the students have been willing to discuss such matters is in our case
obviously affected by the intimate course size, but it also seem heavily influenced by the
varying focus of the four themes, which helped guiding discussions in new interesting
ways. The commercial theme brings focus to personal experiences of products, trends,
and markets. The experimental theme brings more focus to what is known about research
and new technologies. The responsible design theme brings in aspects of ethics and how
1164
to approach people and their values. Finally, the discursive theme brings to debate a
discussion around current design norms and political perspectives around the field as a
whole. Without the four themes, these discussions would, again, probably become
structured in a much more ad hoc fashion, grounded much more in specific research
interests of the teachers, or topics brought up freely by the students. This is not to say that
such discussions would necessarily be any less interesting, but probably less varied and
dynamic. The themes thereby open for reflections around the relationship between
education and research, and how we can develop this relationship so that research and
education could benefit as naturally as possible from each other.
Relevant to our specific experience is also that the students that we work with have
undergone a long education that has a strong thread of classical sciences and
engineering, in contrast to design students with more artistic backgrounds. In comparison
to traditional engineering education, we believe that discursive design especially might
have a similar role as mathematics traditionally has had, namely, as an intellectual
exercise with qualities to expand thought. Here, instead of practicing logical thinking,
students are confronted with the challenge of engaging in more conceptual design
thinking. From this perspective of practicing thought, discursive or critical design could be
argued to deserve a strong and natural place in design education, just because it is
difficult and entails so many conceptual challenges.
Finally, our approach to the four themes have been slightly different each year, and we
see many potential ways that this could be structured differently. One interesting approach,
which we have not yet tested, is to connect the four themes more concretely, e.g. by
having the same overarching design brief stretched over the entire course and then
approached using the four intentions.
Concluding Remarks
In this paper we have discussed our explicit focus on design intentions in the last three
instances of an advanced course in interaction design, and what we see as its main
qualities. The work is inspired by a framework that suggests that design is normally driven
by one of four major types of intentions: to serve users, to generate profit, to learn, or to
trigger reflection and debate. In general, the course structure seem appreciated by the
students, and the most positive expressions has concerned the amount of time spent on
reasoning and talking about complicated issues. Although the framework was presented
as a resource for practicing industrial designers, it seems to have some value also in the
education of interaction design, and probably in other design fields as well. In particular,
we see clearly how this approach aids the student in mapping the landscape of underlying
intentions, something that in turn helps to shape and guide their design processes.
References
Bardzell, J. (2011). Interaction criticism: An introduction to the practice. Interacting with
Computers, 23(6), 604621.
Chalmers, M., & Galani, A. (2004). Seamful interweaving: heterogeneity in the theory and
design of interactive systems. In Proceedings of the 5th conference on Designing
interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques (pp. 243-252). ACM.
Cockton, G. (2006, October). Designing worth is worth designing. InProceedings of the
4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles (pp. 165-174).
ACM.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline Versus Design Science.
Design Issues, 17(3), 4955.
1165
1166
niture_trans_consumer_electronics_toys_by_bruce_m_tharp_and_stephanie_m_tharp__1
2232.asp
Vallgrda, A. (2013). Giving form to computational things: developing a practice of
interaction design. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 1-16.
Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., & Evenson, S. (2007). Research through design as a method
for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on
Human factors in computing systems (pp. 493-502). ACM.
Ylva Fernaeus
Associate Professor in Interaction Design at KTH and researcher at the Mobile Life centre.
Co-responsible for the master program in HCI as well as for the advanced courses in
Interaction Design at the school, including the course discussed in this paper. General
research focus is on crafting within interaction design and new creative practices around
advanced interactive technology, as well as interaction design education. I have been in
charge of the initial structuring the course, but all writing and analysis has been done in
close collaboration with my co-author.
Anders Lundstrm
I am a PhD student in Interaction Design at KTH with a background as Interaction
Designer. In my PhD work I focus on energy and mobility in the practice of driving within
the domain of electric cars. I have been involved in the teaching of our Interaction Design
students at various levels at our school. In the course discussed in this paper I have been
involved in the last course round but have followed and discussed the course format
during all three years of relevance to this paper. The analysis and writing has been done
in close collaboration with the main author of this paper.
1167
Abstract
The possibilities for collaboration among faculty teaching in various disciplines in an art and
design college are often limited by the language we use to analyze, create, and discuss our
work. Although there may, in fact, be a great deal of overlap, our language sometimes obscures
rather than clarifies the possibility of productive and fruitful overlap. Our paperitself the fruit of
a collaboration between a professor of graphic design and a professor of Englishdiscusses
the ways in which various constituent groups at our college talk about visuals (e.g., logos,
advertisements, interiors, photographs, illustrations, etc), noting the ways in which our language
limits cross-disciplinary critique and collaboration and suggesting ways in which it might be
more inclusive and encouraging of both. We share the results of our surveys and interviews
with members of our faculty from diverse disciplines in design, fine art, art history, art education,
and general education. Using the rhetorical triangle as a tool, we then consider the implications
that our results have for improving interdisciplinary dialogue among faculty at the college as well
as for improving our students educational experiences across the curriculum so that we may
better prepare them for an increasingly collaborative work environment and world.
Keywords
Design Education, Rhetoric, Collaboration, Interdisciplinarity, Language
Introduction
The authors of this paper are faculty members at a small college in the Midwest United States
offering undergraduate BFA and BS degrees in 17 art and design disciplines, as well as an MFA
in four concentrations and a Masters of Art Education. Coming from the fields of Graphic Design
and Rhetoric and Composition, we have worked on various committees together to help to
shape the college and its curriculum and have had many discussions and even big debates
over the years about what we teach, how we teach, and the commonalities and differences
between our two disciplines as well as among others across the college.
One theme that has emerged over the course of these conversations was the different ways in
which each discipline uses language to discuss, analyze, apply, or create visual objects. After
all, most instructors from across our institutionwhether they teach graphic design, painting,
photography, art history, interior design, visual rhetoric, aesthetics, etcspend a great deal of
time talking about visuals. That led us to wonder: Even though all major disciplines at our
institution engage with visual objects, does the fact that we all have our own discipline-specific
vocabulary stand in the way of valuable experiences in cross-disciplinary collaboration among
both students and faculty?
1168
1169
the realistic truth is that too often general education courses end up being ghettoized, devalued
as mere hoops through which to jump and distractions from students real work in their major
disciplines. With this project, the authors hope to find ways to help faculty and students see the
possibilities for productive collaboration and synthesis among all the parts of their education
general education, art history, and their art/design studio work. Faculty in general education
want to see this collaboration because, naturally, we want our students to appreciate the value
of the material that wein English, history, math, the social sciences, and so onteach them
and its real and vital relationships with their studio majors.
And certainly art and design faculty at the college also value this skill of getting students to think
outside of their own experiences and disciplines. The well-known American design magazine
Metropoliss 2004 Survey of North American design schools, which was focused on
interdisciplinary collaboration, illustrates this, as most faculty surveyed said that they believed
collaboration was an essential skill for any complex assignment requiring a deep understanding
of environmental sustainability, universal access, craft and technology, and sensitivity to local
cultures in a global market. In fact, 71% of teachers surveyed said that they felt that
interdepartmental collaborations were an important part of their curriculum. Conversely, when
asked how often they initiate collaborations with other design departments, 50% of design
professors said sometimes, 28% said never, and only the minority, 22%, said they initiated
collaboration on a regular basis (Szenasy, 2004).
In that same article, when asked to describe an interdepartmental collaborative project and to
comment on whether or not it was fruitful, one student said, There was a huge learning curve
for everyone at the outset because we couldnt communicate, our vocabularies and experiences
were too specialized. The author of the article also claimed that students, when asked, spoke
freely about the difficulties of collaboration and the obstacles of language use, referring to the
fact that every discipline has its own jargon.
It seems that we all crave greater collaboration; that desire itself is not a big debate. But how
we get to that improved collaboration is the subject of debate. With that question in mind, we
decided to use the common practice of visualization as a starting point, knowing that every
major program at our college used or discussed this practice of talking about visuals in some
way, and that selected general education courses did so as well. We hoped to explore the ways
in which the language of visualization might help our students to engage with one another
through meaningful collaborative experiences.
3.
Please list the kinds of visual objects/artifacts that your students create, choose and
apply, analyze, and discuss in your class(es).
When you have students look at a visual object for the purpose of analysis/learning
and/or application, what are some of the questions you encourage students to
consider or what kinds of things do you want them to notice? (Perhaps you could tell
us the top 3-5 things?)
What are some key phrases or words associated with visual analysis and/or
application?
1170
We received responses from about a dozen faculty from a range of disciplines including art
history, drawing, visual rhetoric, graphic design, interior design, painting, and photography, to
name a number. We observed a number of common threads in the responses. To cite just a
few: many faculty noted the need to have students share their first impressions or
visceral/emotional impressions upon first seeing a visual object. Many focused on the need to
discuss the materials used to create the visual object under scrutiny and the design or artistic
principles evidenced by it, such as scale, materiality, line, color, and so on. Many faculty cited
the need to discuss the users/viewers/audiences experience. And finally most respondents
noted that they would want students spending time understanding or investing the images
contexthistorical, geographical, cultural, artistic, and so on (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Selected words faculty from various disciplines used to discuss visuals.
1171
image. We chose this image (see Figure 2) of the Seattle Public Library, in Seattle,
Washington, because we thought it was a provocative image but not one that any faculty
member would necessarily be accustomed to showing in his or her classes.
1172
context in a city, with the street, with humans, with the neighboring buildings, and so on. And
drawing faculty member said that she would ask students about What makes this structure
unusual in relation to other buildings. Similar kinds of responses were echoed by almost every
other respondent.
Regarding audience, a digital media professor said that he would ask students to find 2-5
words to describe how they think the building would make them feel if they were to walk up to it
from across the street in anticipation of going inside. An industrial design professor said that he
would ask them to pick a specific market (or target consumer group) that they feel would be
attracted to this visual theme. A faculty member who teaches visual rhetoric said that he would
ask students what visually attracts you about the place? What about the design makes it
inviting, or might perhaps turn some people off. Most faculty made some reference to having
students share their own first, visceral, or emotional responses to the place.
Next, regarding comments about the maker, a photography professornaturally responding
more to the photo than the building as the primary object of analysissaid that she would ask
students what they thought the purpose of the photo was, what the photographer wanted to
communicate. Another faculty member who teaches visual rhetoric as well as aesthetics said
that he would ask students to consider if they believe[d] [that] the architect intended to direct
[their] experience of the work in a particular way. Other faculty talked not so much about the
maker and his/her intentions but instead about the personality of the building. For example, a
visual rhetoric faculty member said that she would talk about how ethos (the character of the
speaker/maker) is expressed in the design and execution of the building. And an industrial
design faculty member said that he would ask whether the building presented a masculine
theme? Does it communicate ruggedness? Durability? Safety? Aggressiveness?
(Interestingly, discussion of the maker was clearly the least represented element of the four we
observed.)
Finally, many faculty discussed the formal properties of the object itself. Nearly all of the
respondents said that they would discuss the buildings use of line, scale, pattern, use of
materials, scale, color. For example, an art history professor said that she would have students
discuss [w]hat is contemporary about its form, materials, use of line, color, scale. An interior
design professor said First, I'd ask the students to identify the elements and principles of
design they see (e.g., repetition, form, pattern, scale...). A graphic design faculty noted that he
would have students notice details of the buildings shape, scale, geometric angle[s], as well as
its materials (e.g., glass, metal, landscaping), among other formal properties that he listed.
Notable about theseand mostof the responses from faculty is that they noted this formal
properties first (or, at least, very early) in their responses, indicating the value they place on this
aspect of the analytical process.
1173
1174
1175
Figure 5: The rhetorical triangle with key words from faculty responses integrated.
We certainly do appreciate that discipline-specific language is vitally important to the individual
majors; interior designers, painters, art historians, graphic designers, and so on, have disciplinespecific vocabulary, history, and concepts that necessarily employ as part of their developed
intellectual and practice expertise. We dont intend to diminish the need for that specialized
discourse. Nor do we intend to put forth a prescriptive document or image of a common
language that is necessary to collaborate. Rather, we hope that this kind of visual map might
simply illuminate some of the points of intersection among our disciplineswhether they be
design, fine art, art history, or general education courses such as writing, visual rhetoric,
aesthetics, and so on.
Conclusion
Were theorizing that, for our next step, if we can offer this visual tool to a few of our colleagues
in various disciplines, we can learn (a) what comments they have on it, and (b) how students
might start to use it to transfer knowledge and skills (and an understanding of inter-relatedness)
between classes. We expect that once our colleagues see this map, they may have suggestions
for how it could be revised and improved. Were eager for that kind of criticism. If many of them
would actually contribute to the writing and rewriting of this visual map, then there would
naturally be more ownership of it and, correspondingly, more engagement with it and use of it.
In sum, we hope that a visual map like this one might serve first to spark conversationsand
even big debatesamong faculty as to the points of connection as well as key distinctions
among disciplines. We are mindful of the need to do this in a positive and encouraging spirit to
minimize any perceptions that were preaching to our colleagues or overlooking key and
important distinctions that define their disciplines. From those conversations, our hope is to
create positive connections and conversations among faculty, which in turn may lead to them
1176
thinking more about how to effectively collaborate with colleagues from other disciplines and, in
turn, how to help their students cross boundaries as well.
One specific result we hope to see is that students would be better equipped to transfer learning
from class to classboth within and across disciplines. If students see faculty collaborating and
creating connections between the disciplines and then encouraging student to do so as well,
then students will surely learn better the value of all of the parts of their college education
including their general education. As a result, they will better equipped to collaborate with others
outside of their disciplines once they reach the workplace, which in turn will make them a more
valuable asset to organizations seeking to innovate and succeed in our widely connected global
society.
References
Jakobson, Roman. (1960). Closing Statements: Linguistics and Poetics. In Thomas A.
Sebeok, Style in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 350-77.
Kinneavy, James (1971). A theory of discourse: The aims of discourse. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Schramm, Wilbur (1954). How Communication Works. In The Process and Effects of
Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. 3-26.
Szenasy, S. (2004, August/September). School Survey: 2004. Metropolis. August/September
2004, 88-91.
Weaver, Warren and Claude Elwood Shannon (1963). The Mathematical Theory of
Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Susanna Kelly Engbers
Susanna Kelly Engbers, Ph.D., is Professor of English and chair of the General Education
program at Kendall College of Art and Design of Ferris State University in Grand Rapids,
Michigan, USA. She teaches courses in rhetoric, writing, and literature, and her research
focuses on rhetorical strategies of nineteenth-century American suffragists as well as the
intersections of visual rhetoric and design. Her work has been published in Rhetoric Society
Quarterly, the College English Association Forum, and most recently in Art, Design, and
Communication in Higher Education (forthcoming).
Angela L. Dow
Angela L. Dow, M.Ed., is Professor of Graphic Design at Kendall College of Art and Design of
Ferris State University in Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA. She served as Graphic Design
program chair from 2001 to 2010. She has led a number of collaborative projects with other
design disciplines at Kendall and co-developed a four-course concentration in Design and
Innovation Management. Angela serves as a consultant evaluator for the Higher Learning
Commission and has also served as President of the Board of Directors for the American
Advertising Federation of West Michigan and as Mentorship Chair on the Board of the AIGA
West Michigan.
1177
Abstract
Some recent findings with expert designers relate problemsolution co-evolution and
analogy use to framing practices. We wanted to understand if novices also use coevolution and analogies to frame their thinking. Furthermore we wanted to see if there
are any differences across cultures. The paper reports an analysis of data gained from
protocol studies with novice interaction designers in the UK and Botswana. Novice
interaction designers in the UK and Botswana show some similarities in framing
behaviours using co-evolution and opening analogies to develop metaphorical themes in
framing. But within these observations we also found differences across the cohorts. The
implications are discussed in the light of adopting appropriate design pedagogy for
novices in different cultures.
Keywords
Co-evolution, framing, analogy, design novices, culture
Introduction
Two related aspects of expert designer behaviour have attracted increased attention
from researchers: framing and co-evolution of problem and solution. During framing,
designers create a particular view on the design problem. Cross wrote: designers
appear to explore the problem space from a particular perspective in order to frame the
problem in a way that stimulates and pre-structures the emergence of design concepts.
(Cross, 2007 p. 94). The way designers frame a problem implies certain early solutions.
Several design researchers have found that problems and solutions co-evolve over time
(e.g. Maher, 1996, Dorst & Cross, 2001), and that there are two types of episode in this
behaviour: parallel co-evolution of problem and solution, and bridge building between
these two spaces. The first type of episode involves a progression of parallel thought in
both solution and problem spaces. In the second, intermediate solutions talk back to the
designer to help understand and frame the problem. The talk back situation is
understood as a shift in focus between problem and solution spaces (Dorst & Cross,
1178
2001). It can also be understood as a bridge being built between the two spaces.
Bridges can be built in both directions. Bridges seem to be built to reconsider the
suitability of the current frame and to devise a new solution if the original solution does
not satisfy the evolving problem conceptualization. Parallel episodes seem to progress
solution and problem criteria without major shifts in either space. Other than this, little is
known about the different functions that parallel co-evolution and bridges between these
spaces play in the development of a design solution. What we do know is that problem
solution co-evolution as a whole helps experts to frame their design thinking.
Building on this seminal work in problemsolution co-evolution and framing, a new
intensification in research around this topic has emerged. Recent studies look at expert
designers use of framing strategies. Dorst (2011) argues that the activity of framing
open and complex design problems is at the heart of design thinking. Experienced
designers can be seen to engage with a novel problem situation by searching for the
central paradox, asking themselves what it is that makes the problem so hard to solve.
They only start working toward a solution once the nature of the core paradox has been
established to their satisfaction. (Dorst, 2011, p. 527).
Dorst and Tomkin (2011) then found that metaphorical themes act as bridges between
problems and solutions in a co-evolution process. A theme is a central metaphor, which
creates a rich mental image and steers the designers thinking about the situation in a
particular direction. They are neither problem nor solution but neutral ground between
problem and solution. The neutral ground seems to be the bridge between problems and
solutions.
Similar to the idea of a metaphorical theme in framing, Wiltschnig, Christensen and Ball
(2013) found independently that analogical reasoning is linked to co-evolution. Analogies
occur more frequently in problemsolution co-evolution episode than outside of coevolution episodes in expert designing. Metaphorical themes and analogies seems to be
core drivers for framing experts design thinking. However, little is known about analogy
use in either parallel co-evolution or bridging. Wiltschnig et als analysis didnt focus on
the distinction between parallel and bridging co-evolution episodes.
In previous work we have made this distinction and could demonstrate how interaction
design novices in the UK and Botswana use problemsolution co-evolution in the sense
Maher (1994), and Dorst & Cross (2001) have observed in experts (Lotz, Sharp,
Woodroffe, Rajah & Ranganai, 2013). We have also identified a new type of co-evolution
in novices from Botswana, in which co-evolution does not start from a detailed
decomposition of the problem. Instead, a solution is used to first co-evolve both spaces
in parallel before bridges are built between those spaces. Wiltschnig et al (2013) have
observed a similar change in directionality (solution attempts spark off the analysis of
requirements and possible changes to those requirements (p. 529)) in expert designers
framing.
Dorst and Tomkin (2011) have argued that understanding framing in more detail is
desirable in the study of radical innovation. We believe that understanding framing in
novices is also desirable to study and improve design education. Almendra and
Christianns (2011) found that students had difficulty with framing their designing. Also,
Lindner (2011) has shown that helping students to frame problems leads to more diverse
solutions. This paper investigates framing behaviour in novice interaction designers.
Specifically, we examine how novice interaction designers in the UK and Botswana use
analogy and metaphorical themes in co-evolution and framing. Two questions are
addressed here:
1179
Methodology
The Setting and the Module
The research built on a five-year teaching partnership between the Open University in
the UK and Botho University in Botswana. The two cohorts of participants studied the
same self-contained module, called Fundamentals of Interaction Design, consisting of
a main textbook (Sharp, Rogers, & Preece, 2007) and wrap-around materials. Both
cohorts were given exactly the same materials, the same study path, and the same
assessment.
Protocol Study
The protocol study sessions were run just after the students had completed the modules
design assignment. Each session lasted about 2 hours, and was structured as follows:
introduction, warm-up activity, main study task (lasting about an hour), design
presentation to a facilitator. Materials provided were: module books, design method
summaries (usability and user experience goals, scenarios, storyboards, card-based
prototypes and interface sketches), paper, pencils, refreshments, and a participant
booklet each. The participant booklet contained: study background, consent form, warmup activity (Towers of Hanoi), and design brief. The design brief described the problem
and implications around forgetting to take medication and asked students to design an
interactive product that will help ensure sick people living at home take the right
medication at the right time.
The sessions were recorded using audio and video equipment, and a facilitator was
present in the room throughout.
Data Collection
Data collection was adjusted to the way students in each location would usually work.
Data collection in Botswana used constructive interaction, i.e. students were paired
(OMalley Draper, & Riley, 1985). Constructive interaction helps overcome problems of
concurrent verbalization including silence and inhibition; in addition, students in
Botswana usually worked together. We decided against using think-aloud in Botswana
because of the possible cultural influence in concurrent protocols reported by
Clemmensen, Hertzum, Hornbaek, Shi, & Yammiyavar (2008). Participants were allowed
to choose a preferred local language. Eleven sessions were conducted in Setswana and
two in Kalanga. The participant booklet was translated, and local staff members
facilitated the sessions.
In the UK, participants used the think-aloud technique and worked alone. A facilitator
was present throughout the session. To maintain consistency, facilitators in both
countries worked from a common guide. In Botswana, 30 participants were chosen from
70 volunteers, making 15 sessions. Two sessions were not usable because the
1180
participants were too quiet. In the UK, 7 participants were recruited. One session was
not usable.
Data Analysis
The transcripts were analysed using a modified and extended version of Valkenburg and
Dorst (1998)s notation to identify the processes in Schn (1983)s design and reflection
cycle: naming, framing, moving and reflecting. The extended version includes signature
frame matrices to more clearly identify frames (Blyth, Lotz, Sharp, Woodroffe, Rajah &
Ranganai, 2012) and a more detailed notation that highlights the distinction between
thinking in the problem space and in the solution space (Lotz at al, 2013). The notation
allows visualising exactly when problem and solution space co-evolve in parallel and
when bridges between the spaces are built. We also coded the use of analogies
(Christensen & Schunn, 2007). An analogy helps to transfer elements from the familiar
(a source) to use it in constructing a novel idea. Ideas can be transferred from similar
problems or solutions to the current situation. The coding was completed by two
researchers independently and challenged by two others on a regular basis. This
produced 21 annotated transcripts, 6 from the UK and 13 from Botswana.
Based on these detailed annotations we extracted all episodes that showed parallel coevolution and bridging within and outside of a frame. We split co-evolution into two
separate types of episode: parallel co-evolution and bridging between problem and
solution spaces. We also tabulated analogies that occur within and outside of frames,
and within and outside of co-evolution episodes. In addition to this, and in line with Dorst
and Tomkins (2011) definition of themes, we summarised the main theme for each coevolution episode and analogy. While the frame column is a representative word,
shorthand for talking about the frame, the metaphorical theme column gives a
description of both the problem criteria and solution ideas that frame the designers
thinking. An exemplar table for Botswana pair 8 with all the extracted episodes is shown
below in Table 1. Each row in the table 1 represents one unit of analysis.
Table 1 Episodes of co-evolution and analogy use in the framing behaviour of pair 8. A
blank cell indicates non-occurrence. P = problem, S = solution. Bridges can go from
Problem to Solution (P S ) or reverse S P).
Pair 8:
lines
8: 5 - 18
Frame
Metaphorical
theme
Patients with AIDS
Analogy S, P
8: 19
30
Interactive
watch
8: 70 97
Interactive
watch
Stakeholders
using an alarm
8: 98 113
Interactive
watch
Complexity of drug
taking
8: 115
130
Phone
Flexibility for a
variety of
stakeholder
8: 224 232
Phone
Interactive
watch
Parallel coevolution
Bridge
P S
S P
P S
Mother (P)
Caregiver (P)
Watch (S)
Auto off Alarm (S)
All people (P)
Disability (P)
Alarm (S)
S P
P S
S P
P S
Phone (S)
1181
All stakeholders
(P)
Phone (S)
Text (S)
Voice (S)
Nurse (P)
Language
setting (S)
Deaf (P)
Text (S)
8: 233 237
Phone
Flexibility
S P
P S
Finally the individual tables were compiled into one overview table for each cohort the
UK and Botswana as shown in Tables 2 and 3. Through this analysis we were looking
for novice framing practices in both locations and trying to understand the role of
analogies and co-evolution episodes in novices framing behaviour.
Findings
Our main findings are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Column 1 shows the participant or
pair number, column 2 displays the overarching theme that is developed and column 3
shows the frames and their names. Column 4 describes several details about the
analogies used. To further investigate relationships between co-evolution and analogy
use within framing, we have divided it into 7 sub-columns: the name of the analogy;
whether a solution (S) or problem (P) analogy was used; whether the analogy was used
within a frame (F); whether the analogy opened the frame (O); whether the analogy
occurred during a co-evolution episode (C); and whether it occurred during a bridge
building episode (B). Opening a frame means that an analogy was the starting thought
around which the thinking was focussed and framed.
Column 5 counts the numbers of parallel co-evolution episodes, and column 6 counts
the number of bridge building episodes, and in which direction.
Metaphorical theme
Frame
Analogy
Parallel
coevolution
S
Tablet
device
Doc PC
Tablet
Picture
Prescription
Alarm
X
X
X
X
Device
Scanner
Camera
X
X
1182
X
X
X
X
B
X
Bridge
PS
SP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
System
Doc App
Device
Alarm clock
Pager
Text
message
Release
system
Alarm clock
Alarm clock
Pager
Dosset box
Mobile app
iTunes
Google
search
Home button
Snooze
button
Alarm
Alarm
Phone
Drawer
Phone alarm
Alarm clock
Wristband
Watch
Sum
13
27
26
Av
2.2
4.5
Complexity of medicine
taking requires detailed
input and output design.
Home alarm
at night
Pager
Doc PC
App
App input
Handheld
Watch
X
X
X
X
X
X
13
38
15
6.3
2.5
1.5
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
21
X
X
X
X
9
Metaphorical
theme
Frame
Analogy
A watch for
impaired and
less abled.
Watch
Mobile phone
Alarm
Watch
Wall watch
Watch
Watch
Alarm
System
Simplicity of use
is reached
Alarm
Alarm system
Parallel
coevolution
S
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1183
F
X
X
X
X
X
X
B
X
X
Bridge
PS
3
SP
2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
through
structured
interaction when
setting alarm.
Watch with
alarm
Mobile for
youth
Mobile phone
Computer
User manual
X
X
X
Volunteers
remind elderly
and the youth is
educated to set
mobile alarm as
reminder.
Wearable object
for all
environments.
Volunteering
Education and
mobile phone
Home care
Anti Retro Viral
Mobile phone
Home care
Mobile phone
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Free
Preprogrammed
device given to
poor.
Device needs to
be portable to
not be forgotten.
Mobile
Government
watch
Bracelet
Watch
Watch
Mobile phone
Cattle Bell
Walking
Crutches
Mother
Watch
Watch
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Preprogrammed
and serviced
device by doctor.
Watch
Call system
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Flexibility of
device for
diverse
stakeholders.
Interactive
watch
Phone
Designing a trial
of a device to
specify it further.
Universal
bracelet that is
borrowed from
and serviced by
doctor.
Button device
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Due to
complexity a
governmental
service provider
initiates the
house alarm.
There is a need
for training
instead of
reminding, but
the first solution
suggests
timetabling
reminders.
System housed
in a watch like
object that could
take over family
PA
Medics
House alarm
Radiophone
Mobile phone
Bracelet
Watch
Bracelet
Mobile phone
Ring
Telepole
bracelet
Mobile phone
Watch
Alarm
Alarm
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
10
11
12
13
Watch
Watch
Pouch for
watch
Bracelet
Timetable and
phone
Training
Training
System
Trigger
Phone
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1184
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
12
12
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
members duty
of reminding
Sum
Av
25
1.9
56
4.3
51 5
47
3.9 0.4 3.6
15
1.2
36 16
2.8 1.2
64
6.3
58
2.5
52
1.5
Analogies
Both cohorts use analogies, on average 4.3 in Botswana and 4.5 in the UK. The tables
show a dominance of solution analogy in both settings, as was found in expert designers
(Wiltschnig et al, 2013). There was an average of around 4 solution analogies in both
cohorts, with a slightly higher average in the UK. We can see only a few problem
analogies 5 in Botswana and only 1 in the UK in total. That means novices in both
settings draw on analogies to solve rather than to identify problems.
Our novices use more analogies within a frame than outside of a frame. In fact, only a
few analogies occur outside of frames - in the UK one on average and in Botswana less
than one. We also observed that analogies occurred more often within co-evolution
episodes than outside in both the UK and Botswana. In the UK 22 out of all 27 analogies
occurred in co-evolution and in Botswana 52 out of all 56 analogies occurred during the
co-evolution episodes. This confirms what Wiltschnig et al (2013) found in expert
designers. In novices, the occurrence of analogies can be linked to co-evolution and
framing.
1185
the volunteering frame. The main framing theme to which this leads is Volunteers
remind elderly and the youth is educated to set mobile alarm as reminder. Although
most of the opening analogies occur towards the beginning of the design session, some
are towards the end too, for example in pair 12, the designers reframed the problem
through an opening analogy that saw the problem as training people. Half of the UK
participants also used an opening analogy. For example, participant 1 used tablet
(notepad) as an opening analogy from which she developed a theme around the elderly
use of notepads. Opening analogies are a popular tool to frame novices thinking in both
settings. They offer a quick route into developing metaphorical themes.
Discussion
What implications do our findings have on design pedagogy?
Both cohorts in the UK and in Botswana use co-evolution. But Botswana and UK novices
differed in the number of co-evolution episodes (Botswana had more overall) and the
types - bridging or parallel co-evolution.
UK sessions include more parallel episodes while bridges lead to reconsidering the
problem frame suitability and devising a new solution. Co-evolution episodes evolve
problem and solution spaces but dont shift them radically. Having more parallel coevolution episodes means that UK students progress a small number (often one) of
ideas in depth but generate fewer ideas. The frame suitability is not questioned, as it
would be during bridge building and so UK students remain in a frame.
Botswana students reconsider problem criteria in the light of a less than satisfactory
solution by building bridges. They question the suitability of a frame and generate
alternative ideas, but the new solution does not generate a new frame. Botswana
students have a similar number of frames on average as UK students.
These differences in co-evolution have implications for design pedagogy in both
contexts. To increase reframing and generation of more ideas in the UK, educators
would need to increase the number of leaps between problem and solution spaces. This
supports Lindners (2011) finding that helping students to frame problems leads to more
diverse solutions. Conversely, to encourage Botswana students to frame ideas and work
them through in depth, educators would need to discourage students from building too
1186
many bridges. This has not been discussed much before in literature. In addition, coevolution processes are not much discussed in design education either. Research by
Almendra and Christiaans (2011) has shown that students are unaware of these coevolution processes. A visualisation of the students processes was suggested to
support reflection and learning.
Both cohorts in Botswana and the UK use opening analogies to develop metaphorical
themes and frames. Both cohorts frame their ideas in terms of handheld devices.
Botswana designers are more specific about what kind of handheld device they want to
design, often a bracelet, watch or phone. They are specific early on because they use
opening analogies. Half of the UK designers also show this behaviour.
One implication this has on pedagogy is to encourage the use of opening analogies to
help develop metaphorical themes. On the other hand one could also experiment with
prohibiting opening analogies to see what other framing behaviours occur. We think of
opening analogies like a jump into water, what if we ask students to wade into water
slowly?
Opening analogies start the development of a metaphorical theme for a frame quickly.
We could also see that the development of a metaphorical theme is not only related to
bridging, but also to parallel co-evolution. In the development of metaphorical themes
the consideration of users, user behaviour and contextual constraints allowed solutions
to evolve. In line with accepted interaction design pedagogy, our novices pay particular
attention to user behaviour and requirements. One implication of this for design
pedagogy is that by focusing on user behaviour we also develop students ability to coevolve problems and solutions.
Conclusions
To summarise, novices in the UK and Botswana develop similar frames handheld
devices. Novices use co-evolution in framing. Analogies are linked to co-evolution also in
novices. Opening analogies help students to develop metaphorical themes in framing,
but these themes do not only act as bridges, they also support parallel co-evolution in
novices. This is important to note because bridges might support big leaps (i.e.
reframing) but parallel co-evolution supports incremental progress. Novices need both to
develop metaphorical themes in framing.
The study demonstrated that novices show some expert-like behaviour in co-evolution
and analogy use in framing. We also found similarities and some differences across our
cohorts in Botswana and the UK. We argue that particularly the differences, such as
different numbers of co-evolution episodes or opening analogies, have implications for
appropriate pedagogy in both settings. We believe that design pedagogy should support
but also challenge the natural behaviours in each setting.
We think it is important for educators to know that an emphasis on understanding user
behaviour in designing also supports co-evolution in design education. If educators want
to encourage ideation of multiple solutions they need to teach bridge building between
problem and solution spaces, but if they want to encourage the working through of ideas
they need to emphasise parallel co-evolution. Analogies are clearly important to framing,
but educators could teach different ways of using analogy, beyond the opening analogy.
1187
Finally we think that studying design behaviours across cultures gives us some valuable
insight into how to challenge students design learning and design pedagogy in different
settings.
Limitations
Our goal was to collect high quality data, which meant adjusting the data collection
methods for each country. This might have affected the findings and the level to which
we can compare them. However we believe the quality of verbalisation can be
considered comparable. Comparing a team and a single designer, Goldschmidt (1995)
developed the argument that both, think aloud and concurrent interaction, are an equal
window into thinking, because thinking is brought into being through words. In addition,
our UK participants frequently used social speech (considered responses) rather than
internal speech (stumbling, breaks etc.) when thinking aloud, just as the Botswana pairs
did in constructive interaction. The rationale for choosing pairs in Botswana and
individuals in UK was based on the learning settings that each cohort experience. In the
UK, participants study individually at a distance, while in Botswana participants study in
face-to-face groups. By choosing pairs in Botswana and singletons in the UK we
replicated their normal learning conditions as closely as possible.
The way we constructed our analysis might have had an influence on the results. For
example, in some cases it was difficult to determine exactly when a frame starts. We
decided to mark a frame when the conceptual object it pertains to is clearly named. But
in several UK samples, the designers do not commit to a conceptual object - and hence
a frame - right away. They uncover the beginning of a new frame while moving around
the conceptual object. Speaking metaphorically, the designers waded into water instead
of jumping in. We thought that this approach to framing was interesting but it was out of
scope to study in-depth here. This would be worthwhile to pick up in a further study.
Acknowledgements
This research as been funded by the Leverhulme Trust. We would like to thank all our
participants.
References
Ahmed, S., & Christensen, B. (2009). An in situ study of analogical reasoning in novice
and experienced design engineers. Journal of Mechanical Design, 131(11), 111004.
Almendra, R., & Christiaans, H. H. C. M. (2011). Design students perception of their
own design process. In N. F. Roozenburg, L. L. Chen, & P. J. Stappers (Eds.), 4th World
congress on design research, Proceedings of the IASDR 2011 [CD-ROM]. Delft.
Blyth, R, Schadewitz, N., Sharp, H., Woodroffe, M., Rajah, D., & Ranganai, T. (2012). A
frame signature matrix for analysing and comparing interaction design behaviour. In
Proceedings of BCS HCI 2012, pp 321-326. British Computer Society.
Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to
analogical function and preinventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory
& Cognition, 35(1), 2938.
1188
Clemmensen, T., Hertzum, M., Hornbaek, K., Shi, Q., & Yammiyavar, P. (2008). Cultural
cognition in the thinking-aloud method for usability evaluation. 29 International
Conference on Information Systems. Paper 189. Association for Information Systems.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. London: Birkhuser.
Dorst, K., & Tomkin, D. (2011). Themes as bridges between problem and solution. In N.
F. Roozenburg, L. L. Chen, & P. J. Stappers (Eds.), 4th World congress on design
research, Proceedings of the IASDR 2011 [CD-ROM]. Delft.
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of design thinking and its application. Design Studies, 32(6),
521532.
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem
solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425437.
Goldschmidt, G. (1995). The designer as a team of one. Design Studies, 16(2), 189
209.
Lawson, B. (2004). Schemata, gambits and precedent: some factors in design expertise.
Design Studies, 25(5), 443457.
Linder, J (2011). The value of open-ended problems in design pedagogy. In N. F.
Roozenburg, L. L. Chen, & P. J. Stappers (Eds.), 4th World congress on design
research, Proceedings of the IASDR 2011 [CD-ROM], Delft.
Lotz, N, Sharp, H., Woodroffe, M., Richard, B., Rajah, D., & Ranganai, T. (2013). Coevolving problems and solutions: The case of novice interaction designers in Botswana
and the UK. In Proceedings of IASDR 2013, pp. 10041015 Japan: International
Association of Societies of Design Research.
Maher, M. L., & Poon, J. (1996). Modelling design exploration as co-evolution.
Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 11(3), 122.
OMalley, C.E., Draper, S.W., & Riley, M.S. (1985). Constructive interaction: a method
for studying humancomputer interaction. In Proceedings of Human-Computer
Interaction (pp. 269274) London: Elsevier.
Popovic, V. (2004). Expertise development in product designstrategic and domainspecific knowledge connections. Design Studies, 25(5), 527545.
Schn, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner, how professionals think in action. Basic
Books
Sharp, H., Rogers, Y., & Preece, J. (2007). Interaction design: beyond human-computer
interaction (2nd ed). John Wiley & Sons.
Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams, Design
Studies, 19(3), 249-271.
Wiltschnig, S., Christensen, B. T., & Ball, L. J. (2013). Collaborative problemsolution
co-evolution in creative design. Design Studies, 34(5), 515542.
Dr Nicole Lotz specialises in design research across cultures. She has a particular
interest in how best educational practice in design can be identified and communicated
using design patterns. As a Lecturer in Design, she is involved in the presentation and
production of teaching materials in Design at the Open University, UK.
1189
1190
Abstract
Design practice exists as a complex and varied ecology of practitioners, methodologies and
outcomes, one that harbors varying internal biases, tangents and conceptual stances. As designers
interface with outside practitioners in science, engineering and theory, they are confronted with
both problems and opportunities from these external domains that can appear quite foreign in both
approach and outcome. Design process and its resultant biases are distinct and yet malleable and
these unique aspects should be emphasized when confronting and collaborating with outside
disciplines. In acknowledging our own disciplinary and project specific values, we must remain
mindful of the risk of ceding authority to more pragmatic or quantifiable concerns from collaborators
outside of the design discipline. Negotiating these collaborations requires a careful attention to
communication, methodologies and how project goals are defined and articulated. In analyzing the
procedures, methodology and resulting projects from an interdisciplinary design led research
group, this paper will offer insight into the nature of interdisciplinary conversations and translations
within the context of design education and offer examples of design-led collaborative research.
This paper will argue that identifying, amplifying and communicating the conceptual, aesthetic,
intellectual and emotional goals of a project is a crucial component to fruitful design-led research
collaboration.
Keywords
transdisciplinary education; collaborative design research; computation in design; speculative
design
Introduction
Design ecologies are defined in this paper as a rich and multivalent space which is comprised of a
multitude of design related disciplines, practitioners, methodologies, approaches and outcomes.
This paper uses the recently formed Design Futures Lab as a case study for examining how
individual motivations and disciplinary biases can be leveraged and amplified in the context of a
collaborative research setting. The lab is a newly formed Masters Research Group housed in a
graduate Interior Architecture + Design Program. Last year there were 6 third year graduate
students pursuing yearlong thesis projects within the collaborative framework of the lab. The final
projects produced were a series of future prototypes for domestic life which will be discussed in
more detail below. Each student pursued a term of directed research on an individual topic before
entering a 6 month design development phase. Their topics aligned with the general interests of
the lab and included synthetic biology, the impact of technology on communicating emotional
subtlety, detrimental effects of technology, mechanics of memory, the role of sensors in our
environment and methods of ambient communication. The topics held particular resonance for
each student and this core interest was maintained throughout the project. Students were expected
to synthetize their core research topic and findings with the interests of the lab in exploring
speculative prototypes for inhabitation. The lab specifically seeks to examine and advocate for
novelty in design processes, narratives and aesthetics. A particular focus is given to the potential of
a design investigation to have evocative and unexpected emotional resonance. Students were
continually challenged to locate their specific attachment to the project and to define their
underlying biases, feelings and beliefs about the larger social, conceptual and philosophical
1191
implications. With these motivations being clearly defined and examined, students develop
confidence in their core investment of the project. Only after we have identified and clarified this
seed motivation are students able to proceed to collaboration and further design ideation.
After locating and defining the core research interest and underlying motivations a series of outside
collaborators were identified and cultivated from disciplines including computer science, biology,
biomedical engineering and electrical engineering. Through a series of structured discussions and
later through targeted collaboration, the lab is able to model and facilitate collaborative working
relationships for students. One important focus in structuring the yearlong process is enabling
students to pursue and develop a fairly vague initial topic and interest into a cohesive and realized
final object, experience or environment. In a very intensive project research, design and
development process students are continually exposed to procedures, methodologies and
dialogues outside of their field. The lab model seeks to explicitly encourage and expand these
conversations and collaborations in the pursuit of novel design narratives and artefacts. There are
multiple checkpoints along the way in the form of structured presentations, design critiques and
required written documents which challenge students to revise, refine and advocate for their core
motivations in the project.
Within this space the individual design researcher inhabits a territory through which they develop
and refine a series of trajectories related to design motivations, interests, theoretical and
intellectual goals and potential collaboration opportunities. The ill-defined niche can be
considered a space of opportunity in design ecologies (Murray, 2012). This paper will argue for the
merits of assessing, defining and delineating the particular motivational characteristics of a given
designers niche space. This activity seems in contrast to prevailing wisdom about collaborative
dynamics in terms of finding common ground. Researchers from a variety of disciplines have
examined the collaborative dynamics of interdisciplinary teams (Thomson Klein, 2004, Stokols, et
al., 2008, Gray, 2008). Some of the problems arise from individual approaches to divisions of labor
and an unrelenting focus on usable results. (Pohl, 2005) What this paper argues for is a careful
attention to the dynamics of collaboration and vigilance in asserting and advocating for the specific
designer led positions and motivations in a given project. This privileging of concerns including
things such as the realm of the aesthetic can be met with challenges to its perceived value or utility
in a given project (Hekkert, 2006). This paper is not advocating for a hierarchy of one set of design
related values over any other, but rather it is encouraging designers engaged in trans-disciplinary
collaborative research investigations and educational environments to examine these existing
values and ensure that these concerns are advocated for to ensure that designer input is not
relegated to extraneous or superfluous realms in both the process or output.
In a pedagogical setting, this process of determining, clarifying and advocating for ones specific
niche in a given project can be integrated and modelled in a collaborative design-led research
experience. The lab explores applied design research through a variety of procedural approaches:
exploration of novel form through digital fabrication, enhanced interaction scenarios employing new
responsive technologies, pursuit of material innovations and user-centered narratives to envision
speculative futures. Students were exposed to a diversity of vantage points from the outset of their
initial research. The ability to synthesize this information and to develop novel design narratives out
of these disparate threads was a core focus of the initial research work. The operations of
modelling and synthesis have been identified with design culture as distinct from the disciplinary
approaches of art or science (Cross, 2006). The lab sought to further encourage synthesis of
divergent information and approaches through a series of structured conversations. This involved
discussing students research in progress with invited groups of scientists and engineers. While this
type of interdisciplinary collaboration is becoming increasingly common, some researchers point
out, there is a tendency for designers to adopt the methodology of their scientific collaborators and
less the other way around (Koskinen, et.al, 2011). In structuring the lab and the interactions with
outside collaborators it was a primary goal that student researchers would lead the design narrative
and investigations. Repeated exposure to trans-disciplinary collaborators forced students to
develop comfort and eventual confidence in asserting their design-led narratives and arguing for
their specific design speculations.
1192
Methodology
In facilitating design-led collaborations it is crucial to pay careful attention to how a transdisciplinary process of research should be structured from the initial idea gathering and synthesis
phase through to completion of full scale prototyped artifacts. There is the potential to inhibit or
support the awareness of individual niche positions within the broader design ecology. The
yearlong lab experience was divided into a two distinct phases: initial research and design
development and production. The initial design ideation and creative synthesis phase was an area
of important focus, as it was vital that projects originated from trans-disciplinary research
conversations. These conversations have the ability to become adversarial on the basis of
perceived threats to competence, territory or approach. Strategies to overcome this may include
overt attention to these dynamics. There exists an opportunity to discover the fractured and
heterogeneous nature of ones own field and for all participants to approach the collaboration with
the intent of enriching rather than defending their own position (Kumar Giri, 2002). In the case of
the lab a concerted effort was made to communicate clearly the motivations of the lab as well as
discussing with potential collaborators the pedagogical aims of the structured interactions. In this
way involvement from collaborators was understood to be in service of pedagogical and
collaborative goals. This clarification at the outset is necessary in this structured educational
experience.
Research Processes
Students began initial research in the summer prior to joining the lab. Students each had a general
topic and interest which they explored through self-directed research with some minimal feedback.
Leading up to the fall term student were provided with a comprehensive collaborative reading list
and a set of directives. This list was read by all student members of the lab and the directives
involved the development of a point of view towards their broad subject matter they had been
reviewing. Students were asked to synthesize their previous research with the texts from the group
reading list and begin to locate a critical conceptual position to their work. The use of narrative was
encouraged as a means to help generate and locate this position. Students were encouraged to
identify and develop threads of information that held resonance for them and begin to assemble
and reassemble these threads in a search for a position towards their topic. In the fall term,
students pursued an intensive research synthesis process and engaged in weekly transdisciplinary group discussions with invited collaborators. Students would present short 10 minute
PowerPoint presentations describing the state of their position and then a free form conversation
would follow among students and collaborators. Students would include case studies, precedent
and selected information from their research. The underlying similarities in process and design
ideation across disciplines made this initial conversational phase of the collaboration quite
productive with surprisingly few difficulties in facilitating open-ended narrative development from
the outset.
1193
In surveying research on the creative process in design one finds a variety of attempts to quantify
the process through diagrams, theories and various experimental setups. Precedent research on
the topic reveals a prevalence of analogies and attempts to quantify this process in biological and
other analogous terms. One particularly novel approach, proposed by Maher and Poon (1996),
posited that Genetic Algorithms could provide insight into the way design solutions co-evolved in
response to design problems. By identifying both the design problem space and the design solution
space as co-evolving actors in a design exploration the design process itself can be abstracted,
simplified and simulated. The use of biological analogies is not a new approach in describing
design process. This process has been increasingly understood over the years to be highly
nuanced and very sensitive to context (Edelson, 2002). The description of process has been
successively refined but a sizable gap still remains. This gap may fall under the description of
intuition, fuzziness or any number of romanticized evocative terms but this aspect of process in
relation to creative insight is found in other disciplines as well. It is useful to consider other
disciplinary approaches to ideation and decision making when contemplating collaborative design.
Scientific creativity and the process of decision making in science share a number of similarities
with the processes used by designers during both ideation and production. Scientific disciplines
make extensive use of the hypothesis. This can be understood as a story, a way to make sense of
certain facts or intuitions. The hypothesis is also quite loose, relying on data to refine the story or
redirect the plot (Grobstein, 2005). This comparison to storytelling emphasizes the provisional and
non-deterministic features of this process in scientific experimental procedures. This quasirandom combinatorial is similar in description to findings on design process by design researchers
(Simonton, 2003). Each individual working in a given field shares a subset of ideas and also
obtains novel or unique ideas or information owing to their specific interactions, background,
training and interests. Exposure to additional sources or ideas under the requisite conditions can
produce novel findings, but the required pieces must be in place either through information,
technique or context (Simonton, 2003). This finding is similarly enforced by controlled design
research experiments (Dorst & Cross, 2001). This attempt to quantify the factors contributing to
creativity as well as the decision making involved in design challenges produced results that seem
consistent with our intuitive understanding of creativity. The lab sought to leverage the distribution
of novel information and random combinatorial adjacencies through encouraging a diverse
exchange of ideas and exposure to a wide range of information. This diversity came from the initial
research sources that students pursued and was later amplified through interactions with
collaborators from outside disciplines.
Design Narratives
Broadly, procedures of information gathering in the early stages of the creative process can involve
review of precedent in design, scientific research and experiential and experimental data collection.
Working with these diverse threads of information, however, requires some method for moving
from the broad and somewhat messy overview of data which is needed to set the stage for a
stochastic process of creative discovery towards a more refined model or hypothesis. In the Lab,
the students were encouraged to develop design hypotheses in narrative form, translating and
combining multiple threads of information into a cohesive narrative of possible experience in the
near future. This closely modeled the procedure of hypothesis generating used in scientific
research, and our scientific collaborators seemed to quickly grasp the underlying similarity of these
creative methods across fields. Writing was used as a means to encourage and refine students
attenuated sensitivity to their own evolving positions. All students reviewed similar readings
providing a broad overview of key concepts and precedent in ecology, algorithmic design, tangible
interaction, digital fabrication, critical and speculative design practices, as well as contemporary
philosophy and theory relating to objects. In addition to collective readings, students also pursued
individual research into more specialized areas relating to their topics. Students were required to
research and synthesize information from three distinct domains: Design Case Studies, Scientific
Research and Philosophy and Theory. This research was presented in weekly lab meetings at
which students would discuss their findings with the group as well as outside collaborators
including evolutionary biologists, biomedical engineers and computer scientists.
The idea of an evolutionary search was used as a procedural analogy for this broad multidisciplinary research process. Students were encouraged to cast a wide and divergent net in their
1194
information gathering and research processes in an attempt to increase their chances of stumbling
upon novel or productive adjacencies in their information. Similarly, their exposure to outside
practitioners in other disciplines was conceived as an important part of their research experience.
In reformulating their presentations and hypotheses through subsequent iterations after receiving
feedback from scientists, engineers and other collaborators, students uncovered a number of new
directions and opportunities. Working with diverse data sets and information from a variety of
sources, the students approached their design hypotheses and explorations with a robust toolkit of
ideas and techniques from which to formulate their problems and responses. This process required
a thorough and committed encouragement of individual reflection refinement and re-assertion of a
position each week. Students could easily find themselves directed on any number of tangents
arising from these structured conversations. It was therefore necessary to insist upon a thoughtful
deliberation and a re-development of the narrative each week. This act of deliberation and
exploration through writing differs from writing that merely narrates or recites known information.
Here writing was used as a method for the generation of additional insight. This was a process
meant to privilege and encourage knowledge transforming over simple knowledge telling
(Galbraith & Hallam 2006).
Conceptual Coherence
The progression from information gathering to problem formation and ultimately to a design
response is a crucial bottleneck. Students initially struggled with the procedural synthesis required
to combine such disparate threads and categories of information. Most students tended to jump
very quickly to neat conclusions that arose from preconceived notions. There exists a recurring
issue of indeterminism in the design problem space dealing with ill-structured problems
(Goldschmidt, 1997). Goldschmidt argues that coherence and completion are, therefore, utmost
goals and to achieve coherence and completion, all components and elements of a design must
reach 'good fit', therefore, one may describe the process of designing as one in which the designer
tries to generate only such figures and concepts that can be linked to one another (1997). The
pursuit of a perceived good fit may in fact lead students to overly prescribed and pre-determined
solutions. A greater danger lies in the student acquiescing either consciously or less so to the
perceived goals and disciplinary aims of collaborators external to design disciplines. The pursuit of
coherence rather than completion may privilege a much more nuanced set of relationships and a
more operational term than completion. (Thomson Klein, 2004). Achieving a degree of completion
is understandably challenging when confronting a truly thorough, diverse and fertile accumulation
of research from multiple disciplines, sources and types. Coherence would allow for a transition
and translation between disparate agendas, attitudes and outcomes. Yet defining conceptual
coherence is problematic and it is highly dependent on the specific perspectives of contributing
participants (Murphy & Medin, 1985)
The collaborators helped to challenge students preconceived notions, and in early conversations
they showed a good deal of latitude and creativity in thinking as they were exposed to novel
findings from the students. This process exposed the collaborators to new procedures and insights,
and the collaborators in turn provided students with additional directions for research or
suggestions of precedent to review. The development of a speculative design narrative required
students to incorporate and respond to these conversations, as well as to delve into the emotional
subtext of their research, engaging the subtle nuance that lurks beneath the surface of human
interaction. This required an act of translation on their part, synthesizing subtext, aspirations and
experiential influences in order to speculate on potential tangents to human experience. In
developing a speculative narrative an a priori design assumption is unproductive. General attitudes
and a variety of resonant information are helpful but these threads need to be combined in a
freeform, exploratory and undirected search. Galbraith & Hallam elaborate that, in order, therefore,
to capture their implicit disposition towards the topic, the writer has to formulate ideas
dispositionally, free from external constraints. The crucial claim for present purposes is that, when
novel content is formulated by this process, it will, because it is generated as a dispositional
response to preceding ideas, be conceptually coherent with those ideas (2006). This requires that
students sustain a delicate balance between recognizing threads which are interesting and
meaningful and then be able to approach these threads from a non-judgmental position. Later
these threads are deployed both in conversational form and then later through progressive
exploratory writing sessions which slowly move towards coherence of a variety of parts. This work
1195
happened progressively and was facilitated through conversation, focused writing and multiple
refinements over the term. By the end of the term, students had developed a proposal that outlined
the major findings of their research and began to outline their speculative design narrative. This
work prepared them to begin exploring the design development of their ideas and transition into a
collaborative production phase.
Collaborative production
In transitioning to the design development phase, it becomes even more crucial to assert a strong
conceptual stance towards the work. At this phase other disciplines were relied upon to weigh in
on the feasibility and plausibility of a given design narrative. In this phase of negotiating the
collaboration there was a clear experiential hierarchy between expert and student. Yet the goal of
the lab is to exploit and explore methodologies across disciplines. Therefore our interest was not in
soliciting conventional wisdom or disciplinary norms but rather in encouraging all parties involved to
focus on underlying conceptual, experiential and aesthetic intentions. By retaining a focus on the
particular design niche that each student had begun to assert, these intentions could be re-stated
and emphasized in conversations relating to practicalities and design development discussions.
Particularly in assessing notions of feasibility and plausibility, students could easily fall prey to
assumptions and biases from collaborators outside of the discipline. For this reason it was
important that students developed an extensive familiarity with the current state of the fields they
were engaging. Students engaged with a variety of current and seminal scientific papers that
provided them with a more refined sense of what might be plausible, both scientifically and
technologically. A thorough literature review of relevant external disciplines supplemented by
recommendations from collaborators provided designers with their own intrinsic ability to assess
plausibility without relying on preconceived disciplinary biases. Ideas of plausibility varied quite a
bit between collaborators and across disciplines. Students design-driven assessments of the
plausibility of a given concept often diverged from the opinions of some of the scientists and
engineers with whom they were interacting.
In discussions related to design development issues of practicality, economics, desirability and
feasibility were weighted quite differently across disciplines. However, one area of trans-disciplinary
overlap that suggested a common language was in the realm of computation and programming. All
of the projects in the lab engaged issues of tangible interaction and therefore all needed to
interface with collaborators on issues of coding and hardware. The rise in computational literacy
paired with increased usage of digital modeling, programming and fabrication techniques has the
potential to serve as a common foundation for approaching trans-disciplinary collaboration (von
Mammen & Taron 2012). Technology has the potential to perform as a boundary object and serve
different yet simultaneous functions across disciplines (Marshall and Pengelly, 2006). In the lab,
novel deployment and explorations of computation were a common thread that was negotiated
through the projects in varying ways. This commonality allowed the lab to capitalize on the skill set
and expertise of specific collaborators in combination with the design agendas and computational
methodologies of individual students. The translations that occurred between disciplines originated
in conversation form and expanded through collaborative design and prototyping of the projects.
This model of design-led trans-disciplinary collaboration resulted in a series of compelling full scale
design prototypes that speculate on near future implications of science and technology in our
environments. The methodology employed and the resulting projects offer insight into the nature of
trans-disciplinary dialogues, demonstrating that the crossover between varying internal dialects can
produce emergent design outcomes.
In framing design speculations, some measure of plausibility is useful in defining certain
constraints. While students were encouraged to propose novel deployments of existing
technologies by hacking, as well as to develop and invent new methods to pursue their speculative
narratives, discussions of plausibility came to the forefront as students neared the end of their
research and writing phase. Through a series of round table discussions with students and
collaborators, the plausibility of various design ideas was thoroughly debated at several stages.
Collaborators from different disciplines approached these discussions with their own disciplinary
biases and thoughts on plausibility, which turned out to be a fairly subjective concept. However, the
technological insights of collaborators regarding the complexity and feasibility of certain aspects of
the projects were incredibly useful in the end. The lab required that students pursue full scale
1196
prototypes of at least some portion of their proposal, and this requirement led to a productive
narrowing in scope, in most cases strengthening the final project.
Design Prototyping
The lab worked with several main collaborators in the design prototyping phase. One of these was
a computer scientist and evolutionary biologist currently developing computational methods for the
analysis of collective behavior in animal groups. Another was an electrical engineering student with
a broad skill set in physical computing. I served as the main advisor to each student and provided
feedback on all aspects of the projects including aesthetics, generative design processes, material
experimentation, interaction and the philosophical and theoretical implications of the work. The lab
also exposes students to a variety of novel computational techniques for both form generation and
design fabrication through a series of seminars and workshops. Students prepared detailed
diagrams outlining the nature of the interactions they envisioned in preparing to meet with their
collaborators. They also began some initial interaction prototypes investigating various sensors
while pursuing material and formal investigations. Their early familiarity with these skills and
processes afforded them more time to investigate and develop the more complex technical aspects
of their projects including coding and electronics. Students also had a fairly broad sense of what
was feasible in terms of material and formal investigations. This allowed them to quickly engage
with the prototyping of their ideas and to refine the initial tests into full scale interactive prototypes.
All students had a certain affinity for algorithmic design processes and digital fabrication processes.
This work was initially explored through a special elective seminar I developed and taught which all
students were required to take before joining the lab. This seminar explored novel approaches to
form generation, and utilized digital fabrication tools including the CNC router and 3D printer. Thus,
all students in the lab had encountered and pursued experimental approaches to computational
design and fabrication through formal and material investigations in coursework that served as a
prerequisite to participation in the lab. Students were also given primers in basic programming
using Processing, as well as workshops with core physical computing concepts and basic initial
prototyping. This comfort in exploring novel procedural approaches to generating formal outcomes
yielded work in the lab that displayed a high level of sensitivity to the aesthetics of interaction,
including careful attention to issues of materiality, tactility and form.
Synthetic futures
The resulting projects from the lab display a diverse yet cohesive array of interactive objects and
environments. The projects share a consistent approach to exploring formal and material outcomes
through pursuit of generative computational design methods. All of the projects also pursued some
method of interaction through various sensing mechanisms. Novel interaction aesthetics are
explored through an integrated synthesis of the diverse research tangents. Students have a
tendency to focus narrowly on one facet of the design problem, and one of the primary goals in this
phase was to continue to emphasize a focus and commitment to the underlying core conceptual
values that were defined and developed in the initial phases of research. By emphasizing a return
to these values in tandem with problem solving and engineering of the project in physical form, I
feel these projects retained the rich underlying conceptual intent. Specifically students were
encouraged to revisit and refine their interaction narratives and think carefully about how these
interactions would be best expressed, materially, spatially and aesthetically. One particularly
successful project from the lab explored the potential implications of synthetic biology on our
interior environments (figs. 1-4). This project involved a thorough review of current and emerging
technology and theory relating to synthetic biology. The final project featured a series of three
future domestic surfaces: a wall, a floor and a countertop. In a near-future scenario, these surfaces
would utilize swarms of synthetically-derived bacterial strains to serve a variety of support tasks in
the home.
One of our key collaborators was trained as a computer scientist and is currently pursuing a Ph.D.
in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. He brought an incredible knowledge of computational
modeling and a thorough understanding and sensitivity to the collective behavior of swarms
including bacteria. While this collaborator was able to provide general with coding issues, he also
1197
provided very specialized expertise related to his own research into collective behavior and swarm
intelligence. He worked closely on the project from initial biological inspiration and research into
programming and fine tuning the final bacterial swarm simulations. This exploration utilized
Processing, a Kinect sensor and a projection to simulate a future synthetic wall surface which
would be interactive, allowing a user to modulate openings through tactile interface with light
attractive bacteria. This working relationship was very smooth with very little conflict; this was a
collaborator who understood that issues of aesthetics and form were just as important as
understanding the underlying biological system. This project also required additional physical
computing collaboration. This project was unique in that the student formed an alliance with a local
community hackerspace and members of the community provided assistance in creating a large
sheet of bacterial cellulose. This is an experimental material which is made by fermenting bacteria,
and then harvesting the sheet like substance and drying it out. The use of a bacterial substrate for
a bacterial simulation was a nice material addition to the project and a novel collaboration effort
between the University and the community hackerspace. This project highlights the focus that is
placed on material experimentation and process in the lab. This novelty was incorporated into the
existing design speculation and added depth to the interaction. This collaborator has worked with
artists in the past and he finds the experience of collaborating on creative projects to be refreshing.
Again there are no immediately quantifiable benefits to his own research, but even this descriptor
of refreshing indicates to me that the experience is providing new input and vantage points to the
collaborator which may manifest in a variety of ways in their own work at a later point.
1198
1199
S(c)ent Message
A third project, S(c)ent Message posited a novel interaction based around the sense of smell,
exploring formal outcomes in addition to prototyping a working scent communication device (figs.79). The resultant piece allows a user to transmit a variety of emotionally correlated scent messages
to another occupant within an environment. This project incorporated wireless communication
systems, hacked scent delivery devices, and custom designed scent delivery form and control.
This project also posited very specific user interaction and the interface with the device and spatial
installation reveal a carefully calibrated approach to the design narrative. When assessed as a
whole, all of the projects in the lab synthesize a variety of disciplinary research insights, working
processes and novel experimentation into materiality and form. In each project despite an intensive
1200
development process that required revision and synthesis of multiple levels of information and
technique, the projects retain a cohesive focus in their exploration of novel scenarios for interaction
with our environments in the near future.
1201
Conclusion
In summary, the work produced in the lab this year has demonstrated a diverse yet cohesive set of
responses to issues of spatial interaction and emotional amplification in our environments. Each
student had a particular interest, perspective and motivation that was explored and amplified
through a carefully structured set of interactions and collaborations. The lab benefitted from
initiating collaborations very early in the design research process, with collaborators from outside
disciplines participating in design ideation conversations, and thereby establishing investment in
proposals at an early stage. One universal language that all projects engaged was that of
programming. The interpretation and implementation of coding varied between disciplines, but
served as a common operational language through which to investigate aesthetic nuance. The
labs focus on innovation in materiality and form generation was further enhanced through the
interaction scenarios developed by the students, and insights and skills from our collaborators. The
novel formal and interactive outcomes from the lab display the benefits of a research process that
seeks to leverage information, methodologies and expertise across disciplines. By structuring an
educational experience where unexpected disciplinary adjacencies may emerge, individual design
motivations can be acknowledged, integrated and facilitated to great benefit.
References
Cross, N. & Dorst, K. (2001). Creativity in the Design Process: Co-Evolution Of ProblemSolution.
Design Studies, 22(5), 431.
Cross, N. (1999). Design Research: A Disciplined Conversation. Design Issues, 15(2), 7.
Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage In Design. The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 109.
Galbraith, D., Torrance, M., & Hallam, J. (2006). Effects of Writing on Conceptual Coherence. In
Annual Conference of the Cognitive Sciences Proceedings, 1340-45.
Goldschmidt, G. (1997). Capturing Indeterminism: Representation in the Design Problem Space.
Design Studies, 18(4), 451.
1202
Nicole Koltick
An Assistant Professor in Architecture + Interiors at Drexel University and a principal in the design
research practice lutz/koltick. Nicole is the director of the Design Futures Lab where she leads a
graduate research group in critical design practices and speculative proposals focused on three
main areas of inquiry; tangible interaction in the built environment, the incorporation of novel
advancements in science and computation into our built environments and new models for ambient
communication.
1203
Abstract
This paper investigates the emergence and nourishment of group creativity within humancomputer interaction design (HCID). HCID practitioners are groomed within a scientific
tradition and primarily perceive themselves as knowledge seekers, rather than creative
makers of things. In an effort to add new value to HCID we refer to assemblage of skills
and assemblage of design practices suggesting that practitioners acquire creativity when
combining epistemology (finder) and ontology (maker). We do so by example from an
advanced graduate course in HCID where the students were to design products to be
exhibited in a well-visited and established annual fair at the university. This task required
the presence of skills and practices of both finder and maker. In the process of product
making, the students were not allowed to rely exclusively on learned methods and
approaches involving users and other stakeholders. Rather, they were to unleash their
own creativity. The paper follows this process of emerging creativity through photo
documentation, it provides lessons learned, and it discusses how design comes about
through a relationship between finding and making.
Keywords
Human-Computer Interaction Design; Design Thinking, Creativity; Assemblages
Introduction
When reading Charles Owens paper Design thinking: Notes on its nature and use some
time ago, the sentence Design thinking is in many ways the obverse of scientific thinking
caught our attention (Owen, 2007, p. 17). The use of the word obverse was interesting in
that it is archaic and not in common use any longer. It designates the side of a coin that
bears the principal design. In using this word, Owen gestures toward the importance of
design thinking. He further introduces classification of practitioners of science or design
into finders and makers in our discussion. Makers are those who are creative and
capable of synthesizing their knowledge into new constructs, patterns, concepts, etc. They
can apply design thinking towards solving complex problems such as environmental risks,
poverty, and health. They also design products and services, etc. Finders, on the other
hand, work through science thinking, understanding phenomena and disseminating their
findings through research papers.
Narrowing the focus to human computer interaction design (HCID) (traditionally situated
within scientific thinking and practice), and interaction design (ID) (situated within design
thinking and design practices), we position both HCID and ID as fields between science
and design, in part belonging to both and in part, to neither, see Figure 1.
1204
1205
1206
In this paper we follow the class during the first eleven weeks (the remaining time of the
class, the students worked with a new design project). The students were, initially, asked
to brainstorm about the design brief: make products that illustrate well some aspects of
the research done by the Design-group. The final concepts from this process were to be
implemented in the design, thus the students had to work within constraints of their skills,
knowledge, available materials, and the size of the exhibit space. A few rounds of
concept sharing and critiquing took place before the students formed teams to work on
implementing concepts that were chosen. The students were not to involve users, but
rather employ skills and practices of finders and makers. In their endeavor, the students
chose to work with three themes: privacy issues (materialized as a project based on a
confession booth); sustainable design (expressed through use of energy generated while
biking); and wearable technology (realized in a skirt for women suffering from dementia),
see Figure 9.
In following and documenting the process of assemblages in HCI Design practices we
used different media such as photographs of situations and events in the class, and Postit notes, which were used to jot down tips, ideas, issues to pursue, how, what, and aims,
during the feedback sessions when students presented their projects. The Post-it notes
were collected after being on the whiteboard for a week or so. Further, brief notes were
occasionally taken during conversations with students about their projects, or when they
presented their work. Also, the third author wrote summaries of activities that only
students attended. Additionally, the students answered short, targeted questions,
concerning creativity, either orally or in writing.
The photographic material, consisting of over 300 photographs, was generated throughout
the project process. It is extensive and rich in that it captures a range of situations, from
the feedback sessions and the students presentations of projects (from paper-based
ideas to prototypes in process), to working sessions outside scheduled class hours and
the showpieces exhibited at the fair. Both teachers and students documented the process
photographically and shared their images in Dropbox. The photos used in this paper are
a collection of these shared images. Initially, the photographs primarily served the
purpose of documenting (Crang & Cook, 2007) the process of creative enactment in class,
from the first drafting of ideas to the final designs. In addition, the teaching team realized
that the photographs were rich sources of information beyond documentation. So the
teachers started using the photos as guidelines for understanding, experimenting, and
refining ways of nurturing creativity. This resulted in other decisions. We altered the
traditional lecture set-up to increase participation and involvement: everybody was invited
to gather in a standing circle to see the projects and provide feedback. We fostered the
inclusion of different skills (e.g. sewing, collaging), things (e.g. wood, art design), and
games (such as dancing and designing dance moves). And we introduced ways of
exploring the world (Smith, 2008) by going outside the class to find and experience
sources of inspiration, e.g. diverse interactive installations in the city.
The authors of this article are the two in-house teachers and one of the attending students.
All students were invited to participate in writing this article from the very beginning of the
class, and we are happy that one decided to participate.
1207
and similar skills. It was just as valuable for us all to learn how the students perceive
creativity, as it was to know what kind of skills they brought with them to the class.
Enactments of finders
The initial phase of the class was challenging, for both teachers and students. The
teachers were seeking ways to best convey design thinking/practices and foster the
unfolding of making. The students seemed to cling to their finder skills. It was as if they
anticipated something well known. At a certain point frustrations were at the forefront
from both ends. Teachers complained, students complained. Conversations took place
and both parties made new efforts.
On one occasion, in the process of uploading photos to Dropbox, it became apparent to
the teachers that the class was cut into two parts. Rather than having one standing
collaborative activity going on around the whiteboard, most of the students were sitting at
the table not participating in the critique and idea generation. The whiteboard had cut the
circle in half and worked as a gate that excluded the project teams that were not
presenting their work (Figure 2 to the left). In realizing how the materiality of the artefact
had an effect on the activities taking place, the teachers opted for furthering inclusion. On
the last feedback session, before the exhibition in October, a circle formed around the
confession booth when one of the teachers sat down in it. The booth, in this sense,
became part of the circle, and a good discussion unfolded about how to showcase the
confession booth at the exhibit (see Figure 2 to the right).
Figure 2. At left, the first feedback session, September 9th, 2013. At right, the last
feedback session, October 28th, 2013. Photos by Finken.
Alongside the effect of the artefacts (whiteboard and confession booth), we read the
situation portrayed in Figure 2 as an instance of the enactment of a more predominantly
scientific way of engagement, which prevailed in the early days/weeks of the class. This
initial attitude toward new approaches to design contrasts with the attitude at the end of
the design process, when the students had gained practical experience with design
thinking through their effort with making.
In the following excerpt, written by the student-author in a reflection-note concerning
creativity and its role during the process, we see how the finder is present and how this
finder strives with moving from epistemology to ontology:
At the beginning of the course the teachers asked about my creative skills. I replied that
using technology was a way to solve problems and that I perceived this as creative.
Initially, when the work with the projects started, I felt quite lost. Seeking inspiration, I used
websites, books, and articles to find some viable ways to be creative. On the other hand,
1208
one of the points from the two-three first lectures was about going out of the HCI thinking
and changing my path of designing.
The issue raised in this excerpt, about creativity and how it becomes manifest through
books, websites and articles, was a predominant practice in the beginning of the class. It
is mirrored in the photos from the first phase (Figure 3) where the initial ideas are
presented through cut/past/gluing onto paper.
Figure 3. Feedback session on September 9th, 2013. Photos by Finken and Culn.
In Figure 3 we see students presenting their ideas in class at the first feedback session. If
we take a close look at the photos, we see much cutting and pasting of images that had
been found on the Internet. We also see ideas that had been grabbed from elsewhere,
e.g. facesinplaces (see also (Smith, 2008)), and refrigerator letterings, which were put
together in new ways to form basis for their future designs. In this manner, drawing on
skills of the finder to convey ideas for future designs was the students modus operandi in
the beginning of the class.
What we cannot see in the photos is the feedback, provided by the teachers, jotted down
on the Post-it notes that are glued to the whiteboard (Figure 3 to the left). One of these
notes says: what is required to make it? resources, space, people, technologies, things,
etc. Another Post-it note says how to exhibit + purpose of projects? Yet another simply
concerns the aim of the projects, AIM? it says with capital letters followed by a big
question mark. Other Post-it notes fall along this line of logic by pointing to the very
justification of the projects presented: justification do not need to be actual/logical/perfect
-> you need to show the process, and think, reason & show our projects. prototyping.
These comments advocate for mixing the skills of finders and makers in collective creative
efforts in HCIDesign work. Simultaneously, they instantiate the introducing lines of this
paper: that creativity is a skill to be learned (Csikszentmihaly, 1997; Tan, 2013). The
comments on the Post-it notes were considered to be important for the students, helping
them to incorporate the feedback and to bring the process further along. Taken together,
the comments form an advocacy for the assemblage of skills and practices.
1209
Figure 4. Photos from and around the feedback session September 30th, 2013. Photos
by Finken and Heggelund.
Similarly, the two other project teams brought in materials other than paper. The students
had started working outside digital media and brought along tangible materials to
exemplify their ideas as presented in the slide shows. One group working on an idea for
people suffering from dementia (in the project Skirts with meaning concerning wearable
technologies) brought along items such as skirts and clothespins to showcase their ideas
(see Figure 5). This project also continued further, expanding beyond the class, (see
(Culn & Finken, 2014)).
1210
Figure 5. Skirts with meaning for people suffering from dementia is taking form.
Feedback session, September 30th, 2013. Photos by Culn and Finken.
Another group working on an idea within the area of sustainable design brought along
samples of fabric and knitted patches when showcasing their idea. This project concerns
how interacting with your own energy (in this case when biking) can provide warmth
during cold winters. To exemplify their idea this team also brought along a bicycle and a
prototype of a hand warmer, a knitted glove, which could be attached to the handlebars on
a bicycle. The glove is to be warmed up via a plug-in to a small dynamo when pedalling
(see Figure 6).
Creativity in HCIDesign
In the above we have looked at assemblages of skills and practices and how they have
been facilitated in an effort to nurture the emergence of creativity in ways that were new
for these ten HCID students. Further, it has been a new experience for the students to
work without methodological strands of participatory design in which users are involved in
the process of design. Here we take a closer look at creativity as assemblages of skills
and practices, and how working from such a standpoint affected the students view of
creativity.
In the beginning of the semester we sat down to watch the film Design&Thinking (Design
& Thinking - a documentary on design thinking, 2012.), and a lecture by Klemmer,
(Creating and Comparing Alternatives, 2012) as an example of design in HCI. The main
message of the lecture video was that it is better to start with many different ideas than to
be attached to any particular one. This is important in that participants in a team can let go
of my idea won-mentality, which is often present in group situations. The in-house
teachers aimed at taking a lead with this approach by including the students in critiquing,
developing, and furthering ideas, which should then materialize in the designs to be
exhibited at the fair. When working without user-participants (whose views are important
for HCIDesigners in order to find and formalize opportunities for iterative improvements in
typical design cycles) the students needed new ways of refining designing ideas in ways
that are self-driven.
This process of working with re-formulating/re-designing their ideas came to have an
effect on their orientation towards creativity. Such effects are articulated by the studentauthor in his reflection-note on creativity:
1211
Another learning experience, which I really appreciated, was how we were prompted,
during the design process, to accept that some of your own good ideas had to be
discarded. I think this was a turning point for my creativity, since it required that I would
be even more pro-active in searching for motivation outside of myself, that is, in the
surroundings. A final observation, which concerns my use of technology and its role in
this project, was the ubiquitous and somehow invisible role it had. In concluding my
experience about creativity in this first project, I can state that I reached my design goals
thanks to a desire to create, an increase in challenge spirit, a cultivation of my inborn
curiosity, and also a new understanding about how good design requires hard work.
With this we could say that the students had (finally) started to gather and work on their
projects regularly on their own. This is atypical for HCI students, who do not have much
experience with making and working in studios and labs. For images of work taking place
outside scheduled class hours see (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Lilypad and programming on the left. Fabrics, paint, electronics (lights) on the
right. Photos taken on different occasions during October. Photos by Risvik and
Heggelund.
At the last feedback session, just before the exhibit, the students had had a few months of
experiences with making and with incorporating their academic skills and the skills they
had acquired elsewhere into such process of making. In Figure 8 we see details of
different materials and skills (e.g. sewing, knitting, painting, programming, academic
knowledge) that were involved in the process of making these designs.
Figure 8. Feedback session October 21st, 2013. Photos by Finken and Culn.
1212
In the morning of the last feedback session the students were busy with finalizing their
projects; some were still waiting for electronics to arrive in the mail. They had prepared
the lab with their designs and were ready to showcase and present.
After the feedback session we asked the students to write out their answers to three
questions relating to creativity: a) Describe your creative skills; b) Have you noticed any
changes in your attitude towards creativity?; and c) Would it be easier to engage in
creative processes now? In asking the students these questions we were interested in
understanding how they perceive creativity after having been through this process, and
whether they had learned new skills to be used in future design processes. One of the
students, in his/her replies to the last question, wrote: Yes, to be creative is not just a
matter of being good at drawing. It is also a matter of thinking. You have to learn to think
differently through action [doing] and experience. (Translated from Norwegian by the
authors). Another student replying to the same question said, What we have been doing
in this course inspired me to do more practical stuff, that is not digital! I actually did some
painting at home the other day. Its fun to make physical things and its easier to start this
process now. In a reply to the second question a student said, Yes, lowered threshold,
easier to just do it instead of just thinking about it. Have started to paint and sew, have
made a cover/case for my Mac book Pro. In general the students responded positively to
the questions and seemed to have pushed both their creative boundaries and their effort
with such work. Among the seven replies we received there is one student who stands
out in the sense that he/she writes, the creative skill has not changed.
In coming to an end of this paper we want to emphasize that during the process, in which
the teaching team advocated and facilitated an assemblage of skills and practices, the
students worked hard to push the boundaries of their skills, which is valuable. In Figure 9
we see the outcomes of their hard work. Here we have arrived at the exhibit day and see
(from left): the preparation of the stand and gifts to those confessing; showing the work
at the fair; actively recruiting people for the stand; showing the features of the bike. In the
bottom right corner, an anonymous person is using the booth to confess. The mask,
which is both worn by the students and displayed on the side of the confession booth, is a
Guy Fawkes mask, which is a global symbol of protest and anonymity (Taylor, 2013).
1213
project process and exhibit. The photographs have been important in guiding us,
teachers, in understanding challenges; in being more creative in our teaching (e.g. by
involving the body by dancing), and in prompting our direction of assembling finders and
makers practices and skills. In the table, divergent thinking (purple) is used
interchangeably with convergent thinking, as shown in row 2. The light turquoise color in
the weeks 1-3 column signifies something we tried to encourage the students to do, but
we did not see the effects until much later in the semester.
Conclusion
The aim of this paper has been to inquire into the emergence of creativity through
channels that stand out as alternative in comparison to the ones traditionally used by
HCID practitioners. The setting for such an inquiry has been a course on advanced
interaction design in which a group of graduate students, already having practical
knowledge of HCI, were enrolled. This setting turned out to be well-suited for this kind of
inductive and experimental research and teaching involving design practices and
creativity. We have used the concepts of assemblages of skills and practices in an effort
to reflect on behaviours and activities that unfolded throughout the design process. The
students have shifted their perspective somewhat, from a predominantly scientific
orientation in the beginning, to a more designerly orientation through their endeavours of
making. Working in this way, the students have experienced a shift in the perception of
their own, individual creativity, although all of the work was happening within a team.
Descriptions of such assemblages of skills and practices with evidence of achieved results
could be a good way to start building group creativity, and, thus, contribute to the third
wave of creativity research related to socio-cultural approaches.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank the students who attended the class it has been wonderful
working with you we are grateful to you for you consenting to the writing of this paper, its
content, and for the use of your photos: co-author Andrea Gasparini, Ingrid Arnesen,
Rebekka Castro, Agnethe Heggelund, Rita Johnsen, Henrik Kjersem, Lena Risvik, Anja
Simonsen, Sylvia Saxlund and Paria Tahaee. Also, thanks go to our co-teacher Henry
1214
Mainsah from the School of Architecture and Design in Oslo. Our guest lecturers Tom
Igoe, Amanda Steggell and Lavrans Lvlie have inspired all of us thank you. We also
owe a special thanks to Katie Vann for correcting our English.
References
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking can transform organizations
and inspire innovation. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Carroll, J. M. (2003). HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary
Science. Morgan Kaufmann.
Crang, M., & Cook, I. (2007). Doing ethnographies. Los Angeles; London: SAGE.
Kremmer, S. Creating and Comparing Alternatives. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXmRLgBA9oA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Csikszentmihaly, M. (1997). Creativity: Flow & the Psychology of Discovery & Invention.
London: Harper & Row.
Culn, A. L., Joshi, S., & Atif, A. (2013). HCID: Who is an interaction designer? In
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers (Vol.
4, pp. 19241937.). Oslo, Norway: ABM Media.
Culn, A.L., Finken, S. & Gasparini, A.A. (2014). iCONFESS: Mirroring Digital SelfDisclosure in a Physical Booth. In HCII 2014. Springer.
Culn, A.L. & Finken, S. (2014). A Skirt for Well Aged Ladies with Cognitive Loss. In HCII
2014. Springer.
Culn, A.L., Mainsah, H.N. & Finken, S. (2014). Design Practice in Human Computer
Interaction Design Education. In The Seventh International Conference on Advances in
Computer-Human Interactions. ACHI 2014. ThinkMind.
Design & Thinking - a documentary on design thinking. (2012). Retrieved November 7,
2013, from http://designthinkingmovie.com/#home
Dym, C., Agogino, A., Eris, O., Frey, D., & Leifer, L. (2005). Engineering design thinking,
teaching, and learning. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.olin.edu/mech_eng_pub/22/
Faiola, A. (2007). The design enterprise: Rethinking the HCI education paradigm. Design
Issues, 23(3), 3045.
Fallman, D. (2003). Design-oriented human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the
SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 225232).
Forlizzi, J., Zimmerman, J., & Evenson, S. (2008). Crafting a place for interaction design
research in HCI. Design Issues, 24(3), 1929.
Giaccardi, E., & Fischer, G. (2008). Creativity and evolution: a metadesign perspective.
Digital Creativity, 19(1), 1932.
Goodman, E., Stolterman, E., & Wakkary, R. (2011). Understanding interaction design
practices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 10611070). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Luckhurst, R. (2006). Bruno Latours Scientifiction: Networks, Assemblages, and Tangled
Objects. Science Fiction Studies, 33(1), 417.
Owen, C. (2007). Design thinking: Notes on its nature and use. Design Research
Quarterly, 2(1), 1627.
1215
Sawyer, R. K., & Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human
Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol.
5126). New York: Basic books.
Smith, K. (2008). How to be an explorer of the world: portable life museum. New York:
Perigee.
Stolterman, E., McAtee, J., Royer, D., & Thandapani, S. (2009). Designerly Tools.
Presented at the Undisciplined! Design Research Society Conference 2008, Sheffield
Hallam University, Sheffield, UK.
Tan, A.-G. (2013). Psychology of Cultivating Creativity in Teaching and Learning. In A.-G.
Tan (Ed.), Creativity, Talent and Excellence (pp. 2742). Springer Singapore.
Taylor, A. (2013, November 5). How Guy Fawkes Inadvertently Created the Word Guy.
Slate. Retrieved from
http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/11/05/guy_fawkes_day_how_the_word
_guy_became_popular.html
Wright, P., Blythe, M., & McCarthy, J. (2006). User experience and the idea of design in
HCI. Interactive Systems. Design, Specification, and Verification, 114.
Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., & Evenson, S. (2007). Research through design as a method
for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on
Human factors in computing systems (pp. 493502).
Zimmerman, J., Stolterman, E., & Forlizzi, J. (2010). An analysis and critique of Research
through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach. In Proceedings of the 8th
ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 310319).
Sisse Finken
Sisse serves as Researcher in the Design-group at the Department of Informatics,
University of Oslo, where she has worked since 2007. She teaches two graduate level
courses on Qualitative Research Methods and Advanced Interaction Design. At present
she conducts research in a smart home for senior citizens, with a specific focus on care
and care technologies. In this setting she is interested in understanding the effects that
care technologies have on everyday living and working; that is, more generally, she is
interested in understating relationships between practices of design and use. Her
research is influenced by work in the traditions of social anthropology, science and
technology studies, computer supported cooperative work, participatory design, and
design research. She finds visual methods, such as photography, inspiring in the conduct
of her work.
1216
Andrea Gasparini
Andrea is a senior engineer in the Department of Digital Services at the University of Oslo
Library, where he has worked for the past 14 years. His work involves trying and adapting
new technologies for the use in the library, as well as the development and operation of
library's digital services. In 2011, Andrea completed his master degree studies in
interaction design. His master thesis project involved the use of tablet PCs in education
and learning. Continuing to work with interaction design, Andrea has shifted his focus to
design of new library services. At present, he is a doctoral student, focusing on the
processes of innovation and how design thinking supports innovation processes in the
Academic Library.
1217
Abstract
To the extent previously claimed, concept exploration is not the key to product innovation.
However, companies that are design-focused are twice as innovative as those that are not.
To study design-driven innovation and its occurrence in design education, two case studies
are conducted. The first is an example of design practice which includes observation and
cooperation process maps in an offshore project. The second is an example of product
design education which includes observations of teamwork, team member interviews and
archival studies. While the first case study demonstrates how a company innovates through
a design-driven process with complex knowledge transference and systematic planning and
improvisation, the second case study shows students managing their design processes
through concept generation in a less complex trial and error process. Knowledge exploration
as a part of design activity was analyzed through the criteria of network paradoxes. A
pedagogic concept has been synthesized and validated internally based on the case study,
and externally based on other design practices and design research. The pedagogic concept
synthesized was Knowledge Transfer Flow [KTF]. The KTF concept can help to orient design
students within the information-saturated design processes integrated within complex
innovation systems.
Keywords:
knowledge transfer flow; control over design aspects; network connections; professional
practice in design education
The skill of generating ideas in a variety of ways relates to design practice, but this skill is
transferrable to other fields of product development that can result in design-driven
innovation. This is why general competence in design thinking has gradually influenced
several professional fields (Brown, 2009; Stamm, 2008). According to Stamm, this could
happen because design activity includes processes of expertise, which do not necessarily
include any particular technological or system knowledge. These processes can be used for
encounters with professional practices across technological and social traditions. This can be
done by generating, manipulating or combining product and system design features through
the generative process of concept exploration. Design-focused companies in Norway are
twice as innovative as those that are not, according to Skule Storheil, speaking at the
Inspiration-Innovation seminar at the Norwegian Design Council in Oslo on April 17th, 2013.
If companies already have the necessary knowledge but lack the ability to explore concepts,
which is the key to design-driven innovation, then this should reflect on design education as
well. However, researchers aim for the skill of connecting the right dots (Nussbaum, 2013,
p. 58).rather than exploring concepts in multiple directions (Nussbaum, 2013). Therefore, the
following question should be critically explored: How does concept exploration lead to
increased innovation? The following elements seem relevant in this process:
1218
Problem setting is one of the core values of the creative design process (Schn, 1983). This
value emerges from discussing and interpreting a design problem. In educational and
professional practice problem setting and concept development have been intensively
adopted and methods have been developed (Micheli, Jaina, Goffin, Lemke, & Verganti,
2012), while overlooking other methods of gathering and choosing design aspects that have
been similarly effective in innovative processes (Gillier, Piat, Roussel, & Truchot, 2010).
According to Concept-Knowledge theory innovative and creative work happens in a concept
space (Hatchuel, Le Masson, & Weil, 2011). Once concepts are affirmed, they pass on to
knowledge space; thus, they describe how knowledge is systematized and used again as an
essential design factor in creative methods that can lead to new concept generations.
Concept space is where many creative methods take place, from combining design aspects
to formulating design problems (Lawson, 2006). Thus, in design practices, both associative
and cognitive creative methods operate while exploring possibilities within a specific design
field (Stamm, 2008). This approach seems too fixated on generating new solutions from
existing knowledge, so some researchers propose that these approaches could be
developed further from a creative perspective by including a greater exploration of
possibilities, which happens by actively using phases of divergent and convergent thinking
(Baregheh, Rowley, & Sambrook, 2009). This idea that possibilities can emerge from
complexity is connected to system-oriented design theories, and this is what some design
educators frequently aim to achieve in practical design projects (Sevaldson, 2011). However,
this is not obtainable without the richness of data to combine and the opportunity to explore
the topic in a complex environment. Such a complex environment can be identified in product
design practice today, a profession that has evolved from product branding in the 1980s to
being part of New Product Development (Perks, Cooper, & Jones, 2005).
With a lot of suppliers and collaborators in this complex innovation environment there is a
need for the skill of choosing what is most relevant in each situation, and what can contribute
to innovation. It has been demonstrated that a design team has to be able to explore
knowledge space and to generate concepts at the same time (Valtonen, 2007). Another
factor for successfully implementing concept generation methods in NPD practice is the
ability to handle the increased complexity of knowledge space content and its
interconnections to relevant fields (Visser, Lugt, & Stappers, 2007). Despite these studies in
design-driven innovation and industrial technology, there still seems to be a knowledge gap
concerning the complexity of design-driven innovation in product design education. There is
a need to expand knowledge about this design practice, reflected in a pedagogic model that
includes practice in complex design work. The research question therefore is: how can
network paradoxes in practice contribute to education for design-driven innovation? This
question will be discussed in relation to what extent the product designer can be situated in
the creative process through a methodical choice of relevant knowledge. The aim is to find a
pedagogic tool for design education.
Method
According to Concept-Knowledge theory creative work happens in a concept space through
the combination and manipulation of existing knowledge (Hatchuel, Le Masson, & Weil,
2011). This process is termed disjunction, or knowledge transfer. Once concepts are
affirmed, they pass on to knowledge space. This process is termed conjunction, or concept
transfer. Knowledge is then systematized and reused as an essential concept- generating
factor in a new disjunction cycle. Concept-knowledge theory has been useful from a
theoretical perspective that allowed for framing research. By tracing conjunctions and
disjunctions in different design processes it might be possible to understand how concept
exploration and knowledge transfer can induce design-driven innovation. Concept mapping
was chosen to record the findings because it presents processes in a visual way, which
allows for the comparison of concept and knowledge exploration (Maxwell, 2005).
1219
A case study was chosen because there was a need to exemplify theory in the fieldsuch as,
in this study, network paradoxesin relation to practice (Yin, 2009). In order to understand
how complex design problems and innovations are managed in practice, a relevant design
project from the offshore industry was chosen for the case study. A participatory design
approach (Asaro, 2000) was used to gather the documentation from offshore field work in
order to examine the organizational structure and dynamics of cooperation between
participants in the process. The aim was to collect material about learning outcomes that
enhance understanding, skills, and general competence related to complexity in designdriven innovation. The case study contains observations of two student groups doing their
projects to gain direct information about their everyday practices and perspectives
concerning the design process (Powell & Steele, 1996). Archival studies of their project
reports were used to analyze their reflections on the accomplished projects. As both
innovation and knowledge transfer flow occur in certain environments defined by
relationships and networks, both case studies are described and questioned by mapping
these relationships between participants (called nodes). The results have been analyzed
and selected through the identification of network paradoxes in organizations to understand
how design students become more conscious of how to integrate knowledge space and how
to handle complexity in practice (Hkansson & Ford, 2001).
1220
suppliers through a series of pilot projects (Fig. 2a). These pilot projects were timeconsuming processes that the administrative leadership frequently opposed. On the other
hand, the practitioners in the engineering team gained from them.
The onboard handling system, including trolleys and elevators for automatic transport of the
seismic sensor units, was designed by a company that specializes in airport baggage belts
for passenger self-service; thus, the system was based on engineering skills and knowledge
of logistics. The subsea sensor unit handling (Fig. 1) was executed by a company that
specializes in remotely operated vehicle [ROV] navigation. This company provided the whole
subsea navigation service and was a source of knowledge that enabled the core team to
define design demands for the seismic sensor unit and the ROV tool. The sensor unit
deployment system and ROV tool that handled subsea loads and placement of the sensor
units was fully outsourced to the engineering company that handled high-quality
mechatronics to sustain active deep-water use. The construction of the sensor unit
components was also outsourced to these companies. A metal frame and some metal
vessels were outsourced to a company specializing in metal processes, and this knowledge
transfer influenced the frame design and handling procedures. The sensor unit shell
production was executed by a company specializing in rotational molding that allowed for the
design of numerous multipurpose sensor unit features for both onboard and subsea
handling, maintenance, and human interfacing. Logistics and design were outsourced to a
company that suggested including a product designer as a permanent member of the team.
Software and electronics were designed in a separate division of the home company that
housed the core of the new technology. The team leader stated that: The crucial factor for
innovation success was early, initial involvement of suppliers through pilot projects. This
allowed the team members not only to pick and choose partners but to learn new practices
they were not familiar with. J.F Ns (personal communication, February 21, 2009), (Fig.
2a).
Figure 2a
Figure 2b
The Seabed team featured two chief operators who worked on development in the laboratory
and offshore operating seismic procedures on the vessel. Other team members included an
engineer, a chief developer, and a product designer who was outsourced from another
company. The designers role was to design systems and product features, and to facilitate
discussions through knowing how to visualize animations and to rapidly generate solutions
by exploring suppliers competencies (Fig. 2b). The product designer worked daily with chief
operators on human aspects through participatory design. Daily decisions were made
through discussions and operation simulations. This understanding enabled the designer to
1221
facilitate assembly and operating systems through manuals and user interfaces. The product
designer worked intensively with an engineering team but also communicated on a daily
basis with suppliers about solutions and relevant discussion topics.
A lot of testing of the sensor unit handling system was required. The tests demonstrated that
the results were not only merely good but also that the system needed improvement. When
the practical operation had started, improvements were still made in the process. When an
average sensor unit planting operation took only one minute, the commercial goal was
achieved. At that point, it was not just technology but also a relevant service. The process
was generative and the participants were expanding their knowledge as well as making
solutions. In this approach, people adjusted to the system and the system adjusted to the
people.
The design project won an Honors Award for Design Excellence at the annual evaluation of
the Norwegian Design Council. It was also nominated for Best Design in British Design of the
Year 2010. The concept was characterized as innovative, and its benefits were identified to
contribute to functionality in terms of logistics, timing, and branding. It changed the
perceptions of the clients of the data sales service.
Figure 3a
Figure 3b
Experiences in a subsea technology context and approaches from this practice were used in
an analysis of the practical approaches of product design students. The documentation from
this student project included direct observation, archival studies, and interviews that would
demonstrate students reflections during design education. The reflections were related to
function, performance, originality, and product appeal. Two groups of ten and twelve
students each were observed and interviewed during a six-week period in November and
December 2012. They were told that observations and interviews were conducted as part of
the module evaluation. The goal of the second case study was to exemplify a student project
in the context of an educational setting similar to a start-up company where students are set
up to form and use network connections to develop a commercially viable design concept.
Prior to this subject module, students were trained for two weeks in different skills: third-year
students in dynamic project leadership; second-year students in branding, presentation, and
communication; and first-year students in mock-up building and workshop equipment. The
1222
design students were then merged with several groups of up to twelve students across the
three years of the bachelors program. They were instructed to form and self-manage a
design team using the knowledge they had gained in the previous two weeks. The first
chosen group for this case study was involved in a realistic project with Akershus Energy, a
local hydroelectric plant providing home heating. In order to stay competitive, the plant has to
implement new technologies and widen harvesting capacities to be able to reduce prices.
Therefore, the plant was seeking the opportunity to expose itself to the local community,
raise awareness of its benefits to the environment, and create goodwill and increase
satisfaction among its customers. The second group responded to a furniture design
competition for Bolia, an interior design chain and producer. The company was seeking a
new set of products that would fit in with their portfolio: a specific aesthetic expression with
the topic nature in the city. The first interview with members of both groups was conducted
at the end of design research and the problem formulation phase, and the second interview
was conducted at the end of the six-week period.
Figure 4a
Figure 4b
The results for the problem definition period showed that the first group hadn't considered
any other design aspects than those that were discussed with the client, that the client had
pointed out, or that they had discovered themselves through concept generation (Fig. 3a).
Students had a weekly review with the client in addition to email communication. The leader
stated: We have tight cooperation with the client and they are providing us with relevant
information that we need to know. I. Ryland Hasle (personal communication, November 23,
2012) The group had spent a great portion of their project on finding and defining a concept
that would promote company values.
The second group didn't establish any contact outside the group and defined their design
problem through the interpretation of competition propositions (Fig. 4a). When asked how
they decided on the most important design aspects to address in their project and how they
collected relevant information, the students claimed that they focused on the ideation
process. Since we dont have direct communication with the client, we are focusing on
gathering ideas and then deciding how they could fare in the competition; We have the
specifications from the competition entry, but we have mostly discussed on our own how
these ideas could be commercialized. M.C Torgrimsen (personal communication, November
20, 2012). After the first round, students were encouraged to observe or interview users. The
first group conducted interviews with several users within their target group and adopted their
insights as a valid design aspect when generating final solutions (Fig. 3b). The second group
focused on finishing a functional prototype without previously interviewing or observing any
1223
users. The final prototype was presented to a user and an interview was conducted where
the user reflected on the prototype design (Fig. 4b). These insights were then delivered in the
group report.
1224
visualized, and categorized by concept mapping (Maxwell, 2005) into a pedagogical concept:
Knowledge Transfer Flow (KTF) (Fig. 2b). Furthermore, the case study demonstrated an
example of how complexity can be demanded in professional practice and how certain
design competencies are essential in order to manage and organize problem complexity.
However, it also revealed that complexity cannot be obtained without a thorough examination
of knowledge space in practice. This complexity consists of many highly advanced
professions within a dynamic interplay, and these premises are crucial for design-driven
innovation.
The complexity demonstrated in the subsea technology context was not reflected in the
design education. Although the problem-based learning process demonstrated how design
students were motivated to choose their own problem perspectives, how they discovered it,
and how many aspects of the problem were considered before or during the design activity,
the implication of the study was that design education should be viewed from a wider
perspective than only as a concept-focused process method (Aagaard Nielsen & Svensson,
2006).
1225
Tolerating ambiguity
It is in human nature to solve puzzles, which gives a sense of purpose and, once solved, a
sense of achievement (Lawson, 2006). He warns that designers need to delay this sense of
achievement as part of the design, unlike puzzle games, which almost always lead to
multiple solutions. Choosing the acceptable solution is then part of the convergent creativity
phase. In newer creative personality theories, one of the properties of a creative personality
is tolerance of ambiguity (Stamm, 2008). It is argued that designers have to be flexible
enough to keep the problem open while at the same time having enough confidence to
choose paths in convergent phases of creative processes. Some researchers would see the
tolerance of ambiguity as essential for the innovative results that emerge from complexity
(Sevaldson, 2011).
1226
knowledge space in a very short period of time. It would contribute to the culture of
innovation if designers worked with knowledge sharing to a larger extent in complex
situations. The effort should be put into researching how successful designers manage their
knowledge space exploration process. Students who experience more complex situations in
their design education thus could become more independent in organizing design processes.
Learning to experience and tolerate ambiguity in practice could contribute to strengthening
designers identities and the creative qualities needed for knowledge-based innovation.
References
Aagaard Nielsen, K., & Svensson, L. (2006). Action and interactive research: beyond
practice and theory. Maastricht: Shaker Publishing.
Asaro, P. M. (2000). Transforming society by transforming technology: the science and
politics of participatory design Accounting, Management and Information Technologies,
10(4), 33.
Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of
innovation. Management Decision, 47(8), 1323-1339. doi: 10.1108/00251740910984578
Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design: HarperBusiness.
Buur, J., & Jakobsen, M. M. (1991). Man/machine interface design needs systematic
methods. [S.l.]: [s.n.].
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2008). Flow : the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper
Perennial.
Derfoul, R., Da Veiga, S., Gout, C., Le Guyader, C., & Tillier, E. (2013). Image processing
tools for better incorporation of 4D seismic data into reservoir models. Journal of
Computational and Applied Mathematics, 240, 111-122. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2012.08.022
Gillier, T., Piat, G., Roussel, B., & Truchot, P. (2010). Managing Innovation Fields in a CrossIndustry Exploratory Partnership with C-K Design Theory. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 27(6), 883-896. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00758.x
Hatchuel, A., Le Masson, P., & Weil, B. (2011). Teaching innovative design reasoning: How
concept-knowledge theory can help overcome fixation effects. Ai Edam-Artificial Intelligence
for Engineering Design Analysis and Manufacturing, 25(1), 77-92. doi:
10.1017/s089006041000048x
Hkansson, H., & Ford, D. (2001). How should companies interact in business networks?
Journal of Buiness Research 55.
Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think : the design process demystified. Oxford:
Architectural Press.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design : an interactive approach. Thousand Oaks,
Calif.: Sage Publications.
McCrae, R. R. (1987). CREATIVITY, DIVERGENT THINKING, AND OPENNESS TO
EXPERIENCE. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258-1265. doi:
10.1037//0022-3514.52.6.1258
Micheli, P., Jaina, J., Goffin, K., Lemke, F., & Verganti, R. (2012). Perceptions of Industrial
Design: The "Means" and the "Ends". Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(5),
687-704. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00937.x
Nussbaum, B. (2013). Creative Intelligence: Harper Business.
1227
Perks, H., Cooper, R., & Jones, C. (2005). Characterizing the Role of Design in New Product
Development: An Empirically Derived Taxonomy. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00109.x
Powell, E. T.-., & Steele, S. (1996). Collecting Evaluation Data: Direct Observation.
Rudningen, G., & Hagen, A. L. (2009). Den frste streken materialitetens makt i et
arkitektfirma.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books.
Sevaldson, B. (2011). GIGA-Mapping: Visualisation for complexity and systems thinking in
design.
Stamm, B. v. (2008). Managing innovation, design and creativity. Chichester: Wiley.
Valtonen, A. (2007). Redefining industrial design: changes in the design practice in Finland
(Vol. A 74). Helsinki: University of Industrial Arts.
Visser, F. S., Lugt, R. v. d., & Stappers, P. J. (2007). Sharing User Experiences in the
Product Innovation Process: Participatory Design Needs Participatory Communication
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Nenad Pavel
Assistant professor at HiOA, Institute for product design and design practitioner. Has
experience from offshore industry, marketing and teaching. Nenad has specialized in and
product development through CAD, sketching and prototyping.
Arild Berg
Doctor of arts from Aalto University, Helsinki, and assistant professor at HiOA, Institute for
product design. Arild has specialized in use of participatory design for art in public space.
1228
Designed Research:
Publishing Designs as Scholarship
Cheryl E. Ball, West Virginia University, USA
Abstract
Scholarly publications are a primary means for researchers in any field to foster and support
a shared discourse. As design researchers debate what forms their scholarship might take,
this author suggests looking to examples from other, transdisciplinary academic fields that
have long traditions in publishing designed research, or scholarship that enacts its argument
through design. The author offers cases of several online journals in the sciences, arts, and
humanities that publish designed research of various types, including one example from
digital writing studies, which shares design researchers interests in collaborative, processbased, rhetorical practices. By considering alternative modes of publishing design research
through designed research, the shared discourses of scholarly practice can serve as a
pedagogical site of knowledge-building for the field.
Keywords
Design; Digital scholarship; Scholarly Multimedia; Publishing; Research
For the October 2013 symposium Critiquing the North American Design PhD, moderators
Laurene Vaughan and Cameron Tinkelwise, PhD design faculty at Carnegie Mellon
University, asked prominent scholars and design researchers from around the globe to
respond to a series of provocative questions that would facilitate the one-day discussion.
The first question they posed What is design practice as research? included the following
passage as part of its description:
If designing happens as a kind of researching, does the lack of formality of its
creative-solution-oriented process still invalidate it with regard to the requirements of
academic research? Or, does academicizing the research processes deployed in
designing make them too undesignerly? Perhaps it is academic research that should
change to accommodate more creative or productive research like designing.
(Vaughan & Tonkenwise, 2013a, p. 3)
Each moderator answered the question in the briefing papers, then turned the questions
over to respondents. Vaughans multi-part answer included her definition of research as it
should be practiced within practice-based design PhDs:
Research is only research within the frameworks of the academy when it is
disseminated - published, exhibited, performed or screened. Undertaking fieldwork,
experiments or reflective inquiry in the studio, the library or the lab are the acts of
research but they are not deemed to be academic research until critically appraised
by peers and placed within their appropriate context for [peer-reviewed]
dissemination. (p. 4)
Tonkenwise complicated Vaughans response by adding that the relationship between
design practice and design research must be chiasmatic in that the practice-based
[d]esign PhD must be established as a deliberate anomaly that affords transformation of the
university (p. 5) and, as I argue here, its research products. Moderators and respondents
alike continued this line of discussion by invoking the need for different forms and formats for
design research as it is presented for theses and dissertations as well as how it is
disseminated to other design researchers through design scholarship. Hugh Dubberly listed
1229
the ways in which designers disseminate artefacts to each other through manufactured
artefacts but also through proposals, cases, process maps, model diagrams and other more
process-based methods. He noted that in the design research literature, there is very
precious few of these design thinking artefacts, which has to make design researchers
question how designers reflect on and create new knowledge-making practices and methods
in the field (Vaughan & Tonkenwise, 2013b, pp. 6-8). As Anne Burdick put it, Any practicebased design PhD has not only the opportunity, but I would say the responsibility, to model
(and invent new forms of) multi-modal and cross-disciplinary scholarly production,
interpretation, curation, exhibition, discourse, and community/ies (Vaughan & Tonkenwise,
2013b, pp. 12-13). Indeed, wouldnt more distribution of these knowledge-making, designliteracy practices enhance the connection between design research, as a necessary
component to PhDs in design, and design pedagogy, as one reason for PhDs in design is to
become teachers of practice and subsequent research?
It seems that the call for different forms of design research, as Lisa Grocott pointed out in
her response, is not only necessary but a conversation whose time has come and gone. In
their historiographic literature review of design research methods, Lois Frankel and Martin
Racine (2010) noted that conversations about the relationship between design and research
have been ongoing for decades and include discussions about the form that design research
takes. In summarizing the varied forms that design research can take, Frankel and Racine
wrote that
the answers are translated into form, colour, and the objects that surround us. This
affords practitioners, students, and educators with the challenge to produce discipline
specific knowledge that may be communicated by drawings, sketches, models, and
other visual representations embodying non-verbal codes or messages as well
(Cross, 2007a; Drner, 1999; Downton, 2003; Lawson, 2003; Stappers, 2007). (p. 8)
It is an agreed-upon statement that design research can take the form of designed products
and designerly processes, but where are these products and processes counted as
research, in the sense of peer-reviewed scholarship? What does a form of design
researchone that takes into consideration, as Vaughan (2013a) wrote in her response to
the PhD colloquium, the designerly relationship of evidence through form and aesthetics in
support of the argument (pp. 19-20)look like? Andrew Morrison noted in his response
that [d]esign inquiry demands multi-literacies, which is increasingly realised through
multimodal, electronic communication and tools (Vaughan & Tonkenwise, 2013b, p. 21-22),
while Pelle Ehn remarked that this kind of scholarly, designerly reflection is harder to
perform (p. 20). I argue here that this kind of designerly, multimodal, scholarly research has
been and continues to be performed in another interdisciplinary area: digital writing studies,
which values Richard Buchanens (1985) concept of design-as-rhetoric in its uptake of
designed research (Eyman & Ball, 2014). The majority of this paper turns to examine the
history of scholarly designed research in digital writing studies as well as what the future of
remediating (Bolter & Grusin, 1999) design research into designed, digital scholarship might
look like.
1230
interest in designed research, as the humanities has been the leader of digital publishing in
this respect.
For instance, Postmodern Culture (PMC), a humanities journal focusing on cultural studies,
began publishing peer-reviewed scholarship through an email list in 1990. It is considered
the first peer-reviewed electronic journal in the humanities. In 1994, it moved online to
provide a hypertextual version of the journal (Unsworth, 2004), which also includes
multimedia elements today (Postmodern Culture Author Guidelines, n.d.), although the
multimedia inclusions are typically only still images and figures that supplement the long,
linear text. PMC is, essentially, traditional scholarship moved online for the purposes of
wider (and sometimes quicker) dissemination. So, despite its first-place status in online,
scholarly publishing, this kind of digital scholarship is no different than most peer-reviewed
scholarship readers find in library databases now: It does not take advantage of the
multimodal, designerly arguments that rethinking the formcontent relationship within
academic research affords design researchers. Thus, digital scholarship in this traditional
formatthat is, print-based scholarship put online for the purposes of disseminationis not
the focus here.
On the scale of multimediated research, The Journal of Visual Experiments (JOVE) fares
slightly better. JOVE is becoming a well-known example of an online science journal that
publishes multimedia, primarily videos of lab experiments. However, for design researchers,
I would not hold up JOVE as a great example to emulate given its aesthetic of an animated
PowerPoint with voiceover (see Fig. 1) and its simple cinematic qualities (see Fig. 2). It is a
perfunctory use of multimedia to present research, but it is not a highly considered
designerly one.
Figure 1. Screenshot from JOVE showing a typical opening screen to a video article, which
can last anywhere from 5 minutes to 17 minutes.
1231
Figure 2. JOVE video articles edit an experiment down to its basic segments, which are
quickly presented on-screen (usually in a few seconds) with informational titles. The
production quality of videos is minimal and functional at best.
In the sciences, these video articles take on the feel of a TED talk, which presents a
potentially glossy mash-up of scholarly and popular genresan effective way of
communicating difficult, scientific methods and information to an audience in easily digestible
formats that mimic the static infographics of data presented in newspapers. However, like
TED talks, these videos can run counter to the closed, high-discourse communities and
academic values of traditional scientific research articles and gloss over research that might
need more depth that only writing can provide (see Schaberg, 2014). This is not to say that
multimedia in research isnt useful, but to remind readers that multimedia done well, done
rhetorically is as difficult, if not more so, than writing a traditional research article, and that
the choice of multimedia needs to be well-considered. This concept is de facto for designers,
so I will not go into details here about the rhetorical and aesthetic appropriateness of
multimedia content in designed research (see Ball, 2004, 2012, 2014; Ball & Moeller, 2008).
Humanities and social science journals still publish relatively little multimedia content,
although that number is on the rise in the U.S., Europe, and Australia. In one of the very few
examples of multimedia scholarly publishing in design, FormAkademiskan online, peerreviewed journal based out of Oslo and Akershus University College in Norwayhas
published some articles with embedded videos. In the article shown in Figure 3, for instance,
Jon Olav Eikenes (2010) argued that motional form may be connected to interface actions,
which he shows through a design-experiment technique called motion sketching (p. 80).
The difficulty of showing motion, as a crucial multimodal component to understanding this
design concept, in a print or print-like journal article is ameliorated by the authors ability to
include a video of his motion sketching in the online article itself.
4
1232
As an author of designed scholarship myself, I peruse the submission guidelines of new online
journals in my field frequently, to see if they accept screen-based research. Journals relevant to my
field, such as Fibreculture and Digital Humanities Quarterly, say they accept such content, but rarely if
ever publish such content. Of course, they have to receive such content to be able to publish it, and
the reasons why scholars may not submit this type of work is directly related to the scholarly and
social inrastructuresthat is, the acceptable and valued forms of scholarshipof their discourse
communities (Eyman & Ball, 2014).
1233
Figure 4. This screenshot from a JAR exposition shows, in zoomed-out fashion, how an
author juxtaposes scholarly contextualization and analysis (via the linguistic or written
portions of the text) and multimodal elements (in the videos that contain oral history
elements of the studys subject participants).
The exposition represented in Figure 4 explores a disused mine through the memories of
former miners (Goradesky, 2013, http://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/30418/30419). As
the author notes in her introduction, The work has an artistic character, while presenting an
emphasis on theoretical and conceptual contents, investigating space and its relation to the
6
1234
human perception of it (The Project). She focused particularly on the mode of sound as a
way to endow the minespace with significance, and the exposition includes scholarly
moves typical of print-based articles, such as providing background information, contexts for
the research, a description of her methodological approach, and a discussion of her results.
However, she provided this scholarly infrastructure alongside her collection of oral histories,
the importance for which she described in the following way:
The fieldwork methodology consisted of systematic observation of, and listening to,
the interaction between former miners and the disused mine site, focusing on their
memories of sounds. The intention was to involve the inhabitants (that lived during
the relevant period) in the data collecting as much as possible, to gather details
about the site in a way that goes beyond what can be found in books or videos. (The
Project)
Indeed, this expositionas with many expositions in JARgoes beyond what can be found
in books or videos because of the juxtaposition between scholarly research and design. In
JARs short existence (three issues since 2011, as of this writing), some expositions are
better than others at fulfilling what Pelle Ehn called the paradox of designers having to
perform the compositions and participate in making and enacting the networks in designerly
ways and being practicing reflectioners all at the same time (cited in Vaughan &
Tonkenwise, 2013b, p. 20). But this is true of all scholarship, no matter the medium and
mode used: Only some of JARs scholarship is successful at this dual mission of renegotiat[ing] art's relationship to academia and the role and function of research in artistic
practice (JAR, About). But, practice makes (slightly closer to) perfectan adage that the
field of digital writing studies has taken to heart in the nearly 20 years it has been publishing
designed digital scholarship through its half dozen prominent (and growing annually) online,
multimedia journals.
1235
scholarship designed in ways that enacts an authors argument. The terminology used to
describe such scholarship has shifted along with the fields name over the last two decades,
reflecting how genres change according to social, cultural, and historical contexts (Miller,
1984). Elsewhere, I have articulated the differences between digital scholarship as
represented by PDFs and new media scholarship as online scholarship that has a
necessary aesthetic component because of its designed, multimodal elements such as
audio, video, images, and/or animation in addition to written text [used] to make meaning
(Ball, 2004, p. 404). The term new media has mostly fallen out of favour within digital writing
studies circles, in favour of multimodal (see Lauer, 2009), and online journals that publish
multimodal scholarship variously call this work scholarly multimedia or webtexts, the latter of
which is used by the oldest, continuously publishing journal of its kindKairos: Rhetoric,
Technology, and Pedagogy (http://kairos.technorhetoric.net), which I have edited since 2006.
2
Rhetoric and composition graduate students at several U.S. universities started Kairos as a
peer-reviewed hypertext journal in 1996 to serve as a venue for writing scholars who wanted
to implement the growing body of hypertext theory in their scholarship. Kairos is an openaccess, independent journal with no university affiliation and no subscription fees. Its mission
is to publish scholarship that examines digital and multimodal composing practices,
promoting work that enacts its scholarly argument through rhetorical and innovative uses of
new media. Kairos publishes at least two issues a year, with an average of 9 webtexts per
issue, and has a 10% acceptance rate. Its server hosts over 25,000 media files for the more
than 800 webtexts the journal has published in almost two decades of existence. Additionally,
the journal has over 50,000 unique readers who hail from over 180 countries.
Kairos isnt the only journal in digital writing studies, or more broadly in media studies, that
publishes webtexts. Other journals have been in or more recently joined this publishing field,
such as Computers and Composition Online (published from 19961999 and 2001present),
which is the strongest contender to Kairos. Vectors Journal of Culture and Technology in a
Dynamic Vernacular (published from 20052007, and again from 2012) is a prominent
scholarly multimedia journal in media studies, and from which the term scholarly multimedia
originates within these disciplinary circles (McPherson, 2004). These are the primary
scholarly multimedia journals in the humanities, with a collective publishing experience of
over 40 years.
With the exception of Vectors Journal (for which authors have historically collaborated with
professional web designers), scholarly multimedia authors are responsible for designing their
own webtexts, and revisions are done in consultation/mentorship with the editors (see Ball,
2014). For Kairos, self-design and mentorship reinforces the process-based pedagogies
inherent in the scholarship and practice of digital writing. Indeed, the field is based on the
concept that writing is a collaborative process, not just a product that is created by a genius
out of nothing (Ede & Lunsford, 1990; Murray, 2004). This mantra will likely sound familiar to
designers and design researchers, who understand that contemporary design processes are
multitudinous and extend far beyond the old, limited concept of shape gurus in design.
For instance, in an upcoming issue of Kairos, interaction design researchers Einar Sneve
Martinussen, Jrn Knutsen, and Timo Arnall (2014), PhD students from the Oslo School of
Architecture and Design, will be publishing a peer-reviewed webtext that showcases the
design-process methodologies they used to construct a project called Satellite Lamps. As
Martinussen (2013) explained on his research blog, the team explored and visualized
how GPS takes place in urban environments. The team has looked at the relationships
2 The staff is no longer primarily graduate students. As the field of digital writing has grown up, the staff demographics have also changed, although
working with and publishing junior scholars is still a fundamental component of the journals mission.
1236
between urban space, time and satellite-geometry, and design and has developed
instruments and techniques for visualising the presence and the fluctuations of satellite
signals. Figure 5 is a screenshot of the opening video that shows how the teams time-lapse
film methodology works to visualise these signals. The three authors worked together to
produce the video, curate the multiple slideshows from their photographic archive, research
additional scholarly materials for the literature review, write the linguistic (written) content,
and design the webtext in Ruby (which they had to transfer to HTML for Kaiross archival
purposes).
Figure 5. A screenshot of the Satellite Lamps video embedded within the webtext that
explains the researchers design process. The satellite lamp icon in the upper-left corner is a
mouseover navigation menu that leads to ten different sections in this extra-large webext.
The webtext contains an archive of documentation that shows readers the design processes
(successful and not) that the team undertook to construct a working iteration of a satellite
lamp. Such an annotated and interactive archive (see Fig. 6), which includes photographs,
illustrations, and video complements the authors literature review (with visuals) on the
history of GPS and, combined, forms an argument as to why making satellite signals visible
to users of the networked city is important for understanding the role and interplay of
otherwise invisible information communication technologies in our urban (and rural) lives
today. The benefit to publishing this work as a webtext instead of as a print-like article is
obvious when readers see the multitude of annotated, color photographs and videos that are
presented as equal scholarly arguments to the written content. In addition, the content as a
9
1237
wholeboth written and multimediais far more rich and detailed than would ever be
allowed in a print-based or even print-like journal. Satellite Lamps, like several previous,
large, collaborative webtexts Kairos has published, presents as a book-length treatise, not
an article-length one, signaled as well by the navigation terminology that refers to sections
as chapters (see Fig. 7).
Figure 6. The authors present multiple slideshows (such as this one) of their process
documents, curated and annotated from among the 1000s of photographs they took
throughout the multi-year research project. Having these kinds of documents described
within the design process can be an invaluable teaching tool.
10
1238
Figure 7. When the small lamp icon is moused over in Satellite Lamps, the above menu
appears.
This webtext is speculative design research that is important to share with design colleagues,
yet it is published in a digital writing studies journal interested in design because theres not
currently any design journal that can or will publish webtextual work. It adds to scholarly
knowledge in design through maps, models, and processesthe artefacts Dubberly (in
Vaughan & Tonkenwise, 2013b) called for more of, particularly as the number of design PhD
schools increased and design pedagogy becomes an ever more important component to the
field.
1239
qualities through a drawing; being able to analyze the usability of an interaction from
a video-sketch; capturing the experience of form in well-chosen neologistic title. It is
not just that design research should be conveyed to designers using their own
communication forms; it is that designerly research only exists multimodally, in
between texts and artefacts, texts-as-artefacts and texts-as-texts. (Vaughan &
Tonkenwise, 2013a, p. 20)
Kairos and other scholarly multimedia journals in the humanities already do this, already
have been doing this work for decades. But, whereas digital writing studies has had to argue
for many years that design can function rhetorically as scholarly research (Ball, 2004; Eyman
& Ball, 2014; Purdy & Walker, 2012; Walker, 2006)through the intellectual rigor of
designing interfaces and arguments for webtexts, as clunky and DIY as those may
sometimes be when the authors are not designers by disciplinary practicedesign
researchers can already assume this shared understanding as part of their fields scholarly
infrastructure. Designed research, such as webtexts, is a potential methodology and method
of design research that can connect designers and researchers through literacy practices
already embodied in the fields histories and practices and, further, can be a site ripe for
design pedagogy as teacherresearchers model for and collaborate with students in
disseminating the work of the field.
What is not addressed in this paper is what happens to turn a design into designed research,
which is in part a question of pedagogy. There is very little research on the authorial
practices of turning design research, as presented in the video that the Satellite Lamps
authors produced to showcase their work, into a webtext that upholds the academic
traditions of scholarship in ones field3. In part, this question must remain unanswered here,
or, rather, must be answered within each discipline that takes up designed research as a
methodology and method of practice-based research. For instance, in the fourteen years Ive
worked with Kairos (since becoming a section editor in 2001), I can name only two webtexts
that successfully provide literature reviews that are not in written form: Multimedia as a
method of situating an authors argument within the field is not often appropriate for a field
such as writing studies whose history relies on the written word for the majority of its
scholarship, practice, and inquiry. This is likely not true of design as a (multitudinous) field.
What is also not addressed in this paper is what happens once a piece of designed research
such as Satellite Lamps enters the production cycle of a webtextual scholarly journal, that
is, after it has been deemed by an editorial board (trained to evaluate such scholarly
webtexts) to meet the standards of scholarship in a field. Scholarship about the editing
process of digital media texts is nonexistent, although in practice it is a robust process at
journals like Kairos, where we implement an eight-stage copy- and design-editing process to
ensure that, for instance, the typo in Figure 7 is caught before the issue is published in
August 2014. Yet, despite the seemingly cryptic nature of some developmental and
production processes behind webtextual journals (which are beyond the scope of this paper),
the impetus to start such a journal in design is present and represents a shift in the
conversation about what counts as design research, not only for scholars already in the field
but for students working on or towards thesis-by-publication. In other words, by presenting
designs-as-arguments, scaffolded by or embedded within or linked to those designs
theoretical exigence, we begin to model for newer scholars the breadth of making and doing
and researching that design truly is.
In many ways, it is not surprising that there is little research on this topic, given the nascency of
designed research. But, for two examples of editorauthor interaction during the webtext design
processusing what I call an editorial pedagogysee Ball, 2012 and 2014.
12
1240
References
Ball, Cheryl E. (2014). Multimodal revision techniques in webtexts. Classroom discourse,
5(1), 115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2013.859844
Ball, Cheryl E. (2012). Assessing scholarly multimedia: A rhetorical genre studies approach.
Technical Communication Quarterly, 21 [Special issue: Making the implicit explicit in
assessing multimodal composition], 6177.
Ball, Cheryl E. (2004). Show, not tell: The value of new media scholarship. Computers and
Composition, 21, 403-425.
Ball, Cheryl E., & Moeller, Ryan M. (2008). Converging the ASS[umptions] between U and
ME; or How new media can bridge the scholarly/creative split in English studies. Computers
& Composition Online. Retrieved from http://www.bgsu.edu/cconline/ convergence
Bolter, Jay David, & Grusin, Richard. (1999). Remediation: Understanding new media.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Buchanan, Richard. (1985). Declaration by design: Rhetoric, argument, and demonstration
in design practice. Design Issues 2(1), 4-22.
Cope, Bill, & Kalantzis, Mary. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of
social futures. New York: Routledge.
Ede Lisa, & Lunsford, Andrea. (1990). Singular text/Plural authors: Perspectives on
collaborative authoring. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Eikenes, Jon Olav. (2010). Connecting motional form to interface actions in web browsing:
Investigating through motion sketching. FormAkademisk, 3(1), 80-100. Retrieved November
8, 2013, from https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/formakademisk/article/view/180/179
Eyman, Douglas, & Ball, Cheryl E. (2014/forthcoming). Digital humanities scholarship and
electronic publication. In Jim Ridolfo & William Hart-Davidson (Eds.), Rhetoric and the digital
humanities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Frankel, Lois, & Racine, Martin. (2010). The complex field of research: For design, through
design, and about design. Proceedings from the Design Research Society 2010, 043.
Retrieved from http://www.drs2010.umontreal.ca/proceedings.php
Getto, Guiseppe; Potts, Liza; Salvo, Michael; & Gossett, Kathie. (2013). Teaching UX:
Designing programs to train the next generation of UX experts. SIGDOC '13 Proceedings of
the 31st ACM international conference on Design of communication (pp. 65-70). New York:
ACM.
Goradesky, Carolina. (2013). Innerground_ an exploration of a disused mine through the
memories of former miners. Journal for Artistic Research, 3. Retrieved November 8, 2013,
from http://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/30418/30419/0/0
JAR. (n.d.). About JAR. Journal of Artistic Research. Retrieved from http://www.jaronline.net/index.php/pages/view/133
Jewitt, Carey. (Ed.). (2013). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. New York:
Routledge.
Kress, Gunther. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary
communication. New York: Routledge.
Kress, Gunther, & van Leeuwen, Theo. (2001). Multimodal discourse. London: Bloomsbury.
Lauer, Claire. (2009). Contending with terms: Multimedia and Multimodal in the academic
and public spheres. Computers and Composition 26(4), 225-239.
13
1241
Martinussen, Einar Sneve. (2013). Satellite Lamps. Oslo Lux 2013. Retrieved November 8,
2013, from http://oslolux.wordpress.com/einar-sneve-martinussen-satellite-lamps/
Martinussen, Einar Sneve; Knutsen, Jrn; & Arnall, Timo. (2014/forthcoming August).
Satellite lamps. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 19(1). Retrieve
from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/19.1/inventio/martinussen-et-al
McPherson, Tara. (2004). CFP: Vectors: Multimedia projects: Evidence or Mobility (3/12/04;
e-journal) [listserv announcement]. cfp.english.upenn.edu. Retrieved November 8, 2013,
from http://call-for-papers.sas.upenn.edu/node/14096
Miller, Carolyn. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.
Murray, Donald. (2004). Writing to learn, 8th ed. New York: Wadsworth.
New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.
Harvard Educational Review, 66(1). Retrieved from Kern County Superintendent of Schools
on May 12, 2013,
http://wwwstatic.kern.org/filer/blogWrite44ManilaWebsite/paul/articles/A_Pedagogy_of_Multil
iteracies_Designing_Social_Futures.htm
Postmodern Culture Author Guidelines. (n.d.) Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved
November 8, 2013, from
http://www.press.jhu.edu/journals/postmodern_culture/guidelines.html
Purdy, James, & Walker, Joyce. (2012). Scholarship on the move: A rhetorical analysis of
scholarly activity in digital spaces. In Debra Journet, Cheryl E. Ball, & Ryan Trauman (Eds.)
The new work of composing. C&C Digital Press/Utah State University Press. Retrieved
November 8, 2013, from http://ccdigitalpress.org/nwc/chapters/purdy-walker/
Schaberg, Petger. (2014, Feb. 19). TED-talking the secular soul. Presentation at Writing
Research Across Borders, Nanterre University, Paris, France.
Unsworth, John. (2004). Postmodern culture [Unsworths Academic Home Page]. Retrieved
November 8, 2013, from http://people.lis.illinois.edu/~unsworth/pmc.html
Vaughan, Laurene, & Tonkenwise, Cameron. (2013a, July). Critiquing the North American
design PhD: A symposium exploring the instititutional frameworks for practice- transforming
design research [Briefing papers]. School of Design, Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh,
PA.
Vaughan, Laurene, & Tonkenwise, Cameron. (Eds.). (2013b, October). Critiquing the North
American design PhD: A symposium exploring the instititutional frameworks for practicetransforming design research [Invitee responses]. School of Design, Carnegie Mellon
University: Pittsburgh, PA.
Walker, Joyce. (2006). Hyper.activity. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and
Pedagogy, 10(2). Retrieved November 8, 2013, from
http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/10.2/binder2.html?coverweb/walker/index.html
The WIDE Research Center Collective. (2005). Why teach digital writing? Kairos: A Journal
of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 10(1). Retrieved November 8, 2013, from
http://english.ttu.edu/Kairos/10.1/binder2.html?coverweb/wide/index.html
14
1242
Cheryl E. Ball
In 201314, Dr. Cheryl E Ball was a Fulbright researcher in digital publishing at the Oslo
School of Architeture and Design (AHO). She has an MFA in electronic literature from
Virginia Commonwealth University (c. 2000) and a PhD in rhetoric and technical
communication from Michigan Technological University (c. 2005). She is currently associate
professor of digital publishing studies at West Virginia University, where she specializes in
multimodal composition, digital publishing and editing, and university writing pedagogy.
Since 2006, Ball has been editor of the online, peer-reviewed, open-access journal Kairos:
Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, which exclusively publishes digital media scholarship
and is read in 180 countries. Her research has appeared in a range of rhetoric/composition,
technical communication, media studies, and pedagogy journals including Classroom
Discourse, Computers and Composition, C&C Online, Convergence, Fibreculture, Hybrid
Pedagogy, Kairos, Programmatic Perspectives, Technical Communication Quarterly, and
Writing & Pedagogy. She has co-authored/edited several books and textbooks about digital
and multimodal rhetorics, including Writer/Designer: A Guide to Making Multimodal Projects
(Bedford, 2014), The New Work of Composing (Computers & Composition Digital
Press/Utah State University Press, 2012), and RAW: Reading and Writing New Media
(Hampton Press, 2010). Her online portfolio can be found at http://ceball.com/.
15
1243
Abstract
This paper presents a visual timeline-based assignment used in an
undergraduate Industrial Design History, Theory and Critcism unit. The
assignment was developed in order to find a better way of supporting
design history learning than an exam or essay assessment. It was
developed using constructive alignment and it allows design students to
use their strong visual thinking skills to understand unfamiliar content,
develop their visual literacy of design history, and think deeply about the
links between the designs, styles, movements, events and people in
their timeline. The task produced a variety of responses, from websites
and electronic presentations to large paper timelines, scrolls and 3D
models. These have been admired by peers and used for end of year
shows and permanent displays. Questionnaires were issued to students
to gain feedback about the assessment. Students stated that the visual
nature of the assignment helped them to understand how different
aspects of design history related to each other, assisted with retaining
the information, and that it was more interesting and fun than a report or
an exam. This paper explores the theories behind and the benefits of
using such methods of assessment for design history courses.
Keywords
design education, design history, visualisation, visual literacy,
constructivism
Introduction
This paper explores an assessment task which involved creating a
timeline for industrial design history. This task has been implemented in
a unit called Industrial Design History, Theory and Criticism for the past
three years. The unit has been taught over a 12 week semester within
the third year of a four-year undergraduate Bachelor of Design (Industrial
Design). It comprises 6 weeks of lectures on design history, supported
by set readings and tutorials. This is followed by 6 weeks on design
criticism based on a framework I have been using for more than a
decade (Blackler, 2001). The three assignments are the timeline (worth
30%), a group criticism project (30%) and two discussion papers based
on the set readings that accompany the history lectures (40%) (Blackler,
2013). This paper will focus on the timeline assignment and how it has
1244
Theoretical Framework
I developed this assignment to replace a multiple choice exam that I had
run in this unit and a previous similar unit. The objectives of the exam
were to get students to; 1) thoroughly digest the lecture content from 6
weeks of industrial design history lectures, and 2) retain the information
for the long term in order to form a base of design knowledge that they
could access during their careers. However, I found that even by the
next year they had forgotten much of the information, and also the exam
was not a very effective way of helping them to recognise and
understand images related to design history, which could build their
visual literacy. Exams are also unpopular with students, and in my units
there was generally a low average grade. Setting a personal essay or
research project assignment tends to lead to students learning only
about a very specific topic. Therefore, I replaced the design history exam
with a timeline exercise.
2
1245
On top of the two exam objectives, the timeline assignment had the
additional objectives of 1) helping students to relate various events,
people and designs to each other and understand the causal links
between them, 2) allowing them to work with their strengths by
encouraging use of visual thinking, and 3) strengthening their visual
literacy. This is not a research assignment - all images and dates that
are required are provided through the lecture notes and slides, and
students have to design a graphical timeline (in any format) that shows
the development of industrial design history through the 18th, 19th and
20th centuries. This involves including at least 200 events, designs and
movements and somehow showing the relationships between them. In
2012 and 2013, a starter file was provided in Excel with a list of dates
and events. Despite this, it was made clear that the timeline was to go
beyond this. The exercise requires thorough reading of the lecture notes
and perusal of images provided, which is the kind of activity required
when revising for an exam. However, it is intended to go further than the
exam in helping students to think more deeply about links between
people, things and events, to visualise 300 years of design history and
so build better visual literacy, and have a record to keep for their future
reference. This section explores the theoretical framework used to
develop an assignment that would facilitate all these things.
Deep Learning
A deep approach to learning involves theorising, applying and relating,
not simply memorising and note-taking, which are surface levels of
engagement (Biggs, 2003). Ramsden (2003) explained that all students
are capable of both deep and surface approaches, and which one they
use is dependent on the task they are undertaking. The timeline
encourages deep learning in three ways. Firstly, it is more engaging than
exam revision or essay writing, which is likely to encourage a deep
approach (Ramsden, 2003). Secondly, the assignment forces students
to go through all the lecture notes and accompanying images to find
appropriate facts, dates, events and images to put into the timeline. This
encourages comprehension. It does not allow for skimming as it requires
thorough coverage of the lecture content. Thirdly, it requires them to
make links between events, people, movements and styles and
therefore fosters true understanding and empathy.
Constructive Alignment
For deep approaches the students typically need to be more active in
their learning. Biggs (2003) therefore recommends using constructive
alignment to ensure more students adopt a deep approach. All
components in the teaching and learning system need to be aligned.
These include lecturers, students, the curriculum, teaching methods,
assessment procedures, climate created through interactions, and
institutional climate. Particularly important are curriculum, teaching
methods, and assessment procedures. When there is alignment
between what we want, how we teach and how we assess, teaching is
likely to be more effective. The curriculum is stated in clear objectives,
3
1246
4
1247
Visual Literacy
In generic terms, visual literacy is defined as the ability to read and
comprehend visuals and also to generate understandable visuals. It has
also been defined as the ability to construct meaning from visuals
(Rourke, 2008). Visual literacy in the context of art and design history
education involves the development of familiarity with the tradition and
technology of visual representation. Students need to develop skills in
decoding qualitative semantics and syntaxes. This aids them in learning
to appreciate and critique art and design (Rourke, 2007). To put it
another way, it is an understanding of the visual code that is being used
and how that relates to the purpose or function of the work of art
(Cunliffe, 1992). Rourke (2007, 2008) recommends longer viewing times
of relevant images, simple lecture presentations and the use of
comprehension and categorisation of examples to assist students in
developing visual literacy of design history.
The timeline was designed to assist students in developing design
history visual literacy by requiring use of the provided examples of
designs and styles, thus forcing students to re-view all these images.
This means that viewing time is increased, as recommended by Rourke
(2007). Comprehension of visuals is encouraged through the creation of
a visual overview of three centuries and through students making links
between artefacts, events, designers, etc, with similar styles or visual
characteristics. Also, the act of categorising and placing the images into
the timeline in the correct place helps students to consider and
understand how and why they fit within a context (e.g. place, Movement,
style, designer, time period).
Visual Thinking
There is a body of research around the idea of graphicacy as an
important component of literacy (Cross, 1984), increasing calls for it to
5
1248
6
1249
7
1250
8
1251
9
1252
10
1253
Mean Score
4.4
3.9
4.1
3.7
11
1254
Understanding
links and
relationships
Allows an
overview to be
developed
Time consuming
Research
developed
understanding
Retention of
history facts
Weighting of
marks
Constructing
timeline
themselves led to
improved learning
Understanding
lecture content
Better than
exam/report
Future reference
tool
Helps but painful
Sample responses
...because we are design students
visuals are always best when it
comes to understanding something.
Using the linking made it a lot
more fun and engaging.
provides a further understanding of
how the designs are connected
together.
It provided a bigger picture of the
historical story.
Orientation
positive
Tally
12
positive
11
positive
11
negative
10
positive
positive
negative
positive
positive
positive
positive
negative
12
1255
13
1256
The 2013 cohort mean rating was 2.9. For the 2012 cohort it was 3.3,
with an overall average of 3.1. This result indicates that students felt they
retained a degree of information closer to everything than nothing,
although there is no data from previous exam cohorts to compare.
Although this score is not as high as it could be it does suggest that
retention is occurring, especially when combined with the open-ended
responses.
23 responses to the open ended questions were coded by theme in the
same way as the previous responses. The themes show what aspects of
the assignment contributed to retention of information but since there
were no relevant negative comments the orientation was not coded.
Results are shown in Table 3. The largest category was the visual
overview students commented that creating a visual timeline helped
them to remember the information. The issues of gaining an overview of
design history and using visual thinking were two of the most common
responses in the first questionnaire so it is clear that these issues remain
important for the students in the long term.
Code
Visual overview
Resource to
keep
Constructing
own structure
Sample responses
It helped me to map it all out.
It works well seeing the sequence of events in order.
I found it useful in the way it became a tangible
timeline, allowing me to go back and reference the
events. I have used it 3-4 times recently.
I remember the general styles, practitioners and
eras, but cannot link them together very strongly
It introduced me to products and designs I normally
wouldnt know of.
It made me go back to the lecture content
Tally
8
4
2
2
14
1257
The level of student engagement with this timeline exercise has been
reflected in the marks, as the average mark was substantially higher
than those gained for exams in the past. The mean mark was 77% in
2012 and 76% in 2013.
Conclusion
The timeline assignment was designed to make the student learning
experience in design history deeper and richer by aligning it within the
teaching program and using a task based on constructivism. It appears
to have been a success from the point of view of student engagement,
quality of the learning experience, and marks achieved. It also appears
that students are retaining these facts. The existence of the finished
timeline that they can access when needed, along with the experience of
designing the timeline format and visually organising the entries, assists
with retention.
There is also evidence that increased understanding has occurred the
students have had to relate designers, designs and styles and
movements, which should have assisted with the development of design
history visual literacy. In addition, appreciating the causal links between
historic events, artefacts and people involves a deeper understanding
than the previous multiple choice exam could assess. Students stated
that the visual nature of the assignment helped them to understand how
different aspects of design history related to each other, and also
assisted with retaining the information, and that it was more interesting
and fun than a report or an exam. I argue that this type of assessment
task has great potential for design history learning.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the tutors in this unit over the past three years;
Andrew Cave, Alison Livingstone and Shayne Beaver
References
Anning, A. (1997). Drawing Out Ideas: Graphicacy and Young Children. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7, 219-239.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. NY: Open University Press.
Blackler, A. (2001). Teaching Industrial Design Criticism. In Procceedings of ICSID
Educational Seminar 2001 Seongnam, Seongnam City, South Korea.
Blackler, A. (2013). A new approach to understanding readings for design students. In
Procceedings of Consilience and Innovation in Design, IASDR, Tokyo, Japan.
Claxton, C. S., & Murrell, P. H. (1987). Learning Styles. Washington, DC: George
Washington University (ERIC).
15
1258
16
1259
Abstract
Perceptions of plagiarism and collusion in essays have occupied much research in academic
integrity. This project explores such perceptions in relation to both text-based assessments
such as essays and non-text-based assessment such as visual designs. The principal
research instrument was an Australia-wide survey of academics and students who use nontext-based assessments.
We find substantial differences between perceptions in the text and non-text environments.
With design assessments, participants are less likely to think that basing work on that of
another student, or using freely available material without referencing it, is plagiarism or
collusion; but they are more likely to think that discussing tasks with others or asking others
to improve their work is plagiarism/collusion. Some participants deemed particular practices
acceptable despite identifying them as plagiarism/collusion, and some regarded practices as
unacceptable despite not considering them to be plagiarism/collusion.
As well as substantial differences in perceptions of plagiarism/collusion between text and
non-text assessments, we find greater uncertainty regarding plagiarism and collusion in
design assessments. This suggests a need for clear definitions of plagiarism and collusion
for design assessments, and for universities to incorporate these definitions into their
academic integrity policies and to implement appropriate educational strategies for
academics and students.
Keywords
Plagiarism; collusion; academic integrity; visual design; visual plagiarism; non-text-based
assessment
There is a pervasive view that plagiarism is common and becoming more prevalent due to a
number of factors: the influence of the internet (Park, 2003; Gullifer & Tyson, 2010; Joyce,
2007; Yeo, 2007); the rapid expansion of higher education (Joyce, 2007; Garrett & Robinson,
2012); increased class sizes (Sheard & Dick, 2011); and commodification of education and
casualisation of the workforce (Atkins & Herfel, 2006). Moreover, the increased use of group
work blurs the boundaries between acceptable collaboration and unacceptable collusion
(Pickard, 2006).
Plagiarism and collusion are considered to undermine the value of education, to be
detrimental to the individual involved and to other students, and to potentially damage the
reputation of the institution and the degree (Atkins & Herfel, 2006; Baker et al., 2008; Brooks
& Ellis, 2005; Dick et al., 2003; McCabe & Pavela, 2004; Stappenbelt, 2012).
While there is an extensive body of literature on academic integrity issues in higher
education in relation to prose text, there is a dearth of literature dealing with non-text
assessments, particularly in the disciplines of visual art and design (Blythman et al., 2007;
1260
Porter, 2010; Robinson, 2012). This paper reports on research that has investigated the
perceptions of plagiarism and collusion among academics and students in visual design, in
relation both to essays and to design assessments.
1261
internet and manipulated (Shaughnessy, 2004; Porter 2010; Berman, 2010; Economou,
2011); and the difficulty of detecting plagiarism given the rudimentary nature of visual
detection tools (Garrett & Robinson, 2012; Porter, 2010).
There is little research pertaining to the perceptions of academics and students regarding
plagiarism and collusion in visual design. There are a number of reasons why defining
plagiarism in relation to visual design is less clear-cut than is the case for text. First, the
artistic traditions of collage, appropriation, referencing and homage blur the boundaries
(Blythman et al, 2007; Garrett & Robinson, 2012; Porter, 2010; Robinson, 2012) so that it
becomes difficult to distinguish between copying and appropriation; between respectful
homage and infringement of copyright (Shaughnessy, 2004: 12). Second, there is the
tradition of copying as an integral component of learning and honing technique (Blythman et
al, 2007; Garrett & Robinson, 2012; Robinson, 2012; Walker, 2009; Porter, 2010). As a
consequence, acceptable practices vary according to the specific requirements of each
assignment and the boundaries set will probably vary with the stage/year of the course and,
by implication, the publicity that the work might receive (Porter, 2010: 11).
Recent research in the UK has explored the issue of visual plagiarism using an online survey
of creative arts academics from UK universities (Garrett & Robinson, 2012). The research
confirms the differences between the creative arts and text situations, with academics
pointing to the increased complexity in defining plagiarism in the visual arts due to the
incongruence between the concept of originality and the artistic traditions mentioned
previously.
The survey asked respondents whether they had encountered student work that they
thought had been plagiarised, and how frequently they had encountered academic integrity
issues with student work. While participants expressed the view that plagiarism was
relatively rare in visual assessments, 6% indicated that they encountered it frequently. In
written submissions, on the other hand, 42% of participants felt that visual images were
frequently not referenced properly; and in relation to presentations, 46% felt the same thing.
The attitudes of academics were noted as a barrier to dealing with plagiarism, with some
participants stating that their colleagues did not take visual plagiarism seriously, and some
pointing to poor standards such as not referencing visual images used in teaching (Garrett &
Robinson, 2012).
A greater awareness of perceptions is necessary before we can begin the process of
codifying acceptable practices, enabling the development of comprehensive academic
integrity policies that incorporate non-text-based assessments, and then the development of
effective educational tools to impart this knowledge to students. The research reported here
enhances awareness of perceptions of plagiarism/collusion and of the acceptability of
particular practices. By identifying some of the grey areas acknowledged in the literature, the
findings will contribute to the debate on establishing boundaries of acceptability and
developing policies and guidelines for design assessments. With this purpose in mind, this
paper aims to answer the following research questions:
Are there differences between the perceptions of each group between essays and
visual designs?
1262
Method
The research employed an Australia-wide online survey to gain insights into the perceptions
of academic integrity of academics and students who use non-text-based assessments in
areas such as computing and design.
The survey was preceded by a small number of focus groups, of which the main intention
was to clarify the questions to be asked in the survey. Focus group participants emphasised
that plagiarism and collusion are more difficult to define in the visual arts, and that the
boundaries between acceptable and unacceptable practices are more blurred than with text.
This was attributed primarily to the artistic traditions of homage, appropriation, referencing
and assemblage as well as practices such as developing technical skills through copying
other artists. A further complication is the lack of clear referencing techniques that would
enable references to be located near the quote or the ideas, as can be done with prose text.
While references in visual designs may be included in notes, this is not generally visible to
those viewing the work, who might therefore be led to think that the work is the product of
the artists original ideas.
The major focus of discussion was on plagiarism; collusion was seen as much less of a
problem because students guard their ideas in order to demonstrate originality.
Following the focus groups, the project team developed the questions for the online survey,
informed both by the focus group findings and by other surveys reported in the literature.
The first section of the survey dealt with academic integrity issues in relation to text-based
assessments such as essays. The next section explored similar issues in relation to nontext-based assessments. The third section explored academic integrity policies and how
breaches of academic integrity are detected and dealt with, and the final section collected
basic demographic information. The remainder of this paper presents an analysis of the
survey responses from design academics and students in relation to their perceptions of
plagiarism and collusion.
The survey presented fourteen specific scenarios relating to essays and similar scenarios for
visual design, and asked respondents to indicate whether the scenarios constituted
plagiarism or collusion and also whether they were acceptable practices (see Figure 1). Both
the plagiarism/collusion question and the acceptability question were answered on a threepoint scale: no, unsure, yes. The survey did not define text-based assessments such as
essays, or non-text-based assessments such as visual designs, or the differences between
the two, leaving the survey participants to respond according to their own understandings of
these items. Further, while the survey gave reasonably clear definitions of plagiarism and
collusion, it did not ask respondents to distinguish between the two, asking instead whether
or not each scenario represented plagiarism or collusion.
The survey was conducted online between July and September 2013, and academics at all
Australian universities were asked to invite their colleagues and students to complete it. By
way of encouragement, participants could enter a draw to win one of four iPads or
comparably priced devices. The survey attracted participants from all Australian universities,
though the spread was by no means even and probably reflected the enthusiasm with which
the survey was presented at different institutions. A total of 1315 responses were received,
with a final sample of 990 after eliminating inappropriate and incomplete responses. The
sample consisted of a computing and a design cohort, and this paper reports the results for
the 117 design academics and 317 design students who responded to the survey.
1263
Essay Scenarios
Design Scenarios
10
11
12
13
14
6
7
8
Survey results
It is not possible to present all of the findings from the survey in this paper, so we shall focus
on the findings that we found most interesting.
1264
1265
stricter definitions of plagiarism and collusion than are held by students; and suggests that
students are overly cautious to ensure that they stay on the right side of a blurred distinction.
Fig. 4. Proportions of students & academics who were unsure whether a scenario was
plagiarism/collusion
This view is not fully supported by the findings of this research (see Figure 4). Relatively high
proportions of academics and students were unsure whether some scenarios were
plagiarism/collusion, in the essay as well as the design contexts.
In relation to essays, for example, more than a third of both academics and students were
unsure whether it was plagiarism/collusion to post an essay to an online forum and ask for
feedback on it (scenario 6). For the design assessments there was a great level of
uncertainty, for example, about purchasing images to incorporate into ones design (scenario
3).
1266
altering an essay after completion, and the acceptability of altering a design after completion,
to incorporate features noticed while looking at another students work. The asterisk tells us
that this difference is significant. By contrast, the 3.2 immediately above it tells us that
academics saw little difference between asking another student to improve a completed
essay and asking another student to improve a completed design, and that the difference
was not significant.
Academics
Scenario
Students
Acceptable
Plagiarism
Acceptable
Plagiarism
22.6*
12.8*
40.0*
16.1*
10.0*
11.0*
22.0*
26.6*
54.0*
137.0*
131.4*
3.6
1.5
1.9
4.8
6.0
9.0*
6.2
16.9*
5.0
14.6*
7.1
1.2
10.4*
1.4
21.3*
28.7*
36.8*
23.8*
5.8
2.3
1.4
4.5
7.5*
6.7
17.3*
28.9*
3.7
0.3
2.3
4.6
3.2
3.7
0.9
5.8
3.2
10.4*
13.9*
58.6*
21.4*
9.0*
25.2*
58.3*
* Significant p<0.05
Fig. 5. McNemar-Bowker test statistics for differences between essay and design scenarios.
The blanks indicate where the statistic could not be calculated due to zero counts in some
cells.
Scenarios 1, 10, 13, and 14 were perceived as less acceptable and more likely to be
plagiarism/collusion in the design context than for essays. While the vast majority agreed
that scenarios 1 and 10 were acceptable and did not constitute plagiarism, participants were
still more likely to categorise these as unacceptable and as plagiarism/collusion in the design
context than in the essay context. Respondents were more likely to consider it unacceptable
to ask another student to improve their completed work (scenario 13) when the context
changed from essays to design. For example, of the 17% of academics who said this was
not plagiarism for essays, 32% thought it was plagiarism or collusion in a design context and
a further 42% were unsure.
Scenario 14 displayed a big difference between the essay and design contexts. For
example, more than half of the 33% of students who said this practice was acceptable for
essays changed their opinion for design, with 19% of these being unsure and 24% saying it
was not acceptable. Academics were more likely to categorise scenario 14 as plagiarism in
relation to design, with 27% of those who said it was not plagiarism in essays and 31% of
those who were unsure indicating that they thought it was plagiarism in design assessments.
1267
Conversely, scenarios 2, 3 and 8 were viewed as more acceptable and less likely to be
categorised as plagiarism in design assessments than in essays. Over 80% of both
academics and students thought that scenarios 2 and 8 were unacceptable and
plagiarism/collusion for essays, but somewhat lower proportions agreed in relation to design.
Scenario 3 was highly significant in all cases, with only around half of those who thought the
practice was unacceptable or was plagiarism for essays expressing the same opinion in
relation to design assessments. However, the scenarios in this pair are not as comparable
as in the other pairs, and therefore the results should be interpreted with caution. The essay
scenario refers to purchasing a completed essay from the web, whereas in the parallel
design scenario the purchased images are incorporated into the students design rather than
being presented as the final product.
Academics
Design
Students
Academics
Students
4.0
16.6*
6.9
2.2
6.0
1.7
3.6
3.9
15.0*
9.0*
13.2*
15.0*
6.8*
9.9*
25.1*
38.4*
19.2*
38.8*
5.0
2.1
3.8
7.9*
19.8*
3.3
7.5*
3.8
19.5*
11.7*
7.1
11.0*
16.5*
9.6*
5.1
5.0
10.6*
4.3
24.8*
5.5
9.1*
10.0*
25.6*
44.6*
18.3*
3.9
36.0*
16.0*
33.2*
12.1*
7.4
4.4
4.3
2.9
4.3
* Significant p<0.05
Fig. 6. Comparison of plagiarism/collusion and acceptability. The blanks indicate where the
McNemar-Bowker test could not be calculated due to zero counts in some cells.
For both essays and design assessments, student respondents considered scenarios 11
and 12 to be plagiarism/collusion and yet to be acceptable. For scenario 11, of the 12% of
1268
students who thought discussing the detail of an essay in progress was plagiarism, 27%
identified it as acceptable. Similarly, for design assessments, of the 13% who thought it was
plagiarism, 30% said it was acceptable. Scenario 10 was similarly perceived, with 52% of
students who identified it as plagiarism still finding it acceptable.
There is more support for the converse position, scenarios that were not perceived as
plagiarism/collusion but were nevertheless considered to be unacceptable in an academic
environment and with much greater differences. Student responses show this difference
for seven of the essay scenarios and one design scenario. Academic responses show the
difference for two essay-based scenarios and six design-based scenarios.
In relation to essays, both academics and students felt that scenarios 5 and 13 were
unacceptable but not plagiarism/collusion. For scenario 5, generally referred to as selfplagiarism, of the 17% of academics who said it was not plagiarism, two thirds said it was
unacceptable; and of the 22% of students who said it was not plagiarism, a third considered
it unacceptable. Student responses indicated the same perception about scenarios 3, 4, 7, 8,
and 9 in relation to essays.
In relation to design assessments, both students and academics felt that scenario 5 was not
plagiarism/collusion but was nevertheless unacceptable. Of those who indicated that this
scenario was not plagiarism/collusion, 73% of academics and 28% of students said it was
unacceptable. Academic responses indicated the same perception about scenarios 3, 4, 8, 9
and 13.
It is not clear whether these findings indicate confusion as to what constitutes
plagiarism/collusion, or whether respondents are clear that some practices constitute
misconduct but nevertheless consider them to be acceptable, and vice versa.
Conclusion
The academic integrity literature has focused on prose text when examining the perceptions
of students and academics into what constitutes cheating, plagiarism and collusion. In
contrast, this research investigates whether there are differences in perceptions of
plagiarism and collusion between text-based assessments such as essays and non-textbased assessments such as visual designs. The survey asked whether certain practices
constituted plagiarism or collusion and whether these practices were acceptable, thereby
providing further insights into the ethical judgements individuals make about their actions,
including possible reasons why students breach academic integrity rules and how
academics attitudes may influence their decisions to pursue breaches.
The results of the survey confirmed previous research findings relating to text-based
assessments that there is a general consensus on more extreme examples of
plagiarism/collusion but a high level of uncertainty regarding others. Practices that involved
little effort on the part of the student such as copying without referencing, copying from
other students or purchasing work were overwhelmingly categorised as plagiarism. On the
other hand, practices such as discussing aspects of the work with other students, while still
contributing substantial individual effort, were less likely to be thought of as
plagiarism/collusion.
We found a high level of agreement between academics and students in their assessments
of whether particular scenarios constituted plagiarism/collusion. The only significant
differences were for scenarios 11 and 12, with students more likely to consider these to be
plagiarism/collusion.
There were substantial differences between perceptions in the text and non-text environment.
In relation to design assessments as compared with essays, participants were more likely to
consider that discussing tasks with others or asking others to improve their work was
10
1269
Acknowledgements
Support for this project has been provided by the Australian Government Office for Learning
and Teaching. The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the
Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching.
References
Atkins, J., & Herfel, W. (2006). Counting beans in the degree factory: some practical metaethical reflections on academic integrity in Australian universities. International Journal for
Educational Integrity 2(1): 3-12.
Baker, R.K., Berry, P., & Thornton, B. (2008). Student Attitudes on Academic Integrity
Violations. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, January 2008, Volume 5, Number 1, 513.
Berman, H. E. (2010). Copycat, Copyright, or Coincidence: Maker Beware. Metalsmith, Vol.
30, No. 1, 22-23.
Blythman, M., Orr, S., & Mullin, J. (2007). Reaching a Consensus: Plagiarism In Non-Text
Based Media. London College of Communication, University of the Arts London.
11
1270
Brimble, M., & Stevenson-Clarke, P. (2005). Perceptions of the Prevalence and Seriousness
of Academic Dishonesty in Australian Universities. The Australian Educational Researcher,
Volume 32, Number 3, December, 19-44.
Brooks, C., & Ellis, J. (2005). Fidelity to scholarly practice: Academic honesty and
information literacy in the Faculty of Arts. ASCILITE Conference. Retrieved September, 15,
2013, from www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane05/blogs/proceedings/11_Brooks.pdf.
Curtis, G.J., & Popal, R. (2011). An examination of factors related to plagiarism and a fiveyear follow-up of plagiarism at an Australian university. International Journal for Educational
Integrity, Vol. 7, No. 1, June, 30-42.
Dick, M., Sheard, J., Bareiss, C., Carter, J., Joyce, D., Harding, T., & Laxer, C. (2003).
Addressing Student Cheating: Definitions and Solutions. SIGCSE Bulletin, 172-184.
Economou, I. (2011). The Problem with Plagiarism, Proceedings of the Sixth International
DEFSA Conference. 20/20 Design Vision, University of Johannesburg, 7-8 September 2011,
79-86.
Foltnek, T., Rybika, J. and Demoliou, C (2013). Do students think what teachers think
about plagiarism? Proceedings of International Conference Plagiarism across Europe and
Beyond, 12-13 June 2013, Brno, Czech Republic, 127-135.
Forster P, (2010). Academic Integrity Initiatives: have they made a difference? Paper
presented at the Fourth International Plagiarism Conference, 21-23 June 2010, Northumbria
University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Garrett, L., & Robinson, A. (2012). Spot the Difference! Visual plagiarism in the visual arts.
EVA London, Electronic Visualisation and the Arts (EVA) Conference, 10-12 July 2012,
London, 24-33.
Gullifer, J and Tyson, G.A. (2010). Exploring university students perception of plagiarism: a
focus group study. Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 35, No. 4, June 2010, 463-481.
Gururajin, R., & Roberts, D. (2005). Attitude towards plagiarism in information systems in
Australian universities, Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Conference on Information
Systems, Bangkok, Thailand, Retrieved August, 10, 2013, from. http://www.pacisnet.org/file/2005/106.pdf.
Gynnild, V., & Gotschalk, P. (2008). Promoting academic integrity at a Midwestern University:
Critical review and current challenge. International Journal for Educational Integrity, Vol. 4,
No. 2, December 2008, 41-59.
Huffman, S. (2010). The Missing Link: The Lack of Citations and Copyright Notices in
Multimedia Presentations. TechTrends, Volume 54, Number 3, May/June, 38-44.
Joyce, D. (2007). Academic integrity and plagiarism: Australasian perspectives. Computer
Science Education 17(3), 187-200.
Lampert, L. D. (2004). Integrating discipline-based anti-plagiarism instruction into the
information literacy curriculum. Reference Services Review, Volume 32, Number 4, 347-355.
Marshall, S., & Garry, M. (2005). How well do students really understand plagiarism. In H.
Goss (Ed.), Balance, fidelity, mobility: Proceedings of the 2005 ASCILITE Conference.
Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, 4547-467.
McCabe, D. L. (2005). Cheating among college and university students: A North American
perspective, International Journal for Educational Integrity 1(1). Retrieved July 14, 2013,
from http://www.ojs.unisa.edu.au/index.php/IJEI.
McCabe, D. L., & Pavela, G. (2004). Ten (updated) Principles of Academic Integrity: how
faculty can foster student honesty. Change, 36.3 (May-June 2004), 10(6), 10-15.
12
1271
Owunwanne, D., Rustagi, N., & Dada, R. (2010). Students Perceptions Of Cheating And
Plagiarism In Higher Institutions, Journal of College Teaching and Learning, Nov. 2012, 7,
11, 59-68.
Park, C. (2003). In Other (Peoples) Words: plagiarism by university students-literature and
lessons, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 28, No. 5, October 2003, 471488.
Pickard, J. (2006). Staff and student attitudes to plagiarism at University College
Northampton, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 31(2): 215-232.
Porter, M. (2010). A consideration of academic misconduct in the creative disciplines: From
inspiration to imitation and acceptable incorporation. Emerge. Issue 2, 1-16.
Robinson, A. (2012). More than just a pretty interface: three recent projects at the Visual Arts
Data Service. Art Libraries Journal, Vol. 37, Issue 3, 28-33.
Shaughnessy, A. (2004).So when is a copy right? Design Week, 7 October 2004.
Sheard, J., & Dick, M (2011) Computing Student Practices of Cheating and Plagiarism: A
Decade of Change. ITiCSE11, June 27-29, Darmstadt, Germany, 233-237
Simon, Cook, B. Sheard, J., Carbone, A., & Johnson, C. (2013). Academic Integrity:
Differences between Computing Assessments and Essays, 13th International Conference on
Computing Education (Koli Calling 2013), Koli Finland.
Stappenbelt, B. (2012). Plagiarism in mechanical engineering education: a comparative
study of international and domestic students. International Journal of Mechanical
Engineering Education, Volume 40, Number 1, 24-41.
Yeo, S. (2007). First-year university science and engineering students understanding of
plagiarism, Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 26, No. 2, June 2007, 199-216
Walker, B. (2009). New Twists on an Old Problem: Preventing Plagiarism and Enforcing
Academic Integrity in an Art and Design School, Art Documentation, Volume 28, Number 1,
48-51.
Simon
Simon is a Senior Lecturer in IT at the University of Newcastle, Australia. During eight years
in which he was responsible for handling cases of academic misconduct across a range of
disciplines, he formed the impression that the rules of academic conduct do not apply in the
same way across all disciplines. He then led a team that successfully applied for funding to
investigate questions of plagiarism, collusion, and related matters in assessments not
involving text, with a particular focus on the visual design and computing disciplines.
Beth Cook
Beth Cook has worked as a researcher and teacher with the University of Newcastle for the
past eight years. During that time she has been involved in a wide range of major research
projects, including some funded by the Australian Research Council grants and others
commissioned by government departments and trade unions. In her teaching role she has
provided students with advice and guidance regarding academic integrity requirements.
Mario Minichiello
Prof Mario Minichiello has in the past twenty years served on a number of national and
international learning and teaching boards, which are required to validate new programs and
assessment systems. In these roles he has observed that curriculum and assessment
13
1272
design must increasingly incorporate ways to limit the opportunities for cheating. Mario has
also worked as a reviewer and chair for the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
in the UK, whose role is to safeguard quality and standards in universities and colleges.
Chris Lawrence
Chris Lawrence has spent the past ten years as a lecturer contributing to the graphic design
and visual communication programs at the University of Newcastle. During this time he has
been a major advocate for the clarification of academic standards regarding the submission
of visual material. He has recently taken a break from the academic sector to assume a
quality control position with iStockphoto reviewing the integrity of digital illustrations from its
international community of contributors.
14
1273
Abstract
Studio-based design education is changing to include multidisciplinary design teams,
geographically distributed teams, information technology, and new work styles. In this
paper, we present the research findings from a graduate studio redesign using an
Evidence-Based Design approach with measures and outcomes for function, pleasure,
and the emotional needs of users. Located in a design school at a research university in
the United States, we conducted four types of pre- and post-occupancy measures:
observations, interviews, surveys, and diary studies. Six issues informed studio redesign:
Aesthetics, Acoustics, Collaboration, Faculty Interaction, Sociability, and Stewardship. We
transformed a single room design studio into four interconnected spaces: an area with
individual workspaces, collaborative spaces, a kitchen and social cafe area, and a
classroom with distance learning technology. Student satisfaction significantly improved in
the new studio according to survey results. Some participants open-ended survey
comments suggest that functional needs were met, but some pleasure-related and
emotional needs linked to habitation were problematic. Claiming of individual workspaces
and limited social norms were linked to mixed positive and negative responses on
aesthetics and acoustics. Collaborative and social spaces, where there is no expectation
of ownership, had uniformly positive results in both closed- and open-ended survey results.
Keywords
design studio education; learning environments; design research; Evidence-Based Design
Design studio education is rapidly changing to keep current with and push design practice.
Common trends include multidisciplinary teamwork, increased use of information technology, geographically distributed collaborations, and flexibility in work environments.
The design studio in universities is a physical place, a cultural place, and a social place.
Activities are characterized by five factors: co-location, learning-by-doing, continuous
access, integrative learning, and mimicking practice (Lawson & Dorst, 2009). A studiobased education ecological framework includes observable components, or tools, and
pedagogical approaches used to construct design knowledge (Brandt, Cennamo, Douglas,
Vernon, McGrath, & Reimer, 2011). The studio environment supports a learning-by-doing
pedagogy where guided instruction helps students acquire design knowledge and skills.
Design instructors rely on professional experience, awareness, and talent (e.g., Goldschmidt, Hochman, & Dafni, 2010).
Studio education has a three parts: studio pedagogy, social dynamics, and ideals and
expectations (Groat, & Ahrentzen, 1996). Studios are more than the design functions
supported, the research and design methodologies taught, and declared rules.
Interactions between studio dwellers, faculty, staff, and administration shape social
dynamics. Each person immersed in a studio culture brings his or her ideals, values, and
expectations. Furthermore, global student populations in studio environments require
cultural sensitivity.
1274
Studio critiques and conversations help students navigate the complexities of designing,
and the configuration of the studio where critiques occur in turn may influence interactions
and outcomes. Design critiques in studio education vary along three dimensions: from
number of people (one-on-one, small group, whole class), public/private, and
formal/informal (Oh, Ishizaki, Gross, & Yi-Luen Do, 2013).
Design and architecture schools are shifting from solely individual projects to team
projects (Koch, Schewennsen, Dutton, & Smith, 2002). Increasingly, design studio
environments need to support individual work and teamwork, through individual and
collaborative workspaces.
Universities are rethinking their design studios. For example, the d.school at Stanford
University chronicles their design space transformations in the book, Make Space
(Doorley & Witthoft, 2012). The Human-Computer Interaction Design program at Indiana
University created a new studio with a broad range of types of space, from limited
individual desks for doctoral students to collaborative workspaces and project rooms for
masters students. Faculty offices and students are collocated to increase interaction
opportunities. The studio is also a departmental showcase (Callison, 2011).
Research of university studio redesign projects varies from the anecdotal to rigorous
studies. Evidence-Based Design (EBD) rigorously links credible evidence validated by
research and design decisions. EBD originated in healthcare facility design, as a method
to achieve excellence in medical staff and patient experience, including safety, the
reduction of medical errors, hospital acquired infection, and staff injuries (Ulrich, Zimring,
Zhu, DuBose, Choi, Quan, & Joseph, 2008). Increasingly, EBD is used in other domains
such as learning environments, retail space, and workplaces (Hamilton & Watkins, 2009).
Textbooks detail EBD approaches for elementary and secondary school learning
environments (Lippman, 2010; Hamilton & Watkins, 2009). One perceived limitation to
EBD is the focus on easily measurable functional outcomes.
While functionality and usability are critical in design studio environments, multiple factors
shape learning. Human factors researchers have argued that pleasure with products
and by extension, environments moves beyond mere usability (Green & Jordan, 2002).
Four types of pleasure benefits are linked to design: physio-pleasures, socio-pleasures,
psycho-pleasures, and ideo-pleasures (Jordan, 2000). Users derive physio-pleasures
through design qualities that alter user physiological states (e.g., calming colours that
reduce arousal). Socio-pleasures enable people to be more comfortable in their
relationships with others (e.g., feeling socially accepted). Psycho-pleasures are delivered
through design that makes unpleasant tasks easier by reducing frustration (e.g., online
one click shopping). Ideo-pleasures pertain to peoples moral values and personal
aspirations, and how people want to see themselves and want to be seen by others.
Studio experiences are coloured by emotional responses that operate on three levels:
visceral, behavioural, and reflective (Norman, 2004). Pleasure and emotional design are
linked in a holistic assessment of user experience (van Gorp & Adams, 2012). Visceral
design concerns appearances (e.g., colours, aesthetics), relates to physio-pleasures and
provides hedonic benefits. Behavioural design relates to effectiveness of use (e.g.,
functionality, usability), links to psycho-pleasures and relates to practical benefits.
Reflective design considers interpretation and understanding over time (e.g., experience,
personal story), concerns ideo-pleasures and socio-pleasures and relates to emotional
benefits.
In the sections that follow, we describe a redesign project for a studio that houses
graduate students in a university setting. The design studio was transformed through
renovation from a single room to a suite of connected spaces to better support the range
1275
Design Strategy
The studios before and after renovation house approximately 40 graduate students in twoyear design programs. To discover the main challenges presented by the pre-renovation
graduate design studio, we collected baseline measures using observations, interviews,
an online survey, and a diary study documenting where students did their work in and
outside of the studio. Six key findings from the pre-renovation research informed the
design of the new studio:
1. Aesthetics. Students rated furniture, paint colour, carpeting, and upkeep of the
studio very poorly. Students complained about the overall greyness of the studio,
unaesthetic quality of furniture, and the need for regular maintenance. Student
ratings relate to visceral-design and physio-pleasures.
2. Acoustics. Students identified conflict between individual work requiring quiet
concentration and teamwork demanding group discussion, in the shared, multifunction studio space. Student ratings relate to behavioural-design and psychopleasures.
3. Collaboration. Students were dissatisfied with the amount and quality of space
dedicated to collaborative activities, based on the needed balance of individual
and teamwork in graduate education. Student ratings relate to reflective design,
ideo-pleasures, and socio-pleasures.
4. Faculty Interactions. The studio housed both first and second year graduate
students engaged in course and thesis work. Most interaction with faculty
occurred in classrooms and faculty offices distributed throughout the school.
Limited faculty interactions likely relate to reflective design, ideo-pleasures, and
socio-pleasures.
5. Sociability. Students had limited space to congregate over food and socialize;
furthermore, teams often occupied the social space for non-social purposes.
Student ratings relate to reflective design, ideo-pleasures, and socio-pleasures.
6. Stewardship. Students lacked agency over their studio environment and
complained about studio conditions and upkeep. Lack of stewardship and agency
likely relates to reflective design, ideo-pleasures, and socio-pleasures
The new studio suite increased from 167m2 in a single room (figure 1) to a 400m2
suite formed by four interconnected spaces to support multiple work preferences:
an area with individual workspaces for 40 students, collaborative space with an
enclosed team room, a kitchen and social cafe area and a distance-learning
capable classroom (figures 2,3,4,5). Additional features included wall-to-wall
whiteboards, six 50-inch video monitors, dynamic screen-sharing technologies,
and teleconference abilities. Furnishings were specified through collaboration with
Steelcase learning environments.
1276
Figure 1. Floorplans of old studio (left) and of the remodelled studio suite (right). In the
remodelled studio, the collaboration space and learning lab replaced the former one-room
studio. The laboratory and offices in the old configuration became a large room with desks
for individual work. The classroom across the hall from the old studio became the kitchen
and social area in the remodelled studio. Architectural and interior design by Edge Studio.
1277
Figure 2. Images from the old studio: (far left) individual desk area; (center left) kitchen
area; (center right) social space; (far right) teamwork area.
Figure 3. Panoramic 360 photograph of the graduate design studio before remodelling:
(left) team table; (center) view onto individual desks; (right) kitchen corner and social area.
Figure 4. Images from the remodelled studio: (far-left) individual desk area; (center-left)
kitchen area; (center-right) tables in social space; (far-right) team tables near classroom.
Figure 5. Panoramic 360 photograph of the remodelled graduate design: (left) view into
kitchen and social area; (center) view into classroom; (right) view into collaborative spaces.
Research Methods
We conducted four types of pre- and post-occupancy measures: online surveys, field
observations, interviews, and smartphone diary studies on preferred work locations. All
methods informed the redesign strategy; however, we focus here on the online survey, for
pre- and post-measure comparisons with supporting information from field observations.
While interviews and diary studies were generally informative, there was a large imbalance of participants pre- and post-renovation, providing limited data for comparison.
The online survey had 12 questions with 112 sub-questions with Likert scale responses,
and nine open-ended comment boxes. We conducted the survey twice, pre-renovation in
April 2012, and post-renovation in November 2012. Participants were solicited via email to
the graduate student mailing list. The questions described below are grouped according to
the six key themes for design: Aesthetics, Acoustics, Collaboration, Faculty Interaction,
Sociability, and Stewardship.
1278
Results
In this section, we describe the results from the online survey and field observations. The
design of the new studio suite was very successful, with students rating the new studio
suite over all significantly better than the old one. Forty-three respondents completed the
survey, eighteen pre-renovation, and twenty-five post-renovation. All survey responses
are reported on a seven point Likert scale. We present results according to the six design
themes: Aesthetics, Acoustics, Collaboration, Faculty Interaction, Sociability, and
Stewardship.
Aesthetics. Aesthetic appearance and satisfaction with both the individual and
collaborative areas was significantly higher in the redesigned studio, including
1279
assessments of overall appearance, and satisfaction with colours, finishes, quality and
quantity of surfaces, file storage, and workstation chairs (see table 1).
We interpret open-ended survey responses to signify that the quality of the aesthetic
choices was appreciated overall; however, some students were dissatisfied with aspects
both before and after renovations, but for remarkably different reasons. For example,
comments on the old studio focused on the greyness and lack of aesthetic appeal:
At the moment the walls, tables and floor are all grey. So even when we get stuff
tacked up here and there, the overwhelming feeling is grey grey grey.
Whereas comments on the remodelled studio focused on the pristine condition of the new
space:
So pristine, it's hard to feel totally comfortable. (Although that may be good for a
shared space.)
Not sure what I would actually do, but something to make it a bit more playful,
less dauntingly pristine.
Everything is white and sterile looking, any amount of "lived in" quality
dramatically takes away from the aesthetic. This is especially true in the kitchen.
We interpret the survey questions to mean that the function, quality, and aesthetics of the
remodelled studio significantly improved after remodelling. The negative overtones of the
open-ended responses may indicate that some participants didnt quite feel at ease in the
new studio.
Measure
DF
Sig.
Mean Pre
Mean Post
(a) Aesthetics
1,42
201.06
.0005
1.89
(SD .94)
6.04
(SD 0.94)
(b) Colour
1,42
64.23
.0005
2.16
(SD 1.64)
5.72
(SD 1.31)
1,42
93.90
.0005
2.21
(SD 1.72)
6.12
(SD 1.31)
1,42
11.09
.002
3.74
(SD 1.91)
5.40
(SD 1.78)
(e) File
1,42
5.07
.03
3.95
(SD 2.37)
5.32
(SD 1.68)
(f) Chair
1,42
52.01
.0005
3.21
(SD 1.65)
6.12
(SD 1.01)
Table 1. Measures on aesthetics of environment and satisfaction with personal workplaces (n = 43: pre n = 18, post n = 25). Responses on a seven point Likert scale (1 =
very unsatisfied, 7 = very satisfied).
Acoustics survey measures suggest significant decreases in acoustic interference around
individual workstations and the studio in general, with significant increases in satisfaction
based on reduced interference from other peoples conversations and background noise,
frequency of distractions, distance between people, and privacy for conversations (see
table 2).
1280
Open-ended survey responses suggest that acoustic interference is still a concern for
some students. In the old studio acoustics were mentioned as problematic:
The main complaint with the studio is that there is not enough quiet space to do
focused individual work like writing, reading or synthesis.
In the remodelled studio, creating a quiet area separate from the collaborative areas for
individual work with sound absorbing ceiling treatments and carpet helped with acoustics.
However, establishing social rules about making noise in a quiet space continued to
present challenges.
It is still a fight to find quiet space where I won't be disturbed. I wish there were
quiet chambers where I could lock myself into something or if there were a door
that I could close to indicate that I don't want to be disturbed. I do try to write and
read at my desk using my studio headphones but depending on who is around, I
will still get interrupted and asked questions. That's just the nature of being in a
social environment. There are no quiet rules in the back green-chair area. To get
real peace and quiet I still have to go home to work.
The open-ended comments suggest that acoustics are comprised of both technical and
social issues.
Measure
DF
Sig
1,42
5.02
.031
1,42
13.66
.001
(c) Distractions
1,42
21.50
.0005
(d) Crowding
1,42
13.60
.001
1,42
19.42
.0005
Mean pre
2.94
(SD 1.89)
3.06
(SD 1.79)
2.44
(SD 1.46)
3.68
(SD 2.19)
2.63
(SD 1.57)
Mean post
4.16
(SD 1.65)
4.16
(SD 1.89)
4.56
(SD 1.5)
5.48
(SD 1.36)
4.64
(SD 1.44)
Table 2. Acoustic interference survey measures before and after remodelling n = 43 (pre n
= 18, post n = 25). Responses on a seven point Likert scale (1 = very unsatisfied, 7 = very
satisfied).
Collaboration measures indicated significantly higher student satisfaction in the
remodelled studio, including assessments of meeting space within individual work
locations, space to accommodate work, materials, and visitors around workstations, tools
and technology in meeting areas, quality, arrangement and furnishing of meeting areas,
and variety of places for collaborative work (see table 3).
Open-ended responses in the pre-survey suggested that some participants had concerns
with the collaborative spaces. In the old studio, students lamented the limited amount of
collaborative spaces.
For a lot of the core classes, several groups are always meeting at once. It can
get crowded quickly, especially with the lack of counter space in the kitchen area.
Meetings often trickle into the social dining areas.
The collaborative space in the remodelled space received praises.
1281
I love the studio space. I particularly love the variety of seating and workspace
options - that is hugely important for me. The one issue I have is the lack of
standing workspaces. It's hard to work any way but seated.
The private room is extremely great for interviews and private conversations.
In contrast to mixed positive and negative survey responses on aesthetics and acoustics,
the closed- and open-ended responses on collaborative spaces were uniformly positive.
Measure
(a) Individual meeting areas
(b) Accommodate self and visitors
(c) Collaboration tools and technology
(d) Arrangement meeting places
(e) Shared meeting areas
(f) Variety collaboration spaces
DF
Sig.
1,42
16.95
.0005
1,42
10.57
.002
1,42
109.53
.0005
1,42
76.50
.0005
1,42
74.78
.0005
1,42
165.99
.0005
Mean pre
3.11.
(SD 2.07)
3.68
(SD 2.08)
2.72
(SD 1.02)
3.35
(SD 1.53)
3.16
(SD 1.39)
2.95
(SD 1.04)
Mean post
5.32
(SD 1.49)
5.48
(SD 1.58)
6.27
(SD 1.15)
6.38
(SD .71)
6.16
(SD .91)
6.50
(SD .80)
Table 3. Collaborative meeting space survey measures before and after remodelling n =
43 (pre n = 18, post n = 25). Responses on a seven point Likert scale (1= very unsatisfied,
7= very satisfied).
Faculty interactions were limited in the studio prior to remodelling. Both graduate students
and faculty mentioned that faculty rarely entered the graduate studio room. Faculty
perceived the graduate studio as student territory and went there only if invited or
otherwise necessary. The new classroom integrated within the redesigned graduate
studio suite was commissioned for classes starting in the spring semester of 2013. On
average, faculty members represented 3% of the people counted in the remodelled studio.
On average, faculty members were counted in the studio in two of the four daily
observations.
Sociability. On average participants were significantly more satisfied with the social and
kitchen space going from 3.25 (SD 1.68) before remodelling to 6.83 (SD .28) after
remodelling [F(1,42) = 100.23, p= 0.0005].
Some of the open-ended survey responses before remodelling highlighted the main
concerns with the kitchen and social space.
Kitchen does not have enough features. We need a larger refrigerator, and a
better dish-washing system. People get too lazy to wash dishes because the sink
is too small and it takes too much effort.
After remodelling, some minor concerns remained with regard to kitchen details.
I wish we had storage tubs for the shelves to hide the items on the shelves.
Maybe one for each student? If we bring our own in, they won't match the decor
and may still end up looking messy and low class.
I think there should be more "floor" in the kitchen to avoid hard (carpet) clean ups.
1282
Stewardship and student agency on average significantly improved going from 2.94 (SD
1.47) before remodelling to 4.80 (SD 1.61) after remodelling [F(1,42) = 14.931, p= 0.0005].
While a significant the improvement, 4.8 on a seven-point scale falls between 4 neutral
and 5 somewhat satisfied. Some open-ended survey responses suggest that while
agency significantly improved in the remodelled studio, improvements are still necessary.
Another frustration is that although there are changes we have asked for such as
different garbage cans for the kitchen, all the money has been spent. I don't
understand how this space is supposed to be a work in progress or a prototype to
iterate on when there is no money to make such changes.
It bothers me a bit that people don't erase their work on white boards and that we
are all doing our own chores by volunteering. It seems that there should be a
better system where we can all clean at the same time.
I would prefer if our seats in the studio changed every month or so. This would
give me a chance to talk to people I never get to talk to.
Discussion
The data in this paper raises many questions about what the studio is in design education.
We discuss the main findings in terms of the established six design themes: Aesthetics,
Acoustics, Collaboration, Faculty Interaction, Sociability, and Stewardship.
Aesthetics. The old studio clearly was in need of repair, with deteriorated aesthetics and
limited functionality compared to the renovated design studio (Figures 1,2,3,4,5). Our
interpretation of the survey results is unequivocal in determining that the new studio is
significantly more satisfying from an aesthetic perspective. However, the survey results
are qualified by certain open-ended responses. The presence of both positive and
negative measures in the data suggests that on some levels the remodelling of the studio
significantly improved student satisfaction, and on others the renovated studio presented
aspects of discontent.
We speculate that the patterns observed replicate what philosopher Odo Marquard
termed a typical inversion of negativity. The solution to a problem is first perceived
positively, then with indifference, and finally the solution becomes a new problem
(Marquard, 1990). In this instance, the high quality of the remodelled studio is the solution
to the problems identified in the old studio, yet at the same time the high quality in the
remodelled studio becomes the problem of the new studio.
We had not anticipated that a high quality design solution could be both positive and at
the same time problematic for students. However, the differences between closed- and
open-ended survey comments suggest that there are multiple layers to the problem of
aesthetics as perceived by occupants. The contrasting opinions suggest individual
differences in visceral and physio-pleasure responses to colours and aesthetics.
Acoustics. As described earlier, the closed-ended survey revealed significant
improvement with respect to acoustic interference in the renovated studio, coupled with
negative comments in the open-ended questions on the same topic. The closed-ended
survey questions capture the functional improvements: individual work areas are separate
from group work areas, there are multiple places where groups can work, and the surface
area more than doubled for the same number of people. At the individual level, acoustics
relates to behavioural-design and psycho-pleasures.
1283
The negative comments in the open-ended survey questions suggest a lack of social rules
about how to interact with others in the quiet individual work areas. The tension around
acoustics may be evidence of a missing socio-pleasure. To solve the acoustics problem it
is not enough to install sound absorbent acoustic materials; social rules need to be
enacted by the studio occupants as well.
Collaboration. The collaborative space received positive marks on both the closed- and
open-ended survey results in the remodelled studio. Why is there no inversion for
collaborative space as there was for aesthetics and acoustics? One possible explanation
may be that collaborative work in a shared space is by its nature temporary. Students had
no expectation to inhabit the space and own it past the duration of the team meeting. As
such, perhaps students perceived collaborative space as a temporary space, and not as a
primary territory to inhabit for a long time (Brown, 1987). The collaboration spaces may
have supported reflective teamwork, delivered psycho-pleasures by making typically
unsupported team tasks less frustrating, and increased socio-pleasures by making team
members feel more comfortable in their relationships with others.
Faculty interactions. Two findings relate to faculty presence in the graduate studio. First,
we noted that faculty members were observed more frequently in the graduate studio after
the renovation in general meeting with students. Second, teaching classes in the
classroom connected to graduate studio was associated with the most faculty sightings.
Third, the kitchen and social space provided a public space for interactions with faculty.
Through design critiques faculty members question student work to increase reflection.
Increased interaction between faculty and students likely afforded (a) psycho-pleasures
on difficult design tasks by encouraging students and providing design tips, and (b) sociopleasures, derived from students and faculty working together on design projects.
Social space. Satisfaction with social space and the kitchen area was significantly
improved with studio remodelling, as suggested by closed-ended survey questions and
open-ended comments. The open-ended comments that are critical point out functional
problems and not issues of emotional response or ownership. We believe this is the case
because the kitchen and social spaces are perceived to be shared spaces. Sociability
likely increased opportunities for reflection, socio-pleasures (e.g., belonging), and ideopleasures (e.g., opportunities to be seen within a social group in a particular manner).
Stewardship. Students were encouraged to take ownership of the graduate design studio
suite as a group and to be responsible for the care of it. The closed-ended survey
questions and the open-ended comments suggest that there are several levels to student
agency in the studio suite. The closed-ended questions captured that students felt much
greater agency in the remodelled studio. Encouraging stewardship in the studio
environment provides opportunities for self-reflection and collective reflection on upkeep
and agency. Both ideo-pleasures (e.g., how one wants to be seen) and socio-pleasures
(e.g., belonging to a group) are likely linked to stewardship.
The open-ended comments indicate that the imposed rotation system for self-assigned
upkeep tasks such as vacuuming and cleaning whiteboards and kitchen counters was met
with resistance. Students expressed the desire to create their own system. Other
comments suggest that some students were confused as to the process and budget
available to make changes, and who can make aesthetic decisions in the studio. The
school should decide how much to encourage student studio self-organization, and how
much to guide processes for studio stewardship. Future work will examine alternatives of
how to encourage student agency and studio upkeep.
1284
The apparent contradictions between closed- and open-ended survey results require
multiple explanations. One explanation is that designed artefacts have multiple meanings
that go beyond aesthetics and functional features; for example, meanings attributed to
designer intent or user interpretations in context; solutions to human needs, business or
technical opportunities; and sensory user experiences, and emotional response (Gagliardi,
1992).
User research informed the graduate studio suite redesign. Perhaps, the studio system
designers addressed functional student needs but missed some deeper pleasure or
emotional needs. As inhabitants of a studio environment, design students are acutely
aware and are critical of its features. Behaviours are influenced both by functional
attributes of the studio environment and policy. Since there is a cyclical movement
through the studio with graduating students and new students entering each year, culture,
including social norms, needs to be first established and then communicated to new
members. The challenge to expected behaviours and gradual establishment of new social
norms in studio culture could arguably be presented as a case of second-order or doubleloop learning (Argyris & Schn, 1978).
Rhetoric offers other insights into designed artefacts. Rhetoric is defined as the available
means of persuasion for a dialogue between designed artefact and audience (Buchanan,
1995). Rhetorically, artefacts have their own logic (logos); engender emotional response
in the audience (pathos); and have their own character (ethos). The closed-ended survey
responses may indicate that from a students perspective the logic of the design studio
suite was successful from a functional and aesthetic perspective.
The pathos or emotional responses in the open-ended comments tell a different story.
From an emotional perspective the redesign aesthetics did not resonate with all students.
Some mentioned not feeling at ease, or being afraid to ruin the clean white space by
occupying and working in it.
From an ethos perspective, once something is designed it in turn designs the world (Fry,
2009). Acoustic interference in the studio is shaped by acoustic material qualities,
functional localization choices, social protocols, and noise sources. The acoustic ethos is
shaped by the interplay of such factors.
Conclusion
The pre and post occupancy measures delineate a complex story of how participant
needs in the studio environment are aesthetic, functional, emotional, behavioural, social,
and institutional. Clearly, to design studios researchers should consider these multiple
levels and their interactions. One limitation of the Evidence Based Design approach is the
focus on easily measurable functional needs. While closed-ended survey responses
indicated that students were significantly more satisfied with their new studio in functional
terms, open-ended survey comments suggested that pleasure-related and emotional
needs linked to habitation were problematic for some students. Moving forward, the
analysis of survey data will be triangulated with qualitative methods, including
observational studies, diaries and contextual tours, and attempts to parse out sub factors
in depth, such as identity, agency, and stewardship.
Acknowledgements
Partial funding for the first authors research equipment came from the Berkman Faculty
Development Fund at Carnegie Mellon University. We would like to thank Rita Lee,
1285
Deborah Wilt, Xinran Lu, and Andrea Fineman for their assistance with photographic
documentation, field observations, and data collection.
References
Argyris, C. & Schn, D.A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Brandt, C. B., Cennamo, K., Douglas, S., Vernon, M., McGrath, M., & Reimer, Y. (2011).
A theoretical framework for the studio as a learning environment. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 1-20.
Brown, B. (1987) Territoriality, in Daniel Stokols, & Irwin Altman, (eds). Handbook of
environmental psychology. New York: Wiley pp 505-531.
Buchanan, R. (1995) Rhetoric, Humanism, and Design. In Richard Buchanan & Victor
Margolin (eds) Discovering design: Explorations in design studies. University of Chicago
Press.
Callison, M. (2011). A Design Case Featuring the Graduate Design Studio at Indiana
University Bloomingtons Human-Computer Interaction Design Program. International
Journal of Designs for Learning, 2(1).
Doorley, S., & Witthoft, S. (2012). Make space: How to set the stage for creative
collaboration. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons.
Fry, T. (2009). Design futuring: Sustainability, ethics, and new practice. Oxford, UK: Berg.
Gagliardi, P. (1992). Symbols and artifacts: Views of the corporate landscape. New York:
Aldine de Gruyter.
Goldschmidt, G., Hochman, H., & Dafni, I. (2010). The design studio crit: Teacher
student communication. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and
Manufacturing, 24(3), 285-302.
Groat, L. N., & Ahrentzen, S. (1996). Reconceptualizing architectural education for a more
diverse future: Perceptions and visions of architectural students. Journal of Architectural
Education, 166-183.
Jordan, P. W. (2000). Designing pleasurable products: An introduction to the new human
factors. London: Routledge.
Jordan, P. W., & Green, W. S. (2002). Pleasure with products. London: Taylor & Francis.
Koch, A., Schewennsen, K., Dutton, T., & Smith, D. (2002) Redesign of studio culture: A
report of the AIAS studio culture taskforce. American Institute of Architecture Students,
INC. Washington, DC. Demystified. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press.
Lippman, P. C. (2010). Evidence-based design of elementary and secondary schools.
Hoboken, N.J: J. Wiley.
1286
Marquard, Odo (1991) The age of unworldliness? A contribution to the analysis of the
present. Chapter 5, In Defense of the Accidental. Philosophical Studies. Oxford University
Press. pp.71-90.
Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New
York: Basic Books.
Oh, Y., Ishizaki, S., Gross, M. D., & Yi-Luen Do, E. (2013). A theoretical framework of
design critiquing in architecture studios. Design Studies, 34(3), 302325.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2012.08.004
Ulrich, R. S., Zimring, C., Zhu, X., DuBose, J., Seo, H., Choi, Y., & Joseph, A. (2008). A
review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design. Health
environments research & design journal, 1(3), 61-125.
van Gorp, T., & Adams, E. (2012). Design for emotion. Boston: Elsevier/Morgan
Kaufmann.
1287
Abstract
Many scholars in the design research field are involved in (post)-graduate design
education on the one hand, and some type of corporate education on the other. While
there is a growing body of knowledge on educating design students, there is a gap in this
research field with regard to the education of non-design professionals. This type of
education has become more important now it is increasingly recognized that design can
support innovation in businesses, so-called design led innovation. In this paper we focus
on educating Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs). We propose a learner-centred
approach to the development of education, which means that insights in the learners
needs are used to develop programs on design-led innovation. To illustrate this approach
we present how the learning needs of SMEs were investigated through the qualitative
evaluation of a Building Design Competency program. From this study can be concluded
that SMEs have specific emotional, social and cognitive characteristics that influence their
learning needs. These needs include trustworthy course providers and instructors, a
learning community of non-competing peers, customized stimulation of a deep learning
approach, and adjustment of teaching material to their initial level of customer and
business insights.
Keywords
Design education; Design Capability; Design led innovation; Learner-centred education;
Small to Medium Sized Enterprises
It is increasingly recognized that design strategies positively influence innovation
outcomes in businesses. There are many indicators that the way that expert designers
think and act has merits outside the traditional design domain in both commercial
businesses and social enterprises (Brown, 2009; Dorst, 2011; Martin, 2009; Pozzey,
Wrigley, & Bucolo, 2012). This paper aims to contribute to the adoption of design
strategies in business. To successfully apply design to business systems, design
processes of products and services need to be adjusted and linked to the business
domain (Bucolo, Wrigley, & Matthews, 2012). The concept that links design and
innovation is called design-led, design-driven or design-inspired innovation by scholars in
the fields of innovation and design (Bucolo & Matthews, 2010; Brown, 2009; Dong, 2013;
Liedtka & Ogilvie, 2011; Verganti, 2008). Several tools and methods have been proposed
to unify design and innovation, including for example the business model canvas
(Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010) and the design-led innovation framework of the second
author (Bucolo et. al, 2012).
An essential prerequisite for the successful adoption of design-led innovation in
companies is that individuals within these firms develop design competences. Hobday,
Boddington, and Grantham (2012) suggest that we need to recognize and develop the
notion of design capability (i.e. experience, knowledge and skill) as an important
dimension of design and design thinking in innovation studies. This need for the
1288
1289
customers on the one hand, and to develop a company strategy that is aligned with the
proposition on the other hand.
1290
Participants started with step 1,2 and 3 and subsequently continued with iterations in the
process, as visualized in figure 3.
Figure 3: method for developing value propositions as presented in the BDC program.
Key to the approach we developed for this program was ensuring the participants adopted
a design thinking mindset, which would allow them to explore and adjust the application of
the tools and methods to their own business contexts. The proposed design innovation
method served as a prototype for a pilot of this program and allowed us to both evaluate
1291
the content as well as the teaching method of the course (see next section) with regard to
the learning needs of SMEs.
Figure 4: peers give feedback on the customer journey maps of one of the participants
Research method
The objective of our program evaluation was to investigate the needs of SMEs with
regard to education in design-led innovation. In the development of the BDC program, we
realized we were going through a design cycle ourselves with the program as the object of
the design, and the participants as our customers. We needed a formative evaluation to
gather insights as input to the redesign of the program. We therefore chose to adopt a
qualitative research approach.
Since the government agency that had organised the course also participated in the
course, and since the course participants were also that agencys customers, we could
1292
gather customer insights through the method we proposed in the content of the program.
In this case it was essentially the government agency that gathered the data from their
(and our) customers through our guidance. For example we had the agency interview the
course participants in one session and we identified and analysed the themes from these
interviews, together with participants, in another session.
In addition to the data gathered by the government agency, we recorded the presentations
of the participants in each session in which they reflected on their experiences. Finally we
evaluated the program in a group interview in the last session, which was also recorded.
To analyse the data, relevant parts of the recordings were transcribed. Next, in an iterative
process, sections from the transcripts and survey were assigned to reoccurring themes in
answer to the research questions.
Results
Four groups of two to four employees (including the firm owners or employees
empowered to make or support strategic decisions) from different enterprises completed
the course: two family businesses, an academic service department and the government
agency that offered the program. The participants were not professional designers
although one participant had a background in graphic design. Although the group was
small, evaluating the program did allow us to explore the needs of SMEs in learning
design-led innovation. We acknowledge that data of additional companies is necessary to
be able to generalize the results.
1293
One participant indicated the emotional connectedness was also a barrier for her in asking
feedback from customers, because she did not like her business to be criticized. It turned
out that instead of asking feedback on their current business, asking feedback on new
value propositions in the narratives did not give her this negative feeling:
Doing the interviews with the stories allowed me to look at our business
in a non emotional way.[..] It is a relief that we did not have to be tied to
our current business model and that we can explore others
These comments show that participants were aware of their emotional connectedness to
their business and that they would like someone else to look at their business, while at the
same time appreciating the development of their competence in reflecting on their
business in a non-emotional way.
1294
[In making a choice for advice] you would probably look at the person to
see how much you feel they understood your business. How well they
listened.
Gaining trust requires transparency about ones motivations and interests. In case of the
BDC program this means that every member of the government agency, as well as the
instructors, needs to be transparent about their drivers to offer the course. A problem here
is that the agency tends to talk about their drivers in terms of writing policy, but that the
companies did not relate to that at all. A member of the agency indicated that they mainly
used that terminology to communicate their drivers to the minister, their other customer,
and realized now this language was not suitable for SMEs.
1295
Competence levels
Insight in increased competence levels is necessary to assess the outcome of the course.
As the course was not part of formal education, we did not conclude with a formal
assessment of participants competences. We therefore can only assess their
competences based on what participants presented in the course and the mentoring.
We identified a number of salient competences that were either clearly developed during
the course, or were on the contrary so undeveloped that they hampered the innovation
process:
1296
1297
The individuals within the firms differ with regard to their approach to learning
which influences their need for stimulation of a deep approach to learning.
The initial knowledge of participating firms about their customers influences the
starting point in the design innovation process. Firms that have little knowledge of
their customers need more time and iterations to get to a strategic level in the
development of value propositions.
The participants level of maturity to question and reframe value propositions
clearly increased. However they were still eager to have the support to question if
their approach was valid.
These results show that specific learners have specific needs with regard to a design
innovation course. The success of the BDC program was strongly influenced by the
emotional, social and cognitive characteristics of the participants. This corresponds to the
proposition of Boud et al. (1993) that what learners bring to an event - their expectations,
knowledge, attitudes and emotions - will influence their interpretation of it and their own
construction of what they experience (p11). This shows that in order to design successful
education for non-design professionals we need to further study these needs. For the
BDC program this means that for a next program we would need to get insight in these
characteristics of participating firms as early as possible in the course, so we can adapt
the course to these needs.
We would also like to argue that for the development of these kinds of programs a learnercentred approach to designing education should be adopted. The learner-centred
approach we followed has its roots in the design research domain itself. Firstly, we
adopted a human-centred design approach, which allows designing for diverse users
(van der Bijl-Brouwer, van der Molen & van der Voort, 2013), and is based on the idea
that deep insights in human needs and values are needed to allow reframing of problems
(Bucolo et al., 2012; Dorst, 2011). Secondly, the design approach is characterized by an
iterative design approach, which in this case means that we prototyped a course which
we evaluated to develop a proposal for a new course. Recent studies suggest that this
type of human-centred design has merits outside the traditional design field (see for
example Dorst, 2011), including education, which is currently being explored by the
educational research field itself (Reeves, McKenney, & Herrington, 2011).
Furthermore there is a need for research agenda which focuses on the learning needs of
non-design professionals. This would include research of the required levels of design
competences. As Dong (2013, p0241) suggests researchers should investigate the
evolution of capabilities [associated with design-led innovation] in companies, just as
design researchers currently study the development of design skills in students. These
capabilities are probably different for SMEs than for large organizations, which means we
need to understand the creative and social life of small firms (Hobday et al., 2012). If we
want SMEs to benefit from the development of knowledge in the design (innovation)
research field, then we should carefully design and research the educational means
through which this can be achieved.
References
Beckman, S., & Barry, M. (2009). Design and innovation through storytelling. International
Journal of Innovation Science, 1(4), 151-160.
Biggs, John B., & Collis, Kevin F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO
taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York and London:
Academic Press.
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Walker, D.. (1993). Introduction: understanding learning from
experience. In D. Boud, D. Walker & R. Cohen (Eds.), Using experience for learning (pp.
1-17). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
1298
Dong,
A..
(2013).
Design
x
Innovation.
In
K.
Sugiyama
(Ed.)
Consilience and Innovation
in Design, Proceedings and Program vol. 2 (pp.0234-0245).
Tokyo:
IASDR.
Dorst, K.. (2011). The core of 'design thinking' and its application. Design Studies, 32(6),
521-532.
Dorst, K.. (2013). Shaping the design research revolution. In U. Lindemann, S.
Venkataraman, Y.S. Kim, S.W. Lee, J. Clarkson, & G. Cascini (Eds.), 19th International
Conference on Engineering design; Proceedings Volume DS75-01: Design for Harmonies.
Seoul, Korea: Design Society.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Hekkert, P., & van Dijk, M.. (2011). Vision in Design, A Guidebook for Innovators.
Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.
Hobday, M., Boddington, A., & Grantham, A.. (2012). An Innovation Perspective on
Design: Part 2. Design Issues, 28(1), 18-29.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise: Elsevier Ltd.
Liedtka, J., & Ogilvie, T. (2011). Designing for growth: a design thinking tool kit for
managers. New York: Columbia University Press.
Martin, R. (2009). The design of business: why design thinking is the next competitive
advantage. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Matthews, J., Bucolo, S., & Wrigley, C. (2011). Multiple perspectives of design thinking in
business education. In J. Cai, J. Liu, G. Tong, & A. Ip (Eds.), Proceedings of Design
Management Towards a New Era of Innovation, Tsinghua-DMI.Hong Kong: DMI.
Moon, J.A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: theory and practice.
London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation, A Handbook for
Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Pozzey, E., Wrigley, C., & Bucolo, S. (2012). Unpacking the opportunities for change
within a family owned manufacturing SME: a design led innovation case study. In (Eds.),
Proceedings of Leading Innovation through Design: DMI 2012 International Research
Conference. Boston, Massachusetts: the Design Management Institute.
Reeves, T. C., McKenney, S., & Herrington, J. (2011). Publishing and perishing: The
critical importance of educational design research. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 27(1), 55-65.
Ryan, L. (2009). Exploring the growing phenomenon of university-corporate education
partnerships. Management Decision, 47(8), 1313-1322.
1299
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy.
Verganti, R. (2008). Design, Meanings, and Radical Innovation: A Metamodel and
Research Agenda. The journal of product innovation management, 25(5), 436-456.
Van der Bijl-Brouwer, M., van der Molen, P., & van der Voort, M.C. (2013) Designing on
the road: exploring the who, where and why of individual mobility devices. In U.
Lindemann, S. Venkataraman, Y.S. Kim, S.W. Lee, J. Clarkson, & G. Cascini (Eds.), 19th
International Conference on Engineering design; Proceedings Volume DS75-01: Design
for Harmonies. Seoul, Korea: the Design Society
Van der Bijl-Brouwer, M., & van der Voort, M.C. (2013) Exploring future use: scenario
based design. In C. de Bont, F.E. Smulders, M.C. van der Voort, R. Schifferstein & E. den
Ouden (Eds.) Advanced design methods for successful innovation - Recent methods from
design research and design consultancy in the Netherlands (57-77). Delft: Design United.
Zahra, S.A. (2005). Entrepreneurial risk taking in family firms. Family Business Review,
18(23).
1300
Abstract
This paper reviews the methods and practices that reflect subconscious behaviours of
people in daily lives. Cases, studied for this paper, show how practices of people living in
poor settings, who are members of the base of the economic pyramid, contribute to
designers, belonging to the top of the economic pyramid, in designing better products and
systems. A new approach to the bottom-up innovation is suggested where the source of
inspiration comes from the BoP populations to be implemented by ToP designers to
generate ideas for BoP or ToP products.
Keywords
Daily practices; base of the pyramid (BoP); top of the pyramid (ToP); bottom-up
innovations; culture; design methods
Design literature presents a vast amount of methods and approaches developed for
tackling any possible problem in design processes. This library consists of methods,
models, strategies, and perspectives that are employed broadly from the initial step of
problem definition, towards understanding users, their needs and context, till concept
generation and embodiment. Only recently, the world of design has shown strong interest
in the niche market of developing countries. Numerous design activities have been
directed at the underserved and shifted from traditional markets to the less-discovered
pool of emerging markets. The significantly different design contexts of emerging nations
and the developed world raised the need for new design approaches (Castillo et al., 2012).
The top-down prescriptions of the post-World War II development regime, the UNDP
development goals, appropriate technology, and design for the other 90% are some of
the initiatives originated by people belonging to the top of the economic pyramid to
alleviate the problem of poverty and increase development at the base of the pyramid.
The purpose of this paper is to reverse the source of innovation and to discover
inspirations among daily practices of people living in economically deprived communities.
The study extends the design practice of understanding target groups needs beyond cocreation and participatory methods and proposes an opportunity to learn from their daily
inventions. We argue that daily practices of people in settings with limited resources can
be used as inspirations for designers when designing new products for people in both the
top and the base of the economic pyramid.
Background
The term base of the pyramid (BoP) refers to the global poor, most of whom live in
developing countries with income less than $2 a day. This group consists of over four
billion people (almost 60% of world population), living in various geographic regions
varying from South and East Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa. They represent multiple cultures,
1301
ethnicities, literacy levels, skills, needs and live both in rural and urban settings. On the
contrary, the top of the pyramid (ToP) are the 0.5% of the worlds population that holds the
40% of worlds wealth and mainly come from North America, Europe and the Asia Pacific.
In between is the middle of the pyramid (MoP) that comprises the remaining 39.5% of the
world population.
Bottom-Up Innovations
While the literature supports examples of top-down initiatives, little has been done in the
field of learning from innovations of the poor. The purpose of bottom-up innovations is for
1302
the developed world to learn from the unseen inventions by the poor in settings with
limited resources.
A well-known case of bottom-up innovations is the initiative by the foundation Grassroots
innovations by Gupta (2003) to encourage community-led sustainable solutions in India.
The foundation collects examples of inventions by travelling around villages in India and
helps the inventors realize their practices into industrialized products. In India, these
ingenious solutions to deal with scarcity are known as Jugaad innovation. Some
analogical practices are called in Brazil as gambiarra, in China as zizhu chuangxin and
jua kali in Kenya (Radjou et al., 2012). Dharavi Diary is another initiative to help the poor
in India to benefit from their own inventions. The organization teaches local people design
skills to make products that help them cope with daily struggles (Dharavi Diary, n.d.).
Interest of business leaders in the topic of emerging-market innovation has recently grown
as a phenomenon of trickle-up innovation or reverse innovation. The terms are
associated with the idea that the low-cost products and services initially created for
developing-world nations can be adapted for developed countries (Jana, 2011). An
example is the ultralow-cost electrocardiogram by General Electric, which was customdesigned using commodity components, to be mobile, durable and cheap for use in BoP
context. The benefits of this design, initially targeted at poor settings, found use in a
specific ToP context, such as at accident sites (Immelt et al., 2009). This type of frugal
innovation is also called reverse frugal innovation (Govindarajan & Trimble, 2012).
1303
that people take, the intuitive ways they adapt, exploit and react to things in their
environment, things they do without really thinking. Following images (Figure 2)
demonstrate examples of thoughtless acts by people that may become design ideas.
1304
Research Approach
This paper aims at understanding the value and meaning of bottom-up innovations.
The research questions were as following:
- Are the innovations originated in the base of the pyramid valuable for designers?
- What is the potential of studying such practices in the development of new ideas?
The examples of innovations in the economically-deprived settings were found mainly
based on authors' own experiences living and traveling in different BoP countries. More
examples were added via extensive search of literature in available master and
graduation project reports, scientific articles, blogs and news on internet. The criteria for
selection were that: a) the practice is originated from people in developing countries; and
b) the practice is not (or little) known by designers in developed countries. About twenty
cases of such practices were analysed according to the reasoning model (Roozenburg &
Eekels, 1995) to understand them deeply, explore the context where these inventions
have been created and their characteristics.
Daily Practices
The daily practices discussed in this paper are incremental innovations that people in
impoverished communities perform in circumstances with limited resources in order to
fulfil a needed function. These practices vary from small modifications of an existing
product to constructions of new facilities. In this study, the daily practices of the poor are
reviewed from a utilitarian perspective. These practices are characterized by the context
of the base of pyramid, without attribution to specific culture. Following are some
examples of such practices.
Refrigerating food outside. In areas with little or no access to electricity in a BoP context,
during cold seasons people take advantage of the cold temperatures outdoors to
refrigerate their food. The observed practice includes putting the food, such as fruits,
vegetables or prepared meals in a plastic bag or a container and storing it outside to keep
cold. This practice allows people to save money on electricity and preserve their food for
long periods.
1305
Outdoor shower. In rural areas in developing countries, where plumbing facilities are not
available, people use a large bucket of water installed over the head to wash themselves.
A structure is built outside and used mainly in warm weather. The bucket of water has a
tap lever to release and stop the water. The sun heats the water in the bucket (Figure 4).
1306
Problem
In villages without
asphalted roads, peoples
shoes get muddy, making
it unpleasant to enter the
house.
Placing a brick
on gas stove
to store the
heat.
Keeping
valuables in
ones bra for
safety and
convenience.
Tightening a
head scarf
(hijab) with
pins.
Creating toys
from bicycle
or car tires.
Making boots
non-slippery
by wearing
socks over
them.
Creating light
in houses
using bottles
with bleached
water.
Using cloth
rag as
disposable
nappies.
Finding fuel
for stove.
Using old
billboards as
home furniture
Description (context/benefit)
In front of the house, a knee-level structure is built
with two vertical rods and a horizontal metal piece
connecting them to wipe the mud and dirt from
peoples shoes. People rub their feet against the
metal piece and enter the house without mud on
their shoes.
When the heating does not work, people place a
brick on a gas stove to heat up the room. The need
for affordable heat is solved by the property of the
brick to keep (store) heat in it for a long time.
Hence, the brick that had received heat from the
stove will stay warm for a long time magnifying the
heat to warm the whole room.
Women, who are not carrying a purse or wallet, put
their money in their bras. This invisible wallet
provides both convenience and safety. The initial
function of a bra holding a womans bust obtains a
new function of holding her valuables.
Women tighten their head scarves (hijabs) with a
sewing pin. The almost invisible property of a
sewing pin allows women to affix their head scarfs
inconspicuously.
Children in poor circumstances, when not having
real toys, use old bike or car tires to roll as a toy. A
social play for kids, this toy is a low (no)-cost
entertainment for a kid, while giving parents more
time to spend on other things, such as household
activities.
When people cannot afford expensive, nonslippery boots, they wear a pair of socks over the
boots in order to prevent falling from slippery
roads. The friction of non-slippery texture prevents
from slipping on icy roads.
In windowless African huts, people fix a bottle with
bleached water on the ceiling of a hut instead of a
light bulb. The sun rays penetrate through a plastic
bottle and lighten up the dark areas of the house.
Women use re-washable cloth rags with cotton
padding to hold the discharge during the
menstruation period. Low-cost and reusable
solution.
People collect sticks, shrub, grass or even cow
dung to use as fuel for burning.
In Thailand, we found people using old
advertisement billboards in household to make
partitions in the room or for homeless people to
use as walls. The practice gives privacy, seclusion
and certain furniture.
In the household, housewives sharpen the dull
knife by grinding the cutting side on the back of a
ceramic cup/plate or other dish. The non-glazed
ceramics rough texture allows the sharpening of a
cutting object.
1307
The analysed practices allowed interpreting what implications they have for designers to
implement them as product ideas. Depending on the properties of each practice, these
inspirations can be translated into either an improved BoP product or can even be applied
to a specific ToP market. These possibilities are discussed in the following section.
1308
Designers can learn from a local practice to incorporate it into their new design. A good
example is the biodegradable bag called Peepoo with a bacteria-neutralizing urea liner
(Lysen et al., 2010). Designers observed people in slums in Kibera, who, in the absence
of an indoor toilet, relieved themselves over a plastic bag and threw the bag out of their
windows a practice called Flying toilet. These bags with human waste were scattered
in the slums and caused diseases, such as diarrhea. To prevent that, the practice was
translated into the design of disposable biodegradable bags, which can be used as a
portable toilet and later decomposed into a fertilizer (Figure 9).
Figure 9. Peepoo, plastic biodegradable toilet bag (Lysen et al., 2010; Peepoople, 2013).
1309
The existence of the daily practice of outdoor showers and the campers shower bag,
although developed independently from each other, suggests that, a clear link between a
practice and a product idea can be established if identified at an early stage. Designers,
who are aware of such practices can benefit from saving research and development time
and cost. This emphasizes the opportunity to provide a translation from a BoP practice to
a new product idea. For instance, the aforementioned example of a biodegradable bag to
use as a toilet could be beneficial in a disaster context in the developed world, such as
during earthquakes in Japan.
A product that was inspired by a BoP practice and has been designed to fit specific needs
of a developing country can be later thought to be a good idea for a specific ToP market.
Western designers and companies are more and more interested in designing for the BoP.
These solutions that they come up with are often to accommodate the low budget of target
users. Ultimately, the benefits of accessibility could be beneficial for the ToP as well. The
example given earlier about GEs electrocardiogram is a case of reverse frugal innovation.
A low cost, portable and cheap product was designed for India and China, that later was
picked up by ToP to use in specific context, such as at accident sites. Similarly, designers
of the camping shower bag could have gotten inspiration from the outdoor shower in BoP
setting. Another example is a woodstove developed by Philips to accommodate the
cooking of Indian women and replace the inefficient solid fuel stoves that fill their houses
with smoke. A fan blowing heated air through the fire and low mass, were the main
reasons for this high combustion and heat transfer efficiency. After the launch of the
product in Indian market, the manufacturer questioned whether the technical system could
also be used in a cooking appliance for the Western camping market. A design graduate
proposed a redesign of the woodstove for a Western camping market (Zeijlstra, 2006).
1310
The authors believe that the credibility of a BoP product is increased, if it can also be
simultaneously developed for ToP situations. The special characteristics of a BoP product
being low-cost, low-scale and easy-to-use can benefit in similar context with similar needs
in BoP and as well as in ToP.
Discussion
For designers, the base of the pyramid presents opportunities: the four-billion-population
is a large market with a large number of unsolved needs. People belonging to this
population have many ideas for solving their daily life inconveniences. The strength of
designers is their ability to get a hint from such ideas and apply their knowledge and skills
in designing a better and more effective product. However, these practices are
undocumented and unavailable for designers living in the other parts of the world. The aim
of this study was to investigate how can the essential links be made to connect the
unaddressed needs of the local people at the base of the pyramid with the designers from
the top of the economic pyramid, in order to facilitate an effective design process for a
designer to create solutions for the BoP members?
Figure 12. A link between the base and top of the pyramid
Design research and practice is advancing in accommodating the specific needs of BoP
context. From the traditional approach of considering users as users only (audience), the
BoP design methods are improved to the level that co-participatory design methods are
encouraged to involve and co design with the users, in order to better understand their
context and needs. The next level is to take the work and daily life of the people at BoP as
inspirations and learn from them how to develop better products for them. Another
approach to benefit from BoP practices is to design for specific ToP context that has
similar circumstances as in a BoP setting. The two possibilities are explored below.
A. BoP Practice to a ToP Product.
The analysis of the cases showed that BoP practices can be used as inspiration for ToP
products. By observing the innovations of the poor, ToP designers can improve their
products to become more:
1. Back to basics. The observation of daily practices of the poor allows us to uncover
the basic needs. These people are dealing with the most primitive needs of people
revealing the most essential properties that products should have.
2. Intuitive designs. If people at the base of the pyramid realized that they can use a
paperclip instead of a broken zipper tab, this clearly shows how intuitive the
product is. From learning from these practices designers can create more
functional, more intuitive and simple products.
3. Sustainable designs in terms of efficient use of resources. Studying these
practices helps designers to become aware of efficient use of resources.
1311
Conclusion
The study for this paper started with the question how practices in poor settings can
contribute to new product ideas. The study shows that driven by necessity, people living in
poverty can be innovative in making efficient use of available resources. Designers can
find opportunities to develop products by learning from practices of these people. The
daily practices can benefit designers in designing both for the BoP and ToP markets. A
BoP design can be an improved, accessible product for the people living in poor settings.
Studying the practices in daily lives of people at the bottom of the pyramid will allow
designers to see what needs have highest priorities in their lives. This will prevent from
designing obsolete products that have little chance to be integrated in their lives. By
observing the innovations of the poor, designers can improve the designs of developed
world products to become more intuitive, sustainable in terms of efficient use of resources
1312
and addressing the basic needs of people. The examples can serve as an ingredient for a
tool for designers to make them aware of the possibilities, embedded in the daily practices
of the populations belonging to the bottom of the economical pyramid. The cases studied
here already contribute as means for designers to be aware of such practices and present
the first step to a systematic approach of discovering daily practices, interpreting and
implementing them in designs.
The limitations of this research included the difficulty to find the cases of daily practices in
poor settings. The scarcity of such examples in the vastness of available to us information
resources will also create a barrier for designers who would like to learn from daily
practices for their projects. Here is an opportunity for a follow-up study in which the
elicitation of daily practices is key. Future research will consider developing a strategy tool
for designers to identify such practices, discussed in this paper and translate them into
product ideas.
References
Akubue, A. (2000). Appropriate Technology for Socioeconomic Development in Third
World Countries. The Journal of Technology Studies 26, (1), 3343.
Bhatti, Y. A. (2012). What is Frugal, What is Innovation? Towards a Theory of Frugal
Innovation. Retrieved October 11, 2013, from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2005910.
Castillo, L. G., Diehl, I. J. C., & Brezet, J. C. (2012). Design Considerations for Base of the
Pyramid (BoP) Projects. Proceeding of the Cumulus Helsinki Conference. Helsinki,
Finland.
Crul, M., J.C Diehl., & Ryan, C. (2009). Design for sustainability: a step-by step approach.
Paris: United Nations Environmental Program.
Dharavi Diary. (n.d.). About Dharavi Diary. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from
http://www.dharavidiary.com.
Dix, A. (2007). Designing for appropriation. Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group
Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCIbut Not as We Know It Volume 2
(pp. 2730). Swinton, UK, UK: British Computer Society.
Goedkoop, M.J., van Halen, C.J.G., te Riele, H.R.M., & Rommens, P.J.M. (1999). Product
service systems, ecological and economic basis. PricewaterhouseCoopers N.V. / Pi!MC,
Storrm C.S., Pre consultants.
Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2012). Reverse innovation: Create far from home, win
everywhere. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Gupta, A.K., Sinha, R., Koradia, D., Patel, R., Parmar, M., Rohit, P., et al. (2003).
Mobilizing grassroots technological innovations and traditional knowledge, values and
institutions: articulating social and ethical capital. Futures, 35 (9), 975-987.
Hart, S. (2005). Capitalism at the Crossroads: The Unlimited Business Opportunities in
Solving the World's Most Difficult Problems. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hazeltine, B. & Bull, C. (1999). Appropriate Technology: Tools, Choices, and Implications.
New York: Academic Press.
1313
1314
Van Boeijen, A.G.C., Daalhuizen, J., Zijlstra J., van der Schoor, R. (2013). Delft Design
Guide: Design Strategies and Methods. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.
Van der Aalst, W. (2013). Process Mining: Desire Lines or Cow Paths? Retrieved
Spetember 23, 2013, from http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~wvdaalst/etc/desire-lines-orcowpaths.htm.
Webb,E.J., Campbell, D.T., Schwartz, R.D.&Sechrest, L. (2000).Unobtrusive
Measures: Nonreactive Research in the Social Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Yunus, M. (2009). Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of
Capitalism. Philadelphia: PublicAffairs.
Zeijlstra, C. (2006). A woodstove for the Western camping market. Master thesis. Delft
University of Technology. Delft, The Netherlands.
Eleonora Ibragimova
Eleonora is a graduating student of Integrated Product Design at the Delft University of
Technology. Having born in Uzbekistan, she has lived in countries as the U.S., South
Korea and currently in the Netherlands. She gained a lot of hands-on experience living
and working as a designer in developing countries that triggered inspiration for this
research. Her fields of interest include design for the base of the pyramid, inclusive design,
development projects, culture in design and creating a bridge between design and social
impact.
1315
Abstract
Research shows that lack of physical activity in westernized societies has serious
negative health consequences. We explore a physically sustainable design approach
centered around joyful physical activity in an effort to remedy this situation in some way.
Much technology development has been blind for our basic human need for healthy, joyful
physical activity. This paper presents our approach as used in an explorative case study.
During a college course, thirty students explored how physical movement of their bodies
could be used as creative components in the design process. They engaged in what we
introduce in this paper as "physical movement sketching" - a method for experiencing,
sharing and reflecting on designs through body movement. The students used this
approach to generate, test and discuss new design concepts for outdoor gyms. Engaging
in physical movement sketching allowed the students to both enjoy and trust their bodies
as design tools. We discuss how our students used physical movement in design and
what we learned from the case study.
Keywords
Sketching; Physical movement; Wellbeing; Sustainability; Design space
In this paper, we explore how to open up the design space to add more focus on
movement awareness together with design students. We approach the area by
introducing what we think of as physical movement sketching. Our design students were
engaged in the development and redesign of outdoor gyms. We consider if physical
movement sketching could be adopted and used within HCI and IxD in general as one tool
among others to augment and rediscover the inherent value in movements and our need
for physical load.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) reports that westernized sedentary life-styles
contributes to increasing levels of health problems (Global recommendation, 2010). With
interactive technologies for automation, artefacts and objects connected to the internet
that take over an increasing share of our work, we are increasingly left with light tasks of
supervision (Sheridan, 2002; Degani, 2004). Straker and Mathiassen (2009) argue that
many modern workers need to increase their physical workload (Straker & Mathiassen,
2009).
Within the fields of Human Computer interaction (HCI) and Interaction Design (IxD)
researchers have explored various forms of embodied interaction such as dance-inspired
1316
interaction, full-body interaction, exercise games and other, often artistic forms of
interaction (Boucher, 2004; Gonzalez, Carroll & Latulipe, 2012; Schnauer, Pintaric &
Kaufmann, 2011; Yim & Graham, 2007).
However, we may still ask what happened to the physical body in the everyday world of
lived interaction with technology? How has it been explored in HCI? Technology
development often works with the goal of releasing us from strenuous or monotonous
tasks rather than engage our bodies. Although the technology we use is increasingly
mobile we ourselves seem to become increasingly inactive, immobile and sedentary in our
everyday interaction with technology (Owen, Healy, Matthews & Dunstan, 2010).
Research on embodied interaction design has contributed to our understanding of body
movement in interaction design and related research fields. We find reason to explore
body movement in interaction design further from a physical inclusive perspective. In our
work with body movement design, we are inspired by action centric qualities of using
systems and associated subjective preferences such as the Do it Yourself (DiY), the Do it
With Others (DIWO), the MakerMovement (http://makezine.com,
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2013/04/makermovement/) and the Practice turn in
tangible interaction, (Fernaeus, Tholander & Jonsson, 2008). One way to prevent health
problems related to inactivity is to examine and redesign how we provide opportunities for
design students to make use of their body movements and to be skilled in using and
inviting physical movement in the design.
1317
The field of interaction design has during the past two decades come to embrace physical
perspectives of embodiment and movement. This quote is one example of that change:
In revisiting Engelbarts original idea, we can think more generally about how human
behaviour rather than the human intellect can be augmented with personal, social and
cultural technologies, which aim to actively extend what people can do (Rogers, 2009).
Technology development has opened up possibilities for us to, from the palm of our hands,
perform tasks that used to demand considerable physical ability and energy. They are
often described as smart; smart phones, smart homes, smart fabrics and smart cars. Their
design incorporates a vast selection of functionalities with the same physical movements
for calling, taking photos, listening to music, etc. Maybe it is time to start recalling the
smartness of our bodies, the myriads of functions and movements we can perform and
learn to perform? Many communication tools (and other tools in our work and leisure time)
do not allow us to use physical power any way near the level of what would be sufficient
for the promotion of physical well-being and health. On the whole, the sedentary life style
of the modern world no doubt threatens our health. As an example of how, correlations
between time seated and development of metabolic syndrome have been found (Healy et
al., 2008).
We explore how invite body movements to come into play and used as a skill in design
education. Domains such as Human-Computer Interaction and Interaction Design could
contribute to prevent health problems through a broader physical-movement inclusive
perspective.
1318
ideas for design from physical activities such as those of skateboarders, golfers
(Tholander & Johansson, 2010) and horseback riding (Hk, 2010). These ideas are also
inspiring and give hope for a body longing to be active.
The Spatial Sketch is a 3D sketch application using cut planar materials developed to
facilitate the step from physical spatial movement to design and fabrication (Willis, Lin,
Mitani & Igarashi, 2010). The Kinetic Sketch-up system consists of a series of mechanical
modules that can be physically programmed through gestures to visualize kinetic
behaviour thereby providing a method for motion prototyping in the tangible design
process (Parkes & Ishii, 2009). Sketch-a-Tui produces 3D paper objects that can be
tracked by a capacitive surface. It is a method for rapid low cost prototyping using
cardboard and conductive ink (Wiethoff, Schneider, Rohs, Butz & Greenberg, 2012).
Sketching with haptic material has been explored by Mousette were he describe that The
sketcher can see or read more information than what is visually depicted. These added
meanings or unexpected interpretations directly feed back into the drawing activities,
invariably altering the sketchers actions and understanding of the situation (Mousette,
2012). The potential for forceful motor skills in interaction design has mostly been left
unexplored, but a complete full-body mode of interaction, being carefully adapted to the
size, weight, strength and capabilities of the human body was found in an analysis of the
pre-electronic predecessors of computers, the wooden Jacquard loom (Fernaeus,
Jonsson & Tholander, 2012).
Researchers have looked into the physical experience dimension of technology interaction
through movement and touch (Larssen, Robertson & Edwards, 2007). An especially
concrete way of approaching the design space of physical movement interaction can be
found in recent explorations of human-powered devices (Pierce & Paulos, 2012).
The Wii and the Kinect game-systems that have been frequently used and adopted in art
and design projects are both examples of a more body-inclusive design (Mrquez Segura,
Johansson, Moen & Waern, 2011). These game systems have also found their way into
rehabilitation (Schnauer, Pintaric &Kaufmann, 2011). Techniques for monitoring physical
movements are also developed to motivate us to be physically active in the Internet of
Things research. Kevin Ashton (2009) coined the phrase the Internet of Things (IoT) in
1999 (Ashton, 2009).
1319
impact on the way people can physically move in their neighbourhood and with lecturers
from The Institute of Gymnastics on how the motor system and the nervous system works
to help us orchestrate our movements.
Figure 1: Two Outdoor gyms visited before developing the course, the first in Beijing,
China and the second in Zaragoza, Spain.
1320
reminders and trigger muscle/motor memory and feelings for those that have participated
in the methods related to physical movement sketching.
Bill Buxton (2007) emphasizes the importance of sketching in interaction design practices.
He makes a distinction between sketching and prototyping where sketches suggest,
explore, question, propose, provoke and are tentative whereas prototypes describe, refine,
test, resolve and are specific. Buxton sees sketching as a tool to: explore the design
space, understand the design problem, ground discussion, and communicate progress
and user experiences. User experience becomes the key object of design. Despite the
technocratic and materialistic bias of our culture, it is ultimately experiences that we are
designing, not things. He has provided a list of attributes that are characteristic of design
sketches. One of the attributes is that they suggest and explore rather than confirm [..].
Their value lies not in the artefact of the sketch itself, but in its ability to provide a catalyst
to the desired and appropriate behaviours, conversations, and interactions (Buxton,
2010).
This has motivated us to consider physical movement sketching as a suggestive
exploration tool. It directly provides experience of behaviour, it can be put in context, in
interaction with objects or materials, it highlights our physical movement abilities and
brings it to the design as a resource to consider in early design phases. It is not an
ergonomic checklist but a method to generate experience and if observed by others also
observations of movement dimensions. Dimensions of movements can be duration,
intensity, frequency and from an aesthetic perspective also beauty.
When contrasting our approach with methods such as bodystorming, role-playing or
different ways of sketching (on paper, in 3D or similar) we see both similarities and
differences. With Physical movement sketching we align ourselves closer to sketching
than storming. Sketching usually comes after the idea-generating phase of brain- or
bodystorming. Physical movement sketching is perhaps best seen as an iterative learning
and design processes, aiming at opening up the positive effects of movement in the digital
domain. Physical movement sketching is a way of designing for and building bodily
awareness as we move.
1321
Figure 2: Prototyping with Water container and Dynamometer and the final design concept
The second group went to an outdoor gym that had very few instructions. In their report
they write: Many of us in the design-group did not understand what movements to
perform. Even when we checked the instructions it was hard to transform the illustrations
into movements. We reflected on how difficult it can be to illustrate movements. They
explored ways of designing the activity to make it contextually clear without the need for
additional instructions. They chose students as their target group since they could benefit
from being physically active for free at the outdoor gym. They also developed a mobile
application to motivate and remind the user to exercise at the outdoor gym or suggest
ways to use the nearby environment for physical activity. In Figure 3, the wooden sign
says: "Ready, steady run!" The aim is to encourage physical activity. Here the everyday
city environment becomes an outdoor gym. In Figure 4 Exploring physical force.
The third group examined settings for outdoor gyms. They found that many outdoor gyms
only use a small, restricted area without taking advantage of the potentially larger space
opportunities that many outdoor environments could provide. Considering larger potential
gym areas, this group used color-coded lines (similar to the colour coding of ski slopes)
green, blue, red and black. Within these lines different gym equipment was to be placed.
1322
The blue line was for light movement and the black was designed to be heavy and a real
challenge.
Group five focused on a specific public park situated in the city. The city park was rarely
used which the group found problematic. They came up with solutions to facilitate for the
local community to use the park for physical activity. The design concept (see Figure 5)
for the park in the central city where people mostly had picknicks and went for a stroll with
their dogs was focused around a less obtrusive visual design.
The students sought a design that did not disturb or interfere with other uses of the park.
They also designed a meeting point and a water-station to be used after or during the
exercise. The main design was a mobile application designed to guide visitors to expand
the use the park for a variety of physical activities.
1323
1324
movement in design. This is in line with how Buxton (2007) define sketching as catalyst
to conversation.
The experience in your body of the movement sketch gives you some material to discuss
with end-users. Student 4
We used movement sketching as an ice-breaker between us, the designer and the enduser. Student 19
To do strange movements seems to have opened up the somewhat difficult language of
communication between us. Student 23
(2) Generate Early Moving Concepts Physical movement sketching seems to have a
potential to create value in the initial concept phase. The value lies in quickly providing
movement sketches for future designs. This is similar to one of the attributes that Buxton
(2007) relate to sketching quick and timely. Although there are knowledge domains such
as anthropometry and biomechanics to learn from, the result of physical movement
sketching may remind designers that individuals have different abilities and preferences
for movement. Performed early in the design process physical movement sketching may
negotiate space for physical movement and keep it from being marginalized.
You can generate ideas that might not have come up if using only discussion and
sketching. Student 15
To physically explore is a good method when being in the concept phase. If this were to
become a real project aiming at producing products this would not have been good
enough or quite worthless. You need to be more specific and have a broader knowledge
of muscles and training if constructing an Outdoor gym. Student 2
Through the movement sketching it became very obvious that we all had different
preferences on how to move since our pre-conditions differ. Student 7
(3) Generate Feelings Physical movement design seems to evoke strong feelings.
Apparently there were movements that created such strong feelings that it became hard to
suppress when discussing with end users. Physical movement sketching is an immersive
method and as such can provide internal and intrinsic motivation. The person engaged in
physical movement sketching comes to trust the body as an internal frame of reference.
We also see how movements are connected to feelings that change the perceived state of
being. As described by Buxton (2007) sketches provoke and evoke. We found physical
movement sketching able to evoke and provoke feelings.
If it feels good it can be difficult to change the design if the result from the end-user
survey shows that they want something else. Student 29
Your own experiences tend to be very strong and may trigger you to solve the problem
you yourselves encountered in the bodily sketching. Student 28
Movement sketching creates a feeling and that feeling can be hard to suppress when
you go further in the design and involve end-user that might communicate other feelings.
Student 9
(4) Generate a Notion of Physical load Physical movement sketching seems to create a
memory in your body. This is something that cannot be experienced through sketching
with software or paper and pen. To get an immediate sense of future experience of the
1325
interaction may be of great value when aiming for a movement inclusive perspective.
Physical movement sketching seems to provide a taste of user-experience. This is
important since as Buxton (2007) states it is experience and not simply products that we
are ultimately designing.
We experienced how parts of our body became heavy after quite a short amount of time.
We used the experience of the movement sketch to inform the questions in our end-user
survey. Student 5
One tested and two observed. The one that tested told the observers what he was feeling.
It helped to see physical expressions. Student 12
After body sketch you can easily go back in your memory and refer to the experience the
feeling of weight or the load. Student 11
Discussion
Aiming at exploring ways to open up the design space for a richer palette of tools to
incorporate and explore movements may be criticised as too obvious when selecting a
traditional physical activity such as gym setting. The choice of outdoor gyms as domain
was intentional and deliberate. The experience involved in physical movement sketching
becomes more perspicuous in a domain centered around physical movement. At this early
stage of our exploration we needed such perspicuity. Encouraging students to use a
method that is not fully developed and evaluated but in its very early phase of explorations,
to our judgements, caters for some parts of that setting to be stable. The choice of
outdoor gyms as the focus for the design tasks was a stable parameter in this
exploration. Physical movement is obvious as a part of the design for such products or
settings. It would not put the students in an uncomfortable situation or challenge them too
much from a social or physical perspective.
In some of the student reflections, they refer to their participation in the physical
movement sketching as an important experience that would allow them to see future
design work differently. It was found to open up the design space for a broader variety of
physical skills using knowledge inherent in physical movements. This relates to the overall
aim of our approach.
From the student reflections we see that physical movement sketching can remind
designers that individuals have different abilities and preferences with regards to
movement. Engaging in physical movement sketching, the students were also able to trust
the body as an internal frame of reference. We relate this to the more specific aim of
providing ways for designers to be physically literate and movement skilled. They also
discussed issues of social trust. It was important to learn to be at ease with sharing silly
movements within the design team. Many found it to be a positive experience although
more time consuming than ordinary sketching, but also adding a physical memory.
Physical movement sketching seems to be a way to generate felt observations and
reflections on movement along an open-ended set of dimensions.
In our study we examined sketching to explore movement as experience rather than as
skilled depiction. Our work steps away from traditional sketching where the hand and eye
is dominating in the sketching activity and the outcome is a graphic illustration. The body
becomes the brush or pen performing the physical movement and the sketch is the
memory of the action that captures the feeling in the body. We experienced a growing
confidence in the students' abilities during the course to embrace and use physical
movement sketching for design of physical movement in public spaces. The nine design
concepts span from including more forceful interaction in the case of the elderly's gym and
1326
allowing a parent to find possibilities for physical activity at playgrounds to students need
for cheap out-door activities.
During the course the students frequently came to discuss and share their reflections with
us. They shared their discovery of the lack of physically demanding interaction
opportunities in their everyday life. The physical focus also seems to have influenced the
students everyday life; some started to walk to school or perform push-ups as a short
break during studies. Some showed an increasing awareness of their postures and
became more receptive of body signals. The lack of variation in physical strain and
relaxation is a subject worthy of further investigation.
Conclusion
We have described an explorative case study of physical movement sketching in product
and systems design that aims to explore, build and reflect upon physical movement as a
skill. The impact from this initial exploration (communicated in the students' written
reflections and during conversations in class) suggests that physical movement sketching
can open up the design space and invite the body to come into play to a greater extent. In
this setting it managed to open up discussion, generate early moving concepts, generate
feelings and last but not least a notion of physical load. In promoting and including our
motion abilities as a skill we see benefits for learning, enhancing user experience and for
future sustainable wellbeing.
References
Ashton, K. (2009). That Internet of Things Thing. RFiD Journal, 22, 97-114.
Boucher, M. (2004). Kinetic Synaesthesia: Experiencing Dance in Multimedia
Scenographies, Contemporary Aesthetics, 2.
Buchenau M and Fulton Suri J. (2000). Experience prototyping. Proc. DIS '00, ACM Press
(2000), 424-433.
Bush, V. (1945, July 01). As We May Think. The Atlantic. Retrieved September 7, 2013
from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/
Buur J., Jensen M. V., and Djajadiningrat T., (2004) Hands-only scenarios and video
action walls: Novel methods for tangible user interaction design, in Proceedings of
DIS04. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 185-192.
Buxton B. (2007). Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right
Design. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Fransisco, CA, USA.
Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer
interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (1986). The model human processor: An
engineering model of human performance. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas
(Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance, Vol. 2: Cognitive processes
and performance (pp. 135). New York: Wiley and Sons.
Cohn G, Morris D, Patel S, Tan D (2012). Humantenna: Using the Body as an Antenna for
Real-Time Whole-Body Interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 19011910.
Degani, A. (2004). Taming Hal: Designing interfaces beyond 2001. New York: Palgrave
MacMillan.
1327
Djajajdiningrat T., Matthews B. and Stienstra M., (2007). Easy Doesnt Do It: Skill and
Expression in Tangible Aesthetics, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 11, 8,
(December 2007), 657-676.
Fernaeus, Y., Jonsson, M. and Tholander, J. (2012) Revisiting the Jacquard Loom:
Threads of History and Current Patterns in HCI. In: Proceedings of CHI 2012. Paper
presented at 30th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp.
1593-1602).
Fernaeus, Y., Tholander, J. & Jonsson, M. (2008) Towards a new set of ideals:
Consequences of the practice turn in tangible interaction. In: TEI'08, Second
International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, Bonn; (pp. 223-230)
ACM Press.
Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health; WHO, Physical Activity. (n.d.)
Retrieved October, 10, 2013 from
http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/pa/en/index.html
Gonzalez, B., Carroll, E. and Latulipe, C. (2012) Dance-inspired technology, technologyinspired dance. In Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer
Interaction: Making Sense Through Design (NordiCHI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA,
398-407.
Healy GN, Wijndaele K, Dunstan DW, Shaw JE, Salmon J, Zimmet PZ, et al. Objectively
measured sedentary time, physical activity and metabolic risk: the Australian Diabetes,
Obesity and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Diabetes Care February 2008 vol. 31 no. 2 369371.
Hk K. (2010). Transferring qualities from horseback riding to design. In Proceedings of
the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries
(NordiCHI '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 226-235.
Kallings LV, Sierra Johnson J, Fisher RM, Faire U, Sthle A, Hemmingsson E, et al.
(2009) Beneficial effects of individualized physical activity on prescription on body
composition and cardiometabolic risk factors: results from a randomized controlled trial.
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2009;16: 8084.
Larssen AT, Robertson T and Edwards J, (2007) The feel dimension of technology
interaction: exploring tangibles through movement and touch, In Proceedings of the 1st
international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction (TEI '07). ACM, New
York, NY, USA, 271-278.
Maker Movement. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2013 from
http://p2pfoundation.net/Maker_Movement
Mrquez Segura, E., Johansson, C., Moen, J., & Waern, A. (2011). Bodies, boogies, bugs
& buddies: Shall we play?. In Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI11).
Moussette, C. (2012). Simple haptics: Sketching perspectives for the design of haptic
interactions. (Doctoral dissertation). Ume: Ume Universitet.
Mueller, F., Edge, D., Gibbs, M.R., Agamanolis, Heer, J. and Sheridan, J.G. Balancing
Exertion Experiences. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems (CHI), 5-10 May 2012, USA
Oulasvirta, A., Kurvinen, E., & Kankainen, T. (2003). Understanding contexts by being
there: case studies in bodystorming. Personal Ubiquitous Comput., 7, 2 (July 2003)
125-134.
Owen, N., Healy, G. N., Matthews, C. E., & Dunstan, D. W. (2010). Too much sitting: the
population-health science of sedentary behavior. Exercise and sport sciences reviews,
38(3), 105.
1328
Parkes A. and Ishii H., (2009) Kinetic sketchup: Motion prototyping in the tangible design
process. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and
Embedded Interaction (TEI '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 367-372.
Pedersen, P. K. and Saltin, B. (2006). Evidence for prescribing exercise as therapy in
chronic disease. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2006; 16: 363 (Suppl. 1).
Pierce J. and Paulos, E. (2012). Designing everyday technologies with human-power and
interactive micro generation. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems
Conference (DIS '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 602-611.
Rogers, Y. (2009) The Changing Face of Human-Computer Interaction in the Age of
Ubiquitous Computing. In A. Holzinger and K. Miesenberger (Eds.), USAB 2009
Schnauer, C., Pintaric, T. and Kaufmann, H. (2011) Full body interaction for serious
games in motor rehabilitation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Augmented Human
International Conference (AH '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 8 pages.
Shaer, O. and Hornecker, E. (2010) Tangible user interfaces: past, present and future
directions. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction Vol. 3, Issue 1-2,
April 2010.
Shaw, W. S., Kristman, V. L., & Vzina, N. (2013). Workplace Issues. In Handbook of
Work Disability (pp. 163-182). Springer New York.
Sheridan, T. (2002). Humans and automation: System design and research issues. Santa
Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society/New York: Wiley.
Straker, L., & Mathiassen, S. E. (October 23, 2009). Increased physical work loads in
modern work - A necessity for better health and performance? Ergonomics 2009,
52:1215-1225.
Tholander J and Johansson C. (2010). Bodies, boards, clubs and bugs: a study of bodily
engaging artifacts. In CHI '10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (CHI EA '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4045-4050.
Weiser, M. (1994). The World is not a Desktop, interactions 1, 1 (January 1994), 7-8.
Wiethoff, A., Schneider, H., Rohs, M., Butz, A. and Greenberg, S. (2012) Sketch-a-TUI:
Low Cost Prototyping of Tangible Interactions Using Cardboard and Conductive Ink. In
Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and
Embodied Interaction (TEI '12), Stephen N. Spencer (Ed.). ACM, New York, NY, USA,
309-312.
Willis K. D.D., Lin J., Mitani J and Igarashi T. (2010). Spatial sketch: bridging between
movement & fabrication. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on
Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction (TEI '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 512.
Yim, J., and Graham, T. C. (2007) Using games to increase exercise motivation. In
Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Future Play (pp. 166-173). ACM
1329
worked as a national expert for the EC and been a visiting fellow in the department of
Philosophy at the University of California at Berkeley.
1330
Abstract
Reflective writing is an efficient way of getting feedback from students. Paper-based or
web-based course evaluation questionnaires alone may lack of collecting specific and
detailed information, especially for the fields like design education. This study focuses on
reflections captured from students via two different media personal magazine and online
questionnaire in 2012 Spring Semester conducted in Basic Design II in the Department
of Industrial Product Design at Istanbul Technical University (ITU), Turkey. Throughout the
semester, each student was encouraged to write a diary weekly and expected to submit a
photocopied page of it to reflect freely their impressions about the course and their
experiences, written or visual, or both. At the end of the semester, students were
expected to submit their diaries as personal magazines. This data is valuable to see the
development of the student in terms of design awareness and perceptions about the
course specifically. Moreover, a specific web-based questionnaire is prepared and
delivered to students in order to see the general tendencies about the course. Based on
this data, we explore how we can learn and benefit from students reflections for Basic
Design course mechanism and design education.
Keywords
Design education, Basic design, Reflective writing
Especially in project-based courses, face-to-face relationship with students is apparently
important both for students and instructors. This mutual contact makes students to get
involved in the course with more enthusiasm and also instructors are able to get more
feedback regularly.
Because the student quota for the Department of Industrial Product Design at ITU was
increased from about 30 to 45 step by step in recent years, the problems about
constituting that face-to-face relationship became more obvious especially for 1st year
courses. It has been demanding for instructors to deal with the huge number of students.
1331
Basic Design courses, which are compulsory introductory courses in Industrial Design
curriculum, were affected in such a way that direct and one-to-one interaction almost
disappeared. Therefore, the tutors of these courses also the authors of this paper had
to invent and implement methods to get feedback from students.
This paper aims to discuss these methods and reveal their outcomes. In order to capture
reflections from students two different media was used; namely personal magazine and
online questionnaire.
1332
As Dewey (1993) posited, The function of reflective thought is, therefore, to transfer a
situation in which there is experienced obscurity, doubt, conflict, disturbance of some sort,
into a situation that is clear, coherent, settled and harmonious (p. 100- 101). This
becomes more crucial in the context of design-related domains where problems are
wicked; and thus ambiguous (Buchanan, 1992; Rittel and Webber, 1973).
Based on Schns Reflective Practitioner, there has been a tendency to search for
getting reflections from students. In this context, the idea of reflective journal offers a tool
for inner dialogue that connects thoughts, feelings, and actions (Hubbs and Brand, 2005,
p.62). Specifically, the personal journal/diary (personal magazine in this paper) is
considered as a narrative descriptive writings where students can share their secrets and
no interaction between tutor and students occurs (Hubbs and Brand, 2005).
In short, diaries are used with the purpose of help[ing] the students reflect on their own
learning process, including subjective experiences, and relate learning from literature to
their ongoing design project (Lee et al., 2011).
In this study, personal magazines (a compilation of diaries in a graphically arranged
format) are used to capture reflections in Basic Design course.
1333
1334
1335
1336
However, most of them think that there were some problems regarding assessment and
workload.
The second section of the questionnaire included the course-specific questions. In this
way, we aimed to gather data specifically related to the course. Therefore, we prepared
questions on the projects assigned during semester. Also, we asked them which skills that
they gained during the course. In this question, there were 22 skills listed, which can be
categorized into 3 categories: Skills related to problem definition and process; technical
skills and personal skills.
Skills related to Problem Definition and Process: Time planning, Defining problem,
Problem solving, Experiencing design process properly
Technical Skills: Ability to work individually, Ability to work in groups, Concept
development, Analyzing form-function relationship, Visual presentation quality, Verbal
presentation quality, Ability to analyze materials
Personal Skills: Critical thinking, Curiosity in profession, Creative thinking, Abstract
thinking, Working in a disciplined way, Self-confidence, Courage, Communication with
tutors, Learning from others, Learning from environment, Openness to criticism
1337
That was one of the hardest projects for me and it possibly was the hardest one.
Mutant pinecone work is an abstraction exercise in order to understand the
structure and graphic values of the pinecone. [3D Abstraction]
This initial exercise of the semester was very important and taught us a lot of
things. It enhanced our observation skills and exploring the things we were
surrounded, and the most important was the interaction between human body and
the product. [Body Extension]
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Very much
Much
Moderate
Little
Very little
Defining
problem
Experiencing
design process
properly
Not at all
1338
Time limitation restricts our creative thinking; and this shows us the importance of
time for our occupation. [Body Extension]
60%
50%
40%
Very much
30%
Much
20%
Moderate
10%
Little
0%
Very little
Not at all
1339
1340
that students are mostly aware of what they gained from the course. This is also a sign
that they become reflective where the degree of self-questioning and elaboration are
high. They even criticize their works or processes showing that they internalize being
critical:
My drawing was weak; however, they were good as product family. [Color and
Objects]
I guess I played safe. Actually, this project was suitable for being experimental
[Solid, Liquid, Gas]
Thinking like that does not mean that I can find good ideas and implement them.
[3D Abstraction]
I understood wrong, I still cant believe how I did it. [Body Extension]
Scarcity in projects and difficulty in working show me that it is really hard to change
things that one is used to and is conditioned unconsciously. Although I am not
satisfied with the result right now, this exercise is a good beginning for making
more innovative things by breaking some biases. I think creating awareness is
already a positive aspect of this class. [Color and Objects]
I tried to make a style with lines but this was not good either. That is, it was boring
as well as nothing different and unique to me. [Award Set]
60%
50%
40%
Very much
30%
20%
Much
10%
Moderate
0%
Little
Very little
Not at all
1341
1342
I did not assert that I designed a good logo but it was not so difficult that I feared in
the beginning. [Logo and Layout]
In fact, the feeling of remembering previous projects and benefitting from our
experiences make me excited all of a sudden. I hope I can learn to direct my
excitement in a positive way for my projects in the future. [Logo and Layout]
Starting to the issue of structure with this way was a bit scary. [Structure]
As usual, we felt lonely in a middle of a big sea again. Even if one knows
swimming, he cannot reach to the land. The saver might be a rope from a boat.
Again we are feeling the same. [Logo and Layout]
Perceiving the shapes on the pinecone was an amusing process. [3D Abstraction]
As seen from the excerpts, there is a wide range of emotions that students mention in
their magazines. This implies that students feel free while reflecting themselves.
Conclusion
This paper investigates capturing reflections from students via free writing in the form of
personal magazines in a Basic Design course supported by the data of an online course
evaluation form. It is observed that personal magazines have contributed as a strong way
of reflection to on both students and tutors.
As seen from the rich data gained from the excerpts from magazines, most of the students
become reflective in terms of transferring their impressions on Basic Design course. This
is considered as a positive long-term trait for students as individuals. According to Moon
(1999), a person who is reflective seems to be someone who comfortably and
successfully engages in the mental activity of reflection and would make decisions that
are well considered (p.5). As for the first year design students, we think that it is
noteworthy to gain these skills and become aware of them.
One of students questions herself and reflects her opinions referring to the nature of
design that involves uncertainty:
I found a chance to think on while we were completing our Basic Design course. I
asked myself questions and as usual I could not find certain answers (I guess this
is Industrial Design tradition). However, with this second semester, I am aware of
the change happening inside me.
Moreover, students reflections influence not only tutors motivation but also tutors
perspectives while building their on-going and future courses. Therefore, reflections can
become as one of the main tools to learn from students.
In summary, personal magazines as a tool of free expression surely serve as mediator,
facilitator and also a translator that enables to understand students dialects. It is also a
1343
strong emotive and cognitive link between student and tutor, student and the process,
tutor and the course design.
1344
Acknowledgements
Thanks to our students who took Basic Design II courses in 2012.
1345
References
Bagli, H. & Gelmez, K. (2013). Who is the Designer?: An Experience of Collectivism in
Basic Design Course. DRS // Cumulus Oslo 2013 The 2nd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers, 14-17 May 2013, Oslo, Norway.
Blachnitzky, A. (2011). Is it still valid to teach principles of two- and three-dimensional
design? A documentation of design foundation courses in European Design Universities.
Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal. 5(6). 19-27.
Boucharenc, C. G. (2006). Research on Basic Design Education: An International survey.
International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 16(1)-30.
Denel, B. (1979). A Method of Basic Design, METU Press, Ankara.
Denel, B. (1981). Temel Tasarm ve Yaratclk [Basic Design and Creativity]. ODT
Mimarlk Fakltesi Basm lii (METU Architecture Press), Ankara, Turkey.
Dewey, J. (1993). How we think. D C Heath and Co, Boston, MA
Farivarsadri, G. (2001) A critical view on pedagogical dimension of introductory design in
Architectural Education. Proceedings of AEE 2001 - Architectural Education Exchange,
Architectural Educators: Responding to Change, 11-12 September 2001, Cardiff,
England.
Hubbs, D. L. & Brand, C. F. (2005). The paper mirror: Understanding reflective journaling.
Journal of Experiential Education. 28(1). 60-71
Hullfish, H. & Smith, P. (1961). Reflective thinking: The method for education. Dodd, Mead
and Co, New York.
ITU Course Catalogue Form (2009). Basic Design II
King, P. & Kitchener, K. (1994). Developing reflective judgement. Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, Prince Hall.
Lee, J., Vaajakallio, K. & Mattelmki, T. (2011). Tracing Situated Effects of Innovative
Design Methods: Inexperienced Designers Practices. Proceedings of the 2nd
Conference on Creativity and Innovation in Design. 103-113. New York, NY: ACM Press.
Moon, J. A. (1999). Reflection in Learning & Professional Development. Routledge
Farmer, Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York.
zer, D. (2004) Origins, Aims and Methods of Basic Design Courses in Industrial Design
Programs in Turkey, MSc. Thesis, METU. Department of Industrial Design, Ankara.
Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory.
London: Constable
1346
Schn, D. (1982). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books
1347
Appendix
ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE
SECTION 1.
1. How is your attendance record in the course?
Number of respondents
0
10
15
20
23
80%-60%
59%-30%
25
79,3%
17,2%
3,4%
AA/BA
BB/CB
10
12
DC/DD
2
1
14
16
18
24,1%
16
CC
FF
55,2%
10,3%
6,9%
3,4%
VF 0 0,0%
3. How was your attitude towards the course in the beginning of the semester?
1348
Number of respondents
0
10
Positive
20
19
Neutral
Negative
15
25
65,5%
20,7%
13,8%
1349
70%
60%
Strongly agree
50%
Agree
40%
Partially Agree
30%
Disagree
20%
Strongly disagree
10%
Neutral
0%
A
70%
60%
Strongly agree
50%
Agree
40%
Partially Agree
30%
Disagree
20%
Strongly disagree
10%
Neutral
0%
I
SECTION 2.
5. Evaluate the following projects contribution on your professional development.
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Very much
Much
Moderate
Little
Very little
Not at all
6. Mark the projects that affected you most (You can mark more than one).
1350
80,0%
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
7. Evaluate the qualifications/skills that you gained during the course.
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Very much
Much
Moderate
Little
Very little
Defining problem Problem solving
Time planning
Experiencing
design process
properly
Not at all
60%
50%
40%
Very much
30%
Much
20%
Moderate
10%
Little
0%
Very little
Not at all
1351
60%
50%
40%
Very much
30%
20%
Much
10%
Moderate
0%
Little
Very little
Not at all
1352
Abstract
This study was developed to understand the relationship between Product Design
Engineering education and Product Design Engineers in industry. It is the intention of the
authors to communicate data gathered from Product Design Engineering graduates from
Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia, to better determine the roles
and responsibilities of a Product Design Engineer in the workforce. This information
provides a learning platform for other Product Design Engineering programs, as well as
create a greater understanding in industry as to what a Product Design Engineer can
contribute to product development or manufacturing industries.
The overall objective of this research is to continually improve Product Design
Engineering education around the world to align closely with industry expectations and to
differentiate Product Design Engineers from Industrial Designers and Mechanical
Engineers. With this aim, a focus group and survey-based data collection of Product
Design Engineering graduates was completed to provide a greater understanding of the
roles a Product Design Engineer has in a professional context.
Keywords
Product Design Engineering; Graduate; Industry; Survey
Introduction
Product Design Engineering is a relatively new engineering discipline. The emergence of
this field has created graduates who can successfully combine the creative thinking of
design with the analytical thinking of engineering (Kuys et. al., 2012). The question posed
in this paper is how much of this knowledge is applied by graduates in their respective
employment? To achieve this, a focus group and a survey-based study were completed
with Product Design Engineering graduates and results are presented in this paper.
Product Design Engineering is the convergence of two diverse disciplines Mechanical
Engineering and Industrial Design with the intention of training a qualified engineer with
a comprehensive understanding of applied Industrial Design. It must be noted that
Product Design Engineering is not two courses (Mechanical Engineering and Industrial
Design) combined to create one degree. The structure of successful Product Design
Engineering programs around the world intertwine the curriculum between engineering
studies and design studies to ensure students understand how to apply engineering
theories to tangible design outcomes. To put this in context, an example seen within the
curriculum at Swinburne University of Technology includes engineering subjects that
teach theories of thermo-fluid systems; while in the same semester design studio subjects
teach projects that directly link to the engineering content. In this example a portable
1353
Figure 1. The place of Product Design Engineering in the technological and cultural world.
(In Kuys et. al. (2012) adapted from Dixon, 1966, in Hundal 1997, p. 38).
Product Design Engineering by nature is multidisciplinary merging engineering sciences
with design, manufacturing and social sciences. It is important however to continuously
evaluate and moderate the contribution of these disciplines to Product Design Engineering
curriculum. Furthermore it is also necessary to understand industry requirements and thus
what is actually being done in industry when students graduate from a Product Design
Engineering program. Hence, this study pursues a focused understanding of the role of a
Product Design Engineer to better shape curriculum and to educate others in the wide
field of Product Design Engineering.
The offerings of Product Design Engineering education around the world has increased
over the past 10 years, while at the same time industry becomes more knowledgeable on
1354
what a Product Design Engineer can bring to a company. Identified by de Vere et. al.
(2010) the offering of Product Design Engineering programs is expanding internationally
with similar programs being taught in many universities as outlined in Figure 2. While
there is still a concentration of schools offering Product Design Engineering in the UK, the
geographic coverage is now wider, including Europe, North America, Australia and South
America (de Vere, et. al., 2010).
Figure 2. The Product Design Engineering global landscape (In de Vere et. al., 2010).
This paper represents the findings of 44 Product Design Engineering graduates from
Swinburne University of Technology who completed surveys containing 10 detailed
questions to understand the role(s) a Product Design Engineer plays in industry, with the
intention of better understanding if what is being taught at an undergraduate level is
aligning correctly with industry expectations and needs. Previous publications relating to
this issue tend to consist of qualitative descriptions of the development of courses (Koen,
1994) (Dym et. al., 2005) (Diehl et. al., 2005) (Lamancusa et. al., 1997) (Dieter and
Schmidt, 2009) (de Vere et. al., 2010). This paper provides an insight into what is
currently occurring in industry from a graduate perspective. This is important to ensure
Product Design Engineering curriculum is relevant to appropriately educate future
students for graduate employment, while at the same time enhancing and developing
graduate skills/tools to broaden the understanding industry has on where a Product
Design Engineer can fit within a manufacturing, engineering or design team.
Study aim
The aim of this study is to better understand the nature of work graduates are engaged in,
as well as to understand how these graduates apply what they have learnt during their
course; to subsequently provide a reflection on how the course has been of use to a
Product Design Engineering graduate in their current workplace and what can be further
applied to improve the curriculum according to industry demands.
1355
Methods
The methods used for this study involve:
A.
An initial focus group discussion guided by the authors with the aim of obtaining an
insight into the opinions of Swinburne Product Design Engineering graduates in relation to
the applicability of their program education to their current industry environment. The
objective of performing this focus group was to allow and structure the design of a follow
up survey identifying areas of improvement for the Product Design Engineering
curriculum. The focus group was planned and performed as an online open forum with a
series of guided questions to generate discussion. Four Product Design Engineering
graduates (n=4) were approached to work with the three authors of this paper to set out
appropriate questions to create greater knowledge and exposure for those interested in
this field.
B.
An online survey of 10 questions in total and structured according to discussions
developed through the focus group. The design of this survey was aimed at understanding
the relationship between Product Design Engineering education and Product Design
Engineering employment. The relevance and structure of the questions in the survey was
validated through the preliminary observations provided by the focus group discussion.
These questions were then used to better understand the positive and negative aspects of
Product Design Engineering graduates in industry.
It must be noted that Product Design Engineering at Swinburne University of Technology,
Melbourne, Australia is strictly governed by the university to maintain the quality and
integrity of the program. This study aims to continually enhance this by going beyond the
program/university level to further understand the transition of skills into industry. To
maintain the quality of the program, annual reviews of course content by the discipline
leader in consultation with the course coordinator and staff takes place. This is done in
conjunction with a review of course content by an industry advisory committee that
consists of industry representatives and senior academics from other universities.
Results
1356
The focus group was comprised of Product Design Engineering graduates (n=4) with an
average of 7.52.4 years of industry experience. Initially, an enquiry of current job titles
and professional role descriptions provided an insight of the range of placements available
to Product Design Engineering graduates and clearly identified distinct roles within the
Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Design fields. Congruently, responses to further
queries in relation to work activities showed that practices and skill engagement are
specific to the industrial field; and perhaps not expected across the end-to-end product
development process. Hence, the need to identify a representative sample of the skills
that are expected of Product Design Engineering graduates by current industry becomes
very relevant in order to match industry demand to Product Design Engineering
curriculum.
The insight gained through this focus group further allowed the formulation of a set of
questions to be used in the following online survey. The online survey contained 10
questions that explored in depth the exposure of Product Design Engineers in a
professional context. It was decided that 10 well-constructed questions was adequate in
providing enough insight for this study, and was deemed an appropriate amount to have
higher response rates by limiting the time it takes in completing this survey by the
graduates. The reliability of survey research findings is largely a function of response rate.
Findings must be a true representation of the population size as low return rates are
presumed to suggest biases in data or variance effects in survey results (Edith et. al.,
2005). To prevent any form of bias the survey focused on the responses obtained from
graduates over the past 6 years, as this made up 93.18 % of responses.
The survey was made available online over a two-week period and yielded (n=44)
responses from recent Product Design Engineering graduates with an average of 3.51.3
years industry experience.
Only three Product Design Engineering graduates out of the 44 who responded had more
than six years experience, therefore the majority of respondents (93.18 %) graduated from
20072012. Focusing on this period a total of 129 students graduated, giving a response
rate of 31.8% of the specific sample. While a higher response rate would have been
desirable, 31.8 % of graduates captures sufficient data for this study, equating to just
under one in three graduates over the past six years of the program.
Specific responses to this survey are as follows:
1357
Question 1
How many years have you been working in a relevant Product Design Engineering field?
Question 2
In your current job, to
what extend are you a
Mechanical Engineer?
1358
Question 3
In your current job, to what extend are you an Industrial Designer?
Engineers Australia is the national forum for the advancement of engineering and
the professional development of members. With over 100,000 members
embracing all disciplines of the engineering team, Engineers Australia is the
largest and most diverse professional body for engineers in Australia.
1359
On top of this, a recent search of Seek2 showed a greater percentage of jobs available for
Mechanical Engineers as to Industrial Design and Product Design Engineering as follows:
Mechanical Engineer 935 Jobs available Australia-wide
Industrial Design 686 Jobs available Australia-wide
Product Design Engineer 675 Jobs available Australia-wide
One of the many positive attributes of a Product Design Engineering degree is the
diversity in graduate employment. Figures 4 and 5 suggest graduates have the skills to
work across all areas of Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Design, with the majority
working in both capacities in their current job.
Question 4
Please select the typical Mechanical Engineering activities that you most frequently
engage in during your current job.
SEEK is Australia's number one job site with over 150,000 jobs online and visited
14.7 million times each month. www.seek.com.au (October 28, 2013).
1360
Question 5
Please select the typical Industrial Design activities that you most frequently engage in
during your current job.
1361
Question 6
Please select the typical Mechanical Engineering skills/tools that you most frequently
engage in during your current job.
1362
Question 7
Please select the typical Industrial Design skills/tools that you most frequently engage in
during your current job.
1363
Question 8
Are there skills/tools or activities that you have learned in industry that you wish you had
learnt during your Product Design Engineering degree?
1364
Question 9
Are there skills/tools or activities that you were taught during your Product Design
Engineering degree that you find unnecessary for your current job?
1365
Question 10
Is sustainability considered and applied in your current job?
Kuys, B., Velasquez Montoya, M., Thong, C., Glover, J. (2012). Embedding sustainability
in Product Design Engineering curriculum. A comparison of needs on an international
level. Proceedings of the Design Research Society 2012 Bangkok. Volume 2.
1366
1367
It is the authors anticipation that other universities around the world learn from the
success of this program and consider introducing something similar where a Mechanical
Engineering and Industrial Design program already exist. Product Design Engineering in
Australia has found a niche by filling the void between the analytical engineers and the
creative designers It makes sense for the future success of product development and
manufacturing companies globally and the authors are optimistic this discipline can grow
on a global scale.
References
de Vere, I., Melles, G. and Kapoor, A. (2010). Product design engineering - a global
education trend in multidisciplinary training for creative product design. European Journal
of Engineering Education. Vol. 35, no. 1, p. 33-43.
Diehl, JC, Boks, CB & Silvester, S (2005). The evolution of design for sustainability
courses. In s.n. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Environmentally
Concious Design and Inverse Manufacturing EcoDesign 2005 (pp. 1-8). Piscataway:
IEEE.
Dieter, G. and Schmidt, L. (2009). Engineering Design, 4th edition. McGraw-Hill, New
York, ISBN: 978-0-07-283703-2.
Dym, C., Agogino, A., Eris, O., Frey, D. and Leifer, L. (2005). Engineering Design
Thinking, Teaching, and Learning. Journal of Engineering Education. January 2005, 103
119.
Edith D. and de Leeuw. (2005). To Mix or Not to Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys.
Journal of Official Statistics, Vol. 21, No. 2, p. 233255.
Koen, B. (1994). Toward a Strategy for Teaching Engineering De-sign. Engineering
Education, vol. 83, p. 193-202.
Kuys, B., Velasquez Montoya, M., Thong, C., Glover, J. (2012). Embedding sustainability
in Product Design Engineering curriculum. A comparison of needs on an international
level. Proceedings of the Design Research Society 2012 Bangkok. Volume 2.
Lamancusa, J., Jorgensen, J. and Zayas-Castro, J. (1997). The Learning Factory A New
Approach to Integrating Design and Manufacturing into the Engineering Curriculum.
Journal of Engineering Education. Volume 86, Issue 2, pages 103112.
Melles, G., Kuys, B. (2010) Legitimating industrial design as an academic discipline in the
context of an Australian Cooperative Centre. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2
(2010), 5228-5232, Elsevier.
1368
1741
1742
1743
1744
ISBN 978-91-7601-068-6
DesignResearchSociety
9 789176 010686