| 1. |
- Vink, Josina, et al.
(författare)
-
Designerly Approaches for Catalyzing Change in Social Systems : A Social Structures Approach
- 2021
-
Ingår i: She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation. - : Elsevier. - 2405-8726 .- 2405-8718. ; 7:2, s. 242-261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Given the growing interest in systemic design, there is a demand for de-signerly approaches that can aid practitioners in catalyzing social systems change. The purpose of this research is to develop an initial portfolio of designerly approaches that acknowledges social structures as a key leverage point for influencing social systems. This article presents learnings from experimentation with a host of designerly approaches for shaping social structures and identifies four design principles to guide systemic design practitioners in doing this work. This research contributes to the evolving and pluralistic methodology of systemic design by presenting formats for design activities that take social structures seriously and identifying ways that systemic designers, and other practitioners, can re-entangle themselves in the systems they seek to change.
|
|
| 2. |
- Höök, Kristina, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining Interaction Design by Its Ideals: A Discipline in Transition
- 2021
-
Ingår i: She Ji. - : Elsevier. - 2405-8726. ; 7:1, s. 24-40
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- As a way to capture a broadly acceptable high-level characterization of design, we focus on the guiding values or ideals of the discipline. We first reason from the notion of engineering interfaces for usability and utility up to the 1990s to the current ideal of designing interfaces for experience and meaning. Next, we identify three recent technical and societal developments that are challenging the existing ideals of interaction design, namely the move towards hybrid physical/digital materials, the emergence of an increasingly complex and fluid digital ecology, and the increasing proportion of autonomous or partially autonomous systems changing their behavior over time and with use. These challenges in turn motivate us to propose three directions in which new ideals for interaction design might be sought: the first is to go beyond the language-body divide that implicitly frames most of our current understandings of experience and meaning, the second is to extend the scope of interaction design from individual interfaces to the complex sociotechnical fabric of human and nonhuman actors, and the third is to go beyond predictability by learning to design with machine learning.
|
|
| 3. |
- Khadilkar, Pramod, et al.
(författare)
-
Can Design Be Non-paternalistic? Conceptualizing Paternalism in the Design Profession
- 2021
-
Ingår i: SHE JI-THE JOURNAL OF DESIGN ECONOMICS AND INNOVATION. - : Elsevier. - 2405-8726. ; 7:4, s. 589-610
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Paternalism is an instance of someone making a decision on behalf of someone else. A professional designer can exhibit paternalism through conceptualizing, defining, and selecting current or preferable situations or while finalizing outcomes for stakeholders. Paternalism is thus, a critical ethical dimension related to the design profession. The design academy and community must theorize paternalism if we are to avoid or reduce it. Paternalism may be present at three critical junctures of design decision making. Our three-layer framework examines paternalism as it relates to design process decisions, decisions about participation in design, and normative framework decisions. The circular model represents the hierarchy of paternalistic decision making: any effort to overcome paternalism at the (inner) design level or (middle) participatory level will be ineffective if it is present in the (outer) normative layer. We discuss the extent of possible exhibitions of paternalism and the challenges to avoiding it in decisions at each layer, and contrast these briefly with overtly paternalistic design approaches, such as design for behavior change. We find that design may be inherently paternalistic, at times may need to be that way (in certain contexts especially, where expertise is required for decisions to be made accurately), and that it is up to the individual designer whether they exhibit paternalism in their design decisions or not.
|
|
