A project inside Strategic Design module with the lecturer Tom Inns.
We develop a concept to defend Dundee as Europe Capital of Culture for the year 2016. We also should design a workshop to involve citizens, policy makers and other stakeholders in the planning and making of such event.
Check the final result:
Awesome graphs and motion design from Navid Gornall (take note of this name).
Design Ethnography is not just about discover, is also about how to communicate findings, insights and conclusions in a straightforward way.
At the Strategic Information Design module our challenge was to get WithScotland message across the a quite broad audience they intent to reach – from academics, practitioners and other professionals deeply involved in child and adult protection to the mainstream public who might be interest in the area.
Align a very diverse team – 5 people, 3 different courses, 4 different nationalities
Be very careful with terminology due to the delicate field (child and adult protection)
Respect WithScotland brand parameters
Align level of quality, the skills of the group and a tight schedule
This is the final result chosen by the client as the best of the final solutions.
We would like to thank Beth Smith, Director of WithScotland for her trust, support and feedback. We also want to thank Megan Robertson for her outstanding voice, Setuniman and FreeSound for the soundtrack. We also want to thank Flickr and the following photographers: Frank Guido, Davide Cassanello, Adrian Dreßler, Josep Ma. Rosell, Maessive and Stefano Corso.
Thank you very much for your support through Creative Commons.
Of course they are not against research – for those who do not know Don is the “Norman” on Nielsen Norman Group – one of the biggest and most influential research institutes in the world and he helped to define what HCD is nowadays.
What I think is that disruptive innovations are not common and organizations need to know, get inspired and connect with people, so research is crucial. However, trapping people into a lab-like aquarium and watch a discussion while eat snacks will not be very helpful.
I have moderated many “focus groups” with a diverse range of objectives. From exploring a very abstract concept and its relation to transportation, to very concrete testing where was hard to tell what was prototype and what was a working product. For me the worst part was always the lack of context. Small comments that in a contextual situation (such as house visits) would lead to a conversation around a pan, a ring or a bible ended or simply never happened because the “hook” for the conversation was not there.
Cost effective - You can have a relatively big group of people coming to a facility and giving answers.
Time effective - You can interact with 16 or even more people in a single day, a lot compared to house visits for example.
Proven method - It is somehow traditional and known at the clients side. Way easier to understand than more less traditional methods.
Their proposal is to develop a more empathetic kind of focus group. Do it in other environments, having researchers, designers, participants and clients together in a more natural conversation. Use rough prototypes to stimulate conversations and so on. Have a look on Gravity Tank’s lecture and gather some tips for future focus groups.
In 2009 I was living in Curitiba and kind of bored. I found a challange online to design a mobile phone concept for the year 2020. You know, 2020 is the new 2000 in the collective mind for when-cool-things-gonna-happen.
This is just an exploration, a couple of ideas about how things might be in a couple of years from now. I really believe one of the “next big things” for the mobile world will be these “hardware apps”. The smartphone will not be a box with everything inside, but several devices connected that can be embedded in the same artifact or spread in one’s body.
Bruce Nussbaum, a the big responsible for the presence of term design thinking (and by consequence design) in the business agenda in the last couple of years also wrote about design thinking been a failed experiment in 2011.
I think both have a huge point. “Design thinking” have reached such level as a buzzword that it kind of get us tired of it. As I have said other times when I got involved in arguments about design thinking been something new or not, if it is valid or not, bla bla bla. For me it was always about finding people who were doing a better design, more empathetic and human centered than the use of the term “design” (an expression even more misused than “design thinking”).
A compilation of outstanding Russian dash-camera videos.
As we sometimes forget technology are tools serving people. People inhabit certain contexts that are important for what they choose or avoid to use. These contexts are made of different factors, but the global/local cultures are crucial to understand why certain innovations arise, are adopted and kept, or vanish away. Therefore, the right innovation needs the right context to flourish.
Just like living creatures in nature, new products/services are trying to survive following rules that resemble natural selection. If in Darwin’s theory the environment plays a major role – with predators, mating rituals and food scarcity – at the innovation field the socio-cultural context is the “environment” determining who thrives an who vanishes. In this particular case the Russian historical, social, cultural, juridical and economical context are setting a stage where small digital cameras fit perfectly.
The good thing about it is that using tools from social sciences (such as ethnography) we can study these socio-cultural contexts using findings to design products/services to fit in these scenarios. Is as if species could plan beforehand how they should be to have better chances of success in a certain environment. True intelligent design.
Now that we had this deep impact on the culture of visual documentation, maybe the habit of 24/7 footage arise in other countries, both to better deal with lawsuits, or just to be ready in case pure awesomeness knocks at your door.
UPDATE: Why is it not happening in Brazil?
With the famous corrupt police and technology adoption Brazil should be doing the same thing as Russia. Right? Maybe not.
I guess this phenomenon is not happening in Brazil because of the cultural context. Bribing is usually carried by the person committing the infraction, being the least interested on document it.
Talking about traffic fee for example. Usually the owner of the car is the one trying to get out of the situation. The driver would be the one using the famous “jeitinho Brasileiro” (Brazilian workarounds) to bribe the police officer avoiding a more severe fee.
As far as I know Brazilian corruption have a subtle, almost friendly spirit. A police officer will never openly ask a driver for money, instead what happens is a favor exchange. Starting with a small double-sense chit-chat to feel if the other side would prefer an “alternative solution”. This bribe is called “o dinheirinho da cerveja” or just “pra cervejinha“, which means just a change for a couple of beers (of course many times it is way more than that).
Roberto DaMatta is one of the most respected Brazilian anthropologists and wrote a lot about this behavior.
David Brooks talking about how our emotions and social skills should be important than rationality. Interesting, but risky considering what guys like Dan Ariely and Dan Gilbert can say about how irrational and dumb our decision making is.