Chapter from Design Integrations: Research and Collaboration, Poggenpohl and Sato 2009
This project dealt with HISP, Health Information Systems Programme. A programme that involved academia people from all levels (masters, phd's, researchers) and across different continents (Norway, Africa). It applied formations of study and research opportunities to drive development of HISP. E.g. apart from contributing to the HISP the higher education of S. Africa also gained research knowledge and practice of educational value that supported the creation of a new curriculum Health Informatics in Cape town.
Design for negotiation of logics. Uncovering the "spaces in between" and "new meeting grounds". (What does this have to do with participatory design?). Design as trans disciplinary practice. See also mode II knowledge (What is that?).
Some principles she lays out:
1. Smart capability building. Making it possible for higher education institutions to participate by creating educational programs.
2. Participation is essential 3. Mutual learning
4. Participatory design. Where design and governance of the product has been kept rather local
5. Respectful dialogue 6. Expanding designers responsibilities, knowledge and practice.
These points seem obvious at first glance. I wonder about the implications when going deeper in the material. And if these are principals, in what degree are they transferable to other areas? Particular "3. Mutual learning" seems to be important when design approaches other disciplines. The exchange of effort, knowledge, or any form of transaction must be in equilibrium. Does this transaction have a value? Can this be evaluated?