Conflicts in co-design: engaging with tangible artefacts in multi-stakeholder collaboration

Andersen, Pernille Viktoria Kathja; Mosleh, Wafa Said

doi:10.1080/15710882.2020.1740279

Cited by 27 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a very complex and fragile process, enabling the active presence of people in the design and realization of the common areas is far from obvious, and thanks to this paper, we understand that there is a large gap between intention and realization. Indeed, if it is not well implemented, the involvement of residents can create conflicts [37]. For this reason, the retrospective analysis of the method used primarily on this site has been questioned, adapted and cross-referenced with methods from Sanders [38], Kimbell [39] and Rosanvallon [40].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting Social Interaction through Participatory Architecture. Experimentation, Experience, Evaluation in a Social Housing Complex (Grand’Goule, Poitiers, 1974–2021)

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Has the increase in social life and conviviality commonly imagined by the designers and decision-makers taken place? There are few systematic post-project evaluations of the methods and tools used to answer this question. Therefore, this article wishes to draw lessons from a housing experiment from the end of the 1970s, the Grand’Goule residence in Poitiers, the objective of which was to create a dense social life through design and means of participation. Some devices consisted in the creation of Surfaces d’Activités Partagées (SAPs, shared activities surfaces), which are common spaces where residents can intervene in both the interior design and the function of space itself. In this study, we analyze the Grand’Goule project, which has been displayed as a participative experiment, with the objective of creating a dense social life through original architectural and social devices. We use different sources (interviews of the inhabitants, project owners, and architects, alongside press articles and the architects’ archives) to dissect the practices in order to lead a retrospective analysis of the participative process, its successes and failures. We show that, as a very complex and fragile process, enabling the active participation of people in the design and use of a large-scale architectural project is far from obvious and suffers from several kinds of difficulties. We highlight the gap between initial intentions, final realizations and actual uses in the Grand’Goule project, and how it can inform every participative architectural project.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting Social Interaction through Participatory Architecture. Experimentation, Experience, Evaluation in a Social Housing Complex (Grand’Goule, Poitiers, 1974–2021)

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the HCD process, particularly the co-creation activities (feedback sessions on the sketches, prioritising user and stakeholder needs, and assessing the physical prototypes), contributed to developing shared understanding and building a sustained trusted relationship with the stakeholders. In line with existing studies [42,43], the tangible prototypes also acted as a catalyst to develop a shared understanding of the envisioned product between the university research team and stakeholders from the industry. 4.2.2.…”

Section: Prototypes For Effective Communication With the Stakeholders And The Role Of The Hcd Processmentioning

confidence: 69%

A Case Study of University–Industry Collaboration for Sustainable Furniture Design

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the importance of including a Human-Centred Design (HCD) approach for successful university–industry collaboration. We detail user surveys and user evaluation techniques to engage end-users for the rejuvenation of manufacturing industries through sustainable product development. There are numerous studies describing the importance of university–industry collaboration; however, very few portray the detailed working relationships necessary to fulfil both the university and the industry agenda. This paper explores a joint project between a prominent Melbourne-based university and a government organisation from Malaysia. The intention was to innovate a range of furniture for Malaysian dormitories to stimulate the local manufacturing sector and provide high-value product applications for Malaysia’s abundant timber sector. By detailing a HCD approach, we reveal how to better direct the design outcomes to accurately reflect the research intent. This is detailed through a case study showing how the research data was translated into final product concepts influenced by end-users and collaboration with the industry stakeholders. The resulting products are a range of sustainable, modular dormitory furniture with a direct route to market. Finally, we provide the lessons learned and suggestions for developing sustainable products through university–industry collaboration.

show abstract

“…Despite the increasing adoption of collaborative design approaches, practitioners have noted some challenges for implementation. Amongst the most prominent ones figure the difficulty for supporting trust-building and balancing tensions (Andersen & Mosleh, 2021;Clarke et al, 2021;Sanders, 2006).…”

Section: Collaborative Design Of Learning Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing learning technology collaboratively: Analysis of a chatbot co-design

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative design approaches have been increasingly adopted in the design of learning technologies since they contribute to develop pedagogically inclusive and appropriate learning designs. Despite the positive reception of collaborative design strategies in technology-enhanced learning, little attention has been dedicated to analyzing the challenges faced in design processes using a collaborative approach. In this paper, we disclose the collaborative design of a chatbot for self-regulated learning in higher education using an action research approach. We analyze the design process of EDUguia chatbot, which includes diverse evidence from questionnaires and workshops with students and lecturers, as well as intermediary design objects. Based on the qualitative analysis, we identify several challenges that are transversal to the co-design work, as well as specific to the design phases. We critically reflect on the strategies deployed to overcome these challenges and how they relate to decision-making processes, highlighting the need to make stakeholders’ tacit knowledge explicit, cultivate trust-building and support democratic decision-making in technology design processes. We believe that the recommendations we present in this paper contribute to developing best practices in the collaborative design of chatbots for the self-regulation of learning, as well as learning technology in general.

show abstract

Conflicts in co-design: engaging with tangible artefacts in multi-stakeholder collaboration

Cited by 27 publications

References 34 publications

Promoting Social Interaction through Participatory Architecture. Experimentation, Experience, Evaluation in a Social Housing Complex (Grand’Goule, Poitiers, 1974–2021)

Promoting Social Interaction through Participatory Architecture. Experimentation, Experience, Evaluation in a Social Housing Complex (Grand’Goule, Poitiers, 1974–2021)

A Case Study of University–Industry Collaboration for Sustainable Furniture Design

Designing learning technology collaboratively: Analysis of a chatbot co-design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About