IDEO Read online

  SYLVIA, DESIGN RESEARCHER

  Honesty in practice

  Our preference is to provide full

  information before we engage

  with participants. But when such

  information would unduly influence

  their behavior, we get their permission

  to either not reveal particular

  information or to delay

  sharing it until after

  the session.

  On the way to an interview, one of our clients suggested we introduce her as someone from IDEO. She was worried the participant wouldn’t fully open up if he knew where she worked.

  She then suggested we say nothing and allow the participant to assume we were all from IDEO. As a regular client of ours, it was difficult explaining to her why I wasn’t comfortable “disguising”

  her as an employee. The participant had already been told a client would be present. With hindsight I realized I could have done a better job of preparing the client for the interview by making it clear that we would introduce her truthfully, but without revealing her specific affiliation.

  ANDY, DESIGN RESEARCHER

  Honesty in practice

  During live prototyping it’s sometimes

  important for us to learn about people’s

  natural reactions without their

  knowing at the time they’re involved

  in a test. We share the intent of their

  involvement at the earliest appropriate

  moment, and answer direct

  questions truthfully.

  We were developing future concepts for an online university program, and wanted to assess the level of interest in one of our new propositions. One experiment involved placing an ad for an unfinished concept on the university homepage and then counting the clicks to gauge interest. Anyone who did click got a pop-up window explaining the work was in progress, thanking them for their interest, and offering them a choice to continue exploring the prototype or leave the experiment. That way, we could gather information about initial interest and quickly clarify people’s engagement so that those interested could willingly spend more time with us.

  JOE, BUSINESS DESIGNER

  the Guidelines

  2Gathering

  Information

  We learn from our participants by observing and actively engaging with them—in the

  real world and the virtual one. At this stage of the research process, the principles of respect, responsibility, and honesty are about considering the whole person, and the context in which they live—valuing their actions, beliefs, thoughts, and feelings as well as their limits.

  31

  the Guidelines

  Introduce the team accurately

  When we make personal introductions, we don’t lie or withhold information about the project team if the participant requests it.

  If we’re concerned about introducing participant bias by sharing a client’s identity upfront, it may be appropriate to ask the participant for permission to wait until the end of the session.

  Why It Matters:

  Our participants have a right to make informed decisions about those they allow to study them. This is especially relevant when we’re entering their homes or workplace.

  By representing the team accurately, we offer transparency that helps participants feel comfortable and confident, which leads to more authentic interactions.

  Listen, don’t advise

  Our research is about gaining people’s perspectives, not about offering advice, opinions, or corrections. Participants should always feel their perspectives are valid, and not be swayed by any sense of deference that we are the experts.

  If you see something troubling during your research, please seek advice from experienced design researchers or IDEO’s legal team.

  Why It Matters:

  As design professionals, we are not experts in many other areas that may arise in the course of our research (e.g., medical 32

  GATHERING INFORMATION

  conditions, psychological challenges, or legal issues). If we offer advice that belongs in the domain of other experts and professionals, we may end up doing more harm than good.

  Additionally, offering our own opinion or advice will influence participants during observations, muddying our results and making them less valuable to the project and client.

  Don’t make promises

  you can’t keep

  We avoid setting unrealistic expectations. For instance, prototypes, concepts, or conversations can mislead people into believing something not-yet-produced already exists.

  A clear explanation—either before or after engagement—

  can help avoid situations in which participants feel cheated by the outcome. Consider alternative approaches that could make their involvement more useful to them.

  Why It Matters:

  Disappointment could erode participants’ trust, and create lasting negative perceptions of IDEO and our clients’ new products or services. Participants may also crucially need the proposed solution being presented during the research.

  Deceiving them could delay their progress toward gaining alternative services or products that can help them now.

  33

  the Guidelines

  Take only the information we need

  Today’s technology—video, audio, photography, social media, and other digital resources—makes it possible to gather vast amounts of contextual information about a given participant, sometimes even without their knowledge. We must use restraint. We strive to stay focused, gathering and using no more information than is necessary to support the project at hand.

  Why It Matters:

  Out of respect for our participants, we avoid gathering information they haven’t agreed to. This sets expectations about exactly what we will learn about a participant.

  Taking only what we need also ensures we can more readily identify valuable insights.

  Questions to consider as we gather information:

  » Are we treating our participants like people, not subjects?

  » Are there opportunities to engage in more open and reciprocal ways?

  » Are we considerate of the personal and cultural sensitivities that might prevail?

  » Are we making good use of everyone’s time?

  34

  Respect in practice

  In enthusiastic pursuit of knowledge

  about sensitive personal topics—

  finances, intimate relationships,

  challenging health conditions—we need

  to be alert to subtle signs of discomfort

  that will cue us

  to change tack.

  In field research for a project about dialysis and kidney disease, we interviewed a patient of important social and business status. Even though we clearly stated the purpose of the interview and gained his permission upfront to take photos, we somehow poked his emotional pain points again and again as the interview progressed. His discomfort built until about halfway through the interview he finally stood up and shouted he could no longer bear to continue. We were a little shocked but completely understood where he was coming from.

  So we wrapped up and left. I realized we should always pay close attention to the emotional reactions of respondents, and never force them into anything they feel uncomfortable with.

  HELEN, DESIGN RESEARCHER

  Respect in practice

  When we measure the appeal of

  concepts and propositions, we bear in

  mind that real people are behind the

  data we’re collecting; we acknowledge

  their participation in appropriate ways.

  IDEO.org was working on projects to improve sanitation and build viable business opportunities in Zambia. One involved exploring the appeal of a latrine-emptying service to local villagers. To gauge whether people would realistically pay for it, we asked individuals whether they would sign up for the service—implying it alread
y existed. Villagers were happy to do this, which was great news for the project. Unfortunately, they were infuriated later when we explained how the service was still only a concept, and they wouldn’t be getting their latrines emptied anytime soon. Much later, we realized we could have delivered on the implied promise by arranging several days of service, rather than risk people feeling they’d been duped. Something we’d definitely do in future!

  DANNY, SENIOR DESIGNER, IDEO.ORG

  Respect in practice

  Sensitivities vary widely between

  individuals, and we need to be careful

  not to assume our previous experiences

  or our own feelings will necessarily

  prepare us for the best ways to handle

  interactions. We adapt our

  approach to fit personal

  and cultural needs

  and customs.

  For an IDEO.org project focused on early childhood development in East Africa, we began our research in Tanzania. We found the best way to understand the conventional wisdom in those communities was to ask mothers how a “typical” family in their neighborhood handled children’s nutrition and health care. When we tried the same tactic in rural Ethiopia, it was far less effective, with each person responding, “I don’t know.” Because of Ethiopia’s social norms around privacy, women were uncomfortable speculating about their neighbors’ child-rearing practices. When we discovered this cultural nuance, we reworked our research approach to focus on advice the women had received themselves, avoiding any undue discomfort.

  SHAUNA, DESIGN RESEARCHER, IDEO.ORG

  Honesty in practice

  How we demonstrate honesty can vary

  across cultures. It’s important for us to

  understand those nuances.

  Working with American colleagues, I’ve learned that honesty means stating everything upfront (e.g. that we’ll be taking photos and video), and then asking people to sign an agreement in black and white before any research begins.

  By contrast, in Chinese culture, signing something in black and white is extremely intimidating, especially at the start of an interaction—it can make people feel they’re being forced into a trap. To avoid this, we usually spend time simply talking about the details and explaining everything exactly as it’s written on the consent form before the interview begins.

  Signing the form usually happens at the end of an interview.

  We’ve noticed people are more comfortable doing it this way as they’ve already built trust by experiencing the process.

  The principles are still followed, but executed in a more culturally accepted way.

  HELEN, DESIGN RESEARCHER

  the Guidelines

  3Using and Sharing

  As we make sense of the information we’ve gathered and share insights, the principles of respect, responsibility, and honesty dictate how selective we are about sharing and protecting personal details and information in our care.

  39

  the Guidelines

  Consider the audience

  Think about who you are sharing information with, and why.

  Guard against potentially negative implications, even those you may not be specifically aware of. Consent forms often grant broad permission, so consider the context in which some forms of sharing could be harmful to participants or clients.

  Why It Matters:

  Long after a project has ended, the information we hold about participants may still have implications for their well-being.

  Participants often can’t foresee all the possible outcomes of giving us their personal information, and granting us the freedom to use it for our work. Managing this information appropriately builds trust.

  Represent honestly what we learn

  Our deliverables frequently use people’s stories and comments to explain our high-level insights and findings. It’s important not to distort their words or intentions to fit a given framework or approach. We make inferences based on what we see, feel, hear, and discern, while staying true to an evidence-based point of view.

  Why It Matters:

  We are advocates for the authentic needs of the user; and representing our participants’ needs truthfully helps us design 40

  USING AND SHARING

  the most appropriate solutions. An honest assessment of those needs means our clients can better appraise the potential value of a given design solution.

  Guard raw data

  The goal of design research isn’t to collect data; it’s to synthesize information and provide insight and guidance that leads to action. We don’t hand over unedited material—whether on paper, video, digital, or any other format. Instead, we edit and share insights relevant to the project, in the form of reports and other deliverables. Disclaimers on these deliverables should make clear the limits of repurposing or sharing this content.

  Why It Matters:

  Sharing irrelevant or unedited data can lead to unforeseen consequences outside the scope of a particular project, and carry potentially harmful implications for IDEO, our participants, and our clients.

  Restricting access to data also ensures the client is well informed but without the additional responsibility of maintaining the agreements we have in place with our participants. This is especially important when, as often happens, clients later wish to share the content more widely.

  41

  the Guidelines

  Protect participants’

  recognizability and traceability

  Unless we have direct written permission from a participant, we keep their personal information within IDEO only. We protect this information in all its forms; some less obvious than others.

  For example, we wouldn’t share a participant’s home address.

  Equally, we wouldn’t share a blog they’d written or allow their license plate number to appear in a video.

  Measures to help manage this may include using pseudonyms, asking people to disable location tracking capabilities on phones or other devices, or separating a participant’s likeness from their comments to preserve their anonymity.

  Why It Matters:

  We want to retain the ability to attract people who are comfortable providing us with their personal information.

  We do this by maintaining our reputation for respecting and protecting participants.

  Specifically, protecting medical and mental health information is a legal requirement, and must never be connected to the identity of the person. Even if we come across health-related information unintentionally, it’s crucial we keep it separate from the participant’s identity. We can share the story, but it should never be connected with the person’s name (even first name), a photograph, or any other information that could identify the individual.

  As an ethical matter, IDEO complies with HIPAA regulations, or local equivalent, even when working with clients or in territories where such regulations are not in effect.

  42

  USING AND SHARING

  Archive materials carefully

  As we wrap up each project, we must delete sensitive information, eliminate or restrict cloud-based data, set access limits, and turn consent forms into our legal department for safekeeping.

  We make an effort to protect our participants always, not just for the duration of the project.

  Why It Matters:

  Archiving only what is necessary, and deleting all sensitive information that shouldn’t be kept, reduces the risk of information being accessed or shared later in a way that could harm participants, IDEO teams, or clients.

  Questions to consider as we work with information we’ve gathered:

  » Are we sharing what’s important?

  » Are we confident our documentation respects privacy boundaries and will not harm participants or their reputation?

  » Have we adequately secured any physical or electronic records so that personally identifiable and confidential information is accessible to only those we intend?

  4
3

  Guidelines at a Glance

  1 Planning and Preparation

  Keep the entire team accurately informed

  Seek support to clarify ethical ambiguity

  Give our participants clear explanation

  Seek permission, not forgiveness

  Keep your team lean in the field

  2 Gathering Information

  Introduce the team accurately

  Listen, don’t advise

  Don’t make promises you can’t keep

  Take only the information we need

  3 Using and Sharing

  Consider the audience

  Represent honestly what we learn

  Guard raw data

  Protect participants’ recognizability and traceability Archive materials carefully

  44

  Responsibility in practice

  Sometimes participants are so excited

  by their engagement with us, they offer

  unrestricted access to information

  they’ve shared. Despite this permission,

  we anticipate how their future

  opportunities might be compromised—

  even slightly—by the information we

  hold, and are selective

  about how and what

  we share.

  We were designing mobile technology tools for young people diagnosed with schizophrenia. We interviewed a patient who was so inspired by participating with us he created a lovely song to post online. He was excited by the idea of creating links from his own website to reports about the study, even granting our client written permission to do this. It was tough to refuse—

  we wanted to encourage his creativity and not perpetuate the stigma attached to mental illness. At the same time, we couldn’t be instrumental in allowing his identity to be connected to information about his condition. We discouraged him from linking to our content on his website, and promised to share the story about him as a talented and creative individual, but omitting information that could let others track his identity.