An Evaluation of Participatory Practices in Design Research: Contextual and Practical Differences

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 286 - 313, 20.12.2019

Hatice Kesdi Serkan Güneş

https://doi.org/10.20488/sanattasarim.691156

Cited By: 2

Öz

Participatory design as one of the current approaches in the design research emerged with the demand for democracy at the intersection of the political agenda of the period and the dissemination of the technological infrastructure at workplaces. The participatory approach, first included in the design processes of the information systems, continued its existence as different practices focused on distinctive concerns due to its multidimensional structure that covers issues in political, economic and theoretical perspectives. The variety due to naming deficits of different practices and additional naming for the same practices have caused confusion in participatory design practice and terminology. The study aims to clarify this complexity by classifying the diversity which is the underlying causes of confusion. In this sense, the context of participation and the application areas of design were examined and the conditions that constitute the basis for different practices were investigated by literature review. According to their contextual differences, these different practices, grouped under collaborative design, open design and agonistic approach, were subjected to document analysis as projects. Content analysis categories are the variables taken from the evaluation framework set out in the previous section. As a result of this evaluation indicating the differences in the practices of the three approaches, both the classification was clarified and the effects of the contextual changes on the practices were put forward. Thus, while the results of the evaluation clarify terminology and practice, the evaluation framework guides the designer by emphasizing the points to be considered in practice.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Participatory Design, Application Areas of Design, Collaborative Design, Open Design, Agonistic Approach

Tasarım Araştırmalarındaki Katılımcı Uygulamalara Dair Bir Değerlendirme: Bağlam Ve Pratik Farklılıkları

Öz

Tasarım araştırmalarındaki güncel yaklaşımlardan katılımcı tasarım, soğuk savaş döneminin politik gündemi ile teknolojik altyapının işyerlerinde yaygınlaştırılması çalışmalarının kesişiminde demokrasi talebiyle ortaya çıkmıştır. İlk olarak bilişim sistemleri alanında tasarım süreçlerine dâhil edilen katılımcı yaklaşım, politik, ekonomik ve teorik perspektiflerdeki meseleleri kapsayan çok boyutlu yapısı sayesinde tezahür ettiği her dönemde farklı kaygılara odaklanmış farklı pratikler halinde varlığını sürdürmüştür. Bu farklı isimlerle adlandırılan aynı uygulamalar ya da aynı isimle adlandırılan farklı katılımcı uygulamalar, katılımcı tasarım pratiği ve terminolojisinde bir karmaşaya neden olmuştur. Çalışma, karmaşaya neden olan çeşitliliği sınıflandırıp detaylı olarak betimleyerek bu karmaşaya netlik kazandırmayı amaçlar. Bu anlamda katılımcılık bağlamı ve tasarım uygulama alanları incelenerek farklı uygulamalara zemin oluşturan durumlar literatür taraması ile araştırılmıştır. Bağlamsal farklılıklarına göre iş birlikçi tasarım, açık tasarım ve agonistik yaklaşım altında gruplanan bu farklı uygulamalar, projeler halinde doküman analizine tabi tutulmuştur. İçerik analiz kategorileri, bir önceki bölümde ortaya koyulan değerlendirme çerçevesinden alınan değişkenlerdir. Üç yaklaşıma dair uygulamadaki farkları gösteren bu değerlendirme sonucunda hem sınıflandırma netlik kazanmış, hem de bağlamsal değişimlerin pratikler üzerinde yarattığı etkiler ortaya koyulmuştur. Böylelikle değerlendirme sonuçları terminolojiye ve pratiğe bir açıklık getirirken, diğer yandan ortaya koyulan değerlendirme çerçevesi uygulamada dikkat edilmesi gereken noktaları vurgulayarak tasarımcıya yol gösterir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Katılımcı Tasarım, Tasarım Uygulama Alanları, İşbirlikçi Tasarım, Açık Tasarım, Agonistik Yaklaşım

Kaynakça

• Alhumaidan, H., Lo, K. P. Y ve Selby, A. (2018). Co-Designing With Children A Collaborative Augmented Reality Book Based on A Primary School Textbook. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 15, s.24–36.
• Asaro, P. M. (2000). Transforming Society by Transforming Technology: The Science and Politics of Participatory Design. Accounting Management and Information Technologies, 10, s.257-290.
• Atkinson, P. (2010). Boundaries? What Boundaries? The Crisis of Design in a Post-Professional Era. The Design Journal, 13(2), s.137-155.
• Bannon, L. J. ve Ehn, P. (2013). Design: design matters in Participatory Design. J. Simonsen ve T. Robertson (Ed.), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design içinde (s.37-63). Londra, New York: Routledge.
• Bachore, Z. ve Zhou, L. (2009). A Critical Review of the Role of User Participation in IS Success. Proceedings of the 15th Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Francisco.
• Basballe, D. A., Halskov, K. ve Hansen N. (2016). The Early Shaping of Participatory Design at PDC. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 2016, Aarhus, s.21-24.
• Beck, E. E. (2002). P for Political: Participation is not enough. Scandinavian Journal of Informa¬tion Systems, 14(1), s.77- 92.
• Bekker, M., ve J. Long. (2000). User involvement in the design of Human-Computer Interactions: Some similarities and differences between design approaches. S. McDonald ve G. Cockton, (Ed.), People and Computers XiV: Proceedings of the HCI 2000. içinde (135-147). New York: Springer.
• Bergvall-Kåreborn, B. ve Ståhlbrost A. (2008). Participatory design: one step back or two steps forward?. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 2008, Indiana, s.102-111.
• Bin, G. (2013). A reasoned action perspective of user innovation: Model and empirical test. Industrial Marketing Management, 42, s.608–619.
• Björgvinsson, E. B. (2008). Open-Ended Participatory Design as Prototypical Practice. CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts, 4(2), s.85-99.
• Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. ve Hillgren, P.-A. (2010). Participatory Design and “Democratizing Innovation”. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 2010, Sydney, s.41-50.
• Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. ve Hillgren, P.-A. (2012). Agonistic Participatory Design: Working with Marginalised Social Movements. CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts 8(2-3), s.127-144.
• Bogers, M., Afuah, A. ve Bastian, B. (2010). Users as Innovators: A Review, Critique, and Future. Research Directions Journal of Management, 20(10).
• Bossen, C., Dindler, C. ve Iversen, O.S. (2010). User Gains and PD Aims: Assessment From A Participatory Design Project. Proceeding of Participatory Design Conference 2010, Sydney, s.141-150.
• Bossen, C., Dindler, C. ve Iversen, O.S. (2016). Evaluation in participatory design: A literature survey. Proceeding of Participatory Design Conference 2016, Aarhus, s.151-160.
• Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), s.5-21.
• Buchanan, R. (2001). Design Research and the New Learning. Design Issues, 17(4), s.3-23.
• Cavaye, A.L.M, (1995). User Participation in System Development Revisited. Information & Management, 28, s.311-323
• Clement, A., Griffiths, M. ve van den Besselaar, P. (1992). Participatory Design Projects: A Retrospective Look. Proceeding of Participatory Design Conference 1992, Cambridge, s.81-89.
• Cruickshank, L. ve Atkinson, P. (2013). Closing In On Open Design: Comparing Casual and Critical Design Challenges. Proceedings of the 10th European Academy of Design Conference, Gothenburg.
• Davis, M. (2008). Why do we need doctoral study in design? International Journal of Design, 2(3), s.71-79.
• De Brujin, E. (2011). RepRap: The Viability of Open Design. Open Design Now. Erişim adresi: http://opendesignnow.org/index.html (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018)
• Demir, E., Ekin, G. ve Balaban, M. (2018). Kullanıcı Deneyimi Tasarımı Pratiğinde Katılımcı Tasarım: Dijital Acente Portalı Tasarımında Katılımcı Tasarım Atölyelerinin Kullanılması. UTAK 2018 Bildiri Kitabı, Ankara, s.117-129.
• Desıs Network (2013). Public & Collaborative: Exploring The Intersection Of Design, Social Innovation And Public Policy. Erişim adresi: https://www.desisnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/DESIS_PUBLIColab-Book.pdf (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018)
• Dexter, M., Atkinson, P. ve Dearden, A. (2013). Open Design and Medical Products: Irreconcilable Differences, or Natural Bedfellows?. Proceedings of the 10th European Academy of Design Conference, Gothenburg.
• DiSalvo, C. (2010). Design, Democracy and Agonistic Pluralism. Proceedings of The Design Research Society International Conference, Montreal Üniversitesi, Montreal.
• DiSalvo, C. (2012). Adversarial design. Cambridge, Londra: MIT Press.
• Ehn, P. (1988). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum,.
• Eason, K. (1987). Information Technology and Organizational Change. Londra: Taylor and Francis.
• Franke, N. ve Piller, F. (2004). Value creation by toolkits for user innovation and design: The case of the watch market. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21, s.401–415.
• Gerrard, V. ve Sosa, R. (2014). Examining participation. Proceeding of Participatory Design Conference 2014, Windhoek, s.111-120.
• Greenbaum, J. (1993). PD: A personal statement. S., Kuhn ve M. Muller (Ed.) Special Issue on Participatory Design, Communications of the ACM, 36(4), s.47.
• Ives, B., ve Olson, M. (1984). User Involvement and MIS Success: A Review of Research. Management Science, 30 (5), s.586-603.
• Jonas, W., Meyer-Veden, J. (2004). Mind the gap! – On knowing and not-knowing in design. Bremen: Hauschild-Verlag. Jones, J. C. (1970). Design Methods. Seeds of human futures, Londra: John Wiley & Sons.
• Kensing, F. ve Blomberg, J. (1998). Participatory Design: Issues and Concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 7, s.167–185.
• Kraft, P. ve Bansler, B. (1992). The Collective Resource Approach: The Scandinavian Experience. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 1992, Cambridge.
• Krippendorff, K. (1995). Redesigning design; An invitation to a responsible future. P. Tahkokallio ve S. Vihma (Ed.), Design: Pleasure or responsibility içinde (s.138-162). Helsinki: University of Art and Design.
• Latour, B. (1999). Pandoras Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Lynch, T. ve Gregor, S. (2004). User Participation in Decision Support Systems Development: Influencing System Outcomes. European Journal of Information Systems, 13(4), s.286-301.
• Manzini, E. (1994). Design, Environment and Social Quality: From “Existenzminimum” to “Quality Maximum”. Design Issues, 10(1), s. 37-43.
• Manzini E. (2007). Design Research for Sustainable Social Innovation. R. Michel (Ed.), Design Research Now içinde (s.233- 245). Basel: Birkhäuser.
• Manzini E. (2014). Making Things Happen: Social Innovation and Design. Design Issues, 30(1), s.57-66.
• Miller, S. E. (1992). Political Implications of Participatory Design. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 1992, Cambridge, s.93-100.
• Mouffe, C. (2000). The Democratic Paradox. Londra, New York: Verso.
• Olsson, E. (2004). What Active Users and Designers Contribute in The Design Process. Interacting with Computers, 16, s.377–401.
• Raasch, C., Herstatt C. ve Balka, K. (2009). On The Open Design of Tangible Goods. R&D Management, 39(4), s.382-393.
• Sanders, E. B.-N. (2000). Generative Tools for CoDesigning. S. A. R. Scrivener, L. J. Ball, A. Woodcock (Ed.), Collaborative Design: Proceedings of CoDesigning 2000 içinde (s.3-12). Londra: Springer-Verlag.
• Sanders, E. B.-N. (2002). From User-centered to Participatory Design Approaches. J. Frascara (Ed.), Design and Social Science içinde (s.1-8). Londra: Taylor &Francis.
• Sanders, E.B.-N. (2008). An Evolving Map of Design Practice and Design Research, Interactions, s.13-17.
• Sanders, E. B.-N., Brandt, E., ve Binder, T. (2010). A Framework For Organizing The Tools and Techniques of Participatory Design. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 2010, Sydney, s.195-198.
• Shapiro, D. (2005). Participatory Design: The will to succeed. O. W. Bertelsen, N. O. Bouvin, P. G. Krogh ve M. M. Kyng (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing: Between Sense and Sensibility, Aarhus, Danimarka, s.29-38.
• Sharing Cities (2017). Activating The Urban Commons. Erişim adresi: https://www.shareable.net/sharing-cities (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018)
• Sinclair, M. (2010). The Specification of A Consumer Design Toolkit to Support Personalised Production via Additive Manufacturing (Doktora tezi). Erişim adresi: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134/11051 (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018)
• Star, S. L. ve Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces. Information System Research, 7(1), s.111-34.
• Star, S. L. (2010). This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(5), s.601-617.
• Suchman, L. (2002). Located Accountabilities in Technology Production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), s.91–105.
• Taxen, G. (2004). Introducing Participatory Design in Museums. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 2004, Toronto, s.204-213.
• Tooze, J., Baurley, S., Phillips, R., Smith, P., Foote, E. ve Silve, S. (2014). Open Design: Contributions, Solutions, Processes and Projects, The Design Journal, 17(4), s.538-559.
• van den Besselaar, P. (1998). Democracy and Technological Change: Limits to Steering. R. H. Chatfield, S. Kuhn, M. Muller (Ed.), Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference 1998, Seattle, s.1-10.
• http://wdo.org/about/definition/ (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018) http://pdcproceedings.org (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018) https://reprap.org/wiki/RepRap (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018)
• https://wikihouse.cc/ (Erişim tarihi 10.10.2018)