Designing for accountability

Eriksén, Sara

doi:10.1145/572021.572041

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Suchman instead adopts a deliberately political stance. As also noted by Eriksen [Eriksen 2002], the concept of 'located accountability' implies reflexivity and awareness of our personal participation in various communities and of the possible benefits to be derived from 'boundary-crossing networking' [Eriksen 2002:182]. Each of us must be accountable for our actions in a wider and 'commonal' sense [Eriksen 2002:182], The design and use of technologies are collective attainments for which each of us is, in some way, responsible.…”

Section: Design For Accountabilitysupporting

confidence: 55%

“…However, the expression 'design for accountability' is a more recent coinage by Sara Eriksen [Eriksen 2002]. In her paper, citing the ethnomethodological definition of accountability -'visibly-rational-and-reportable-for-all-practicalpurposes' [Garfinkel 1967:vii] -Eriksen remarks that design methodologies lack an understanding of accountability 'from a user perspective'.…”

Section: Design For Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Designing the Accountability of Enterprise Architectures

Campagnolo

Jacucci

IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Design For Accountabilitysupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Design For Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing the Accountability of Enterprise Architectures

Campagnolo

Jacucci

IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From the perspective of HCI-AC, users' learning about technology, their empowerment, and the expectation that some ideas from this process would be carried out in design (Eriks en, 2002;Suchman, 1993) was a social and academic impact they strived to make. However, given the interdisciplinary nature of the project where technical decisions were managed by other partners, the accomplishment of this impact depended in part on other consortium members who were all skeptical to embrace PD.…”

Section: Impact Through Accountable Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact in interdisciplinary and cross‐sector research: Opportunities and challenges

Gooch¹,

Vasalou²,

Benton³

2016

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact is embedded in today's research culture, with increasing importance being placed on the value of research to society. In interdisciplinary and cross-sector projects, team members may hold distinct views on the types of impact they want to create. Set in the context of an interdisciplinary, cross-sector project comprised of partners from academia, industry, and the nonprofit sector, our paper unpacks how these diverse project members understand impact. Our analysis shows that interdisciplinary projects offer a unique opportunity to create impact on a number of different levels. Moreover, it demonstrates that a lack of accountable design and collaboration practices can potentially hinder pathways to impact. Finally, we find that the interdisciplinary perspectives that such projects introduce encourage a rich gamut of sustainable outcomes that go beyond commercialization. Our findings support researchers working in these complex contexts to appreciate the opportunities and challenges involved in interdisciplinary cross-sector research contexts while imparting them with strategies for overcoming these challenges. IntroductionIn recent years, policy makers and funders are asking researchers to provide evidence of how their research benefits the wider public (European Commission, 2014; National Research Council, 2012; Research Councils UK [RCUK], 2014). This is formalized through revised funding processes that require them to anticipate and articulate who will benefit from their research and in what ways. National and international funding bodies-including the European Commission (EC), RCUK, and the National Science Foundation (NSF)-now all include impact as a key component of their grant proposals (European Commission, 2014;RCUK, 2014; The National Science Foundation, 2014).Although such mechanisms are relatively new, assessing the impact of research has always been important. Donovan (2008) and Jackson, Steinhardt, and Buyuktur (2013) explain how the earliest measurement for establishing research impact was the peer-review process. External imperatives, however, have since broadened our understanding of impact from a concern to produce scholarly knowledge to one that also seeks to impact all levels of society. The imperatives provoking these changes include transparency as to how public funding is spent while ensuring that investment results in meaningful returns to taxpayers (Donovan, 2008;Penfield, Baker, Scoble, & Wykes, 2014), enhancing economic competitiveness (Donovan, 2008), creating public value to society (Donovan, 2008), directing research funding to areas of national interest (Donovan, 2008, Penfield et al., 2014, assessing the performance of research groups (Boaz, Fitzpatrick, & Shaw, 2009), and establishing accountable research practices in line with promoting positive outcomes (Boaz et al., 2009). Early attempts of funders to introduce a broader impact component to research were premised on the notion that the purpose of science is to support a country's economy and should be chiefly captured t...

show abstract

“…The authors proposed policy-aware transaction logs, which are created by logging of relevant information by individual entities in a system. Identifying fundamental accountability concepts of who and how are discussed in Eriksn [12].…”

Section: Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling

Guédria¹,

Bider²,

Guerreiro³

2016

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Data-accountability encompasses responsibility for data and the traceability of data flows. This is becoming increasingly important for Socio-Technical Systems (STS). Determining root causes for unwanted events after their occurrence is often not possible, e.g. because of missing logs. A better traceability of root causes can be supported by the integration of accountability mechanisms at design time. We contribute a structured method for designing an accountability architecture for STS at design time. Therefore, we propose the elicitation of accountability goals to answer why an unwanted event happened and who is responsible for it. We also identify four di↵erent interaction types in STS. Additionally, we derive accountability graphs from a generic accountability model for STS that serve as a baseline for designing accountability mechanisms for all relevant entities in an STS. The resulting architecture is adjusted to legal requirements, regulations and contracts. We demonstrate the applicability of our approach with an eHealth case study.

show abstract

Designing for accountability

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Designing the Accountability of Enterprise Architectures

Designing the Accountability of Enterprise Architectures

Impact in interdisciplinary and cross‐sector research: Opportunities and challenges

Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About