Junior design professionals experience conflicts in collaboration with others, with value differences being one of the issues influencing such conflicts. In a retrospective interview study with 22 design professionals, we collected 32 cases of perceived conflicts. We used a grounded theory approach to analyse these cases, resulting in five conflict categories that group 24 distinct value differences arising in 10 critical moments, an event that causes the value-based conflict. Thus, value differences are underlying the perceived conflicts of junior design professionals on many different occasions during collaboration with others. Conclusions are drawn on setting up guidelines for addressing values in co-design practices and supporting junior designers in their professional development.
MULTIFILE
One aspect of a responsible application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is ensuring that the operation and outputs of an AI system are understandable for non-technical users, who need to consider its recommendations in their decision making. The importance of explainable AI (XAI) is widely acknowledged; however, its practical implementation is not straightforward. In particular, it is still unclear what the requirements are of non-technical users from explanations, i.e. what makes an explanation meaningful. In this paper, we synthesize insights on meaningful explanations from a literature study and two use cases in the financial sector. We identified 30 components of meaningfulness in XAI literature. In addition, we report three themes associated with explanation needs that were central to the users in our use cases, but are not prominently described in literature: actionability, coherent narratives and context. Our results highlight the importance of narrowing the gap between theoretical and applied responsible AI.
MULTIFILE
Our current smart society, where problems and frictions are smoothed out with smart, often invisible technology like AI and smart sensors, calls for designers who unravel and open the smart fabric. Societies are not malleable, and moreover, a smooth society without rough edges is neither desirable nor livable. In this paper we argue for designing friction to enhance a more nuanced debate of smart cities in which conflicting values are better expressed. Based on our experiences with the Moral Design Game, an adversarial design activity, we came to understand the value of creating tangible vessels to highlight conflict and dipartite feelings surrounding smart cities.
LINK
