Deadlines. This assignment is due on Thurs Nov 7, with the exception of the pitch. You will be presenting your pitch in class on Wed Nov 13 (more details on format below). This pitch is due on Sun Nov 10 at 11:59pm.

Overview

Your final project work will follow a similar path to your individual projects. The tasks that comprise each of the stages will be familiar to you from before, although some will be deepened and slightly expanded either to take advantage of your greater experience, or to match the larger scope of a team project.

The first stage of your project lays the groundwork for all subsequent stages. Its aim is to attain some clarity about the problem you plan to solve and the solution you have in mind, and to gain some confidence that your choices are reasonable: that the problem matters and that your solution is likely to have the desired impact.

This stage builds on the prior work you did on needfinding and value-sensitive design, but places them in a new framing. Your goal will be to develop an impact case that makes the case for your problem and its solution, marshaling evidence from research and interviews. This is an opportunity to benefit from the insights and expertise of others, to make your project a more successful and enjoyable experience. You will use VSD prompts to help you anticipate wider impacts that you might otherwise have missed, and to find novel ways in which your project might align with stakeholders’ incentives. This kind of exploration, in which you consider the relevant stakeholders, identify their needs and the gaps they currently face, and assess the likely impact of proposed solutions, is called “ecosystem mapping.”

This stage does not require a detailed design; that will come later, and you will have ample opportunity to tune your design ideas before committing to them. It does however require you to articulate what sort of functionality you have in mind, and why you believe it will be effective.

Team contract

Before you begin your work as a team, we ask you to agree on a “team contract.” We’ve found that such contracts take only a little time, but reduce the chance that projects are derailed by misunderstandings and disagreements. The team contract should be the result of an open and candid discussion amongst team members about what your individual aspirations and commitments are. Your team’s contract should include the following:

  • Expected level of achievement and effort for each team member (what grades do you expect to get? how much time do you plan to put in?);
  • Personal goals for each team member (building a great app? learning a particular skill?);
  • Frequency, length and location of team meetings;
  • How quality of work will be maintained (reviewing each others’ code? team review meetings? pair programming?);
  • How tasks will be assigned, and what to do if deadlines are missed;
  • How decisions will be made and any disagreements resolved.

When thinking about assigning tasks, you can divide the work for the project amongst team members as you please, with two caveats:

  • The amount of work per team member must be roughly the same over the length of the project; and
  • Each team member must participate in all stages and in all activities (eg, interviewing, designing, coding, etc).

Your Tasks

  1. Select a problem area and a tentative solution. First, pick one of the problem areas that one or more of your team members described prior to your team being formed. Develop a rough idea for a solution that outlines the kind of functionality you plan to build.

  2. Draft an impact case. Using the template below, draft an initial attempt at an impact case that explains what problem you intend to solve, why it matters, why your solution is likely to work, and how you might measure it. This impact case will be the baseline from which you will evolve a fuller case that will be the final product of this stage. You will hand in both the initial draft and the final version.

  3. Identify interviewees. To substantiate an impact case, two kinds of interviews are generally conducted: with stakeholders (most immediately potential users of your system, but also others who might be impacted), and with experts who can provide advice (about how to approach the problem, what pitfalls to avoid, where else to obtain help and resources, etc). If you can identify experts to talk to and arrange to do so within the time frame of the assignment, you will likely benefit greatly from their help. But this is not required, and you can choose for all your interviews to be of stakeholders. Either way, draw up a list of roles for your interviews (that is, what kinds of experts and stakeholders you want to talk to), and identify possible candidates for each role. Contact them as soon as you can, because it may take a couple of days to schedule interviews. You should aim to conduct at least four interviews. There’s no need for all team members to be present at every interview, so long as you take sufficient notes so that the results can be shared amongst team members.

  4. Do some research. Use any resources you can find (most likely online) to find evidence in support of (or perhaps refuting) your impact case. You should focus on identifying gaps: respects in which existing solutions do not serve the needs of stakeholders. Summarize what you learned in a structured way (eg, as a table or a bulleted list).

  5. Explore impacts. Explore the possible negative impacts of your solution idea by applying the prompts of value-sensitive design. There is no minimum number of prompts that you are expected to match to your impact case. Instead, you should use all the prompts generatively as you attempt to identify potential problems, and your work will be judged by the quality of the insights you obtain. Summarize what you learned in a list of impacts and the ways in which you intend to mitigate them (including changing your problem or solution).

  6. Conduct interviews. Prepare a brief interview plan for each interviewee. Conduct the interviews and take notes, making sure to record all salient points that you learned. As you talk to your interviewees, focus in particular on obtaining answers to the following questions (not necessarily by asking them explicitly!): what are their motivations? what are their strengths, needs and blindspots? Summarize the key lessons from the interviews as a whole, focusing on identifying gaps (what does this space need?) and opportunities to create value.

  7. Revise your impact case. In the light of your research, VSD impact analysis, and interviews, produce a revised version of your impact case. This revised version should include evidence in support of its claims, with appropriate citations (of sources or interviews).

  8. Class pitch. Prepare a five-minute presentation of your impact case that you will deliver in class to your fellow students. Your presentation need not cover (indeed cannot cover) your case in depth, but should convey your key ideas. You can choose either to present in person or to create a video.

Deliverables and Submission Process

You are not required to hand in all your notes and deliberations. The deliverables are (with estimated lengths, as if printed single-spaced):

  • Team contract (0.5 pages)
  • Draft impact case (0.5 pages)
  • List of interview roles and potential interviewees (0.5 pages)
  • Research findings (0.75 page)
  • VSD analysis (0.75 pages)
  • Interview plans and summaries of key lessons (1 page)
  • Revised impact case (0.5 pages)
  • Class pitch (3-5 slides, 5 minutes max)

Submission

This week’s deliverables. Your submitted work should appear on the portfolio of every team member. You should also submit this form (just once for the whole team), which asks you for a link to the work in one of your portfolios You will also be asked to include an email address for the whole team; you should create this in advance using Moira.

Pitch. You should submit your pitch with this form which requests a link to a video or to slides.

Rubric

Part Excellent Satisfactory Needs Improvement
General Research A diverse range of resources were surveyed to collect evidence both in support for and to refute the draft impact case. A rich analysis helped identify a compelling set of gaps that serve as prompts for interviews. Research draws on a broad range of resources but largely skews to either making or refuting the draft impact case. A well-conducted analysis identifies an interesting set of gaps. Relatively shallow research has been conducted (e.g., by not surveying a more diverse range of resources). Unclear if the research results support or refute the draft impact case. Gaps are unclear or very straightforward.
Interviews Diverse and well-chosen interviewees. Interview report goes beyond a summary to richly characterize surprises, contradictions, and tensions surfaced in the interviews. Quotes from participants are well-chosen to add insightful texture. Reasonable interviewees, with at least one interviewee who brings a substantially different perspective than a college student/affiliate/family member/friend/etc. The interview report is well-structured, but focuses primarily on summarizing results. A richer analysis could have provided more insightful takeaways to spur design thinking. Useful participant testimony is included but is sometimes redundant/repetitive rather than informative. Interviewees do not represent very diverse perspective. Interview report is largely an uninformative transcription of answers, lacking much structure. Not much evidence from interviewee testimony provided.
VSD analysis A crisp and thoughtful analysis that uncovers impacts that go beyond well-known issues (e.g., covered in the press/podcasts/classes/etc.) and includes several well-considered and/or creative mitigation strategies. A good analysis that identifies real impacts and offers corresponding, albeit relatively routine, mitigation strategies. However, deeper research would help surface richer insights and/or suggest more creative design modifications. A shallow analysis has been conducted, and has yielded insights that are relatively trivial or have missed larger, more important issues. Mitigation strategies are relatively minor.
Impact Case: Problem Statement Crisply and compellingly explains the problem, and makes the case for its importance by providing evidence of its scale, urgency, proximity, and/or cost. Evidence takes the form of data from primary sources, stakeholder testimonials, or credible secondary sources. Problem seems plausible but is not sharply articulated. Provides some evidence that the problem might be important, from mostly credible sources. Unfocused description of problem, or not supported by credible evidence.
Impact Case: Solution Hypothesis Crisp description of the proposed solution, demonstrates clear cause-and-effect linking solution to problem. Includes evidence that the intervention will have the intended result. Intelligible solution, and evidence linking it to the problem is plausible but not strong. Proposed solution is unclear, does not seem directly related to problem, or lacks any evidence for impact.
Impact Case: Outcome Measurement Viable and effective way to assess not only whether the solution “works” but whether it contributes to solving the original problem. Plausible way to measure effectiveness, but may be hard to apply in practice or may fail to address root cause. Measures not practical, or unlikely to shed any light on effectiveness.
Pitch Captivating and convincing presentation of key elements of impact case. Presentation covers key elements of impact case but could be more convincing. Presentation fails to cover key elements of impact case or is hard to follow.

Impact Case Template

  1. The problem of X is important because ____.
  2. Our solution to address this problem is Y.
  3. We believe Y is a good solution because ____.
  4. We could measure N to prove that Y is a good solution to X.

Advice

  1. Get started early. The first few tasks should not take more than a couple of hours, and are ordered so that you can contact potential interviewees as soon as possible. If you delay, you may find that you don’t get such good interviewees, and miss out on an opportunity for important help with your project.
  2. Refer to earlier advice. Reread the advice about needfinding and interviewing from the personal assignment earlier this term.
  3. Quality not quantity. We are intentionally not specifying minimum or maximum lengths for the various parts of your impact case and analysis. We do not expect you to write a lot; brevity is a virtue. Bear in mind also that appropriate formatting (lists, bolded subtitles, tables, even diagrams if you choose to use them, etc) can help you convey the same content more directly and succinctly.
  4. The magic wand question. A good question to ask in interviews, often at the end: if you had a magic wand that could help you achieve your goals most effectively or change the situation most dramatically, what would it be?
  5. Thank your interviewees. Remember to send a message to your interviewees afterwards thanking them for taking the time to help you.
  6. Mix it up. The tasks are listed in a very linear way, in order to make it clear what you’re expected to do, and to encourage you to reach out early to interviewees. But you may well want to mix things up, for example exploring impacts or pursuing research ideas in response to interview leads.