Other+research

=Links := http://www.core77.com/reactor/03.06_winhall.asp

http://civic.mit.edu/blog/msauter/participatory-design

http://dddxyz.org/opinion-piece-identifying-the-individual-in-participatory-design/

http://aisel.aisnet.org/sjis/vol15/iss1/9/

Daria's article (talks about democracy and Scandinavian PD techniques) > technological change and systems development but change and development of people, organisations, > and practices, occurring in changing socio-historical contexts. `Design is about changing: changing artefacts as well as changing people, organisations, communities. Thus, there is an emphasis on imagined future use with new tools and changed infrastructures and interactions. From this perspective on design as change, > ` . . . participatory design approaches seek to include future users in most parts of the design process, even as co-designers. Ideally, users at many levels participate so that change can be shaped from several perspectives' [28]. At a minimum, as Finn Kensing put it, employees collaborating in a participatory design project `must have access to relevant information, they must have the possibility for taking an independent position on the problem, and they must in some way participate in the process of decision making. > Knowledge about the politics and power structures in social settings is essential; such local knowledge > also recognises possibilities for change already there. Creating the preconditions for viable participation includes working to bring forward tacit knowledge and shared knowledge that is taken for granted and therefore usually unspoken or invisible. Mutual learning between and among designers and users is a core principle in working relations. >
 * IN PARTICIPATORY DESIGN, `the people destined to use the system play a critical role in designing it'. Participatory design thus entails collaborative partnerships and co-construction of knowledge in analysis and co-construction of changes in social practices. Diverse participatory design methods adopted from and inspired by Scandinavian participatory design projects have been practised in North America and elsewhere since the mid-1980s.
 * three principles that distinguish Scandinavian approaches to participatory design:
 * deep commitments to democracy and democratization
 * discussions of values in design and imagined futures
 * how conflict and contradictions are regarded as resources in design
 * User participation in design is desirable for several reasons:
 * improving the knowledge upon which systems are built
 * enabling people to develop realistic expectations, and reducing resistance to change
 * increasing workplace democracy by giving the members of an organization the right to participate in decisions that are likely to affect their work (this motivation is culturally and politically based in Scandinavia, in legislation and in participatory design approaches)
 * BACKGROUND: Scandinavian participatory design practices are not distinguished by particular methods but rather by political commitments to societal concerns and r-ships w. participating users and communities
 * In the Scandinavian countries, in addition to participatory design, there are broadly shared traditions in mainstream informatics and information systems design that favour `user-oriented' and `human-centred' design. There is also an orientation towards action research. Morten Kyng observes that the emphasis in participatory design is on design as an experimental inquiring process, as a learning process, is broadly shared.
 * Scandinavian participatory design approaches emphasise change and development, not only
 * DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIZATION: The participatory design movements in Scandinavia have their roots in post-war political movements striving for industrial democracy including forms of co-determination by unions and `shopfloor' workers in decision making and efforts to improve the quality ofworking life, in the broad context of democratisation of society.


 * __D for Democracy: On Political Ideals in Participatory Design__**

Main points: Lytje argues against the idea of user participation as the way to democracy pointing out that ”the user, regardless of the democratic surface, will function only at the premisses of the developer. I agree with Lytje’s concern for the inequality between users and designers in systems design.

Bjerknes and Bratteteig (1995) argue that ”it is not obvious that user participation in system development activities is a means or the only means” to democracy (91). Among other things, they argue against ”the assumption that there is a connection between a democratic process and a democratic result” (91).

System design, is rather a ”reality construction” where ”Design creates its own foundations and sets its own goals” (ibid., 95). We also acknowledge what Orlikowsky calls ”the duality of technology” (Orlikowsky 1992) pointing to how technology finds its meaning in use where it is shaped by as well as it shapes users and the use context (see also Bijker and Law (eds.) 2000).

I would say that research within the (Scandinavian) IS-field has shown us the importance of a focus on democratic processes based on an acknowledgement of the social factor of technology in its design and use.

The article is not strongly related to PD but more on how democracy is a political ideal, and Participatory Design can be used to enhance that as it involve the users and developers in building systems, which would connect politics and research and this proves its democracy due to the involvement of other entities apart from the developers.