society & individual essay

7/29/2019 Society & Individual Essay

1/38

How can participatory design

methods and processes helpincrease social responsibilityand care?


2/38

MA Design Futures

Society and the the Individual Essay

Gaja Menari Osole

Writing as

Socially engaged designer with a wish o becoming a uture

researcher

Reading on behalf of

erry Richardson, design proessor at the University o Goldsmiths,currently researching the eld o desing participation and democracy

Tis is the third o the our design letters. I am addressing it to erry

Richardson, since I have heard about his new collaborative project

concerning participatory design practice. Since my research on the

subject is at the stage o early beginings, I would like to create a spaceor discussion that might lead me to a better understanding and ur-

ther exploration. My approach toward the writing is a play o using

theoretical ramework, practical examples and personal experience to

understand and illustrate the researched subject, like a gradient that

expands rom abstraction to a high concretisation and subjectivity.

Printed 14th November 2012

Version 1


3/38

Frankly speaking, not everyone

should always be asked or in-vited to be included in the deci-sion-making process (Miessen2010: 43). 1


4/38

4

Not a long time ago I was working with a group o designers, coming

together rom dierent design proessions, joining the project or dier-

ent reasons and expecting dierent kind o results. All though we were

all coming rom design background, it was rather hard trying to nd acommon language within our cultural, proessional and personality di-

erences. Since we did not manage to handle our diversities, the research

was not coherent, the ideas were not constructed and in the end I think

none o us was happy with the experience. I started to question the col-

laborative processes o design and decided to investigate how the prob-

lem could be transormed into a more pleasant experience.


5/38

5

Tis essay is exploring the emergence, conceptualisation and prac-

tice o participatory design processes in order to support the reader

with the the acquired knowledge and provoke urther exploration

and questioning. It starts with the quick overview o the impactcapitalistic system had on the eld o design in order to ground and

contextualise the explored theme and understand the reasons or o

the ormation o participatory design practice. Furthermore it skims

through the art and design history, which started with DADA move-

ment in the 1920s, widely expanded in the 1960s and inuenced

Scandinavian design practice and research trying to democratise thework conditions and open up design processes to potential users. It

continues with the introduction o intersubjectivity and the impor-

tance o role-play and gives special attention to the problem o demo-

cratic consensus describing its negative consequences that result in

the paralysation o emerging alternatives. In that context it presents

some possible alternatives and explores how they can be applied inthe practice. At the end it briey looks into meta-design practice, in

order to expand the ocus and show a wider context o the act o par-

ticipation that goes beyond the ocus o user-designer relations and

explores the creation o inrastructures and environments, or design

to take place.


6/38

6

Capitalism is

out o Fashion


7/38

7

Te merge o industrial revolution and capitalistic system prevented

people rom accessing common resources which resulted in creation

o the modern proletariat and accumulation o capital or supporting

the industrial revolution. Te consequences o the event maniestedin mass poverty, migration and criminalisation. As an ongoing pro-

cess the orm o capitalism is continuously imposing enclosures o

'commons', moving rom natural resources, towards entitlements,

welare benets and education (how can service design be under-

stood in this context?) (De Angelis 2010).

Te capitalistic mode o production cut the relationship between the

users and the used. With things becoming mere objects o consum-

mation people lost responsibility or the environment and society.

Freedom was suddenly something one could buy on the shelves o the

supermarket. More money one earned, less responsibility he had.

Te environmental, ecological and economical crisis are the crisis othe lack o responsibility and attachment.

It could be perceived that only the engagement o the society in the

process o decision making and creating can bring back the notion o

responsibility. As design writer John Tackara argues 'eighty percent

o the environmental impact o the products, services, and inrastruc-

tures around us is determined at the design stage. Design plays an

enormous actor in the creation o our spaces and cultures.'

Te system shi towards a more socially engaged values is looking

at opening up the design processes o production, engaging commu-

nities and public as active collaborators in the process o creating a

social realm.


8/38

8

Many contemporary design disciplines are in a stage o re-direction

towards the re-construction o social organisations, as they try to

avoid the commodity orientated design practice and strive towardsmore humanist modes o design intervention. Collaboration, par-

ticipation, co-working, co-design, sharing, interdisciplinary are

terms that quite oen appear in the contemporary design vocabulary,

theorised, practiced and avorised as new social values or building

up more egalitarian and sustainable liestyles. All though it seems like

we are all o a sudden re-entering the peace and love o the colourulsixties, the reality under the veil o the beautied truth is struggling

to nd new ways o bringing such ideals into a unctional and opera-

tional existence. Inclusive and intersubjective process bring up new

kinds o negotiation and decision making conrontations.

What are the benets o the democratisation o this processes andwhat might be the accompanying obstacles?


9/38

9

Te Commons

o Participation


10/38

10

What brings together the creative practice inuenced with the 'aes-

thetics' o participation can be characterised with three main eatures:

the end subject/objet is co-created with the experience o engaging

public, the authorship is shied rom the individual to the group oinvolved collaborators which makes the process o creation as well as

the nal outcome more unpredictable and egalitarian, and nally it

evokes ormation o the social bond through common experience and

'collective elaboration o meaning' (Bishop 2006: 12). One o the ea-

tures that is also typical or the organisational practices o the partici-

patory design is by my opinion also the specic characteristic o theoutcome which is never truly dened, hence it is interlaced with the

process o creation that becomes a never-ending ux.


11/38

11

How did it started: Art Perspective

Tus design was widely considered to derive out o 'arts and cras

movement' in the late nineteen century the passage o understand-ing how participatory design ormulated as an acknowledged practice

commences in the art practice.

Te democratisation o creative processes was started with the DADA

movement in the 1920's as an attempt to pull art rom the galleries

and bring it closer to everyday lie. Te next decade German theorist

Walter Benjamin gave a theoretical ramework to the political statuso participation with acknowledging the active engagement o the

viewer in co-production o the work and understanding the the role

o spectators not as mere cultural consumers but as engaged co-crea-

tors. Te concept was then urther developed and avorised in the six-

ties as a consequences o the production o capitalistic commodities

with several perormative as well as pedagogical outcomes. Te socialagenda o the art practice was on work to erase the border between

the artist and the spectator, the amateur and the proessional, the pro-

duction and reception in order to highlight the 'collective dimension

o the social experience' (Bishop 2006: 10).


12/38

12

Te democratisation o Work in Scandinavia

A decade aer, in the 1970's the big boom o the socially engaged

artworks the orm o participatory design practice emerged in theScandinavian countries as a research strategy that recognised workers

as important subjects o collective knowledge that can be benecially

used or improving the design o the end products. Te so called 'ac-

tion research' process (a hands-on research process that merges the

act o participation, action in a orm creating tacit knowledge on the

base o experience and research under the same roo) was ramed asa democratic approach that helped researchers to get the rst-hand

inormation and collaborators the opportunity to express their opin-

ions and wishes and thereore participate in the decision-making

processes (Bdker 1996: 218). Participatory design was born out o

the idea, that the people who were inuenced by design should have a

say in the design process.

Te key issue was building on peoples own experiences, providing

resources or them to be able to actin their current situation (Bdker

1996: 218). Te relationship between users and designers as well as

researchers was put into a less hierarchal level, looking at establishing

a more egalitarian relationship. As Jonh Ehn, a proessor at Malm

Universitys School o Arts and Communication argues, this was a

political conviction, not expecting consensus, but also controversies

and conicts around an emerging design object (Ehn 2008).

Te approach was used or solving the trade unions struggle trying to

improve the workers environment and was concerned with the de-

velopment o technological systems and organisational practices. Te


13/38

13

major ocus in this methodological rame was looking at the practical

raming o its methods or the direct engagement o potential users,

tools and techniques such as mock-ups, prototypes, scenarios and

games which would help to achieve a more democratic process odecision making and creating (Maz, Keshavarz 2013).

As Ehn points out there were two dominant reasons or the ormation

o participatory design practice. One was the idea o democracy that

questions and seeks or proper ways in which user can act as an ac-

tive participator in creative processes and the second one was to rec-ognise the tacit knowledge o the participants and use it as a ormal

resource and base or new design interventions (Ehn 2008).


14/38

14

Conceptualising Participation

Te conceptualisation and methodologies o participatory design

practice, or design to use beore the use, were constantly chang-ing. 'User-centred design', 'contextual design' and nally 'experience

design' have all looked through slightly dierent angels in order to

shape design process that would invite users to participate as co-de-

signers and 'align participants around a shared, though problematic,

object o concern' (Ehn 2008)?

Te action o design participation is being constantly re-constructed

and de-constructed producing various methodologies and approach-

es which tackle the ormation o collaborative process. Bottom-up

and top-down approaches play a signicant role in the researchers

approach towards nding the optimal solutions.

Design processes are still based on perormative tools such as proto-

types, scenarios and games that are unctioning as a 'boundary ob-

jects' or mending the communities o users and designers together.

Opening up the communication space with the designing participa-

tive design activities like workshops enables hands-on activities and

methods o participation as 'design-by-doing' and 'design-by-playing'

which resulted in 'learning-by-doing' as the basic method o enquiry.

Te conceptualisation o participatory design through 'communities-

o-practice' (Lave, Wenger 1991) brings in a new ocus on 'learning' as

an act o wanting to become a legitimate member o the proessional

community, gain the skills and a sense o belonging to a particular

group. From this perspective it becomes clear that 'languaging' is not


15/38

15

enough to understand the socio-material rame o the community,

as participation is a complex process that combines thinking, eeling,

belonging, talking

Participatory design, as a pragmatic design theory, can be understoodas an overlapping communities practice (users and designers) and the

process as the 'meeting between communities-o-interest' (Fischer,

Schar in Ehn 2008).


16/38

16

Intersubjectivity and Participation

In the article Te Quality o Design Pariticipation: Intersubjectivity in

Design Practice, researchers Denny K. L. Hoo and Yanki C. Lee un-derstand participation not as a political act but rather as methodo-

logical activity activity o continuous search o ways or integrating

the knowledge o users in the whole design process. Te research

was looking at creating new environments or providing commu-

nal knowledge and resources that could serve as a starting point or

building commons representing the base or co-design and co-re-ection. Teir concern mostly lies in introducing the space o inter-

subjective communication as a communal resource or co-designing.

Tey conceptualise the substance o participatory design process with

six parameters: design-with, co-design throughout the whole design

process, solution ocused strategies, adductive logic, opening up the

communicative space, empathy/intersubjectivity and re-description(Ho, Lee 2012: 72). Te authors are keen on the idea o designing

with users who help to determine the problem, contribute in deci-

sion-making processes and have an inuence on the ormulation o

the nal decision. Te creation o the space or communication re-

sults in a subjective reasoning that is a blend o experience and belies

rather that the presentation o the external world (Reason in Ho, Lee

2012: 73). It is a contemporary approach or understanding the value

o knowledge beyond the objective, rational truth, which can not be

achieved without participants and their knowledge.

Another important aspect which underpins a co-construction o new

understanding is the reciprocal exchange o subjective experience

and knowledge between the individual and the other which can be


17/38

17

linked with the concept o intersubjectivity. Intersubjectivity reers to

a situation in which at least two agencies join together to work some-

thing out through joint activities (Matusov in Ho, Lee 2012: 74).

Te article introduces new concepts o understanding and applying

the three-old typology (I-It, I-thou and It-thou relationship) in the

context o intersubjective methods which could provide a successul

tool or analysing possible relationships between designers and users

and seed new kinds o interactions. Te third aspect o the typology

(It-Tou) introduces empathy as a tool or understanding the outsideworld with positioning the observed subject into the other in rela-

tion to a certain object. With that kind o role play activity the ac-

tive design researcher gets a better perception o the given situation

through various approaches o experience embodiment that is pro-

cessed through three main stages: imagination o replacement, acting

out anothers bodily experience and nally merging with anothersbodily experience (Finely in Ho, Lee 2012: 79,80).

Te methodology presents how opening up a space or probing col-

lecting a communal knowledge as a oundation or co-design. It is a

constructed method that is based on the principles o role-play and

constructed situation and serves as an example o how to build up a

space where equal dialogues can be created.


18/38

18

Problems o

Generalisation


19/38

19

Since I came to England I have more than ever experienced the destroy-

ing power o so called democratic consensus. In Slovenia I was used to

express my opinion constantly or i not that I was denitely used to be

challenged to deend it all the time. I eel home-sick rom time to timeand I noticed that I am getting this reective impulse o exaggeratedly

admiring your own country and ways o doing and being in your home

social environment. I come rom the northern-South part o Europe and

my emotions, at least rom the inside can not be shut down easily. I nd

it hard to deal with english politeness and political correctness where

every voice is shut down in a consensual manner (unless you deneyoursel as an activist) and I am starting to get a eeling that nothing

can really be changed. Everything is seemingly good and everything ac-

ceptable. Since I have got this eeling that the conrontation o opinions

seems almost like a violent act and my english is not so sophisticated to

put my thoughts into a box o chocolate, I most o the time seat silently

and make the conversations with mysel. I eel shut down.

I decided to describe my very personal experience o the power o

consensus to illustrate the situation which is very relevant or the

participation design practice today. Trough last decades the general

opinion on the role o participatory design was the intention to im-

prove our quality o living, to achieve the agreement among the mem-

bers o community and to arrive at consensus with opening up the

space or communication. Te orm o participation is usually based

on democratic methods in many contemporary societal arrange-

ments using consensus as a result o agreement upon 'stabilisation o

a particular set o social relations, norms and courses o action' which

always puts excluded options out o ocus (Keshavarz, Maz 2013).


20/38

20

Consensus can be a great problem-solving method within a shared

space o a homogenous community. But there a re two main worries

that rise up concerning this afrmative political position. Firstly it

can also be greatly used as a tool or imposing pre-constructed beliesand personal agendas. Our democratic systems today is greatly abus-

ing the democracy o consensus, leading us in the pre-constructed di-

rection. When we have to choose between two inappropriate options,

the raise or the alternative is unreachable. Te case might sound

amiliar rom democratic voting systems.

When things that use to point a critics stance become a shallow trend

and the modus operandi becomes a viral orm or distributing alse

intentions, it is time to re-rame and re-language the content. Most o

the words today, which I personally call the 'stolen words' are words

o abused meaning thanks to the populism and kitsch, which should

orce us to nd better alternatives to express our ethical convictions.

Te other negative consequence o consensus is a claim that support-

ing the similarities in the negotiation process produces closed com-

munities that exclude others rom their activity which might be con-

sidered as privileged, unattainable and static. Greek architect Stavros

Stavrides argues that we must 'establish the ground o negotiation

rather than the ground o afrmation o what is shared. He suggests

that 'egulating relationship between dierences is more important

than afrming commonalities based on similarities (Stavrides 2010).

Political correctness as a caricature o consensus is a static point with-

out conict and also without progress. Consensus is out o passion.

It is acting against the contestatory nature o human being, reducing


21/38

21

political 'subjectivisation to rational debate among parts o commu-

nity' (Keshavarz, Maz 2013). Many theoreticians agree that consen-

sus is erasing the possible healthy alternatives. Tey are considered to

be more o a threat than a call or democracy which consequentiallyresults in a politics without conrontations and leads to lack o politi-

cal identity and subjectivity. In this sense it is important to stress that

consensus can be a very succesull way o decision-making, but it is

necessary to recognize the possible alternatives and know when and

how to use them.


22/38

22

Teoretical Frames

or Alternatives


23/38

23

Friendly Enemy

Conict is widely perceived as a negative, destructive orce, something

we should avoid and not speak about. Te antagonistic approach isconsidered to be un-ethical and sometimes even a bit barbaric. But i

we try to look at it through the lens o participation it suddenly ap-

pears in an interesting role, as a 'micro-political practice' that allows

participant to become an engaged member who insists on his belies

even i they are dierent rom the others (Miessen 2010: 93).

In that context a rench political philosopher Chantal Moue sug-

gests a new model o 'riendly' agnosticism which she calls 'agonistic

model o democracy or agnostic pluralism' in which as she claims the

opposite sides are not in the riend-enemy relation, but are each oth-

ers 'adversaries' or riendly enemies with a common symbolic space.

Tis so called 'conictual consensus' is to be understood as a conict-ual struggle o dierent interpretations on the same subject. Bringing

back the passions and desires in a political dialog, mobilising them

towards democratic designs (Moue 2000).

Strangely my cultural prop that we had to present in the context o

Society and Individual seminar, within which also this essay is being

constructed, was a condom. Te reason why is because it was represent-

ing a junction o two values that are strongly important to me: one is

pleasure and the other is responsibility, so I coined a new value which I

called 'pleasure with responsibility'. I believe it strangely overlaps with

the position that Moue is talking about.


24/38

24

Dissensus

French philosopher Jacques Rancire proposes a more radical alter-

native o dissensus. Te concept does not represent a mere oppositionto an afrmative consensus, it is constructed on a aesthetic regime

called 'sensible order'. Te concept is inclusive and exclusive at the

same time, hence it depends on the type o perceptible means that at-

tracts together some part o the society and qualies them to discuss,

see, listen and excludes the others. Te 'sensible order' thereore cre-

ates 'communities o sense'.

'As a process, rather than an achievement, dissensus is always under-

way, resisting the politics o law and order by questioning the givens

o a particular situation. In this sense, dissensus is not the opposite o

consensus, but, rather, a process concerned with the potential emer-

gence o new political ormations' (Keshavarz, Maz 2013).


25/38

25

From Teory

to Practice


26/38

26

Case Study based on the Teory O 'Dissensus'

and 'Agnostic Pluralism'

Design researchers are taking the philosophy o politics into action,nding concrete operational techniques, methods and procedures to

understand how the solution might be accessed and new meanings

constructed.

I we move to a study that takes into greater ocus the questionable

homogeneity o the 'other' we can urthermore dene an even more

precise understanding o the complexity o negotiation process inparticipatory design.

Mahmoud Keshavarz's project Forms o Resistance which has been

produced as an MA dissertation by the supervision o design re-

searcher Ramia Maz is trying to put the concept o dissensus into

design research practice. With orming and raming design processthrough the perception o dissensus he is speculating to open up new

alternatives that might emerge in the currently predominately ho-

mogenous design disciplines with widely excluded alternatives.

Keshavarz developing his methodologies with questioning the orm

o consensual democracy and avorising the political stance o 'dis-

sensus' and 'agnostic pluralism'. In other words he is arguing that the

afrmative voice o the majority might not be the best solution in

recognising the subjective views o the 'others' that might bring new

dynamics and realities into our perception o reality.

As I understand Keshavarz is trying to use the principle o dissensus

as an experimental intervention into the existing social realm, create


27/38

27

a gap, a ree space or new possibilities and questions how it can be

understood in the universe o the established meanings.

He executed three researches, the rst one was in eheran, connectedwith a group o activist women ghting against the violence over

women in everyday lie. In a rst experiment he trend to interlace

wight the group and become an equal member, without imposing any

disciplinary voice in the given situation. For that reason he coined

an interesting term called 'indisciplinarity', which acknowledges the

pragmatic action in the actual situation over the voice o accepteddisciplines like design, sociology, physiology He urther on ex-

plains that by not acting as a acilitator not even by imposing a set o

tools or scenarios, he managed to construct an Tou-it rather than

I-it relationship which resulted in complete diminishment o design

discipline. Te important things was to implement the ideas on their

own agenda based on their previous experiences that appeared dur-ing e-mail discussions.

He entered the second situation in Sweden with a group o women

with a help o activist that were working together to protest over the

'disappeared women'. As he claims he could by the principle o 'indis-

ciplinarity' use the previous experience an share them with swedish

activists.

Te last stage o action was staged in a galley as a ormat or exposing

(rather than exhibiting) gathered understanding to a well established

audience. Here he decided to act as a designer, ollowing the 'sensible

order' in order to translate the materials to another type o the audi-

ence. He understood this conrontation o this two worlds in terms


28/38

28

o dissensus, rontier in a positivistic sense. As white paper that gives

an opportunity to create something totally new. As a designer transla-

tor he decided to ollow up Walter Benjamin's discussion o the task

o the translator, claiming that the role o the translator is to intensiythe contradictions between images in texts in order to open the space

or political subjectivization.

He pushed it on the develop a desinerly approach to translation called

'ree-translation', a subjective view o presentation not ollowing the

logic o rational meaning, which give spectators an open space orcreating their own meaning based on the given materials. Following

this approach Keshavarz succeeds to establish a link between the two

worlds and thereore creates a new community constituted o story-

tellers and translators.


29/38

29

New Forms o Subjectivity

In the described project Keshavarz illustrated one o the possibilities

how design as well as design research might act when searching ornew solutions or negotiation. Te 'outcome' o this project should

not be looked in a objective manner. Te nal exhibition, a highly

subjective mediation o gathered materials is an example o how de-

signer can act in order, putting the spectator in the dialogical position

with twisting the 'objective' reality, opening new spaces o participa-

tion and thereore unpredictable micro-political situations. Te qual-ity o this project lies in the sensitive navigation o the process and

creating a 'symbolic space that acilitates conrontation' (Fezer in

Keshavarz, Maz 2013), but a conrontation o dierences that allows

a symbiotic co-habitation. In that manner the progress becomes the

project. Building new participatory tools through the direct experi-

ence is helping to build up theoretical rames within design eld.Rather than creating new disciplines it creates new knowledge (that

lies between truth and belies) to the existing ones. With that gesture

it suggests that the value o design practice does not lie in creating

endless methodological and conceptual xed models, but to nd a di-

versity in creating new possible ways o negotiating and creating new

opportunities or uniying what seemed to be incompatible.


30/38

30

Meta-conclusions


31/38

31

Metadesign: 'Design-Afer-Design' (Johan in Enh 2008 )

Design discipline was pioneered by Fischer and Schar and Fischer

and Giaccardi inuenced by the art, biotechnical design and knowl-edge theory. 'Meta-design is explored as a way to meet the equally

unachievable design challenge o all-encompassing anticipation or

envisioning o potential design to take place in use aer project de-

sign' (Ehn 2008). Te critiques o participatory design were claiming

that it is not enough ocused on the users in the outside world who

are as well inuenced by the products o design and thereore need tobe taken in consideration. Te problem lies in the lack o envisioning

more complex system structures and not considering the impact that

the project might cause in the uture.

Metadesigh understands users as well as designers as design partici-

pators that operate in dierent 'sensible orders'. By designing design-ers construct methods, processes, strategies that can potentially ani-

mate users to adopt them in their own design processes. Metadesign

understands design process as tools that might be appropriated and

entangled with the contemporary social realm in order to improve

our uture o living. Te ocus is thereore shied rom users to situ-

ations that are representing a design project by its sel, acknowledg-

ing design beore the project, duringand aerthe project. Metadesign

ocus goes beyond the concern o setting the ground or the designer

and user to act in the design process, instead it sees every use situa-

tion as a potential design situation. Like Keshavarz's example it is not

ocused in designing efcient products or services but creating envi-

ronments, situations or design projects in use.


32/38

32

Tis concept leads us to an even higher level, rom designing an ob-

ject, to designing a process into designing an environment or the

process. All the products o design are intended to have dierent uses

and purposes, but they are all 'representatives o the object o designas well as the socio-material public things' (Ehn 2008).


33/38

33

Discussion


34/38

34

I have been strongly inuenced and intrigued by the article o

Mahmoud Keshavarz discussing and practicing the theory o 'dissen-

sus' and 'agnostic pluralism'. It does not provide us with the perect

model or generating the most efcient solutions, it rather opens upthe importance o subjectivity and alternatives that might provide us

with potential solutions that seemed unimaginable. I am also quite

keen on the idea o 'sensible order' and the power o personal sensi-

tivities over the rules o proessional categorisation. Deconstructing

what we know and constructing it again, based on the experience and

not blindly using pre-constructed kits and tools, that might resultin imposing certain kinds o knowledge over the other and sloppy

generalisation. I think participatory design as a democratic concept

brings many advantages into the communal world that we live in,

but it has to be in a constant ux o searching contextualised ways o

negotiation.

I do not think that it represents the only and best way o design prac-

tice. I still believe in the importance o the individual authorship in

the development o our society as much as I believe in the power o

collaboration. How can we re-rame the value o single authorship to

recognise it as a necessary practice in our society? How can we learn

to appreciate participation without putting immoral and unethical

etiquettes over alternative design practices? I think that designers

should be very careul and exact when dening and communicat-

ing their ethics and values to prevent the project-based methods and

principles becoming victims o generalisation and misunderstand-

ing. ools always come handy but we have to ocus on the problem in

order to know which ones should we use and when. And the answer

always comes with practice.


35/38

35

Te other thing I would like to open new questions on the lack o the

coherent language and space or design practice. So many attention

has been given in creating new design disciplines, but so little in con-necting them between each other. Many o them are speaking about

the same thing but in a totally dierent way. For example how can be

the theory o 'dissensus' connected with meta-design tool o 'bisocia-

tion' or the 'I-thou' relationship with 'indisciplinarity'? In order to

build a common identity I believe it is important to develop our own

common language and we can perceive that with a better design edu-cation and research practice.

I I return to my initial problem, that got me thinking about participa-

tion and efciency, I think it is still hard to speculate how it might work

better. One o the things that got me thinking is that I re-think the rame

with upon which the starting groups were ormed so that they would beequally classied in therms o the diversity o knowledge the students

had. Since we did not know each other rom beore it was hard to know

how compatible the members might be. Maybe a technique o speed-

dating would come handy to get to know each other and nd out about

our interests. Since projects usually reect our personal/proessional

values we might even try to nd groups according to that, rather than

nding a consensus in a incompatible group, we might try to seek or a

more unied group at the beginning.

From another point o view, i we consider the diverse group as a start-

ing point o potential conrontation, we would then have to create a

common space or an open dialog and that would allow members to

develop their own ideas and get support rom the rest o the group.


36/38

36

Te members might then join in teams o similar interests and nd

potential connections between the interests o the others. In that man-

ner we could come to an unamiliar result that would include everyones

attention because o our attachment to our previous work as well as thenovelty o the unexpected. By creating that we would orm a common

ground in therms o dissensus that might bring more exciting results.

Although that is just a mere speculation and the real experience would

show how the tactics would work in reality.

Which brings me back to the notion o responsibility that can bepracticed only when we eel attached to a certain matter. So what par-

ticipatory design should do is to seek or this attachments and make

them visible.


37/38

37

Bibliography


38/38

Angelis, M. and Stavrides, (2010) On the commons: A Public Interview

with Massimo De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides, E-Flux, No. 17, June-

August. [Online], Available: http://www.e-ux.com/journal/on-the-

commons-a-public-interview-with-massimo-de-angelis-and-stavros-stavrides. [14. February 2013].

Bishop, C (2006). Participation (Whitechapel: Documents o Contem-

porary Art), Te MI Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Bishop, C. (2009) Rediscovering Aesthetics, ransdisciplinary Voicesrom Art History, Philosophy, and Art Practice, Stanord University

Press: Stanord

Ehn, P. (2008) Participation in Design Tings, Proceedings o Partici-

patory Design Conerence (PDC), Bloomington, Indiana, USA.

Ho, D. and Lee, Y. (2012) Te Quality o Design Participation: Inter-

subjectivity in Design Practice, International Journal O Design, vol. 6,

No. 1, pp 71-83.

Keshavarz, M. and Maz, R. (2013) Design and dissensus: raming

and staging participation in design research, Design Philosophy, No.

1, January. [Online], Available: http://www.desphilosophy.com/dpp/

dpp_journal/paper1/body.html. [14. February 2013].

Miessen, M (2010). Te Nightmare o Participation, Sternberg Press:

Casshochrome.