Jon Whittle
ABSTRACT
This paper considers the relationship between depth of participation (i.e., the effort and resources invested in participation) versus (tangible) outcomes. The discussion is based on experiences from six participatory research projects of different sizes and durations all taking place within a two year period and all aiming to develop new digital technologies to address an identified social need. The paper asks the fundamental question: how much participation is enough? That is, it challenges the notion that more participation is necessarily better, and, by using the experience of these six projects, it asks whether a more light touch or 'lean' participatory process can still achieve good outcomes, but at reduced cost. The paper concludes that participatory design researchers could consider 'agile' principles from the software development field as one way to streamline participatory processes.
- Acosta, R., Burns, C., Rzepka, W., and Sidoran, J. Applying Rapid Prototyping Techniques in the Requirements Engineering Environment, 1994, Proceedings of Requirements Engineering: 66--74.Google Scholar
- Balka, E. Broadening discussion about participatory design: A response to Kyng, 2010. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 77--84.Google Scholar
- Barreteau, O., Bots, P. W., & Daniell, K. A. A Framework for Clarifying Participation, 2010, Ecology & Society, 15(2):1.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. and Hillgren, P-A. Participatory design and "democratizing innovation", 2010. Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference: 41--50. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carlson, J., Ehn, P., and Sandberg, A. Planning and control from the Perspective of Labour: A Short Presentation of the Demos Project, 1978. Accounting Organizations and Society, 3(3--4).Google Scholar
- Ehn, P. Participation in design things, 2008. In Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Conference on Participatory Design: 92--101. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ferrario, M. A., Simm, W., and Whittle, J. Speedplay: Managing the Other Edge of Innovation, 2013. In Proceedings of Digital Futures.Google Scholar
- Glicken, J. Getting stakeholder participation 'right': a discussion of participatory processes and possible pitfalls, 2000. Environmental Science & Policy, 3(6):305--310.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hand, E. Citizen Science: People Power, 2010. Nature 466(7307): 685--687.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Johannessen, L. K. and Ellingsen, G. Lightweight Methods in Heavyweight Organizations, 2008, Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference: 11--20 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kautz, K. Participatory Design Activities and Agile Software Development, 2010. In J. Pries-Heje (ed.), Human Benefit through the Diffusion of Information Systems Design Science Research: IFIP WG 8.2/8.6 International Working Conference. Springer: 303--313.Google Scholar
- Kensing, F. Methods and Practices in Participatory Design, 2003. ITU Press, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
- Kyng, M. Bridging the Gap Between Politics and Techniques: On the next practices of participatory design. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 2010, 22(1): 49--67.Google Scholar
- Kyng, M., and Mathiassen, L. Systems development and trade union activities, 1982, In Information Society, for Richer, for Poorer, N. Bjørn-Andersen, editor, Amsterdam, North Holland, 247--260.Google Scholar
- Larman, C. Agile and Iterative Development: A Manager's Guide, 2004. Addison-Wesley Google ScholarDigital Library
- Latour, B., Bijker, W., Laredo, P., Woolgar, S., McNally, R., Peters, P., Hommels, A., Duret, M., and Martin, S. PROTEE. Final Report, European Commission, 2000.Google Scholar
- Menzies, R. Developing for autism with user-centred design, 2011. In Proceedings of ASSETS 2011, ACM: 313--314. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Muller, M. J. Participatory design: the third space in HCI, 2003. Human-computer interaction: Development process: 165--185.Google Scholar
- Muller, M., Wildman, D., and White, E. Taxonomy of PD Practices: A Brief Practitioner's Guide, 1993, Communications of the ACM, 36(6): 26--28.Google Scholar
- Nygaard, K., and Bergo, O. T. The trade unions, new users of research. Personnel Review, 1976, 4(2).Google Scholar
- Rittenbruch, M., McEwan, G., Ward, N., Mansfield, T., and Bartenstein, D. Extreme Participation -- Moving Extreme Programming Towards Participatory Design, 2002, Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference.Google Scholar
- Sanders, E., and Stappers, P. Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design, 2008. CoDesign, 4(1): 5--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schwaber, K. Agile Project Management with Scrum, 2004. Microsoft Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ward, B., Lewis, J., Britain, G., Unit, N. Plugging the Leaks: Making the most of every pound that enters your local economy (2002). New Economics FoundationGoogle Scholar
- White, S. and Bray, B. Examining Shared and Unique Aspects of Social Anxiety Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder Using Factor Analysis, 2012. Journal of Autism and Development Disorders 42(5): 874--84.Google ScholarCross Ref
- White, S., Oswald, D., Ollendick, T., Scahill, L. Anxiety in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders, 2009. Clinical Psychology Review: 216--229.Google Scholar
- Winschiers-Theophilus, H., Bidwell, N., and Blake, E. Community Consensus: Design Beyond Participation, 2012, Design Issues 28(3).Google Scholar
Index Terms
- How much participation is enough?: a comparison of six participatory design projects in terms of outcomes
Recommendations
"Participation is not enough": towards indigenous-led co-design
OzCHI '18: Proceedings of the 30th Australian Conference on Computer-Human InteractionParticipatory design seeks to involve users as partners in the design process. However, for traditionally disenfranchised groups participation may not be enough. Over the past year, we've worked with Indigenous leaders and end-users to develop a process ...
Issues of Participation: A Framework for Choices and Compromises
Members of the Participatory Design PD community often raise concerns about participation-participation in what, by whom, and for what purpose? To help determine and answer questions important to participatory practice, the author derived a framework of ...
Designing Together?: Group Dynamics in Participatory Digital Badge Design with Teens
IDC '17: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and ChildrenBalancing the dynamics between industry, academia, and stakeholders in a participatory design (PD) project can be challenging, particularly with teens as design partners. In this reflective case study of digital badge design, we attempt to untangle ...
Comments