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

material”, I continue from that by focusing on what actually are the core
qualities of design games. However, before going into them, this chapter
prepares the ground by introducing the background for co-design; as it
has evolved from user-centred design to user experience design, perspectives
to co-design, and how empathic design is part of the way co-design
is organized in my research. As I have already touched upon some of
those issues, I will next discuss the confusion in the terminology concerning
participation in design, which results from the tradition, discipline,
and community where authors belong or contribute to (Mattelmäki
& Sleeswijk Visser 2011, p 7).
In their recent article Lost in co-x: Interpretations of co-design and
co-creation Mattelmäki and Sleeswijk Visser (2011) address the terminological
challenge caused by several overlapping terms with co-design,
including co-creation and participatory design (PD). The aim of their
article is to clarify the use of the concepts in design research and related
fields (for example marketing that is connected to service design).
They summarise the various uses of co-design and co-creation as follows
(ibid., p 11): “Co-design is a process and the planning, adjusting tools
and facilitation is built on a mindset based on collaboration. Co-creation
can take place within co-design processes but focuses much more on the
collective creativity of involved users and stakeholders.”
In their mapping, Mattelmäki and Sleeswijk Visser (ibid.) looked, for
example, at the way Sanders and Simons (2009) use the concept of co-design,
referring to collective creativity during a design process, co-creation
being a particular case of collaboration aiming at creating something unknown.
Sanders and Simons (2009) propose that co-creation may occur
within communities, among organizations, in B2B context, and between
companies and the people they serve. It may also take place throughout
the design process.
One of the sources in Mattelmäki’s and Sleeswijk Visser’s article (2011)
was Cottam and Leadbeater (2004, p 22), who describe co-creation of services
as a “creative and interactive process which challenges the views of all
parties and seeks to combine professional and local expertise in new ways”.
According to them, co-creation could provide means to challenge traditional
thinking on economical and social issues, thus leading to new innovations.
Thackara (2006, p 223) uses the term co-design approximately
the same way: “Collaborative design means finding ways to share a vision of
a system among all its actors and stakeholders as the system evolves.”
One of the approaches often related to co-design and co-creation is participatory
design, where common interests are shared in involving users actively
in the creative design process. Participatory design, which emerged
in Scandinavia in the 70s, emphasises user involvement in design, arising
from a political ideology to empower workers and labour unions in workplace
design. According to Mattelmäki and Sleeswijk Visser (2011), while
52