Vision labs (original) (raw)
2008, Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Designing for Habitus and Habitat - OZCHI '08
https://doi.org/10.1145/1517744.1517781
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Relational aspects in user-centered design, UCD, are largely overlooked in the literature. We use criticism of UCD to facilitate a discussion of how discourse, activities, and materials give shape to user involvement in design activities. Drawing on experiments with the workshop format for devising innovations and creative solutions with users, we introduce some criteria and points of interest in the development of a workshop format we call Vision Labs.
Related papers
Exploring User-Centred Design in Practice: Some Caveats
Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 2009
This paper provides a nuanced perspective on the topic of user-centred design (UCD) in the humancomputer interaction (HCI) field. After a brief outline of its emergence, we describe some of the central tenets of the approach, using the process model of Gulliksen et al. (Behav Inf Technol 22(6):397-409, 2003) as a welldocumented exemplar. We then examine in more detail some of the difficulties one can encounter in performing user-centred design (UCD), illuminating these issues through vignettes from specific projects in which we have been involved. In this paper, we focus on issues that can arise in working with children and with people of differing mental abilities. Our argument is that, while a user-centred perspective is required at all times in the design team, the forms of participation of users in the design process needs to fit the context and can vary significantly from that presented as the prototypical UCD approach.
The reason for undertaking this research came as a need to understand the users, their interactions and activities in the natural context. Understanding these three factors gives rise to the effective outcomes of design processes. For clarification and validity of this research, the next paragraph and sections will highlight the issues and contributions from different fields of architecture, interaction design, urbanism, psychology, anthropology, healthcare, human-computer interaction, user experience design and business respectively. Humans need to be understood in order for their needs to be met as they are the core of any process. For these needs to be met, the environment they interact with should comply with their activities. One of the many ways this can be achieved is by adhering to the aspect of design that appeals to human needs in the built environment. Where the built environment here refers either the virtual (intangible) and physical (tangible) environment. The most prominent aspect of the human anatomy that appeals more to the design process beyond taste and smell are the auditory, visual and tactile aspect respectively. All these aspects work in unison to enhance the user experience in any given environment, especially the built environment. The attributes of the built environment that combine to form a system, designer should follow to design effective environments are the psychological and the physical attributes, as these should be understood before designing environments for human. Understanding human needs in the natural environment is crucial to creating systems and processes tailored to their needs. For effective representation of information, stressing the need for clarity, simplicity and order is important in addition to making things visible. Though a few things need to be considered such as individual differences and variation in addition to accessibility issues. This will result in a happier and satisfied user, as it will reduce confusion, mis-interpretation, error and ultimately frustration. Over the years, computing has drifted from personal computing to ubiquitous systems which is totally becoming smaller and Intangible making it possible for people to communicate seamlessly. This has created the affordance of designers and researchers to develop systems and processes that support such with the consideration of outliers who are people with special needs or capabilities. People with special needs abound everywhere, but to what extent has their needs been met? This leads the researcher to design with a purpose. Design research is a process employed by designers to solve design problems by seeking to understand human needs, which can be achieved when the researcher takes time to observe and participate in human activities. Researching with outliers and people with special needs is crucial for effective and useful functionality because collaborating with such stake holders gives meaning to inclusive design. Interdisciplinary collaboration and participatory design is crucial to the design process especially in the built environments, and therefore the design process should be seen as an avenue for interdisciplinary learning and inclusion. This invariably brings knowledge of each discipline, group and stakeholder represented to the table. This allows for knowledge sharing leading to the adoption of patterns in a unified manner that draws from the collaborative design process in interdisciplinary teams and collaborative groups.
Co-Designing Visions, Uses, and Applications
An emergent idea in contemporary design discourse is that of users becoming actors in the design processes, especially those of ICT's and digital applications. It is clear however that users, or their wishes or needs, seldom initiate developments, nor are they in a position to suggest design or development processes. Our work concentrates on exploring ways in which the emerging possibilities of digitalization could be discussed, informed and envisioned with nonexperts, before concrete product and business plans enter the stage. We will like to argue that it is possible to envision ways in which design research can give people tools to become more proactive rather than just reactive towards technological development. The paper illustrates some of our work in progress in order to understand this challenges, the work done with different communities, and the lessons learned along the way, in the context of co-designing visions for everyday life applications.
The reason for undertaking this research came as a need to understand the users, their interactions and activities in the natural context. Understanding these three factors gives rise to the effective outcomes of design processes. For clarification and validity of this research, the next paragraph and sections will highlight the issues and contributions from different fields of architecture, interaction design, urbanism, psychology, anthropology, healthcare, human-computer interaction, user experience design and business respectively. Humans need to be understood in order for their needs to be met as they are the core of any process. For these needs to be met, the environment they interact with should comply with their activities. One of the many ways this can be achieved is by adhering to the aspect of design that appeals to human needs in the built environment. Where the built environment here refers either the virtual (intangible) and physical (tangible) environment. The most prominent aspect of the human anatomy that appeals more to the design process beyond taste and smell are the auditory, visual and tactile aspect respectively. All these aspects work in unison to enhance the user experience in any given environment, especially the built environment. The attributes of the built environment that combine to form a system, designer should follow to design effective environments are the psychological and the physical attributes, as these should be understood before designing environments for human. Understanding human needs in the natural environment is crucial to creating systems and processes tailored to their needs. For effective representation of information, stressing the need for clarity, simplicity and order is important in addition to making things visible. Though a few things need to be considered such as individual differences and variation in addition to accessibility issues. This will result in a happier and satisfied user, as it will reduce confusion, mis-interpretation, error and ultimately frustration. Over the years, computing has drifted from personal computing to ubiquitous systems which is totally becoming smaller and Intangible making it possible for people to communicate seamlessly. This has created the affordance of designers and researchers to develop systems and processes that support such with the consideration of outliers who are people with special needs or capabilities. People with special needs abound everywhere, but to what extent has their needs been met? This leads the researcher to design with a purpose. Design research is a process employed by designers to solve design problems by seeking to understand human needs, which can be achieved when the researcher takes time to observe and participate in human activities. Researching with outliers and people with special needs is crucial for effective and useful functionality because collaborating with such stake holders gives meaning to inclusive design. Interdisciplinary collaboration and participatory design is crucial to the design process especially in the built environments, and therefore the design process should be seen as an avenue for interdisciplinary learning and inclusion. This invariably brings knowledge of each discipline, group and stakeholder represented to the table. This allows for knowledge sharing leading to the adoption of patterns in a unified manner that draws from the collaborative design process in interdisciplinary teams and collaborative groups.
This paper describes an innovative approach about sharing insights from user studies with designers. The experiences of real people concerning real product use situations are of great value for designers especially during the earlier phases of the design process. Such information needs be practically useful during idea generation. We believe that this can be realised if the tool supports communication through three qualities: by enhancing empathy, by providing inspiration, and by supporting engagement. We have developed a tool to make the receivers of the information, the designers, participative in the act of communicating. In this way they become cocreators and co-owners of the information, which may result in higher degrees of acceptance and use. The project comprised the design and testing of a tool, a set of cards based on the transcripts from individual users, augmented by cues that invite interpretation. The use of the tool was evaluated in two studies. In one study the use of the card set by designers was explored. In the other study the use of the card set was compared with the use of other tools. The results of the studies suggest that the participatory character of the tool leads designers to a deeper understanding and more intensive use of insights from user studies.
User-designer collaboration during the early stage of the design process
As user involvement becomes a necessary part of the product development process, various ways of accessing users' latent needs have been developed and studied. Reviews of literatures in user involvement and product development have revealed that accessing users' latent needs and transferring them into design process could be facilitated by effectively implementing user-designer collaboration during the early stage of the design process. In this paper, various types of user-designer collaboration were observed and then distinct characteristics of user-designer collaboration were classified into three categories. 1) Passive objectivity, 2) workplace democratisation, and 3) shared contexts were observed as strategies for better user-designer collaboration, which have been employed in the area of user-centred design, user participatory design and design for experiencing. Based on the literature review, this paper proposed a basic collaboration mechanism between the users and the...
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
References (14)
- REFERENCES
- Constantine, L. Beyond User-Centered Design and User Experience: Designing for User Performance, Cutter IT Journal, 17 (2), February, 2004
- Norman, D. A. 2005. Human-centered design considered harmful, Interactions 12, 4 (Jul. 2005),
- Tétard, F, Patokorpi E, and Kadyt!, V. User-Centred Design of Mobile Services for Tourists, Mobile Information Systems, Volume 158/2005.
- Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Boston: Academic Press
- Loch, C. H. and Huberman, B. A. 1999. A Punctuated- Equilibrium Model of Technology Diffusion. Manage. Sci. 45, 2 (Feb. 1999), 160-177.
- Van Kleef, E., van Trijp, H.C.M and Luning, P. Consumer research in the early stages of new product development: a critical review of methods and techniques, in Food Quality and Preference, 16, 2005
- Agre, P.E. Computation and Human Experience, Cambridge University Press, 1997
- Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (Eds.). User centered system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1986
- Dourish, P. 2006. Implications for design. in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 22 -27, 2006
- Tuomi, I. Networks of Innovation: Change and Meaning in the Age of the Internet, Oxford University Press, 2002
- Star SL & Griesemer JR. Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. in Social Studies of Science 19 (4)
- Girard, M. and Stark, D. Distributing Intelligence and Organizing Diversity in New Media Projects, in Environment and Planning A, vol. 34, no 11, November 2002
- Hult, L, Irestig M, Lundberg, J. Design Perspectives Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 21, Issue 1 March 2006
Related papers
Vision labs: seeing UCD as a relational practice
2008
Relational aspects in user-centered design, UCD, are largely overlooked in the literature. We use criticism of UCD to facilitate a discussion of how discourse, activities, and materials give shape to user involvement in design activities. Drawing on experiments with the workshop format for devising innovations and creative solutions with users, we introduce some criteria and points of interest in the development of a workshop format we call Vision Labs.
User Centered Design in the Wild
2011
Modern hi-tech product development is becoming increasingly complex, posing difficulties for achieving technically sound products, that also address the user needs. User Centered Design (UCD) methodologies have been developed, but are not easy to fit into modern industrial practice. We describe UCD practice in new product development (NPD) practice at Oce with a distributed R&D developing high tech products. The UCD professionals are embedded in NPD teams. Specifically we describe the social nature of product development in large close coupled teams, whereby the contribution of specialists is orchestrated whilst developing, and are enacted into prototypes. It was found that boundary objects (like prototypes) that depict the intended outcome strongly contribute UCD, just as boundary experiences . These concern events that can be experienced and reflected on by all specialists involved. To orchestrate the contributions of specialists, a powerful tool is creating a product story . This...
2010
User centred design research methodologies are usually adopted to inform design practice. Here, this paper proposes a case for the potentially key role of design practice, and the value of artefacts, as a fundamental methodological approach to user-centred research. This paper reflects on the evolution of design research and the growing recognition of the value of interdisciplinary user-centred research methodologies in product development. The paper will describe three practice based design research case studies, directed by the author, that highlight the challenges and limitations of more traditional user-centred research methodologies. The paper will demonstrate and help define the role of design as research (critical design), and the key role of artefacts as tools to access tacit knowledge and as an aid to communication in the context of research. There is a wide spectrum of ways in which users are involved in user-centred design activity. Generally users are consulted about their needs and involved at specific times during the design process typically in the early stages to establish requirements and later for usability testing. There currently exists few case studies that challenge and clearly define the value of user engagement in design research and articulates designing as research. This paper presents a case for a user-centred design research method where 'users' and other stakeholders are involved as concurrent partners with the designers throughout the design process.
Users as Designers is the main design philosophy of Waag Society. It states that real users should be the ones to define design requirements. When the user and designer work together according to this design philosophy, they both take on multiple roles throughout the design process. This philosophy relies strongly on empathy, subjectivity of interpretation, personal intuition, human interaction and trust, with research integrated in the development process and development being the focus of its research. By involving prospective users in the design process, the results are likely to bring meaningful perspectives and options into the hands of people. This leads to better systems that are designed with the user in mind. Adoption and appropriation of the results become far more likely than by using traditional methods of development. In this publication, Waag Society focuses on a hands-on description of its methods. Hereby, we hope to spread the use of Users as Designers; improve our own understanding by sharing and learning from the responses, and eventually sowing and growing seeds of change that we hope will flourish.
2011 - Structuring diverging ideas and converging them toward the user-AXIS: A Design Process
This paper proposes a model for human-computer interface design. Design activities are integrated into the early stages of the discovery process to bring stakeholders together and help them reach common goals and explore the project through collaboration. The model offers an environment for dealing with the complexity inherent to the design process when the aim is a human-centered design. The proposed model guides and structures the move around a central axis that represents the evolving users' interests by bringing all stakeholders to collaborate in design activities. Everyone's engagement around that central line, their dialogues and their exchange of information lead to the convergence of viewpoints and to enrichment of project knowledge for the team, more successful design, and development of the project in a timely and more economically efficient manner. INTRODUCTION This paper discusses the problematic of design of human-computer interface (HCI) when a team composed by client, user, designer, and all other stakeholders collaborate. The paper proposes a model where design activities are staged to assist the team to achieve meaningful communications and align their focus on users' needs and wants. The ongoing development and increasing complexity of computer interfaces such as the Internet, or using a software program, impact not only our professional work, but also our social and economic interactions. HCI continually generates new opportunities and problems which design has to address (Löwgren, & Stolterman, 2004). At the same time, unsuccessful design is generally accepted to be a direct result of an inadequate approach at the conceptual level, and in many cases, the inadequate approach is caused by miscommunication, misinterpretation, and lack of understanding among team members (Kleinsmann et al. 2007, Carrara et al. 2009). Being design practitioners and researchers, we presume that design activities have, in the early stages of design process, the potential to bring a diverse team together, help them focus on common goals, and achieve meaningful communication. This also means that the team should meet face-to-face and discuss diverse aspects of the project. As mentioned by Oak (2010), "face-to-face talk is an essential part of the collaborative practice of design, and occurs in tandem with the aforementioned modes of representation and communication (such as sketches and gestures)". In summery this paper outlines how design activities may be used as a method to help the team collaborate efficiently toward usercenteredness. We will discuss the problematic of the research, its methodological approach and the proposed model. We then present how the model was validated.
A Workshop Method that Involves Users Talking, Doing and Making
2007
This paper discusses a workshop method suitable for use in projects with a participatory design approach. Participatory design is sometimes criticised for focusing too much on what users say. The method described here takes that into account by having users not only talk, but also do acting and make lo-fi prototypes. The method has been used in several different projects. The structure of the workshops is designed to enable the participants to express themselves by talking, doing and making. People express different aspects through different channels and by enabling people to express themselves not only by talking but also by acting and constructing artefacts we create a richer understanding of their needs and desires as well as their context and situation. The method often gives ‘good’ results that are foundations for further design work. Index terms – design process, human centred design, methods and tools for idea generation, cooperative design, participatory design, workshops, p...
Users as Subjects in and of Co-Design
2020
Co-design implies the active participation of all stakeholders in the system development process. Users have a double role in this being subjects both in and of co-design – they take an active part in the design and the system is designed for them. This requires a design language that allows users to make meaningful contributions. Common system design languages, such as UML, do not fulfil this requirement. Here we investigate to what extent metaphors can provide an appropriate communicative medium to increase user involvement and how we can translate them into more detailed designs.
Designing with ethnography: a presentation framework for design
1997
Designers of interactive systems often work in environments that am continuously changing. External, uncontrollable change is rapidly becoming a daily impedim~t in many designers' lives. In this age of rapid technologml progression and heightened competition, systems designers must be able to prepare for, cope with, and even pdbrm better because of inevitable change. 13ecauM the nature of user interbce design is to make complicated technology usable, user intedltce designers tve especially afkcted by design changes.
Design Participation Tactics: Redefining User Participation in Design
Proceedings of Design Research Society Wonder …, 2006
How can users take part and what are the potential roles of users in participating in design processes? In which parts of the design processes can users take part and what are the roles of designers and of other stakeholders?
Related topics
Cited by
A typology of strategies for user involvement in innovation processes
Prometheus (St. Lucia), 2020
This paper investigates how an organization can involve users in innovation processes. Based on three case studies and the literature on spaces, user-driven innovations and design management, the paper develops a framework that organizes different types of user involvement strategies. The framework aims to provide a rich understanding of how innovative spaces can be staged under different management strategies. To test the framework, nine SMEs from different Danish industries were selected. The findings show that the framework needs to be flexible in order to accommodate how users can be involved in different contexts and stages of the process. In addition, the study demonstrates various approaches to innovative spaces for involving users and their interests in the company. The framework includes a critique of the one-sided promotion of certain innovation paradigms in the literature. As demonstrated in this paper, different contexts require very different innovation approaches.