CO/DEsign: building a shared dialogue around analysis within co-design

Abstract

In times of rapid social, economic, environmental and technological change designers can play a valuable role by applying their creativity to catalyse innovative solutions to address complex problems. As they do so, it becomes apparent they need to ask fundamental questions about what they make, how they make it, and who for. The mindsets and postures of designers often go unnoticed and unacknowledged, but they profoundly influence what is identified as a problem and how it is framed and addressed. This paper draws upon a research project titled 'CO/DEsign', which explores the application of agile co-design methods in an endeavour to understand and identify the most appropriate approach for rigorous analysis. The 'CO/DEsign' project argues that, while it is important to draw upon other disciplines and borrow methods such as thematic analysis, further methods should be developed that better represent and support designers and their approaches.

Participatory codesign of patient involvement in a Learning Health System: How can data‐driven care be patient‐driven care?

“…Dependability, referring to the stability of findings, also clashes with the participatory focus on ongoing dialogue that could lead to changes over time. In the field of Design, methods are evaluated based on the extent to which they enable participants to explore their own needs, and support collective meaning‐making, 24,50 which we argue was achieved here. In the PPI literature, authors have suggested that trustworthiness in the context of two‐way learning is about answering the question ‘did the interaction lead to a change?’ 51 and transparently reporting changes in the researcher's thinking 52 rather than about evidencing contributors' thoughts.…”

“…After each workshop, the lead researcher completed field notes and shared a written summary of the discussions, which contributors could add to or revise. Workshops were not audio‐recorded, to focus more on active recording of feedback within the workshop, as interactive design tools can capture richer data compared to transcripts in codesign settings 24 …”

“…Workshops were not audio-recorded, to focus more on active recording of feedback within the workshop, as interactive design tools can capture richer data compared to transcripts in codesign settings. 24 By engaging in codesign with public contributors with considerable experience of patient involvement practice, the workshops would draw on previous experience of barriers and facilitators to involvement to generate hypothetical mechanisms for optimal involvement in the LHS. A further goal was to agree on important impacts or attributes that would serve as indicators for a 'fully functioning patient-centred LHS' as an expansion on the original…”

Conducting Co-Design with Older People in a Digital Setting: Methodological Reflections and Recommendations

“…Inductive thematic analysis was performed by the research team using the data transcripts [ 24 ]. This inductive method was chosen for its lack of assumptions regarding the patterns of meaning contained within the data [ 24 ] and is a method commonly employed in co-design research [ 25 26 27 ]. Analysis was conducted in parallel with data collection to ensure that any issues raised are explored in co-design sessions in the development of the solution.…”

Le codesign d’une plateforme numérique fondé sur des principes au service de l’agentivité des enseignantes et des enseignants en contexte de développement professionnel | Co-Design of a Digital Platform Based on Principles Supporting Teachers’ Agency in the Context of Professional Development

“…En cohérence avec les approches de design participatif et d'agentivité transformatrice, l'identification des thèmes émergents a été réalisée et négociée pendant les rencontres, plaçant les participantes dans une posture de praticiennes, de chercheuses et de conceptrices : « The design/research blur will be disruptive at first, with arguments going back and forth about who is best suited to do what, which tools and methods belong to whom and how to analyze the data » (Sanders et Stappers, 2008, p. 13). L'analyse a été menée en contexte de design et d'investigation, poursuivant ainsi le dialogue partagé amorcé au niveau de l'analyse des données (Johnson, Ballie, Thorup, Brooks et Brooks, 2017) par une validation à postériori du contenu des grilles produites durant les trois ateliers.…”