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

2.3
Tangible
props
in
design
dialogue
2.3.1
Balance
between
abstract
and
concrete
ing the co-design, as will be discussed next.
Visual and tangible representations in general are typical tools to outline
alternatives in design. Säde (2001) writes that they put designers into the
role of communicator within a multidisciplinary design team. As the theatre
and role-play oriented co-design activities discussed above illustrate,
tangible artefacts have a special role in performance to support role-taking,
acting and imagination. Next I will discuss some of their properties
in more detail in regard to facilitating co-design.
To start with, the terminology concerning various artefacts utilised in
design may be confusing, as pointed out by Westerlund (2009, pp 45–48),
due to the distinct disciplinary domains, the intention of the artefact, and
the stage of the design process. In general, design representation may be
used to describe all types of artefacts: from drawings through tangible
mock-ups and demonstration models to working prototypes. In early
concept design, tangible and visual representations should be cheap to
produce and invite further elaboration (Ehn & Sjögren 1991). They are
typically unfinished and rough in nature, aimed, for instance, to evoke
new ideas, to trigger memories and feelings, to support negotiation
among distinct perspectives, to point out and test alternatives, or to build
a common design language for a design team.
As I focus on early concept design, the artefacts should be rather
anonymous and open for new interpretations. Therefore, I use mainly the
terms design materials or props to describe them. The concept of props
originates in the context of theatre where they refer to artefacts used by
the actors to support performance. Similarly, in enacted forms of design,
like when acting out scenarios, props together with the surroundings,
movement, and verbal expressions convey the central ideas, being tightly
connected to the context where they appear. Design material is seen in
this dissertation mainly in two ways: 1) as a mock-up to be, referring to
the “building blocks” that are used to create a some sort of tangible representation
or documentation of participants’ discussion during the codesign
session; and 2) as design game material representing fragments of
user data or to share and explore an individual’s insights. Fundamentally,
both terms refer to an artefact the meaning and form of which, and what
they can do, are not yet fixed, differentiating them from more developed
prototypes. Since different types of artefacts can be used for distinct purposes,
I will use the original terms when I refer to other authors’ work.
One debate related to tangible design representations in co-design concerns
the optimal level of abstraction. It has been proposed that these representations
should be concrete enough to support communication but
abstract enough to allow freedom for creativity (Säde 2001). The concrete
– abstract relationship depends on whether they are used as illustrations
of designers’ ideas to generate feedback, or props to evoke new design pos-
79