Below you will find a conglomeration of executed methodologies for the development of user-driven participatory solutions during the UPSIDE project:

  • Project-in-a-day: From Concept Development to Business at Play (Clark & Lahtivuori, 2011)
    In innovation work that spans various professional contexts, there is an over reliance upon verbal explanations and one-way presentations, as opposed to demonstrating, trying and performing. Organizing project teams across organizations and professional competencies relies upon creating active collaborative activities that allow participants to both move forward with the project, while reflecting upon how they work together. Innovation work involves not only discovering what could be possible, but also bringing novel solutions into practice, and driving the business to get them there. This contribution seeks to explore how staged role-play activities can raise practice-specific issues. The authors argue that by staging prospective project trajectories, especially at the outset of a project, the partner team members have the opportunity to orient their future actions according to potential desired and undesired futures.
    Brendon Clark & Madlene Lahtivuori, 2011, Project-in-a-Day: From Concept Mock-Ups to Business at Play, In Participatory Innovation Conference
    Proceedings. PINC 2011. Sønderborg, Denmark: University of Southern Denmark, pp. 151–157.
  • Crowdsourcing
    Crowdsourcing initiatives, especially the format of idea and research contest have provided companies with unique and inventive opportunities to capitalize on users’ innovative potential and knowledge. Inspired by the potential, nonprofits are beginning to use the principles of crowdsourcing to develop better solutions for social problems. This research aims to enhance the knowledge on crowdsourcing for social innovation.
  • Participatory Innovation
    An increasing number of corporations engage with users in co-innovation of products and services. But there are a number of competing perspectives on how best to integrate these understandings into existing corporate innovation development processes. This paper maps out three of the dominant approaches, compares them in terms of goals, methods and basic philosophy, and shows how they may beneficially enrich one another.
    Jacob Buur & Ben Matthews; Journal article: Participatory Innovation, International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 12, No 3 (Sep 2008), pp. 255-273. Imperial College Press.
  • Rehearsing the Future
    This is a 210 page edited book focusing on grounded explorations of bringing users and stakeholders into dialogue to solve societal challenges.
    “…the design anthropological innovation model will have global impact through its commitment to a design anthropology … which is open and participatory, accessibly tangible through models and games, and enhances the positive value systems of people.”
    Dori Tunstall, Swinburne University of Technology
    Halse, Joachim, Eva Brandt, Brendon Clark, and Thomas Binder. Rehearsing the Future. Copenhagen: The Danish Design School Press, 2010.
  • Ethnographic field methods (contextual interviews)
    Here the relationship between developing a descriptive understanding of human behavior and designing artifacts which ostensibly support the activities described is explored. Although there is a growing recognition that an understanding of users’ current work practices would be useful in the design of new technologies, the debate about what it would mean to acquire such understanding and to link it with design is only beginning. What are the implications of developing ways of representing the views and activities of communicates of practice outside one’s own such that the knowledge would be useful in design? The ethnographic approach, with its emphasis on ”natives’ point-of-view”, holism, a natural settings, provides a unique perspective to bring the bear on understanding users’ work activities. However, anthropology is mute when it comes to ways of integrating such an understanding with design. The languages of design and of ethnography evolved in quite different contexts and in relation to different concerns. While the ethnographer is interested in understanding human behavior as it is reflected in the lifeway of diverse communicates of people, the designer is interested in designing artifacts that will support the activities of these communities. The current challenge is to develop ways of linking these two undertakings.
    Blomberg, Jeanette, et al. “Ethnographic field methods and their relation to design.” Participatory design: Principles and practices (1993): 123-155.
  • Context mapping
    In recent years, various methods and techniques have emerged for mapping the contexts of people’s interaction with products. Designers and researchers use these techniques to gain deeper insight into the needs and dreams of prospective users of new products. As most of these techniques are still under development, there is a lack of practical knowledge about how such studies can be conducted.
    Visser, Froukje Sleeswijk, et al. “Contextmapping: experiences from practice.”CoDesign 1.2 (2005): 119-149.

A participatory methods inventory is available here.