Co design tools research

DIFFERENT METHODS OF CO-DESIGN: HOW
CAN DIFFERENT DECISIONS IN CO-DESIGN
AFFECT THE OUTCOMES IN DESIGN AROUND
EUROPE?
Co-design Tools Research
LICA426 Major Research Project
Spring and Summer Term
Student Name: Michael Solaymantash
Student Number: 30261043
E-mail: M.Solaymantash@lancaster.ac.uk
MA Design Management
2013-‐14

2
CO-DESIGN TOOLS RESEARCH:
Student Name: Michael Solaymantash
Contents
1. Lego role-playing..…………....……………………....………..………….…………………… 3
1.1 Lego real-time web - Trivioquadrivio Case study……………………....……………… 4
2. Role playing…………………....……………………....………..………….…………………... 7
2.1 Designing a medical service – Ideo Case Study………………………………………. 7
2.2 Go Project – Case study……………………....………..………….………….…………. 8
3. Group Sketching……………………....………..………….…………………………………… 10
3.1 Democracy, What consultant’s think of MP’s – Design council…………….………... 11
4 Issue cards……………....………..………….………………………………………………….. 11
4.1 Service design for airport security – Carnagie Mellon University……………..……… 11
4.2 Silk method deck – Engine Case Study……………....………..………….……………. 12
4.3 Bovisa Co-housing project – Dipartimento di Innovazione Sociale…………….……. 13
5.
Rough Prototyping……………....………..………….…………………………………………. 14
5.1 Photocaring – Adam Little at CIID……………....………..………………..……………. 16
5.2 Direct care – Carrie Chan, Carnagie Mellon University………………..……………… 17
5.3 Smart street objects – Royal College of Art Case Study ……………....………..…… 19
6. Affinity diagram……………....………..………….……………………………………………. 20
6.1 Service design for airport security – Carnagie Mellon University…………………….. 22
7. Motivation Matrix……………....………..………….…………………………………………... 23
7.1 E-Meal Motivational matrix……………....………..………….………………………….. 23
8. Mind mapping……………....………..………….…………………………..………………….. 24
8.1 D-School Mind map – IDEO Case Study……………....………………....……………. 24
9. Storytelling……………....………..………….…………………………..……………………… 24
9.1 Rentathing Case Study ……………....………………....………………....…………….. 26
9.2 Narrative design tool kit Case Study……………....………………....……....…………. 27
10. Character profiles..………………....………………....………………........………………… 27
10.1 Daddy Cool- Domus Academy Case Study……....………………........…………….. 28
11. References..………………....………………....………………........……………………….. 29

Users and other figures can become part of the design process as expert of their experience,
but in order to take on this role they must be given appropriate tools for expressing
themselves. The designers should provide ways for people to engage with each other as well
as instruments to communicate, be creative, share insights and envision their own ideas. The
co-design activities can support different levels of participation, from situation in which the
external figures are involved just in specific moments to situations in which they take part to
the entire process, building up the service together with the designers.
These tools and their case studies should ideally help to generate a better concept of what
design tools can be applied to scenarios where they are most relevant and will participate in
helping to find out how co-design can affect a projects outcome.
1. Lego serious play
LEGO Serious Play is an innovative, experiential process designed to
enhance the generation of innovative solutions (Frick, Tardini, Cantoni 2013).
Defining
Lego
Serious
Play
-‐
provided
by
‘Service
design
tools
2013’.
3
LSP builds on a set of basic values, which can be summarized as follows:
• The answer is in the system.
• Everyone has to express his/her reflections.
• There is no ONE right answer.
The LSP Core Process is based on four essential steps:
• The facilitator poses the question
• Participants build their answers using LEGO bricks.
• Participants share their answers with the other participants.
• Participants reflect on what they have seen and heard.
This kind of hands-on, minds-on learning produces a deeper, more
meaningful understanding of the world and its possibilities; moreover LEGO
Serious Play deepens the reflection process and supports an effective
dialogue (Service design tools, 2013).

1.1 CASE STUDY:
LEGO REAL TIME WEB - Trivioquadrivio
Trivioquadrivio is a consultancy agency in Milan, Italy. NewMinE Lab of USI
(Università della Svizzera Italiana) developed an idea for a new methodology
based on LEGO Serious Play (Service design tools, 2013).
Till 2008 the existing methodologies have been the ‘LEGO Real Time Identity’
which supports the definition of the identifier lines of an organization, and the
LEGO Real Time Strategy, supporting the identification of the operational
strategy that an organization has to assume in relation with a specific project
(Service design tools 2013).
Aim:
The aim of the new methodology developed by Trivioquadrivio and NewMInE
Lab is to use the immediateness of the metaphoric language of LEGO to
facilitate the communication between clients and designers at the early stages
of web applications' projects (Team, 2008). The LEGO Real Time Web allows
the defining and sharing of a very precise idea of the design purpose, of the
context and the market in which the application will be positioned, of its
potential users, of the required contents and of the roles and functionalities of
each figure involved in the development (Service design tools, 2013).
4
Lego
Serious
Play
image
-‐
provided
by
‘Service
design
tools
2013’.

Definitions
provided
by
‘Service
design
tools
2013’
and
‘Frick,
Tardini,
Cantoni
2013’.
5
The process:
1. LEGO SERIOUS PLAY gathers around a table for up to ten
participants. The work is carried out under the guidance of a certified
facilitate the LEGO SERIOUS PLAY, which is responsible for directing
the activities of the participants in the strategic objectives set.
2. Participants build a model, first individually and then collectively . In
constructing the model, each participant highlights and shares the
metaphorical meaning .
3. Through the sharing of "organizational stories" attributed to the model,
groups construct a collective view and are set a few simple guiding
principles, useful to determine a shared horizon of action.
The official forms so far developed and offered by the LEGO ® are:
Lego Real Time Identity: the aim is to define the lines of identifying a
company or an organization. Members, activities, goals, market positioning,
internal and external agents, both positive and negative with respect to the
company. It allows participants to understand themselves and their colleagues
better.
Lego Real Time Strategy: the aim is to identify the strictly operational
strategy that the company in question could be taken in reference to a specific
project.
1. Real Time Strategy for the Team: which aims at unlocking the full
potential of a team quickly, effectively, and deeply; and
2. Real Time Strategy for the Enterprise: a process to continuously
develop strategies in an unpredictable world.
An LSP workshop typically takes from half a day to a couple of days. It always
starts with a skills building program, i.e., a set of exercises that aim at
introducing participants to the method and making them acquainted with it.
Then, the ‘real’ workshop starts with the first AT (Building individual models),
which is the only mandatory AT, and, may be used with one or more other
ATs.

6
The LSP methodology is based on the Core Process and on seven
Application Techniques.
The Core Process has four essential steps:
1. Posing the question - The facilitator presents the challenge to the
participants. The challenge must have no obvious or correct solution.
2. Construct - Participants build their answer to the challenge using
LEGO bricks. While building their models, participants assign a
meaning to them and develop a story covering the meaning. In doing
so, they construct new knowledge.
3. Sharing - Participants share their stories and the meanings assigned
to their models with each other, and listen to the stories of other
participants.
4. Reflection - The facilitator encourages participants to reflect on what
they have heard and seen in the models.
The seven Application Techniques (AT) are:
1. Building individual models
2. Building shared models
3. Creating a Landscape
4. Making Connections
5. Building a System
6. Playing Emergence and Decisions
7. Extracting Simple Guiding Principles

7
2. Role playing
Some actors, the sample users or the designers themselves perform a
hypothetical service experience. The implied condition is thinking that the
service really exists and then building a potential journey through some of its
functionalities (Service design tools, 2013). By assigning players a particular
viewpoint through role-playing or telling a story, design games aim at
providing a glimpse of another world in order to potentially evoke empathy
and human-centered thinking instead of ethnographically correct information
(Vaajakallio, 2012).
A possible evolution of this tool consists in the performance of the same
scene several times, changing the character profiles on each scene in order
to understand how different users would act in the same situation (Service
design tools, 2013). Techniques for role playing and acting out interaction are
all planned and structured. Other enactments, however, are unplanned,
situated, and taken for granted. These expressions of interaction and usage
often take the form of gesture (Arvola & Artman, 2006).
2.1 CASE STUDY 1:
DESIGNING A MEDICAL SERVICE - Ideo
While designing a medical service, some designer of IDEO role-played
situations involving doctors, nurses, anaesthesiologists and patients in order
to simulate the interdependent tasks demanding of the operating rooms staff.
Each member of the team assumed a specific role and behaved in the
situation according to role assumed. In this way the team could better imagine
the specific situation, trigger empathy for actual users and discover which
were the relevant issues to solve or improve (Service design tools, 2013).
Role
Play
image
involving
a
medical
service
-‐
provided
by
‘Service
design
tools
2013’.

2.2 CASE STUDY 2:
GO PROJECT - Giulio Iacucci, Kari Kuutti and Mervi Ranta
Aim:
The aim of the GO project was the implementation of a wireless network in
the Helsinki University of Technology in order to investigate the service
architecture for the Nomadic Internet User of the Future. (Service design tools
2013).
Role games were used for allowing users, experts and designing in envision
and act out new product concepts taking into account three fundamental
aspects: the interaction between different groups, the mobility of participants
during the interaction and the context of each participant in terms of artefacts,
tools and environment.
The process:
The basic principle of the games was to let participants play roles or act as
themselves in given situations. The players imagined what kind of devices or
services could support their mobility and communication, and they discuss,
and act out the ideas in the given situation. The number of the players varied
from 3 to 7 participants. The story structure also varied in the games
according to the presence of the following: initial scenario or situation, plot or
event lists, incidents, roles and goals of players. In other words, the group
interaction can be organized around an initial scenario letting the players free
to improvise, or can be influenced by predefined information.
In some games, a designer played the game master (similar to role games
like Dungeons and Dragons). The master guides the unfolding of the game
introducing incidents and deciding who plays. The master is the interface to
the environment representing the world with its opportunities and constraints.
A designer has a direct influence in the game's unfolding.
In some games the group interaction was improvised and not guided by rules.
In other games, rules defined the order for players to speak or act; how ideas
are developed in teams, in a group or individually; when to throw the dice; to
pick up a card with an unexpected incident.
The games were played in a more or less detailed representation of the
environment. They reproduced locations in the campus but also commercial
centers and, pubs, discos. In some buildings, they also had a representation
of different rooms. In this way, it was possible to act out scenarios of local
mobility as well.
After trying out different approaches in the first five games, they decided they
felt confident enough to spend some days preparing a sixth game. Three
users were the actual players and the two designers of the game played side
roles. They were not contributing to the development of the product ideas but
helping to keep the game moving. The places were prepared around the room
on bookshelf and tables. Each place had a printed sign showing its name and
a graphical symbol and was filled with as many contextual characteristics
(artifacts) as possible (see the Figure 7).
8

Figure
7:
Role-‐playing
game,
a
particular
of
the
game
setting
–
Provided
by
‘iacucci,
Kuutti
&
Ranta
(2000)’
9
They used a box with incident cards to introduce some surprises and
dynamism to the game.
The following rules were also hung on the wall:
1. Use always the toy character
2. Act out the use of the device/service
3. Use the dice to decide about non predefined aspects
4. Everyone chooses a toy character and picks a "mobic" a mock-up
representing a magic mobile device
5. Now and then a player is asked to pick an incident card
The environment helped the players to be context aware. It helped them in
considering which artifacts might be part of the environment. It also helped the
players throughout the game to be aware of when they were changing the
context. Moreover, the players were aware of the activities and contexts of the
others. As the designers were playing side roles, they could help the rest of
the player to overcome inhibition in the game by giving examples of how to
use the toys. The game showed the importance of a fluent flow of the story
and stimulating setting that allows the players to live their roles in an inspiring

and innovative atmosphere. Finally, the game provided support for a shared
understanding of the scenarios and made the player aware of the context and
of other's contexts and activities.
10
3. Group Sketching
Group sketching is used during the co-design sessions in order to share the
insights inside the team: this tool offers a common ground for the discussion
even when the participants have different cultural and social backgrounds. It
is based on basic and simple drawings in order to encourage the participation
of everybody (Greenberg, Roseman & Webmaster, 1992).
The author Tang constructed a guideline, which can be followed to give a
good quality outcome when facilitating a group sketching (Tang, 1991).
Four of the guidelines are summarized below:
1. Enable all participants to share a common view of the work surface
while providing simultaneous access and a sense of close proximity to
it.
2. Provide ways of conveying and supporting gestural communication.
Gestures should be clearly visible, and should maintain their relation
with objects within the work surface and with voice communication.
3. Convey the process of creating artifacts to express ideas.
4. Allow seamless intermixing of work surface actions (listing, drawing,
gesturing) and functions (storing information, expressing ideas,
mediating interaction).
People are encouraged to present their thoughts to the group, to build upon
the ideas presented by fellow members, and to problem-solve. Participants
typically use some large communal work surface —a group drawing area—to
facilitate their interactions. Typical media now used include white boards, flip
charts, and large sheets of paper for drawing and note taking.

3.1 CASE STUDY:
DEMOCRACY, WHAT CONSULTANTS THINK OF MP’S – Design council
The observation of the public confidence and trust in politicians and political
institutions in UK shows that there is a strong level of alienation towards
politicians, especially towards MPs (Service design tool, 2013).
The Design Council developed this project in order to understand which
practical things MPs could do in their constituency to rebuild democracy in
Britain.
After the observation, MPs have been engaged with their constituents to
understand their needs and spot opportunities to make a difference. During
one of these workshops a young group of constituents was asked to design
the perfect MP, using sketches to share ideas and represent the final solution.
11
4. Issue cards
The issue cards are a physical instrument used as a peg to induce and feed
interactive dynamics inside a team (Service design tools, 2013).
Each card could contain an insight, a picture, a drawing or a description;
everything is able to suggest new interpretations of the problem and to induce
the assumption of a different point of view. The result is the identification of
new criticalities and opportunities in the context of reference.
The heterogeneity and simplicity of the contents are required to guarantee the
success of this tool.
4.1 CASE STUDY 1:
SERVICE DESIGN FOR AIRPORT SECURITY – Jamin Hegeman, Kipum
Lee, Kata Tennant (Carnagie Mellon University)
This project dealt with the ideation of a service that will foster flow at the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) security screening stations at
the airport.
After identifying the design principles leading the project (communicate to
passengers, feel in control and say goodbye), the team developed several
concept ideas for each principle. The ideas were captured on cards in order to
share them with the TSA and be something that TSA could share with each
other in order to start having meaningful conversation about the experience.
Each card contains a concept with a sketch and a description, while the colour
identifies the relative design principle.

Figure
8:
Issue
cards
for
the
TSA
–
Provided
by
‘Service
design
tools,
2013’
4.2 CASE STUDY 2:
SILK METHOD DECK – Engine
Kent County Council (KCC) is a recognized leader in innovative practice in the
public sector. With high expectations and reduced budgets, many local
governments have to become more innovative to meet more complex
challenges, expanded responsibilities and more discerning residents.
KCC created a Social Innovation Lab for Kent (SILK), a space and community
of practice brought together around shared challenges to tackle these
problems, including developing more innovative services and building
capacity across the organization to connect people’s everyday lives with
policymaking and services (Engine website).
Aim:
Engine worked with the SILK team to develop a tailored project management
framework and an accompanying toolkit to enable SILK to stimulate and
support innovative practice amongst council staff.
The approach was developed and tested through a selection of live pilot
projects, from engaging fathers in the Kent community, to creating Kent
Gateways, one-stop-shops for accessing council services. The cards are part
of the SILK toolkit with the aim to stimulate and support innovative practices
among the council staff (See figure 9).
12

Figure
9:
Silk
cards
made
by
Silk
–
Provided
by
‘Service
design
tools,
2013’
4.3 CASE STUDY 3:
BOVISA CO-HOUSING PROJECT – DIS (Dipartimento di Innovazione
Sociale (Politecnico di Milano)
During the construction of the house, the future co-housers have in the past,
been involved in several design exercises directed to test the definition of
future living environment’s aspects.
The issue cards were used for choosing the activities they wanted to include
in the house, establishing their importance and finally defining their disposition
inside the spaces.
The cards were used to help with the visualization of the concepts and the
discussion by transforming the ideas into physical objects that could be
pointed out, taken and moved on the table. Each card was composed with a
partially drawn and partially photographic image in order to give a precise cue
but not a well-defined visual reference; each image was followed by a short
text describing the activity with a simple language (see figure 10).
13

Figure
10:
Cards
made
for
the
Co-‐Housing
project
–
Provided
by
‘Service
design
tools,
2013’
14
5. Rough Prototyping
The rough prototyping is a quick method to build prototypes using all the
objects and materials available in that specific moment and location.
These elements are used to simulate the service components in order to
better explain an idea in front of the other members of the team.
It is a tool supporting the visualization of ideas and a way to be sure that all
the members of the team are talking about the same thing.
It also contributes to make the process of design more interactive and
concrete.

The author Lindsay Gordon believes writes in her blog that prototyping
is used because:
15
1. ‘Proof of Principle’/Exploration
• Making a physical model can be a source of creativity to get the
juices flowing before you have all the answers
• Gives you an opportunity to test the ‘proof of principle’ of your
most basic idea and find unexpected problems
• Allows you to explore design alternatives, improve the design and
allow your team to appreciate the experience of the end user
2. Communication of your idea
• Internal: Words leave room for misinterpretation, simple 3-D
models can communicate ideas to team members and convince
them of your design concepts
• External: A slightly more sophisticated model can be very useful
in pitching/selling your idea to stakeholders. Shows a good
understanding of the product/service and facilitates visualisation
of your idea
3. User Involvement
• Giving your user something tactile requires user involvement in
the design process (easier to understand users and their
experiences, behaviours, perceptions and needs with a physical
object)
• User feedback is delivered in real time while they’re
experimenting with the prototype
Gordon also goes on to give tips about creating a successful rough
prototyping exercise:
• When involving users don’t worry about creating a professional looking
model but make it refined enough that it won’t distract them. You want
them to take you seriously but if the prototype has too much detail
users may focus on the wrong things (e.g. a button is too big)
• Early models should invite improvement! Inspire your audience to
assess the service through the eyes of a customer and imagine the
concept evolving into something they would enjoy using

5.1 CASE STUDY 1:
PHOTOCARING – Adam Little at CIID
The project PhotoCaring was constructed by a student named Adam Little as
a concept for the GUI course using the insights coming from the previous user
research course.
Aim:
The aim was the creation of an application based on a graphical user
interface for an eldercare context with multiple user groups (patients, doctors,
nurses and visitors).
Starting form the insights given by the research, Adam had the idea of a wall
displaying contextual information, a wall reacting to the presence of persons
in front of it, with an intuitive touch interface allowing users to interact with the
contents and explore photos on the wall itself. Other functionalities were then
added, such as the possibility to save or vote the favourite pictures, to learn
about other persons through the photos themselves and to control the display
according to specific circumstances (for the hospital staff).
The process:
Some paper prototypes of the interface were built in order to test the concept
directly with users, conducting them through hypothetic paths and observing
their behaviour and their level of involvement and self-confidence with the
proposed system.
These kinds of prototypes, which simulate the interface in terms of visual
appearance and general dynamics with physical objects such as paper
sheets, allow quick tests of the interaction flows and give information about
the comprehension and accessibility of the system before starting its
construction.
16

Figure
11:
Paper
prototype
screen
for
PhotoCaring
–
Provided
by
‘Service
design
tools,
2013’
5.2 CASE STUDY 2:
DIRECT CARE – Carrie Chan, Carnagie Mellon University master thesis
Direct care is a thesis project for enhancing the parent experience at
Pittsburgh Children’s Hospital: starting from the observation of the emotional
journey of children parents and of the current method of information delivery,
the concept proposed has the aim to improve the method of family education
inside the hospitals.
To have families participate in the design of an ideal information system,
Chan created a rough LCD screen, some fictitious mobile devices, various
sized colored papers acting as widgets and labels denoting different types of
information (See figures 12 & 13).
The idea was to allow parents to configure their own information display (one
to be used in their child’s hospital room and one to be used on a mobile
device away from the hospital).
17

Figure 12: Cartoon showing the walkthrough for a parent. Image provided by ‘thinkcarrie.com’.
Figure 13: LCD screen developed by Chan. Image provided by ‘thinkcarrie.com’.
Research began by talking to CHP staff. Focus was placed on parents staying
at an intermediary care unit housing children that were not critical enough to
stay in ICU but still needed constant monitoring. I also talked to various
parents who had children staying at the unit. Speaking to staff and families
gave the researcher a lot of information regarding the clinic.
Common problems
• Information is not given to you unless it is critical, or unless you ask
• First visits to the hospital are overwhelming both emotionally, and with
18
the overload of information
• Parents need to seek out a lot of information on their own
• Parents never remember to ask the questions they want or need when
the doctor is there
• Parents can’t always remember verbal information
• There are too many staff to interact with; “you don’t remember who
you’ve asked what to”

19
Common positive aspects
• Keeping journals was very helpful for parents who did this
• Learning and knowing medical terms helps
• Most of the nursing staff were friendly and helpful
• Guidance and friendliness from social workers
What parents thought would help
• More connection with staff
• Knowing about other parents’ experiences
• A more consistent experience
• Being made aware of all resources and information
5.3 CASE STUDY 3:
SMART STREET OBJECT – students at Royal College of Art with tutors
Wendy March and Bas Raijmakers
The students were asked to develop scenarios and concepts in relation to the
idea of Smart Streets, to merge doing research, developing ideas, prototyping
and testing, to engage with people in the street as co-creators in the design
research.
They created this tool called “design your street” in order to make people able
to visualize their ideas of Gloucester Road in the future through rough
prototypes (See figure 14).

Figure 14: design your street prototype. Image provided by ‘service design tools, 2013’
6. Affinity diagram
The affinity diagram is a creative process used for gathering and organizing
large amounts of data, ideas and insights by evidencing their natural
correlations (Service design tools 2013). It is a management and planning
tool. Use of this tool is based on the understanding that time invested in
planning will produce remarkable dividends as the generated ideas and plans
are acted upon and implemented (Bonacorsi, 2008).
It starts with a statement of the problem or the goal. During the first session
each participant should think of ideas and write them on small pieces of paper
(cards or stickers). Then those cards would become the physical instrument to
work on their contents, find the correlations and identify the significant groups
of sense.
The result is a sort of verbal and visual representation describing the first
exploration of design solutions.
An affinity diagram is the result of a creative
process focused on finding the major themes affecting a problem by
generating a number of ideas, issues or opinions. The process identifies these
ideas, groups naturally related items and identifies the one concept that ties
each grouping together (Bonacorsi, 2008).
20

To conduct the exercise, there are a number of steps that should be followed
to ensure a successful outcome from participants:
21
1. The team should consist of five or six people who have knowledge
about the situation to be considered. They should be relatively familiar
with each other and accustomed to working together and should
“speak the same language,” Include people with valuable input. If the
team needs specific information beyond the scope of the members’
knowledge, the team should draw in resource people as temporary
team members.
2. The more explanation or limitation in the issue statement, the more
likely the thought process will be constrained. The statement should be
neutral to avoid limiting or directing responding ideas. For example,
“How are we going to fix our quality problems?” might produce a fuller
and more valuable collection of responses if rephrased “What are the
issues affecting product quality?”
3. Generate and record ideas. This step of the process uses the
traditional guidelines for brainstorming:
o No criticism or discussion of ideas
o Generate many ideas in a short time
o Everyone participates
o Record the ideas exactly as spoken and not as interpreted by
the recorder.
4. Display the completed idea cards. Randomly lay out the cards so that
all the team members can see them.
5. Arrange the cards in natural groupings. This collects ideas that go with
each other. In silence, all team members should simultaneously begin
moving idea cards, collecting and arranging in columns the cards that
each person believes belong together. Team members are allowed to
disagree with a placement by making a new placement or returning to
a previous one. Back and forth moves may occur for some time until
the team settles on an arrangement that is acceptable to everyone.
6. Look for a card in each grouping that describes the central idea that
ties the whole group together. If it does not, the team should decide on
the central idea and create a concise, usually three to five words,
header card for that grouping. While silence is important for sorting,
discussion should be used for selecting or creating headers.
7. Draw the finished diagram. The team should continue to change the
diagram until it reflects the actual situation.
Figure 15: Bonacorsi’s proposed rules for an Affinity diagram. Image provided by
‘Improvement and innovation, 2008’

22
6.1 CASE STUDY:
SERVICE DESIGN FOR AIRPORT SECURITY – Jamin Hegeman, Kipum
Lee, Kata Tennant (Carnagie Mellon University)
This project dealt with the idea of a service that will foster flow at the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) security screening stations at
the airport.
At first step, the team decided to observe what happens at the Pittsburgh
International Airport; after the observation, the findings were switched into
notes on post-it and diagrammed according to their affinities. This allowed the
team to determine the three main design principles: communicate to
passengers, feel in control and say goodbye.
Figure 16: Post-it findings from the observation. Image provided by
‘Service design tools, 2013’

23
7. Motivation matrix
This is a technique that visualizes the functional relationship between all the
actors participating in a production system. Filling up the cells in the
motivation matrix forces the designer and each actor to reflect upon the
specific role of each participant.
Aim:
The aim of the motivation matrix is the understanding of the connections
between the different actors of the system. This is a possibility thanks to the
strong willingness that each one of them has while participating in the system:
each actor expresses what he needs or expects from the service.
The motivation matrix is an interesting means of investigation of the solution
assuming the point of view of each stakeholder with his own interests.
7.1 CASE STUDY:
E-MEAL MOTIVATION MATRIX – François Jégou, Ezio Manzini, Anna
Meroni
This sample is taken from the context of the HiCS (Highly Customized
Solutions) EU Research, whose objective was to define methodological tools
for supporting and guiding network of firms in the development of highly
customized solutions.
As this sample shows, the motivation matrix gathers the real partners involved
in the solution and their expected benefits and makes the interactions
between partners emerge in terms of synergies and potential conflicts that the
designers have to investigate (Morelli & Tollestrup, 2007).

Figure 17: Motivation matrix designed lists actors expectations when Co-‐operating
with each other. Provided by ‘Manzini, Collina et al. 2004’.
24
8. Mind mapping
The mind map is a tool for the visual elicitation of our thoughts and their
connections (Service design tools 2013).
The visualization begins with a problem or an idea put in the centre of the
representation. Then signs, lines, words and drawings are used in order to
build a system of thoughts around the starting point.
8.1 CASE STUDY:
D-SCHOOL MIND MAP – David Kelley, IDEO
In 2004 David Kelley was establishing a new design school at Stanford with
the goal of providing an inter-disciplinary program for the development of
products, experiences, services and spaces with the design as the core skill.
The mind map shows his idea of the educational experience for the “d-school”.

Figure 18: The mind map by Kelley. Provided by ‘Service design tools 2013’.
25
9. Storytelling
A story is a linear sequence of events. Designers are asked to choose an
object, imagine and visualize what there could be before and after it. Objects,
pictures, words, even a simple dot could become part of a temporal sequence
and deliver unexpected meanings (Zamarato, 2008). Storytelling supports the
exploration of the service idea. Through the use of simple words, the teller will
illustrate the solution, as it is a story. Service design tools 2013).
This allows the communication of the idea inside a group but also the
preparation of the first sketches for the storyboard. The storytelling leave
some blanks to be fill in by the suggestions of other stakeholders and users.
Details are responsible for its success. Telling a story only through its details
helps to create a sort of narrative jigsaw (Zamarato, 2008) where a single
move changes everything and different mixes generate new narrations.

9.1 CASE STUDY 1:
RENTATHING - David Chiu, David Hilhrost
RentAThing is a Reputation Management Service, which enables negotiation
for access by addressing risk (Service design tools, 2013).
Aim:
It provides additional information about the reputation of the parties involved
and enables smoother transactions: instead of silos of reputation, with various
services, companies, and individuals developing isolated reputations, it gives
a centralized way of managing and developing a single reputation.
The process:
The designers realized a sequence of pictures in order to describe some
possible scenarios and show how the service could work. They invented
different characters –extremely improbable characters- and put them in the
scene through the use of ‘Playmobil’ puppets.
The use of this visual language, together with the choice of the strange
characters and plots, create an ironic storytelling that supports the narration,
stressing the most relevant aspects of their concept in a simple, effective way.
26
Figure 19: Interaction between two characters in a story. Provided by
‘Scoobyfoo, 2008’ using Flickr.

9.2 CASE STUDY 2:
NARRATIVE DESIGN TOOLKIT – Marco Zamarato
Marco Zammarato created the workshop Narrative Design - designing through
stories (IUAV) after having observed that storytelling is frequently used as a
communication tool through the design process but not really as a creative
tool. To achieve a deeper comprehension of narrative and use it in a creative
way, he developed a kit that helps designers build stories. Once the designers
identify the characters and the basic elements of the plot, they developed the
stories moving them into narrative structures.
27
Figure 20: A story design. Provided by ‘Narrative design, 2008’.
10. Character profiles
The character profiles are a tool for the creation of a shared knowledge about
the service users inside the team (Service design tools, 2013).
In order to build these character profiles, it’s required the identification of
some significant fictitious characters and then the collecting of an image and a
textual description for each one of them.
The character profiles offer a clear and visible picture of the different kinds of
users that are the centre of the design activities.

28
10.1 CASE STUDY 1:
DADDY COOL - Parekh, Wallen & Yang (Domus Academy Master Course)
In the first phase of the workshop V-tail, the students were asked to explore
some specific retail experiences. They spent some time inside the selected
shops, observing the users and their attitudes in order to identify significant
character profiles.
Some empty profiles were given them as tool for supporting the analysis.
The students could characterize the appearance of these profiles by adding
hand-drawn details and chose their fictitious names in order to point out the
most interesting feature of each character (See figure 21).
Figure 21: The character profile. Provided by ‘Service design tool, 2013’.
They finally had to specify what kind of physical objects these characters use
to interact with inside the shops and what kind of objects they use to bring
with themselves.
All these aspects allowed getting a synthetic picture of each character profile
and to immediately get some opportunities related to their behaviours,
attitudes and peculiarities.

References:
Bonacorsi, S. (2008). What is… an Affinity Diagram?. Available:
http://www.improvementandinnovation.com/features/article/what-affinity-diagram/. Last
accessed 20th April 2014.
Frick, E., Tardini, S., & Cantoni, L. (2013). LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY®.
Greenberg, S., Roseman, M., Webster, D., & Bohnet, R. (1992, January). Issues and
experiences designing and implementing two group drawing tools. In System Sciences, 1992.
Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on (Vol. 4, pp. 139-150).
IEEE.
Iacucci, Giulio, Kari Kuutti, and Mervi Ranta. "On the move with a magic thing: role playing in
concept design of mobile services and devices." Proceedings of the 3rd conference on
Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. ACM, 2000.
Kankainen, A., Vaajakallio, K., Kantola, V., & Mattelmäki, T. (2012). Storytelling Group–a co-design
29
method for service design. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(3), 221-230.
Morelli, N. & Tollestrup, C. (2007). New representation techniques for designing in a
systematic perspective. Aalborg: Aalborg University, Institute of Architecture and design. p2 -
p7.
Scoobyfoo. (2006). RentAThing: Applied Dreams 2.2 Presentation. Available:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scoobyfoo/sets/72057594083488682/. Last accessed 19th May
2014.
Service design tools Author. (2013). Communication methods supporting design processes.
Available: http://www.servicedesigntools.org/. Last accessed 20th May 2014
Tang, John C., and Scott L. Minneman. (1991) "Apparatus allowing remote interactive use of
a plurality of writing surfaces." U.S. Patent 5,025,314.
Team. (2008). Designing with lego. Available:
http://www.sketchin.ch/it/blog/design/progettare-con-i-lego%C2%AE.html. Last accessed 18th
May 2014.
Zamarato, M. (2008). NARRATIVE DESIGN. Available: http://www.interaction-venice.
com/projects/iuav-thesis/2008n/narrative-design/. Last accessed 19th May 2014.

Co design tools research

More Related Content

What's hot (6)

Similar to Co design tools research (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Co design tools research