Robin,
To my mind, a prototype is only as good as the
acting skills of the person handling the proto-
type in a test-scenario. If that person is a
'user' then s/he needs to be actively re-imagining
the prototype as real, embodying the way the
designer sees the design. If that person is the
'designer' then s/he needs to be actively becoming
the target user using the design in the richly-
pictured use-case/-scenario. Consequently, 'inform-
ance' is designed to enrich the fundamental empathy
of designing.
A colleague and I argued in a badly written paper
and hasty presentation that something like 'infor-
mance' is crucial to 'service design', particulary
in relation to the politics of designing the activ-
ities of service providers:
http://www.slideshare.net/cameront/theatrical-politics-of-service-design-253
9008
See the references of that paper for articles on
the use of theatrical techniques in design research
and service designing.
In addition to the Buchenau and Suri piece that Jeff
just mentioned, see also the special issue of
Interacting with Computers Volume 18, Issue 5 (September 2006)
on performance in HCI:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1220979.1221451
Cameron
On 4/4/10 9:56 PM, "Robin Adams" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is anyone familiar with the research tool of "informance"? I'm
> looking for sources and any insider knowledge on the use of this
> method. I'm also trying to figure out how it differs from other kinds
> of techniques.
>
> fyi - this is a method where research team members perform actions to
> help understand the lived experiences of the people for whom they are
> designing.
>
> Thanks,
> Robin Adams
|