Session 8 – Participatory Approach of Design

Participatory Design is an approach to the assessment, design and development of technological or organizational systems that concentrates a maximum attention on the active involvement of potential or current users of the project in design and decision-making processes. It regards every participant or user in a Participatory Design project as a stakeholder whose voice has a crucial importance and needs to be heard. It recognizes every worker and user as a prime source of innovation. Good and successful design ideas would arise in collaboration with participants from wide diverse backgrounds. Using the approach, our company has to adopt a system involving networks of people, practices and technology embedded in particular organizational contexts.
The main strengths within the organization are increasing the work control over the work content, measurement and reporting. Helping workers to communicate and organizing them across the hierarchical structure or with peers elsewhere will improve and create one better reflective and productive employee. Exactly giving the users the voice in the design process will increase the probability of a usable, original and profitable design. Actually, the developers, business representatives and users could work together trying to design a final business solution. The need of providing an opportunity for developers to meet, work and understand their users is common for the approach. Unlike other approaches to understanding users, participatory design assumes that users should play an active role in the creative process. The companies have to give huge efforts to understand people and their experience. Important is to take into account that all people are creative, all people have dreams, people project their needs onto ambiguous stimuli and people are making meaning trying to fill unsaid or unseen things.

There are clear and interesting advantages of this approach:
- It is affordable- the cost for user research is much cheaper than many large consulting and research firms
- It is extremely efficient- this method provides useful user data when it can do the most to improve designs. Before the design begins, during the fast prototyping or final validation, The Participatory Design could help in these well-known hard moments in every business process.
- There is a communication- the companies do thorough, deep and careful interviews and observe their own research.
- There is independence- in meaning of independent evaluations of ideas or work from outside users, developers or different background branches within the company.

Regarding the participatory design as an only search for creative users could rename it to Participatory Discovery. Concept where the users can design everything and the need of designer`s management thinking doesn`t exist anymore.

References: Blomberg and Kensing (1998), Gaffney (1999)

Session 7

Session 7 – Participatory Design Approach

Numerous design concepts can be adopted by companies in an organisational context. The Participatory strategy allows for the business and all the technical representatives to work together in order to develop the ideal solution. Blomberg and Kensing (1998) state that “The politics of design, the nature of participation and methods, tools and techniques for carrying out design projects” are issues that have to be scrutinised.

The participants or ‘technical representatives’ must be identified in the case of Company U and Q where a training event is being developed. The users would involve all those required to work on the new system for which the training is being held. They would range from the Administrative staff, to the Directors and also include Trainers of the system. Gaffney (1999) describes that companies “generally agree that users should be consulted at market research and testing phases” but “design is the domain of the developers”. It is important to understand that users are the experts in the work flow of the system that would be developed and it is crucial to involve them to present a “reality check in the design process”. The use of meetings, observation and constant appraisal with the users will ensure that the organisation has a forum that provides continuous feedback allowing for any issues to be identified immediately.

Other important participants would include Managers or Directors who would not directly interact with the system, but their familiarity with the project is crucial. Through numerous meetings, this participant is aware of the progression of the project and constantly feels involved. The ultimate decision to progress with the project will be with this participant underlining the importance of their involvement.

The Analysts and Designers are critical participants who through the adoption of this strategy can translate the user requirements into a plan that can be understood by the developers. Through the use of brainstorming, scenario and paper prototyping alongside the user, detailed analysis of the problems of the current system can be observed and a solution communicated that is appropriate by both the user and the developer requirements.

Developers and Implementers are another technical representative required. This method will provide an opportunity for them to meet, work with and understand their users. Gaffney (1999) identifies that “developers often have no real knowledge of user interface design” and through the use of paper prototyping, the developer and user can visually detail the requirements of the system.

Finally, Facilitators and Trainers would be the final most necessary participants. Trainers must be involved in the development to have a clear understanding of the user requirements and to understand the exact workflow that the product achieves. After the deployment of the product to the users, classroom sessions, one-on-one training methods and even video conferencing tools can be used to train users.

Gaffney (1999) identifies that while this approach may develop feelings of loss of control by technical personnel, adopting this ‘low-tech’ technique “prevents one individual or group from controlling the design activity, and gives equal voice to all participants.”

Session 6 workshop - Group 3

In this session our group played the role of Company U (UK based), that has been taken over by a large Company Q (India based)

Part A

Managing Emotions

During the merging process a lot of emotions are involved such as;

Positive:

• New opportunities & challenges
• New benefits for people who like change
• Employees will be happy and excited as the company is merging with a large company and is being transformed.

Negative:

• Employees will be nervous about their ability to work efficiently in the new environment, under the new rules.
• There will be a new disciplinary system in the new hierarchy which employees may feel put their jobs at risk. Fear of change
• New routines need to be adapted, which may become problematic for those who are resistant to change.
• Fear for both Companies of cultural differences
• Company U employees may lose their independence an/or the way of work.


In order to overcome the negative emotional aspects involved Company U will need to adapt a gradual transition approach which would mean that the employees will not face sudden changes that will affect their job. The companies will also need to define a clear purpose of merging and set common goals. An employee handbook or contract can be produced and distributed amongst all employees. Things such as video conferencing can be used to familiarize the employees to each other and to the common ground of the company. The employees will need to be patient, understanding, and be attentive to prevent repetitiveness and misunderstandings.


Managing Language

As both companies are based in different countries where different languages are spoken there will be problems occurring. To overcome these language problems, first of all we need to establish a common verbal language (English). The English language will also need to be standardized to professional so that it is understood by all.

Improving Communication

1) Informal social gatherings could be used for team members to build rapport if possible. They should take into consideration, the physical constraints.

2) An organisational structure chart would clearly illustrate the levels of authority ensuring the employees are aware of everyone's position in the hierarchy.

3) A report and presentation on both sites, clearly stating the reasons of the merger and it's benefits to company U employees, will decrease the sense of apprehension shared by the employees.

4) Information should be provided detailing the standardised procedures e.g. report writing, meeting rules and documentation.


Part B

Common Ground

The Common Ground Approach is a means of navigating through conflict and identifying possibilities that are not apparent from an adversarial mind set. It is a set of principles and practices that, when utilized, causes a fundamental shift in people's relationship with conflict - away from adversarial approaches toward cooperative solutions. By using the common ground approach the companies will build a shared understanding, come to common terms, negotiate, accept changes and ideas, compromise with each other, and become flexible. This will make the merging process smooth.


Affordance

Affordance is a quality of an object, or an environment, that allows an employee or company to perform an action. In 1988, Donald Norman appropriated the term affordances in the context of human–machine interaction to refer to just those action possibilities which are readily perceivable by an actor. Through his book The Design of Everyday Things, this interpretation was popularized within the fields of HCI and interaction design. It makes the concept dependent not only on the physical capabilities of the actor, but also their goals, plans, values, beliefs and past experience. If an actor steps into a room with an armchair and a softball, Gibson's original definition of affordances allows that the actor may throw the recliner and sit on the softball, because that is objectively possible. Norman's definition of (perceived) affordances captures the likelihood that the actor will sit on the recliner and throw the softball. Effectively, Norman's affordances "suggest" how an object may be interacted with. For example, the size and shape of a softball obviously fits nicely in the average human hand, and its density and texture make it perfect for throwing. The user may also bring past experience with similar objects (baseballs, perhaps) to bear when evaluating a new affordance. (Wikipedia)


Deictic references

Deixis is collectively the orientational features of human languages to have reference to points in time, space, and the speaking event between interlocutors. A word that depends on deictic clues is called a deictic or a deictic word. Deictic words are bound to a context — either a linguistic or extralinguistic context — for their interpretation.

Some English deictic words include, for example, the following:

now vs. then
here vs. there
this vs. that
me vs. you vs. him/her
go vs. come

The origo is the context from which the reference is made—in other words, the viewpoint that must be understood in order to interpret the utterance. (If Tom is speaking and he says "I", he refers to himself, but if he is listening to Betty and she says "I", then the origo is with Betty and the reference is to her.)

Coordination and Disorder

Session 5 - Coordination

Flores and Winograd introduce an interesting twist to the term ‘technology’ when describing its uses in modern society. While we generally would describe them as a design of physical tools to help us to build, design or execute our jobs effectively, they instead describe it as a “design of practices and possibilities to be realized through artifacts”. The perception that computer technology simply duplicates human effort is incorrect. Computer technology encompasses the design of new practices and in turn opens a whole new realm of possibilities of practices that coordinates our efforts.

In the given scenario, video conferencing tools have become a standard business practice of communication. This cross geographical communication tool which is instantaneous, cost-effective and reliable is one of the new practices that has been adopted through the development of computer technology. In preparation of a video conference, a number of important details will have to be taken into consideration. Video conferencing allows for oral reporting of decisions to be made between individuals but, it also provides an opportunity to engage the group through a visual connection. The lighting conditions of the room in which the conference is held, is as important as ensuring that the auditory equipment is fully functional.

“Organizations are structures for the social coordination of action, generated in conversations based on requests and promises”(Flores and Winograd, 1988). No action can take place without an initial request, and this concept should be adopted by all businesses when conducting any meetings. Before any meeting, the distribution of printed documents detailing the agenda, structure and time limitation of the meeting, will ensure that there is a clear understanding of the issues that the meeting will address. The printed documentation will also ensure no difference in understanding and interpretation of the message that may arise from cultural and social differences.

The outcome of every meeting will ensure that all issues addressed in the agenda have been tackled or discussed to some extent. The outcome should not only include a shared understanding of each individual’s tasks in the organization, but also a clear comprehension of the common goal of the employees as a single entity. To address these issues is to “open the way to diagnosing breakdowns, increasing effectiveness, and in general designing the workplace as an effective healthy environment.”