How can design research contribute to the development of new ways of using modern technology? And how can a designer define his contributions in a large, interdisciplinary research project where the goal is to test and develop new software architecture? Those were some of the challenges facing Gunnar Kramp, an architect and now a Ph.D. from the Aarhus School of Architecture, in his Ph.D. project Designing Mixed Media Devices for Support of Healthcare Professionals, which he defended on 5 February 2008.

By Mads Nygaard Folkmann

In his Ph.D. dissertation, Gunnar Kramp discusses how a designer can interact with a field consisting of modern computer technology, which is dominated by computer scientists. The overall research question was how one might “design for so-called ubiquitous computing”, a situation where computer technology is present throughout, but often hidden and communicating through wireless networks.

The project was part of the complex EU-financed PalCom-project, which lasted for four years, ending on 31 December 2007. Gunnar Kramp’s Ph.D. project was financed by the EU and was thus a key element of the research share of the Aarhus School of Architecture in the overall project. The project was headed by the Computer Science Department at the University of Aarhus, and Gunnar Kramp was therefore based in the so-called PalCom office in Katrinebjerg in Århus, which is home to the Computer Science Department.

Emergency situations. In his dissertation, Gunnar Kramp has focused especially on the scenario Major Incidents, a situation with many casualties. An important element in an emergency situation is the assessment of patients’ condition and triage procedures. The current practice is that the emergency response professionals fill out an ‘incident card’ and put a triage label on the injured person, indicating whether the person needs to go to hospital right away, or whether he or she can wait. Model photo taken by Gunnar Kramp

Design and IT
“In a certain sense, it was like travelling to a new and unfamiliar country, as the PalCom-project did not aim to develop new products but rather to develop new software architecture to optimise the way in which products communicate in wireless networks,” says Gunnar Kramp.

“To that end, we used a number of case studies to ensure that the resulting software architecture in its applied form made sense to the users in the actual situation. Here, we set up a number of scenarios for complex application areas, for example Surgical Rehabilitation, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and Emergency Response at Major Incidents; in my dissertation I studied the latter area in depth. Major Incidents, such as train crashes, the explosion at the fireworks factory in the Danish town of Seest in 2004, etc., are chaotic emergency situations with many casualties, where paramedics, doctors and police are involved. I focused in particular on a prototype for a biomonitor that can be attached to injured individuals to store personal data and monitor the person’s status,” he says.

To Gunnar Kramp it is an important challenge to integrate design and IT.
“From a design perspective, the emphasis is on exploring new platforms in order to discuss how we might develop integrated solutions that take advantage of the inherent potential in the phenomenon of ubiquitous computing. It’s not a matter of having a design product and then adding a little software to it or having an IT device and adding a stylish finish. Instead, you might discover new functionalities when you use design to unfold technology in new ways. For example, what happens when the approach to communication in wireless networks is tested in a concrete setup with a number of device prototypes? And in a major emergency situation: Which information about the casualties should the attached biomonitors pass on, and how?” he says. 

Thus, the dissertation focused on the physical dimension of the technology in use.
“It’s important to fit handles on the technology, and to discover which handles we need,” Gunnar Kramp explains. “Where you might say that the technological basis for the dissertation overall is the principle of ubiquitous computing, this may be seen as a vision for having computer technology incorporated throughout – it becomes invisible, but it’s also automated. In terms of palpable computing, there is a stronger emphasis on making the technology visible and tangible, having it produce feedback and enabling intervention. Palpable computing has to take place on the user’s conditions and must accommodate the fact that the reality it operates in usually can’t be put on a formula. As designers, here, we’ve aimed to make the software systems more user-friendly – the ambition has been to make the technology more transparent and human-friendly.”

Data collection. The biomonitor is intended to collect data on individual patients, monitor their condition in terms of blood pressure and blood count, among other data, and quickly alert staff in case of any critical changes. As a databank, the biomontor can provide constant and ongoing monitoring. Photo: Gunnar Kramp

Application Prototypes as Methodology
In his dissertation, Gunnar Kramp describes how he has applied a dual perspective in the approach to his research question. On the one hand, he has generally focused on an understanding of the principles in ubiquitous and palpable computing; and on the other hand, his focus has been on the use and design of application prototypes.
“The end goal for the PalCom-project overall has not been to develop specific products but rather to create new software architecture,” says Gunnar Kramp.
“But at this point it has been important, from a design perspective, to strive for an understanding of the role that prototypes can play for technological development.”

The prototypes have played a role in particular for the field studies that were both a part of the overall PalCom-project and an essential component of the dissertation.
“Where the field studies have provided insight into various application scenarios, the prototypes have contributed to a new understanding of specific technology applications. The prototypes have provided us with direct reactions from the users, that is, we’ve used them to evaluate our design ideas, and they have also acted as a platform for the crucial communication between designers and users,” says Gunnar Kramp.   

Prototypes. Gunnar Kramp has focused particularly on HIFI-prototypes, i.e. prototypes with a high degree of physical credibility, which can be used to envision and test specific usage situations, for example in a situation where time is of the essence. Photo: Gunnar Kramp

“At this point, the prototypes have been a crucial part of the design method we applied in the project, which is participatory design. The idea is to include the end-users actively in the design process, since they’re the ones who are best able to express and assess desires for product functionalities. In practice, this takes place in an iterative process, where knowledge acquired from the users goes into developing a prototype, which is then tested with the users, who in turn once again provide input for product improvements; then we develop a new prototype, which is tested, etc.,” he explains.

Framing the Design Process
Gunnar Kramp’s research question about how to design for ubiquitous computing also provided answers on a more generalised, methodological level. At an early stage in the work process he discovered that he needed a comprehensive frame for understanding the complex field of design and technology that he was operating within, which could also be used as a common frame of reference for all the project participants to clarify the various project components.

The result is a model where three of the challenges involved in connection with ubiquitous computing are related to three perspectives or dimensions of the design process.

The three challenges involved in ubiquitous computing are:
• The designer must have an understanding of practice and everyday use
• The designs must accommodate a range of devices that can interact in a variety of ways (“mixed media devices”)
• The software architecture must provide a common network.

These challenges represent design-oriented goals.

The three perspectives for the design process that Gunnar Kramp has identified are:
• A physical perspective: What are the physical surroundings, what is the physical dimension of the thing that is being designed; what technologies should be applied?
• A pragmatic perspective: What knowledge and skills are required; what types of people or roles are involved; what rules apply?
• An information-related perspective: What information and what type of information are involved; how is this information generated, and how is it expressed?

These perspectives express a mapping of the characteristics and dimensions of the design.

Together, this provides a fine-mesh structure with nine areas to help the designer clarify and describe the design use, as illustrated in the figure below.

Defining Disciplinary and Professional Profiles
“I’m used to working in an interdisciplinary environment, so I found it interesting to use the model also for describing how the various disciplinary profiles can be positioned in relation to each other,” Gunnar Kramp explains.

“My goal with the model was to clarify how the field of ubiquitous computing relates to specific disciplines and professions, such as programmers, information architects, interaction designers, product designers and sociologists. And in particular, the model can also be used as an instrument for identifying how and within what area the designer can play a role for this type of project, based on his or her specific profile,” Gunnar Kramp concludes.

Theoretical output. Gunnar Kramp’s dissertation has aimed especially at developing – and challenging – some of the principles that apply to design for so-called ubiquitous computing. Among other things, Gunnar Kramp has used a model to identify what components may be involved in this type of design project, and what disciplinary and professional profiles play a role in the various areas. Illustration: Gunnar Kramp

 

Mind Design #7, 2008