Seeing

 Outside  the  Box:  

Using  Cri4cal  Artefacts  to  
Foster  Innova4on  

Simon  Bowen  
February  2010  
>  Lecture  aims  
•  Outline  the  challenge  of  human-­‐centred  innova:on  
•  Discuss  my  cri:cal  artefact  methodology  as  a  way  forward  
Open  a  debate  on:  
•  How  you  might  use  similar  methods  
•  The  role  of  cri:cal  design  within  Par:cipatory  Design  and  
Human-­‐Centred  Design  
Forget  me  Not  Frame  (2004)  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
image  
To  be  con4nued…  
>  Human-­‐Centred  Design  

•  User-­‐centred  design  
•  Designing  for  users  and  use  
•  By  understanding  users’  
prac:ces  and  needs  

•  From  ‘users’  to  stakeholders  

•  Beyond  ‘usability’,  support  
human  endeavour  
•  Human-­‐centred  design  
Josephine,  Henry  Dreyfuss  
>  Understanding  Users,  Stakeholders  
•  Par:cipa:on  as  informants,  co-­‐creators  
•  Par:cipatory  Design  (etc.)  
•  Poli:cal  and  technical  features  of  P.D.  (Ehn  1993):  
–  stakeholders  have  democra:c  right  to  be  included  in  the  design  of  what  
affects  them  and  will  benefit  as  a  result;    
‘happier’  (empowered,  enabled,  valued,  fulfilled)  stakeholders  
–  including  stakeholders  in  design  ac:vi:es  results  in  beSer  products  etc.  
be<er  products/produc?vity  
>  A  Par4cipatory  Design  process  

time

•  Understanding  and  exploring  a  space  of  possibili:es  

•  Converging  to  a  solu:on  
>  Par4cipatory  Design  and  innova4on  

can’t discover this?

•  Limited  to  solu:ons  within  space  of  possibili:es  

•  Innova:ve  solu:ons  may  exist  outside  space  of  possibili:es  
>  The  challenge  of  Par4cipatory  Innova4on  

'If I had asked people what

they wanted, they would have
asked for a better horse’
Henry Ford(?)

•  Designs  that  are  both  innova:ve  and  human-­‐centred  

•  Show  stakeholders  what  could  be  to  (together)  determine  
what  should  be  
•  Provoca:ve  conceptual  designs  (Cri:cal  Design)  
>  What  they  said  about  Forget  Me  Not  Frame  
"the  whole  concept  of  wiping  
someone  out,  I  think  that's  
horrible”  

"they're  just  too  precious  [..]  it's  a  

memory,  you  can't  dispose  of  
memories”  

"I  think  that's  a  good  idea  [..]  we've  

got  lots  of  separated  and  divorced  
friends  [..]  and  they  won't  want  to  
look  at  their  other  ex-­‐half"  

•  Not  wanted  as  a  prac:cal  product  

•  Discussions  informed  designer’s  
understanding  
>  Cri4cal  Design:  Dunne  &  Raby  
>  Cri4cal  Design:  IDEO,  Social  Mobiles  
>  Cri4cal  Design:  Human  Beans  
>  Cri4cal  Design:  Pohflepp,  Sandelin  &  Torstensson  
>  Cri4cal  Artefacts  and  Innova4on  

Cri:cal  Artefacts  (the  outputs  of  Cri:cal  Design):  

•  Not  prac:cal  solu:ons  to  obvious  user  needs  
•  Not  explicitly  intended  for  sale  
•  Provoca:ve,  prompt  reflec:on  
•  Design  for  debate  –  the  end  point?  
•  More  instrumental  use  –  fostering  innova:on?  
•  Artefacts-­‐as-­‐cri:ques:  
–  Suggest  alterna:ve  possibili:es  
–  Reveals  stakeholders’  and  designer’s  limited  assump:ons  
–  Envisage  new  possibili:es  (broadens  the  space)  
>  Example:  Living  Rooms  (2006)    

•  Design  of  the  home  for  tomorrow’s  older  people  

•  Meal  Mates  -­‐>  Biscuit  Tin  Buddies  
Meal  Mates  
Meal  Mates:  workshop  discussion  
Biscuit  Tin  Buddies  
>  (Some)  Methodology:  Artefacts-­‐as-­‐cri4ques  
•  Links  between  Cri:cal  Design  Prac:ces  and  Cri:cal  Theory  
•  We  (stakeholders,  designers)  unwihngly  assume  what  the  
role  and  form  of  design  and  its  products  etc.  can  be,  and  
this  ‘givenness’  limits  what  we  can  do  and  be;  
•  This  ‘design  status  quo’  reflects  a  restricted  set  of  possibili:es  
(social  prac:ces,  applica:ons  of  technology  etc.)  
•  Reflec:ng  on  the  alterna:ve  possibili:es  in  artefacts-­‐as-­‐  
cri:ques,  allows  us  to  recognise  restric:ons  and  envisage  new  
possibili:es  

(Phew!)  
>  Or…  Reflec4ng  on  Alterna4ve  Possibili4es  

critical artefact
time
>  See  New  Possibili4es,  Explore  Broader  Space  

innovative design?
 >  Outline  of  a  method  using  cri4cal  artefacts  

time

workshop 1: workshop 2: workshop 3, 4…: outputs:

stakeholders’ critical revised innovative
artefacts artefacts artefacts product ideas

designing
>  Example:  Digital  Mementos  (2008)    

•  Develop  proposals  for  the  digital  equivalent  of  physical  

mementos    
•  Aroma-­‐mouse  
>  A  Cri4cal  Artefact  Methodology:  
1. PD  with  design-­‐led  par:cipant-­‐observa:on  
2. Uses  cri:cal  artefacts  (artefacts-­‐as-­‐cri:ques)  
3. A  progression  from  provoca:ve  towards  ‘prototypical’  artefacts  
via  designing  to  develop  innova:ve,  human-­‐centred  product  
ideas.  
>  Par4cipant-­‐observa4on  informing  Design  

descriptive insights for

account design
social situation

analysis designing

stakeholders researcher

existing environment
(artefacts, systems, spaces, processes etc.)
>  Designers  as  par4cipant-­‐observers  

existing
environment
existing social situation

stakeholders
designer

designing

transformed social situation

designed
artefact(s)
>  Artefacts  in  Par4cipatory  Design  

Prototypes?:    
•  looks  like,  works  like,  behaves  like,  feels  like  (IDEO)  
•  exploratory  prototypes,  tes:ng  prototypes  

Are  cri:cal  artefacts  prototypes?  

•  converging  to  a  solu:on?  

Prototype:  
“1.  a  first  form  of  something  from  which  other  forms  are  developed  or  copied    
2.  a  typical  example  of  something”  (Oxford  University  Press  2002)  
>  From  Provoca4ve  to  ‘Prototypical’  Artefacts  
•  Prototype  –  sugges:ve  of  design  direc:on  or  des:na:on  
•  Cri:cal  artefacts  provoke  (reflec:on  on  alterna:ves)  
•  ‘Prototypes’  afford  evalua:on  
•  As  designer’s  understanding  increases,  make  artefacts  more  
‘prototypical’  
•  Cri:cal  artefacts  to  ‘open-­‐up’  explora:on  
•  Increasingly  ‘prototypical’  artefacts  to  ‘close-­‐down’  to  solu:on  

activity
intention
exploration testing

artefact
character
provocative prototypical
>  ‘Opening  up’  and  ‘Closing  down’  

activity
intention
exploration testing
artefact
character
provocative prototypical
>  Designing  to  ‘process’  workshop  discussions  
•  Designer  par:cipates  whilst  aSen:on  on  
designing  
•  Understand  context  tacitly  (no  explicit  
descrip:ons  of  context)  
•  Polanyi  (1966)  dwelling  in  stakeholder  
ac:vi:es,  appreciate  in  terms  of  what  is  
designed    
•  Implica:ons:  
–  Last  stage  always  designing  
–  Outputs  are  designed  things,  expressing  tacit  
understanding  
>  Polanyi:  indwelling  
•  Tacit  Knowing:  rela:onship  
between  two  phenomena:  
proximal  and  distal  
•  Proximal  is  appreciated  only  in  
terms  of  the  distal  
•  Making  something  func:on  as  
proximal  in  act  of  tacit  knowing  is  
indwelling  
•  E.g.  using  a  s:ck  as  a  probe  
 >  A  Cri4cal  Artefact  Methodology   time

workshop 1: workshop 2: workshop 3, 4…: outputs:

stakeholders’ critical revised innovative
artefacts artefacts artefacts product ideas
educate
exercise

stakeholders’ understanding

designing

designer’s understanding

contextual
review
>  Summary  
•  Human-­‐Centred  Design  via  stakeholder  par:cipa:on  
•  Par:cipatory  Design  as  exploring  a  ‘space  of  possibili:es’  
•  Innova:on  limited  by  space  of  possibili:es  
•  Show  stakeholders  what  could  be  to  (together)  determine  
what  should  be:  
–  Cri:cal  artefacts  provoke  reflec:on  on  alterna:ve  possibili:es,  reveal  
restricted  assump:ons,  enable  seeing  new  possibili:es  
–  Cri:cal  artefacts  broaden  space  of  possibili:es  
–  Design-­‐led  par:cipant-­‐observa:on  –  designing  to  understand  users  
–  Moving  towards  ‘prototypical’  artefacts  in  broadened  space:  
innova:ve  and  human-­‐centred  

•  How  might  you  use  cri:cal  artefacts  within  your  design  

prac:ce?  
•  How  else  might  cri:cal  artefacts  be  used  in  Par:cipatory  
Design  and  Human-­‐Centred  Design?  
>  Thank  you!          www.simon-­‐bowen.com  
BOWEN,  S.  J.  (2009).  A  cri?cal  artefact  methodology:  Using  provoca?ve  conceptual  designs  to  
foster  human-­‐centred  innova?on.  PhD.  Sheffield  Hallam  University.    
DUNNE,  Anthony  (1999).  Hertzian  tales  -­‐  electronic  products,  aesthe?c  experience  and  cri?cal  
design.  London,  RCA  CRD  Research  Publica:ons.    
DUNNE,  Anthony  and  RABY,  Fiona  (2001).  Design  noir:  The  secret  life  of  electronic  objects.  1st  ed.,  
Basel;  Boston;  Berlin,  Birkhäuser.    
EHN,  Pelle  (1993).  Scandinavian  design:  On  par:cipa:on  and  skill.  In:  SCHULER,  Douglas  and  
NAMIOKA,  Aki  (eds.).  New  Jersey,  Erlbaum  Associates,  41-­‐77.    
FLOYD,  Chris:ne  (1984).  A  systema:c  look  at  prototyping.  In:  BUDDE,  R.,  et  al.  (eds.).  Approaches  
to  prototyping.  London,  Springer  Verlag,  1-­‐18.    
HOUDE,  Stephanie  and  Charles  HILL  (1997).  What  do  prototypes  prototype?  In:  HELANDER,  
Mar:n  G.,  LANDAUER,  Thomas  K.  and  PRABHU,  Prasad  V.  (eds.).  Handbook  of  human-­‐
computer  interac?on.  2nd  ed.,  Amsterdam,  The  Netherlands,  Elsevier  Science  B.V.,  367-­‐381.    
HUMAN  BEANS,  (2006).  Human  beans  [online]  hSp://www.humanbeans.net/.    
POHFLEPP,  SASCHA,  (2006).  Between  blinks  &  bu<ons  [online]  hSp://www.blinksandbuSons.net/.    
POLANYI,  Michael  (1966).  The  tacit  dimension.  1983  Doubleday  &  Company  Inc.  ed.,  Gloucester,  
Mass.  USA,  Peter  Smith.    
SANDELIN,  ERIK  and  TORSTENSSON,  Magnus,  (2008).  Digital  peacock  tails:  Designing  post-­‐op?mal  
electronic  aOre  [online]  hSp://www.unsworn.org/dpt/.