Creating Equitable Options for Public Engagement
Eliza McLellan
Project Team: Raquel Meneses, Joe Blair & Eliza McLellan
Based on project work conducted for 2017 Experience Design Lab 2
Professors Jon Campbell & Ben Little|Massachusetts College of Art & Design
Part 2 of 3
Jumping Into Prototyping
After identifying insights from our research, we pushed forward to create some ideas we could prototype. But first we revisited our challenge.
Empower the community to participate in the school building planning process through workshops and other forms of engagement.
How exactly were we going to do this? How could we manage to create a sense of community and equity? That is a tall order to ask. We scratched our heads and then quickly understood that we must identify all of the components of a particular engagement. A singular engagement is part of a bigger experience. It is comprised of much more than a workshop or meeting itself. It is what happens before, during and after. And the experience throughout each these stages affects the quality of the outcomes.
But there was another question we had to answer. What did each stakeholder need to take away from the engagement? We take something from everything that we interact with in life. Whether it is a simple hello on the street, the spaces we inhabit, or the meetings we attend. Everything makes an impression on us and we make an impression on it.
We were outcome seekers, trying to pin point why so many engagement workshops left space for improvement. Could a single engagement encourage community bond and understanding between stakeholders of different perspectives? Could it be enjoyable and empowering? And produce actionable items for the lead project team?
About to be swallowed by the ever-growing abyss of questions, we took action and identified a framework to design around:
Awareness
Participation
Action/Reaction
AWARENESS
Awareness is about marketing the effort. If someone does not understand why something is pertinent to them and are not excited about it, the likelihood of someone showing up to a workshop is slim.
We determined what the core purpose of marketing was and identified goals.
Goals:
-Educate
-Hype
The solutions had to test against our insights to be sure they were portraying: Build-to-Grow and De-Slickify.
Option #1:
“Meet People Where They Are At”
Big data can help inform civic projects, but introducing this data for the first time in meetings can be intimidating for attendees. We wanted to create an option that would allow people to become acquainted with information at their convenience during their daily commute.
‘Public Transportation Advertisements’-
Could allow commuters to spend wait time mulling over the information fulfilling the goal of “educate.”
Prototype Fabrication:
Images of the principles and data of the report collected from the website were Photoshopped onto images of bus shelters and the interior train advertisement slots. Included data heavy text and direct reference to the report.
Testing:
We printed the images out and interviewed people on the street to see what their first impressions were like.
Outcome:
When asked, participants agreed that it would be a good use of money.
Constructive Feedback:
-What’s the call to action?
-I’d like to see my school represented.
-The graphics must be at a scale that’s easy to read.
Option #2:
“Give Voice to the Students”
It is important to get people excited! People are more willing and open to participate if they are excited. Students have power to “hype” and unite the community if you let them. We wanted to harness their hope and dreams and spread them throughout the community.
‘Draw Your Dream School on a Postcard’-
Could encourage dreaming of a future state and be a more personal way to receive an invitation to a meeting. A connection to the students could help create “hype” through both the making and receiving ends.
Prototype Fabrication:
Blank notecards and a box of crayons.
Testing:
We brought the notecards and crayons outside and asked students enjoying the day to take a moment to draw their dream school. When they were done, we asked them to tell us about their drawing.
Outcome:
It is about what the drawing represents, not about the drawing itself. A best practice is to make sure to ask the participant about the drawing. Unlock the stories!
If the participant does not say many things, prompt with, “Can you tell me more?” Or point to a specific part of the drawing and ask, “Can you tell me more about this part?”
Constructive Feedback:
Some students are too young to give meaningful feedback.
PARTICIPATION
Participation is about the active engagement. To do this, participants must first be present. Once they are there, it is beneficial to have activities that prescribe tasks. This helps encourage a feeling of belonging and ownership. One project goal was to create understanding and empathy between participants. We recognized that this is not something that could be forced or created. However identifying and removing barriers could make room for it to happen organically. We wanted to create a safe place by finding a way to prioritize items that would encourage a sense of ability and ease.
Prioritizing items is a way to weigh options, but also a way to familiarize people with new vocabulary.
Goals:
-Show Up
-Play & Make
-Prioritize
The solutions had to test against our insights to be sure they were portraying: Not Just a Workshop and Safe Place.
Option #3:
“Make It Bite-Sized”
There is a lot of technical vocabulary and over 50 parts of a school identified to understand. This is too much to digest when it is given in a list form.
‘Prioritization Flipchart’ —
Could make it easier to absorb this information and test how many items one is able to prioritize between and still feel comfortable. This would fulfill the goal of “Prioritize.”
Prototype Fabrication:
Colorful hand drawn images with description labels on paper. Subject matter to prioritize was familiar and non-technical. One flipchart was about preferred beverages and the other was about preferred living arrangements. Each flipchart included four pages. First page included two options to choose between, the second was 4 options, the third was 6 and the fourth was 8. No items repeated from page to page.
Testing:
We went outside on a brilliantly sunny day and asked individuals on benches to choose one item per page. We paid attention to how long it took them to answer according to how many items were on the page. We tried: from the most options to the least; the least to the most; randomized number of options between pages; randomized content between pages; randomized number of options and content between pages; only text; and only text in a list format.
Outcome:
Images are fun and sunny days are great! It is much easier when the content is familiar, illustrated and starts only with two options increasing in increments of only two.
Constructive Feedback:
-Lists are bad
-Text only is bad
-Starting with too many options is confusing
Option #3 Iteration:
“Make It Bite-Sized and Repetitive”
The more times someone sees something, the more familiar it becomes.
‘Prioritization Flipchart’
-with school building vocabulary
Prototype Fabrication:
Printed photos and imagery of school building vocabulary with labels. Flipchart contained a total of 16 unique choices. Pages increased by two options each time leaving the previous options on the page. The two new options were highlighted in gray on the right-hand side.
Testing:
The day was gray and the participants a little less jovial but still willing to try out our prototype.
Outcome:
The participant only had to take in two new pieces of information at a time while still being able to choose between the previous options. This made it simple and digestible. The images were incredibly useful.
Constructive Feedback:
Does giving one take away from another? (It was not clear why one should have to choose between “means of egress” and “fire sprinklers”.)
[After clarifying with our client, we understood going forward that it is more about the dream for a new kind of school than a prioritization of the data points presented.]
The items to be prioritized need to be reconsidered.
ACTION/REACTION
Action/Reaction is about the proceedings after an event. It is important to document the happenings of an event. This can be used later for “awareness” but most urgently it must be used to make progress on the intended effort. Information is exchanged and a moment and experience is shared.
Goals:
-Document
-Exhibit Understanding/Mastery
The solutions had to test against our insight to be sure they were portraying: Memento.
Option #4:
“Give Them Something to Remember”
People takeaway feelings and memories from an event. How can this be leveraged? Can we give something to participants to remember it fondly?
‘What is a Memento?’-
Could be a way to find what is most memorable about an experience for different people.
Prototype Fabrication:
Printed photos of different kinds of mementos including a pencil, a small branded Lego figure, a Polaroid photo and a video.
Testing:
At first, we showed one person the set of images and asked, “Which one of these represents a memento best for you?” We realized quickly that the options were too limiting. It was better to ask what a memento was first and then use the sheet of photos in case the participant needed prompting.
Outcome:
When we asked what a memento was, the overall consensus was that it was, “Something that you can bring with you.”
Constructive Feedback:
Participants had a hard time connecting to our images because, they noted, there was a lack of story behind them.
Option #5:
“Show Documentation and Show Something Has Been Done”
After an event, especially a meeting, it is crucial to keep the momentum going. This can be done in a form of documentation and action. It’s time to find out what kind.
‘Feedback Types’-
Could be a way to determine what ways people are currently used to getting feedback and what their feelings are about it.
Prototype Fabrication:
Printed photos of different kinds of ways to get feedback including check boxes, a newspaper, an e-mail or a hand written note.
Testing:
We showed participants on the street the sheet of photos and asked, “Which way do you prefer to get feedback from an event or meeting?”
Outcome:
Initially all participants gravitated towards selecting the check boxes, “Check boxes are satisfying.” Many people were confused with the idea of getting useful feedback and had a hard time understanding how getting it through something other than e-mail would work.
Constructive Feedback:
E-mail is status quo: informative but not satisfying.
Next Steps
After our initial prototypes, our next step is to take a look at how we can incorporate all of the feedback. The core ideas will stay the same but it is important for us to keep what works and identify what does not. We will then test the next iterations and log what works and what does not. Then we will refine our prototypes to look closer to what we envision the final ones will be.
