Active8-planet Wiki - User contributions [en]

People-centred mindset

2022-03-30T11:34:09Z

TilenS: /* Discovering the "unknown unknowns" */

<p>The following section presents key concepts that were developed and proposed in the PEOPLE project and relate to nurturing the people-centred mindset affecting all key actors, i.e. students, university teachers & researchers together with industry professionals and other relevant external stakeholders.</p>

=== Discovering the "unknown unknowns" ===
<p>People-centred development differs from linear problem-solving techniques. In contrast to being stable, defined, and methodologically well framed it can feel more like an adventure into unknown territories – ''discovering the “unknown unknowns”'' – and each project has its own contours and character. Very frequently it is about uncertainty, anxiety, contingency; involving even improvisation and relying on intuition. It is about being confident and trusting the process and methodology together with its leaps and iterations, even if it feels uncomfortable and hectic.</p>
<br>
[[File:Unknown unknowns.png|1260]]

Image 1: Discovering the unknown unknowns

As demonstrated in Image 1, the people-centred development approach aims to dig into the unknown areas which are hidden and not illuminated through conventional problem-solving approaches. It is often about researching, discovering and chasing possibilities, imagining and sensing the unknown – discovering the possibilities and potential solutions that have not yet been totally figured out together with the people we serve. The confidence drives the people-centred developers to prototype and make things, testing them out, getting them wrong, and to keep on working and innovating along the way. Not using and implementing people-centred development produces costs of missing something which is still hiding beyond the surface.<br>

=== Creating with the people – and not for the people – we serve ===

The people-centred approach is designed to encourage direct involvement of people as co-creators of possibilities and solutions. It allows people-centred developers to engage, learn from and co-create directly with people (as potential end-users). Not only that they spend a great deal of time not knowing the answer to the problem or challenge at hand; they also spend a great deal of time researching the actual problem – discovering the unmet needs and trying to open up a breadth of creative possibilities and opportunities together with the people.<p>People-centred developers are experimenters and learners, they empathize and iterate, and they look for inspiration in unexpected places. They believe that a variety of solutions is out there and can be reached focusing on the people they are serving for. People-centred developers iterate because this allows them to keep learning. Instead of hiding out in design workshops, betting that an idea, product, or service will be a hit, they quickly get out in the field and let the people they are developing for be their guides. </p>

=== Emic perspective ===
<p>People-centred development differs from conventional problem-solving techniques in which subject matter experts try to predict the future (often based on their ''false assumptions'') and furthermore aim to solve the imaginary problems from their expert perspectives – wearing their ''“expert hats”''.  The key difference compared to conventional problem-solving techniques is that people-centred development firstly tries to understand challenges from the perspective of subjects (i.e. humans) – from the emic perspective.</p>
<p>Etic: from the perspective of observer. An 'etic' account is a description of a behaviour or belief by an analyst or expert observer.</p>
Emic: from the perspective of subject. An 'emic' account is a description of behaviour or a belief in terms meaningful (consciously or unconsciously) to the actor; that is, an emic account comes from a person within the culture.

People-centred developers try to see and experience things through the eyes of people; they aim to acquire deep insights and unique perspectives through stepping into the shoes of people they serve. Emphatic capacity drives the people-centred development considering people as its roadmap to innovative solutions. Immersing in another world not only opens up new creative possibilities, but it allows to leave behind the assumptions, preconceived ideas and outmoded ways of thinking. Empathizing with the people is the best route to truly grasp the context and complexities of their lives – and it keeps people in the centre of the development process.

=== Ethnography ===
Ethnography is perceived as a “trademark” methodology of anthropology, used in multiple field-sites and responding to diverse questions and challenges. Ethnography could be defined as minimally: ‘''iterative-inductive research (that evolves in design through the study), drawing on a family of methods (such as semi-structured interviews, participant observation, focus groups, fieldwork, shadowing), involving direct and sustained contact with human agents, within the context of their daily lives, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions, and producing a richly written account that respects the irreducibility of human experience, that acknowledges the role of theory as well as the researcher’s own role and that views humans as part object/part subject’''.
<p>Transferred to non-academic settings, ethnography proved to be highly valuable, but was often also perceived as time- and resource-consuming, or non-generalizable due to its focus on individuals and small groups. PEOPLE has experimented with alternative routes to understanding. The so called short-term or rapid, but still theoretically informed ethnography is emerging as an approach to doing research that is contemporary in both its subject matter and in its use for applied research projects designed to lead to informed interventions in the world. It is a type of ethnographic research adapted to non-academic, corporate settings’ time constraints. Short-term ethnography is characterized by forms of intensity that lead to deep and valid ways of knowing. They employ participatory and collaborative (rather than observational and distanced) ethnography. It involves intensive excursions into peoples’ lives, which use more interventional as well as observational methods to create contexts through which to delve into questions that will reveal what matters to those people in the frame of what the researcher is seeking to find out.</p>
Through these collaborations with project internal and external participants, the intensity of the research encounter becomes part of the way that we learn and empathize. To illustrate, spending up to four or so hours with one person in a context where one is focused on trying to understand or imagine their embodied practices, sensations or emotions, asking them questions about this and reflecting on one’s own affective responses, is an exhausting experience. Both, the researcher and the informant begin to feel overwhelmed by the depth and intensity of our respective research encounters. We journey into what is important to the participants and learn about elements of their everyday work lives that they normally do not talk with anyone about. Overall, the research is designed to enable ethnographers to ‘share’ or better understand other peoples’/stakeholders’ experiences, and to generate closer and empathetic understandings of these experiences in contexts of further analysis, interpretation and dissemination.

It is very important to note that the (short-term) ethnography as proposed and conducted in the PEOPLE project is not disassociated from its academic roots in anthropology. It draws from contemporary renderings of anthropological ethnography, originating in the late twentieth century reflexive turn of the ‘‘writing culture’’ debate and its legacy the idea anthropological ethnography involves doing research with rather than about participants. The fact that people-centred development is grounded in ethnography and in constant dialogue with the anthropological theory makes the approach unique and distinct from other approaches, such as user-centred design and design thinking. The PEOPLE approach goes beyond perceiving people solely from a design and business consulting perspective and makes a crucial step from “users”/”customers”/”clients” to the “actual”/“real people”.

[[File:people-centred.png|450px|thumb]]

We aim to emphasize a clear distinction, i.e. moving from a simple, linear and customer-oriented design process to a theoretically informed and data-driven approach involving ethical considerations and understanding bigger contexts of emerging futures and world’s challenges. Anthropology students are educated in theoretical disciplines and spend several years learning how to observe people. Therefore, the key added value of people-centred development lies in its field work and data interpretation involving real people as co-creators from the very beginning. The breakthrough switch – which also requires change in the mindset – is that products, services and solutions are not only made FOR the people but are developed WITH the people that we – as people-centred developers – are willing to serve.

=== From "Big Data" to "Thick Data" ===

People-centred developers are looking at emerging human dynamics that have not been discovered and understood yet. Thick data is brought to light using qualitative, ethnographic research methods that uncover people’s emotions, meanings, behaviours, stories and models of their world. Relying solely on big and quantitative data increases the chances that we will miss something, while giving us the illusion we know everything. ''“People are getting caught up on the quantity side of the equation rather than the quality of the business insights that analytics can unearth. More numbers do not necessarily produce more insights”. ''''''On the other hand, integrating big data and thick data provides organizations a more complete context of any given situation. To form a complete picture, people-centred developers need both big and thick data because each of them produce different types of insights at varying scales and depths.
<br>
[[File:Big_data.png]]
<br>
In her inspiring paper “Why Big Data Needs Thick Data”, Tricia Wang concisely explains the importance of thick data and difference between both types – stating that thick data can rescue big data from the context-loss that comes with the process of making it usable. Thick data requires smaller samples to see human-centred patterns in depth. Thick Data reveals the social context of connections between data points while big data reveals insights with a particular range of quantified data points. Thick data techniques accept irreducible complexity, while big data techniques isolate variables to identify patterns. Thick data loses scale while big data loses resolution (see Table 1).<div>
{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;"
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | BIG DATA
| style="width: 50%;" |
THICK DATA
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | What, where, when, (how)
| style="width: 50%;" | Why, (how)
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Analytics, social media posts, GPS positioning
| style="width: 50%;" | Ethnography and other people-centred approaches (participant observation, interviews, focus groups, experiments)
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Large number of participants
| style="width: 50%;" | Few people
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Collected and analysed by machines
| style="width: 50%;" | Collected and interpreted by people
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Broad
| style="width: 50%;" | In-depth
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | People are (often) not aware of data being collected
| style="width: 50%;" | People are highly aware of data being collected
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Analysis uses statistical methods
| style="width: 50%;" | Analysis includes developing codes, summaries, and themes
|}

<p>Thick data is the best method for mapping an unknown territory. When organizations want to dig into an unknown territory, they need thick data because it gives something that big data explicitly does not – inspiration. The act of collecting and analysing thick data through ethnography produces deep insights. </p>While using big data in isolation can be problematic, it is definitely critical to continue exploring how big data and thick data can complement each other. This is a great opportunity for qualitative researchers to position our work in the context of big data’s quantitative results.
=== Desirable, viable and feasible ... and sustainable ===
<p>People-centred development is uniquely situated to arrive at solutions that are meaningful, reliable, useful, desirable, feasible, viable, ethical and sustainable. By starting with people - their values, motivation, hopes, fears, and needs – the process aims to uncover what is most desirable. However, this presents only one lens through which people-centred development looks at future solutions. Once a range of different possibilities are researched with the actual people and communities, the co-creation focuses also on what is technically feasible to be actually implemented and how these solutions could be financially viable. It is a balancing act, but one that is absolutely crucial to designing and developing solutions that are reliable, successful and sustainable.</p>

[[File:Desirable_viable_feasible.png|900px|thumb|center]]

<p>In addition to the beforementioned 3 pillars, the people-centred development projects map onto the United Nations sustainable development goals. PEOPLE considers the Sustainable Development Goals as the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. Goals address the global challenges we face, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperity, and peace and justice.</p>
<p> </p>
[[File:SDGs.png|900px|thumb|center]]

=== Conveying ideas ===
<p>One of the key steps of the people-centred development approach is to test and refine the ideas together with people as potential future users of solutions. To keep the thinking, design and development sharp enough, the ideas should be made tangible. Pure abstractions are neither useful or precise enough to properly convey the ideas and to learn how to improve them. And because people-centred developers very rarely succeed the first time, they need to share what has been developed, and iterate based on the feedback they receive.</p>
<p>Therefore, people-centred developers are also makers, crafters and builders. They use different tools and methods to properly convey their ideas; from cardboards, art constellations, campaigns, videos, performance to physical prototypes and sophisticated digital tools. In the process of actually making something, the developers frequently discover opportunities and complexities that had never been thought about before. People-centred developers are action oriented so their ideas should be taken out of their minds and put into hands of people as co-creators.</p>

{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;"
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_1.png|450px|center]]
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_2.png|450px|center]]
<br>
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_3.png|450px|center]]
<br>
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_4.png|450px|center]]
<br>
|}

=== Remaining optimistic in the face of failures ===
<p>Developing, co-creating, experimenting with and testing ideas require an understanding that not everything is going to work. If this involves contemporary societal and environmental challenges the probability that several proposed ideas are bound to fail at very early stages will be even higher (despite the fact they were co-created and tested with people as potential end-users). The relatively high percentage of “early failures” requires adopting the right mindset.</p>
<p>People-centred design and development starts from discovering the unmet needs and opening up the possibilities together with the people, jointly researching the challenges and co-creating potential solutions. People-centred developers are aware that only through ACTIVE listening, thinking, collaborating, interpreting, building, co-creating and refining, they will be able to come to meaningful, sustainable and desirable products and services. Therefore, they are not afraid to fail and they often “fail” very early to be able to improve and succeed later. Refusing to take risks can lead to a situation where developers close themselves from the outside world and therefore minimize their chances to co-create and innovative with the people they serve. On the other hand, the people-centred mindset calls for firstly identifying what will not work as part of discovering what will. The basic idea is to release the prototypes as early as possible and then use them to keep learning, asking, testing and “failing”. When people-centred developers get it right, it is because they got it wrong the first (and second, and third etc.) time.</p>
<p>Therefore, people-centred development is in its essence driven by curiosity, positive attitude and optimism. Optimism is the embrace of possibility, the idea that even if we don’t know the answer, that it is out there and that we can find it. Optimism makes development and co-creation process more creative, encourages developers to push on when they hit dead ends, and helps all the stakeholders in a project gel. People-centred developers are persistently focused on what could be, not the countless obstacles that may get in the way. Constraints are inevitable, and often they push developers toward unexpected solutions. But it is the core animating belief – that challenges are solvable – that shows just how deeply optimistic people-centred developers are.</p>
<div><div><p><br></p></div></div></div>
<div><div></div></div>

People-centred mindset

2022-03-30T11:33:52Z

TilenS:

<p>The following section presents key concepts that were developed and proposed in the PEOPLE project and relate to nurturing the people-centred mindset affecting all key actors, i.e. students, university teachers & researchers together with industry professionals and other relevant external stakeholders.</p>

=== Discovering the "unknown unknowns" ===
<p>People-centred development differs from linear problem-solving techniques. In contrast to being stable, defined, and methodologically well framed it can feel more like an adventure into unknown territories – ''discovering the “unknown unknowns”'' – and each project has its own contours and character. Very frequently it is about uncertainty, anxiety, contingency; involving even improvisation and relying on intuition. It is about being confident and trusting the process and methodology together with its leaps and iterations, even if it feels uncomfortable and hectic.</p>
[[File:Unknown unknowns.png|1260]]

Image 1: Discovering the unknown unknowns

As demonstrated in Image 1, the people-centred development approach aims to dig into the unknown areas which are hidden and not illuminated through conventional problem-solving approaches. It is often about researching, discovering and chasing possibilities, imagining and sensing the unknown – discovering the possibilities and potential solutions that have not yet been totally figured out together with the people we serve. The confidence drives the people-centred developers to prototype and make things, testing them out, getting them wrong, and to keep on working and innovating along the way. Not using and implementing people-centred development produces costs of missing something which is still hiding beyond the surface.<br>
=== Creating with the people – and not for the people – we serve ===

The people-centred approach is designed to encourage direct involvement of people as co-creators of possibilities and solutions. It allows people-centred developers to engage, learn from and co-create directly with people (as potential end-users). Not only that they spend a great deal of time not knowing the answer to the problem or challenge at hand; they also spend a great deal of time researching the actual problem – discovering the unmet needs and trying to open up a breadth of creative possibilities and opportunities together with the people.<p>People-centred developers are experimenters and learners, they empathize and iterate, and they look for inspiration in unexpected places. They believe that a variety of solutions is out there and can be reached focusing on the people they are serving for. People-centred developers iterate because this allows them to keep learning. Instead of hiding out in design workshops, betting that an idea, product, or service will be a hit, they quickly get out in the field and let the people they are developing for be their guides. </p>

=== Emic perspective ===
<p>People-centred development differs from conventional problem-solving techniques in which subject matter experts try to predict the future (often based on their ''false assumptions'') and furthermore aim to solve the imaginary problems from their expert perspectives – wearing their ''“expert hats”''.  The key difference compared to conventional problem-solving techniques is that people-centred development firstly tries to understand challenges from the perspective of subjects (i.e. humans) – from the emic perspective.</p>
<p>Etic: from the perspective of observer. An 'etic' account is a description of a behaviour or belief by an analyst or expert observer.</p>
Emic: from the perspective of subject. An 'emic' account is a description of behaviour or a belief in terms meaningful (consciously or unconsciously) to the actor; that is, an emic account comes from a person within the culture.

People-centred developers try to see and experience things through the eyes of people; they aim to acquire deep insights and unique perspectives through stepping into the shoes of people they serve. Emphatic capacity drives the people-centred development considering people as its roadmap to innovative solutions. Immersing in another world not only opens up new creative possibilities, but it allows to leave behind the assumptions, preconceived ideas and outmoded ways of thinking. Empathizing with the people is the best route to truly grasp the context and complexities of their lives – and it keeps people in the centre of the development process.

=== Ethnography ===
Ethnography is perceived as a “trademark” methodology of anthropology, used in multiple field-sites and responding to diverse questions and challenges. Ethnography could be defined as minimally: ‘''iterative-inductive research (that evolves in design through the study), drawing on a family of methods (such as semi-structured interviews, participant observation, focus groups, fieldwork, shadowing), involving direct and sustained contact with human agents, within the context of their daily lives, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions, and producing a richly written account that respects the irreducibility of human experience, that acknowledges the role of theory as well as the researcher’s own role and that views humans as part object/part subject’''.
<p>Transferred to non-academic settings, ethnography proved to be highly valuable, but was often also perceived as time- and resource-consuming, or non-generalizable due to its focus on individuals and small groups. PEOPLE has experimented with alternative routes to understanding. The so called short-term or rapid, but still theoretically informed ethnography is emerging as an approach to doing research that is contemporary in both its subject matter and in its use for applied research projects designed to lead to informed interventions in the world. It is a type of ethnographic research adapted to non-academic, corporate settings’ time constraints. Short-term ethnography is characterized by forms of intensity that lead to deep and valid ways of knowing. They employ participatory and collaborative (rather than observational and distanced) ethnography. It involves intensive excursions into peoples’ lives, which use more interventional as well as observational methods to create contexts through which to delve into questions that will reveal what matters to those people in the frame of what the researcher is seeking to find out.</p>
Through these collaborations with project internal and external participants, the intensity of the research encounter becomes part of the way that we learn and empathize. To illustrate, spending up to four or so hours with one person in a context where one is focused on trying to understand or imagine their embodied practices, sensations or emotions, asking them questions about this and reflecting on one’s own affective responses, is an exhausting experience. Both, the researcher and the informant begin to feel overwhelmed by the depth and intensity of our respective research encounters. We journey into what is important to the participants and learn about elements of their everyday work lives that they normally do not talk with anyone about. Overall, the research is designed to enable ethnographers to ‘share’ or better understand other peoples’/stakeholders’ experiences, and to generate closer and empathetic understandings of these experiences in contexts of further analysis, interpretation and dissemination.

It is very important to note that the (short-term) ethnography as proposed and conducted in the PEOPLE project is not disassociated from its academic roots in anthropology. It draws from contemporary renderings of anthropological ethnography, originating in the late twentieth century reflexive turn of the ‘‘writing culture’’ debate and its legacy the idea anthropological ethnography involves doing research with rather than about participants. The fact that people-centred development is grounded in ethnography and in constant dialogue with the anthropological theory makes the approach unique and distinct from other approaches, such as user-centred design and design thinking. The PEOPLE approach goes beyond perceiving people solely from a design and business consulting perspective and makes a crucial step from “users”/”customers”/”clients” to the “actual”/“real people”.

[[File:people-centred.png|450px|thumb]]

We aim to emphasize a clear distinction, i.e. moving from a simple, linear and customer-oriented design process to a theoretically informed and data-driven approach involving ethical considerations and understanding bigger contexts of emerging futures and world’s challenges. Anthropology students are educated in theoretical disciplines and spend several years learning how to observe people. Therefore, the key added value of people-centred development lies in its field work and data interpretation involving real people as co-creators from the very beginning. The breakthrough switch – which also requires change in the mindset – is that products, services and solutions are not only made FOR the people but are developed WITH the people that we – as people-centred developers – are willing to serve.

=== From "Big Data" to "Thick Data" ===

People-centred developers are looking at emerging human dynamics that have not been discovered and understood yet. Thick data is brought to light using qualitative, ethnographic research methods that uncover people’s emotions, meanings, behaviours, stories and models of their world. Relying solely on big and quantitative data increases the chances that we will miss something, while giving us the illusion we know everything. ''“People are getting caught up on the quantity side of the equation rather than the quality of the business insights that analytics can unearth. More numbers do not necessarily produce more insights”. ''''''On the other hand, integrating big data and thick data provides organizations a more complete context of any given situation. To form a complete picture, people-centred developers need both big and thick data because each of them produce different types of insights at varying scales and depths.
<br>
[[File:Big_data.png]]
<br>
In her inspiring paper “Why Big Data Needs Thick Data”, Tricia Wang concisely explains the importance of thick data and difference between both types – stating that thick data can rescue big data from the context-loss that comes with the process of making it usable. Thick data requires smaller samples to see human-centred patterns in depth. Thick Data reveals the social context of connections between data points while big data reveals insights with a particular range of quantified data points. Thick data techniques accept irreducible complexity, while big data techniques isolate variables to identify patterns. Thick data loses scale while big data loses resolution (see Table 1).<div>
{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;"
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | BIG DATA
| style="width: 50%;" |
THICK DATA
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | What, where, when, (how)
| style="width: 50%;" | Why, (how)
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Analytics, social media posts, GPS positioning
| style="width: 50%;" | Ethnography and other people-centred approaches (participant observation, interviews, focus groups, experiments)
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Large number of participants
| style="width: 50%;" | Few people
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Collected and analysed by machines
| style="width: 50%;" | Collected and interpreted by people
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Broad
| style="width: 50%;" | In-depth
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | People are (often) not aware of data being collected
| style="width: 50%;" | People are highly aware of data being collected
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Analysis uses statistical methods
| style="width: 50%;" | Analysis includes developing codes, summaries, and themes
|}

<p>Thick data is the best method for mapping an unknown territory. When organizations want to dig into an unknown territory, they need thick data because it gives something that big data explicitly does not – inspiration. The act of collecting and analysing thick data through ethnography produces deep insights. </p>While using big data in isolation can be problematic, it is definitely critical to continue exploring how big data and thick data can complement each other. This is a great opportunity for qualitative researchers to position our work in the context of big data’s quantitative results.
=== Desirable, viable and feasible ... and sustainable ===
<p>People-centred development is uniquely situated to arrive at solutions that are meaningful, reliable, useful, desirable, feasible, viable, ethical and sustainable. By starting with people - their values, motivation, hopes, fears, and needs – the process aims to uncover what is most desirable. However, this presents only one lens through which people-centred development looks at future solutions. Once a range of different possibilities are researched with the actual people and communities, the co-creation focuses also on what is technically feasible to be actually implemented and how these solutions could be financially viable. It is a balancing act, but one that is absolutely crucial to designing and developing solutions that are reliable, successful and sustainable.</p>

[[File:Desirable_viable_feasible.png|900px|thumb|center]]

<p>In addition to the beforementioned 3 pillars, the people-centred development projects map onto the United Nations sustainable development goals. PEOPLE considers the Sustainable Development Goals as the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. Goals address the global challenges we face, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperity, and peace and justice.</p>
<p> </p>
[[File:SDGs.png|900px|thumb|center]]

=== Conveying ideas ===
<p>One of the key steps of the people-centred development approach is to test and refine the ideas together with people as potential future users of solutions. To keep the thinking, design and development sharp enough, the ideas should be made tangible. Pure abstractions are neither useful or precise enough to properly convey the ideas and to learn how to improve them. And because people-centred developers very rarely succeed the first time, they need to share what has been developed, and iterate based on the feedback they receive.</p>
<p>Therefore, people-centred developers are also makers, crafters and builders. They use different tools and methods to properly convey their ideas; from cardboards, art constellations, campaigns, videos, performance to physical prototypes and sophisticated digital tools. In the process of actually making something, the developers frequently discover opportunities and complexities that had never been thought about before. People-centred developers are action oriented so their ideas should be taken out of their minds and put into hands of people as co-creators.</p>

{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;"
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_1.png|450px|center]]
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_2.png|450px|center]]
<br>
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_3.png|450px|center]]
<br>
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_4.png|450px|center]]
<br>
|}

=== Remaining optimistic in the face of failures ===
<p>Developing, co-creating, experimenting with and testing ideas require an understanding that not everything is going to work. If this involves contemporary societal and environmental challenges the probability that several proposed ideas are bound to fail at very early stages will be even higher (despite the fact they were co-created and tested with people as potential end-users). The relatively high percentage of “early failures” requires adopting the right mindset.</p>
<p>People-centred design and development starts from discovering the unmet needs and opening up the possibilities together with the people, jointly researching the challenges and co-creating potential solutions. People-centred developers are aware that only through ACTIVE listening, thinking, collaborating, interpreting, building, co-creating and refining, they will be able to come to meaningful, sustainable and desirable products and services. Therefore, they are not afraid to fail and they often “fail” very early to be able to improve and succeed later. Refusing to take risks can lead to a situation where developers close themselves from the outside world and therefore minimize their chances to co-create and innovative with the people they serve. On the other hand, the people-centred mindset calls for firstly identifying what will not work as part of discovering what will. The basic idea is to release the prototypes as early as possible and then use them to keep learning, asking, testing and “failing”. When people-centred developers get it right, it is because they got it wrong the first (and second, and third etc.) time.</p>
<p>Therefore, people-centred development is in its essence driven by curiosity, positive attitude and optimism. Optimism is the embrace of possibility, the idea that even if we don’t know the answer, that it is out there and that we can find it. Optimism makes development and co-creation process more creative, encourages developers to push on when they hit dead ends, and helps all the stakeholders in a project gel. People-centred developers are persistently focused on what could be, not the countless obstacles that may get in the way. Constraints are inevitable, and often they push developers toward unexpected solutions. But it is the core animating belief – that challenges are solvable – that shows just how deeply optimistic people-centred developers are.</p>
<div><div><p><br></p></div></div></div>
<div><div></div></div>

2022-03-30T11:20:01Z

TilenS: /* Conveying ideas */

<p>The following section presents key concepts that were developed and proposed in the PEOPLE project and relate to nurturing the people-centred mindset affecting all key actors, i.e. students, university teachers & researchers together with industry professionals and other relevant external stakeholders.</p>

=== Discovering the "unknown unknowns" ===
<p>People-centred development differs from linear problem-solving techniques. In contrast to being stable, defined, and methodologically well framed it can feel more like an adventure into unknown territories – ''discovering the “unknown unknowns”'' – and each project has its own contours and character. Very frequently it is about uncertainty, anxiety, contingency; involving even improvisation and relying on intuition. It is about being confident and trusting the process and methodology together with its leaps and iterations, even if it feels uncomfortable and hectic.</p>
[[File:Unknown unknowns.png|1260]]

Image 1: Discovering the unknown unknowns

As demonstrated in Image 1, the people-centred development approach aims to dig into the unknown areas which are hidden and not illuminated through conventional problem-solving approaches. It is often about researching, discovering and chasing possibilities, imagining and sensing the unknown – discovering the possibilities and potential solutions that have not yet been totally figured out together with the people we serve. The confidence drives the people-centred developers to prototype and make things, testing them out, getting them wrong, and to keep on working and innovating along the way. Not using and implementing people-centred development produces costs of missing something which is still hiding beyond the surface.

=== Creating with the people – and not for the people – we serve ===
The people-centred approach is designed to encourage direct involvement of people as co-creators of possibilities and solutions. It allows people-centred developers to engage, learn from and co-create directly with people (as potential end-users). Not only that they spend a great deal of time not knowing the answer to the problem or challenge at hand; they also spend a great deal of time researching the actual problem – discovering the unmet needs and trying to open up a breadth of creative possibilities and opportunities together with the people.<p>People-centred developers are experimenters and learners, they empathize and iterate, and they look for inspiration in unexpected places. They believe that a variety of solutions is out there and can be reached focusing on the people they are serving for. People-centred developers iterate because this allows them to keep learning. Instead of hiding out in design workshops, betting that an idea, product, or service will be a hit, they quickly get out in the field and let the people they are developing for be their guides. </p>

=== Emic perspective ===
People-centred development differs from conventional problem-solving techniques in which subject matter experts try to predict the future (often based on their ''false assumptions'') and furthermore aim to solve the imaginary problems from their expert perspectives – wearing their ''“expert hats”''.  The key difference compared to conventional problem-solving techniques is that people-centred development firstly tries to understand challenges from the perspective of subjects (i.e. humans) – from the emic perspective.

<p>Etic: from the perspective of observer. An 'etic' account is a description of a behaviour or belief by an analyst or expert observer.</p>
Emic: from the perspective of subject. An 'emic' account is a description of behaviour or a belief in terms meaningful (consciously or unconsciously) to the actor; that is, an emic account comes from a person within the culture.

People-centred developers try to see and experience things through the eyes of people; they aim to acquire deep insights and unique perspectives through stepping into the shoes of people they serve. Emphatic capacity drives the people-centred development considering people as its roadmap to innovative solutions. Immersing in another world not only opens up new creative possibilities, but it allows to leave behind the assumptions, preconceived ideas and outmoded ways of thinking. Empathizing with the people is the best route to truly grasp the context and complexities of their lives – and it keeps people in the centre of the development process. 

Ethnography is perceived as a “trademark” methodology of anthropology, used in multiple field-sites and responding to diverse questions and challenges. Ethnography could be defined as minimally: ‘''iterative-inductive research (that evolves in design through the study), drawing on a family of methods (such as semi-structured interviews, participant observation, focus groups, fieldwork, shadowing), involving direct and sustained contact with human agents, within the context of their daily lives, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions, and producing a richly written account that respects the irreducibility of human experience, that acknowledges the role of theory as well as the researcher’s own role and that views humans as part object/part subject’''.<p>Transferred to non-academic settings, ethnography proved to be highly valuable, but was often also perceived as time- and resource-consuming, or non-generalizable due to its focus on individuals and small groups. PEOPLE has experimented with alternative routes to understanding. The so called short-term or rapid, but still theoretically informed ethnography is emerging as an approach to doing research that is contemporary in both its subject matter and in its use for applied research projects designed to lead to informed interventions in the world. It is a type of ethnographic research adapted to non-academic, corporate settings’ time constraints. Short-term ethnography is characterized by forms of intensity that lead to deep and valid ways of knowing. They employ participatory and collaborative (rather than observational and distanced) ethnography. It involves intensive excursions into peoples’ lives, which use more interventional as well as observational methods to create contexts through which to delve into questions that will reveal what matters to those people in the frame of what the researcher is seeking to find out.</p>
Through these collaborations with project internal and external participants, the intensity of the research encounter becomes part of the way that we learn and empathize. To illustrate, spending up to four or so hours with one person in a context where one is focused on trying to understand or imagine their embodied practices, sensations or emotions, asking them questions about this and reflecting on one’s own affective responses, is an exhausting experience. Both, the researcher and the informant begin to feel overwhelmed by the depth and intensity of our respective research encounters. We journey into what is important to the participants and learn about elements of their everyday work lives that they normally do not talk with anyone about. Overall, the research is designed to enable ethnographers to ‘share’ or better understand other peoples’/stakeholders’ experiences, and to generate closer and empathetic understandings of these experiences in contexts of further analysis, interpretation and dissemination.

It is very important to note that the (short-term) ethnography as proposed and conducted in the PEOPLE project is not disassociated from its academic roots in anthropology. It draws from contemporary renderings of anthropological ethnography, originating in the late twentieth century reflexive turn of the ‘‘writing culture’’ debate and its legacy the idea anthropological ethnography involves doing research with rather than about participants. The fact that people-centred development is grounded in ethnography and in constant dialogue with the anthropological theory makes the approach unique and distinct from other approaches, such as user-centred design and design thinking. The PEOPLE approach goes beyond perceiving people solely from a design and business consulting perspective and makes a crucial step from “users”/”customers”/”clients” to the “actual”/“real people”. We aim to emphasize a clear distinction, i.e. moving from a simple, linear and customer-oriented design process to a theoretically informed and data-driven approach involving ethical considerations and understanding bigger contexts of emerging futures and world’s challenges. Anthropology students are educated in theoretical disciplines and spend several years learning how to observe people. Therefore, the key added value of people-centred development lies in its field work and data interpretation involving real people as co-creators from the very beginning. The breakthrough switch – which also requires change in the mindset – is that products, services and solutions are not only made FOR the people but are developed WITH the people that we – as people-centred developers – are willing to serve.
=== From "Big Data" to "Thick Data" ===
People-centred developers are looking at emerging human dynamics that have not been discovered and understood yet. Thick data is brought to light using qualitative, ethnographic research methods that uncover people’s emotions, meanings, behaviours, stories and models of their world. Relying solely on big and quantitative data increases the chances that we will miss something, while giving us the illusion we know everything. ''“People are getting caught up on the quantity side of the equation rather than the quality of the business insights that analytics can unearth. More numbers do not necessarily produce more insights”. ''''''On the other hand, integrating big data and thick data provides organizations a more complete context of any given situation. To form a complete picture, people-centred developers need both big and thick data because each of them produce different types of insights at varying scales and depths.

[[File:Big_data.png]]

<br>

In her inspiring paper “Why Big Data Needs Thick Data”, Tricia Wang concisely explains the importance of thick data and difference between both types – stating that thick data can rescue big data from the context-loss that comes with the process of making it usable. Thick data requires smaller samples to see human-centred patterns in depth. Thick Data reveals the social context of connections between data points while big data reveals insights with a particular range of quantified data points. Thick data techniques accept irreducible complexity, while big data techniques isolate variables to identify patterns. Thick data loses scale while big data loses resolution (see Table 1).<div>
{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;"
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | BIG DATA
| style="width: 50%;" |
THICK DATA
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | What, where, when, (how)
| style="width: 50%;" | Why, (how)
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Analytics, social media posts, GPS positioning
| style="width: 50%;" | Ethnography and other people-centred approaches (participant observation, interviews, focus groups, experiments)
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Large number of participants
| style="width: 50%;" | Few people
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Collected and analysed by machines
| style="width: 50%;" | Collected and interpreted by people
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Broad
| style="width: 50%;" | In-depth
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | People are (often) not aware of data being collected
| style="width: 50%;" | People are highly aware of data being collected
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | Analysis uses statistical methods
| style="width: 50%;" | Analysis includes developing codes, summaries, and themes
|}

<p>Thick data is the best method for mapping an unknown territory. When organizations want to dig into an unknown territory, they need thick data because it gives something that big data explicitly does not – inspiration. The act of collecting and analysing thick data through ethnography produces deep insights. </p>While using big data in isolation can be problematic, it is definitely critical to continue exploring how big data and thick data can complement each other. This is a great opportunity for qualitative researchers to position our work in the context of big data’s quantitative results.
=== Desirable, viable and feasible ... and sustainable ===
<p>People-centred development is uniquely situated to arrive at solutions that are meaningful, reliable, useful, desirable, feasible, viable, ethical and sustainable. By starting with people - their values, motivation, hopes, fears, and needs – the process aims to uncover what is most desirable. However, this presents only one lens through which people-centred development looks at future solutions. Once a range of different possibilities are researched with the actual people and communities, the co-creation focuses also on what is technically feasible to be actually implemented and how these solutions could be financially viable. It is a balancing act, but one that is absolutely crucial to designing and developing solutions that are reliable, successful and sustainable.</p>
[[File:Desirable_viable_feasible.png]]

<p>In addition to the beforementioned 3 pillars, the people-centred development projects map onto the United Nations sustainable development goals. PEOPLE considers the Sustainable Development Goals as the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. Goals address the global challenges we face, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperity, and peace and justice.</p>
<p> </p>
[[File:SDGs.png|1160px|thumb|center]]

=== Conveying ideas ===
<p>One of the key steps of the people-centred development approach is to test and refine the ideas together with people as potential future users of solutions. To keep the thinking, design and development sharp enough, the ideas should be made tangible. Pure abstractions are neither useful or precise enough to properly convey the ideas and to learn how to improve them. And because people-centred developers very rarely succeed the first time, they need to share what has been developed, and iterate based on the feedback they receive.</p>
<p>Therefore, people-centred developers are also makers, crafters and builders. They use different tools and methods to properly convey their ideas; from cardboards, art constellations, campaigns, videos, performance to physical prototypes and sophisticated digital tools. In the process of actually making something, the developers frequently discover opportunities and complexities that had never been thought about before. People-centred developers are action oriented so their ideas should be taken out of their minds and put into hands of people as co-creators.</p>

{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 80%;"
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_1.png|550px]]
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_2.png|550px]]
<br>
|-
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_3.png|550px]]
<br>
| style="width: 50%;" | [[File:case_studies_4.png|550px]]
<br>
|}

=== Remaining optimistic in the face of failures ===
<p>Developing, co-creating, experimenting with and testing ideas require an understanding that not everything is going to work. If this involves contemporary societal and environmental challenges the probability that several proposed ideas are bound to fail at very early stages will be even higher (despite the fact they were co-created and tested with people as potential end-users). The relatively high percentage of “early failures” requires adopting the right mindset.</p>
<p>People-centred design and development starts from discovering the unmet needs and opening up the possibilities together with the people, jointly researching the challenges and co-creating potential solutions. People-centred developers are aware that only through ACTIVE listening, thinking, collaborating, interpreting, building, co-creating and refining, they will be able to come to meaningful, sustainable and desirable products and services. Therefore, they are not afraid to fail and they often “fail” very early to be able to improve and succeed later. Refusing to take risks can lead to a situation where developers close themselves from the outside world and therefore minimize their chances to co-create and innovative with the people they serve. On the other hand, the people-centred mindset calls for firstly identifying what will not work as part of discovering what will. The basic idea is to release the prototypes as early as possible and then use them to keep learning, asking, testing and “failing”. When people-centred developers get it right, it is because they got it wrong the first (and second, and third etc.) time.</p>
<p>Therefore, people-centred development is in its essence driven by curiosity, positive attitude and optimism. Optimism is the embrace of possibility, the idea that even if we don’t know the answer, that it is out there and that we can find it. Optimism makes development and co-creation process more creative, encourages developers to push on when they hit dead ends, and helps all the stakeholders in a project gel. People-centred developers are persistently focused on what could be, not the countless obstacles that may get in the way. Constraints are inevitable, and often they push developers toward unexpected solutions. But it is the core animating belief – that challenges are solvable – that shows just how deeply optimistic people-centred developers are.</p>
<div><div><p><br></p></div></div></div>
<div><div></div></div>

File:Case studies 4.png

2022-03-30T11:19:15Z

TilenS:

File:Case studies 3.png

2022-03-30T11:19:09Z

TilenS:

File:Case studies 2.png

2022-03-30T11:19:02Z

TilenS:

2022-03-29T13:35:14Z

TilenS:

File:Desirable viable feasible.png

2022-03-29T13:33:44Z

TilenS:

File:Big data.png

2022-03-29T13:31:04Z

TilenS:

People-centred mindset

<p>Over the last few decades, digital technologies have driven deep and profound changes in our relationships to communication, culture, and society at large. This has caused Informatics, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Computer Science, and Digital Design to undergo a silent revolution the past two decades: human-centric innovation, user experience, and strategic device-agnostic service design do not only complement the traditional product-centric perspective – it has even been claimed to dominate it. <ref>Kolko, J. (2010b). On experiences, people, and technology. Interactions, 17(6), 80.</ref> <ref>Norman, D. A. (2007). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things: Basic books.</ref> </p>
<p>Digital design in the 2010s thus rapidly and continuously puts new requirements on theory and practice. Educational initiatives aiming to teach digital design need to evolve with the field and resonate with not only declarative academic requirements, but also the procedural craftsmanship and reflective qualities of design practice.<span style="background-color: #fbeeb8;">Kolko, 2011</span> <ref>Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action: Basic Books.</ref> <ref name="selander">Selander, S. (2008). Designs of Learning and the Formation and Transformation of Knowledge in an Era of Globalization. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 267-281. doi: 10.1007/s11217-007-9068-9</ref> <ref>Wärnestål, P., & Lindqvist, M. (2013). Designerly Ways of Teaching and Learning: A Course Structure for Interaction Design. Learning in Higher Education, 9(1), 179-188.</ref> As theory and design practice are being revitalized in this context, there is room for improvement in how we prepare students to deal with these sorts of problems professionally. To this end, several suggestions have been voiced, such as arts-based learning <ref>Snyder, J., Heckman, R., & Scialdone, M. J. (2009). Information studios: Integrating arts‐based learning into the education of information professionals. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 60(9), 1923-1932.</ref> , studio-based and apprenticeship courses (e.g. <ref name="sas">Sas, C. (2006). Teaching Interaction Design through Practitioners’ Praxis. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the Higher Education Academy.</ref> <ref name="wang">Wang, T. (2010). A new paradigm for design studio education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(2), 173-183.</ref>), and learning in authentic, off-campus contexts. <ref>Wärnestål, P., & Lindqvist, M. (2012). Course structuring for procedural knowledge in interaction design education. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 35th information systems research seminar in Scandinavia.</ref> Despite that some criticisms have been voiced regarding studio pedagogy, some scholars have recommended that the studio should be the default learning environment for design-oriented education (cf. <ref>Cho, J., & Cho, M.-H. (2014). Student perceptions and performance in online and offline collaboration in an interior design studio. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(4), 473-491. doi: 10.1007/s10798-014-9265-0</ref> <ref name="wang" />) since it is suitable for creative work and for addressing wicked problems and challenges. <ref>Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4(2), 155-169.</ref> </p>

== Design-Based Learning Sequences ==
<p>Design-based learning is characterized by open-ended, hands-on, authentic, and multi-disciplinary design tasks resembling professional communities of practice. <ref>Puente, S. M. G., van Eijck, M., & Jochems, W. (2013). A sampled literature review of design-based learning approaches: a search for key characteristics. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 717-732.</ref> <ref name="sas" />The design-based learning environment stresses the notion of students “making meaning” through design, and having teachers that facilitate such a process through formative and summative assessment of both individuals and teams. Communication and peer-to-peer interaction are critical aspects of a design-based learning environment. Indeed, communication as “making meaning” is conceptually close to design, which is seen as a way to configure social interaction and communicative resources.<ref name="selander /> In this light, a user-centered design process – where emphasis is put on transparency, communication, user control, and participation<ref>Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (2004). Thoughtful interaction design: A design perspective on information technology: Mit Press.</ref> – is a promising candidate for not only a rigorous design process <ref>Garrett, J. J. (2010). Elements of User Experience, The: User-Centered Design for the Web and Beyond: Pearson Education.</ref> , but also a highly suitable process for learning and making meaning. <ref>
</ref></p>
<p>Selander<ref name="selander /> presents a theoretical map that formalizes stages of a creative learning process. In short, the model describes a learning process starting with the teacher “staging” the course, including setting a theme for the course, making an inventory of available resources, and considering the curriculum of both the course and the program. As depicted in Figure 2, there are two transformational cycles following the staging. The primary cycle is focused on transforming and forming of knowledge where available media and modes are utilized. By the end of the primary cycle, students have formed a representation that mediates the transfer to the secondary transformational cycle, where reflection and meta-reflection comes into focus. The teacher’s role in the primary cycle is mainly formative and facilitating (along the lines of design studio practice), whereas the role changes to summative assessment of the work. By setting up the learning sequence in this manner, both teachers and students can use the model as an evaluation and reflection tool at the end of the course.</p>
[[File:Transformation_cycles.png|950px|thumb|left]]

Image 1: Transformation cycles in a formal learning sequence. After Selander<ref name="selander" />.

<p>Selander’s theoretical lens coupled with a user-centered, creative design process implemented in a design studio environment are the fundamental building blocks for the design studio learning framework.</p>

== Design-Specific Dimensions for Progression ==
<p>Based on the theoretical concepts presented above regarding aspects of design, creativity, and learning, we have identified seven dimensions relevant to design-oriented studio-based learning that characterize aspects of digital design practice. Table 1 presents the dimensions and associated scales used to characterize the studio course challenges.</p>

{| class="wikitable" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%; height: 258px;"
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" |
<br>
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | '''Dimension'''
| style="width: 73.9222%; height: 23px;" | '''Meaning'''
|- style="height: 97px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 97px;" |
D1
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 97px;" |
Design Problem
| style="width: 73.9222%; height: 97px;" | <p>The design problem ranges from well understood and closed (routine) to ambiguous, open, and loaded with internal conflicts in its sub-problems (“wicked”).</p>
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" | D2
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | Theoretical Base
| style="width: 73.9222%;" | <p>This dimension aims to capture how challenging the theoretical underpinnings are related to the content of the studio course. If the course theme is captured within theory that is established within e.g. HCI or Informatics it is considered less of a challenge, compared to cross-disciplinary themes where current HCI theory is lacking. The latter case may require students to contribute to the theory-building themselves.</p>
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" | D3
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | Perspective
| style="width: 73.9222%;" | <p>The design challenge may be tactical or strategic. A tactical design focuses on a specific product or service, and tends to measure objective product attributes, whereas strategic design takes into account long-term use, sustainability and viability, and measures effects on user experience in relation to identity, brand, and business model, etc.</p>
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" | D4
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | Target Platform
| style="width: 73.9222%;" | <p>The target platform (or device) can be given as part of the design problem (“Your mission is to build a website and e-shop for product X”), or it can be open-ended (“Your mission is to build a service that increases physical well-being”) and leave the choice of target platform open.</p>
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" | D5
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | Design Tools
| style="width: 73.9222%;" | <p>This dimension is related to D4, since the choice of platform often dictates the availability of design tools. On the less challenging end are mature and easily available tools for e.g. website prototyping. Projects residing on the more challenging end of this dimension require teams to build their own design tools for new interaction modalities.</p>
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" | D6
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | Service Complexity
| style="width: 73.9222%;" | <p>Most systems do not exist as isolated islands, but are part of a larger digital (and analogue) user experience context. A product or service is typically experienced through multiple touch points, across several channels, distributed in time and place. To regress the challenge in this dimension the problem can be limited to a single device and a single touch point in the service ecosystem. On the more challenging, and realistic, end of this dimension designers are expected to work on multiple devices and multiple touch points, as well as designing the user journeys between them.</p>
|- style="height: 23px;"
| style="width: 5.99362%; height: 23px;" | D7
| style="width: 20.0841%; height: 23px;" | Contractor's Digital Design Literacy
| style="width: 73.9222%;" | <p>The contractor (or client) who initiates the original theme or design problem can be highly proficient in digital service design, and have a robust understanding of what the service will entail, what a user-centered design process looks like, and how to manage complexity along dimensions D1-D6 above. On the other end of the scale, the contractor can be firmly set in a completely different domain or field, and is neither skilled nor experienced in terms of digital service design and user-centered design processes. In the former case, the design team has a natural ally in the client, who can indeed function as a mentor throughout the process. In the latter case, the responsibility of managing the process and argue for design decisions becomes a heavier load on the designers.</p>
|}

<p>The design process is the structure that these dimensions are anchored to. The design process is, as noted previously, one of the most valuable assets in a designer’s toolbox. From a learning point of view, the process also ties together the studio courses, and help students confidently work even if the challenges progress along dimensions D1-D7. Though the content and theme of the courses change, the design process remains basically the same (see Figure 1). It provides a lens of understanding for problem definition, design generation, and synthesis. It is therefore important that the design process is the anchor for all studios, when other variables change in the progression between studio courses.</p>

== Using the framework ==
<p>The transformation cycle and the dimensions of complexity forms the basis of a design-oriented learning cycle framework that gives instructors and industry partners a tool for tweaking the challenge and complexity of the studio project at “run-time”, in order to meet the needs and capabilities of the student group at hand. Should a student (or team of students) need a harder challenge to meet their potential, the instructor can select a dimension and progress it as a form of scaffolding. On the other hand, if the default challenge is too hard for students, or if they have chosen a particularly complex or challenging route on some of the dimensions, the instructor could coach the students to regress other dimensions so the workload can still be manageable and fruitful.<ref>Wärnestål, P. (2016). Formal learning sequences and progression in the studio: A framework for digital design education. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 15, 35-52.</p>

== References ==
<References />