Page 0: Page 1: System Designer Assessments of Role Play as a Design Method: A Qualitative Study Gry Seland Department of Computer and Information Science Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) NordiCHI 2006, 14-18 October 2006 1/ ? Page 2: 목차 1. Introduction 2. Method 1. 2. 3. 4. The workshops Workshop Descriptions Description of Evaluators Evaluation Methods 3. Analysis 4. Results 5. Discussion 6. Conclusion 2/ ? Page 3: Introduction  Role Play in IT design  Earliest us in UTOPIA project in Five main categories of reasons 1. Understand users and context the 1980s  2. Explore, test and communicate ideas 3. To involve users 4. Enhance design process 5. Other reasons  Only one based on explicit feedback from the participants and others not 3/ ? Page 4: Introduction  기존 overview의 한계 1. it is based on the perceptions of those organizing the role playing events and not by independent external observers The lack of systematic evaluation studies might create a bias towards focusing on positive aspects on role play and a lack of discussion of negative aspects 2.  Basic Element of Roleplay      주체: having someone 행위: physically acting out 상황: an imagined future use situation 방법: for some imagined technology 도구: with physical objects representing that technology. 4/ ? Page 5: Introduction  Research Questions  What do system developers and interaction designers perceive as the strengths of role play as a system development method in system development? In what phases of a development project may role play be useful, and for what type of projects? What do system developers view as weaknesses of role play as a system development method?    Evaluate Role Play   Qualitative Methods Multiple Sources 5/ ? Page 6: Method – The Workshops   Seven workshops on role play with low fidelity prototyping conducted in the period 2002-2005, in addition to an evaluation meeting to create guidelines for companies a theoretical understanding making users active and creative participants in early phases of an IT project. a current practice scenario By improvisation a future practice scenario 6/ ? Page 7: Method 7/ ? Page 8: Method – Workshop Descriptions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Exploring the use of PDAs in hospitals Developing ideas and requirements for mobile Electronic Patient Records in hospitals Developing ideas about technology for learning at petrol stations Developing ideas and requirements for mobile Electronic Patient Records in hospitals (Without Drama Intructor) Developing ideas and requirements for mobile Electronic Patient Records in a Pre-round Meeting Creating ideas for possible future services for telecommunication company Teaching interaction designers how they can organize a role playing workshop Obtaining an expert view of role play and low fidelity prototyping as a system development method 8/ ? Page 9: Method – Description of Evaluators  O = Observer at workshop, following all groups;  PO = Participative Observer, observing a particular group;  E = External, knowledge of workshops through video highlights;  P = Participant, participating directly in workshop 9/ ? Page 10: Method – Evaluation Methods  Qualitative Methods  Interesting topics followed up on 1. 2. 3. 4. Focused discussions with workshop participants Follow-up meeting after workshop 3 Semi-structured interviews after workshop 4 and 5 Free-writing about role play after workshop 4 and 5 10 / ? Page 11: Analysis  All evaluation sessions recorded on video and transcribed (except for workshop 7)  Coding to organize the transcribed text  descriptive codes attached to text fragments with the application Atlas.ti based on themes that emerged in the text: “GROUP PROCESS create common understanding” descriptive codes were checked for consistency: the most descriptive term chosen the quotes were organized according to the research questions 11 / ? Page 12: Results  A. Strengths of Role Play as a System Development Method  To Get New Ideas That Would Have Been Difficult to Obtain in Other Ways: To Enable Users to be Active – Reaction & Situation Understanding Context of Use – 백문이 불여일견   12 / ? Page 13: Results  B. When is Role Play of Value in the System Development Process?  Fast Idea Creation  To get overview of the domain  Not limit the idea generation process  To Create a Focus in a Project  Finding the right direction  To Establish a Good Design Group Process  Get to know each other  User의 실제적인 need 파악 – Developer와의 괴리 해소  Common understanding 구축 13 / ? Page 14: Results  C. Weaknesses of the Method  Role Play and Low Fidelity Prototypes must be Supplemented by Other System Development Methods  Many unanswered questions  Danger of Loosing Overview of System  Around IT professionals  Scenarios 수의 제약 – 좁은 시야 형성 위험  Danger in Believing that Role Play is Reality  실제 미래 반영 불가 – utopianism, not the reality 14 / ? Page 15: Discussion  Roleplay is…  particularly useful in early development phases, for  fast idea creation  creating a focus in a project  establishing a good group process  problematic as a stand alone method  lack of system perspective  lack of creating an overview of a system  dangerous if gets confused with reality  Limitations of Study 1. 2. the credibility of the results – 참여자 직업군 통제 부족 정성조사 방법론이 적절한가 – Roleplay에 대해 알려진 바가 적다 3. 실제 상황에 적용 가능한가 – 적용해봐야만 알 수 있다 15 / ? Page 16: More Discussion & Conclusion  Relating the Results to Previous Studies on Role Play  Positive aspects  Developing ideas in context  Using the approach to enhance active user involvement  Understanding context of use  Negative aspects on role play  no similar descriptions to those described by our evaluators.  CONCLUSION  Roleplay의 단점에 대한 새로운 발견 이루어졌다. 16 / ? Page 17: