Editing Participatory design (section)

==Definition==

In participatory design, participants (putative, potential or future) are invited to cooperate with designers, researchers and developers during an innovation process. Co-design requires the end user's participation: not only in decision making but also in idea generation.<ref name=":0" /> Potentially, they participate during several stages of an innovation process: they participate during the initial exploration and problem definition both to help define the problem and to focus ideas for solution, and during development, they help evaluate proposed solutions.<ref name="The Value of Codesign"/> Maarten Pieters and Stefanie Jansen describe co-design as part of a complete co-creation process, which refers to the "transparent process of value creation in ongoing, productive collaboration with, and supported by all relevant parties, with end-users playing a central role" and covers all stages of a development process.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The 7 Principles of Complete Co-creation|last1=Pieters|first1=Maarten|last2=Jansen|first2=Stefanie|publisher=BIS Publishers|year=2017|isbn=978-90-6369-473-9|location=Amsterdam|pages=15}}</ref>

===Differing terms===
In  "Co-designing for Society", [[Deborah Szebeko]] and Lauren Tan list various precursors of co-design, starting with the Scandinavian participatory design movement and then state "Co-design differs from some of these areas as it includes all stakeholders of an issue not just the users, throughout the entire process from research to implementation."<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.4066/AMJ.2010.378|title = Co-designing for Society|year = 2010|last1 = Szebeko|first1 = Deborah|journal = Australasian Medical Journal<!--Prior to 2016, before it got acquired by OMICS -->|pages = 580–590|doi-access = free}}</ref>

In contrast, Elizabeth Sanders and Pieter Stappers state that "the terminology used until the recent obsession with what is now called co-creation/co-design" was "participatory design".<ref name=":0">Sanders, E. and Stappers, P. J: "Co-creation and the new landscapes of design." CoDesign 2008. 4(1): 5–18.</ref> They also discuss the differences between co-design and co-creation and how they are "often confused and/or treated synonymously with one another".<ref name=":0" /> In their words, "Co-creation is a very broad term with applications ranging from the physical to the metaphysical and from the material to the spiritual", while seeing "co-design [as] a specific instance of co-creation".<ref name=":0" /> Pulling from the idea of what co-creation is, the definition of co-design in the context of their paper developed into "the creativity of designers and people not trained in design working together in the design development process".<ref name=":0" /> Another term brought up in this article front end design, which was formerly known as pre-design. "The goal of the explorations in the front end is to determine what is to be designed and sometimes what should not be designed and manufactured" and provides a space for the initial stages of co-design to take place.<ref name=":0" />

An alternate definition of co-design has been brought up by Maria Gabriela Sanchez and Lois Frankel. They proposed that "Co-design may be considered, for the purpose of this study, as an interdisciplinary process that involves designers and non-designers in the development of design solutions" and that "the success of the interdisciplinary process depends on the participation of all the stakeholders in the project".<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal |last1=Sanches |first1=Maria Gabriela |last2=Frankel |first2=Lois |date=July 7–9, 2010 |title=Co-design in Public Spaces: an Interdisciplinary Approach to Street Furniture Development |url=https://dl.designresearchsociety.org/drs-conference-papers/drs2010/researchpapers/105 |journal=[[Design and Complexity – DRS International Conference]] |pages= |via=DRS Digital Library}}</ref>

"Co-design is a perfect example of interdisciplinary work, where designer, researcher, and user work collaboratively in order to reach a common goal. The concept of interdisciplinarity, however, becomes broader in this context where it not only results from the union of different academic disciplines, but from the combination of different perspectives on a problem or topic."<ref name=":7" />

=== Fourth Order Design ===
Similarly, another perspective comes from Golsby-Smith's "Fourth Order Design" which outlines a design process in which end-user participation is required and favours individual process over outcome.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Golsby-Smith |first=Tony |date=1996 |title=Fourth Order Design: A Practical Perspective |url=https://www.tribalmind.co/S3/tribalmind-live/Discoveries/J5rwalOILkmXmg0VOkA7dg.pdf |journal=Design Issues |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=5–25 |doi=10.2307/1511742 |jstor=1511742 }}</ref> Buchanan's definition of culture as a verb is a key part of Golsby-Smith's argument in favour of fourth order design.<ref name=":1" /> In Buchanan's words, "Culture is not a state, expressed in an ideology or a body of doctrines. It is an activity. Culture is the activity of ordering, disordering and reordering in the search for understanding and for values which guide action."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Buchanan |first=Richard |date=1988 |title=Branzi's Dilemma: Design in Contemporary Culture |url=https://www.ida.liu.se/~steho87/und/viskult/468816.pdf |journal=Design Issues |pages=10–29}}</ref> Therefore, to design for the fourth-order one must design within the widest scope. The system is discussion and the focus falls onto process rather than outcome.<ref name=":1" /> The idea that culture and people are an integral part of participatory design is supported by the idea that a "key feature of the field is that it involves people or communities: it is not merely a mental place or a series of processes".<ref name=":1" /> "Just as a product is not only a thing, but exists within a series of connected processes, so these processes do not live in a vacuum, but move through a field of less tangible factors such as values, beliefs and the wider context of other contingent processes."<ref name=":1" />

=== Different dimensions ===
As described by Sanders and Stappers,<ref name=":0" /> one could position co-design as a form of human-centered design across two different dimensions. One dimension is the emphasis on research or design, another dimension is how much people are involved. Therefore, there are many forms of co-design, with different degrees of emphasis on research or design and different degrees of stakeholder involvement. For instance, one of the forms of co-design which involves stakeholders strongly early at the front end design process in the creative activities is generative co-design.<ref>{{Cite book |author=Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N. |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/1197783702 |title=Convivial toolbox : generative research for the front end of design |date=2012 |isbn=978-90-6369-284-1 |oclc=1197783702}}</ref> Generative co-design is increasingly being used to involve different stakeholders as patient, care professionals and designers actively in the creative making process to develop health services.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Vandekerckhove |first1=Pieter |last2=Mul |first2=Marleen de |last3=Bramer |first3=Wichor M. |last4=Bont |first4=Antoinette A. de |date=2020-04-27 |title=Generative Participatory Design Methodology to Develop Electronic Health Interventions: Systematic Literature Review |url=https://www.jmir.org/2020/4/e13780 |journal=Journal of Medical Internet Research |language=EN |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=e13780 |doi=10.2196/13780|pmid=32338617 |pmc=7215492 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bird |first1=M. |last2=McGillion |first2=M. |last3=Chambers |first3=E.M. |last4=Dix |first4=J. |last5=Fajardo |first5=C. J. |last6=Gilmour |first6=M. |last7=Levesque |first7=K. |last8=Lim |first8=A. |last9=Mierdel |first9=S. |last10=Ouellette |first10=C. |last11=Polanski |first11=A.N. |last12=Reaume |first12=S.V. |last13=Whitmore |first13=C. |last14=Carter |first14=N. |date=2021-03-01 |title=A generative co-design framework for healthcare innovation: development and application of an end-user engagement framework |journal=Research Involvement and Engagement |volume=7 |issue=1 |page=12 |doi=10.1186/s40900-021-00252-7 |issn=2056-7529 |pmc=7923456 |pmid=33648588 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Another dimension to consider is that of the crossover between design research and education. An example of this is a study that was completed at the Middle East Technical University in Turkey, the purpose of which was to look into the use of “team development [in] enhancing interdisciplinary collaboration between design and engineering students using design thinking”.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last=Kaygan |first=Pınar |date=2023-04-01 |title=From forming to performing: team development for enhancing interdisciplinary collaboration between design and engineering students using design thinking |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09736-3 |journal=International Journal of Technology and Design Education |language=en |volume=33 |issue=2 |pages=457–478 |doi=10.1007/s10798-022-09736-3 |issn=1573-1804}}</ref> The students in this study were tasked with completing a group project and reporting on the experience of working together. One of the main takeaways was that "Interdisciplinary collaboration is an effective way to address complex problems with creative solutions. However, a successful collaboration requires teams first to get ready to work in harmony towards a shared goal and to appreciate interdisciplinarity"<ref name=":8" />