A Set of Heuristic Measurements for Evaluating the Inclusiveness of a Technology

Abstract

At a high level of abstraction, 'social inclusion' can be defined as the extent to which an individual or community can fully participate in society and control their own collective destiny. There are large disparities in this, particularly in underdeveloped rural areas of the world. Information and communication technologies designed to address this disparity must take into account the many barriers in the use of technology that these communities face. We define an 'inclusive technology' as a technology which overcomes the barriers to using technology inherent within a given community and increases the opportunities available to that community. We propose a conceptual model and a set of heuristic measurements for examining the 'inclusiveness' of a technology with respect to a given community, and illustrate their use by applying them to two real-world projects. By proposing this model and set of measurements, we hope to achieve a better understanding of 'development projects' and create a systematic process and a framework to assist software engineers in designing and evaluating software based services intended to reduce the Digital Divide.Please use the following format when citing this chapter:

Meeting user needs in national healthcare systems: lessons from early adopter community pharmacists using the electronic prescriptions service

“…To meet user needs in terms of system design, users are often involved in the system development process [38]. Applying user-centric principles, such as user-centred design, which moulds the design of the system to suit its intended users, is recognised as best practice [39].…”

“…In our findings, CP professionals’ needs were not met, particularly in how the system was designed so they had to find ways to adapt them to their needs. The usability and user experience issues identified did not conform with key facilitators of technology adoption such as ease of use and compatibility [ 9 , 38 ]. While an explanation of the unintended uses could be attributed to CPs collective resistance to change, it does not appear as if the system was tailored to their needs in the first place, which is a key facilitator of technology adoption.…”

“…While reasons such as lack of technical and other forms of support, no added value in terms of finance, or even resistance to change could be explanations for why CPs could not interact effectively with the design of EPS2 [ 9 , 20 , 38 ], active user-involvement could be another explanation. Firstly, in terms of dispensing directly from screens, CPs elected to print and dispense from tokens because various usability requirements such as equipment sharing, job sharing, multi-tasking, and providing advisory slips to patients made dispensing directly from screens challenging.…”

YOUTHS’ SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD WITH INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES: TOWARD AN ICT FOR DEVELOPMENT QUALITY MODEL

“…In this study, the importance of these factors is applied to the ICT4D quality model (Pitula, 2010). However, while in a previous study the model were used in elaborating the set of ICT-specific tools, resources and skills that comprise a given project to ensure that they are appropriate for the targeted rural community (Pitula and Radhakrishnan, 2007), the present paper draws on the ICTs quality model to explain why ICTs must be understood within the sociodynamics of a system's sustained use in a community if they are going to contribute to any meaningful development, to sustainable livelihood and to any measurable benefits to the community, particularly its youth. Initially, the models proposed by Pitula (2010) emphasize the interaction of numerous factors in the actual operation and use of ICTs for development in communities.…”

“…In summary, we recognize a set of factors that an ICT4D project should possess in order to increase its likelihood of achievement. In a previous report, this set of factors for the ICT4D quality model were applied in describing the set of ICT-specific tools, resources and skills that should be included ina given project to guarantee that they are appropriate for the rural society concerned (Pitula and Radhakrishnan, 2007).…”