Skip to main content

Participatory Design: Issues and Approaches in Dynamic Constellations of Use, Design, and Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Configuring User-Designer Relations

Part of the book series: Computer Supported Cooperative Work ((CSCW))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Classical references with tentative answers to the question what PD is about are, for example, Bjerknes et al. (1987), Greenbaum and Kyng (1991), Schuler and Namioka (1993), Kuhn and Muller (1993), Trigg and Anderson (1996), Blomberg and Kensing (1998). The evolution of the term can also be seen in the proceedings of the biannual Participatory Design Conference.

  2. 2.

    Floyd et al. (1989) contains a historical reconstruction of Scandinavian ICT development projects with worker/user participation, concepts and ideas that provided the background, and important references for further reading. Bansler (1987, 1989) argues for a particular classification of Scandinavian approaches to ICT development, reconstructs relations between the categories and locates predecessors of PD.

  3. 3.

    As an indicator, 12 out of the 23 full papers presented at the Participatory Design Conference 2004 (Clement and van den Besselaar, 2004) contain at least one reference to “Design at work” edited by Greenbaum and Kyng (1991); at the Participatory Design Conference, 2006 (Jacucci et al., 2006), 9 of the 15 full papers refer to it at least once.

  4. 4.

    In practice, larger societal issues and local relations are inevitably tied to each other, so this distinction should be seen as merely an analytical one.

References

  • Ackerman, M. S., Pipek, V. and Wulf, V. (eds.). (2003).Sharing Expertise: Beyond Knowledge management. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, E., Heeren, E., Hettinga, M. and Wulf, V. (eds.). (2003). Special issue on “Evolving Use of Groupware”,Computer Supported Cooperative Work.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansler, J. (1987). Systemudvikling: teori og historie i skandinavisk perspektiv. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansler, J. (1989). Systems development research in Scandinavia: Three theoretical schools.Office, Technology and People, 4(2). Also in:Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 1, 3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bijker, W. E. and Law, J. (1992).Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Technological Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerknes, G. and Bratteteig, T. (1987). Florence in wonderland: System development with nurses. In: Bjerknes, G., Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Computers and Democracy – a Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 279–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerknes, G. and Bratteteig, T. (1995). User participation and democracy: A discussion of scandinavian research on system development.Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 7, 73–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerknes, G., Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (eds.). (1987).Computers and Democracy – a Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, UK: Avebury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg, J. and Kensing, F. (eds.). (1998). Special issue on participatory design in CSCW.Computer Supported Cooperative Work.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratteteig, T. (2003).Making Change. Dealing with Relations Between Design and Use. Dr. Philos dissertation. Oslo, Norway: Department of Informatics, University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braverman, H. (1974).Labor and Monopoly Capital – The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büscher, M., Shapiro, D., Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Slack, R., Voß, A. and Mogensen, P. (2002). Promises, premises and risks: Sharing responsibilities, working up trust and sustaining commitment in participatory design projects.Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Malmö, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buur, J., Binder, T. and Brandt, E. (2000). Taking video beyond 'hard data' in user centred design. In: Cherkasky, T., Greenbaum, J., Mambrey, P. and Pors, J. K. (eds.),Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Nov. 28–Dec. 1, 2000 in New York, USA. Palo Alto, CA: CPSR Press, 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buur, J. and Bødker, S. (2000). From usability lab to “design collaboratorium”: Reframing usability practice.Proceedings on Designing Interactive Systems, pp. 297–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, S. (1991).Through the Interface? A Human Activity Approach to User Interface Design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, S., Christiansen, E., Ehn, P., Markussen, R., Mogensen, P. and Trigg, R. (1993).The AT Project: Practical Research in Cooperative Design (DAIMI report No. PB-454). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University, Department of Computer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, S., Ehn, P., Romberger, S. and Sjögren, D. (eds.). (1985).The UTOPIA Project: An Alternative in Text and Images (Graffiti 7). Swedish Center for Working Life, the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden and the University of Aarhus, Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, S., Ehn, P., Kammersgaard, J., Kyng, M. and Sundblad, Y. (1987). A Utopian experience. In: Bjerknes, G., Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Computers and Democracy – a Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 251–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, S., Grønbæk, K. and Kyng, M. (1993). Cooperative design: techniques and experiences from the Scandinavian scene. In: Schuler, D. and Namioka, A. (eds.),Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 157–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, K., Kensing, F. and Simonsen, J. (2004).Participatory IT Design: Designing for Business and Workplace Realities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, A. and van den Besselaar, P. (1993). A retrospective look at PD projects.Communications of the ACM, 36(4), 29–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clement, A. and van den Besselaar, P. (2004).Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference. Toronto, July 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehn, P. (1988).Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehn, P. (1993). Scandinavian design: On participation and skill. In: Schuler, D. and Namioka, A (eds.),Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (1987). The collective resource approach to systems design. In: Bjerknes, G., Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Computers and Democracy – a Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 17–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1987).Learning by Expanding. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G. (2001). Communities of interest: Learning through the interaction of multiple knowledge systems. In: Bjørnstad, S., Moe, R. E., Mørch, A. I. and Opdahl, A. L. (eds.),Proceedings of the 24th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia(Vol. 1), Ulvik, Norway, 11–14 August 2001. Bergen, Norway: Department of Information Science, University of Bergen, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floyd, C., Mehl, W.-M., Reisin, F.-M., Schmidt, G. and Wolf, G. (1989). Out of Scandinavia: Alternative approaches to software design and system development.Human-Computer Interaction, 4, 253–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. (1967).Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, J. (1993). PD: A personal statement. In: Kuhn, S. and Muller, M. (eds.),Special Issue on Participatory Design. Communications of the ACM, 36(4), p. 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (eds.). (1991).Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, D. (1992). Labor-managed systems and industrial redevelopment: Lessons from the Fagor Cooperative Group of Mondragón. In: Rothstein, F. A. and Blim, M. L. (eds.),Anthropology and the Global Factory: Studies of the New Industrialization in the Late Twentieth Century. New York, NY: Bergin and Garvey, 177–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Rouncefield, M. and Sharpe, M. (2000). Being there and doing IT in the workplace: A case study of a co-development approach in healthcare. In: Cherkasky, T., Greenbaum, J., Mambrey, P. and Pors, J. K. (eds.),Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Nov. 28–Dec. 1, 2000, New York, USA. Palo Alto, CA: CPSR Press, 96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Slack, R., Voß, A., Büscher, M., Rouncefield, M. and Rouchy, P. (2002). Co-realisation: Towards a principled synthesis of ethnomethodology and participatory design.Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 9–30. Republished in Ackerman, M. S., Halverson, C. A., Erickson, T. and Kellogg, W. A. (eds.). (2007).Resources, Co-Evolution and Artifacts. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. P. (1983).Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880–1930. Baltimore, ML: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyysalo, S. and Lehenkari, J. (2002). Contextualizing power in a collaborative design. In: Binder, T., Gregory, J. and Wagner, I. (eds.),Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Malmö, Sweden, 23–25 June 2002. Palo Alto: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, 93–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacucci, G., Kensing, F., Wagner, I. and Blomberg, J. (eds.). (2006).Proceedings of the ninth biannual Participatory Design Conference, August 1–5, Trento, Italy. Palo Alto, CA: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility(CPSR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Karasti, H. (2001). Bridging work practice and system design – integrating systemic analysis, appreciative intervention and practitioner participation.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 10(2), 211–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karsten, H. and Jones, M. (1998). The long and winding road: Collaborative IT and organisational change.Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Oct. 1998, Seattle, WA. New York: ACM SIGCHI, 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. and Muller, M. (eds.). (1993). Special issue on participatory design.Communications of the ACM, 36(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyng, M. (1998). Users and computers: A contextual approach to design of computer artifacts.Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 10(1 and 2), 7–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyng, M. and Mathiassen (1982). Systems development and trade union activities. In: Bjørn-Andersen, N., Earl, M., Holst, O. and Mumford, E. (eds.),Information Society, for Richer, for Poorer. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999).Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leont’ev, A. N. (1978).Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leont’ev, A. N. (1981).Problems of the Development of Mind. Moscow: Progress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems.Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J. and Heath, C. (eds.). (2000).Workplace Studies – Recovering work practice and Information System design. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, D. and Wajcman, J. (eds.). (1999).The Social Shaping of Technology (2nd ed.). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, M. J. (1992). Retrospective on a year of participatory design using the PICTIVE technique.Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Monterey, CA, May 3–7, 1992. New York, NY: ACM Press, 455–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, M. J. (2002). Participatory design: The third space in HCI. In: Jacko, J. A. and A. Sears (eds.),The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1051–1068.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, M. J., Wildman, D. M. and White, E. A. (1993). Taxonomy of PD practices: A brief practitioner’s guide. In: Muller, M. and Kuhn, S. (eds.), Special issue on participatory design,Communications of the ACM, 36(4), June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, E. (1987). Sociotechnical systems design – evolving theory and practice. In: Bjerknes, G., Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Computers and Democracy – a Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nygaard, K. (1975). Kunnskaps-strategi for fagbevegelsen (knowledge strategy for trade unions).Nordisk Forum 6, 10(2), 15–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Evolving with notes: Organizational change around groupware technology. In: C. U. Ciborra (ed.),Groupware and Teamwork – Invisible Aid or Technical Hindrance? Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons, 23–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poltrock, S., Grudin, J., Dumais, S., Fidel, R., Bruce, H. and Pejtersen, A. M. (2003). Information seeking and sharing in design teams.Proceedings of GROUP’03, 239–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procter, R. and Williams, R. (1996). Beyond design: Social learning and computer-supported cooperative work – some lessons from innovation studies. In: Shapiro, D. et al. (eds.),The Design of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Groupware Systems. Elsevier Science, 445–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, Å. (ed.). (1979). Computers dividing man and work: Recent Scandinavian research on planning and computers from a trade union perspective. Demos project report #13. Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D. and Namioka, A. (eds.). (1993).Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human–machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (2000).Human/Machine Reconsidered. Department of Sociology, Lancaster University at: http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/soc040ls.html. Last accessed: August 21, 2002.

  • Suchman, L. (2002). Located accountabilities in technology production.Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. A. and Trigg, R. A. (1991). Unterstanding practice: video as a medium for reflection and design. In: Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 65–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. S., Trigg, R. A. and Blomberg, J. (2002). Working artefacts: Ethnomethods of the prototype.British Journal of Sociology, 53(2), 163–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Törpel, B., Pipek, V. and Rittenbruch, M. (2003). Creating heterogeneity: Evolving use of groupware in a service network. Special issue on evolving use of groupware,Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 12(4), 381–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigg, R. and Anderson, S. I. (eds.). (1996). Special issue on current perspectives on participatory design.Human-Computer Interaction, 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trist, E. (1981).The Evolution of Socio-Technical Systems. Toronto, Ontario Ministry of Labour, Occasional Paper No. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1999).Communities of Practice – Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, W. F. (ed.). (1991).Participatory Action Research. New York, NY: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winograd, T. and Flores, F. (1986).Understanding Computers and Cognition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bettina Törpel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Törpel, B., Voss, A., Hartswood, M., Procter, R. (2009). Participatory Design: Issues and Approaches in Dynamic Constellations of Use, Design, and Research. In: Büscher, M., Slack, R., Rouncefield, M., Procter, R., Hartswood, M., Voss, A. (eds) Configuring User-Designer Relations. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-925-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-925-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-924-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-925-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics