Diapositiva 1

1
(No Transcript)
2
The point of view
Experimental computer scientist designing
computer based systems to support knowledge
workers in complex design activities . Forced
to invade other domains to introduce
meta-design as a necessary response to
environmental requests.
3
Meta-Design a first definition

• a design methodology that
• encourages users to be active co-designer of the
  artifacts, new media and technologies they use.
• requires the management and sharing knowledge
  and wisdom progressively created
• provides all the stakeholders in a design
  process with suitable media and technologies to
  foster their personal and common creativity.
• provokes shift of power in organizations

4
Meta-Design why

• Meta-design is a necessity not a luxury (Fischer
  2009 )
• An emergent methodology that responds to
• needs requirements
• exploiting
• new affordances possibilities
• created by the co-evolutions of
• communication media
• design (production) models

5
Overview of the lecture

• The emergence of meta-design from co-evolution of
• Communication and digital communication
• Complex design
• Production models and user role
• Meta-design anatomy
• Meta-Design processes

• The emergence of meta-design from co-evolution of
• Communication and digital communication
• Complex design
• The evolution of user role in the production
  chain
• Meta-design anatomy
• Meta-Design processes

6
The communication process a semiotic view (1)
A process of communication needs
1. an environment a world of phenomena
adapted from Tondl81
7
The communication process

• 2. at least two communicant systems

I1
I2
8
The communication process a semiotic view (3)
3. a system of means of communication constituted
by
- a finite set of events (messages) that can be
transmitted along a channel
- a bidirectional channel to transmit events in
the set
- tools to support communicants in
coding/decoding intended meanings into channel
events
a1
a2
I1
I2
C(D)
D(C)
channel
adapted from Tondl81
9
The communication process the complete view
Correct communication occurs if the two
communicants assign a same meaning to exchanged
messages
a1
a2
I1
I2
C(D)
D(C)
channel
F1
fe
F2
adapted from Tondl81
10
When a communicant is a computer
For each message, activity, pattern of
activities two interpretations of different
nature exist - Human cognitive interpretation -
Machine computational interpretation
Bottoni et alt. 1999
11
Machine Interpretation
Performed by a program The designer
interpretation mediated by the program
user
Designer
a
P
R
Designer's view on current state of corrent
practices
User's view on current state of current practices
evolved from Tondl 81
12
The program as a mediator
- is a proxy of the (absent) designer a -
interprets the content according to
designers rules (De Souza) - is a (meta)
message from the designer to users - offers
affordances as conceived by the designer
De Souza 2005
13
The digital message

• has two forms internal (content) and external
  (human perceptible representation)
• content is not directly accessible to humans
• physical representation is created on the fly by
  and depends on a program P (weak external form)
• content is persistent, can be distributed to
  other machines

content
P1
P2
Programmed mediators
P3
Materialization may be multimodal
14
Correct communication at risk
discussing a 401(K) plan with the boss
Received and deployed on receiver's screen
401 (K) plan
Digitized, deployed on the authors screen.
The author has no control on the output
materialization
HCI requirement virtual interactive environments
should allow users to trust on their mediation.
The risk digest, vol.23,issue 48,Aug 2004Acm
http//catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.48.htmlsubj5
15
Correct communication.

• also fails for semantic reasons
• a same word used with different meanings
• different naming techniques (use of synonymy and
  context)
• - misunderstandings and ambiguities

16
Cause
Communicants belong to different communities of
practice (CoP).
A community of practice is characterized by the
shared manner in which its members act and how
they interpret events. Practice provides the
source of coherence for a community and includes
both the explicit and the tacit. (Pawlosky 2000).
17
Communicational gap

• Each CoP develops
• their own dialects to reason on the problems of
  interest
• notations to share ,communicate and store
  knowledge
• tools to support the members activity.

Communication gaps arise among communicants
belonging to different CoPs
18
To overcome the gaps

• admit that communicants have to accept to teach
  and instruct each other. (symmetry of ignorance)
  Rittel 84
• recognize the need of creating a common language
  as a common field of interaction and not only a
  common terminology.

19
Creation of a common language
Through progressive semantization, a
trialanderror process in which the two
communicants reach a common understanding of
each message and create a common language. tondl
20
Cultural glasses as colored glasses
B
C
A
C
A
B
A
B
C
A
B
C
21
Overview of the lecture

• The emergence of meta-design from co-evolution of
• Communication and digital communication
• Complex design
• Production models and user role
• Meta-design anatomy
• Meta-Design processes

22
An example
Two stakeholder belonging to different CoPs
cooperate in the design of a environmental
management strategy.
Image interpreterglaciologist cooperation
They overcome the communicational gaps and
cooperate in building knowledge by sharing
images and visual and verbal annotations
23
Mediation mechanisms
boundary objects shared objects to talk about
and to think with. In the example they are
virtual images and annotations boundary zones
spaces and places where different cultures can
meet. In the example the virtual space created by
the network of environments (adapted from
Fischer 2001)
24
Communities of interest
The glaciologist and the image interpreter
constitute a Community of Interest defined by
their common concern of reaching a physically
consistent image interpretation
"Complex collaborative design activities cannot
be solved by individuals or by single groups.
Communities of interest (defined by their
collective concern with the resolution of a
problem) bring together different communities of
practice which represent groups of practitioners
from different domains.Fischer 2000
25
Stakeholder needs
Stakeholders in the CoI bring into the design
process their explicit and tacit knowledge and
wisdom, but they express their knowledge and
wisdom by different notations and languages.
They need Notation and trustable tools of
reasoning on the design within their
experience Notation and trustable tools of
mediation among different cultures to support
progressive semantization. Mediation mechanisms
must be identified or designed to overcome the
communicational gaps.
26
Complex design

• requires
• the coordinate modeling of the system at hand by
  different stakeholders.
• the management of large amounts of information
  relevant to the design.
• understanding the design decisions that have
  determined the
• evolution of the designed artifact.

27
Morch MapBoundary objects, boundary zones and
communities of interest
Web portal Scenarios, CRM Company products
Company annual customer forum Design workshop
Where heterogeneous expertise meets, adapted
from Fischer (2001)
BZ Neutral ground in-between activity systems,
allowing goals, outcomes and structures of
different stakeholders to be reflected (Konkola,
2001 Edwards, 2007) BO Shared artifacts between
activity systems that may also be part of an AS
(Star,1989)
from A. Morch presentation at IS-EUD 2009
28
Overview of the lecture

• The emergence of meta-design from co-evolution of
• Communication and digital communication
• Complex design
• Production models and the user role
• Meta-design anatomy
• Meta-Design processes

29
Warning
In Industrial Design engineering production
includes three phases design engineering
manufacturing. Following Bruns 2008
production ? design
30
role of users in production value chain
Industrial production value chain
producer ? distributor? consumer
Fords mantra you can have any color you
like, as long as it is black Users role be
CONSUMERS have needs, which designing CoI then
identify and fill by designing and producing new
products
Adapted from Bruns 2008
31
but users
are owners of the problems tacit knowledge?
implicit information operate as competent
practitioner Experience shows that user
experience on usage is important future users
behaviors and problems cannot be completely
anticipated at design time. live user
experience how the product behaves and is used
in the real world are creative using the
system changes the users, and as they change they
will use the system in new ways ( nielsen)
belong to different communities of practice
32
The role of users (1)
in presence of competitive offers users may
determine the success or failure of a
product Capturing the user experience and
user creativity to design a successful product
becomes a need
33
The role of users (2)
The rise of new media influences the rise of new
proposal for capturing user experience
An example due to A. Morch and presented at
ISEUD 2009 User-driven innovation (UDI) in
recreational bicycle manufacturing
34
Bicycles models in Norway 1820-1972
Notice major changes in some of the models!
Due to a. Morch Presented at ISEUD 2009
35
Motocross era (Apache, 1972)
Question Why did this specific model emerge?
36
The inspiration for this design came from outside
bicycle manufacturing

• Easy rider movie (1969) and commercials

User adoption of motorcycle features by
tweaking their own bicycles (on-road gt
off-road)
TV broadcast in US, On any Sunday, Movie
Trailer 1971, Youthprogram
37
What the example illustrates

• Boundary crossing between amateur and
  professional communities
• Developer community (bike manufacturer)
• User community (youths, 8-14 years old)
• Other professional communities (motor bikers,
  motocross, movie stars)

38
Users become visible
producer ? distributor? consumer
The designing CoI looks for feedback from the
consumer
A further evolution the designing CoI allows
users to tailor the product
The consumer becomes a prosumer contributing not
just the money, bur market and design information
vital for the production process
Professional consumer, A.Toffler ,1980)
39
User becomes designer
e-Machineshop.com, a self service a web site
allows users to design and get realized physical
parts, products, prototypes.
Julie downloads an easy to use 3-D CAD software
and designs her bicycle in metal. She can get
quote, order the bicycle on line and get the
product through eMachineshop which forwards the
design to a real world machine shop for
manufacturing.
40
Julie as designer
Julie is neither a mechanical engineer nor a
dynamic expert. How can trust on her design?

• The outcome of Julie design process is encoded
  as
• CAD files (digital content),
• easily shared with other experts in the web,
• can be materialized as 2-D AND 3-D renderings
• can be criticized and updated by experts

Julie can ask for help and create a CoI
e-Machineshop.com act as meta-designer provides
all the stakeholders in in the CoI with suitable
and technologies required foer the collaboration.
41
What the example illustrates

• In the industrial process, we could see the
  design phase separated from the production phase.
  (Bauwens 2005)

the physical product are information product
during the design stage
in physical product field, product development
by users can evolve to the point of largely or
totally supplanting product development- but not
product manufacturing- by manufacturers Von
Hippel
42
Overview of the lecture

• The emergence of meta-design from co-evolution of
• Communication and digital communication
• Complex design
• Production models and the user role
• Meta-design anatomy
• Meta-Design processes

43
An example from an industrial case
A factory automation company produces factory
automation systems for clients companies. Shop
foremen of the client company customize and adapt
robot to the requirement of specific work
situations. Operators program, check, trigger,
monitor and comment on the activity of a
pick-and- place robot interacting with
Application Workshop
44
The application workshop
Localized to - the operator culture (Italian,
mechanical engineering and company language,
standards) - the task - the context
Consistent with - other sign languages used in
the real workshops
Usable easy to learn easy to use
Efficient time saving reliable in
operation not error prone
A single case solution, localized to the operator
culture context and role
45
Who develops the Application Workshop?
A shop foreman (a member of a different CoP)
interacts with (System Workshop ) to develop
Application Workshops customized to the current
operator and production shift.
Again a single case solution, localized to the
shop foreman culture, context and role
46
Communication
Shop foreman and operator communicate exchanging
annotations and executable configuration of the
workshop
The receiver reads the annotation and execute the
interactive process that generated the problem
47
Situation and problems
The Shop Foreman is a domain expert using a
domain specific language to design is NOT an
HCI expert is NOT an (EU) SE expert is NOT an
operator
Shop foreman design too often resulted in not
usable nor efficient systems
48
To overcome the flaws
Accept the principle of symmetry of
ignorance. Operators are owners of usage
problems, Shop Foremen are owners of the domain
production problem, Software Engineers are owners
of the technology, HCI experts are the owners of
usability methods
Adopt a participatory approach to development.
49
Participatory design
P-to-P collaboration among different stakeholder
Clash of different cultures ? communication
gaps. Design adequate boundary objects and zone
to allow progressive semantization.
50
To overcome the gaps
(EU) Software Engineer
Be concrete use the prototype Application
Workshop as messages (boundary objects) in the
collaborative discussion.
Be local let each stakeholder participate to the
design being supported a System Workshop local to
its culture
Shop Foreman
HCI expert
Costabile, et al.., Visual Interactive Systems
for End-User Development, IEEE Trans. on
Systems, Man and Cybernetics,, Volume 37, Issue
6, Nov. 2007
51
To overcome the gaps (2)

• (Meta)-design interaction languages and
  environments for each stakeholder
• (Meta)-design boundary languages and boundary
  zones

52
The SSW network in robot automation case
A network arises composed of workshops and
channels through which stakeholders exchange data
and boundary objects
Meta-Design Level
stakeholders as produsers end users of
workshop and a co-designer of the application
SE
To Use level
HCI
Shop Foremanr
To Use level
Design Level

Shop Foreman n
Shop Foreman1
Use Level

Production shift manager
Mechanical test


Assembly line Operator 1

Robot software test1
Mechanical programming
Assembly line Operator n

Assembly line Operator 2

53
Observed effects

• The different stakeholders go through
• - a progressive semantization process
• the creation of new concept and tools to support
  their activities in the specific domain
• continuous co-evolution of tools, users culture
  and skills, technology and work organization
• - the evolution of the user roles, organization
  and work practice through appropriation ,
  knowledge creation and diffusion
• - the evolution of the system role and designer
  culture and organization

54
Users become Produsers
The physical product are information product
during the design stage (Von Hippel)
As producer
Information product
Information product
Produser
Adapted from Bruns
As user
co-designers participating actively in
personally meaningful activities. (Fischer )
55
Meta-design requires

• Trustable software mediators
• Interaction localized to the single stakeholder
• Adequate system of boundary objects and zones
• Capability of attracting and engaging users

56
Meta-design offers

• Users design tools rather than products of
  design
• Stakeholders tools to create or adapt tools for
  their own reasoning and doing
• Stakeholders tools to create or adapt tools for
  shared reasoning and doing

57
Meta-design implies

• Coupling of the design process to use
• Continuous design along the whole life of the
• Continuous evolution of systems and organization
  

58
Meta-design fosters social creativity
The theory of meta-design supports the
development of new media systems that are
convivial systems, the interface of the system is
no longer driven by a predefined data base of
information and possible interaction. Rather the
meta- design system is an open system providing
opportunities and affordances that encourage and
support debate discussion and collaborative
knowledge construction (Jennings 2005 )
59
Approaches to meta-design

• Several approaches
• The one underlying the lesson SSW (System
  Software Workshops) proposed by an Italian Group
  
• SER (Seed, Evolutionary growth, Reseeding) model
  proposed by Fischer et al.

60
SER

• A discrete vision of system evolution
  distinguishes between design time and use time
• The evolving system continually alternates
  between period of unplanned evolutions by users
  and period of deliberate restructuring and
  enhancement, involving users in collaboration
  with designers
• .
• Meta-design a framework to provide users with
  tools that allows them to tailor and further
  develop professional tools in their own context.
• Meta-designers use their creativity to develop
  socio-technical environments in which other (less
  technical oriented) users can be creative in
  their own area of expertise

61
SSW

• SSW blurs the distinction among professional
  designers and users. Users may act as designers
  or meta-designers
• Distinguish between (meta) design activities and
  use activities not between design time and use
  time
• No more release not product but artifacts (Bruns
  2008)
• Focus on communicational aspects of HCI and
  communication among stakeholders ? interaction
  languages and mediation languages

62
Conclusion

• Meta-design scholars agree on meta-design
  offering
• new sources of creativity
• culture of change
• new design styles
• Meta-design determines the emergence of new
  mindsets, styles of communication and social
  reasoning

63
Ref

• Pawlowski, S. D., Robey, D., and Raven, A.
  (2000) Supporting shared information systems
  boundary objects communities, and brokering, in
  Proc. 21int.Conference on information Systems,.
  AIS, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2000, pp. 32P9-338

P. Mussio,et al. "Media for Knowledge Creation
and Dissemination Semantic Model and Narrations
for a New Accessibility to Cultural Heritage",
Proc. Creativity Cognition 2007, June 2007,
ISBN978-1-59593-712-4
Fischer, G. Seeding, Evolutionary Growth and
Reseeding Supporting the Incremental Development
of Design Environments (with R. McCall et al),
Human Factors in Computing Systems, in
Proceedings of CHI'94 Conference, 1994, pp.
292-298
Rittel, H. (1984). Second-generation Design
Methods. In N. Cross (Ed.) Developments in Design
Methodology, John Wiley Sons, New York, pp.
317-327.
J.J. Garrett, The elemnts of user experience,
AIGA New Riders, New York, 2002
Arias, E. G., Fischer, G. (2000) 'Boundary
objects Their role in articulating the task at
hand and making information relevant to it', in
International ICSC Symposium on Interactive
Collaborative Computing (ICC 2000 University of
Wollongong, Australia), ICSC Academic Press
Wetaskiwin, Canada, 2000, pp. 567-574
A.Toffler,The third wave,1980
Fischer, G., Giaccardi, E., Ye, Y., Sutcliffe, A.
G., and Mehandjiev, N., 2004, Meta-design a
manifesto for end-user development. Commun. ACM
47, 9 (Sep. 2004), 33-37. DOI http//doi.acm.org/
10.1145/1015864.1015884
Jennings, P., 2005, Tangible Social Interfaces
Critical Theory, Boundary Objects and
Interdisciplinary Design Methods, Proceedings of
the 5th conference on Creativity Cognition,
London, United Kingdom
Fisher G., 1998, Seeding, Evolutionary Growth and
Reseeding Constructing, Capturing and Evolving
Knowledge in Domain-Oriented Design Environments,
Int. Jl "Automated Software Engineering," Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, Vol.
5, No.4, October 1998, pp. 447-464,