Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Integrating Design for All in Living Labs Abstract
The European Union has identified innovation as a key driver behind business competitiveness and responsive governance. However, innovation in and of itself may not be sufficient to help businesses bring new products to market and governments to shape public services which really meet people’s needs. The Integrating Design for All in Living Labs (IDeALL) project sought to identify and test methodologies for designing with users in real-‐life settings. The results of the experiments showed how different methodologies can be applied in different contexts, helping to provide solutions to societal issues and to create products and services which genuinely meet user requirements. The project’s website www.usercentredbusiness.com offers a repository of these methodologies along with case studies showing them in use, so that businesses and public bodies can discover and test them for themselves.
‘Design as a driver of user-‐centred innovation contributes to getting good ideas to market. It enhances agile and focused product and service development … It facilitates the development of better, transparent and more effective public services and contributes to social innovation, thereby raising the quality of life for all citizens of Europe. And for complex societal problems, design offers people-‐centred approaches that can achieve better solutions.’
Design for Growth and Prosperity (2012)
Introduction
Innovation is often promoted as essential to the prosperity and indeed survival of European economies in global markets, exemplified by the European Commission’s Innovation Union programme at policy level. With the rise of emerging economies, the Commission warns, their European counterparts may face chronic decline unless they can differentiate themselves through advances brought about by innovation. Yet, while it may be tempting to view “innovation” as a magic solution, innovation in and of itself may not have a universally beneficial impact, as commentators such as Rufo Quantevalle argue (2014).
On the macro-‐level, funding for research and development in Europe has not necessarily translated into innovation take-‐up in Europe (‘Open Innovation 2.0: A new paradigm’ Curley and Salemin, 2013). On the micro-‐level, even in purely market terms, innovation is no guarantee of the success of a product or service, as writers such as Mulder have shown in this publication (2012). Indeed, Gournville finds that while ‘Innovation is crucial to the long-‐term success of many firms’, ‘highly innovative products… fail at a greater rate than less innovative products’ (2005; pdf link), a phenomenon which he attributes to the need for fundamental behaviour change the adoption of such products requires.
How, then, can companies lead the innovation charge while mitigating the risks of launching new products?
How can public services evolve in such a way that they empower citizens without leaving any one group behind?
How can design be a factor of change while leading innovation to the market?
This article describes the IDeALL project, which aimed to address these issues. The first section shows how the European Union has begun to consider the discipline of design as a driver of innovation; it goes on to give a brief explanation of the two main themes of the project, design for all and Living Labs. The second section explains the rationale behind the project and gives examples of the methodologies collated and compared, according to different criteria which were used to classify them. In the third section, examples and findings of some of the experiments undertaken and case studies researched during the project are given in four main areas: services, health and social care, information and communication technology (ICT) and urban design, with suggestions for possible further applications of these methodologies by other businesses and public-‐sector bodies.
Design as a driver of innovation The European Commission has begun to address these questions at policy level in a number of ways, including a focus on non-‐technological innovation such as design. In 2011 it established a Design Leadership Board, whose report Design for Growth and Prosperity was published in 2012 with recommendations aimed at ‘enhanc[ing] design’s long-‐term contribution to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth through increased competitiveness and the pursuit of a better quality of life’ (ed. Thomson and Koskinen, 2012; pdf link). The report presents design, defined as ‘an activity of people-‐centred innovation by which desirable and usable products are defined and delivered’, as a driver of innovation; by bringing the end user closer to the innovation process, it argues, the risk of launching new products and services may be reduced.
Design for all, is a branch of design which takes human diversity into account so that anyone, no matter what their personal characteristics and including future generations, can access goods, services and environments and hence participate fully in society (Aragall and Montaña, 2012). While technology brings new possibilities, it can be a barrier as well as a facilitator (Steinfeld and Maisel, 2012); design for all seeks to ensure that technological innovation is tied to social progress, as design-‐for-‐all professional Rafael Montes has suggested, for example, in an interview cited in the Design for All Foundation Awards 2013 brochure.
The emergence of Living Labs has provided a mechanism for precisely this kind of multidisciplinary, co-‐creative approach, allowing companies to test products with users and public bodies to try new ways of providing services. Living Labs allow design for all to make the logical step from user-‐centred design to user-‐driven, co-‐creative design. As Mulder (2012) and others suggest, by providing a real-‐life environment for the co-‐creation and evaluation of innovations, Living Labs allow complex problems to be identified and solutions to be developed which will ultimately be more acceptable to a range of end users. Furthermore, thanks to new technologies and manufacturing methods, more channels for co-‐creation and evaluation have been made possible, as many commentators, including the European Design
Leadership Board in Design for Growth and Prosperity, note. However, the ability of Living Labs to facilitate user-‐driven design has not yet been fully embraced by the small and medium enterprises (SMEs) which make up 99% of businesses in the European Union or by public bodies who may be intrigued by Government 2.0 but wary of the risks involved in changing their ways of operating.
Integrating Design for All in Living Labs The IDeALL project was developed as a response to this. One of six projects co-‐financed under the European Commission’s Design-‐Driven Innovation programme, it aimed to bring the design and Living Lab communities closer together and to identify within these communities the best ways to innovate with users in different contexts. Led by the Cité du design in France, itself a design centre and Living Lab, the project consortium included design centres, Living Labs, educational institutions and research centres, as well as the European Society of Concurrent Enterprising Network and the European Network of Living Labs. Among the Living Labs in the consortium and its supporting community were examples of the different types analysed by Leminen et al in this journal (2012).
Responding to Pallot et al’s identification of ‘the lack of comparative studies on design methods involving users’ as one of the barriers ‘towards a more integrating approach of methods that could be used in a L[iving] L[ab]’ (2012), a comparative analysis of user-‐centred design methodologies was undertaken. The methodologies were compared using the following criteria:
• the phase of the development process (research/ideation/prototyping/evaluation) • the methodology duration (short/medium/long) • the user involvement (low/medium/high).
This analysis showed how the methodologies might be useful in different contexts according to different requirements and restrictions, and methodologies can be searched by these criteria on the website. For example, a company wishing to develop a service might use the Service Innovation Corner methodology used by the University of Lapland, or Laurea University of Applied Science’s Service Innovation and Design methodology. A company wishing to design and prototype a new product might use the Cité du design’s Laboratoire des Usages et Pratiques Innovants (LUPI) (Innovative Use and Practice Laboratory) methodology, while a company wishing to shift to a more user-‐centred business model overall might consider Francesc Aragall’s HUMBLES method for user-‐centred business. In the subsections below, we describe some examples of these methodologies, which are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of four example methodologies for user-‐centred design
Methodology Phase Duration User Involvement
1. Service Prototyping Ideation
Prototyping
Evaluation
Short High
2. 3H Research
Ideation
Prototyping
Evaluation
Medium to long High
3. LUPI Research
Ideation
Short to medium Medium
4. HUMBLES Research
Ideation
Prototyping
Evaluation
Medium to long Medium
Service prototyping – University of Lapland
SINCO (Service Innovation Corner) is a service prototyping lab at the University of Lapland in Rovaniemi. SINCO lab helps visualising and concretising abstract services and experiences by using service design tools and prototyping methods. Service prototypes consist of pictures or videos that are projected to screens and also sounds, lights and props. After completion of the service prototype, it will be tested and further developed by using drama methods.
What does service prototyping: means?
-‐ Helping entrepreneur to see the service from a customer point of view -‐ Enhancing new service ideas by previewing different kinds of possibilities -‐ Increasing likelihood of innovations -‐ Helping strategic decision making -‐ Decreasing risks related to producing and launching a new service
SINCO makes it possible to:
1. Analyse existing services and user experiences 2. Visualise ideas and develop them quickly 3. Communicate, test and act out concepts coherently
Usually, stakeholders involved in SINCO experimentation are customers, designers, engineers, salespersons etc… The fields of application are those where the user experience or customer journey is paramount, ie. public institution buildings, shops, restaurant industry, transports etc…
Interactions with the end-‐users are not online but in real life. Therefore, the contact with users is very high as they use drama to prototype the service. On the downside, it is difficult to apply
the exercise to more than 10 persons at once. The relative cost to apply SINCO is variable, whereas the timespan to apply it is quite short.
Service design is one of the strategic research areas at the University of Lapland where The Faculty of Art and Design has worked for several years with service design and service prototyping methodology. Research concentrates on two different areas: 1) Studying how service prototyping can add value at various phases of the service design process and 2) Researching how agile technologies can be used in prototyping customer journeys, service moments and different touch points quickly and iteratively. Both research areas become concrete in University of Lapland’s SINCO (Service Innovation Corner) laboratory, which represents a holistic hands-‐on approach to service design, co-‐creation and user-‐experience-‐driven innovation activities. SINCO also helps visualising and concretising abstract services and experiences by using service design tools and prototyping methods with the support of existing technological solutions (Rontti et al. 2012). These are the reasons why service design and especially service prototyping methods were selected to IDeALL-‐project experimentation. For implementing issue SINCO you’ll need at least: Two back projection screens, two video projectors, space for service stage (Space for prototyping and experiencing the simulation), control computer, speakers and dual-‐display adapter, PowerPoint-‐software which is programmed in two screens (for more information www.sinco.fi).
Service Innovation and Design – Laurea University of Applied Sciences
Laurea University of Applied Sciences is an expert in the field of living labs and user-‐centered and user-‐driven innovations which is enabled by its pedagogical model Learning by Developing (LbD). As being a living lab and developing services together with the end-‐users, participatory design and co-‐creation methods in Service Design are essential part of all practical work done by Laurea UAS. As seen from the case studies provided by Laurea UAS, it is evident that in our case as an educator, not one specific methodology is chosen over another, as development of innovations is always context-‐bound and dependent on the purpose of the development. However, new methods, e.g. Visionary Concept Design, Carpet of Stories and Design for All User Panel, have been created through case studies. Laurea UAS has been co-‐creating also tools like CoCo Toolkit.
3H (Head, Heart, Hands-‐on) – Citilab
3H methodology uses the human body metaphor to describe a step-‐by-‐step user-‐driven innovation process. It is an open living lab methodology. It has been specifically developed for the iCity project.
The methodology goes through three major phases:
1. Head activity: identifying and mapping the actors of the community innovation system, to provide protocols and tools to collect and understand the needs and barriers to participate.
2. Heart activity: consolidating all the relationship necessary to establish trust and commitment between all the stakeholders.
3. Hands-‐on: engaging the participants in the co-‐creation and development activity in itself. The final part of this activity includes an evaluation activity based in a client-‐driven set of indicators
3H methodology favours multi-‐disciplinary teams and is not restricted to a particular type of user (4ple helix. However, 3H has been developed by Citilab and has been tested in their citizen engagement activity. This in-‐house methodology has been adapted to the iCity project in order to engage its stakeholders, and to foster the co-‐creation of public interest services applications. The approximate cost of 3H application is of 15% of the total innovation project budget. Moreover, the approximate timespan needed to apply 3H is of 15% of the total timespan allocated to the innovation project.
For information, a particular attention is needed for the preparation of the interviews with the end-‐users. Indeed for insight gathering, meetings with end-‐users are frequently employed. This implies high contact with the user through face-‐to-‐face discussions. On the downside, preparing and conducting these interviews demand a lot of time and thus quantity of insights can be limited.
3H is best used for: Investigation, exploration, development, execution and evaluation
This project covers the all development project from the research to the evaluation. The duration depends on the scale of the project. The minimum for its application would be one year. This project works with the user in different ways during all the process. The users are engaged so they become co-‐creators. For that reason we describe the User involvement as high.
LUPI – Cité du design
LUPI is a user-‐centered co-‐creation tool conceived in the Cité du design. Inspired by research methods from the Cité du design research department, the LUPI’s added value is its flexibility (it has been applied in the private as well as local government sector) as well as its short duration (three to six months), which is in line with SMEs temporality. A LUPI project always consists in three phases:
1. Framing the issue (1 day): During the first meeting, the goal is to frame the starting issue. Usually, partners share their issues and clarify them collectively. Throughout the day, with the help of a couple of designers and the project coordinator these ideas are refined and a particular investigation track is chosen. When the issue is clarified, a typology of users is also defined in order to prepare the next phase of the LUPI project.
2. On-‐site observations (3 ½ days): The second phase is the more immersive one. LUPI
partners are trained by the designers in reporting insights from the previously identified users by personally meeting them for a 2 to 3 hour interview. Just like designers, the LUPI stakeholders will have previously prepared the reporter book and defined field sensors in order to better catch the “hidden” insights that users will express in the midst of the interview. After the interview, LUPI stakeholders will have to synthetize the interview in order to present it to the group.
3. Sharing (1 day): Turn by turn, each LUPI partner presents (in a 20 minute format) the
collected insights from the on-‐site observations and interviews. A particular stress is made on the most visual presentation as well as on the “hidden” insights that a user may express through a powerful verbatim. After the presentations, the LUPI goes through an ideation phase were the collected and new ideas are mapped with the help of the designers. A particular attention will be addressed to concepts with strong strategy leading to sustainable business models.
Finally, the most significant concepts generated from the last LUPI step are rendered in the form of a scenario title associated to a presentation pitch, illustrated by visual elements (sketches, videos, animation…). The storytelling medium is therefore the form of the LUPI final deliverable. These hypothesis are then assembled in a portfolio created by the designers (as a resource). The complete deliverable is composed of a minimum of 12 scenarios.
LUPI methodology is a research methodology. It is therefore not much involved in the prototyping or evaluation phase of projects. However, 90% of LUPI projects have led to prototypes and sometimes products on the market.
Concerning time, the LUPI is originally a tool dedicated to companies and SMEs that usually don’t dedicate a lot of resources to innovation. A total of three meetings spread in three to six months, is usually accepted by a majority of companies or local governments.
Here the users’ involvement is considered ‘medium’ as their impact is indirect. However from the point of view of the LUPI partners, the involvement is very high as they are directly involved in a typical design process: on-‐site observations, end-‐user interviews and visual restitution.
HUMBLES – DfA foundation
HUMBLES methodology was created by Francesc Aragall (Design for All foundation) published in a book together with Jordi Montana (ESADE Faculty of Business Administration). This human-‐centred methodology works on seven iterative steps that are:
1. Highlight Design for All opportunities 2. User identification 3. Monitor interaction 4. Breakthrough options 5. Lay out solutions 6. Efficient communication
7. Success evaluation
HUMBLES is adapted to the following typology of users: CEO, CFO, HR, Marketing, R&D, employees, customers and consumers. Therefore, it is strongly adapted to the SME world. The application cost and time is quite difficult to confine as it is not mandatory to go through all the seven HUMBLES steps to apply it. However if all the steps are applied sequentially, then the estimated timespan would be from one moth up to one year and the estimated cost of would be between 3.000€ and 70.000€
For gathering end-‐user insight, HUMBLES is quite effective quantitatively as it is mainly based on surveys. On the downside, the level of qualitative insights will be limited by this medium of user insight collection.
This method is mainly focused on shaping the companies strategies by human diversity and users expectations. The concrete tools to research about the end users and to involve them in the design process varies for each business sector and company strategy. It has been proven especially effective to change the companies' perception of the value of users as knowledge source.
Some findings
A majority of the collated methodologies involve the user at a high level of implication. The user is active at the first steps (ideation) in all the methodologies, but we don’t know about the implication in further ones. Therefore it is more accurate to mention these methodologies as design for the user rather than with the user. Finally, as time is a strong constraint for companies, it is fortunate to notice that a majority of the collated methodologies have a quite short duration (a LUPI can be applied in 2 months).
Experimenting methodologies in real-‐life environments With the aim of testing these methodologies and finding what made each of them particularly suitable in different contexts, experiments were carried out in the Rhône-‐Alpes region of France, Catalonia, Slovakia, Latvia and Finland. Case studies showing additional applications of the methodologies were also collated. These are collated on the website www.usercentredbusiness.com, allowing users to see examples of the methodogies in action, adapted to the requirements of the local context.
Service design
Service design is becoming an increasingly important sector, and good service design can result in increased customer loyalty. The two Finnish partners involved in the IDeALL project, Laurea University of Applied Sciences and the University of Lapland, are at the forefront of service design in Europe. Lapland’s SINCO service-‐prototyping methodology is particularly useful for delivering mock-‐ups of services which immerse users in the experience before the service is fully designed. This methodology is used to explore ways to make a shopping centre more interactive and multisensory; techniques included interviews, customer observation, surveys and service prototyping. Furthermore, the tool has been experimented outside its country of birth (Finland) in the context of the 2013 International Design Biennial Living Lab space ‘Les
Labos’ in Saint-‐Etienne. The experiment has proven very successful as the visitors ‘roleplayed’ as foreign shopping centre users and consumers.
The shopping centre’s manager commented: ‘Young people who grow up here can be seen as long-‐term clients for us. They use certain services now, but if they stay in [the] …area as grown-‐ups they can continue to be our clients for a very long time.’ (See video).
SINCO Living Lab methods in action at the Rajalla-‐På Gransen shopping centre and the Biennale Internationale Design (2013 edition)
Laurea’s approach to service design was demonstrated through case studies collected for the project. These provide examples of co-‐designing services which might be complicated or involve ethical considerations, such as creating home safety devices to support independent living in the Guarantee project for designing a kit to self-‐test heart arrhythmia.
Laurea was involved in service-‐design aspects for the Heartbug
Health and social care
With rising levels of obesity and an ageing population, the health challenges faced by European countries are familiar to many industrialised nations. Technology may create lead to the creation of increasingly sophisticated healthcare solutions, but focusing on the user is essential if they are to be genuinely responsive and personalised to individual needs.
Several experiments were undertaken in the area of healthcare as part of the project, and show how businesses and public bodies can select methodologies to respond to users’ healthcare needs. These include the development of a smart pill dispenser, supported by IDeALL partner Medic@alps. The HUMBLES method for user-‐centred business was applied in an experiment involving Lékué, a Catalan company with a strong focus on innovation. This helped them to shift their business aims from ‘being a market leader in the production of silicon-‐based products’, to ‘producing utensils which would support people to cook well and follow a healthy diet’.
User co-‐creation and co-‐prototyping tools and methods have also been used in one of the several social-‐care projects led by the Cité du design. For instance, ‘Métamorphoses, Design Local! Ou la rénovation par les usager’ where users with light psychological disorders are all involved in a heavy renovation of their association’s premises with the help of the staff and a designer. Adherents where empowered as designers of their future premises from the early ideation phases (discovery of the design discipline, co-‐creation brainstormings), to the collective prototyping (each user was involved in mock-‐up building), to the actual renovation (painting, furniture manufacturing…). The uniqueness of this project resides in the indirect therapeutic effect of the action as some of the adherents gained self-‐confidence and learned new techniques that could lead to job opportunities.
Hands-‐on session at the Lucien Bonnafé association
Information and communication technology (ITC)
ICT clearly plays a pivotal role in this new co-‐creative landscape, providing both the paradigms (e.g. open source) and the tools (e.g. user-‐generated content-‐sharing networks). Several experiments and case studies selected by the IDeALL project show how new technologies can open new possibilities for all users, as shown in the example of Barcelona Laboratori, an IDeALL case study which seeks to make the whole city of Barcelona into a Living Lab. Serra describes Barcelona Laboratori as a project “to build a second generation of citizen laboratories involving both the current official innovation system (universities, research centres, large businesses) and new, emerging stakeholder, such as entrepreneurs, urban innovation communities, (arduinos, fablabbers, social innovators), extending this innovation potential to as many citizens as possible … through schools, cultural centres, retirement homes, not-‐for-‐profit organisations and more’”. This ethos is exemplified in the IDeALL experiment the iCity project, which seeks to open up cities’ information infrastructure to promote the co-‐creation of public services in areas such as mobility, environment, security and health, by developers. This example may be instructive for local governments wishing to introduce smart technology into their area, who can use this approach to ensure that new services are responsive to residents’ needs and that big data is used in a way which benefits citizens.
At the local level, Citilab experiments have been directed towards equipping participants with the skills to adapt to a new digital economy and participate in the Internet of Things. The ‘Nuevos Artesanos’ (New Artesans) experiment, for example, was developed as a response to people with traditional craft skills finding themselves out of work. Combining programming and electronics workshops with a DIY ethos, participants were able to put their craft skills to
use in the creation of smart items, documenting the process as they went along (website). Similarly, the ‘Inventa’t la feina’ (Invent your own job) experiment sought to find a solution to the situation in Mataró, which has some of the highest youth unemployment levels in Europe, by supporting young people to develop and assess their own business ideas.
Nuevos Artesanos at work. Citilab, 2014
In the Rhône-‐Alpes area, the Agence Régionale du Développement et de l'Innovation (ARDI), (Regional Development and Innovation Agency) oversaw further experiments opening out technological innovation to a wide range of users. In the Webnapperon 2 (Web Doily 2) experiment by ERASME HOST, co-‐creation workshops led to the “Web doily” which works with an RFID-‐equipped photo frame to allow online content to be shared and therefore older users in particular to keep in touch with family and friends without needing computer skills.
ICT-‐themed workshops in Rhône-‐Alpes, France
Urban design
With ever greater numbers of populations living in cities, coupled with changing conditions in industry and the pressures brought about by increasingly scarce resources, creating cities which are vibrant, sustainable and promote health and wellbeing is a key policy issue for many European nations. Several IDeALL experiments took place in the urban sphere. In Saint-‐Étienne, several experiments used the LUPI methodology. One of the experiments for examples tried to answer the question of urban furniture modularity. Among the stakeholders were found: mechanical industry company clusters and technicians from the city of Saint-‐Etienne. After having met and interviewed key stakeholders from the urban furniture domain, LUPI stakeholders altogether with two designers produced more than a dozen concepts of modular furniture fastening systems in the form of use-‐scenarios. Fortunately, the project went further than the conceptual phase and after various prototypes the PLUG emerged (Urban Pillar for General Use), a unique fastening system that allows to very easily and
securely plug urban furniture in the street according to the city’s numerous events (market day, open-‐air concerts, exhibitions etc..).
Urban Pillar for General Use, concept images
An experiment in Slovakia, a country where, according to the Slovak Design Centre, the concept of design for all was not well known, showed how users could co-‐create public spaces based on real needs. The original idea was to come up with designs for street furniture, but this evolved into a more fundamental question: what do people want in public spaces? The Slovak Design Centre involved the City of Bratislava, designers, architects, an art academy and university of technology, cycling and accessibility associations, bicycle and street-‐furniture manufacturer in the project. Using a range of user-‐centred methods to gather and prototype ideas in the actual setting, the experiment was widely publicised in the Slovak press. By helping the city council work towards its sustainable transport objectives, the experiment to redesign a street gained their support, while simultaneously introducing a new generation of students to the idea of user-‐driven, design-‐led innovation.
Street for All experiment organised by the Slovak Design Centre Photos: Jan Mytny
Conclusion While technological innovation is crucial to remaining competitive in international markets, the results will only be adopted if they are attractive to end users. The IDeALL project helped demonstrate how bringing user-‐driven design into Living Labs can translate innovations into solutions for everyday user needs. It showed that there is a wide range of user-‐centred design methodologies which can be adapted to different contexts and which can help provide solutions for societal issues such as caring for an ageing population, obesity and unemployment. Different methodologies will be of interest to different organisations: for example, businesses wishing to deliver tailored services may wish to use service-‐design methodologies such as those used by the University of Lapland and Laurea University of Applied Sciences, while local governments may wish to consider methodologies such as LUPI to help co-‐design public spaces and at the same time support local businesses. Further
experiments using these methodologies would help to determine different applications. Also the project has helped building a taxonomy of methodologies: a majority of the collated methods implicate the user at a high level at the ideation/conception phases but we not so much in the latter ones (prototyping for instance).
The IDeALL consortium invites anyone interested in user-‐driven, design-‐led innovation to explore the user-‐centred business portal: www.usercentredbusiness.com and provide feedback on how this can be improved to better meet their requirements. One of the most interesting results of the project has been the creation of the Master’s course ‘Smart Cities: Designing with Citizens’. Launched by the Design for All Foundation and BAU School of Design in Barcelona, this aims to ensure that the smart cities of the future will be co-‐created with their citizens.
Authors
Francesc Aragall
Madeleine Gray
Design for all foundation, Barcelona, Spain
Isabelle Vérilhac
Mikaël Mangyoku
Cité du design, Saint-‐Etienne, France
Artur Serra
Laia Sánchez
Citilab, Cornellá, Spain
