Skip to main content
×
Home

Communicating actionable user research for human-centered design

  • Celeste Roschuni (a1), Elizabeth Goodman (a2) and Alice M. Agogino (a3)
Abstract
Abstract

In human-centered design, user research drives design decisions by providing an understanding of end users. In practice, different people, teams, or even companies manage each step of the design process, making communication of user research results a critical activity. Based on an empirical study of current methods used by experts, this paper presents strategies for effectively communicating user research findings across organizational or corporate boundaries. To build researcher–client relationships, understand both user and client needs, and overcome institutional inertia, this paper proposes viewing user research clients as users of user research outcomes. This reframing of the crafting of communication across boundaries as a parallel internal human-centered design process we refer to as a double ethnography.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Reprint requests to: Celeste Roschuni, 1865 Euclid Ave No. 27, Berkeley, CA 94709, USA. E-mail: celery@berkeley.edu
References
Hide All
Baecker D. (2001). Why systems? Theory Culture & Society 18(1), 5974.
Bartel C., & Garud R. (2009). The role of narratives in sustaining organizational innovation. Organization Science 20(1), 107117.
Beyer H., & Holtzblatt K. (1997). Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Bucciarelli L. (1996). Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Carlile P.R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science 13(4), 442455.
Crilly N., Maier A., & Clarkson J.P. (2008). Representing artefacts as media: modelling the relationship between designer intent and consumer experience. International Journal of Design 2(3), 1527.
Dougherty D. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization Science 3(2), 179202.
Dym C.L., Agogino A.M., Eris O., Frey D.D., & Leifer L.J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching and learning. Journal of Engineering Education 94(1), 103120.
Ericson K.A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Faste R.A. (1987). Perceiving Needs. Technical report. Washington, DC: Society of Automotive Engineers.
Frascara J. (2004). Communication Design: Principles, Methods, and Practice. New York: Skyhorse Publishing.
Freeman C., Robertson A.B., Achilladelis B.G., & Jervis P. (1972). Success and failure in industrial innovation (Report on Project SAPPHO by the Science Policy Research Unit). London: University of Sussex, Center for the Study of Industrial Innovation.
Gasson S. (2003). Human-centered vs. user-centered approaches to information system design. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 5(2), 2946.
Gratton L., & Erickson T.J. (2007). 8 ways to build collaborative teams. Harvard Business Review 85(11), 100109.
Hargadon A. (2002). Brokering knowledge: linking learning and innovation. Research in Organizational Behavior 24, 4185.
Heath C., & Heath D. (2008). Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die. New York: Random House.
Henderson K. (1991). Flexible sketches and inflexible databases: visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Science, Technology & Human Values 16(4), 448473.
Henderson M.R. (1993). Representing functionality and design intent in product models. Proc. 2nd ACM Solid Modeling 1993, Montreal.
Hey J., Yu J., & Agogino A.M. (2008). Design team framing: paths and principles. Proc. ASME 2008 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf., New York.
Lai J., Honda T., & Yang M.C. (2010). A study of the role of user-centered design methods in design team projects. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design and Manufacturing 24(3), 303316.
Madique M.A., & Zirger B.J. (1984). A study of success and failure in product innovation: the case of the U.S. electronics industry. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 31(4), 192203.
Maier A.M., Dönmez D., Hepperle C., Matthias K., Lindemann U., & Clarkson P.J. (2011). Improving communication in design: recommendations from the literature. Proc. 18th Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED '11), Copenhagen.
Maier A.M., Eckert C.M., & Clarkson P.J. (2005). A meta-model for communication in engineering design. CoDesign 1(4), 243254.
Maier A.M., Kreimeyer M., Hepperle C., Eckert C.M., Lindemann U., & Clarkson P.J. (2008). Exploration of correlations between factors influencing communication in complex product development. Concurrent Engineering 16(1), 3759.
Martin M.J.C. (1994). Managing Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Technology-Based Firms. New York: Wiley.
Nafus D., & Anderson K. (2009). Writing on walls: the materiality of social memory in corporate research. In Ethnography and the Corporate Encounter: Reflections on Research in and of Corporations (Cefkin M., Ed.). New York: Berghahn Books.
Newman C., & Lieu D.K. (2005). Comprehension scaffolding for multimedia: structuring technical animations for learning. ASEE/EDGD Proc. Mid-Year Meeting.
Raven M.E., & Flanders A. (1996). Using contextual inquiry to learn about your audiences. SIGDOC Asterisk Journal of Computer Documentation 20(1), 113.
Sanders L. (2008). On modeling: an evolving map of design practice and design research. Interactions 15(6), 1317.
Schein E.H. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
Schön D.A. (1994). Frame Reflection. New York: Basic Books.
Shannon C.E., & Weaver W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Springfield, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Sole D., & Wilson D. (2002). Storytelling in organizations: the power and traps of using stories to share knowledge in organizations. Boston: LILA, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Accessed at http://lila.pz.harvard.edu/_upload/lib/ACF14F3.pdf
Star S.L., & Griesmer J.R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations,” and coherence: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–1939. Social Studies of Science 19, 387420.
Stompff G., Henze L.A.R., de Jong F., van Vliembergen E., Stappers P.J., Smulders F.E.H.M., & Buijs J.A. (2011). User-centered design in the wild. Proc. 18th Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED '11), Copenhagen, Denmark.
Strauss A., & Corbin J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Suchman L. (1987). Plans and Situated Action. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Visser F.S. (2009). Bringing the everyday life of people into design. PhD Thesis. Delft University of Technology.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

AI EDAM
  • ISSN: 0890-0604
  • EISSN: 1469-1760
  • URL: /core/journals/ai-edam
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 10
Total number of PDF views: 61 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 423 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 18th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.