DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION DESIGN
Dutch Spark: Second sprint
Designing Across Cultures at Digital Society School
Our Team:
We are a multidisciplinary team of professionals chosen to work on a cross-cultural project to help build trust and reliability in impact data.
- Kelsey Trites: is an experienced Field Researcher, with a background in Nutritional Sciences as well as Organization and Management.
- Mercy C. Chumo: has a background in Agriculture, Sustainability and Management.
- Shreya Gupta: has a background in Computer Science Engineering and Digital Game and User Experience Design.
- Prasam Pal: has a background in Mechanical Engineering along with Industrial & Product Design.
Coach: Anneke van Woerden / Program Manager: Nick Verouden
Dutch Spark: Second sprint
What is Perception? can we contextualize its effects around impact data within the Dutch Spark Network? Fancy observing members of a consortium react to data presented to them based on personal interpretation, experiences, preferences ….etcetera without commenting or asking questions? (We actually appreciate the chance to attend a stakeholder’s meeting. )
This marked the start of our second sprint.
LET’S GO!
We discussed on what would be essential to stakeholders while making decisions around reliable impact data. Such were, for instance, the approaches, methodologies, criteria threshold and so forth. While at it, we had a session on Design Ethics with Charlie Mulholland. As we grow we learn and continue to discern what we value. They influence things we say, do not say or even things we buy! Instrumental values help us journey towards our intrinsic or terminal values. This is the difference between what is a means to an end and what is an end in itself. Choosing to be happy is driven by our intrinsic values. I hope you choose happiness today !
As a designer, you make decisions for others. You decide what they get to use, interact with or what they would feel comfortable with. However, sometimes when we design, we end up with unforeseeable & unintended consequences that affect our end-users. Not everything ethical to one is legal on the other hand. And Ethics does not equate to moral systems. On the other hand, a combination of values forms a moral system! When some elements of a value system clash, ethics begin!
A short reflection on our project…
In our project, women are involved in the carbon credit value chain. To reduce carbon emissions, they are given clean cooking stoves. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) serve as the foundation for project collaborations at Digital Society School. Our project, Design Across Culture, is in line with SDGs 5, 8, 9, 13, and 17. These SDGs imply an impact on livelihoods, ecosystems, the environment, and common ground for collaboration.
Data on stove usage is gathered from families in developing-country villages. These could potentially jeopardize privacy. Aside from the sensors collecting data, someone must also participate in a monitoring survey, which is part of the Gold standard’s certification requirements. We also considered the buyer’s safety as another area where design ethics could come into play in our project. We reasoned that data could be gathered at the community level. A scenario in which they could band together and present themselves as a group. The question is whether these women are aware of the carbon offsetting benefits and how group synergy can be beneficial.
Another session was on the basics of user research. This was to understand why and who a user could be, their needs and their position in the project. A user is part of an ecosystem and to be able to understand their needs in design, we should EMPATHIZE! Therefore, Thick data (qualitative) uncovers context and complexities while big data (quantitative) uncover points of understanding people’s cultures, habits, customs and mutual differences. Another highlight was the influence of positionality in research. This is what differentiates and contextualizes us, humans, socially and politically. It defines the differences in gender, sexuality, race, class and ability status. They can potentially create a bias and our understanding of how we look at anything around us today.
Interview with Fair Climate Fund & Translate Session
The interview with Neera Van Geest (Fair Climate Fund) was insightful for our sprint review event and our current sprint. She suggested changes on our mother map of the consortium stakeholders. She also mentioned how collaboration within the ecosystem is sustained by mutual benefit. That data is power in business and what is exchanged in any form influences investments. Another takeaway is that the government only comes into the carbon credit value chain if they have directly invested.
Presently, she mentioned how stacking needs to be anticipated as part of impact data collection that eventually gets certified. Also, while undertaking monitoring and evaluation for the usage of stoves, there are costs associated with sending staff to the households. Stacking is the use of multiple cooking combinations by one household. For instance, households can use a Mimi Moto stove that uses clean cooking fuel (Pallets) while still using another stove consuming firewood or charcoal. If accountability was anything to go by, then stacking influences the impact generated by the concerned household. Even so, can be seen as an opportunity while sell carbon credits.
The translation session with Nick Verouden gave us a sense of direction, especially for the sprint. This was somewhat relief from what seemed to be a ‘Low energy-unsettled-yet hopeful’ time of the sprint. We were unsure what direction could be beneficial and significant to the partner and similarly suited to our various capabilities and knowledge. Whereas we are open to being pushed further as part of the challenge, we still felt uncertain as a team. He guided us through several options to look at while still highlighting the importance of small steps towards the final solution.
Additionally, understand deeper some key challenges and decide which one we could focus on. Some of the matters are around; sharing of learnings within the Dutch Spark network, stacking, certification of impact data, the minimum criterion for impact data, approaches to visualization and representation of both qualitative and quantitative data and stakeholder & buyer needs. We also divulged on the possibility of these three key stakeholders being at the centre of our design challenge: carbon credit buyers, project developers and certifiers.
Charged Moment…
After populating our Miro board with knowledge from the translation session, We decided as a team to go into a brainstorming session. We asked ourselves: what problems do we know so far within and around the consortium? What else could we add? we decided to use the problem tree approach under the Design method tool kit. We individually wrote down points and ideas to be ideated further on its causes and effects. We then grouped them on their similarity of ideas and established about 12 problem statements within the ecosystem and those related to Dutch Spark as a consortium.
This enabled us as a team to divide problems into definable, feasible, and manageable chunks. Problem analysis in project planning provides a thorough understanding of challenges while also highlighting their interconnectedness. Furthermore, it establishes a shared course of action, purpose, and understanding.
We voted for three problems related to data, stacking and collaboration with a total of 5 scenarios. These were; Visualizing Qualitative and Quantitative Data, Energy Stacking an opportunity and, Increasing Collaboration in Dutch Spark. We felt that visualising data better could be an intermediate step between Dutch Spark and the Gold standard. As for stacking, we speculated the possibility of incorporating stacking as part of carbo credit in form criteria such as percentage or grades. Collaboration on the other hand was to, allow for knowledge, innovations, learnings, opportunities, etcetera within the Dutch Spark consortium.
Branding Masterclass
The session equipped us with knowledge in positioning ourselves as a professional in the job market and also for our project. Adding a personal touch to your brand gives it a unique identity while constantly learning. As for the team branding, we identified some colours using the Dutch spark logo and other components that constituted the project. These were Blue (flame, clean energy), orange (helping), black (carbon, smoke), simplicity, combining technology and data, with earthy elements. What about the moto? Kesley (tracker for this sprint) puts it: “Making carbon offsetting sexy. Making saving the planet trendy” Below is a mood board that we created.
Back to the scenarios …
We decided to build stories around speculative solutions using protagonists from various personas of both individuals and companies. We developed story archetypes for the protagonists’ events, activities, or scenes in the scenarios. For example, in the first scenario, stacking was viewed as an opportunity. Stacking is observed and reported in qualitative data, but it never reaches the end product, carbon credit. Stacking in many dimensions is a behavioural phenomenon that is also influenced by context. Africans, for example, cook different meals at different times. They also prefer to prepare their cultural meals using traditional cooking methods. While we introduce new and clean cooking stoves, cultural contexts have an impact on the adoption of new technologies. Nonetheless, as seen in some case studies on the Gold Standard website, allowing for both methods encourages the incorporation of new technologies.
As seen above is Ahana, TeachAll’s CSR Manager. The others were; Malik (ABN NGO employee), Maite (Fair Climate Fund), BitMEX, the Seychelles-based Company and Alex (investment agent at BIX Capital Company). These protagonists were speculated to be taking part in activities, making investment decisions, collecting data and, offsetting carbon credits using various tools or websites. Presenting this work-in-progress to our coach and program manager and getting a positive gave us so much assurance and a sense of direction. These were going to be a guide for the following sprint while also allowing for feedback and discussions with the partner about their needs in the sprint review.
Workshop on Transformation Design by Marco
Transformation Design is a process that incorporates sustainability, diversity & inclusion, re-adaptive learning and experimentation to provide solutions. This workshop focused on the roles of a designer and a discussion topic on solutionism. Solutionism uses technology to fix every political, social and cultural problem. In a solutionist world, life is presented to be smooth and without any friction. However, this is not the case at all times because technology has negative impacts. We had a ‘rally’ to create pickets with statements illustrating the positive and negative sides of solutionism, in our day-to-day lives. We were also Introduced to the SWEDOD method to determine whether or not something should be designed (a flow chart of yes/no questions). We were divided into two groups and, our team was on the negative side of solutionism.
Preparation for our Sprint Review
We presented the scenarios to Nick and, he was impressed with the speculations. These scenarios were to enable us to get focus on what would be, an ideal or feasible design challenge for the project. Also, what are the strengths, and where do the partners see real opportunities for a design challenge. In line with this, we had a brainstorming session to determine what skills we currently have and, what we might need to work better on the design challenge. For example, we felt that we needed more skills in data visualization, video editing, advanced web design and graphic design.
Sprint Review
The sprint review event was hybrid as we had some members of the Consortium joining us physically and virtually for an hour. The event coincided with World Health Day. Check out our LinkedIn post https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mercy-c-chumo_worldhealthday2022-sdgs-sdg3-activity-6917879218504630273-botv?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web
Our project focuses on data generated from providing clean cooking solutions to people that use fuels that are socially (unhealthy), economically (unreliable) and environmentally (destructive). “Worldwide, almost 3 billion people rely on traditional cookstoves and open fires to cook and heat their homes, facing multiple health risks such as injuries and serious respiratory illnesses.”
Hey reader, what method or source of fuel do you use for cooking?
Finally, we had a personal development session with Jeroen. What gives you energy? drains your energy?
CONCLUSION
This second sprint has been about better understanding the challenges at hand while also presenting what design challenge would be attainable and appropriate for the partners. It has been engaging and involving in both research and knowledge gathering in order to communicate potential design solutions that are progressive. Problem tree analysis is useful for determining the root cause and significant consequences of problems in an ecosystem. Figma, Canva, and Procreate were all helpful in bringing our speculative scenarios to life. The partners present preferred one of the three scenarios- Qualitative and quantitative data visualization. Stacking was mentioned as a potential challenge, but technically it could be difficult. The nature of stacking, for example, is cultural, behavioural, and contextual. We will then pursue this as a design focus. We were relieved that one of our speculative scenarios had led us to this point. We are looking forward to the next sprint, which will investigate design methods for visualizing qualitative and quantitative data.
CIAO
I hope you are enjoying this Digital Transformation ride with us; please comment if you want to share something with us or know more about us, our project and partners or Digital Society School.Continue to read about our process in Sprint three.
