Towards a Culturally Independent Participatory Design Method Fusing game elements into the design process

Mika Yasuoka Interaction Design

IT University of Copenhagen Copenhagen, Denmark

myj@itu.dk

Momoko Nakatani and Takehiko Ohno Service Evolution Laboratories

Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation Kanagawa, Japan

{nakatani.momoko, ohno.takehiko}@lab.ntt.co.jp

Abstract— Historically, Participatory Design (PD) was introduced and applied in the Scandinavian and American context as a practical design method for collective creativity and stakeholder involvement. In this paper, by fusing game elements into PD, we suggest a first step towards a culturally independent PD method called the ICT Service Design Game to ease the prevailing concern that PD has limited applicability in other cultural settings. We conduct four experiments on ICT Service Design Game in Scandinavia and Asia to evaluate its feasibility. The experiments identify some differences in the PD process and the created Persona characteristics, probably due to cultural differences. Of more interestingly, despite these process differences, the game elements of our PD variant were found to promote the key values of PD in culturally diverse settings by stimulating idea creation and participation. Our experiments imply that the introduction of game elements allows PD to be effectively utilized in culturally diverse settings.

Design Methods, Participatory Design, Creativity, Culture

I. INTRODUCTION Participatory Design (PD) was first introduced in

Scandinavia [e.g. 9] and North America [e.g.17] but its use has remained rather limited. Although the root of the Scandinavian PD is said to lie in ‘Democracy’ and ‘Equality’ [4, 12], currently PD has developed into a practical design method that tries to promote collective creativity and stakeholder involvement [e.g.,1, 3, 10, 19, 20].

Lately, PD has attracted attention in Asia and Africa, areas with widely divergent cultures, largely because of strong demand for collective creation and innovation in groups, communities, and societies. To survive in the competitive global market, it is increasingly critical for companies to create attractive services and products by using diverse resources. For tackling socially challenging problems, it has been gradually recognized that diverse stakeholders are required and active participation is essential for optimal solutions [14, 16].

This paper creates a culturally independent variant of PD through the fusion of game elements. Based on comparative experiments in culturally different settings, this paper attempts to argue that the use of game elements allows socio-culturally different societies to effectively apply the PD approach and benefit from its core ideas of collective creativity and stakeholder involvement.

In the rest of the paper, first we exemplify why PD is not currently well accepted in culturally disparate societies, using Japan as an example. Next, our variant, the ICT Service Design Game, is introduced as a culturally independent PD method; experiments on our proposal are detailed. We evaluate the cultural independency of the proposal based on a preliminary analysis of our findings, focusing on the acceptance of the proposal.

II. WHY GAME ELEMENTS? Even though PD is recognized as a source of creativity,

its adaptation beyond Scandinavia has been scant. As shown in recent work, strong correlations between socio-cultural environment, design, and usability methods [e.g., 2,19] hinder the use of PD methods by other cultures. It has been postulated that PD methods contain cultural biases and assumptions [11], and it might not be so simple to adapt such culturally-specific methods to other socio-cultural settings in spite of their potential value.

The historical trajectory of PD was explained in the argument “the sociocultural background is given due consideration [7].” Given these biases, some researchers and practitioners questioned the use of PD in socio-culturally different societies and organizations.

In fact, compared to the number of PD cases conducted and reported from Scandinavia and North America, those from Asia, South America and Africa [e.g., 15, 19, 20] are quite limited. Some Japanese researchers argue for the incompatibility of participatory methods in culturally different societies, such as Japan1, due to a different social value system and a different understanding of the concept, ‘Participation’. This concern has, to a large extent, prevented practitioners from applying PD in socio-culturally disparate societies, despite increased demand for participatory activities [e.g. 3].

A. Three Assumptions of PD The history of PD application evidences the

characteristics of PD, which are seemingly regarded as fundamental prerequisites. To name a few, (a) Equality, (b) Open discussion and (c) Commitment to participation. There appear to be potential barriers to conducting PD in Japan.

1 Arguments are not yet available in English. (����� DBT���� ������2009)

2013 International Conference on Culture and Computing

978-0-7695-5047-3/13 $26.00 © 2013 IEEE

DOI 10.1109/CultureComputing.2013.24

92

In Scandinavia, empowerment in the workplace toward flat relations and equality was an original objective of the PD movement [4,12]. Although this democratization perspective has diminished in the current mainstream of PD theories and practice, its importance for equal discussion through the PD process is still valid. In contrast, Japan is a hierarchical society where the distance between the top and the bottom of an organization is great, and is a key barrier to the introduction of PD to collective design activities. In spite of the organization restructuring movements for flat structures in the 90’s, power transfer and process reduction for flatness remain a challenge in Japanese organizations2.

In Scandinavia, open discussion prevails in every corner of society; at schools, offices, and public spaces [3]. In Japan, on the other hand, openly expressed opinions in formal meetings are not expected because of the social norm, although they are not expressly prohibited. Even in occasions targeting open discussions such as workshops, some have difficulty in opening up to strangers or members with different rank in a hierarchy.

It is generally agreed that the stakeholders’ commitment to the PD process is of critical importance [10], since PD must have the participants’ self-motivation and commitment for participation. Especially in organizations where the division of work is clear, people not only from Japan but also from Scandinavia tend to be reluctant to support a PD process beyond their work descriptions in spite of the obvious benefits of PD activities to higher level processes [3]. It is critical that stakeholders can benefit from participation.

B. Design Game The design game is one of the PD methods that allows

stakeholders to collectively design future services and products, using a form of board games with the goals of collective creativity and stakeholder involvement. To benefit the most from the game, field materials from ethnographical observations are collected and form game materials such as cards and pieces. With such original tools, players can ground their play in the real world easily and deepen their understanding of the field as the game proceeds and the design takes shape.

As discussed above, the value of PD resides in the discussion processes realized by equality, open discussion and commitment to participation. Thus, it is of critical importance to reach a conclusion that all stakeholders are satisfied with and contribute to, without being influenced by a single authority or affected by a loud talker. However, it is not always easy to realize equal participation in a group or to overcome hierarchy in certain socio-cultural settings. A series of design games, which were originally suggested to empower workers, could be beneficial as well as practical tools to overcome obstacles for participation and trigger creative ideas, which current societies long for.

2 The well-known Kaizen and Tokyota approaches empower employees by providing tools for bottom-up decision-making. However, these methods do not alter the organizational hierarchy.

For example, ‘Layout kits’ is a game suggested by Ehn [4], in which players set machines on a factory floor to optimize layout. Players handle machine cards as a tool in the game. The game lets shop floor workers participate in the relocation of work stations. It contributes to their ownership of and satisfaction with their work place. Brandt et al. [1] suggested a series of design games – the user game, the landscape game, the technology game and the scenario game - for designing spaces. In these games, participants create a persona, design an activity space, design shapes and functions, and play use-scenarios, respectively. These games facilitate the design process and contribute to collaboration among cross-disciplinary design groups.

C. Game Elements for PD We see potential in using game elements to overcome the

cultural obstacles implicit in PD. A game space provides PD participants with another kind of space where ordinary life is temporarily suspended and new roles are taken within the game [8, 13]. Even in societies with strong hierarchy and social norms, “the players can engage in behavior that might be risky, uncomfortable, or even rude in their normal lives [8]”. The rules of the game, which players must agree to abide, break hierarchies and social norms. By introducing rules, the game can provide equal participation possibilities, otherwise impossible in the ordinary organizational settings. Although the game provides a fictitious world, game tools based on real world data keep players attached to reality. The game tools hold information about the game and help players to concentrate on the task. Furthermore, the game processes allow the participants to be subsumed by the game world and let them naturally commit to the task [1]. As such, games make a difference by substituting for and freeing participants from their real-world cultures without violating social norms or hierarchies.

III. THE ICT SERVICE DESIGN GAME Based on the design games suggested by Brandt [1], we

designed the ICT Service Design Game (the ICT game) as a PD variant; its aim is to supporting the design process for creating home ICT services. In contrast to previous studies on design games, which aim at facilitating a user-centered design process for cross-disciplinary design groups and emphasize user involvement, our proposal focuses on overcoming socio-cultural differences and emphasizes collective creativity as well as participation.

A. Three Games The ICT Game consists of three successive games that

should be played as a set. Considering the practical constraints on stakeholders attending the games, our game duration is limited to about 1-2 hours; 3-5 participants with different backgrounds form a team and play a game together. A game framework is constructed on a fictitious worldview, a goal, and rules as restrictions [8, 13]. The main three rules are (1) keep your turn (never skip your turn), (2) respect time limits, and (3) play based on the provided data. During the game, facilitators ensure that stakeholders follow the rules.

93

Game materials were prepared based on the real world data from two main sources, ethnographic-inspired responses of end-users and technology seeds. The data was collected from an ethnographical study on five households of Danish and Japanese potential users; couples around 30-40 years old with children. The focus of the observations was ICT aspects such as usage and attitudes. Ethnographical data has been collected inside the houses since the ICT Game targeted the creation home ICT services. Based on the collected materials, tools for the three games such as 30-second video clips, moment cards, technology cards, and LEGO pieces were prepared. The video clips show target user’s activities at home in 30 seconds and moment cards show a moment of the video clips. Technology cards show technology seeds from a research lab and LEGO blocks are equivalent tangible artifacts. All cards are name-cade size picture cards (e.x. see Fig.1). Although the game provides a fictitious world space, the game tools, such as cards, pieces, and videos, are deeply rooted in the real challenges and needs of end-users and actual technology seeds from a research institution. Next we describe the three games in detail.

1) The User Game The first game is the user game. The user game should

create a fictitious user image, persona, by constructing a person’s story based on real target user data collected from the field. The game tools are the video clips and moment cards.

The game starts by the cards being placed on the table. The first player then picks five cards and watches the equivalent 30 second video clips together with the group members. After watching the five videos, the first player makes a story based on the cards s/he selected. Then, s/he places all five cards on the table in order and makes a title on a sticky note reflecting the needs disclosed by the story. The next player takes four other cards and overlaps her/his story with the previous one, meaning that the second player must use at least one card already placed on the table in the previous turn. The game is over when all cards are used or all team members agree that no new stories can be created. Finally, the team fills out a persona sheet based on the stories made. The persona sheet (Fig. 2) holds a few details such as name, age, characteristics, family structure, job/income, living area, hobby and attitudes toward things related to ICT services.

2) The Service Game The service game should design ICT services using

future technology for the persona created in the user game. In this game, technology cards and LEGO blocs are used as game tools (Fig.1).

The game is based on the persona’s needs found in the persona game. The first player picks one technology card and an equivalent LEGO block and makes a story of how the persona will use the technology at home to challenge the first prioritized needs defined before hand. The second player picks another technology card and makes another story. The game is over when all the needs are solved or time is up. Finally, the team fills out a service sheet by picking or combining stories created in the game. The team fills out a service sheet by adding a few details about the service such

as service name, user needs fulfilled, when and where the service is provided, service summary, and visualization of the service.

Figure 1. Game Materials and a Service Sheet for the Service Game.

3) The Scenario Game The scenario game should create use-scenarios where the

persona uses the ICT service in a future home. Describing possible futures and enacting scenarios are known to represent a multi-faceted design tool [1]. By acting, stakeholders can simulate the targeted users’ experiences and feelings, which can contribute to understanding challenges and designing services and products [6, 18]. The experiences from previous games are condensed, empathy for the users and the use-situations is developed, and also the design concept is elaborated while the players take on roles, create scenarios, and act them out in physical space such as kitchen.

Figure 2. Output Examples (Persona Sheet and User scenario).

In this game, players create a design plot. The game uses white sheets of paper and pens, and the persona and service sheets created in the previous games (Fig. 1, 2). The first player draws one initial scene in two minutes referring to the sheets. Then, another player draws a successive story in another two minutes. In this way, the team creates at least two stories, each with 3-5 scenes. By drawing scenes in turn, all participants will contribute a part to the whole story. In the end, the team picks a team story. The created story is used as a plot for acting. Team members will act out the scenario and polish the team story until all members are satisfied or time is out.

B. Four Experiments For evaluating the cultural independence of the ICT

game, we conducted four experiments; two in Denmark and two in Japan in different socio-cultural settings (See Table 1). The experiment structure, the game materials and the game settings were almost the same in the four settings except

94

some condition differences for playing games such as game durations, caused by practical constraints.

TABLE I. FOUR EXPERIMENTS

Participants were carefully selected to reflect actual service development environments. Each team consisted of three to four participants from technology, marketing and design backgrounds. While all participants in Denmark could be potential end-users of the service, one participant in Japan was an end-user and represented the potential target group. Half of the participants represented small or middle size organizational cultures with less hierarchy and the other half represented large size organizational cultures with strong hierarchy.

The theme of all experiments was the future ICT services to be used in a household in three years (2015 or 2016). The participants were requested to design future ICT services, that benefited users’ daily life by supporting household chores, promoting communication among family members, and supporting enjoyable, beneficial and productive daily life. The persona sheets had a few more detailed items such as attitude towards household chores, attitude toward IT services, attitude toward family communication, and attitude toward raising children.

Three kinds of data were collected and analyzed using both qualitative [5] and quantitative methods. Conversations in the experiments were taped and transcribed. Persona and service sheets created during the games and game outputs were collected. Lastly, participants filled out two kinds of questionnaires. One of them evaluated participation and contribution level to the game, and the other analyzed shared understanding of the team persona among team members. Persona evaluations were scored from 0 to 5 to calculate the correlations among team members.

IV. ANALYSIS In this section, we analyze the results, focusing on the

differences and similarity observed in the experiments on the ICT game from socio-cultural perspectives.

A. Personas – Approximately Similar, Details Different In the persona game, participants constructed their

persona image step by step and the team settled on the same image. In filling out the persona sheet, they reached agreement easily without large disputes. Surprisingly, many teams created personas with similar images (Table 2) i.e. similar age (mostly 38 or 40 years old), profession (housewives or women with part time jobs), family structure (husband and at least two children), and low IT literacy and

usage. This was expected since the game materials were created from the same category group with these characteristics. Still, these results are meaningful as each team created a persona that reflected the original user category characteristics.

TABLE II. CREATED PERSONAS

Personas created in Denmark

DK1-A DK1-B DK2-A DK2-B Age 35 40 38 38 Jobs House wife Part timer House wife House wife

Family Husband and 3 children

Husband and 2 children

Husband and 3 children

Husband and 6 children

Characteristics

Passive, self sacrifice� Obedient Stressed, un-

happy, dutiful Messy, Bored

Personas created in Japan

JP1-A JP1-B JP1-C JP2-A JP2-B Age 38 38 38 38 38

Jobs House wife

Full time work

House wife

House wife

Part time work

Family Husband and 4 children

Husband and 2 children

Husband and 2 children

Husband and 2 children

Husband and 2 children

Characteristics

Passive, self sacrifice�

Obedient Ambitious, Outdoor

Patient, Family-minded

Clumsy, Care for family

The correlations on persona characteristics among team

members were also high. For example, correlations among JP2-A participants’ recognitions on their persona, were at most 0.86 and on average 0.52, which shows that they held a similar image of their persona.

While we observed several similarities among personas from the four experiments, differences between Danish and Japanese personas were visible such as in details of characteristics, attitude toward household chores or toward ICT. For example, all personas created in the Danish experiments were negative woman, exhausted by household chores and characterized as ‘passive and self sacrificing’ and ‘oppressed’ person. Although personas created in the Japanese experiments also had negative aspects such as ‘short tempered’, their basic characteristics were positive with aspects of ‘care for family’ and ‘ambitious’. Furthermore, even though all teams shared the image of ‘Persona doesn’t like household chores’, the detailed image on attitudes toward household chore were different. While Danish personas exhibited strong tendency toward negative attitudes such as ‘Just duty’, ‘Obligation’ and ‘Hate’, Japanese personas had positive attitudes with ‘Conscious’ and ‘Pays attention to details’.

B. Service - Approximately Similar, Service Different Through the technology game and the scenario game, all

nine teams created one future ICT service within the defined game duration and despite the diversities of participants with different socio-cultural backgrounds, all teams generated surprisingly similar outputs as regards quality and quantity. All suggested services similarly aim to make the personas happy with new ICT services with advanced ubiquitous functions and hardware. However, interestingly, the services

Denmark Japan

2012. August

2 Teams (A, B) 3 stakeholders (Engineer, Marketing, Designer) Small org. size

3 Teams (A, B, C) 4 stakeholders (End-user, Engineer, Marketing, Designer) Middle org. size

2013, January

2 Teams (A, B) 3 stakeholders (Engineer, Marketing, Designer) Varied org. size

2 Teams (A, B) 4 stakeholders (End-user, Engineer, Marketing, Designer) Varied org. size

95

were different although all teams used the same game materials. Some services provide similar functions with different seed technologies while other services were quite distinctive, quite original to the authors. For example, JP1-A, JP1-B, and DK1-A suggested cooking support services with thin, flat, tablet devices with advanced interfaces. JP2-A also offered a cooking support service but with an anime character on the display that was manipulated by the persona as a mother from a distance so that children could follow cooking instructions easier.

We do not detail each service or their analyses in this paper. In our preliminary analysis, ICT services and their use-scenarios as deliverables of the game showed no significant differences among the four experiments.

C. Similarity and Differences in Game Process Participants played the games by following rules and

reached the goal without exceeding time or significant detours. According to the questionnaire collected at the end of the experiments, their satisfaction levels toward attendance, collective creation, and output quality were relatively high. Through the game process, the participants in the four experiments gave opinions in equal amounts and committed to the 1 to 1.5 day sessions in a proactive manner.

Looking at the outputs as the only evaluation criteria, PD was, seemingly, applied in similar manner in the four experiments due to the proposed changes. Participants from hierarchical organizations followed rules and evidenced no clear organizational impact on participation. However, a detailed comparative analysis on communication in the Danish and Japanese experiments suggests different interpretations. First, although players in Japan kept their turns following the game rule, some players often spoke out his/her thoughts as if they were talking to her/him-self. Listening to other players’ comments, s/he presented own opinion at the end. They tended to ask for other’s implicit approval of their thoughts as shown below. This informal pre-negotiation before presenting an opinion was typical in all sessions in the Japanese workshop.

End-User: I guess… (Checking others are nodding) Our persona is alone on the way back home from work, or two if she is on the way back from kindergarten. (mumble the end of the sentence) Engineer: I guess she picks up her child and goes shopping on the way. End-User: …checks update and realizes she needs milk. Engineer: Doesn’t she check shopping lists in the morning, and in the evening, she checks them with smart phone and knows what’s missing, which connects to the next scene. End-user: Yes, yes..(nodding) (Author’s translation from original conversation in Japanese)

On the other hand, Danish teams tend to have another

challenge of intervention in the discussion process. When the lead player was presenting his story, the other team members sometimes intervened and tried to create stories for the speaking player. In such cases, a team facilitator intervened and gave the turn back to the speaker; such interjectors tended to hold back by him/herself over time by paying more attention to the rules. As such, facilitators often played critical roles especially in the beginning of the game. In spite of the need for intervention, the game rules made it easier for

facilitators to intervene and ensure that the participants kept to the rules without degrading the mood or collaboration.

V. DISCUSSIONS The experiments exemplified how the proposal was

applied differently and similarly in the context of culture in spite of its well-defined procedures. In this section, we argue how the ICT Service Design Game can overcome the deficiencies of conventional PD methods when they are applied in socially disparate cultures.

A. Fostering Stakeholder Involvement The game space and rules such as (1) keep own turn, (2)

keep time limits, and (3) play based on the provided data, let all participants have an equal say since they have to wait for their own turn to tell their own stories. As such, participants regardless of their socio-cultural background are active in the game and offer their opinions to form the team results.

Because of rule (1), opinions of end-users who tend to be in a weaker position in terms of hierarchy were heard and given equal weight. Since end-users could provide insightful ideas that others could not argue against, the end-users’ opinions often evaluated higher than the other suggestions. Even when participants who were supposed to be passive gave their opinions, the rule stopped his/her interruptions, without creating personal tension, which could otherwise lead to failure. When participants forgot the rules and no one in the team objected, the facilitators as gatekeepers made sure that the participants followed the rules.

By introducing game elements, our PD variant yielded the benefits of including all stakeholders equally and opening the table to discussions, reflecting opinions from different perspectives evenly, and ensuring commitment to the design process. The game elements ensure that the participants follow the rules and roles without violating stakeholders’ social status.

B. Supporting Creativity Recent work on intercultural collaboration has

demonstrated that diversity is a source of creativity [14, 16]. The intersection of knowledge is a source of innovative thoughts and the deliberate construction of a group with varied opinions can be beneficial for innovative service creation, as long as opinions are equally represented in such a group. In our experiments, the size of one team is three to four professionals with varied knowledge backgrounds, such as end-user, design professionals, business professionals and engineers, since they can contribute from different angles. The teams are designed to be small enough to let all participants speak and large enough to have different points of view represented.

As stakeholder involvement was harmonized by the introduction of game elements, the variety provided by the groups could be fully utilized. During the experiments, participants often gave their opinions based on their knowledge or experiences such as “as a engineer, I know the function is feasible”, or “As a heavy user of this service…”. End-users who tend to be in a weak social position in PD also contributed to the design processes and others listened

96

carefully. Supported by the diversity among participants, good conditions for collective creation were formed. As a result, the service ideas generated covered a broad spectrum, some of which went beyond the facilitators’ expectations.

We should note that not all suggested service ideas were totally new, and not all functions were technically feasible in 3 years. For those reasons, it could be argued that the created service ideas were not a good indicator of the power of collective creativity. We note that service ideas are obviously influenced by the game materials provided and the worldview set as the game frame. Although in-depth evaluations on generated services are required to determine how well the method enhances creativity, many service ideas are unique and exceed what one person could create by him/herself and we saw some hints of the creativity that the game can invoke.

VI. CONCLUSION In this paper, we suggested a participatory design (PD)

variant, the ICT Service Design Game, aiming to support collective creativity and stakeholder involvement by fusing some game elements into the PD process to benefit societies culturally disparate from the societies that created the PD process. Our experiments showed that the variant generated creative outputs and fostered participation. The game elements with selected tools, defined as rules and goals in the ICT Design Game, succeeded in ensuring that different societies could received the same benefits of PD.

Our experiments also showed that different socio-cultural groups interpreted the same data differently. Interestingly though, by sharing negative persona images in one cultural setting and positive persona images in another, each team could reach a consensus and generate similar service outputs in spite of the different personas.

This work has several limitations. First it is a challenge to evaluate the quality of the services created. As a practical PD variant, our method should yield useful service ideas, with the potential for wide acceptance in the market. However, it is difficult to accurately evaluate the success of an idea until it is accepted by the market. Second it is a challenge to separate the contributions of the game elements from those of the facilitators. Although our PD method contributes to the promotion of PD values regardless of cultural barriers, we should not overlook the fact that that the facilitators’ contributions were strong in our experiments. Last but not least, our experiments examined only two ethnic and organizational perspectives. Although the two ethnic cultures represent widely disparate societies, they can not be expect to cover all possible differences.

There is a range of implications as to future research. Analytical criteria on creative services, long term follow ups of the suggested service ideas and additional processes to convert the ideas into real market services will help to evaluate the quality of the proposal. In addition to testing our proposal in wider socio-cultural settings, designing a more

detailed game frame would also contribute by lessening the need for facilitators.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT We appreciate and thank the participants of these

experiments and data collection. This research was supported by a grant from NTT Service Evolution Laboratories.

REFERENCES [1] E. Brandt., J. Messter, “Facilitating Collaboration though Design

Game,” Proc. Participatory Design Conference, pp.121-130, 2004. [2] T. Clemmensen, “Templates for Cross –Cultural Specific Usability

Testing”, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 634-669, 2011.

[3] P. Dalsgaard, “Challenges of Participation in Large-Scale Public Project”, Proc. PDC 2010, pp.21-30, 2010.

[4] P. Ehn, “Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts”, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1989.

[5] K. A. Ericsson and H. A. Simon, “Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data” MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993.

[6] A. Fleury, “Drawing and Acting as User Experience research Tools”, Proc. APCHI 2012, pp.269-278, 2012.

[7] C. Floyd, W. M. Mehl, F. M. Reisin, G. Schmidt, and G. Wolf, “Out of Scandinavia: Alternative Approaches to Software Design and System Development,” Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 4, pp. 253–350, 1989.

[8] D. Gray, S. Brown and J. Macanufo, “Gamestorming – A play book for innovators, rulebreakers, and changemakers”, O’reilly, 2010.

[9] J. Greenbaum and M. Kyng, “Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems”, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 1991.

[10] J. Gulliksen, A. Lantz, and I. Boivie, “User centered Design –Problems and Possibilities – A summary of the 1998 PDC & CSCW workshop”, SIG CHI Bulletin, Vol. 31, No. 2, 1999.

[11] J. Iivari and N. Iivari, “The relationship between organizational culture and the deployment of agile methods’. Information and Software Technology 53, 5 509-520, 2011.

[12] F. Kensing, and J. Blomberg, “PD: issues and concerns”, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Vol. 7, 167–185. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.

[13] J. McGonigal, “Reality is broken, why games make us better and how they can change the world”, 2011.

[14] S. Page, The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton University Press, 2007.

[15] S.K. Puri, E. Byrne, J. L. Nhampossa, Z. B. Quraishy, “Contextuality of participation in IS design: a developing country perspective” in Proc. PDC 2004, ACM press 42- 52, 2004.

[16] K. Sawyer, Group Genius, Basic Books, 2007. [17] D. Schuler, A. Namioka, “Participatory Design: Principles and

Practices”, CRC Press, 1993. [18] S. Titta, K. Mehto, T. Kankainen, , Kantola, V., “Drama and user-

centered methods in design”, in Coleman, R. and Macdonald, A. ed. Proc. International conference on inclusive design, pp.5-8, 2005.

[19] H. Winschiers, N. J. Bidwell and E. Blake, “Being Participated – A Community Approach”, Proc. PDC 2010, pp.1-10, 2010.

[20] M. Yasuoka and R. Sakurai, “Out of Scandinavia – Adaptability of Participatory Design in Culturally Distant Society” Proc. PDC 2012 vol.2, pp.21-24, 2012.

97