Participatory and Value-Sensitive Design Lecture #6 - February 17th, : User Interface Design and Development

Today’s Outline 1)Participatory Design (PD) 2)In-class Futures Workshop 3)Value Sensitive Design (VSD)

Participatory Design

Emerged from strong labor movement in Scandinavia in the early 70s Shift from top-down, management-driven, rationalistic perspective to a bottom-up, democratic, humanistic perspective New legislation and policies provided workers a role in how technology was introduced into organizations Legislation was not enough to shift the balance away from the managerial perspective - this required the innovation of new design methods

PD = CD? Isn’t this the same as Contextual Design? They share certain ideas and approaches, but the underlying emphasis is different Contextual design emphasizes understanding the context of work Participatory design emphasizes actively articulating problems and co-creating solutions in cooperation with users Other names for PD include Cooperative Design and Collective Resource Approach

Landmark PD Projects NJMF –Norwegian Metal Workers Union –Kristen Nygaard DEMOS –Swedish Trade Union Confederation –Ehn and Sandberg DUE –Kyng and Matthiasen UTOPIA –Nordic Graphic Workers Union (NGU) –Ehn, Kyng, Sundblad, Bødker Florence –Nurses –Nygaard, Bjerknes, Bratteteig, Kaasbøll, Sannes, Sinding- Larsen

Scandinavian Culture Rich social democracies, relatively small Use technology to a large extent, very fast diffusion Small and medium sized organizations Equity and equal rights very important Democratic work life (employee representation in company boards, etc.) High percentage of trade union membership Protestant ethics Source: Tone Bratteteig, “Participatory Design - Scandinavian Tradition”, 2003

Computing Applications Enhance workplace skills, rather then degrade them As tools, applications should support work activities, not make them more rigid Organizational issues should be a specific focus of the design In addition to improving productivity, also improve the quality of work and results Source: Bødker, Grønbæk and Kyng; “Cooperative design: techniques and experiences from the Scandinavian scene”

Involving Users Improve the knowledge upon which systems are built Enable workers to develop realistic expectations Reduce resistance to change Increase workplace democracy by giving the members of an organization the right to participate in decisions that are likely to affect their work (for example, automation) Source: Bjerknes & Bratteteig, 1991; Bjørn-Andersen & Hedberg, 1977

Participatory Design Process Recognize conflict Guided by designers Situated within user's work Encourage creativity and draw out tacit knowledge Simulate the future to aid in prediction and evaluation of design Adapted from Patrick Williams

Role of Designers Coordinate activities Facilitate discussion Prepare materials Advocate solutions Adapted from Patrick Williams

Case Study: The AT Project National Labor Office (AT) in Aarhus, Denmark Country-wide labor inspection service Includes inspectors, administrative personnel and researchers Inspectors conduct health inspections, follow up on workplace accidents, and lead campaigns related to specific work hazards and/or industries Goal of this project was to decentralize application development and support Action Research - do research while making concrete contributions to the project Source: Bødker, Grønbæk and Kyng; “Cooperative design: techniques and experiences from the Scandinavian scene”

Stages of the Project Workplace visits - understand current situation and work practices Future workshop - compile current problems and brainstorm potential solutions Organizational game - Envision possibilities by presenting new scenarios using mock-ups and prototypes Embodying ideas - Continue development by co-creating mock-ups and prototypes and by trying out new / modified work situations

Future Workshops “The technique is meant to shed light on a common problematic situation, to generate visions about the future, and to discuss how these visions can be realized” Participants should share a set of problems, a desire to change the work situation, and the means to achieve that change Usually involves two facilitators, and no more then 20 participants

Stages of a Future Workshop Preparation Critique - draw out specific issues and problems Fantasy - imagine how things could be different Implementation - figuring out how to make it happen Follow-up

Critique Structured brainstorming about current problems at work Everyone gets a chance to speak –Time can be restricted, for example, to 30 secs. Statements are recorded, and then grouped into a number of themes

Fantasy Problem themes are inverted to generate positive ideas for the future “No statement about the future is considered too extreme - if somebody wants it, it’s OK” Positive visions are grouped under a number of themes Themes are selected to develop “utopian outlines” - idealistic visions of how things might work in the future

Implementation Use utopian outlines as a starting point Envision the resources, systems and organizational changes required to make the vision a reality Plan how to access those resources, build the systems and gain consensus around the required organizational changes

Organizational Games “Act out” alternate work organizations and confront the new problems that arise Using mock-ups and prototypes as “props” Metaphor of acting in a play –Playground - the “scene” where the action occurs –Roles - the “parts” that various actors play –Situation cards - introduce particular breakdowns –Commitments - actions taken by actors in response to specific situations –Conditions - requirements for taking these actions –Action plan - how to propose the idea to the rest of the organization and make it happen

Cooperative Prototyping Prototyping provides learning not only for the designer, but also for the user Users can understand the potential of technology to impact work, and envision realistic future scenarios Users and designers cooperatively envision new designs, and inform each other’s perception of their practicality and utility The final result is not a surprise!

Mock-up Design Mock-ups and lo-fidelity prototypes provide hands-on experience with new situations Everyone has the knowledge and tools (pens, scissors, etc.) to make modifications Everyone understands their limitations They can be made cheaply They are fun to use and modify

Limitations of Mock-ups Changes can be time-consuming Hard to illustrate dynamic aspects of the interface Can lead to a disjoint between the design and technical possibilities Require someone to have a strong understanding of these possibilities

In-class Future Workshop Redesign 1) how students register for classes or 2) how you selected your project topics for this class –Critique - 10 minutes –Fantasy - 10 minutes –Implementation - 5 minutes Need one facilitator and one documenter The rest of you can be participants

Limitations of PD Requires close collaboration between users and developers –Physical proximity –Resources and time to support collaboration –Difficult to overcome cultural, linguistic barriers –Does not address distributed teams, Internet-based systems Requires strong organization of labor –In Scandinavia, can rely on existence of unions –In other places, unions may not exist, and workers may be fundamentally disempowered –This makes it difficult to access the “right” users –Users may not be comfortable with articulating their desires –Users may be disappointed when their visions are not realized Not all systems are workplace-based –What about consumer technologies? –What about systems for fun, or communication? PD ideology can usually be adapted for dealing with these variations, but not all the formalisms carry over

Value Sensitive Design

“a value refers to what a person or group of people consider important in life” Value-Sensitive Design is a methodology that explicitly consider the values of users and other stakeholders in the design process Developed by Batya Friedman and Peter Kahn at UW, along with other collaborators Source: Friedman, Kahn and Borning; “Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems”

Practical Suggestions for VSD Start with a Value, Technology or Context Identify Direct and Indirect Stakeholders Identify Benefits and Harms for Each Group Map Benefits and Harms to Values Conduct a Conceptual Investigation of Values Identify Potential Value Conflicts When conducting interviews, ask “Why?” Source: Friedman, Kahn and Borning; “Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems”

Important Values for System Design Human Welfare Ownership and Property Freedom from Bias Universal Usability Autonomy Informed Consent Sustainability Source: Friedman, Kahn and Borning; “Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems” Accountability Courtesy Identity Calmness Trust Privacy

For Next Time Come prepared to present your contextual observations, scenarios and personas! Put your presentation on a USB drive before class if possible