Search

HCI and design research has turned toward exploring methods, technologies, processes for societal impact, and do so by intervening in the real world and designing for, with and by people and existing citizen initiatives. A key issue faced is enabling efforts to continue beyond the project or grant timeline. For this reason, there is a growing need to create a forum where researchers and practitioners can share their approaches to shed light on opportunities and challenges of supporting lasting civic initiatives moving forward. This workshop aims to bring together researchers and practitioners interested in how to make civic initiatives have lasting impact: either by supporting and sustaining such initiatives or by focusing on how their outcomes increase people's capacity to act on their ideas and wishes.

Citizens and communities play a significant role in shaping the cities they live in, providing a human touch to the development of smart cities. Designers and researchers aim to support this movement through developing (partly) digital technologies together with citizens and communities. However, while the body of examples on this topic is steadily growing, less effort has been made to aggregate existing research and map the underlying processes. In order to contribute to a better understanding of community technology initiatives, this article presents a qualitative systematic literature review on the design and deployment of (partly) digital technologies for civic communities. The article outlines five important topics in these community technology initiatives, based on a qualitative analysis of findings from 36 empirical studies. The five topics are: connectedness to the community context, establish(ed) networks and relationships, balanced roles and responsibilities, diverse and inclusive involvement, and collaborative development of community technologies. The article provides a starting point for future research and design of community technology initiatives and offers an introduction for researchers new to the field.

In this paper, we develop the notion of design archives to understand how different forms of knowledge are systematically accumulated and shared in and across design processes. Drawing on philosophy and media theory, we present a working definition of design archives as more than documentation. Through an interview study, we investigate how various archives systematically inform design work and govern the way design processes are represented and reflected upon. The study provides insights into an abundance of tools used to access, record, store and share information. We highlight the difference between personal, shared, and public archives, different archival barriers for sharing, how prototypes act as (an)archival conduits of design potentials, and how information (and people) tend to get lost in the archives. Finally, we discuss how a design archival approach might help identify power relations in design while also facilitating a move from 'dead' to 'living' archives in design work. In this paper, we develop the notion of design archives to understand how different forms of knowledge are systematically accumulated and shared in and across design processes. Drawing on philosophy and media theory, we present a working definition of design archives as more than documentation. Through an interview study, we investigate how various archives systematically inform design work and govern the way design processes are represented and reflected upon. The study provides insights into an abundance of tools used to access, record, store and share information. We highlight the difference between personal, shared, and public archives, different archival barriers for sharing, how prototypes act as (an)archival conduits of design potentials, and how information (and people) tend to get lost in the archives. Finally, we discuss how a design archival approach might help identify power relations in design while also facilitating a move from 'dead' to 'living' archives in design work.

Hackathons have attracted increasing interest in recent years, and whereas much of the research focus on the role of hackathons as potential means for education, innovation, or municipal engagement, this paper focuses on the creative process of a hackathon. We present an explorative, autobiographical case study of a team at a hackathon and in the analysis we identify four factors, which in particular impacted the team's design judgement during the hackathon: 1) The hackathon format, 2) the available tools and materials, 3) the participants' domain knowledge, and 4) the participants' technical knowledge. Though the factors are evident in most design processes, we discuss how the four factors in a hackathon setting influenced the design judgement in a particular way and how the factors influenced the creative engagement in developing technology in the hackathon. We discuss potential implications for future research on how to understand design judgements made under the particular circumstances of a hackathon. Hackathons have attracted increasing interest in recent years, and whereas much of the research focus on the role of hackathons as potential means for education, innovation, or municipal engagement, this paper focuses on the creative process of a hackathon. We present an explorative, autobiographical case study of a team at a hackathon and in the analysis we identify four factors, which in particular impacted the team's design judgement during the hackathon: 1) The hackathon format, 2) the available tools and materials, 3) the participants' domain knowledge, and 4) the participants' technical knowledge. Though the factors are evident in most design processes, we discuss how the four factors in a hackathon setting influenced the design judgement in a particular way and how the factors influenced the creative engagement in developing technology in the hackathon. We discuss potential implications for future research on how to understand design judgements made under the particular circumstances of a hackathon.

This article starts from the paradox that, although participation is a defining trait of participatory design (PD), there are few explicit discussions in the PD literature of what constitutes participation. Thus, from a point of departure in Actor-Network Theory (ANT), this article develops an analytical understanding of participation. It is argued that participation is a matter of concern, something inherently unsettled, to be investigated and explicated in every design project. Specifically, it is argued that (1) participation is an act overtaken by numerous others, rather than carried out by individuals and (2) that participation partially exists in all elements of a project. These traits are explicated in a design project called ‘Teledialogue’, where the participants are unfolded as networks of reports, government institutions, boyfriends, social workers and so on. The argument is synthesised as three challenges for PD: (1) participants are network configurations, (2) participation is an aspect of all project activities and (3) there is no gold standard for participation.

This workshop aims to examine and discuss the role and nature of design tools and materials in creative work, and to explore how novel tools can meaningfully combine existing and novel tools to support and augment creative work. By exploring and combining methodological, theoretical, and design-oriented perspectives, we wish to examine the potentials and limitations in current uses of design tools and materials, and discuss and explore when and how we can introduce ones. Participation in the workshop requires participants to document and analyse central themes in a case, and the resulting material will serve as the empirical grounding for workshop discussions.

The aim of the workshop is to examine and discuss how computers can support, enrich, and transform collaborative creative processes. By exploring and combining methodological, theoretical, and design- oriented perspectives, we wish to examine the implications, potentials, and limitations of different approaches to providing digital support for collaborative creativity. Participation in the workshop requires participants to actively document and identify salient themes in one or more examples of computer- supported collaborative creativity, and the resulting material will serve as the empirical grounding for workshop discussions.

For 25 years the Participatory Design Conference (PDC) has been concerned with the understanding and development of Participatory Design in theory and practice. The main contribution of this paper is an informed understanding of how the participatory design tradition formed the early PDC community and how the PDC community's understanding of PD developed during the 90s. The paper presents an inquiry into the recurrent, fundamental aspects of participatory design, namely: politics, context, product, people, and method. Using politics as our point of departure the paper elucidates how the core aspects were shaped and developed during the first decade of PDC. The paper thereby establishes a basis for advancing how interaction design researchers position and discuss their research in relation to the roots of participatory design at PDC. In the papers concluding remarks we suggest how contemporary researchers can build on, challenge, and fill in gaps in the PDC community's understanding of PD.

We investigate the diversity of participatory design research practice, based on a review of ten years of participatory design research published as full research papers at the Participatory Design Conferences (PDC) 2002-2012, and relate this body of research to five fundamental aspects of PD from classic participatory design literature. We identify five main categories of research contributions: Participatory Design in new domains, Participatory Design methods, Participatory Design and new technology, Theoretical contributions to Participatory Design, and Basic concepts in Participatory Design. Moreover, we identify how participation is defined, and how participation is conducted in experimental design cases, with a particular focus on interpretation, planning, and decision-making in the design process. Five fundamental aspects of PD from classic participatory design literature.Five main categories of research contributions.We identify how participation is defined.We identify how participation is conducted in experimental design cases.

This paper introduces the idea of craftsmanship as a way of understanding the shaping and re-shaping of code as a material crafting practice. We build our analysis on a qualitative study of a coder engaged in creative and expressive programming on an old hardware platform. The contribution of the paper is a set of conceptual categories: craft engagement, craftsmanship rhythm and craftsmanship expressivity, that conceptualizes coding as crafting. This paper introduces the idea of craftsmanship as a way of understanding the shaping and re-shaping of code as a material crafting practice. We build our analysis on a qualitative study of a coder engaged in creative and expressive programming on an old hardware platform. The contribution of the paper is a set of conceptual categories: craft engagement, craftsmanship rhythm and craftsmanship expressivity, that conceptualizes coding as crafting.

This paper contributes an exploration of ownership as a dynamic process in community-oriented projects. We use case study accounts of two design projects to consider participation in contexts where social structure is relevant to design outcomes. In studying these dynamics, we consider four aspects: what motivates ownership; how ownership transitions; structures to support ownership; and facilitating efficacy among participants. Specifically, we study the contribution of a Danish research team to the production of a media façade for a Swedish municipality and how British researchers engaged community groups in making internet radio podcasts to share insight. We examine the complexity of the social process involved and trace patterns of change, before concluding with pragmatic and ethical reasons for technology design to pay attention to ownership issues. This paper contributes an exploration of ownership as a dynamic process in community-oriented projects. We use case study accounts of two design projects to consider participation in contexts where social structure is relevant to design outcomes. In studying these dynamics, we consider four aspects: what motivates ownership; how ownership transitions; structures to support ownership; and facilitating efficacy among participants. Specifically, we study the contribution of a Danish research team to the production of a media façade for a Swedish municipality and how British researchers engaged community groups in making internet radio podcasts to share insight. We examine the complexity of the social process involved and trace patterns of change, before concluding with pragmatic and ethical reasons for technology design to pay attention to ownership issues.

In this paper we present an example of how to work with the challenges inherent in media facade design processes. We base the paper on our experiences from the creation of a series of design proposals for a media facade on the Odenplan subway station in Stockholm, Sweden. We approach the question of how to design for media facades by discussing how we have structured our design process to address specific sets of challenges outlined in previous literature in the field of media architecture. In our view, such research is valuable in that it helps establish common ground for researchers and practitioners in a developing field by building a repertoire of approaches, as well as highlight important issues that need to be addressed in this emergent field.