Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 1 Participatory Design — Scandinavian tradition Tone Bratteteig, February readings: Ehn Bansler Lyytinen & Iivari

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 2 User participation in systems sevelopment ”The Scandinavian approach”: users participate in many phases of the systems development, as co-designers Reasons for user participation: 1) to improve the knowledge upon which systems are built, 2) to enable people to develop realistic expectations, and reduce resistance to change, and 3) to increase workplace democracy by giving the members of an organization the right to participate in decisions that are likely to affect their work. Bjerknes & Bratteteig, 1991; Bjørn-Andersen & Hedberg, 1977

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 3 Florence ( ) based on nursing as a profession and as work SYDPOL (SYstem Development environment and Profession Oriented Languages) aimed to build an information system with nurses as co-designers and decision makers mutual learning techniques for user participation in design for nurses, based on their professional knowledge focus: profession, work place & organization Bjerknes & Bratteteig, 1987

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 4 The Work Sheet System (the Florence pilot system) name diagnosis allergies name diagnosis allergies name diagnosis allergies name diagnosis allergies name diagnosis allergies name diagnosis allergies... team x y z... tasks medicine xx yy...

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 5 Mutual learning: Nurses don't do what they say that they do Observations vs. interviews Work practice is personal and situated. Is practice more “correct” than standard routines? Bratteteig, 1997

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 6 Mutual learning: Our nurses refused our prototype Learning by experiencing mistakes (trial & error) Mutual learning is based on a willingness to listen but the ability to listen is in turn based on knowledge. Bratteteig, 1997; Bjerknes & Bratteteig 1987

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 7 Mutual learning: Our nurses designed the pilot system After “mutual learning” the nurses worked out a list of suggestions for computer system support in their work We all agreed on their #1, then they made a design sketch The learning provided them with technological fantasy The design sketch was very well suited for communicating about the system and its functionality

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 8 Mutual learning: Our nurses were responsible for the training Sharing of rights and duties in the project The nurses responsible for introducing the pilot system including training their colleagues in using the system The introduction was smooth and utilized characteristics of the work organization that we did not think of.

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN364 9 Mutual learning – mutual respect: Nurses' acknowledgement of informaticians Mutual respect goes both ways, the balance is difficult The mutuality can be difficult to communicate if the differences between traditions and cultures are large Bratteteig, 1997

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Participatory design: Who are the designers? Our nurses decided on the design because we, the researchers in the project, gave them the power to do so Giving away power to decide on the design was difficult for us as researchers and informaticians Evaluation of computer systems: simple and well-functioning systems that everybody can learn vs technical brilliance or utilization of the latest technologies Bratteteig, 1997; Bjeknes & Bratteteig 1988

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Some Scandinavian research projects in the Participatory Design ”school” NJMF ( ): Norsk Jern- og MetallarbeiderForbund with Norwegian Computing Centre (Nygaard, Bergo) results: data agreements (Viking Askim 1973), text books, vocational training ++ → Handel & Kontor, Kjemisk... DEMOS ( ): DEMOkratiske Styringssystemer Ehn & Sandberg, negotiations (”Företagsstyrning och löntagermakt”) DUE ( ): Demokrati, Udvikling og Edb Kyng, Mathiassen: trade unions, education (DUE kursus) Ehn, 1991; Bjerknes & Bratteteig, 1995

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Some Scandinavian research projects II UTOPIA ( ): Utbildildning, Teknik, och Produkt I Arbetskvalitetsperspektiv Ehn, Kyng, Sundblad, Bødker: trade unions (graphical workers), ”Grafitti” the tool pespective Florence ( ): Nygaard, Bjerknes, Bratteteig, Kaasbøll, Sannes, Sinding- Larsen: profession, work place (organization), use context case for the SYDPOL programme (SYstem Development environment and Profession Oriented Languages: ) the application pespective Ehn, 1991; Bjerknes & Bratteteig 1984; 1995

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Some more research projects MARS ( ): Metodiske Arbejdsformer i Systemudvikling Andersen, Kensing, Lassen, Lundin, Mathiassen, Munk- Madsen, Sørgaard: systems development practice & systems development work, professionalization of systems development: theory (independent of methodology) FIRE ( ): Functional Integration through REdesign Bjerknes, Bratteteig, Braa, Kaasbøll, Smørdal, Øgrim: integration and continuous redesign, use & development contexts & organizations Bjerknes & Bratteteig, 1995

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Mapping the Scandinavian approach institutionsituation organization as a whole special interest groups Bjerknes & Bratteteig, 1995 the LO/NAF Cooperation projects Integration and redesign (FIRE) florence Cooperative design UTOPIA NJMF DUE DEMOS

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Strategies for user participation levels of action: 1) work situation NJMF, DUE, DEMOS, Florence, Cooperative design 2) work place SocioTechnique, FIRE 3) inter-organizational relations between org.: ex. EDI, user interest groups between interest groups: ex. UTOPIA; Florence 4) work life legislation; NJMF, DUE, DEMOS

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Readings: Ehn [1993]: design for democracy at work DEMOS ( ): DEMOkratiske Styringssystemer interdisciplinary team, 4 enterprises UTOPIA ( ): Utbildn., Teknik, och Produkt I Arbetskval.perspektiv graphical workers’ trade unions in Scandinavia the tool perspective Philosophical foundation for skill-based participatory design Dreyfus; Winograd & Flores (Heidegger and Gadamer) language as action Wittgenstein language games Polanyi tacit knowledge Ehn 1989  design as a learning process  design as creation of language-games  system descript. for discussion  design-by-doing

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Readings: Bansler on SD research traditions: 1) system theoretical engineering, cybernetics, technology optimism: systems thinking Langefors (60’s): infology  ISAC 2) sosio-technical human factors, psycho-social work environment, balance technical—social system: systems thinking, analysis of variances Thorsrud (LO/NAF; 60/70’s), UK: ETHICS,  SSM 3) critical politically based critique, alternative solutions, trade unions, technology as tool (autonomy & control): critical & political philosophy, studies of use (and development) Nygaard (70’s): social science methods / theories, techniques for SD as a social work process Bansler, 1989

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Readings: Iivari & Lyytinen [1998] 1. infological approach 2. formal approaches 3. socio-technical approach 4. trade unionist approach 5. socio-cybernetic approach 6. language action approach 7. professional work practice approach 8. object-oriented approaches 9. activity theory approach 10. structuration theory approach Iivari & Lyytinen, 1998

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Regrouping Iivari & Lyytinen Systems thinking Critical theory (dialectics) 1. infology 3. socio-technics 4. trade union-based 5. socio-cybernetics 7. professional work practice

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Regrouping cont. theories Systems thinking Critical theory (dialectics) 1. infology 3. socio-technics 4. trade union-based 5. socio-cybernetics 6. language-action 7. professional work practice 9. activity theory 10. structuration theory

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Regrouping cont. computing views Systems thinking Critical theory (dialectics) 1. infology 2. formal methods 3. socio-technics 4. trade union-based 5. socio-cybernetics 6. language-action 7. professional work practice 8. object-orientation 9. activity theory 10. structuration theory

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN User participation and Participatory design Scandinavian approach to user participation in systems development co-designers SD as organizational, technical, human change process is different from participatory designUSA based in software production HCI (Human Computer Interaction) participative design / developmentUK/ Australia development of local communities (not technical)

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN 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 (employees repr. in boards etc.) high percentage of trade union membership (increasing) protestant ethics Boland [1998]: nature equality irony

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Participatory Design as a Scandinavian tradition equality: respect for the user as an expert (on equal terms) physical and social-psycological work environment important for health (well-being) and productivity autonomy & co-determination nature: control of the product vs. continuous change and learning situated knowledge, local action irony: question the taken-for-granted conflict – harmony & politics – ethics +worries about the quality of the system (the toolness) uncertainties connected to use and implementation (introduction) ”happy pigs taste better”

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN and some differences within the Scandinavian approaches conflict – harmony as strategy for development politics – ethics how do we regulate quality process and product control of the product – continuous change and learning perspective on systems development implemented in methods and methodologies

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN What is Participatory Design? aims to make the users have control of their tools and of the way they change (as the work change)  autonomy and responsibility in the work situation at the work situation (and work place) level, systems development can contribute by emphasizing  functionality as result (use situation & use context)  designers’ responsibility for use (accountability) at the organization and social level  individual, local action link to collective, global concerns through strategy, action, debate?

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Does it make a difference? at the work situation (and work place) level (Florence):  Functionality as result rather than starting point the use situation & context as basis for design of the system based on skilled performance of action (like work, balancing standardization/flexibility) based on professional knowledge (durability, control)  Responsibility for the use situation (accountability) designing a part of a use situation—not just a gadget, a thing open up for challenges of design ideas open up for accountability (not distant, general, abstract...)

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN User participation in systems development is established as valuable (techniques/practices & politics) theory differs from practice degree of involvement varies Scandinavian characteristics: democratic work life respect for users’ expertice vary with respect to politics and interdisciplinarity  users participate in many phases of systems development, as co-designers

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN Challenges to the Scandinavian tradition of PD globalised work life globalised work market inter-organizational systems global technology – local use continuous change of IS integration of generations ICT intra / extra / internet changing view on time & space changing view on work (play, learn) cultural changes (ex. individual vs collective) etc....

Tone Bratteteig “Participatory design — Scandinavian tradition” Feb IN some references Florence: Bjerknes m.fl. (1985): Gjensidig læring, Florence report no 1,IFI/UIO Bjerknes & Bratteteig (1987): Å implementere en ide, Florence report no 3, IFI/UIO Bjerknes & Bratteteig (1987): Florence in Wonderland. System Development with Nurses, in Bjerknes et al. (eds): Computers and Democracy. A Scandinavian Challenge, Avebury, Aldershot Bjerknes & Bratteteig (1987): Perspectives on description tools and techniques in system development, in Docherty et al (eds): System Design for Human Development and Productivity: Participation and Beyond, North-Holland, Amsterdam Bjerknes & Bratteteig (1988): Memoirs of two survivors, in Proceedings of CSCW, ACM Bratteteig (1997): Mutual Learning. Enabling cooperation in systems design in Braa & Monteiro (eds): Proceedings of IRIS'20 Skandinavian tradition: Bjerknes & Bratteteig (1995): User Participation and Democracy. A Discussion of Scandinavian Research on System Development, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, vol 7 no 1, April 1995