Current Issue
The Principle of Genuine User Participation - 3 May 2005
by Ann Light
Read this article in Chinese (translated by Sean Liu)
The principle of genuine user participation calls for the active participation in the project group’s efforts by representatives of staff members who are directly affected. There are both pragmatic and political arguments for such user participation.
The pragmatic arguments rest on the need for mutual learning between users and IT designers: IT designers need knowledge about the work environment that make up the design project’s object field, and users need knowledge about technological options. That end is most effectively attained by organizing activities that enable the two groups to learn from one another. Such a mutual learning process also supports developing a shared understanding of the problems that the design project aims to solve and helps anchor the proposed solutions in the business organization. It is our experience that users can contribute innovative and constructive suggestions for change when they have the right conditions for doing so. We will return to this mutual-learning perspective later on in this section.
The political arguments revolve around the users’ right to influence their own working conditions, which are often significantly affected by IT projects. Many managers also regard staff members’ influence on their own working conditions as an element in establishing and maintaining a good working environment and, as such, a strategy for attracting and keeping the staff members they consider central. Moreover, as regards participation, some staff may have an interest beyond the ongoing current project: knowledge about IT projects can be a valuable competency for an individual to further his or her own career.
In stressing user participation as a principle, we have two goals. Initially, user participation increases the potential of visions produced by a design project to reflect the users’ true situation and needs. Later, user participation increases the potentials of the systems to be used according to their intentions. However, the principle of genuine user participation does not imply that IT designers will always be working alongsideusers. First, users may not be exempted from their day-today work to participate in the IT design process; second, IT designers handle certain tasks on their own.
Experientially, the aims of user participation may vary widely, just as the ways in which users actually participate in IT projects may vary. Sometimes, users may be involved only as informants for IT designers, who then analyze and present the results on their own. That is not what this book means by “genuine user participation.” If users’ participation is limited to serving as informant, for instance, in interviews about their work functions and IT needs, or to taking part in systems testing, the resulting systems may not cover the users’ actual needs. Possible reasons for this may be that the wrong users participated or that the focus of user participation was too narrow. Often, participation is limited to middle managers or executives, who may excel at representing the company’s overarching goals for the project. They typically express how they think the work should be performed under ideal conditions. However, they rarely have insight into day-to-day routines, including what factors may be complicating the work or what useful alternatives could be.
In many IT projects, the aim and focus of user participation are unclear. This may be the case where IT designers are mostly concerned about specifying IT systems while users and managers are primarily focused on the new products and services that the systems may enable. As a result, participation may be handled in ways that do not afford users opportunities to develop and express their needs, ideas, and visions for IT usage.
Management is responsible for allotting the time and information resources necessary for making user participation happen. Furthermore, it is up to management to delegate decision-making competency and clarify the types of decisions it will entrust to the project group. Once the decisionmaking competency has been established, the project group is responsible for organizing the design project to make for genuine user participation. It is a good idea to clarify both the aim and the focus of user participation during the initiation phase.
How user participation actually progresses depends on how the users are situated in relation to the design project. Their influence may extend to the results of the design project or to planning and managing the course of the design project. Conflicts may exist-or emerge-around an IT project. For that reason, it is important that there are forums for resolving such conflicts. Beyond their representation in the project group, users may sometimes also serve on the steering committee. Depending on the company’s corporate culture or the nature of the design project, shop stewards or employee representatives on management-and-union committees may be steering committee candidates.
To aid the project group’s efforts, other staff members can be drawn in via interviews and various forms of workshops. They may also be included when the project group updates the staff members about the status of the project and the products, offering them opportunities for feedback and dialogue.
Both procedures help prepare them for changes that will result from the project. This is part of what we call “anchoring.” Accordingly, accommodations should be made to allow staff members and affected parties to keep tabs on the design project and comment on its products.
As users in the project group cannot be expected to possess any knowledge about how to go about a design project, it is the IT designers’ job to develop project proposals, which are discussed in the project group before being submitted to the steering committee for a decision. Moreover, users in the project group are key persons in developing an understanding of the selected work domains and in assessing the visions for overall change.
During the initiation phase, it is decided which users will participate in the project group’s work. Whether the employees themselves or the managers make the selection depends on the corporate culture. We recommend including two to three users in the project group. These users should have knowledge of the involved work domains and professional respect among their co-workers. Another more pragmatic criterion often is who has enough time to participate in the project. But the more important the project is to thecompany, the more important it is to accommodate the first two criteria.
Users in the project group will participate over the entire course of the design project. This includes participation in project group meetings, information gathering and analysis, and possibly in developing the design project’s products.
Users may be assigned autonomous tasks in the design project or may work together with an IT designer, depending on their familiarity with the tasks in question. A common practical problem involves handling the differences that often arise between the users in the project group and other staff members. Users involved in the project group often gain greater understanding of, and insight into, the project and its ends and means. They typically develop a stronger commitment to the project than their fellow workers. Accordingly, it is necessary to continually consult other staff members about goals, problems, needs, as well as generated visions for solutions.
Keld Bdker, Finn Kensing, and Jesper Simonsen
An excerpt from their book: “Participatory IT Design Designing for Business and Workplace Realities”, published by MIT Press, October 2004, $50.
Ann Light is editor of Usability News and also consults on communication strategy and usability. She balances this with an academic presence as visiting research fellow at Queen Mary, University of London, under whose wing she publishes on interaction design and networked communication. She is part of the HCI community that seeks to introduce insights from arts and humanities into digital product design, just now helping to launch the Leonardo Network. Before devoting herself to the relationship between people and technology, she was a political journalist and her first serious job was drama teaching, an early example of her interest in interaction design. Her education includes an English degree, a PGCE in Drama, an MSc in Knowledge Based Systems and a PhD in ‘Interaction through Websites’ from Sussex.
Comments made
Possible Related Articles:
Latest Comments