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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fig. 1 W: “Oh, Arabia’s toilet container which are leaking. Ok. (Pretends to calling somewhere) Can I get a contact to the Putkivuorio, the supplier, please? The school attendant from the Snelman’s elementary school, hello. The 4th floor’s toilet’s water container is broken. I don’t know the model but it is roundish not angular. Can I have a new container for that? It’s at Albert’s side of the school building and girl’s toilet. Ok, thank you. As soon as possible, please.” W: “Then I press this button to save the conversation and another button to convert it into text mode and at the same it turns it to an order.” A clip from a video recording illustrates how ageing worker acts out possible use scenario with the Make Tools. 1 Design collaboration As the term co-design suggests, ideas are not generated by the users, designers or researcher alone but in the interaction between several people representing different backgrounds and skills. With the Situated Make Tools, the ageing workers became momentarily equal as designers with the researchers. It was noticed that the workers never stopped the action to initiate idea generation, though they were advised to do so. This emphasized the researcher as an opportunity seeker in the midst of the action and the initiator of idea generation who asks the user to reflect on what has been observed and how that could be changed. By giving the power to the workers to build mock-ups based on their personal experiences allowed them to describe functionalities and scenarios they found valuable. They did not need to be taught how to use mock-up because they were the designers. 2 The following papers, where I am one of the authors, discuss Active@work and Situated Make Tools: Vaajakallio, K. & Mattelmäki, T. (2007). Collaborative Design Exploration: Envisioning Future Practices with Make Tools. Proceedings of Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces (DPPI07). University of Art and Design Helsinki, 223–238. Mattelmäki, T., Vaajakallio, K. & Ylirisku, S. (2007). Active@work- Design dealing with social change. Online proceedings of the Include conference 2007. London: Helen Hamlyn Research Center, RCA. http://www.ektakta.com/include_proceedings/ Ylirisku, S. & Vaajakallio, K. (2007). Situated Make Tools for envisioning ICTs with ageing workers. Online Proceedings of the Include conference 2007. London: Helen Hamlyn Research Center, RCA. http://www.ektakta.com/include_proceedings/ Ylirisku, S., Vaajakallio, K., Buur, J. (2007). Framing innovation in co-design sessions with everyday people. Online Proceedings of Nordic Design Research (Nordes07). Stockholm, Sweden: http:// www.nordes.org/upload/papers/104.pdf Mattelmäki, T. & Lehtonen (current Vaajakallio), K. (2006). Designing alternative arrangements for ageing workers. Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference (PDC 2006). ACM, 101–104. 23
Creative interplay between current practices and future opportunities With Situated Make Tools it was possible to study people’s practices in parallel with making a design intervention. New understanding was produced in the assumed use context, and it was grounded to those people’s interpretation design concepts were targeted to. Being in a possible use context maintained the link between the current practises and the envisioned situations, as Buur and Søndergaard (2000) have also claimed. When observing with eyes open for change instead of being eyes open for observing, the context evoked new ideas and opportunities for the researchers as well (see more Vaajakallio & Mattelmäki 2007). The stance taken by the researchers at the study was to listen first what the ageing workers proposed and then address his/her own suggestions evoked by the observations, to test ideas immediately with the workers. Facilitators’ roles are discussed more thoroughly in the next chapters. What can be considered as a possible shortcoming of the approach is the exceptionally dynamic and unpredictable setting that is difficult to control: the enacted scenarios took place in various locations, outdoors and indoors, inside one building or between many buildings. Another possible shortcoming is the resources required since only one user participated at a time; hence there were as many gatherings as there were involved users. The improvisational character of the Situated Make Tools raises a question about how well these types of sessions can be planned beforehand without losing the sensitivity towards arousing design opportunities that at least partly result from being continuously alert. 2 Design materials as tools in ideation As stated by Ehn and Kyng (1991), even simplest mock-ups can create hands-on-experiences and, besides designers’ idea generation, support users’ thinking as well. Their unfinished nature can be seen as an advantage since it distinguishes them from real objects; people see them as ideation tools instead of considering them as representations of the final design (ibid.). We noticed that the Make Tools were abstract enough to be understood as a design language but concrete enough for the workers to offer insights on mobile technology. For instance, a woman from the cleaning maintenance staff reflected upon a recent phone call from an unsatisfied client while envisioning properties for a dream device (Vaajakallio & Mattelmäki 2007). Although having the open-character Make Tools guided discussion and thinking; they were created based on early assumptions of alternative design opportunities, consequently limiting the solution space as well. For example, one of the maintenance men came up with an idea of a smart vest, but he couldn’t demonstrate his vision with the provided design material. The form of a mock-up he was able to build likely influenced his idea on how to use the device, as we discussed in (Ylirisku et al. 2007). 3 24
Page 1 and 2: 5mm Design games as a tool, a minds
Page 3 and 4: Aalto University publication series
Page 5 and 6: Chapter 3: Diving into games, play
Page 7 and 8: This thesis has been made possible
Page 10: Chapter 1 Setting the stage for co-
Page 13 and 14: When I started my research, my view
Page 15 and 16: three terms throughout the disserta
Page 17 and 18: claring my preconceptions and the w
Page 19 and 20: Setting the stage for co-design: Th
Page 21: The observational part aimed at est
Page 25 and 26: My research approach follows the
Page 27 and 28: The methods developed for sharing k
Page 29 and 30: Based on our experiences, we propos
Page 31 and 32: As for sharing experiences during t
Page 33 and 34: All three gatherings aimed at ident
Page 35 and 36: the core spirits and values of Desi
Page 37 and 38: The cases introduced above followed
Page 39 and 40: Creative interplay between current
Page 41 and 42: Johnston (1998/2005, p 69) has poin
Page 44: Chapter 2 Direct and indirect user
Page 47 and 48: see user experience as a complex se
Page 49 and 50: By considering users’ creative in
Page 51 and 52: material”, I continue from that b
Page 53 and 54: part of collaborative design) is, s
Page 55 and 56: the UK, and there are more market-o
Page 57 and 58: What I find worth of further studie
Page 59 and 60: According to Wright and McCarthy (2
Page 61 and 62: in its aims of eliciting inspiratio
Page 63 and 64: Contextual approaches in performing
Page 65 and 66: Above I pointed out some of the ben
Page 67 and 68: Sensitising in empathic design ofte
Page 69 and 70: example through the performance. Ma
Page 71 and 72: are intertwined: since the stage is
Page 73 and 74:
ative was a story about an archaeol
Page 75 and 76:
sign partners are not professional
Page 77 and 78:
as inspiration and empathic underst
Page 79 and 80:
Fig.17 In this dissertation, when I
Page 81 and 82:
The selection of props is relevant
Page 83 and 84:
enhancing the creativity of ordinar
Page 86:
Chapter 3 Diving into games, play a
Page 89 and 90:
Design games: As a research tool. F
Page 91 and 92:
Like concept design games organizat
Page 93 and 94:
(2000) have proposed a technique ca
Page 95 and 96:
96 methods for this category typica
Page 97 and 98:
designing involves agreement-making
Page 99 and 100:
about qualities, but instead focus
Page 101 and 102:
utilized card based approaches in s
Page 103 and 104:
with someone who is employed by the
Page 105 and 106:
size and amount of video-cards can
Page 107 and 108:
ut not be overwhelming, and so fort
Page 109 and 110:
Common qualities for all design gam
Page 111 and 112:
or revelations may emerge. These in
Page 113 and 114:
ing the introduction speech, consid
Page 115 and 116:
“In one case games are systematic
Page 117 and 118:
ut it still has all the essential c
Page 119 and 120:
According to Caillois (1961, p 5),
Page 121 and 122:
as artistic events, many of them sh
Page 123 and 124:
e-invention: betwixt and between. I
Page 125 and 126:
It could be claimed that the notion
Page 127 and 128:
The critique that Ehn and Sjögren
Page 129 and 130:
emained the same, the players have
Page 131 and 132:
materials. As such, design game is
Page 134 and 135:
This chapter discusses how the Play
Page 136 and 137:
(discussed in pages 94-96); in that
Page 138 and 139:
Fig. 31 The phases are partly overl
Page 140 and 141:
Since the approach emphasis on desi
Page 142 and 143:
4.3 The three cases: Seeking for ne
Page 144 and 145:
methods as well. In the Project Pla
Page 146 and 147:
The methods placed under different
Page 148 and 149:
The difficulties in encouraging par
Page 150 and 151:
Some of the personal discoveries ma
Page 152 and 153:
whereas in the first time the metho
Page 154 and 155:
out-of-box thinking in co-design. I
Page 156 and 157:
services. The Extreme Design case s
Page 158 and 159:
3 Experiences that the participants
Page 160 and 161:
As was illustrated, the development
Page 162 and 163:
4.4 The fun of playing Fig. 43 Desi
Page 164 and 165:
Fig. 45 A sequence of the game: Nin
Page 166 and 167:
which the turn to introduce a scena
Page 168 and 169:
a radio play by taking the characte
Page 170:
4.5 Between a process overview and
Page 174 and 175:
This chapter discards the chronolog
Page 176 and 177:
the places of the cards, and throug
Page 178 and 179:
5.2 Leaving visual traces: material
Page 180 and 181:
happen in the magic circle that is
Page 182 and 183:
action in the Character Game, a spe
Page 184 and 185:
presented earlier, we may analyse t
Page 186 and 187:
words, everyone had mixed roles as
Page 188 and 189:
simultaneously. The emphasis given
Page 190 and 191:
During the design games, the discus
Page 192 and 193:
The notion that people are easily c
Page 194 and 195:
Fig. 58 Participants started to go
Page 196 and 197:
and one from YIT, referred as Playe
Page 198 and 199:
5.3.8 Insights through role-play On
Page 200 and 201:
Player 4: “I have my mobile phone
Page 202 and 203:
As has been mentioned previously, r
Page 204 and 205:
Like Hannu and Nina, who began joki
Page 206 and 207:
Planning Game, mainly utilised desi
Page 208 and 209:
dependent from the overall applicat
Page 210 and 211:
ous people and what information is
Page 212:
epresentations such as co-construct
Page 216 and 217:
Whereas metaphors are useful in gui
Page 218 and 219:
framework, this theoretical backgro
Page 220 and 221:
6.1.1 Design games as a tool As Kei
Page 222 and 223:
ery design researcher designs an ap
Page 224 and 225:
printouts given to the participants
Page 226 and 227:
The purpose of role-immersion, for
Page 228 and 229:
6.2.1 Reflection on research aims I
Page 230 and 231:
1 2 3 The Project Planning Game str
Page 232 and 233:
the design purposes, but, since I w
Page 234:
As has been discussed in relation t
Page 237 and 238:
Fulton Suri, J. (2003). Empathic de
Page 239 and 240:
Sanders, E.B.-N. (2002). From User-
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?