Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-30T14:00:38.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

User involvement in the design of complex digital tools for employees in a large organisation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Anya Petyaeva ,
Joy Goodman-Deane  and
P. John Clarkson
Anya Petyaeva*
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
Joy Goodman-Deane
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
P. John Clarkson
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
*
ap2160@cam.ac.uk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Large organisations are designing complex technology-based tools for their staff to use. In busy workplace environments, it can be difficult to get user input about a design. This paper describes the designer and user interactions in one such organisation, gaining insights that could be useful in other similar settings. The findings are based on a set of interviews with designers and researchers within the organisation. The paper identifies the current practices and constraints involved in understanding and capturing users' needs and discusses potential solutions.

Keywords

design practicedesign methodsuser testinguser involvementdesigning internally
Type
Industrial Design
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 2423 - 2432
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: a practical guide. London: SAGE Publications, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caputo, F. A, Greco., , D'Amato, I., Notaro, S. S. (2018). On the use of virtual reality for a human-centred workplace design. Procedia Structural Integrity, Vol 8, pp 297 – 308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2017.12.031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, J., Coleman, R. (2015). History of Inclusive Design in the UK, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 46, pp. 235-247. ISSN 0003-6870, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, H., Keates, S., Clarkson, P.J. (2004). Inclusive Design in Industry: Barriers, Drivers, and the Business Case. In: Stary, C., Stephanidis, C. (eds) User-Centered Interaction Paradigms for Universal Access in the Information Society. UI4ALL 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3196. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30111-0_26.Google Scholar
Irizar-Arrieta, A., Casado Mansilla, D., 2017. "Coping with user diversity: UX informs the Design of a digital interface that encourages sustainable behaviour". Conference: 11th Multi Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. Jul 21 - 23, Lisbon, Portugal, pp 1 - 20.Google Scholar
Goodman-Deane, J., Bradley, M., Lazzarini, B., Roca Bosch, E., Waller, S., Clarkson, P.J. (2023) Effectiveness of the Inclusive Design Wheel in practice: Lessons from five pilot projects. In: Goodman-Deane, Lazar, Heylighen, Dong, Clarkson (eds). Design for Sustainable Inclusion, pp. 191-200. Springer.Google Scholar
Goodman-Deane, J. Ward, J. Hosking, I. and Clarkson, P.J. (2014). A comparison of methods currently used in inclusive design. Applied Ergonomics. Vol.45, No. 4, pp. 886-894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.11.005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heier, J. (2021). "Design Intelligence - Taking Further Steps Towards New Methods and Tools for Designing in the Age of AI". In: Degen, H., Ntoa, S. (Ed.), Artificial Intelligence in HCI. Springer, vol 12797. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77772-2_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornung, O., Smolnik, S. (2022). AI invading the workplace: negative emotions to-wards the organizational use of personal virtual assistants. Electronic Markets, Vol. 32, pp123–138. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12525-021-00493-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keates, S., Clarkson, P.J., 2003. Countering design exclusion: bridging the gap between usability and accessibility. Universal Access Information Society. Vol 2, pp 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-003-0059-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landauer, T.K. and American Council of Learned Societies (1995) The trouble with computers usefulness, usability, and productivity. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mieczakowski, A., Hessey, S., Clarkson, P., 2013. "Inclusive Design and the Bottom Line: How Can Its Value Be Proven to Decision Makers?", [online] Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Design Methods, Tools, and Interaction Techniques for Inclusion. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39188-0_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD, (2017), Pensions at a Glance 2017: OECD and G20 Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/pension_glance-2017-en.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedó, B., Nguyen, Q.A., Koskela, L., Tezel, A., Vrabie, E., Whitelock-Wainwright, A., Potter, D., Robinson, S. and Tzortzopoulos, P. (2022). Devising and Implementing Process Models Within Infrastructure Engineering Design. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC30), Edmonton, Caneda, 2022, International Group for Lean Construction, pp 504–515. doi.org/10.24928/2022/0155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petyaeva, A., Goodman-Deane, J., Bradley, M., Waller, S., and Clarkson, J. (2022) "Improving our understanding of user trial samples using survey data", Proceedings of DRS 2022, Bilbao, Spain, 25 June - 3 July, Design Research Society, https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raisch, S., Krakowski, S. (2021). Artificial Intelligence and Management: The Automation–Augmentation Paradox, [online] Academy of Management Review. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0072 (accessed 10.11.2023).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shneiderman, B., Hochheiser, H. (2001). "Universal usability as a stimulus to advanced interface design", Behaviour & Information Technology, Vol 20 No. 5, pp 367-376. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290110083602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trischler, J., Pervan, S.J., Kelly, S.J., Scott, D.R. (2018). The Value of Codesign: The Effect of Customer Involvement in Service Design Teams. Journal of Service Research, Vol. 21, pp 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670517714060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, K., Pahl, G. (Gerhard), Blessing, L., 2007. Engineering design: a systematic approach. Springer, London.Google Scholar
Wilkens, U. (2020). "Artificial intelligence in the workplace – A double-edged sword". International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, Vol, 37. No. 5, pp. 253 - 265. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-02-2020-0022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, C. R., De Angeli, A. (2014). "Applying user-centred and participatory design approaches to commercial product development", Design Studies, Vol 35, No. 6, pp. 614-631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar