Design games as a tool, a mindset and a structure Kirsikka Vaajakallio

The levels of knowledge introduced in the game show how the participants
were not just performers acting according to a predefined storyline,
but also sourcers who introduced topics for the performance, thus
influencing the turns that the final storyline encompasses. Anyway, the
researchers can be considered the main producers in the Project Planning
Game because they had strong control over the game setting. A somewhat
different approach was taken in the other two design games, where
the participants were the main sourcers and producers in turn, as demonstrated
next.
In the Character Game, the invited participants became sourcers when
they, first, told their personal stories, second, during the design game
when they reflected on their own interests and experiences related to
the evolving game and role-playing, and third, when they brought in their
professional and personal insights to guide the idea generation following
the intensive role-playing part. While constructing the game world
and creating the scenarios, they functioned mainly as producers by making
connections between their own professional knowledge, other participants’
insights and the design game material representing fragments
of the senior world. When improvising the scenarios, everyone expect
the facilitator, who acted as a producer throughout the gathering, was a
performer. The dynamic relationships between being a sourcer, producer
and performer in the Character Game are an excellent illustration of the
mixed roles typical of co-design gatherings.
In all design games the starting point for the discussion is provided by
the design game and the core performance is more or less dependent on
the players’ input. For instance, even though contextual photos and seniors’
quotations triggered reactions in the Character Game, personal experiences
and values along with the professional knowledge that people
brought into the performance were the main means for learning during
the gathering. Different perspectives and insights were needed to push
the participants to reformulate the design task and come up with meaningful
design drivers and personal discoveries.
5.3.4
Letting
user
and
interest
group
input
dominate
the
performance
Participant 1: “I would continue considering the colour coding and
would place this [quotation card] over there [to the illustration of the
future senior house on the wall].” Participant 2: “I need to tell a story.
I was in usability tests…” Colour coding prompts related memories
concerning usability tests and how people are confused when they
step outside the elevator about whether they are on the vright floor
or not. This evokes discussion on possible solutions, such as using
painted numbers on the floors as guidelines. (KONE / Character
Game, March 2009, translated from Finnish)
192