Performance ritual and the design of
mobile devices
Submitted by
Kym R. Campbell
30th May 2016
Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Canberra, Australian Capital
Territory, Australia
Abstract
This thesis argues that concepts of secular ritual, drawn from the work of Erving Goffman and James Carey, can provide a useful way of understanding the relationship between the production and design of mobile devices and their use, and hence provides further insights into the broader relationship between mobile technologies and society.
This argument is developed by reviewing scholarship on the relationship between technologies and society, before engaging with ritual as a secular concept and a way of understanding human relations with technology. James Carey's work on ritual and communication is key to linking technology with ritual, while Erving Goffman's work on ritual and performance provides a way to develop a framework for further analysis.
The ritual performance-oriented framework is described here as the theatre of design, and acts as a metaphor for describing the dynamic between society and the mobile device. In essence, this approach argues that we can understand our relationship with mobile devices as a performance in which the device can be a prop, users can be thought of as actors, and designers take on the role of director.
To develop this framework further, the device is examined through a sociocultural lens. Du
Gay et al’s circuit of culture is utilised to illustrate how meaning comes to associate with the technology. In the context of this thesis, however, Rook's work on consumerist ritual provides a way to link the circuit of culture back to the concept of ritual, uniting the idea of a circuit of meaning-making activities, which involve production and consumption, within the theatre of design.
iii
While this approach could be used to focus only on the relationship between the user and the
mobile device, the focus of this thesis is on the ways that performative ritual-like activities are embedded into the processes of production and design. This concept is explored in this thesis by conducting in-depth interviews with key informants, which both informed the development of the framework, and also served to ground it in practice.
The interviews with key informants found both support for the theatre of design framework, and provided insights, which guided its development. Five key themes emerged from the interviews which together show that there is evidence for performative uses of mobile devices being central to the concerns and processes of mobile device design. In particular, ritual-like engagement with devices is embedded into the design process through design concepts such as affordance, emotion, experience and sharing and exchanging.
iv
Acknowledgments
My thanks, respect and appreciation to my supervisor, Dr Sam Hinton, for without his unwavering guidance, care and optimism this thesis would not have been possible.
Also thanks to James Martin for proof reading this thesis in accordance to the guidelines laid down in the Universities national guidelines.
To my mother, Joy whose continual support and calmness helped me to understand that all things are possible. And my brother Marc, whose strong will always acted as a reminder to me.
Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Susan, who always had faith in my abilities. Her inquisitive intelligence and infectious enthusiasm about technology and research always helped to bring out the very best in me. And to my son, Kim, who makes me proud every day and shows me that life is full of optimism and infinite surprise.
This thesis is a tribute to my late father Aylmer John Campbell, who taught me the art of simplicity, determination and patience.
vii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments vii
Table of Contents ix
List of Figures xv
1. Introduction 1
1.1. Structure of the Thesis 2
2. Technology, Society and the Mobile Device 11
2.1. Overview 11
2.2. Technology and Society: Science and Technology Studies 13
2.2.1. The Social Construction of Technology 15
2.2.2. Actor-network theory 19
2.3. Overview of the mobile device 22
2.3.1. Definition of Mobile Devices 24
2.3.2. The PDA as precursor to the Mobile Device 26
2.4. Mobile as a Technical Device 32
2.4.1. Emergence of the Smart Phone 42
2.4.2. Operating Systems 45
2.5. The Mobile as Cultural Object 48
2.5.1. The Apple iPhone 52
2.6. Conclusion 60
3. Ritual, performance and technology 63
3.1. Overview 63
3.2. Ritual 64
ix
3.2.1. A Secular Approach to Ritual 67
3.3. Carey, Ritual and Communication 72
3.3.1. Communication as Ritual 73
3.3.2. Carey, Ritual and Technology 77
3.4. Goffman, Ritual and Performance 79
3.4.1. Goffman’s Ritual 82
3.4.2. Collins and interaction ritual chains 85
3.4.3. The Performative Turn 87
3.5. Theatre of design 89
3.6. Conclusions 95
4. Consumption Ritual and the Mobile Device 97
4.1. Overview 97
4.2. The Mobile Device as a Socio-cultural object 98
4.2.1. Cultural circuits 99
4.2.2. Julier’s Domain of Design Culture and du Gay et al.’s Cultural Circuits 101
4.2.3. The Sony Walkman and the Identity Moment 104
4.3. Consumption, production and design 110
4.3.1. Circuits and Domains: production and design 111
4.3.2. Making meaning 112
4.3.3. Designers and conceptual spaces 115
4.3.4. Extending the fictional space 119
4.3.5. The use of story to create fictional space 122
4.3.6. Apple Products and the walled garden 127
4.3.7. Samsung Bada 128
4.4. Consumerist rituals 129
4.4.1. The ritual artefact 130
4.4.2. The ritual script and performance 131
x
4.4.3. The ritual audience 136
4.4.4. Public ritual and technology 137
4.4.5. The Apple Store as ritual-like activity – theatre of distribution 138
4.5. Conclusion 140
5. Production and the Mobile device 141
5.1. Overview 141
5.2. Design - What is Design? 142
5.2.1. Form and function as narrative in design 147
5.2.2. Designing a Mobile Device 150
5.3. Designers 153
5.3.1. The design team 153
5.3.2. Design process 156
5.3.3. User-centred design 161
5.3.4. Designer-centred design 168
5.4. Embedding value 170
5.4.1. Affordances 175
5.4.2. HCI and form 177
5.4.3. Experience design 180
5.4.4. Emotion in design 181
5.4.5. Aesthetics and sound 183
5.4.6. Designing by sound 184
5.4.7. Company design strategy: mobile device – package design 186
5.5. Conclusions 192
6. Methodologies and methods 193
6.1. Overview 193
6.2. Research Methodology 194
6.2.1. Grounded Theory 195
xi
6.2.2. Technology and grounded theory 201
6.3. Data Collection 205
6.3.1. Method overview 206
6.3.2. Key Informant Interviews 207
6.3.3. Sample Size and Selection 209
6.3.4. Interview Method 213
6.3.5. Ethical Considerations 217
6.4. Data Analysis 218
6.4.1. Summarising interviews 219
6.4.2. Manual coding 221
6.4.3. Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (CAQDAS) 226
6.4.4. CAQDAS methods and analysis 228
6.4.5. Individual data analysis 235
6.5. Conclusion/Summary 237
7. Findings 239
7.1. Overview 239
7.1.1 A note on interpretation of leximancer graphics 240
7.1.2. Main Themes 242
7.2. Summary of Findings 243
7.3. Theme: people 246
7.3.1. People and market 247
7.3.2. People and work 249
7.3.3. Work and interaction 250
7.4. Concept of Look 258
7.4.1. Prominence of themes 264
7.5. The Pattern 266
7.6. The social in design 267
xii
7.7 Limitations and strengths to coding and software analysis 278
7.8. Conclusion 279
8. Conclusion - The Value of Ritual 281
8.1. Introduction 281
8.2. Summary 284
8.3. Recommendations for further research 293
8.4. Limitations of the study 296
8.5. Conclusion 297
9. Bibliography 301
10. Appendices 335
10.1. Appendix A: NEAF approved letter of participation and consent form 335
10.2. Appendix B: Leximancer result of normal themes and maximum
concepts of all participants 339
10.3. Appendix C: Leximancer results of normal themes and maximum
concepts of individuals 341
10.4. Appendix D: Summarised raw interview transcripts and manual categories 347
xiii
List of Figures
Figure 2-1. Nixdorf LK-3000 ...... 26
Figure 2-2. Psion Organiser...... 27
Figure 2-3. Police in Chicago using a radio telephone, Time, US, Bettman Corbis ...... 34
Figure 2-4. Prototype of the DynaTAC mobile telephone, Meyers ...... 35
Figure 2-5. Motorola MicroTAC ...... 36
Figure 2-6. IBM Simon (US, 1993)...... 39
Figure 2-7. Nokia 9000 Communicator (US) ...... 40
Figure 2-8. 2G to 4G Networks, Interpreting Srivastava system from The Mobile Makes Its Mark ...... 43
Figure 2-9. Timeline of Apple products from 1976 - 2010, Wiki ...... 53
Figure 3-1. The theatre of design illustrating the stage and circumstances ...... 92
Figure 4-1. The first Sony Walkman, TPS-L2, Sony, (Japan) ...... 106
Figure 4-2. The Founding Prospectus of the Tokyo Telecommunications Engineering Corporation (Sony) ..... 107
Figure 4-3. "Skins" used in personalising mobile devices in Kyoto, (Japan, 2011) ...... 110
Figure 4-4. The Apple store Tokyo (2011) Figure 4-5. Consumers learning about devices in the Apple store 131
Figure 4-6. Quotation from the founder of Apple, Steve Jobs at the entrance of the Apple headquarters in
Cupertino (2013) ...... 132
Figure 4-7. Crowds of people line up in a procession to buy the iPhone 4s (2011) ...... 133
Figure 4-8. The Apple store in Hong Kong (2012) Figure 4-9. Consumers in the Apple store, Hong Kong 138
Figure 4-10. Formal training class, Apple store Figure 4-11. Apple staff ceremonially offering guidance .... 139
Figure 5-1. Rabbit "skins" cover for a mobile device, Singapore ...... 143
Figure 5-2. Connectivity indicating the various stages ...... 158
Figure 5-3. iPhone 5 campaign (2013) ...... 167
Figure 5-4. iPhone encrusted with diamonds Figure 5-5. iPad 24 karat gold cover valued at HK$23800 .. 176
Figure 5-6. Japanese Bento boxes, Kyoto Figure 5-7. Visual detail in Bento packaging, Kyoto ...... 187
Figure 5-8. A comparison between packaging of Apple boxes and Bento boxes in fig. 5.9...... 188
Figure 5-9. A Japanese Bento box arrangment that is symmetrical and divided into four squares ...... 188
Figure 5-10. The iPad instructions contained in package ...... 189
xv
Figure 5-11. The instructions for IKEA Grundtal wall shelf (Inter IKEA systems) ...... 189
Figure 5-12. IKEA store package shelves and boxes...... 190
Figure 6-1. Framework of grounded theory and CAQDAS strategy ...... 205
Figure 6-2. Key Informant profiles ...... 212
Figure 6-3. Summary of informants that illustrates integration of notes from before and after interview ...... 215
Figure 6-4. Line of questioning taken from the interview transcript ...... 215
Figure 6-5. Areas of questioning that guided the interview ...... 216
Figure 6-6. Extract taken from summary of Nokia designer Ruth Ng ...... 220
Figure 6-7. Manual coded documents from the interview transcript ...... 225
Figure 6-8. Partial example taken from Anggras list of themes and concepts ...... 226
Figure 6-9. Leximancer map of individual first cut analysis of James ...... 229
Figure 6-10. Sample of tables analysis of James based on first cut and concept mapping ...... 230
Figure 6-11. Leximancer map set to maximum concepts and interview data culled ...... 232
Figure 6-12. Leximancer concept map set to normal themes without interviewer and ALL informants ...... 233
Figure 6-13. Sample tabled analysis of ALL participants ...... 233
Figure 6-14. Example of categories and concepts manually tabulated ...... 234
Figure 6-15. Individual interviews mapped with concepts and themes ...... 236
Figure 7-1. A colur coded table indicating frequency and connectivity in the Leximancer map ...... 241
Figure 7-2. Leximancer concept map of ALL informants ...... 243
Figure 7-3. Leximancer concept map indicates the pathway taken from concepts
of "work" to "interaction" follows the same path to the "t_interface" ...... 252
Figure 7-4. Leximancer concept map showing the pathway from a concept of "people" to "interaction" ...... 253
Figure 7-5. Leximancer concept map showing the pathway from a concept of "work" to "interface" via
"interaction" in mobile technology design ...... 256
Figure 7-6. Leximancer concept map showing the pathway taken from the t_people to t_ interface ...... 257
Figure 7-7. Leximancer concept map showing the correlation between "people" and "technology" ...... 260
Figure 7-8. Leximancer concept map revealing the association of all concepts with "look"
that is contained in the t_people...... 262
Figure 7-9. Leximancer map showing the themes when reduced to the most prominent themes ...... 264
xvi
Figure 7-10. Leximancer map indicating the concept of "idea" and the pathway taken
to the concept of "product" ...... 272
Figure 7-11. Leximancer map showing the concergence of device, phone and mobile under t_phone and the
pathway from device to phone ...... 276
xvii
Introduction
All across the world mobile devices have become a familiar part of people’s lives. We have
mobile devices in our pockets that connect to the Internet and link us with friends and family.
This experience is not limited to the developed world. In India and China mobile devices
have a subscription rate well over 71% and 89% respectively (ITU). The mobile device is
truly a global phenomenon.
It is not surprising then that a significant amount of scholarly work is emerging that seeks to
explore and explain people’s relationship with this technology and the role it plays in their
lives. There has been a lot of excellent scholarship that looks at the relationship between
society and mobile technology from the perspective of use and consumption; Katz and
Aakhus’s Perpetual Contact, Brown, and Green and Harpers Wireless World both provide an overview of social factors in shaping society and behaviour today. Ling’s and Pedersen’s
Mobile Connection in 2005 and Manuel Castells Mobile Communication and Society in 2007 address similar issues. However there is comparatively less written on the way that these devices are designed and produced. The thesis seeks to add to our knowledge about mobile devices through a focus on their design rather than on their use and user behaviour.
A number of researchers have looked at some reasons for the consumption of designed artefacts. Elizabeth Shove et al. looked at the invisible role of objects and their significance in society, which she describes in her book The Design of Every Day Life. The premise was why people renew their kitchens as often as they do. In her study Shove pointed out that “the
relations between people can be inscribed and hardwired into the design of material artefacts”
(7). Though Shove et al. is not concerned with technological artefacts there appears to be at
least a correlation between designers and objects. Taking this premise and applying it to a
study of the mobile device is as important as it is intriguing. The mobile device, like Shove’s
1
kitchen, is changed quite often by people but it is the possibility of some invisible activity
that takes place between the designer, the artefact and the consumer that is a fascinating
proposition.
However, fascinating propositions do occasionally need new ways to look at things and this
thesis explores a new way of thinking about the relationship between mobile technologies
and society. It does this by using a ritual performance–oriented framework to understand the dynamic between society and the design of the mobile device. Therefore this thesis will establish whether designers discreetly embed ritual-like activities in their design or within the design process by using affordance, emotion and experience in their work.
To do this requires an understanding of the interactions between three key concepts: the mobile device, the mobile device design, and ritual-like activities and performance.
A smaller but important aim of this work is to reinvigorate older theories and concepts that will establish this thesis’ perspective about the mobile device, design and society. Drawing from the work of Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical approach to society and James Carey’s view on communication as ritual, it will be demonstrated that these older concepts are rich and invaluable in the perspectives they can offer about new technologies. Only by extending them into current research can we reveal their greater potential and ongoing value.
1.1. Structure of the Thesis
Broadly, the thesis is structured around two main parts. The first part, which covers chapters
two to five, develops a conceptual framework. This establishes a position on the relationship
between technology and society, and uses Carey and Goffman’s ideas of ritual and
communication to develop a theatrical metaphor for studying mobile devices as designed
objects in a consumer market. The second part of the thesis presents a case study in which
2
five mobile device designers are interviewed in depth. This second part works to ground the conceptual framework; in short, the goal is to augment the conceptual framework by seeking evidence that the conclusions are actually reflected in practice. It should be noted here that although these parts are presented separately, during the course of this thesis’ development, each part informs the other: the conceptual framework was refined through the results of discussions with designers, but likewise, the interviews were informed by the evolving conceptual framework provided by a grounded theory approach. This two-way reflexive relationship between the case study and the conceptual development is important to note if the thesis is to be regarded properly as a unified piece of work.
The thesis begins by establishing a position on the relationship between technology and society. In line with social shaping by social and construction theorists under the canopy of science and technology studies, the thesis argues that technologies must first be understood within their broader social context. Chapter two situates the mobile device within a historical and socioeconomic context. Since there has already been a substantial amount of work undertaken in this field, this chapter serves as a review of this work and establishes some of the key concepts that will be used throughout the thesis.
Therefore, chapter two begins by establishing science and technology studies as a framework.
This lays both a foundation and serves as an overview. Two strands are discussed within the field of STS and are helpful in that they provide a background context to STS: the social construction of technology; and, actor network theory. Both strands have different approaches to science and technology but are united in their insistence on the importance of social and cultural influences when studying technology. Once this framework has been established, the chapter moves on to discuss the development of the mobile device within a broader context. The broader context presents two narratives that are extant in the literature:
3
one narrative discusses the mobile device as a technological advancement in communication
and the other sees the mobile device as a cultural device. The establishment of the device as
cultural lays the foundation for examining aspects of ritual within design and later the
consumerist ritual.
After defining the object of study in chapter two, the thesis further develops the framework in
chapter three by focussing on ritual and performance as the key analytical parts of the
framework. Here the works of James Carey and Erving Goffman are mobilised. Starting with
a review of the substantial work already undertaken in this field, the chapter establishes some
key concepts. Carey’s work provides a way to examine communication as a cultural activity
rather than as a transmission activity. This communication position of technology and society
identifies ritual-like activities where “reality is produced, maintained, repaired and
transformed” (Carey 23). A second approach draws from the work of Collins and Goffman.
Collins’ work focuses on interaction ritual as a driving force in society, while Goffman uses
the performance in social interactions as a way to explain society and culture. The chapter
concludes by proposing the “theatre of design” as a framework that will bring together key
themes around technology, ritual and performance and which will guide discussion of the
mobile device in the subsequent work.
The theatre of design acts as a metaphor that encompasses the ritual performance framework
underlined by positing both Carey’s view of the ritual in communication and then later
Rooks’ consumer ritual that serves to describe the connection between society and the mobile
device. Therefore, the theatre of design argues that we can understand this connection when it is seen as a performance, in which the device can be a prop, users are actors, and the designer takes on the role of director.
4
Following the conceptual work of chapter three, chapters four and five further develop the
framework of Carey and Goffman’s contribution to ritual and performance and the theatre of
design, to mobile technology specifically, first to the study of the mobile device as consumer
object, and then, to the study of production and the design processes from a cultural perspective.
Chapter four argues that manufacturers construct the mobile device as a consumer object through design that enables the use of devices in ritual-like activities and performances. This argument draws upon du Gay et al.’s, concept of cultural circuits and explains that the value of this association requires an illustration of how culture and meaning come to be connected to technology. In du Gay et al.’s work, the Sony Walkman provides a classic example of the process where meaning is determined when the object passes through different key moments of identity, production, consumption, regulation and representation that make up the circuit.
Chapter four compares the similarities and differences between two types of cultural production presented by du Gay on one hand, and Julier on the other. Du Gay et al. uses representation and identity as a way that effects consumption and production while Julier addresses consumption more specifically as the relationship between value, creation and practice (Julier 14). The best example of this is the designer’s role in the creation of commercial value, where good design does not always equate to commercial value. In other words, designing an aesthetically pleasing object that is very expensive to manufacture may result in an overall decrease in commercial value (profitability) for the company. The importance of lifestyling and identity also plays a part in the way the mobile device is valued and therefore represented.
In the context of this thesis, the argument has importantly shifted its focus to consumption, because it is here that the mobile device that was seen initially as a cultural object, can also
5
be seen designed and produced as a consumer device that helps our understanding of how
culture can be utilised in the pursuit of capitalism. It is by situating the mobile device as a
consumer object in everyday life that a connection is made between cultural studies and STS,
particularly the social construction of technology discussed earlier in chapter two. The
dependency of the designer in this process is integral and incorporates the way that meaning
has become associated with the mobile device through a series of socially constructed
negotiations between the consumption, production and the design of the mobile device itself.
The process of consumption can be seen in the way that companies market and advertise
consumer devices for periods of time and use narratives as a way to associate a lifestyle with
their products. Sony, for example, designed devices for specific social profiles such as young
children with the “my first Sony” campaign (du Gay et al. 67). The devices were colourful,
utilised big buttons for unsteady little fingers and were playful in their design. Here we note
that the device was designed to tell a story that was scripted into the production of the device.
The idea of a type of script also plays an important part in Rooks work on consumer ritual
and provides a way of linking product design and lifestyling with the ideas of ritual in the
theatre of design discussed in chapters two and three. Rook’s consumer ritual involves
specific kinds of ritual-like activities that attach meaning to these objects that can be seen in a ritual script; the ritual artefact, the ritual performance and the ritual audience and provide
Rook a construct to interpret the consumption process.
The consumerist ritual does describe ritual activities as dramatic enactments and working in conjunction with Goffman’s dramaturgical work, discussed earlier in chapter two and chapter three, helps to define the relationship between the mobile device and the ritual. The introduction of the theatre of design is to introduce a lens that underpins Goffman’s social
6
interaction performance metaphors and Rooks consumer ritual that helps to closely look at the relationship between device, ritual and designer.
Whereas chapter four looks at consumption and the relationship between ritual, performance and the mobile device, chapter five examines production and the relationship between ritual and performance. This chapter argues that ritual and performance are taken into account in this production process and that designers discreetly embed values such as experiences, emotions and company design strategies when designing the mobile device and in its package design.
Designers are seen as producers of the mobile device. It is argued that designers inconspicuously embed meaning in the mobile device that promotes engagement in ritual-like
activities. One way to look at this is from the viewpoint of the theatre of design that was
introduced in chapter three. Designers can be seen as writers, directors, and set designers and
are at work back stage to produce a design for the “front stage” (Goffman, The Presentation
of Self 15-16).
Chapter five therefore presents an overview of the type of design processes and designers that
are needed to produce a mobile device.
The production of the mobile device builds on du Gays et al.’s cultural-circuit approach and
points to the managed inter-relationship between production and consumption. This
relationship is seen in two ways: firstly by affordances, and secondly by creating emotion and
experience. Affordances are ways that objects behave and appear to people. For example,
buttons afford pushing, or levers afford pulling. In Design of Everyday Things Donald
Norman develops this concept further, suggesting that by creating a mental model we
unconsciously carry out actions with an object.
7
The second way is by designing emotional experiences, which have become central to design
because doing so creates value in what is designed. Levi jeans for instance get more desirable
as they age, so engineers and designers work on materials that wear gracefully and become
more stylish over time. The jeans soon become our partners in life, carrying an emotional
value. Prasad Boradkar in his study of the culture of objects, argues that consumer goods act
like a trigger to memories and emotions for the user of the object (50). Value can be seen as
having commercial value but also includes social, cultural, environmental, political or
symbolic value (Julier 14). For du Gay et al. it is seen as both emotional and cultural value in
a company strategy where the Sony Walkman represents the Sony company’s way of life and
its organisation (du Gay et al. 45) as technical, and where people were bright and
inspirational on one side and optimistic and approachable on the other (49) and offered this
representation to the consumer. The understanding of bringing the consumer and device
together and the use of affordance, emotion and experience is further explored in the design
of human computer interaction in chapter five.
The difference between the approach presented in this thesis and other work is that it focuses
on the way that performative ritual-like activities are embedded into the process of
production and design rather than the relationship between the user and the mobile device. To explore this concept, chapter six and seven ground the conceptual approach presented in the preceding chapters by providing a more in-depth study of mobile device designers and how ritual-like considerations inform and/or direct their design process.
Chapter six presents the methodology that was employed which includes how the data was gathered and how it was analysed. The primary methodology was grounded key – informant interviews that examined five expert designers employed in high profile companies. The chapter explains how the interviews were conducted and recorded. Apart from the gathering
8
of interview material, the chapter further explains how the overall methodological grounded
theory approach determined how the responses were coded and then analysed. For example, the comparative and iterative nature of grounded theory supports the researcher to be immersed in the data and in so doing creates a richer experience and result. This means the researcher can go back and forth into the interview responses further drilling down to find specific themes and concepts.
Another strength of grounded theory is that it works in conjunction with a computer assisted
qualitative data analysis programme called “Leximancer. The software was used to verify the
primary data findings gathered from a grounded approach while maintaining a supportive
role, like triangulating the findings. This methodology also serves as an opportune way to
discuss the strengths and weaknesses in the use of analysis software but it equally proved
useful to determine the integrity of the findings.
Chapter seven provides the analysis of the interview data from the key informants and
summarises the key findings. The findings are coded into themes after analysing the
transcripts taken from the key informant. The use of visual maps presents any evidence to
support the primary findings. For instance, in all cases the informants reported the social in
design and this was found to be a consistent key finding.
The final chapter presents a conclusion that will bring together the framework developed in
chapters two to five with the findings from the interviews discussed in chapters seven and
eight. In particular, this chapter notes the way that ritual-like engagement in the mobile
device is embedded into the design process through emotion and affordances and experience.
The arguments in each chapter culminate in an exploration of the mobile technology and
ritual-like activities together. This contribution has offered a different perspective on
technology and design, a new way of understanding the relationship between technology and
9
society and has found ways to extend older theories like James Carey’s view of ritual into
mobile technology design and Erving Goffman’s social dramas and performance while
concurrently validating the theatre of design as a useful lens. The concluding chapter also presents avenues for further study, positing the approach taken in this thesis as a way to understand other technologies and practices by looking at them through a performative ritual lens.
10
2. Technology, Society and the Mobile Device
2.1. Overview
Technology is derived from the Greek word techne meaning an area of “know how”. It also contains a derivative of the word logos which, for Aristotle, was the study of grammar and rhetoric (Olsen, Selinger, and Riis 17). The word has slowly evolved through the ages and
today is understood to be the study of the manipulation of nature, and a resultant
manipulation of matter. Any such manipulation is based on a precept that, for this study, is
communication.
The rise of technology compels us look at new forms of social interaction that are produced
or mediated by an artefact, and also to rethink “cultural models” and cultural transformations
(Caron 143). There is certainly an observable change in social practice in play today, but that change cannot be completely explained by a technological determinist viewpoint. The
underlying assumption in technological determinism is that technology is the main cause of
macro changes in social order and micro level influences in how people use technology
(Campbell and Russo 317). In the case of the mobile device, this theory would have us
believe that the mobile artefact itself caused this massive social change. This thesis instead
will contend that the mobile device is a tool that allows us to enact a metaphoric ritual that
arises from a network of human and non-human considerations.
When a person uses a mobile device, they are not just interacting with the device, but are
engaging with a technological object that is deeply embedded within a complex matrix of
relationships. Like any technology, the mobile device is not a neutral technological object in
this series of relationships; it is a highly designed and refined artefact with embedded
meanings. Recognising this, it is important for any analysis of mobile technologies to seek to
11
understand and reveal the nature of these relationships, and in particular, the relationship
between the design of the device and its uses. To understand the mobile device, it is
necessary to understand it within the context of the society that produces and consumes it. To
do this requires a framework that assumes mobile devices and technology per se are social
activities. Science and technology studies does this, it assumes the “social” to mean
designers, scientists and engineers as members of a community that are trained in the skills to
make these devices (Sismondo 19). In other words, knowledge and mobile devices are
constructed, they are human products governed by the circumstances of their production.
The value that science and technology studies brings to this thesis is therefore its multiplicity.
Taking users for instance, the approach views the connection with users, designers and the
mobile device in a number of ways. Social construction of technology approach conceives
users as social groups (see 2.2.1) where the connection between designers and users is made
more explicit with the technological frame set out by Bijker (103). In this case users and
designers could share a technological frame situated around a particular technology such as
the mobile device. Steve Woolgar introduced the concept of “configuring the user” where in his semiotic approach a metaphor is used that illustrates the device is to be read like text
(Woolgar 60). Here users are represented by designers (see 5.3). Ackrich and Latour in
Actor-Network Theory (ANT) urge an analysis of the negotiations between designers and
their projected users and between real users and objects while in culture and media studies
the focus is on users and consumers where technologies must be adopted within culture and
described by Bourdieu in Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, as its
function or where consumers are cultural experts (du Gay et al 89); (see section 4.3).
This chapter establishes that relationship between mobile technology and society, arguing
that the mobile device both shapes society while simultaneously being shaped by it. The
12
chapter begins by presenting science and technology studies as a framework for thinking
about the relationship between technology and society. After establishing this framework, the
chapter then moves on to look at the development of the mobile device within a broader
historical context.
Two parallel narratives are identified. One narrative is about technological advancement as a communication device (see 2.3.2) and the other narrative can be read as a cultural device with the emergence of lifestyling and identity in technology (discussed in 2.5.1 and 4.2.3). This not only defines the object of study, but also provides a functional explanation of the general approach to technology underlying this thesis.
2.2. Technology and Society: Science and Technology Studies
Science and Technology Studies (STS) emerged in the 1960s in order to develop an
understanding of the significance of the nature of science, technology and their relationship
to society while remaining aware of the potential traps of technological determinism. The
central argument of this discipline is that technology does not simply exist unto itself, but
instead emerges from an amalgamation of cultural, economic and political factors.
Technology is not created ex nihilo, nor does it exist in its own bubble. What this means is
that designers use the material world in their work and that culture can therefore be said to
influence technology. The designed mobile devices will have their own mechanism of
reproduction, one where technologies influence other technologies, and hence replicate and
mutate cultural influences.
Science and technology scholars argue that it is important to re-embed technology into
culture, in order to recognise that technology is a by-product of culture, an action or a
“symbol” of how the world works. The process through which a society adapts a technology
13
and then embeds it back into an individual’s experience is referred by STS as the
“domestication of technology” (Berker 4).
Historians and other theorists have discussed technology and material culture for decades,
though as a subject in its own right, it was largely confined to the periphery until Bryan
Pfaffenberger’s article in the Annual Review of Anthropology, “Social Anthropology of
Technology” in 1992. In this paper, Pfaffenberger argues that despite his profession’s traditional association with material culture, STS has pointed to shortcomings of their approach.
Though celebrating the role of the anthropologist as being alone in addressing questions
concerning the kind of cultural meaning that is embodied in technological artefacts,
Pfaffenberger did acknowledge that approaches from science and technology studies had also
been filling a void that existed between technology and the humanities. In agreement with the
view that socio-technical systems (the sociality of human technological activities) are central
to studying technology, culture, ritual and design, Pfaffenberger recognises that social use of
artefacts are part of a single complex structure that is highly adaptable and expressive.
The process has a tone familiar from both Latour and Callon’s Actor-Network Theory (ANT)
(see 2.2.2) and the methodology of Bjiker and Pinch’s Social Construction of Technology
(SCOT). Nonetheless, Pfaffenberger argues that while STS viewed what he termed a standard
or popular view of technology in which a common sense view of technology is unacceptable
(such as, all artefacts fulfil a need and have a master function) (493), so too should anthropology question its privileging of a certain view of a humans’ relationship with technology that would have us believe that invariably “necessity is the mother of invention” and “that the history of technology is a unilinear movement from tools to machines”(Pfaffenberger 514).
14
One of the key principles of science and technology studies is that “the technological, instead of being in a sphere separate from society, is part of what makes society possible”
(MacKenzie and Wajcman 23). The separation of technology from society referred to here is the result of science and technology scholars focusing on the study of individual processes rather than cultural systems or networks, and privileging evaluation over synthesis. For instance, technology was often evaluated without due consideration to ethics, identity or politics (Dodig-Cmkovic 530). Therefore, humanities are separated from science and technology, which are seen as “driving” society, while at the same time as being distinct from it. This perspective is also argued by C.P. Snow in his 1959 The Two Cultures Rede lecture that highlighted the separation between the humanities and sciences in British schools since the Victorian era. He argued that the sciences and humanities are unbalanced and that bridges should be made between the two cultures of science and the humanities.
STS works to “fill the gaps” between science and society with a background of information that gives meaning to technologies. Within this broad understanding of the relationship between science, technology and society there are a number of distinct approaches or strands of enquiry.
2.2.1. The Social Construction of Technology
One of the strands of STS, Social Construction of Technology (SCOT), addresses the apparent disconnect between technology and society by weaving social and cultural factors into the design of artefacts. It was derived from the studies of the sociology of scientific knowledge and the history of technology (Pinch and Bijker). Its implicit premise is that every actor – even a non-human actor – has its own biography.
15
SCOT’s primary methodology is to provide a framework by which to understand technology as something that is shaped by social processes and social groups. Theorists commence their analysis with an artefact and discuss the multiple forces that work together to bring that artefact into use or prevent the artefact from being accepted. It uses case studies as its primary mode of theoretical enquiry. This theory has three components that are most commonly discussed: interpretative flexibility, relevant social groups, and closure or stabilisation.
Pinch and Bjiker’s 1984 article “The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts” is a seminal one in this field. In it they “told the story” of technologies such as the Penny Farthing bicycle and Bakelite, acknowledging that a range of social factors determined their development and uptake. In this article, they introduce the concept of interpretative flexibility – when the technological artefact is first evolving, it is being “culturally constructed and interpreted” as it is being used (Pinch and Bijker 421). Regardless of the explicit intentions of the designers and engineers, once technology enters the sphere of use it can take on multiple meanings for different people and different groups of people. In other words, something is designed in one way but people make use of it in a different way, one not intended by the designers.
To understand how the meaning of technology is flexible and evolves, it is necessary to first identify the social groups, people, organisations and institutions that play a role in determining the eventual shape of the technology. Different social groups can derive very different meanings from one single technology. These meanings create expectations that then lead to a redesign of the artefact and the acceptance of one technology over another. Here,
Pinch and Bijker use the bicycle as an example (411).
The original Penny Farthing bicycle had a large wheel at the front and a small wheel at the back. They claim that young men saw this artefact as a “macho” machine, because it could
16
throw the rider over the handlebars at high speed if he hit an obstacle (Bijker 48). On the
other hand, women and older men preferred the “safety” bicycle, which had two equal sized wheels. The latter design was eventually accepted due to the cultural ascendance of the concept of safety (rather than machismo) at that time.
Relevant social groups are indicative of the second component of SCOT. Both the bicycle and the mobile device suggest that different social groups can have different interpretations of the same technology. If one were to take another technological artefact like a word
processing system, using the same construction concept, we can see that one social group saw
it at once to be a powerful tool for desktop publishing. The acceptance by this social group
determined the shape of the technology that led to its redesign into a laptop computer.
However, the artefact would have been seen by a different social group as merely a fast
typewriter (Haas 224).
Pinch and Bjiker’s bicycle analysis has been critiqued in a number of ways. Rosen believed
that the social groups considered (women and older men) were too broad and needed to be
more clearly defined (Clayton 351–360). For example, the category of “women” needs to be understood in contexts such as race, age and social classes, all of which factors may have had an effect on the way in which they interacted with the technology. The groups would vary in their interpretation of how they used the bicycle and therefore would have constructed the artefact governed by their own schema.
Schema is a term that is predominantly used in psychology but has also made its way into other disciplines like film theory (Bordwell 31–34) and theatre (Melrose 19). It refers to a representational mental map that people have based on preconceived ideas, which therefore helps people to organise information quickly. In short, it is a mechanism to understand the world through self-hypothesis checking (Watson, DeBortali-Tregerthan, and Frank 72).
17
Because differing interpretations of the same phenomena form around different schema, Lee
Humphreys calls for the relevant social groups to be placed into four categories: producers,
advocates, users and bystanders (234). The term social group is used here to denote
institutions and organisations, as well as organised groups of individuals. In selecting the
relevant social group the question of what particular meaning the artefact has to members of
that particular social group (rather than society as whole) should be asked.
The third component often associated with SCOT is closure or stabilisation. This occurs after
a technological artefact loses its interpretative flexibility and a common meaning has become accepted. It can occur in two ways. The first is with “rhetorical closure”, when it is not so much that a problem or need for the technology is solved through technological or social ends, but more when the relevant social groups believe that it is solved. T. Hughes (45) observed that problems are not so much inherent in the technology, but rather people such as
engineers and designers define aspects of technology as problems. The second is when an
artefact that was recognised as a (failed) solution to one problem and becomes a solution to a
different problem, and this second problem is later constructed as the very obstacle that the
technology was created to overcome. The problem is shaped around the artefact’s action; the
artefact itself does not have to change. This is called “closure by redefinition of the problem”.
For example, the air tyre on a bicycle provided a way to reduce vibration and was only useful
to low wheel general public bicycles, but for the Penny Farthing cyclists, this was not a
concern. These sporting cyclists found that they could increase their speed with the air tyre
(Bijker 84). In this case, closure has been reached by redefinition of a problem.
These observations can be applied to a mobile device. Apple’s iPod has been understood as
primarily a portable music device, but could similarly be used to underline the interpretative
18
flexibility where social groups defined the device as cultural icon, companion, and distraction
(Kahney; Lee 63).
When the iPhone was released, iPod social groups found that they could equally do on the
iPhone what they did with their iPods, as well as much more, such as making phone calls and
browsing the Internet. The iPod had reached a stabilisation and the social group had found a
new companion.
2.2.2. Actor-network theory
Another strand of STS is actor-network theory (ANT). ANT sees networks of technological
and social actors as fundamental to cultural and scientific analysis. The most eminent scholar
in this area is Bruno Latour, who, along with his collaborator Michel Callon, are generally
associated as the key thinkers behind the ANT approach. Latour says that ANT is a system
that “re-contextualised context” (We Have Never Been Modern 192). In simplistic terms, it
provided a map of the interrelatedness of things, embracing the idea that things were not just
matters of fact and could never be known in isolation. Things have concerns and one needs to
know as much as one can about those concerns in order to find connections between things.
These connections form a network where objects could be critically viewed “with the tools of
anthropology, metaphysics, history, sociology to detect how many participants are gathered
in a thing to make it exist and to maintain its existence” (Latour, "Why Has Critique" 246).
The constructed network, with all its connections, then gives meaning and sense to a thing. A network is defined as a chain of actors through which translation takes place that defines those actors. The connectors or “intermediaries”, such as inscriptions (texts), artefacts, human beings and money can also define the relationship of actors through their translations.
19
In other words, the origin and the locations of things were determined by these relationships or connections. Latour revealed the position of things by learning from the position of other known things and the mechanics of the system that relied on the relationships. The objects gather their meaning from a large network, and this material and conceptual map of relationships determines their origin and meaning.
However, in Latour’s cognitive map of networks, there is no physical distance as one would expect to see on a road map, only a flat landscape made up of relationships, where the varying strengths of the associations of things replaces the scale that defines the distances that are conveyed on a map. The map exists as a global entity in that it interconnects everything and anything. ANT has been used to examine many different types of social systems from electric vehicles (Law, Rip, and Callon 19) to the Portuguese spice trade expeditions to India (Law, Power, Action, and Belief 196).
Mobile devices are particularly suited to ANT analysis. They are part of the large heterogeneous network of things (not to be confused with a cellular network) that connects them and is made up of other devices, users, designers, institutions, events, goals and history.
The mobile device is the centred actor within the network and when other actors are aligned to a goal then the network is stable. For ANT researchers the term actors is used to refer to non-human, human and material or the temporary or the permanent. The non-human aspect of the actor is another reason that this theory is productive when it comes to discussing the design of mobile devices, as it allows the physical mobile device to be incorporated into a single sociotechnical system. The broadness in understanding the actors is one of the strengths of ANT, since it allows bridging between the technological and the social.
20
The paradigm that all actors are connected via a series of networks does call into question
what the relationships are that give meaning to the mobile devices. The relationships are
determined by the stories about their history and identity, that is to say, a biography.
One weakness of ANT is its inability to distinguish between the social and the technological.
However, this can also be seen as ANT’s strength, as ANT does not subscribe to myths
concerning technology or science, such as the “standard view of technology” with its
“exaggerated picture of technological evolution” (Pfaffenberger, Social Anthropology of
Technology 513). These myths are seen when one overstates claims such as artefacts were designed to fill a particular need, or an assumption that the division of human history is accurately described by terms such as the Age of the Tool, or the Age of the Machine or the
Industrial age.
This section has looked at STS as a way to understand technology and society as being closely linked. Two main strands, SCOT and ANT have been discussed. What unites these approaches under the general banner of science and technology studies is their insistence of the importance of the social and cultural in all considerations of technology.
The role of STS and its relationship to the history of mobile technology is best explained by
Bijsterveld and Pinch with their examination of music technology. Concentrating on sound, their work offers a view that technology (incorporated into the mobile device such as iPods and iPhones) and STS can “contribute a focus on the materiality of sound, its embeddedness not only in history, society, and culture, but also in science and technology and its machines and ways of knowing and interacting” (Pinch and Biksterveld 636). The important point is that personal technologies have transformed the ways that individuals interact and experience social life. Michael Bulls study of personal stereos and iPod usage explains this transformation but equally demonstrates how well STS works as a framework since the users
21
in the study are active consumers of technology (2). In this thesis, consumers of technology are most visible when the thesis explores them “interacting” with the mobile device as a technical device (see 2.4), such as the Apple iPhone (47) and in section 3.4.1 concerning
Goffman and interaction also in section 3.4.2 when Collins discusses interaction chains and finally in the design of the mobile device (see 5.2 and 5.4.2). The “experience” is also an important factor when considering STS’s contribution to the study and is dominant in both the discussion on the mobile as a cultural object (section 2.5) but also in developing the idea of embeddedness, which takes place in the Apple store as a ritual activity (see 4.4.5).
The following section reviews the history and development of the mobile device, using STS as a guide for interpretation. While histories of technologies are common in writings about technology (and mobile technologies are no exception), the technique is presented here because it presents a view of the history of the development of mobile devices as a struggle that defines technology and design and is the basis of the remaining chapters of this thesis.
The following section embraces STS as an approach to the study of technology and uses the history of the technology and correspondingly the influence of social events, as a vehicle for emphasising the importance of societal context. This becomes increasingly important as the thesis develops ideas about the relationship between the technology and ritual-like activities in the following chapter.
2.3. Overview of the mobile device
The mobile telephone or mobile as it is called in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia and
elsewhere, is in North America referred to as the “cellular phone”, or “cell phone”. It
represents a technology in personal communication that is ubiquitous, portable and intimate.
22
In recent times, there has been a different and significant emergence of gadgets, devices or
“instruments” that facilitate personal communication (Caron 4). Mobile technology – which includes smart phones and mobile devices such as tablets or pads – is interesting because the devices perform such an array of roles, from the practical to the perfunctory. A mobile device is like a mobile being that is routinely carried around by a human. It communicates with the individual user, with other machines and with the world at large in a variety of ways. Its scale and closeness to our body invites intimate interaction rituals. It acts a kind of non-human friend.
The mobile device is a particularly fascinating area of research because it embodies a convergence of many different technologies into one artefact. It has become a platform for entertainment, commerce, information and media, and is significant because it plays out a relationship between the user, designer, the device and society against a backdrop of culture, communication, economics and politics.
It is this relationship between the users that include designers and the artefact (device) that
STS scholars have argued to have played a large part in the various meanings that is associated with the construction of technology (Pinch and Bijker 415). It is the relationship of users or consumers defined as being a relevant social group (see 2.2.1) that is crucial to not only how designs are shaped by social, cultural and economic elements but how technology also shapes such factors.
The birth of the mobile communication culture has been a sudden and unpredictable phenomenon. In 2014, there were an estimated 6,915 million mobile phone subscribers worldwide. That is, 95% of the world’s population had access to a mobile phone and 96% of the world had access to mobile networks. That makes a sizeable increase from the 4,640 million mobile subscriptions that were taken up by the end of 2009. India and China have
23
been the main drivers, adding 300 new mobile subscription companies between them in 2010.
2010 to 2014 has seen Africa, Asia and the Pacific as the regions with the strongest mobile-
cellular growth (ITU 2011).
The mobile device consists of hardware, software and the network systems supporting the use
of the device. A mobile device can take a variety of different forms: mobile phones, personal
digital assistants (PDAs), smart phones, and iPads. In this thesis, the definition of a mobile device includes smart phones and iPads or tablet computers. Inevitably, however there may be the occasional blurring of the distinction between mobile phones, PDAs, tablets and iPads
because of their overlapping history.
2.3.1. Definition of Mobile Devices
As described in Bijker’s Of Bicycles, Bakelite and Bulbs, and discussed above, there has been
an ongoing “debate in the history of technology” concerning the method of “framing” the
device (9). This study will look at mobile devices in context, and hence will examine these
artefacts in relation to political, social, economic and scientific arenas and by looking at the
details of the artefacts themselves. It will also focus attention on the interaction between
micro and macro levels.
Apple products such as the iPhone, iPad and other mobile devices by companies including
Nokia, Sony, Ericsson and Samsung will be in focus. The following section will spend time
looking at the history of the PDA and the Walkman, two artefacts whose use and social
function overlap with that of the mobile device.
Mobile device is used here as a term that will cover a range of different devices including
personal digital assistants (PDAs), smart phones, and Internet enabled devices all in one.
Therefore they are usually: 1) portable and small in size; 2) connected and enabled; and 3)
24
convergent, in that they allow various types of platforms and media genres such as music,
movies, documents, and applications to come together. The form is similar to handheld
devices but smaller than the Ultra Mobile PC (UMPC). As such, these smaller devices
mentioned above are part of the mobile device range, which could be described as filling a consumer niche between cellular telephones and tablets.
The development of the mobile device by both “filling a consumer niche” and being portable,
connected and convergent represents a major innovation in media technologies therefore
raising various issues around the user and shaping the technology that are of particular
interest to STS. According to Pinch, technologies can be thought of as technological artefacts
that are engrained within various user’s communities and their social relations (Pinch and
Bijsterveld 638).
The next section describes the development of the mobile device from its roots as a PDA and
telephone to a multifunctional device, just as many classic STS and construction of
technology studies were about the early stages of technologies. For example, Bijkers study of
how the bicycle, fluorescent lights and bakelite moved from interpretative flexibility to
stability (the early high wheeled bicycle as unsafe paved the way for the safety bicycle) in Of
Bicycles, Bakelite and Bulbs. The confusion of definitions in technology seems to be
unavoidable because of the fast pace of change in the industry and the various different
designs of the artefacts. For example, in 2001 when considering the definitions of particular
devices, Kyle Schurman said that “because the difference between handheld devices and
PDAs is sometimes unclear, we’ll stipulate that handhelds have a keyboard, while PDAs are
Palm-type devices that use a stylus”(Schurman 7–9). Obviously, neither of those definitions would work today.
25
Throughout this thesis there may be instances where the term mobile device, device, artefact
and mobile phone are used interchangeably. This is inevitable as the language used to
describe mobile devices is still emerging. As Gerard Goggin argues, “iPhones, Smartphones
and “apps” ... constitute a new platform for the work of culture, for social action, for political
participation and for supporting new economic models” (Goggin, The iPhone and
Communication 24)
2.3.2. The PDA as precursor to the Mobile Device
One of the key reasons for the creation and popular uptake of the mobile device was the
facility to access the Internet on cellular phones from the mobile device from the 1990s to the
turn of the century (Castells 201; Goggin, Cell Phone Culture 46). However, the mobile device has a history that extends before the mobile Internet. One could argue that its evolution began in 1977, when Klausner and Hotto patented the PDA.
The PDA came into existence as the LC-836MN, which was licensed to the Toshiba
Company in 1978. The device resembled a calculator and was commonly known as the
Memo Note 30. Its main function was to store phone numbers and simple memos. In 1978, the LK-3000 began to be produced under licence of Siemens Nixdorf (fig. 2.1). The device had interchangeable language modules, and could facilitate currency exchange and metric conversion as well as run a database and provide a rudimentary note taking application
(Koblentz 172).
Figure 2-1. Nixdorf LK-3000
26
These devices did not have access to the Internet, since in 1978 Internet access via acoustic
modems was only available to the US defence community. The earliest public mobile devices
that could access internet-like services like CompuServe came into existence in the 1980s
(Hinton 70). At this time there were only two devices that employed the technology: the
Panasonic RLH-1400 Hand held Computer in 1981 and the Psion Organiser in 1984, both of which could support file transfer and remote access to computers (Koblentz 2) but not the
Internet.
Figure 2-2. Psion Organiser
For the London based company that created the Psion, their artefact heralded a new category of personal computing device. They dubbed their device an organiser, and it resembled a portable device for computational work (see fig. 2.2.) It had a port for various plug-in modules and an RS-232 port, sometimes called a “comms link” or “serial link”, which could provide communication to various other devices, including a desktop computer. A slot on the top of the device could support a telephone dialler and even a dedicated thermal printer.
The next major stage of development of handheld devices was spurred on by the move from wired to wireless in the 1990s. The Nokia 1011 emerged in 1992. It was a GSM phone, and the first device to have text-based messaging (Lindholm, Keinonen, and Kiljander 11-12).
GSM or Global System for Mobile Communication introduced in 1991became a digital
27
standard for many places in the world with the exception of the United Sates. It allows eight
simultaneous calls on the same frequency on its narrow bandwidth (Lindholm, Keinonen, and
Kiljander 286). Around the same time in the United States, IBM presented its 9075
“PCradio” laptop.
In contrast to the view that users are passive recipients or consumers of technology, STS
scholars argue that users play a considerable role in creating various meanings associated to
the construction of technology (Pinch and Bijker 415). The IBM “PCradio laptop, is one such
case, which was developed and made available to help technicians to order parts and update
customer records at the job site. The interpretative flexibility of the technology is linked to
the problems and meanings associated with a relevant social group; in this case, the
technicians.
The device had options for cellular and wireless data radio (ARDIS) and modem communication. Advanced Radio Data Information Service (ARDIS) was a packet switched wireless data network from the American Mobile Satellite Corporation that was created by
Motorola. It was known for being able to penetrate the walls of a building in order to receive a signal (IBM Knowledge Center). Here, adaptions to the device were in response to the consumer or user needs. Equally the impact of need on the formation of the technology demonstrates a connection between designers and users through a technological frame (see
2.3.1) or a set of shared assumptions (Bijker 192-195).
At the same time as these product releases, IBM, Apple and Motorola Inc. (as a technology partner) announced a series of agreements. The agreements involved an open system environment for IBM and Macintosh (Apple) software programs to be run on a new IBM
developed microprocessor called Reduced Instruction Set Computer (RISC). The agreement
28
also saw a joint venture to create and license multimedia technologies for a wide range of
companies and an independent, jointly owned company to develop object-oriented software.
The use of the term “object oriented” can be viewed as a group of interacting attributes and
behaviors created by a programmer that is attached to an object. The object can process its
own data and send and receive messages to other objects (Murray, Inventing 137–138).
Simply put, this software improves the efficiency, stability and quality of devices’ software.
In 1993, Apple revealed the Newton. John Sculley, former chairman of Apple, utilised the
Psion’s nomenclature and dubbed the new device a PDA (O’Grady 148). Apart from being a
PDA, the Newton was also the first tablet platform for portable computing. This eventually
evolved into the platform for the Apple iPhone and iPad technology. The intention behind the
Newton was to be a device to suit a particular relevant social group, architects, but after a
series of deadline issues its intention changed (148). It reinvented personal computing, since it could store addresses, contacts, and send and receive data. It also had stylus, audio and handwriting recognition with the latter devices shipping with infrared connection (IrDA)
(Linzmayer 190-191).
Despite its substantial features, it was not successful in the marketplace at that time. The reason has been the subject of some speculation. One explanation was that people were simply not ready for this “advanced technology” (O’Grady 85). But there were other practical considerations. The Newton was both large and expensive. The interface was slow when scrolling through notes and the synchronisation (connectivity) was inconsistent, and hence there was little “in it” for the general user. That said, the device was advanced and the mobile device market in the 1990s was sprinkled with one-off unsuccessful technological devices that consequently had no follow through in device advancements.
29
With the benefit of hindsight, it would seem that the Newton should have been the next logical step in the technical evolution of mobile devices. In many ways the features that were pioneered in the Newton have since becomes staples of modern mobile devices. However, looking at the Newton from an STS perspective reveals that there may have been other considerations.
The fact that there was very little “in it” for the general user because of a number of practical concerns such as size and cost as well as the unreliable connectivity and that the Newton was initially designed for architects gives weight to what happens when an ill-conceived “ideal user” is configured into the design of the technology. This gives weight to Steve Woolgar’s
STS semiotic approach, where technologies are developed with particular users in mind and the configuring is the process of “defining the identity of putative users, and setting constraints upon their likely future actions” (Configuring, 59).
However, in addition to Woolgar’s work, the Newton reinforces that it is a two way process.
Users are not only represented by designers but the user can also be implicated in the technological innovation of the device by feeding back into the process. For example, in the case of the Newton the user did not buy the device. Mackay et al. takes it one step further suggesting that “…designers in turn are configured by both users and their own organisations” (752).
According to Walter Isaacson, Steve Jobs’ official biographer, the returning Apple CEO, had a dislike for needing a stylus or pen to write on a screen (309). Also there was some speculation that as the Newton was the former CEO John Sculley’s project, for that reason alone Jobs terminated the project in 1998 (Linzmayer 202; Isaacson 338).
Beyond politics there were also major economic reasons for the device’s failure. In 1997 the
Newton project managed to sell only 300,000 units and had incurred a cost to Apple of
30
$500,000,000 (Linzmayer 203; O’Grady 98). Apple was facing financial problems and the
company needed to streamline its product range to bring the company back into profitability
(Isaacson 338).
In 1995, and most likely as a result of earlier agreements made between IBM and Apple,
Motorola announced their new product, the Motorola Marco. This device was a PDA based on the Newton Operating System, with a built-in wireless modem. It was big and heavy, weighing approximately two pounds.
In March 1996, Palm™Inc. unveiled the PalmPilot. This handheld was a smaller, more portable device that could organise personal and professional lives and was enthusiastically embraced by mobile busy people. The PalmPilot was essentially a stripped down version of the Apple Newton, which make its huge success a little paradoxical (Korhonen and Ainamo
92). The PalmPilot professional could access Macintosh [Apple] and Microsoft Windows computer networks and allowed for the use of Microsoft Mail Outlook or Lotus electronic mail systems. A Palm modem could be coupled to the device and, through a standard RJ11 telephone cable, it could connect to an analogue telephone line in order to send faxes and browse the Internet.
The movement from hand-held device to PDA, to PDA with wireless Internet connectivity demonstrates the convergence of PDAs and soon to be its convergence to mobile phone
technology. IBM had in fact been working on the first mobile device with native Internet applications from 1992; this would become the first smart phone.
One way to understand the mobile device is to understand the devices’ technical history and how the technology has stabilised. The development of the mobile phone as a technical device has seen it develop from mobile telephony to a communication device.
31
2.4. Mobile as a Technical Device
It is difficult to devise the history of the mobile device because of the relatively small time
frame of its development, that being the last 50 years for the mobile phone and the last
twenty or so for the smart phone. The other difficulty, as referred to by Gerard Goggin in Cell
Phone Culture, is caused by the relative infancy of the discipline of mobile technology history, so that “while there have been many institutional, technical or national histories of telecommunications, studies that take the social and cultural dimensions of telecommunications are relatively scarce compared to a wealth of literature on other
media”(Goggin 23).
Particular books devoted to the theme have been: John Agar’s Constant Touch a global
history of the mobile phone, Dan Steinbock’s Nokia Revolution and its varied accounts of
Nokia, covering its beginnings and its strategic marketing influences, and Gerard Goggin’s
Cellphone Culture, an interdisciplinary approach that fills the gap between technology, culture and history. The social context of mobile phones has been amply covered by authors such as, Ling’s New Tech, New Ties, Katz Magic in the Air and Castells Mobile
Communication and Society.
The following provides with a potted history of the technology involved in how the mobile phone evolved from what was a device used primarily for communication, into a more multi- modal “smart” device. This evolution tells us about our selves and since the mobile device has evolved it has become more integrated into people’s lives and therefore it has become more social and reflective of society and us.
The size of the evolution demonstrates the broad range of the mobile devices interpretative flexibility in its cultural construction and interpretation (see 2.2.1). The history of the mobile
32
device evolves because of its instability to become a protypical design in technology. STS
scholars Pinch and Bijker (416) suggest that stabilisation occurs at different points by
different social groups. In other words, when the features and problems of the device have not been negotiated and solved by the social groups the device will continue to evolve since it hasn’t reached closure.
Smart phones, according to former Nokia employees Christian Lindholm et al., were devices that had as their main functions the placing of voice calls and messaging, but they were smart
because they could do a variety of other function such as contain contact lists, calendars, to
do lists, gaming and so on (172). This history can be divided into the stories of the phone
company, the computer company and the electronics company. Each collective is a fulcrum
of social and economic capital that had a stake in the development of the mobile device.
Mobile communication started in the 1890s when Guglielmo Marchese Marconi patented his
invention of wireless telegraphy for ships using Morse code as the language of
communication for vessels around the world (Goggin, Cell Phone Culture 24). The invention
of this technology also heralded the advent of interaction design, as a whole system was
created in order to facilitate its enactment. This included operators, Morse key design,
electronics, cabling, and training. Messages were crafted, sent and received, and so a device
was responding to human inputs through interaction.
Mobile telephony, in its broadest definition, began in the early twentieth century. In the US
army Signal Corps in 1909, portable and transportable telephones facilitated by radio signals
were strapped to horse carriages. In 1921, the police force in the US began experimenting
with radiotelephones, which usually facilitated one-way communication.
33
Figure 2-3. Police in Chicago using a radio telephone, Time, US, Bettman Corbis
Bell laboratories developed the first radiotelephone in 1924 and the device would later be
used by police departments in their cars in the United States (see fig. 2.3). The phone had become mobile. The leader of technological innovation at this stage was Galvin
Manufacturing Corporation in Chicago, which later became known as Motorola (25).
World War II saw the manufacturing of two-way radio sets by General Electric and
Motorola. They soon became known as the “Walkie Talkie” (Agar 35). The device was a portable phone and comprised a half-duplex channel. This meant the user would push the button to speak, release to receive and only one device could send though many could listen to the message being sent.
In 1973 Motorola invented a portable cellular phone, and phone trials commenced in the
United States, but it was not until 1974 that the Motorola Pageboy became the first commercial pager. Medical staff, which saw the pager as a necessity in order that they could be alerted by their respective hospitals about emergencies, first took up the device (Goggin
Cellphone Culture 28). Soon many people started using pagers. Once alerted by the artefact, they would call the pager service for the message or indeed call another telephone number directly. For companies, it was an indirect way of contacting staff and having them
34
permanently on call when on holiday or elsewhere. This is the beginning of the social
dynamic that has come to be called “perpetual contact” (Katz, Perpetual Contact 442).
The 1980s saw Motorola launch the first commercial mobile phone, the DynaTAC 8000X
(DYNamic Adaptive Total Area Coverage). It resembled a black and white brick (see fig.
2.4) and weighed slightly less than a pound or about half a kilogram (Agar 42). The consumption rate was slow due to the high price and poor reception quality when compared to that of the car phone.
Figure 2-4. Prototype of the DynaTAC mobile telephone, Meyers
In Sweden there was a greater adoption rate, partly due to the better-planned management of the radio spectrum and partly due to the distribution of a small population spread over a large, heavily forested country. In 1981, Sweden had 20,000 mobile users, which was proportionately the largest of any country in Europe (49). The mobile phones for the Nordic countries were provided by Danish Dancal and Storno, Swedish Ericsson and Finnish Mobira
(part of Nokia) (50).
Not only Sweden but also many other Scandinavian countries had progressive adoption rates.
What was significant was not the technology but the social and political initiatives concerning the availability of the radio spectrum and also the positive attitude by Nordic countries toward mobile communication (Steinbock 91). The attitude was endorsed by the
Nordic co-operation agreement under the Nordic Council of Ministers in 1971 where
35
Scandinavian countries enjoyed reciprocal rights in one another’s countries (91). The
adoption rate of the mobile device is technologically framed because it specifies the way in
which the “relevant social groups interact and the way they think and act” (Bijker 264). In this case, it was in the form of a micro political aspect of power (Nordic Council of
Ministers) and that had a positive effect on the development of the mobile device and upon the attitude of Nordic countries toward mobile communication.
Seen here and throughout the development of the mobile device, the interpretative flexibility makes it clear that the stabilisation of the device is a social process, and in the case of the
Scandinavian countries the social process is “subject to choices, interests, and value judgement – in short, to politics” (Bijker 281).
Geography also played a part with the population of these countries spread out in remote places that demanded a need for a mobile device to remain in contact. This environment provided opportunities for companies like Nokia to prosper, which in turn influenced the social and economic market.
In 1989 Motorola introduced the MicroTAC (see fig. 2.5), which was the first flip covered phone and was an attempt to make the first pocket phone. This design made the phone much more portable.
Figure 2-5. Motorola MicroTAC
36
Noteworthy at this time in the history of the mobile as a technical device was that size seemed to matter. Portability became desirable and it heralded the start of the smaller is better mantra. Lindholm, Keinonen and Kiljander, believe that portability implies small size and one hand operability that is in a causal relationship with the user needs (268). If so, then design matters and so does the consumer market that informs it. Size can also be seen as a way to differentiate a product with that of other companies (Steinbock 270).
Size and its relationship to portability is representative of the “shifts” between development and consumption that enables the design process to be bridged between users and designers
(Pinch and Trocco 313- 314). The boundary shifter recognises users and the developer’s ability to shape the development of the mobile device, but it also focuses on the interaction that produces the changes in technology.
Europe, Germany, Italy, Great Britain and France were attempting to create their own mobile cellular systems. In 1982, this led to a meeting among eleven European countries to inaugurate the Group Special Mobile (GSM) that was later renamed as the Global System for
Mobile Communications. The GSM, which became the standard for digital mobile technology, was finally launched in 1991, and finally began operation in 1992 (Agar 62).
The Motorola International 3200 became the first mobile digital phone that used 2G (2nd
Generation) digital encrypted technology within the GSM standard. The second-generation network also introduced SMS, known as short message service and is a system for sending short text messages, which, by the late 1990s, was the choice of communication method for the young (Goggin, Cell Phone Culture 87; Mariscal and Bonina 74; Miyata, Boase, and
Wellman 209).
In the 1980s, the United States was attempting to saturate users into their analogue system, and it wasn’t until the radio spectrum could not hold enough users that they turned to the
37
digital GSM. They tried a number of solutions such as Time Division Multiple Access
(TDMA), that divides up the transmission into different time slots and lets several callers
access it, and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA), that transmitted a mixture of signals
and used TDMA to reassemble the original message if the random signal was known. The
multitude of varying standards created frustration amongst users as they tried accessing the
patchwork of different digital standards and networks. The United States finally settled on
GSM that, by then, had been deployed worldwide. CDMA remained active mainly in the
United States and parts of Asia to support 2G systems. Incidentally, in the early days of 2G
Japan also used a system called PDC or personal digital cellular (Srivastava 17). 3G networks
included derivatives of both these standards called UMTS or Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System and WCDMA (a wider band version of CDMA).
The GSM standard for mobile technology meant that there were greater opportunities for
innovation in features of mobile devices. There was an onset of address books and PDA
services such as alarm clocks, calendars and phone settings including subscriber information
that could be stored on SIM cards (subscriber identity modules). The advent of the SIM
meant that data could be transferred among devices via these cards (Goggin, Cell Phone
Culture 32). The improvements made with the range of the transmission of the devices
foreshadowed the convergence of text, image, video, sound and media and touch that exists
in today’s smartphone (Lindholm, Keinonen and Kiljander 11).
In 1993 the IBM Simon was perhaps the first smartphone. It had phone, pager, fax, and PDA
in one device (fig.2.6).
38
Figure 2-6. IBM Simon (US, 1993)
The tapping in by designers with the relevant social groups was always a factor within the
history of the mobile device. A key requirement was that the social group share the same set
of meanings that were attached to the device (Pinch and Bijker 414). The meanings could
take the shape of fads or trends, or other cultural forms as the mobile device allowed for a
social connection through group identification.
For instance, 1996 saw the introduction of a clamshell Motorola starTAC that was inspired
by the popular science fiction television series Star Trek (Katz, Magic in the Air 68). The
device had PDA features such as calculator, pager, address book and email. This fascination
with pop culture was not only expressed by Motorola but also by Apple. In 1992 CEO of
Apple John Sculley called a joint project between Apple and Novell, Star Trek. The project
was so named because “it would boldly go where no Mac had gone before” that is putting
Mac OS on Intel devices (Linzmayer 229).
The start of the smart phone (mobile device) era was signalled by the arrival of the Nokia
9000 communicator (fig. 2.7) that replaced IBM’s Simon. The Nokia 9000 had an LCD screen and a QWERTY keyboard.
39
Figure 2-7. Nokia 9000 Communicator (US)
The arrival of QWERTY keyboards was a translation from earlier developments made in the
PDA market. The move was a decisive event in the conflation of PDA features and mobile
device features. The Communicator Nokia 9000 was later seen to be a platform for
developing and exploring the opportunities of integrated phones, palmtop computing and
handheld multimedia services (Korhonen and Ainamo 91).
The development of mobile device technology and its market was taking a parallel course in
Asia. The Japanese market was slow at first. However, electronics companies such as Sony,
Panasonic and NEC had been busy producing devices for export to the rest of the world.
Nippon Telegraph and Telephone created their own mobile division, forming NTT DoCoMo.
This division had great success in 1999 when it created a new service called i-mode, which was a significant working Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) network (Agar 96). They led the way by inserting a microprocessor chip in their phones, and soon it became evident that a
NTT DoCoMo mobile could be much more than a phone. NTT DoCOMo’s success was not just about the device, however. It also relied on the successful i-mode network. WAP had failed in the West, but in Japan i-mode was highly successful, primarily because it had successfully delivered a “standard”. An initial element of this standard was a gateway that could filter content using NTT DoCoMo’s rules governing what was allowed and what was not (Agar 99).
40
In the late 1990s Kei-ichi Enoki, managing director of the “i-mode” service in the mobile
market, had this to say about the range and selection of features on mobile devices:
PCs are like department stores. They have a wide selection of content, including
excellent graphic images. If you decide to make a visit, you can stay as long as you
like and explore different sites at your leisure. [By contrast] mobile phones are more
like convenience stores, where only a selection of goods are on display in the limited
space available. The contents have to be simple, but the convenience comes from the
fact that they can be accessed at any time (Agar 100).
The mobile device soon started to become saturated with features. In 1999, the most popular
mobile phone to date in the market was released: the Nokia 3210. There were over 160 million units sold (Meyers). Following this, the Nokia 7110 was released. This had full web
and GPS capabilities.
The Nokia 7110 used WAP, which at this time was an open global standard for
communication between mobiles phones and the internet and was compatible with GSM,
CDMA and TDMA standards (Lindholm 33). Samsung produced the MPH-M100, which was
the first phone with an MP3 player. In Japan in 1999, cameras began to be built into phones
like the Kyocera Visual phone (VP-201). With Japan launching its 3G network in 2001, the
sharing of images from camera phones soon became a reality (Goggin, Cell Phone Culture
33). The Internet, network technology and mobile devices had begun to converge so that mobile devices started to perform as multi-media platforms.
The mobile device through its interpretative flexibility had met closure and had now been reframed by relevant social groups. The telephone that was originally intended to be of use for people to only communicate had now become portable and over its evolution it was a device that could do a number of tasks from taking pictures to accessing the internet.
41
Clearly the intentions and purpose of the device had been altered by a number of social
influences interacting with the mobile devices technological characteristics.
The turn of the century saw even more convergence as cameras and web access, colour
screens, voice dialling and keyboards became the norm. In October 2000, Sharp produced the
first commercially available integrated camera phone with a 110, 000-pixel CMOS image sensor. This phone allowed the user to send and receive images by email (Sharp Corporation) and by the end of 2004 it was estimated that 75% of the mobiles sold in Japan were camera phones (Farley 33). Computer and electronic companies as well as phone companies began to produce phones, because by this stage, mobile devices were multi-purpose platforms. A phone was not just a phone because it had evolved to become a stage allowing a variety of performances. These performances could involve camera operations, audio playback, and conveying of speech and Internet access. Cell phone circuitry was starting to be built into laptops and PDAs such as the Blackberry (Farley 30). The phone was now becoming smart.
2.4.1. Emergence of the Smart Phone
A new player in the field, a company called Research in Motion (RIM) had begun to make
the BlackBerry, which would become one of the most popular mobile devices for a time. The
BlackBerry 5810 had phone functionality and could send email (Tofel). The device also
included its own specifically designed operating system that enabled users to have immediate
access to their emails and schedules within a secure network. The BlackBerry operating
system supported 3G, Wi-Fi and GSM and included a number of input devices such as track
wheel, trackball, trackpad and touchscreen.
42
Following this product was the Handspring Treo that was launched in 2001 and featured a keyboard or graffiti text input with text and email functions and had the first Palm operating system.
The “smartness” of the device was facilitated by the evolution of mobile networks. The mobile device of the 1990s – 2005 saw the GSM and CDMA mobile systems continue to thrive, with the exception of China, which adopted a hybrid system called TD-SCDMA in order to keep their market closed. China’s system was a cross between TDMA and CDMA.
However for the European continent they were making plans to migrate their GSM system to
WCDMA for their 3G networks.
Figure 2-8. 2G to 4G Networks, Interpreting Srivastava system from The Mobile Makes Its Mark
The complexity of the network systems in regional areas and worldwide can be seen highlighted in fig. 2.8. The figure illustrates the multiple systems and the overlaps of each
system that caused a mix of standards and reception.
43
The 2000s saw further proliferation in the features and possibilities of the mobile device, indicative of the evolution that highlighted its technical specifications as paramount in its role as a technical device. However, the next device was important for a number of reasons that did not concern its technical specifications.
The Motorola RAZR was an attempt to create a “fashion phone” image, and sold 50 million units by mid- 2006 (Meyers). The Razr was an average device with a poor quality camera and unexceptional battery life. But the sleek metal body and thinness of the design drew mass appeal, as was evident in its consumer figures. Razr created a shift from mobile devices being just utilitarian gadgets to fashion accessories for lifestyle purposes (A. Richardson 146).
The strong identity by social groups with cultural forms like pop culture that was seen earlier with the Motorola starTAC in 1996, is repeated in 2006 but now with the Razr. It exemplifies the influence of relevant social groups having a shared meaning within culture, however this time it was in the form of fashion. The phone was reframed.
Mobile devices were on the move and looking for new avenues and for Apple it was design and “iTunes” that were innovative. iTunes allows a device to not only play music, but to also act like a library (with archival facilities) enabling it to download, save and organise digital music and video files. However before Apple released the iPhone in 2007, there was another device that could link to “iTunes”. That was the Motorola ROKR E1, and it was powered by a Linux based operating system called MontaVista. The design of the device according to a review by Sascha Segan and Mike Kobrin for PCmag, was not enticing but it was the iTunes functionality that was intriguing. However the integration of the device and iTunes was not complete. It was only able to pair with one computer and the phone had a second MP3 player that didn’t talk to iTunes at all. This lack of integration and the design of the device proved unpopular with the consumer who continued to use their iPods. It was becoming evident that
44
phones were becoming smart but their success was not always associated with the devices’ technical prowess.
The tablet PC concept had been in existence since at least 2002, with Microsoft preaching its virtues and a few manufacturers releasing tablet PCs with a stylus or pen to inscribe data into the device. At around this time, Apple also started their tablet project in the pursuit of a low- cost notebook computer. Jonathan Ive, the Head Designer at Apple, asked for the removal of the keyboard that was attached to the bottom, which was then replaced with a touch screen
(Isaacson 491). The multi touch screen, which was the essence of the device, would eventually lead to the development of the iPad. However, the project was put on the shelf.
The tablet PC technology, however, was not forgotten and made its way into the first iPhone
(Jobs, Steve Jobs At D8 2010). The development of the iPhone will be discussed later in this section.
2.4.2. Operating Systems
Apart from the importance of the type of network system used by mobile devices, another important component in the biography of the mobile device is its operating system (OS). An
OS is the “brain” of the mobile device, a software platform that allows the processing and control of data and the completion of tasks.
There were a number of operating systems in use in PDAs. The Palm OS was used on the
Handspring, IBM, Palm and Sony, to name only a few; Windows CE/Pocket PC/ Pocket PC in 2002 was the main system for Casio, Compaq, HP; and Blackberry used their own system, which was developed by RIM.
In 2012 the predominant mobile operating systems were Apple’s iOS (iPhone Operating
System, a Linux based system); Windows Phone 7 by Microsoft; Android by Google for
45
Samsung phones (a Linux based system); Palm WebOS (mainly for PDAs); Symbian for
Nokia phones manufactured before 2011 (a non-Unix system); Windows Mobile for Nokia phones manufactured after 2011 (a Microsoft non-Unix system); and Blackberry OS by RIM
(Linux based system).
How these main players have created mobile device technology can be seen through the history of their development. In its early development, Nokia used Symbian, which is a robust system with the native language of C++. The software development is dependent IDE
(Integrated Development Environment or Integrated Design Environment), which is a software application that allows programmers to design how the mobile device will operate.
The IDE can be either Carbide C++, CodeWarrior by Metrowerks or Visual C++ (Microsoft
Visual Studio). Java is the second most important programming language. The strengthening of network connectivity saw Bluetooth being added to the OS in 2002, followed by EDGE
(Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution), which was a result of shared APIs that supported
3G. The current version of Symbian, OS 9.5, includes television broadcasts in DVB-H and
ISDB.
The Android platform started in 2007, and is based on the Linux kernel for its drivers, memory, processing management and networking. Developed by search engine giant Google, the code is written in C++, though managed through its official language Java. Primarily, it supports GSM connectivity as well as 3G, EDGE and 802.11 WiFi networks. The platform is a multi-process system in which each application in the system runs its own process. Talking independently is one way the system ensures its security. Android is used in Samsung and
HTC mobile devices. In its earlier days, the systems had a few limitations, such as its incompatibility with Bluetooth stereo and wireless keyboards.
46
Apple’s iOS is in use on the iPad, iPhone and iPod touch. It uses the GSM network, but can
also connect with 3G, CDMA and WiFi networks. The programming language is Java but is
also compatible with C/C++. This OS allows particular features such as home screens,
folders for direct manipulation, multitasking and application switches. It is a robust but
expensive system.
The BlackBerry OS was developed by RIM in North America. This OS supports 3G, WiFi,
GSM and CDMA and is used only by BlackBerry devices. The device talks in C++ only, but
it can support Java. The OS was praised for being secure but this has in some cases worked
against the company. For example, in 2011 RIM came under pressure in India and the Middle
East to allow BlackBerry calls to be monitored by their government agencies (Infosecurity).
BlackBerry resisted and paid the price with both countries blocking the use of BlackBerry
handsets. Earlier in the year, ComputerWeekly.com claimed that RIM was advising their
users to disable JavaScript because there was a vulnerability that enabled hackers to retrieve
contact lists and image files from particular mobile devices (J. Williams).
Windows Mobile OS is Microsoft’s mobile device system. It saw much development in early
2013. Its features include a home screen that shows upcoming appointments, emails and
tasks. The new look Windows Phone platform is the same platform and uses the same
interface design that exists in laptop computers and desktop PCs with its connectivity
supported by GSM/EGSM, WCDMA, 4G LTE, and WiFi (802.11 b/g/n). Social networking
is embedded into its core. It uses mobile versions of Microsoft Office and has Internet
Explorer as its web browser. This OS was predicted to overtake Symbian in 2010, but it
instead dropped to fourth place. Nevertheless, in 2013 it was finally gaining strength with
Nokia, Samsung and HTC all using the Windows Phone OS. Nokia has abandoned their own
system in order to use the Windows OS, increasing its possibility of success. Windows is
47
programmed in C++ language and includes writing native with Visual C++ and .NET
Compact Framework.
The importance of the operating system and the engineering involved in the technological
side of the mobile device is seen in this section as integral to both the telecommunication
networks that provide support for the mobile device as well as the improvements seen in the
device itself. But these developments discussed from the past to today have also led to the
increase in the number of features provided by each mobile device. In Constant Touch, Jon
Agar argues that in the future the form of the mobile phone is in a precarious position where
technological change has allowed so many features that they reach a point of saturation so
that the device may barely work as a phone. STS would determine that the mobile device in
this case would approach a state of closure and become a transitory stage to another
technology (166). In other words, the relevant social groups technological frame had changed
and their influence begins to focus on other challenges.
This section has described one narrative about the technological advancements of the mobile
device from mobile telephony to communication device: the mobile device as Agar suggested
moving from one technology to another (166). But there is second parallel narrative, a
cultural narrative that emerges in the technology that also shaped the device: the mobile as a cultural object.
2.5. The Mobile as Cultural Object
The mobile device has a significant cultural precursor in the Sony Walkman. First released in
1979, it introduced the concept of having one’s own portable stereo system, allowing one to
have a personal experience in a public space. Even the name Walkman – which Sony CEO
Morita himself never liked (Morita et al. 81) – was most likely related to the term “walkie
48
talkie”, and so suggested a link to a communication device. At this stage, the artefact only
enabled the user to play music, rather than think, speak, write or connect with it.
Initially, the Walkman was not all that well received by everyone, especially by retailers.
According to Sony, “eight out of ten Sony dealers were convinced that a cassette player
without a recording mechanism had no real future” (Sony Corporation). In his cultural study
of the Walkman, Paul du Gay argues that through its marketing to young and mobile
consumers, Sony “began to lifestyle the Walkman” (66). “Lifestyling” was also evident in its ever-changing design, which, as previously discussed, addressed different “identities” or markets.
But lifestyling was a way to target numerous relevant social groups. It was clear that the meaning embedded in the device is interpretively flexible since adaptions to the Walkman such as colours, sizes and shapes were created out of response to consumer needs.
The Walkman was a precursor to the iPod, which in turn was a precursor to the iPhone. The relationship between CEO Steve Jobs and Sony was one built on admiration and respect, which explains the connection of the iPod to the Walkman (O’Grady 35; Isaacson 125). The iPhone “represents a distinctive moment, both in the very short history of mobile media and in the much longer history of cultural technologies” (Hjorth, Burgess, and Richardson 1).
This is because it was the first device to combine activities of a PDA with those of a media player and a phone. Nokia’s Communicator mobile device combined PDA and phone functions in 1996, as did the Handsprings Treo 180 in 2002, but these devices did not have multimedia functions. The iPhone is significant in that it was a key moment in device convergence that enabled the functionalities of various different artefacts to be combined into one.
49
According to William Wheeler in his study of wireless technology, the PDA has been described as both a glorified calculator and a full-featured computer (Wheeler 59). He maintains that both of these statements are wrong and argues that a PDA is more like an extension to a computer and consists of functions like calendar, task lists, notes, memos, contacts, addresses and phone numbers. There are usually other applications like a calculator.
The device itself is portable, and serves as an aid to memory. More important than this is that when the device had wireless connectivity, it could be a source of instant information updating and availability.
The Nokia 9000 Communicator was released in 1997. Nokia describe it in terms of its communication capacity, saying that the Communicator allows its user to send:
faxes, e-mail and short messages as well as access internet services and corporate and
public databases. The new product also provides users with organization functions
such as electronic calendar, address book, notepad and calculator in addition to being
able to do voice calls (Nokia, "The Saint").
Other devices such as the Blackberry and Windows had already included these functions, but the degree of emphasis here on the connective aspects of the mobile device is significant.
Another precursor of the contemporary mobile device that was mentioned earlier in this chapter was the Apple Newton, released in August 1993. Development of this piece of equipment started much earlier, in 1989 (Levy 110). The Newton was not a great success because of its size, weight and price. Another reason for its failure was that it focussed on user productivity rather than entertainment and other types of media content (Pixell 20).
Despite its failure, the Newton was important in that it introduced Apple into the PDA market.
50
It was also significant because the technology lived on in other devices. It was picked up by a firm called U.S. Robotics in 1996. The company introduced the Pilot 1000 (or PalmPilot).
The PalmPilot became the first successful PDA. Soon other PDAs were being released including the Pocket PC, Handspring, and Compaq iPaq to name a few. These companies started on the road to convergence, which eventually saw the Palm, iPaq and Blackberry integrating wireless functionality and a mobile phone, thereby creating a smart phone.
In 2001, Apple launched the iPod, a small, white portable device, which was, in essence, a cross between a Walkman and a hard drive. Apple had started its sojourn into the arena of the digital music or MP3 player (Buckley and Clarke 4). It was not the only player in the market, but it was by far the most popular. It soon changed the music industry, not just in the way that music was played, but also in the way it was distributed. It was “the combination of music, hardware and software [that] proved a hit” (Kahney 5). The device was lauded for its ability to fit a whole music library into one’s pocket. Jason O’Grady believes the iPod was popular due to a number of its innovations. First the size made it “pocketable”. Second, it had a huge capacity compared to previous devices. Third was its fast transfer speed, through FireWire or
USB connectivity. Finally, it had an easy-to-use interface. All of these factors led to its immense popularity, with 100 million devices being sold in the first six years (O’Grady 56).
The iPod then developed further, with the inclusion of video and then a wireless component enabling the device to connect to the Internet via wireless access points. The iPod Touch was becoming an informational device, and its design was a precursor to the iPhone’s. Apple’s
Safari Pad project had also been instrumental in reviving the Newton Message pad into a browser-based device, but as I have previously mentioned, CEO Steve Jobs suggested downscaling this tablet to a phone (Isaacson 467). The digital stage was set for combining the
PDA, iPod and phone into one device (Davies).
51
This discussion of the creation of technologies, whether it is the iPhone, Nokia mobile device, Samsung Galaxy or Walkman, has illustrated a phenomenon in their design. There is a penchant for combining two or more known technologies together to create a new technology. For the Walkman it was a merging of a tape recorder and a pair of stereo headphones, and for mobile devices it was the phone and desktop computer, or the phone and the PDA. For Apple and its iPhone it was much more than a merging of technologies.
2.5.1. The Apple iPhone
Apple can be presented as the development of a device that was intimately linked to experience, and being more lifestyle centred like the Walkman, than an engineering marvel.
Apple learned, through the iPod, which itself took cues from the Walkman, that a device is an experience, a statement about lifestyle and social status, and social belonging. It was associated with music, and being young and cool (or old and cool, in a sophisticated way).
The important moment in the history of mobile devices occurred in 2007 when the Apple iPhone was released. The prominent feature of the iPhone was not the functions but the communicative middle ground (Vogelstein 3-4). It had a design interface which afforded simplicity and ease of use. Up until this time, the number of functions that mobile devices had was growing, but the connections between functions were stagnant.
52
Figure 2-9. Timeline of Apple products from 1976 - 2010, Wiki
Fig. 2.9, illustrates the timeline of Apple devices and the speed of development and the different names and forms over the last 30 years. The term mobile device incorporates Apple devices that have Internet access. The only other new product around the time of the release of the iPhone was the Apple TV. So the iPhone was cool but according to Vogelstein, on the launch day for the device the software in the iPhones’ Wi-Fi radio was very unstable (20).
What was interesting was the social perception that the iPhone was new and revolutionary.
The key differentiator may have been its use of a touch screen (36). The new device required only your finger because, as Steve Jobs claimed, “who wants a stylus?” (O’Grady 135). The popularity of the artefact grew extremely fast, in a way reminiscent of the uptake of the
Walkman 30 years earlier. In 2007, Apple claimed that quarterly iPhone sales had exceeded 1 million (Apple, "Reports Third Quarter") by December 2012, 37.04 million iPhones had been sold (Agence France-Presse, "iPhone Sales").
The consumer uptake of the iPhone was significant and so too was the reason so many people were compelled to possess such a device. Was it the design, user interface or the fact that it was a device aimed for “generalists”, that is, defined by Apple as day-to-day users?
The device lacked some of the functions that other devices had at the time but it did have
53
essential qualities that a generalist would need each day, such as a calendar, a contact list, a
note taking facility and the ability to make phone calls. One perhaps more significant reason
for its popularity was the concept of “apps”. These could customise the device and would ameliorate the “one size fits all” nature of software and hardware.
The iPhone created a platform for apps and a simple way to access the Internet (Banks 155).
It also leveraged the popularity of the iPod and iTunes. This became a core part of a strategy
for the Apple Company. The smart phone was now being improved by a computer company
rather than a phone company. Apple lent their human computer interaction design ideals to
mobile devices. It was a success that led to the creation of interaction design, an
interdisciplinary model incorporating “industrial and communication design, human factors
and human-computer interaction” (Saffer 3).
But the question remains whether the iPhone’s diverse functionality and its ability to be personalised are significant enough to create such a phenomenal uptake of this artefact. To simply focus on the abilities of the iPhone would invite a technologically determinist reading of its success, which would not take good enough account of the ritual-like activities of the iPhone’s use. Does technology, in this case the iPhone, construct society or has society shaped this technology? As mentioned earlier, the iPhone’s development offers a glimmer of insight into the debate, but to provide a coherent view will demand a shift of focus onto another actor in this network: the user and lifestyling, a concept Sony had engaged with about
30 years before.
When the iPhone came onto the world stage in June 2007 in the United States it was advertised as being “revolutionary” (Moritz, 339). However, as Moritz argued, it was in fact
“evolutionary”. He suggests that other companies had rushed products to the market while
Apple had waited and refined these companies’ “half baked” ideas and products (339).
54
The first step is to examine the “evolutionary” nature of this device. This will help us to
understand the relationship between the iPhone and other manufacturers of mobile devices.
The “interpretative flexibility” (Bjiker 20) of the iPhone has also had a hand in determining
the nature of the ritual like relationship between the users and the mobile device.
The iPhone and other mobile devices epitomise convergence culture. They are not just telecommunication devices, they also allow us to send messages, take photos, play games, download information, watch movies and a host of media operations such as taking movies and watching them (Jenkins 16). Convergence culture is a term coined by Henry Jenkins and
refers to situations in which old media and new media come together, where grassroots and
“corporate media intersect” and where the media producer and the media consumer interact
in unpredictable ways (270). Convergence culture suggests that the consumer will have more
authority and power. It will enable new forms of participation and collaboration through a
process of integration and digitalisation. What this means is that if someone went for a
holiday in the 1990s, she would pack a camera, a book, a camcorder, board games and a
music player into her bag, but today she can just pack a mobile device.
In the case of the iPhone, it may have been the downloading of and listening to music that
started the convergence ball rolling, but this was soon followed by a mobile application store
and lifestyling. According to Fogg, Husson and de Lussanet, there was a missing link in the
emerging mobile internet ecosystem that was filled by Apple and their App store (1). The
applications themselves were designed to improve the Internet experience by “walling off” a particular part of the Internet in order to create the key Apple experiences of empathy and emotion. As Goggin argues, it is “important to recognise the heightened role of the senses, emotions and affect activated in new ways by the iPhone” (Goggin, The iPhone and
55
Communication 21). The iTunes app store filled a gap and was very important to the iPhone
success as a device itself (Vogelstein 78).
One affect that is created by the iPhone is the sense of “newness” and “innovation”. Apple plays into this feeling by constantly creating new versions of the iPhone. In 2013, it was announced the first iPhone mobile device would be obsolete in June of that year (Lanxon), meaning that Apple will provide no more support for a device that is only seven years old.
Whether this is a case of built-in obsolescence for corporate profit or not, what remains firm is the importance of a constantly changing technology and improvements within the mobile device ecosystem to Apple.
The iPhone 4 was released in early 2010. On 20 July Apple released its financial results with
CEO Steve Jobs announcing that “it was a phenomenal quarter that exceeded our expectations all around, including the most successful product launch in Apple’s history with iPhone 4”. He went on to say that the “iPad is off to a terrific start, more people are buying
Macs than ever before, and we have amazing new products still to come this year” (Evans 1).
However, there was a well-documented problem relating to the iPhone 4. Yahoo’s technology writer Christopher Null describes it in this way:
iPhone 4 users are reporting en masse that their new handsets suffer a significant loss
of signal strength when the phone’s antenna is touched with bare skin. Unfortunately,
it is pretty much impossible to use a caseless iPhone 4 without touching the antenna,
because the steel band that runs around the entire outside of the case is the antenna.
To avoid touching it you’d somehow have to pinch the front and back of the phone
between two fingers (Null).
56
The reaction to this by users was then backed up by Consumer Report (a reviewer and watchdog for products) who said that they could not recommend the iPhone as it had so many issues with reception (Gikas). It also called into question the claim by Apple that the signal strength issue was only an illusion. Consumer Report argued that Apple should fix the antenna problem at no extra cost to the user and then went on to recommend the older 3GS iPhone. Jobs came onto the scene and said the phone should be held in a certain way so that the hand does not encase the gap between the antennas that run around the outside of the phone. Soon Apple released rubber bumpers to prevent the hand from touching the gap.
This social construction of the iPhone had three main processes: the interpretative flexibility, the consensus for it to build closure and, its relevant social groups. The mobile device had a number of relevant social groups that were represented by designers, Apple organisation, and the user as either an individual or as a group.
The iPhone antennae problem needed closure and at first it was found in the form of a
“rhetorical closure” by the claim from Apple that the signal strength was only an illusion
(Bijker 86) and was a simple case of just redefining the problem. Closure had not been met until interpretative flexibility; the rubber bumper was introduced so that the hand would not affect the antennae and therefore the reception.
The iPhone now is in its role of exemplar (that is, after closure when it is part of a technological frame) has become obdurate (Bjiker 282). What had developed is that the relevant social groups who have built up a technological frame and to a degree invested so much in the iPhone that the devices meaning had now become fixed – and “cannot be changed easily that it forms part of a hardened network of practices (Bijker 282). In this case the relevant social groups can be seen as followers and that the closure process had resulted
57
in one of the relevant social groups meaning becoming dominant and a new technological
frame had been formed.
So therefore even with this obvious design problem, Apple was still selling the iPhone 4s as
fast as they could make them. Why? Particular users and social groups seemed to so strongly
identify with the product that its conception as a “must have item” seem to outweigh a logical evaluation of the quality of the technology. Even taking into account comments from Jobs
such as “If you don’t like it don’t buy it” (Toroian) and his offer of a rubber cover for the
iPhone, which could be seen as a slap in the face to consumers, the product still remains a
number one seller for Apple to date. It is also interesting to note that Apple is not the mobile
communications leader when it comes to worldwide market share. This position was reserved
for Nokia up until 2012, and then for Samsung (Arthur). So Apple has the highest profile,
whilst not being the biggest company.
The case of the iPhone 4’s antennae is a good example of how an understanding of a network can be revealed and transformed when one actor in that network ceases to operate in its prescribed way. The network centred on the user of the iPhone 4 and was an assumption because of the importance of mobile communication. However, with the poor technology design of the antennae being revealed, the artefact of the iPhone was shown to be more reliant on networks of social meaning than communication. In other words, the continued popularity of the iPhone 4, even though it does not work very well as a phone, suggests that the dominant use of this mobile device may well be not as a phone at all.
Another network of meaning that has coalesced around the iPhone is that they are “rare” or
“special” or “desirable”. This is created by the ritual lack of iPhones. Apple can’t or won’t make enough of them to sate consumer demand. Growing suspicion of this tactic has led to the current CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, claiming, “Apple does not purposely create artificial
58
product shortages to garner free press and generate hype among consumers” (N. Hughes).
Instead, demand for the iPhone 4 was framed as simply being a case of Apple being “caught off guard”.
We can see the strong social emotional attachment that a relevant social group of users have to iPhones. This is centred on the iPhone’s identity effects that are achieved through its ability to be personalised (Hjorth 197). It becomes a way in which we ritualistically perform ourselves. The personalisation of the iPhone has a historical precedent in the history of other mobile devices. For example, in Japan’s i-mode, Japan’s young users made the closed platform of i-mode’s system cute (Hjorth, Burgess, and Richardson 197). Today Apple mobile devices are routinely made cute through the application of external covers and attachment, but Apple’s customisation is also available in its apps. Apple has drawn much focus to its ability to be customised, and has “rebranded personalisation as if it was Apple’s invention” (197). Domesticating technologies through anthropomorphism is certainly not new. Domestication here is the users appropriation of a technology in ways that makes it applicable to their daily lives (Kilker 25; Hjorth 193) Individuals find strategies to control technologies and reinvent them for their own use and one way is through customisation and to lifestyle the device. Sony Style for instance targets the trendy and entertainment seeking with features such as downloads of music, movies, games or additional software products to enhance their devices. Giving a device a human name or putting an outer skin covering on a device are ways of assigning emotions and personality traits that are anthropomorphic
(Norman, Design Future 47). It embodies the user’s experience with a device and in turn the user can become emotionally tied to their artefact.
Another device was soon to enter the consumer market; the iPad was finally launched in
January 2010, filling what Steve Jobs had termed a void between the iPhone and the laptop
59
(Isaacson 495). This device could browse the web, email, view photos, video, music, games
and e-books (electronic books). It could make phone calls, albeit only through a Skype
application accessing the Internet. Skype was created in 2003 and is a voice over Internet
protocol (VOIP) service that allows users to communicate by voice video and instant
messaging. It does not rely on traditional telephone networks but can call them.
The iPad was a “post-PC” (Jobs, "Apple Launch"). As soon as the iPad was released, the
demand was phenomenal, with “one million iPads [being sold] in 28 days” in the United
States (Agence France-Presse, "Apple sells").
2.6. Conclusion
This chapter has discussed science and technology studies and how they can be used as a
framework in order to examine the mobile device. The three most discussed components of
STS: “interpretative flexibility”; “relevant social groups” and “closure”, have been examined to illustrate the relevance of this framework to the object of study. When considering the concept of STS it is important to recognise that it has a number of strands such as ANT and
SCOT that also focus on society and culture.
Beyond this ontology, the chapter has introduced the focus of this study, the mobile device, and has charted the mobile devices’ development through time.
The chapter has also highlighted that mobile development cannot simply be understood as a technological narrative, and that more ineffable human factors play a big role in its development and the consumption of the device.
These human factors found in the technological narrative illustrate that the “biography” of the mobile device can be read not only from its technology but also from its design and culture. It infers that the mobile device is not only the making of a utilitarian or aesthetically pleasing
60
physical object, but also introduces its cultural upbringing. Apple’s success has stemmed from their emphasis on interactive design and also a particular element known as life styling.
The chapter has described how “technology married with liberal arts, married with humanities” (Jobs, "Next Insanely") can create immensely successful products. By examining technologies in a broader social context and it relationship with STS’s the chapter has been in line with a social shaping approach.
With the object of study now defined, the following chapter will examine how the mobile device will be studied, specifically focusing on ritual and performance as a way to interpret the relationship between technology and society. It will do this by first looking at the work of
James Carey and Erving Goffman.
61
3. Ritual, performance and technology
3.1. Overview
The previous chapter defined the object of study, the mobile device, and situated it in an historical and socioeconomic context. This chapter builds upon this general approach to the study of society and technology by introducing a ritual-based understanding of the role of technology.
A ritual view allows for a wider understanding of the mobile device and sees it as more than a device used for the transmission of information. The framework will make sense of ritual- like activities, for example everyday activities such as constantly checking the device for messages or browsing in a shop to look at devices with no intention of buying one, which would not make sense from a purely transmission-based perspective. It is therefore a perspective that links the social with the technological.
As discussed in the previous chapter, the development of mobile devices can be read as both a technological narrative and a social narrative. In particular, the evolution of the Apple suite of devices strongly suggested that human factors, as much as technological ones, play a vital role in technological evolution. The approach taken in this chapter is to conceptualise those social elements of mobile devices as a kind of ritual, an approach that has previously been used by other scholars to conceptualise the nature of human social relations. In this approach, the mobile device becomes an object that participates in a range of ritual-like behaviours that play an important role in the use and design of mobile devices.
63
In order to establish the relevance of ritual to the study of mobile devices, this chapter
reviews two important approaches to studying culture and technology through the lens of
ritual: Carey’s notion of communication as ritual and Goffman’s notion of performance and
ritual.
This chapter begins a broad discussion of ritual and the way it has been examined by
different disciplines. Following this, the chapter examines two concepts of ritual and ritual-
like activities. The first draws upon James Carey’s use of ritual as a way to understand
communication as a cultural activity rather than from a transmission perspective. The second
approach draws on work by Collins and Goffman and focuses on the application of notions of
ritual and performance to understand and explain society and culture.
The final part of this chapter brings together Carey, Collins and Goffman’s work into a
framework called the theatre of design. The theatre of design is presented as a conceptual
framework for studying ideas of ritual and ritual-like activities within the context of technology studies. The theatre of design provides a metaphor, which will be utilised in the following chapters when examining the role of ritual in the design of the mobile telephone.
3.2. Ritual
It may not be immediately clear that a concept such as ritual, which for some may evoke
images of religious or pagan rites, has any relevance to the study of a thoroughly
technological and secular technology like the mobile telephone. However, some scholars
such as James Carey and Erving Goffman have used ritual as a way to study society and
communication. In the context of their work, extending ritual to the study of mobile devices
and their design has potential merit. A starting point into this approach, then, is to briefly
consider what ritual is, and then to move into a more nuanced understanding of the term.
64
Ritual is an elusive term that has been defined in diverse ways. Its definition is clouded by
the multitude of actions that it performs. It is a “slippery concept” in that many activities are
seen as rituals and “many perspectives of analysis compete, contradict and inform one
another” (Hillis 47).
Many eminent scholars have theorised ritual and, as Hillis points out “one is struck by the on-
going, evolving set of disputes among researchers, often anthropologists, over the definitions,
meanings, and purported utilities of the idea of ritual” (47). A danger for any researcher in
this field is the potential of seeing ritual in almost everything. That is, reducing everything
down to one bland level where rituals explain everything and therefore explain nothing of
interest. Collins addresses this danger by turning the proposition around and instead uses
ritual to show aspects of human action and sharing that would occur in a wide range of
situations. Like Collins, this researcher will attempt not to put everything on one level
(Collins 15).
From an anthropologist’s perspective, ritual is largely dealt with by looking at ceremony and
its connections to religion and, to a lesser degree, the magical. Durkheim (The Elementary
Forms of Religious Life), Weber (The Sociology of Religion) and Goffman (Interaction
Ritual) have all posited notions of the processes of ceremony. Indeed, ritual and ceremony have been the primary focus of attention for anthropologists (along with language, art and social organisation) for a considerable length of time.
The gamut of theories taking a slice of the ritual “action” has been considerable, and there is a large unresolved debate on the meaning of ritual. Durkheim regards “totemism” as the origin of religion (The Elementary Forms of Religious Life 112–119), Turner sees ritual as being liminal performances (Turner 96), Grimes argues that ritual is a mediating process (87),
Bell proposes that ritualisation is always strategic (Constructing Ritual 28) and Goffman
65
argues that the self is a ceremonial thing (sacred object) that needs ritual care (Interaction
Ritual: Deference and Demeanour 269–279).
Rites and ritual, according to sociologist Emile Durkheim, come in two varieties of dividing
religious beliefs: the “sacred and the profane” (The Elementary Forms of Religious Life 37).
The sacred refers to enacting these beliefs by communicating or praying to gods or spirits.
According to Schechner, these supernatural forces can be symbolized by other supernatural beings or the natural world itself (55). Durkheim suggests that the sacred is an ideal that transcends everyday existence and therefore “anything can be sacred” (37). The profane is also a highly charged emotional state concerning itself with only the individual, which is why it is difficult to separate the religious belief of ritual into two camps. However, Durkheim accounts for the profane as particular practices and objects that can be regarded as being an experienced routine or ordinary occurrence and carries an everyday attitude and familiarity about them (38). It could be an everyday action that humans do, such as driving a car or going to work.
The categories mentioned are characteristic of religious thought for Durkheim where beliefs, myths, dogmas and legends are either representations or systems of virtue. The profane allows a better fit with the scope of this thesis.
The theories and the attached debate range across many disciplines. For instance, the field of sociology, which is a broad discipline involving many aspects within the study of society, has looked to both anthropologist Victor Turner and to sociologist Erving Goffman for their definitions of ritual.
Demonstrating the range of theorizing within this field, Goffman and Turner have approached their work from different angles, Goffman uses social interaction and dramaturgical analysis while Turner sees ritual as a social drama (Ritual Process 187), where
66
rituals are activities in a sequence that restore irregular social norms. Nevertheless, both have
utilised drama to underpin their approach. This could be seen as a commonality to the
approach of ritual or a manoeuvre to achieve a desired outcome.
For many commentators who have written about ritual, there is a desire to avoid manipulating
ritual’s role because it can be used to explain away many things. Bell agrees that it [ritual]
“will not stay neutral”; that is that it keeps changing when taken out of context (Ritual
Theory, Ritual Practice 14). At the very least, researchers in this field have to remain vigilant
with regards to the context of the ritual they are studying. In the context of this thesis, I am
interested in the ways that mobile devices can be thought of as artefacts that are designed to be used within a communication environment that can be seen (following Carey’s conceptualisation of communication, discussed below) as being like a ritual (“ritual-like”), in
which “reality is produced, maintained, repaired, and transformed” (Carey 24).
Elizabeth Bell notes that in this model of communication, a communion is taking place,
representing “shared beliefs” that are engaged in ritual-like concepts of “talk, identities,
bodies, relationships, communities, cultures and technologies and performances” (8). The
ritual view of communication therefore incorporates not only the act of communication, but
the artefacts and behaviours that accompany it.
3.2.1. A Secular Approach to Ritual
In proposing ritual and performance as a conceptual model for interpreting the relationship
between technology and society, the ritual view of communication describes a way to explain
ritual-like activities with the mobile device. Framing the concept of ritual by a secular
approach excludes the religious aspects known as the sacred. The secular approach will be
outlined through this section starting with the work of communication theorist James Carey.
67
Carey’s 1975 essay A Cultural Approach to Communication put an emphasis on
understanding communication as a “ritual”, defined as “sacred ceremony that draws persons together in fellowship and commonality”, and is performed through oration and required the actor to be present to do so (15). But Carey admits that the word sacred and ritual though
“shorn of its explicitly religious origin” never completely escaped the connotations of its metaphoric root (15). For Carey it is used to highlight the role in the construction and maintenance of an ordered and meaningful cultural world.
Carey argued that an alternate and more conventional model of communication is the
“transmission model” that stresses “a process whereby messages are transmitted and distributed in space for the control of distance and people” (15). Telegraphy, telephone calls, television, the Internet, and the processing of digital information by mobile devices, all demonstrate a communication strategy of extending messages across geographical space.
Carey argued that the cultural aspects of communication were absent in the transmission view of communication, displaying a pervasive ignorance of the space between the “senders” and
“receivers” and the socio-cultural climate as a whole. Hillis explains Carey’s preference for the ritual over the transmissive as being an attempt to realign communication under cultural analysis and therefore giving a greater emphasis to its history (61).
What has become more apparent is that it is difficult to separate the two models, as both are interdependent on each other. For example, a mobile device both transmits messages through time and space, and allows the user to participate in communal activities and ceremonies.
These are the types of communication that Carey suggests are ritual communications since they confirm the invention, maintenance, and on-going repair and renewal of social relations.
Yet Carey’s use of ritual is confounded somewhat depending on the disciplinary lens one wishes to view the idea of ritual through; it can be seen under media, communication, cultural
68
studies or anthropology, and each of these disciplines has its own understanding of the notion of ritual. Even within Carey’s communication model, there are some questions as to what the notion of ritual actually means. For example, Ronald Grimes argues that Carey was unclear whether ritual is an activity in its own right or merely a point of view taken in studying something else (8).
The social role of ritual needs to be defined: for example, Durkheim’s ritual was seen as purely religious activity: either sacred or profane. Or, as Turner questions, is ritual a temporary way of dissolving social hierarchies, remaking personal identity and engendering cultural creativity (Grimes 12)? Approaches such as Durkheim’s idea of ritual as creating social cohesion are too reductionist within the scope of this thesis to be entirely useful. It is important to find a meaning for ritual that is neither too specific (as, say, only pertaining to particular religions) nor too general (as pertaining to any form of communication that binds social ties).
The sacred ritual is based on a set of religious belief systems involving a supernatural force, whether emanating from God or Nature. The secular ritual, such as a football match like the
World Cup, or a state ceremony, does not have any specific religious associations. However, the edges delineating the two can blend together and an event can be both secular and religious. A wedding is such a case where the happy couple may have prayers and religious rites, but then will “cut the cake” and “throw the bridal bouquet” which exemplify the secular type of ritual (Schechner 53). Indeed there is no compelling reason why rituals need to be religious and equally no reason why a ritual cannot be an individual public or private act
(Hillis 49).
Communication studies scholar Eric Rothenbuhler has given a useful general definition of ritual as something that has a voluntary performance and a symbolic effect through a
69
patterned behaviour (27). The Oxford dictionary defines the word as a “series of actions
performed according to a prescribed order” and takes the term further as “a series of actions or type of behaviour regularly followed by someone”. Certainly the adjectival form of the word connotes an action arising from convention or habit. The defining features of ritual seem to be order, actions, pattern, behaviour, symbolic effect, performance and ceremony.
Rituals reflect a group identity, and to facilitate this identity there are ritual artefacts, ritual scripts, ritual performance role(s) and ritual audiences (see Rook, Ritual Dimension of
Consumer Behavior). Rituals are also often defined as a “sequence of action[s]”, which are socially recognised (Grimes 163).
Goffman suggested that there is a kind of activity that can be termed as an, “interaction ritual”. These ritual-like behaviours lack the social recognition that would earn them the recognition as a formal rite. But Grimes calls this kind of activity “ritualization”, which occurs when an activity that is not normally viewed as a rite is treated as one (163). Some critics believe it to be important to draw a distinction between “ritualization” and a “ritual- like” activity (see Bell. Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions 173) and in this thesis, the term ritual-like will be used throughout.
Rappaport claims that there are three aspects of rituals: that they are composed of conventional, stereotyped movements or posture, that they are performed regularly kept to time or circumstance, and they have affective or emotional value (62).
The importance of value to this formulation is worth deeper consideration. Emotional Value is a notion that was also noted in Goffman’s work, for instance, in his acknowledgment of rituals of self-respect as a way of “saving face” or “giving face” (Interaction Ritual 9).
Building on Durkheim’s model of ritual, Goffman’s paradigms of rituals are of everyday
70
interaction celebrating the self. As Goffman says, “For the actor, others may come to be seen
as sacred objects” (Goffman 103).
The assertion that all human rituals are communicative and are ways of sharing and offering
communion is remarkably similar to Carey’s notion of communication as a ritual, which will
be discussed in the following section. The concept is not radical and many including
Goffman have adopted a similar stance (Rappaport 63). This would suggest that there is a
long history of scholarship of ritual that has come about because ritual is a universal
phenomenon present in our daily lives, within our culture and perhaps even our biology
(Ritual : Perspectives and Dimensions 254). Bell argues that there is no one unified definition
of ritual throughout history, and although this is certainly true, this does mean it is difficult to
give a conclusive definition of the concept. Bell’s definition describes ritual as the values in society of rebirth or death. It can also be the process of initiation of an individual into a community allowing the person to establish his or her own identity in the community (such as adulthood). But ritual can also mean a social transformation by which one takes on symbolic values of the real world. She suggests that all these formulations are tools that help to analyse the activities in ritual (89).
There are two things that stand out from Bell’s definition. First, there is similarity to Carey’s ritual discussed earlier in this chapter in which, “reality is produced, maintained, repaired, and transformed” (Carey 24) and to Bell’s rebirth, establishing of identity and social transformations.
Secondly, Bells’ notion of ritual encompasses all, though it is the use of the word “tools” that stands out. Ritual seen as a tool can be either “an invention to fit into historical and cultural paradigms” (267) or a term that enables a useful way to bridge between concepts and activities.
71
The idea of bridging concepts can be seen when examining communication as transmission shadowed by ritual and “traditional rituals set in situated places [that] have been adapted to online settings, in “virtual worlds” (Hillis 2). Hillis refashions the meaning of the word ritual from the way it was used in Carey’s work and uses it like a tool. As Grimes points out, when referring to ritual and media, we sometimes enthusiastically equate rather than fearfully segregate. This can also be applied to the possible oversimplification of what we attribute to ritual concepts by layering multiple theoretical propositions on top of it.
In Online A Lot of the Time, Hillis challenges the concept of ritual by taking it into the realm of technology and the Internet, by using Carey’s transmission and ritual theory of communication as a starting point. Carey’s notion of ritual being a communion allows Hillis the scope to argue that transmission on the Internet is enacted under the umbrella of ritual.
The nature of the Internet means that it is inevitable that the spatial separation of users can be bridged, at least theoretically.
3.3. Carey, Ritual and Communication
Canadian scholar James Carey articulated his notion of ritual and its role in communication and culture in the late 1980s. Carey’s perspective is useful here because although he is talking about communication in general, rather than digital communication specifically, his characterisation of communication can also be applied to the role of the mobile device as ritual object.
As noted above, the term ritual is heavily laden with meaning both in popular culture
(inviting images of mystery, religious, spiritual, communion and sacrifice) and in the academic literature (in particular, of course, within the field of anthropology). It is no wonder
72
that with so many interpretations, there exists an equal amount of debate and definitions, and like the rites themselves, definitions of ritual have a history (Grimes 11).
Carey looked deeply into the act of communication as it is embodied within the field of culture. He argued for two views of communication: a ritual view, in which communication was primarily about sustaining and establishing human relationships; and, the transmission view, in which communication is understood as a way to extend control over space (15–16).
This was not a straightforward problem for Carey. For him, the consequence of applying both views to a situation would result in quite distinct consequences and are therefore derived from quite different problems. The result is that the basic question offered by one tradition doesn’t connect with the basic question offered by the other (34). Instead, Carey creates a common field or stage of play rather than disembodying communication and ritual into self- reflexive specialisations with little meaning. For Carey, this stage is called culture. The interpretations of what is seen are many but an order and correlation have been created between “on the one hand life, existence, experience and behaviour and, on the other hand, attempts to find the meaning and significance in this experience and behaviour” (34).
3.3.1. Communication as Ritual
The discussion about communication as ritual was presented in Carey’s influential text
Communication as Culture (1989) which claims that if we are to fully comprehend the role and function of human communication, a model of communication as ritual needs to be created in order to complement a more commonly held understanding of communication as the transmission of information across space. The model of communication as transmission imagined that communicative transmissions were signals that were sent or transmitted over distance, in a way similar to the way goods are transported geographically from one place to
73
another, but in this case the goods were messages. (Carey 12) According to Carey, the view
of communication as transmission had become highly popular within the American scholarly
tradition (15).
The transmission model can be seen in technology, as the user writes a short message into
their mobile device and by doing so creates a series of symbols consisting of electronic bits in
the device that is called code. This code is then transmitted to another device, from sender to
receiver and by mutual agreement of the code it is then recoded back into a message. The
sender and the receiver must agree on what the symbols represent so that they can be
understood and therefore decoded. These agreements are called protocols. This technical
view of communication, outlined famously by Shannon and Weaver in The Mathematical
theory of Communication 17) is of immense importance to network engineers, who need to
understand the way that signals are physically transmitted.
However, Carey argued that beyond the technical aspects of communication, if
communication was to be considered from the sociological rather than a mathematical
perspective, it was in fact more like a ritual process. He also argued that this ritual view of
communication was far older than the transmission view (Carey 15).
Communication-as-ritual is linked to concepts such as “sharing”, “association”, “fellowship” and “commonality” creating a sense of communion. It is not directed at transporting messages across time and space, as is the case in the transmission view, but is rather a sacred ceremony, concerned with “the maintenance of society in time” (Carey 33).
Carey argues that many communication acts are rituals and demonstrates this through the example of a reading the newspaper. He says:
74
Reading a newspaper [is] less as sending or gaining information and more as
attending a mass, a situation in which nothing new is learned but in which a particular
view of the world is portrayed and confirmed. News reading and writing is a ritual act
and moreover a dramatic one.
We recognise, as with religious rituals, that news changes little and yet is intrinsically
satisfying; it performs few functions yet is habitually consumed … A ritual view does
not exclude the processes of information transmission or attitude change. It merely
contends that one cannot understand these processes aright except they are cast within
an essentially ritualistic view of communication and social order. (Carey 17)
For Carey, transmission and ritual models co-exist in order to service meaning: transmission with its preoccupation with messages being sent across space, and ritual with its concern of managing and maintaining societies through time.
Rituals are also integral to daily life, as much today in our technological, always-on societies as they were in earlier societies. Extending Carey’s framework and proposing a deeper understanding of the ritual-like processes that exist beyond the religious is valuable and could lead researchers to what was, according to Foucault and Melican, a ritual value of technology which permits a cultural appreciation of communication technologies like mobile devices:
“studying the most archetypal examples of communication rituals and the ways that ICTS become involved, we are offered a glimpse into the intersection of technology and cultural values at the height of their expressions” (Foucault and Melican 1).
Importantly for this thesis, the ritual view permits a wider understanding of the role of technology that extends beyond its immediate use as a device for transmission of information. For example, within the ritual framework, certain activities which make little sense from a transmission perspective can begin to make sense, such as carrying a mobile
75
device that doesn’t have a service plan, or a mobile device that never gets turned on, or taking
digital photos that are never looked at, or going to the Apple or Sony shop to browse mobile devices that are then not purchased.
In such events, information is clearly not transmitted in a conventional sense, but rituals are enacted. An academic from Bucharest, Andrei Dumitrescu, at a conference on manufacturing systems in 2004, referred to these kinds of interactions using a product in ways other than its basic aim, calling them “Technological Ritual” (Dumitrescu). This ritual was centred for the most part on identity, status and satisfaction of the user. However, it was also a way that a product can be used to attain a level of psychological satisfaction at both a perceptual and central level for the user. The importance of the concept was that technological ritual objects are used more often than other objects and the identity of the consumer would be more exposed to the manufacturers brand and identity.
Ritual is seen here as an equally important aspect of communication and should play a role in mobile device design and evaluation. Extending the argument by Foucault and Melican, ritual and communication should be examined in combination with the meaning that technology plays within society, the meaning and function encompassed in the device itself (such as the functionality of the device intended or otherwise by the designer) and the design ritual which may be “communicated” to and through the device by the designer.
Examining such ritual-like activities will reveal the shaping and maintaining of society because, as Carey argues, the value of communication in rituals is not the transmission of information, but rather the reification of social and personal roles.
76
3.3.2. Carey, Ritual and Technology
Importantly for this thesis, Carey saw technology as playing a key role in his ritual model of
communication. In an interview with Jonathan Game, Carey discussed his perspective on the
relations between culture and technology:
Technology is also a central character and actor in our social drama, an end as well as
a means. In fact, technology plays the role of “trickster” in American Culture: At each
turn of the historical cycle it appears centre stage, in a different guise, promising
something totally new. While tricksters are usually human they also can be, in
traditional societies, animals or have animal companions. In our environment,
sheltered as it is from the world of nature, technologies can appear as tricksters or
companions of tricksters in the stories and rituals we tell ourselves about ourselves
(Game 118).
According to Carey, technology is something that is embedded in art, ritual, common sense, religion and other human practices. Carey’s argument is that throughout history, technology has been slowly stripped of its context and has become a thing in itself that we treat as “an autonomous force” that is outside human control (Game 3).
Here Carey argues that technology plays an important role in communication and social development. Carey’s view of the ritual is extended when technology becomes embedded in the consumerist ritual referred to in section 4.4. The section explored the sociocultural dynamic by looking at the ritual script, ritual audience, ritual performance and the ritual artefact. However, Carey is also careful not to fall into the trap of technological determinism.
Raymond Williams succinctly defines the technological determinist fallacy in his critique of
McLuhan’s tendency toward technological determinism:
77
New technologies are discovered, by an essentially internal process of research and
development, which then sets the conditions for social change and progress. Progress,
in particular, is the history of these inventions, which “created the modern world”.
The effects of the technologies, whether direct or indirect, foreseen or unforeseen, are
as it were the rest of history (Raymond Williams 5).
Williams argues that if Marshal McLuhan’s technologically determinist stand sees the
medium as being the message then all other causes apart from the medium – that is that “all
that men ordinarily see as history” are reduced to mere “effects” of technology (Williams and
Williams, Television 126–127). In this case, technology effects and causes societal change
and so, as Rosalind Williams argues in her work The Political Feminist Dimensions of
Technological Determinism, “technology drives history” (218).
But it is the fluidity of McLuhan’s use of terms like “medium” and “technology” that symbolize the conflations and social projections (Jones 423) that he uses to justify his argument, whereas Williams describes technology merely as socially shaped cultural forms.
The use of conflated concepts is exemplified in White’s technological determinist argument about the stirrup and feudalism, in which the claim is made that the evolution of European feudal society is caused by the stirrup that led to a revolution in fighting methods. The weakness of the argument highlighted by Sawyer and Hilton (1963) is that the introduction of technology (the stirrup) was not an adequate explanation for any changes in the European feudal society.
However, Carey, like Williams, does not discount the role of technology in the construction of culture, even if it is not the strongly deterministic force associated with technological determinism. Although humans create machines, they do not have complete control over the ramifications of those machines, and hence there are often problems between these scientific
78
and technological innovations and society (Game 4). In other words, the relationship between
society and technology is not a simple causal relationship. This relationship was seen earlier
in chapter two when examining the Sony Walkman as a cultural object and the evolution of
the Apple iPhone.
Carey’s work is valuable in that it shows us how technology and cultural practices are
meshed together (Crowley 104). But it also makes a valuable statement about ritual and the
association to cultural practices such as the consumer rituals that will be examined later in section 4.4. Carey’s concept of “ritual communication” demonstrates a path of study in which communication is seen as a ritualistic behaviour geared towards maintaining society across time and space. It also works as an invitation to “flesh out” the ritualistic nature of such communications.
To do this requires a way to centre ritual within a framework that is divided between consumption and production. Earlier it was seen that sociologists turned to Goffman and
Turner for their approach to ritual-like activities and drama was seen as a commonality within their work. The next section will discuss Goffman’s view of performance and drama in a way to bring the relationships between technology and society together.
3.4. Goffman, Ritual and Performance
So far we have looked at ritual as a broad concept, discussed the sacred and profane and
looked at Carey’s ritual communication model as an alternative to the mere transmission of
information. But to draw the threads of the mobile device and society together within a ritual
framework requires a discussion of a close relative of ritual that was discussed earlier in this
chapter: drama and performance.
79
Erving Goffman was one of the most influential sociologists of the mid twentieth century. He
approached social life as a theatre where behaviours and their actions and strategies are
planned or “rehearsed” and then presented, with each of us being “actors” performing to and for each other and ourselves (Schechner 209; Goffman, The Presentation of Self in Everyday
Life 33). Drama was used as a metaphor to discuss the many faces and behaviours that people convey to others. His extraction of a constructive discourse relies on his observation of details, and his linking them to artefacts and concepts from the theatre world, such as costume, props, gestures, mannerisms, set, backstage and front stage.
However, Goffman had no repeatable methodology. His views were merely what he observed and all of his examples exclusively supported his position. It could be argued that his observations were myopic, without methodological rigour, and hence simply reflected the world according to Goffman (Manning 18; Gouldner 33). That being said, his work is a valuable guide to understanding the existence and the process of social interaction between actors in everyday life. Goffman’s study is not systematic, and one must trust that his accounts are factual, even though they are, at times, written like a fiction. For example:
I have been told by Shetlanders that their grandfathers used to refrain from improving
the appearance of the cottage lest the laird take such improvements as a sign that
increased rents could be extracted from them (The Presentation of Self in Everyday
Life 39).
Despite there being some concerns with the rigour of Goffman’s work, it is appropriate when analysing the concept of ritual and performance within technology and design, because it demonstrates the idea that everyday activities are performative social rituals. At times, it bears a similarity to the theoretical concerns of the Durkheimian tradition. Take for instance
Goffman’s application of the social ritual to everyday activities and the influence that these
80
face to face interactions have on “social solidarity” (Ling, New Tech New Ties 58) and group
interactions. The study of social cohesion is one such aspect that shares a commonality as well as “rituals themselves which demonstrates that cohesion” (Ling, New Tech New Ties
59).
Goffman suggests that the self is a social product called the “socialised self” (The
Presentation of Self in Everyday Life 56). He uses theatrical metaphors whereby the self is understood as a performer (252), and sees a tension between self, character, performer, social conditioning and cultural circumstances (Goffman Reader, xiviii). Carey and Goffman’s view of the social value of communication are quite similar. For Carey, communication is a ritual activity through which societies are created, transformed and maintained (Gitelman 7), and for Goffman, the performance of social life can be seen as dramas, rituals and games.
Goffman was specific in his use of interaction order, confining it to face-to face communication and claiming he was not a symbolic interactionist. Symbolic interactionists are influenced by the perspective that people act towards things based on the meaning those things have for them; and it is derived from social interaction and modified by interpretation.
This theory was most famously proposed by John Dewey, who claimed that people are best understood in relation to their environment (Dewey and Bentley 185).
In efforts to move away from this territory, Goffman defines the “social situation” (rather than the individual) as the unit of study of interaction. This concept is particularly useful in the study of mobile technology, because of its nature of creating and making routine the creations of networks (Katz, Handbook of Mobile 174). In the case of the mobile telephone, it can be seen when students are texting in a class. The student is engaged in a routine that is a social situation and will need to finish the message though still listening to a teacher in a co- present social situation. There is a dual situation in process and network. Goffman discussed
81
this particular process in Relations in Public (72). The idea of the performance of
“interpersonal rituals” like gestures, mannerisms and vocal expression to describe a social situation that is engaged with both public and private presentation of the self is valuable and seen where mobile devices bring the private into the public, and the public into the private.
3.4.1. Goffman’s Ritual
Goffman is a key thinker for those interested in a dramaturgical perspective of behaviour
within the domain of sociology. His arguments pertain to a multitude of disciplines that have
a great interest in understanding ritual, such as performance studies, sociology, anthropology,
cultural studies and social psychology. Each of these disciplines has a number of arguments
that could pertain to the rituals that I will examine here. However, for the most part, I will use
a dramaturgical perspective as was used in Goffman’s work when looking at mobile devices
and their relationship to ritual-like practice. The use of a dramaturgical device for looking at
humans is not new: Brenda Laurel’s adventurous yet constructive study into human and
computer interaction Computers as Theatre was one such case. Laurel looked at human users
and their interaction with the interface of a device as an Aristotelian dramatic concept, where
action is imitative process and it (action) consists of a narrative journey with a beginning,
middle and end. The point for Laurel was to determine that drama is an “enactment” and in
relation to the interaction of a device with a human, these can be seen as comprising a
number of scenes that are acted out. According to Laurel it is observed as a “dramatic
technique for orchestrating human response” (93).
Goffman’s frame analysis can prove to be very effective when discussing the relationship
between the interface and the user. Theoretically it is a schematic that formalises particular
ways that we encode and decode information into a cognitive value (Drucker 6). But it is also
helpful in discussing the differences between a graphical interface that organises visual
82
information and the activity of reading, for instance text in an application. The analysis is useful in determining a structuralist view of frames and relates them to a textual analysis.
Structuralism emphasises things that are studied as no more than the sum of their parts. The whole is a system of elements that are interconnected and the structure determines their position. Structuralists believe that every system has a structure and the laws of structure involve co –existence and do not change. Simply it is a method “that examines phenomena as the outward expression of their inner invisible structures” (Assiter 275). Claude Levi Strauss for example, emphasises the elements in structural linguistics. For mobile devices, the meaning that is being conveyed by mobile device buttons and their placement with icons on a home page menu is then different when the user opens an application and is faced with another set of frames.
Frame analysis is also useful when discussing connections between the ritual and communication and can be seen in Carey’s work through his idea that ritual is embedded in a wider context. In the case of mobile devices, design frames technology, which is in turn framed by the cultural. At a micro level, frames can allow ritualised action to be made distinct from repetitious behaviour or habit.
One of Goffman’s major arguments is that his theories should only be applied to “total institutions”. According to Goffman, these are organisations “where all parts of the life of individuals under the institution are subordinate to and dependent upon the authorities of the organisation” (Erving Goffman, The Goffman Reader 55–57). But there has been subsequent critical discourse in favour of using his frameworks to look at alternative institutions such as secret societies, or ones with “rites of passage”(Scott 213 -231).
It could be argued that institutions such as Sony or Apple also have their formal social order and ritualised behaviour. There are, in fact, marked similarities between the behaviours of
83
designers in these institutions and a secret society. One could even argue that these
companies are a kind of modern-day secular temple that suggest particular forms of ritual- like behaviour; a point which I will return to in the next chapter.
Goffman’s work has been applied by many researchers in the field of mediated communication (see Ling, New Tech New Ties; Meyrowitz, No Sense of Place; Pinch, The
Invisible Technologies of Goffman’s Sociology). The irony is that Goffman explicitly restricted himself to face-to-face interactions in his studies (Rettie 421), and carefully excluded mediated contact from his analysis. For Goffman, co-presence is a prerequisite for the creation of a situation; he infers that mediated interactions do not constitute a proper situation (424).
Nevertheless, there have been a number of claims by subsequent scholars when it comes to the differentiation between mediated and face-to-face interaction for sociological analysis.
Meyrowitz extended Goffman’s theory to mediated contexts, arguing that because physical boundaries are irrelevant in mediated communication, situations should be defined as
“information systems” or “patterns of access to information” (37). Ling proposed that if
Goffman writes about ceremonial interaction such as “gifts, greeting cards and salutatory telegrams and telephones calls” that are not physically co-present, (not face to face communication) the Goffmanian approach can be used to acknowledge the role of mediated communication in affirming relationships (Ling, New Tech New Ties 68). Ling applies
Goffman’s concept of “front stage” to claim that mobile phone calls create a “parallel front stage” (Ling, “One Can Talk About Common Manners” 11). Steve Woolgar also examines the front stage, back stage notion in relationship to the debate that mobile phones have changed the “bases of social action” (“Mobile Back to Front” 32).
84
In other words, Goffman’s theoretical framework is flexible, and can be extended to explain
new forms of sociability and acknowledge the dominance of different forms of technology.
Ritual-like activities and communication are evolving, and if Durkheim could suggest that his
theories of ritual pertaining to the religious can also be extended to secular life, then
Goffman’s description of ritual as a focussed interaction at a micro level (Summers-Effler
136) can also be extended to other realms. Goffman’s research can effectively be extended to
create something new, as demonstrated by Collins in his development of the concept of the
interaction ritual.
3.4.2. Collins and interaction ritual chains
Collins embraces both Goffman and Durkheim in his theoretical stance, though there is a
stronger connection in his work to Durkheim. Much of Collins’ work relies on secondary
sources or archival material illustrative of Durkheim’s methods and approach. The similarity
of Collins’ work to Goffman’s work however stems from his argument that face-to-face
interaction is the foundation of social life.
Focusing on the ritual in communication, Collins is emphatic that for a ritual to take place,
there must be two or more people in the physical presence of each other, a mutual awareness
shared by the participants and a common focus of attention whether it is on the group itself,
an activity, or a particular symbol and a common emotional mood, although this mood can
change or grow during the ritual itself (Collins 49–50).
A particular aspect of Collins’ list of conditions is intriguing, that is, that two or more people
must be in the physical presence of each other. Contrary to this assertion, in Online a Lot of
the Time, Hillis describes “self determination” as a contract with oneself, as a part of the tradition of the West, and believes that it too can be ritualised as a way of foregrounding
85
one’s place amongst the larger order of individuals. In other words, there is no reason that a
communion with oneself is not possible and therefore the concept of ritual can be extended to
include self-ritualised moments.
Further to this point is the question of ritualised moments involving an artefact as a common
focus of attention. If there is a mutual awareness of this focus, then ritualised moments can
include artefact interactivity. If, according to Collins, the motive for a mutual focus is
entrainment (where one falls into a shared rhythm like a new year celebration when people
make noises that continue to build off the excitement of the event generated by other people)
(Collins 52), then a condition in which artefacts interact can pre-exist.
Collins focuses on a situation, rather than an artefact. However, if we look through the lens of performance theory, we can note that an individual can interact and respond to a situation, creating and involving an action or involving a designed artefact. Ling, for example believes
that a mobile device can “extend the ritual reach of society beyond co-presence” (New Tech
New Ties 157). However, Collins firmly believes that there must be co-presence of the persons participating in the ritual interaction for the ritual to exist.
Collins’ highlighting of interactions and relationships is useful in this thesis in two ways.
Firstly, as discussed in chapter two, for STS an emphasis on interpretative flexibility of technology has allowed theoretical perspectives to be applied to fixed entities such as technology. This body of literature underscores that technical evolution and technological production is based on the historical and the social. Therefore, it cannot be separated from technology as it is socially constructed. Interpretative flexibility is valuable as it emphasises the social contributions that gave rise to a technology. Consequentially, it is a useful tool to describe the ways that technology has changed and to understand the variations of its use.
86
Secondly, Collins’ focus on the situation means that an actor’s relationship and interaction
with the artefact is acknowledged.
There is a propensity in ritual theory to argue that, “ritual interaction generates the emotions
that are at the basis of social life” (Summers-Effler 136). Particularly important is
Durkheim’s position that society is not based on the individual but rather that symbols are
formed in social interaction that are then used by individuals. Thus, the properties afforded to
the self are attributed to interaction. Collins’ work is a bridge between both Durkheim’s and
Goffman’s work, with the latter believing the self to be a product rather than a cause of a
situation.
It is particularly interesting to note, that the interaction ritual can be seen as a kind of social action that can manipulate cultural meaning. Cultural theorists soon turned to the idea that these human relations and identities can be defined in relation to consumption. Mary Douglas and Baron Isherwood in The World of Goods, described this by determining that consumer goods are in a ritual process. This action is seen as consumption rituals and this will be discussed further in section 4.4.
3.4.3. The Performative Turn
According to Bell, the mid 1970s saw the emergence of a “performance approach” to the study of the ritual (Ritual : Perspectives and Dimensions 73). For example Victor Turner’s conception of “social drama” and Goffman’s ideas of social interaction have both used concepts of ritual and performance. This approach brings to the fore an appreciation of the symbolic activities of dance, music, drama and ritual. However, cultural researchers suggest metaphors of drama and performances are useful in order to embody and revalue social attitudes and ideals (Williams, Television, Technology and Cultural Form; Turner, Ritual
87
Process; Goffman, Presentation of Self; McKenzie, Perform or Else; Brisset and Edgley, Life as Theatre). In other words, such a theorisation can posit how ritual enables people to change, transition, shape and reshape cultural beliefs and ideals.
Bell affirms that a performative turn can highlight the idea that ritual is emotive, physical, sensual, and can even emphasise the creativity inherent in ritual, as “ritual does not mould people; people fashion rituals that mould their world” (73). On the other hand, James W.
Fernandez has organised ritual action through the model of “performative metaphors” using linguistic theories (Fernandez 53) . For him, ritual is a way of applying metaphors to people’s sense of their situation in a way that moves them emotionally and creates religious experiences or empowerment. There are a number of central approaches to ritual through a performance; namely, that it is an event that changes people’s perceptions and understanding as well as an appreciation of the physical and the sensual aspects of kinaesthesia or synaesthesia.
In the instance of kinaesthesia, body movement causes sensations in the mind of the observer or performer, and for Anna Halprin (an American dancer and choreographer) it is a way that dance rituals could be expressive and act as therapy (Schechner 56). The whirling dervishes of the Mevlevi ritual dance are an example of such kinaesthetic expression, which unites the mind, the heart and the body by activating life by turning and spinning (Schechner 84).
Synaesthesia is related to ritual through a total sensory experience. The combining of the rhythms of music and visual techniques can make imagery more vivid, creating an effect and experience (Fachner and Rittner 242).
Ronald Grimes challenges common viewpoints by arguing that rituals can happen at any time or in any place. He discusses relationships with media or performance with an overarching eclecticism and believes that performance-oriented theories of ritual are as good a place to
88
start as any (13). Agreeing with Hillis’ view that “ritual(s) are marked by performance”, we
can dig deeper into the relationship, and see that there are two camps in such a debate,
separated by their perceptions of causality: first, the ritual theorists who argue that theatre has
emerged from ritual; and, second, the performance theorists who argue that ritual - or at least
the quality of ritual - is defined as a function of performance.
3.5. Theatre of design
The theatre of design is presented here as a metaphor for linking technology, ritual and
performance. So far the chapter has painted a picture of ritual in a variety of ways but found a
common ground with its use, which is to understand communication as a cultural activity, a
place where reality is produced, maintained, repaired and transformed, and not from a
transmission perspective. Ritual-like activity also possesses an emotional value and offers a
sense of sharing and communion. Goffman’s focus on the notions of performance finally
leads to the need for an intermediary that will bring together these elements with technology.
This section will review the theatre of design as a way to talk about performance with
technology and ritual. It will do so by introducing designers and technology to the stage.
Performances in their way mark identities and tell stories. According to Goffman they serve
to influence particular participants and the audience, observers, or co- participants also
contribute to the performance. A pre- established pattern of action occurs during a
performance like a routine and a social relationship occurs (Goffman, The Presentation of
Self 15-16). These routines can be seen as “restored behaviours” and to perform is understood
as “to succeed” or “excel” but also to “put on a play or to show or to go to extremes”
(Schenchner 28).
The theatre of design is a concept that contributes to the emerging literature of a new approach to design, communication and interaction. It draws its essence from acknowledging
89
that a mobile device is part of a performative ritual. Within the theatre of design, users are like actors, for whom the mobile device can be both prop and fellow actor, designers can occupy the role of director or set designers, setting the stage and gently influencing the performance without ever having complete control over how it will unfold. The mobile device can be an actor seen through its interaction by messaging, providing reminders and information in it applications but is also a prop (see 4.3.3) where the design of the device or
the devices physical enhancements like the customisation of the devices “skin” can add value
to it user’s status or identity. The theatre of design is a concept that encompasses interaction
designs, as determined by designing or directing behaviours in technological product design.
Society and culture give context to any performance, and shape a performance by providing it
with its ecology. The ecology can be described as the mise-en-scène or “setting” for the performance. It provides an imperative understanding of the action. James Gibson’s proposal that human beings perceive affordances rather than objects is useful here. The affordance of an object can be defined as being a quality of a thing that communicates the action that may be performed on or with it (Boradkar 235). The affordance can be seen as an object’s essence. For example, a bell affords ringing, and a pen affords writing.
A mobile device has multiple affordances. Its stage is a communication network. The artefact
assumes the role of a main character, and its costume is utility and form. The designer is
director and, in his or her own particular ways, can perform the role of actor, too. He passes
the script to the artefact, designing its appearance (the form factor) and its voice (the
interface) that becomes a mobile device’s character. The viewer or audience of users play
their part as well through representation, forming emotional attachments to the mobile device
character. The mobile device also becomes a prop for the audience as they become actors,
too.
90
In approaching the role of the mobile device, the designer directs its performance. We could
see similarities to the Stanislavski school of theatrical performance; an attempt for both
director and actor to remain objective in their portrayals, and be free of bias (Creating a Role
4, 40). As discussed above, Goffman’s back stage and front stage and private and public face
are present in the continual interplay that humans engage in to read and present and adapt to
achieve an outcome. To achieve this outcome, theatre actors start by initially using the word
“if” at the beginning of the sentence: for instance, “if I were king”. This gives the actor
permission to leave their “selves” along with their biases and explore character and context to
the fullest. It is what Stanislavsky called perspective (Building a character 175-177). A product designer’s process starts in a similar way, with the question (for example), “If I was shopping how would I write an SMS on the mobile device?” This creates a similar window of creativity and escape from the biases of the self by providing a “perspective”. This is a way in which the “given circumstances” of an artefact can be constructed (see fig. 3.1).
The use of performance as one of the fundamental ways to view an artefact differently opens up a range of new possibilities. The previous discussion of the tenets of STS has explained that the way given circumstances affect and shape an actor is important in the performance of things. The concept of the theatre of design reveals possibilities through a core of similar dynamics.
91
Figure 3-1. The theatre of design illustrating the stage and circumstances
The words “what if?” are important because they suggest a place to start and a place where
designers and actors can at least be momentarily divorced from their assumptions and
preconceptions. Adopting this approach for the design process would enable all possibilities
with the interaction of design to be explored by providing a perspective. We can find this
approach in the method of scenario-based design, which stages re-enactment of actions with the designed object in order to simulate real life events so as to refine the design.
Performance is interaction and it overlaps with everyday life such as socializing or in the arts, in sports or in business, in technology, in sex, in ritual and in play (Schechner 31). Designer
Bill Verplank, who along with designer Bill Moggridge coined the term interaction design, believes creating meaning by using metaphors and scenarios is significant and the ability to tell a good story is a head start to making sense to people (Moggridge 3). Interaction design is now shaping our everyday life through digital artefacts. For example, the Xerox star user
interface (unique because it was the first graphical user interface) and the Apple interface
were very important in creating the menu at the top of the screen that lays out all the user’s
possibilities (G. Smith xi). Interaction design is a fusion of many factors. It is not just visual,
92
it is also sonic, tactile and mobile and the designer needs to draw on all disciplines to create
and understand it. It enables the communication between actors: the mobile device, designer and user. The user performing with the device must also interact with the character of the device, and the user will always attempt to create a social interaction with the non-human actor.
There is also the question of the dynamic that exists between the designer/actor and the user/ actor. This dynamic creates a tension that is then responsible for the creation of the artefact.
The artefact is born out of a performance of interaction between the two players. There is also an interaction between designer to client (product) and the user. In this way the design project develops “through an on-going dialogue between designers, the design and the test audience”
(Laurel, Design Research 176). While a design can fulfil the designer’s expectation, it might not fulfil the client’s. For instance, when designing a bottle for a bath product, the bottle may be aesthetically beautiful but the material used is too expensive, and the client will not approve of it. There are always limiting factors of economics and politics. This set of given circumstances create another tension. There is thus a network of tension and communication between designer, device, user and client. This kind of network of social actors and relations
corresponds to Bijker’s social construction of technology whereby there is a tension created
in attempts to keep the meaning of a device stable.
If we concur with Fortunati’s view that “life is still a theatre”, or indeed Shakespeare’s
similar expression, then the boundaries between what constitutes our self and what self we
are acting are blurry (Fortunati 217). As she points out, a device assigns approval for us to
stage ourselves. It is a constant reminder that a performance is, if not central, then still a close
collaborator in the communicative link between actors. The link between theatrical
performance and user experience is therefore inherent within the design.
93
When considering the theatre of design, it is worth being mindful to the existing relationships amongst artefacts and the social interaction in a performative or representational analysis.
When artefacts perform there is a break between the representational side of a social situation
and of that between artefacts, which understand that knowledge is coded or inscribed. In
other words, the performative turn in the theatre of design used as a metaphor is an attempt to
understand the role of action, or “doings” of how things are done by way of material practices
rather than only on how they are described. By doing this it highlights the blurred lines that
are indicative between how the representational versus performative knowledge. It is quite similar to Judith Butler’s use of the performative in Gender Trouble that proposes it as an
active practice, a “doing” that constructs gender, therefore implying that the world is not
filled with fixed entities but rather they emerge over time, continually transformed due to our
history of interactions with it.
Butlers point underlines that performances between artefacts, situations and social interaction
are constitutive of culture and not something that can be added to culture as an afterthought.
Performances are epistemic, in that we learn something about our world through our
performances and it can also serve as a critical lens for looking at and challenging our
culture.
Whether the theatre of design is a metaphor indicative of the representational analysis within
Goffman’s social interaction or with the concept of communion in Carey’s communication in culture it can equally suggest the performativity of pushing a button on a mobile device while demonstrating the transformation of the devices affordance over time. Overall it constitutes culture. The thesis suggests that there is ambiguity between performative and representational analysis but it is this very tension that is necessary and inevitable in any study or performances that constitute culture (Hopkins 228-36).
94
3.6. Conclusions
There are numerous ways of looking at ritual and technology and performance. This chapter
has defined ritual in that it has identified the difference between religious and secular ritual and maintained a focus on the secular. The concept of ritual in technology does have problems, but these problems are not insurmountable. The chapter has looked at the role of ritual in communication and technology through Carey and has described that there is a similarity with other perspectives about ritual activity such as those of Bell and Goffman, in which “reality is produced, maintained, repaired and transformed” (24).
Introducing Goffman’s approach to ritual and emphasising his focus on performance has
defined a way to study ritual-like activities and technology within society. It has also
determined the existence of emotional value, confirming that ritual-like activities are
communicative and offer elements such as sharing and communion. The section also
suggested that human relations and interaction can be examined in relation to consumption
and consumption ritual (see 3.4.2).
Finally the chapter introduces the idea of the theatre of design as a way to link ritual to
mobile technology. Goffman’s front stage and back stage are appropriate in the theatre of
design to talk about how mobile devices interact with humans. Back stage is where designers
have directed behaviours into many aspects of the mobile device like affordances that will be
performed on the front stage where user and other participants are the audience. The social
situation is seen as interpersonal rituals and the routines with a mobile device can be seen as
ritual-like activities. Framing will give context to the ecology that surrounds the mobile device.
95
The following chapter develops the trilogy of ritual, performance and technology by way of the theatre of design as a metaphor. Hillis declared that, “[w]e are surrounded by the wondrous effects of machines and we are encouraged to ignore the ideas embedded in them”
(18). Chapter four will therefore examine the role of ritual-like activities in the design and consumption of the mobile device.
96
4. Consumption Ritual and the Mobile Device
4.1. Overview
The previous chapter presented an argument for using the concepts of ritual and performance
as tools for examining the relationship between communication technologies and society.
This chapter and the following one develop this idea further by examining the role of the
mobile device as a ritual-like object.
Chapter four argues that manufacturers construct the mobile device as a consumer object
through ritual-like activities and performances. It focuses on the way that ritual-like activities
are involved with the purchase and use of mobile devices. Chapter five then takes elements
of this analysis and applies them to examine the way that the design and production of mobile
devices enables the mobile device to be used in ritual-like performances. Together chapters four and five form an argument for ritual and performance as tools for understanding the relationship between mobile devices and society, which is then grounded and examined more specifically through case studies in chapters six and seven.
The chapter opens by looking at the mobile device as a socio-cultural object, drawing upon du Gay et al.’s concept of cultural circuits to explain how the device is linked to cultural production. Du Gay et al.’s perspective is then developed with reference to Julier’s domain of design culture, and then illustrated through a discussion of the Sony Walkman and the identity moment.
Science and technology studies previously discussed in chapter two underlie the discussion specifically in examining society’s role in producing the mobile device and in its consumption, further relating to McKenzie and Wajcman’s, Social Shaping of Technology and the influence that society has on technological design.
97
The next section develops this theme of the mobile device as a cultural object designed to be
a consumer object. It specifically focuses on consumption, production and design as aspects
that feed into the development of the mobile device. The section then extends the discussion
into the realm of designers and their processes of production of a consumer object. The
section looks at Apple’s walled garden approach and the development of the Samsung Bada
as illustrations.
The final section takes the designed consumer object and utilizes Rook’s work on ritual and
consumption to examine specific examples of the kinds of ritual-like activities that attach meaning to these objects. Rook is an important addition here because it provides a vehicle for understanding the mobile device as a consumer object involved in ritual-like activities.
4.2. The Mobile Device as a Socio-cultural object
The first step to understanding the mobile device that it is fundamentally involved in ritual-
like activities is to provide a context for the device. This section will provide that context by
acknowledging that manufacturers construct the mobile device as a consumer object and that
it is linked to cultural production. It will do this by first examining du Gay et al.’s formulation
of cultural circuits and then their relationship to the device by centring the argument on the
Sony Walkman and how social factors shaped its identity.
However before centring on this relationship it will be necessary to first clarify a few terms
that are used sporadically throughout this section. The term “consumer objects” are also
known as “objects of consumption” and are goods that are made to be bought, owned or used
by people; the process is sometimes called consumption (see section 4.3.2; and also du Gay et
al. concerning the product and consumer in section 4.3.5).
The use of “technological object” in the thesis defines how objects appear to do things, or at
98
least are made to do things because of technology. The mobile device makes phone calls or
connects wirelessly to the internet because of its technology such as the software or the
mother board inside the device. A team of designers are needed to make the device do things by means of its technology (see 5.2.2).
However when determining how meaning is inscribed or read from an object it will be
defined as a “cultural object” and that the object can be framed as a concept that we can
communicate about to a variety of people in a number of different contexts. “It belongs to our
culture because we have constructed for it a little world of meaning” (du Gay et al.10) and
meaning is what makes the object a cultural object (see 4.3.1). For example, according to
Burgess’s study on how the iPhone is framed within cultural technologies, the iPhone was
represented as a “kind of magical object with which we are physically intimate and which
responds to our interior thoughts …” (Burgess 39).
4.2.1. Cultural circuits
In their book Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman, Paul du Gay and his co-authors discuss the “circuit of culture” as a way to enable us to analyse a mobile device and determine how people make meaning from objects. The circuit is seen as comprising key
interacting moments of identity, production, consumption and regulation and representation.
Du Gay et al. use theoretical concepts that range from Murray Schafer’s sound design and
Walter Benjamin’s “The work of art in the age of electronic reproduction” to Pierre
Bourdieu’s, “habitus” (du Gay et al. 17) in their study to underline various theoretical
concepts and their relationship to cultural studies. However, the usefulness of the circuits of
culture in the context of this thesis is that it engages with STS “since most of the STS
research strategies have originated from cultural studies” (Bijsterveld 293). The circuits offer
a framework that is consistent and clear in its analysis because the object that is being studied
99
must pass through the key moments (identity, production and so on) that make up the cultural circuit.
But before the usefulness of the “circuit of culture” can be addressed it is first necessary to understand the integration between STS with cultural studies. The relationship hinges on technological change. Technological change shapes social roles and institutions (Volti 363) though this can equally suggest that the development of these institutions has been the result of human action in a particular social milieu (see the growth of the Sony Corporation in 4.3.2 or the Apple store and its consumer ritual in section 4.4.5). This reciprocal interaction only reinforces STS position within culture and its multidisciplinary role. For instance, science and technology has intersected with media studies by focussing on how people actually use media technologies (Silverstone and Hirsch) and with consumption and material culture
(Douglas and Isherwood; Kopytoff 64-95; Miller; McCracken).
Michael Bull in Sounding out the City, established consumption and STS as a worthwhile relationship in his research about the practices of music consumption and the uses of the
Walkman. He noted that there were specific experiences between the urban environment and the personal experience of headphones in public spaces.
The mobile device as a cultural object that is designed to be a consumer device integrates the mobile device in the broader picture of cultural studies within consumption and everyday life.
It connects STS within this work, while exemplifying the need to understand du Gay et al.’s circuits of culture. The next section will do this by comparing the cultural circuits of du Gay et al. with one that is offered by Guy Julier.
100
4.2.2. Julier’s Domain of Design Culture and du Gay et al.’s Cultural
Circuits
The discipline of design has come a long way and according to John Heskett the variations in
design practice have been affected by the far reaching changes in technology, markets, and
cultures (129). Art history for example has been influenced by Science and Technology
Studies and by Cultural theory (see Fallan 2010). A cultural approach has therefore become relevant because it can engage with design in both a humanistic and interpretive way.
Both du Gay et al. and Julier are related to a tradition of social sciences and humanities. Paul
du Gay believes products in themselves do not possess meaning, but the meaning is created
throughout the interaction and intersection of the different elements of the cultural circuit and
through this process, are attributed to the product. The product becomes a cultural artefact
with symbolic meaning (du Gay 2).
Design and the culture in, and of, design is the prime focus of Guy Julier. For Julier
introduces the concept of design culture, both as an object for study and as a discipline. On
one hand his work looks at design considering objects, spaces and images while on the other
hand, looks at contextual factors such as production, designer and consumption. The
“interaction and intersection of these domains and their interactions with designed artefacts”
(Julier 13) that are the prime interest in his study.
There is a noteworthy and striking similarity between Julier’s domain of design culture and
du Gay’s et al. “circuits of culture” because although the individual components have been
categorised differently, the basic content remains quite similar.
Julier’s “domain of design culture” describes a triangle where the three apexes represent the
production, consumption and the designer. Paul du Gay’s “circuit of culture” is represented
101
as a pentagram with the apexes labelled production, consumption, regulation, representation
and identity (Julier 13).
On closer observation, Julier’s description of production includes not only manufacturing but
also various ways of making, distributing and marketing these goods and services, for
example, “product positioning”, “advertising” and “distribution channels” as well as
“materials and technology” and “marketing”(Julier 13).
For du Gay et al., the term “production” exists as one of the main categories of his framework
but includes what he calls the “culture of production” that relates to particular aspects of how
the production of an artefact is represented, its identity and its consumption, which are
incidentally also separate categories.
Identity is closely linked to how an artefact is represented and takes into account how we see
a company’s culture and influence extend into an object’s design and production and also
how an object can be identified with particular groups of consumers (du Gay et al. 89).
It is worthwhile at this juncture to distinguish between a number of representations; brand
identity and object identity. Brand identity is more oriented toward the visual elements such
as colour, design, logo, name and symbol that identify a company brand within the
consumer’s mind. Object identity however is a property of an object that distinguishes each
object from all the others. The object is encoded with a particular meaning in its design.
Consumers can sometimes become attached and develop a relationship to specific material
objects, independently of the objects brand (Lastovicka & Sirianni 323-342).
The practice of representation for du Gay is how an object is represented in both oral and
visual language (4), and subsequently includes advertising and marketing. “Consumption” in
Julier’s model concerns social relations, and areas such as taste, cultural geography,
102
ethnography and psychological response. In comparison to Du Gay’s five parts of the cultural circuit there is a focus on how consumption is involved with the production of meaning, but both accounts cover quite similar territory, albeit from various approaches. Du Gay’s
“regulation” stands out in the case of the Sony Walkman by being used as the basis for questioning how technology has challenged the traditional distinctions that have been made between private and public space and its cultural regulation (du Gay et al. 112).
Whilst there are great parallels between Julier and du Gay’s model, there are also important differences. Julier uses the designer as a third major category, du Gay et al. have deconstructed the process of design to include representation, regulation and identity as separate categories, and have incorporated other aspects into production. The similarity between the two models indicates that there is a system of relationships that give meaning and social context to a design, but also indicates that the labelling of distinct processes can be arbitrary.
Since the industrial revolution and the consequent establishment of branding and advertising, there has come about a sense of representing and creating an identity and a value for that identity through the consumption of objects. Marx understood this phenomenon as a process whereby the human values of the labour market were deposited into objectified commodities through capital exchange (Marx 32).
The representation and identity of an object also provides a map of meanings that enables its users or consumers to “make sense” of the world (du Gay et al. 8). Culture and cultural production allow the representation of relationships. As Scot Lash asserts, “culture is now three dimensional, as much tactile as visual or textual, all around us and inhabited, lived in rather than an encountered in a separate realm as a representation” (Critique of Information
149).
103
Despite the slightly different ways consumption is handled by Julier and du Gay et al, (du
Gay et al. uses representation and identity as a way that effects consumption and production
while Julier involves consumption with specific aspects of design) we are able to understand
that cultural production allows a representation of relationships.
In summary, on one side of the coin Julier sees the designer as a contextual factor of design because there are a series of governing ideologies and value systems that surround the designers and the design. On the other side of the coin du Gay deals with cultural meaning and that design is to inscribe products with cultural meaning to become a cultural artefact.
Having established that objects can be seen as both social and cultural, it is important to now apply this insight to the mobile device.
4.2.3. The Sony Walkman and the Identity Moment
Ritual-like activity creates identity for participants, not so much as an individual, but as part
of a group. We can understand identity as being “who or what something or somebody is”, or a “state of being very close or the same as somebody or something” (Hornby 589). There is a paradox in the notion of identity, as it simultaneously defines a person by their sameness
(such as being of a particular gender, a part of a particular nation, or as having a particular sexuality), but equally by their distinguishing characteristics, their “individual identity”.
Identity is a concept that can be applied not only to humans, but also to technological artefacts. For example, the Sony Walkman attained its identity in a number of ways, some of which were then associated with how it was represented through marketing campaigns and in the broader culture. The company was advertising the device’s mobility and suggested that the device and its electronics were sexy. One ad featured a long legged Western woman in a
104
halter top dancing frenetically while a Buddhist monk with bulky earphones watched on glumly (Levy 210).
The creation of identity can be seen as the result of designers working in a particular company culture, in that Sony had an identity effect on its designers, which in turn provided the environment that was embedded or “encoded” into the device (du Gay et al. 63). A detailed examination of designers involved in the production of the mobile device will follow in chapter five; however we can say that these particular nuances that established the
Walkman’s identity were then, in turn, passed on to the relationship between the artefact and the consumer. For instance, Sony was concerned that people would resist going outside with their Walkman because the headphones might be associated with a kind of hearing disability.
Morita, CEO of Sony, countered this concern by saying that Sony would create a “a headphone culture” (Levy 112).
The process of identity formation is further complexified because consumers often customise their artefacts in order to establish their unique identity. This tendency can especially be seen in the customisation of mobile devices, a point I will return to shortly.
There are various stories of how the Walkman came to be designed, but the most likely is that, in the 1970s, one of the founders of Sony, Masaru Ibuka, had a monaural tape recorder modified for stereo so that he could listen to stereo music on his overseas flights (Levy 206, du Gay et al. 42). Chairman and founder of Sony, Akio Morita was a mediator in this process.
He could see the potential of this product, and insisted that the device be developed into a product that eventually became the TPS – L2. It is here that the design of the Walkman was an enactment by a network that included both technological actors, and the human actors of
Morita and Ibuka, to name only a few of the team.
105
Figure 4-1. The first Sony Walkman, TPS-L2, Sony, (Japan)
Sony has a particular, formalised company culture that was drawn up by Morita and Ibuka.
The Sony Company’s prospectus gave its goal as establishing an ideal factory that put
emphasis on freedom and open-mindedness and encouraged the highest levels of
technological skills. Masaru Ibuka inscribed this into a document on 7 May 1946 (fig. 4.2). It told the history of the company, its objectives, product vision and the future direction of its technology.
106
Figure 4-2. The Founding Prospectus of the Tokyo Telecommunications Engineering Corporation (Sony)
Its core mission when it came to company/consumer interaction was to bring “radio communications and similar devices into the household and to promote home consumer electronics” (Sony Corporation). The creation of the “Sony way” of doing things and the design philosophy to “do what has never been done before” was integral in creating the environment that in turn created the Walkman’s identity (Sony Corporation). In turn, the
Walkman also created the identity of the company, and introduced the Japanese electronics company to a global audience/market (du Gay el al. 77). The production process led to the consumption of the device and its identity was also developed from marketing, which sold a particular “lifestyle” compelling to young, mobile music listeners.
However, the popularity of the device meant that many more different types of people were using the device than Sony had first anticipated. The details were fed back to the design and production team. They then needed to diversify the device to meet further demands from a different market profile than that of outdoors and sports oriented users. The process was continual and the effect could be seen in the changing design of the Sony Walkman. Over
107
time, the buttons on the side were moved to the front and the device became lighter.
Consumers had become another actor in the network of designers, engineers, company
management, organisational executives, financial heads, and human resources, marketing and
advertising executives that created the artefact of the Sony Walkman.
In this case, the consumer’s influence over the product was slow. The Walkman was still a
mass produced product, and its identity effects were very general: that is, the user was an
“outdoors person” or a “young and mobile” person. It was difficult to customise. The iPhone
(which in some ways can be seen as the descendent of the Walkman in both its ability to
provide portable music, and its identification with the “young and mobile” sector of the
market) is far more customisable. It is more actively engaging in the processes of what I will
call “self-verification”.
Self -verification is a process of managing the loss or instability of self-identity. In spoken language, this can be seen in the way humans very often use the word “ok” or “right” at the
end of a sentence when speaking. They are verifying to themselves that they have said the
right thing or have finished a sentence correctly. They are checking off a cognitive list in
their headspace that the activity has been completed. For social psychologists, this is a
process that allows actors to fit a schema actors have about themselves (Watson et al. 72). It
is information seeking in so much as information is required in order to confirm an actor’s
self-conceptions (Watson et al. 72). On the flip side, actors can be seen resisting information
that does not fit their schema. Simply put, it is a process of attaining and/or creating
feedback.
I propose that there are moments of self-verification in the du Gay et al. circuit of culture
(production, consumption, regulation, identity and representation). For instance, the iPhone
has an aesthetic identity both in the sleek, monochromatic casing of the artefact and in the
108
ubiquitous operating system. The look of the operating system itself cannot be changed,
except in the most trivial ways (customisation of alert tones, changing background images are
the main avenues here). So the most common way that people make their device more
personal and register their own personality is by the use of “skins” (external covers placed over the casing of the device).
These allow a verification of the self, and a confirmation of the hypothetical model of themselves. In other words, humans believe that a particular colour or shape of iPhone skin will reflect and/or create their personality (fig 4.3), in order to distinguish themselves from one another. Ironically, the skin was actually created in order to differentiate one brand identity from another. In 2004 the Apple Company was producing the iPod, which was a mobile MP3 music player. However, Hewlett-Packard (HP) started selling HP versions of the popular iPod. HP tried to distinguish itself from the Apple device by offering a range of
custom stick-on covers that allowed personalisation (Kahney 52).
Though HP’s device was only mildly successful, what is evident throughout is how the
mobile device can be seen as a socio-cultural object and secondly the devices relationship
with establishing an identity. The next section will discuss how this socio-cultural device is
being designed as a consumer object.
109
Figure 4-3. "Skins" used in personalising mobile devices in Kyoto, (Japan, 2011)
4.3. Consumption, production and design
So far this chapter has discussed culture as encompassing consumption, production and design, after being described by both du Gay’s “circuits of culture” and Julier’s “domain of design culture”. As discussed above, du Gay et al. applied their theory to the Sony Walkman, whereas Julier looked at a culture of design; this study will focus on the mobile device.
Identity and how it is represented was seen as a mode that effects consumption and production. But to further understand this relationship, it is necessary to examine consumption and production in more detail through design. This section looks at the idea that the mobile device is a cultural object designed to be a consumer object. The section starts with an analysis of how du Gay et al.’s “circuits” and Juliers “domain” relate to design, which is then followed by a discussion how we have constructed a meaning for the mobile device as a cultural object through creating a narrative and an identity for the device.
110
4.3.1. Circuits and Domains: production and design
This thesis takes du Gay’s cultural circuit and delimits it for the purpose of examining the key elements in a culture of designing technology. The use of representation and identity seen earlier is involved in a process of self-verification by the user personalising the mobile device or a company designing a personality into the device that the users then see as a part of their personality, like the “sports” Sony Walkman. On the one hand, these aspects inform each other, but on the other hand, they carry distinct values. Design is informed by a designer’s schema consisting of a historical cognitive map of background, ideologies, education, profession and reading of the market.
To draw from Julier, consumption encompasses the designers’ schema, culture and psychology, identity and demographics. It follows that production relates to the influences of identity that are present in the form of advertising and marketing, materials and technology, and manufacturing systems. It is the causality of relations holding the system together and within the system that is of interest here.
The mobile device represents a kind of visual culture – that is, the way people make meaning from its looks– and is not static; visual culture has changed through time. For example,
Martin Jay identified three common ways of looking at objects throughout history. First is the primarily Cartesian view that came to the fore in Renaissance painting. Here, perspective is key and the relationship between the observers and the observed was based on the idea of a single static viewing position. Second is the view of art as a form of empiricism by which sensory experience revealed the “particularity of surface detail”. Third is the visual phenomenon that was common in Baroque art, by which the viewer pieces together information in order to form a coherent narrative. These observations of the visual suggest
111
that the framework of both making and understanding meaning through visual design has
changed over the course of history.
According to Julier, the emphasis on visual culture started during the industrial revolution
and was driven by the creation of mass consumer markets and the expansion of the urban
lifestyle. Visual culture became dominant because commodities and services needed to be
more visual in order to market and advertise products more quickly to a wider audience (8).
This was also the time that saw the birth of film, photography and the growth of department
stores, with their emphasis on spectacular visual displays. This is not to suggest that a
supposed literary era had ceased and a visual era had started. Instead, we can think of this era as one which saw a change in culture, the interweaving of production and the beginning of mass consumption, terms fruitfully used by both Julier and du Gay et al. In summary, what is important is the idea of “visuality” in design, and what it means to people.
The mobile device is a cultural object because we have constructed a meaning for it, represented by language and metaphor. In the theatre of design the use of theatrical metaphor is used to establish the “appearance”, “front stage and “back stage” or the “performance” as
Erving Goffman had established in his dramaturgical model of social life, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Language also established a narrative between the mobile device and consumption by creating a value and an identity.
4.3.2. Making meaning
To make sense of the world, Du Gay proposes that the gap between the material world and
the place where language, communication and thinking takes place is filled by meaning and
constitutes the symbolic world (du Gay et al. 13). For example, a mobile device can be seen
as a cultural artefact because we have constructed a meaning for it that exists in our world.
112
The device helps us with social practices and functions such as messaging, making phone calls, checking flight information, scheduling appointments and so on. Therefore, its meaning is intrinsic to the culture that we use it to participate in (du Gay et al. 10).
Our understanding of both the textual and the visual implies that it is through language
(which can be understood as any relatively stable system of representation, be it written or spoken, and including systems such as photography and drawing) that signs and symbols represent things. As mentioned earlier, it is these languages that allow a device like the Apple iPhone to speak for itself.
However, the use of this language metaphor is now seen as a way to describe meaning, in order to allow us to grasp the meaning of a particular artefact. The metaphor is a conduit for contextual associations. For an individual, these associations are embedded in their schema of personal surroundings, history, politics and education called “aesthetic experience” (Lakoff and Johnson 235) while being surrounded by a “sea of meanings” called culture (du Gay et al. 14). For example, a mobile device such as the Nokia Lumia 900 has connectivity to the internet wirelessly by 802.11b/g/n connection to a wireless local area network (WLAN), or by its data connection through a 2G (GSM – Global System for Mobile communications), or by 3G/ 3.5G (HSDPA – High speed Downlink Packet Access), or by 4G (LTE – Long Term
Evolution). Nevertheless, whatever the specific system is in place, the design of this artefact is centred on the idea that this device will be seamlessly online, connected to the Internet and therefore connected to the world. The technology therefore carries a meaning of being
“connected”.
By being connected, one will be able to receive “super speedy updates, great gossiping
groups and quick photo sharing”(“Nokia Lumia 900 - Nokia - Singapore”). Its connectivity
113
signifies that this artefact is up to date, high tech and as a user of this artefact, you will
always be connected, and never be alone.
It’s important to note that these kinds of semantic associations exist not only in the
consumption but also in the production of the device. Mobile devices produce a “text” that is advertising about themselves, and they also carry a meaning that is embedded in the device by the designers. The intended usage of this device can also be read by the consumer in official documentation by Nokia, but new meanings can also be created by the user and then played back through the circuit of production.
The meaning of an artefact is established in a manner similar to that described by du Gay et al.; one way is by comparing the similarities and differences to other artefacts (du Gay et al.
16) or to other abstract concepts.
Performers have been using comparison for more than a century in order to create the identity of characters on stage that is quite different from their own character and from other characters in the play. In the case of an artefact, comparison consolidates what we may think about the device’s identity (du Gay et al. 16). The Sony Walkman was a personal stereo introduced in 1979. It was like other tape players but it was different because it was portable and had headphones. In their performance of a character, theatre actors may play the differences between themselves and a character and leave the similarities alone to look after themselves. The reasoning is that if they are similar, they are natural, and there is no need for intervention from the actor.
This concept of difference and similarity can also be expressed in how we understand a message in communication. Alan Kay, best known for his work on user interface graphical design at the Palo Alto Research Centre Incorporated (PARC), understood that the most important thing about the medium of communication is that “message receipt is message
114
recovery. Anyone who wishes to receive a message embedded in a medium, must first have internalised the medium so it can be subtracted out to leave the message behind”(Kay qtd. in
Laurel and Mountford 192).
In narrative scripting for television, film, theatre, advertising or computer gaming, differences
are used to delineate meanings and textures in dialogue. Simply put, it is the difference that
signifies the meaning (du Gay et al. 16; Hornby 589). Hence the making of meaning is an
active pursuit. For critics like Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, meaning is attributed
to things through psychic activity. They believe that artefacts are not static, and they have a
meaning projected onto them. The attention created from an intentional act that he calls
cultivation (a type of psychic energy) creates a transaction between human and artefact that is
meaningful (8). Nevertheless, what is meaningful is that the narrative is contextualised and is
likely to occur within a conceptual space.
4.3.3. Designers and conceptual spaces
The use of theatre of design and textual metaphors creates a conceptual space, for example,
“back stage” where actions occur when the audience is not present or “front stage” where
behaviours are visible. This conceptual space is created through or behind the screen of a
mobile device. It is a space created by designers for users of the mobile device to participate
and to “act” in with props and that it has a narrative script or code.
This argument is an extension of the work by Dindler, which argues that participatory design
– that is, where potential users are empowered to be part of a proposed design team and
usually have minimum technological expertise because they represent those most likely to be
the users of a new device, (Murray, Inventing Medium 64; Saffer 34) – takes place within a
conceptual space.
115
Here these participants practice games of make believe that are mediated by props. The strength of this view is centred on the inspiration taken from literary theory and Malmgrens study of the relationship between author, text and reader and proposes a fictional world.
Dindler (168) relates this concept to design and uses a visit to a museum to exemplify the way in which institutional practices are constituted. He then examined the alternative ways that visitors engaged with museum exhibitions. His work is useful here, because it ties together elements such as props, performance, text and narrative space and demonstrates an acknowledgment of the involvement of culture in the realm of designs of mobile devices, and also of the holistic techno-social relationship that is embodied in the mobile device.
Much design work created now depends on and is built upon the past. Design is described by
Molotch as a practice by which “designers carry forth the history…the whole stream of what has become before” (Molotch 52). Design work then becomes a place that predetermines where users are and how the devices or artefacts are used, constructed from the design process. If this is the case, then user-centred design offers no advantage when compared to a creation from a conceptualised fictional space. The fictional space creates a mimetic world through the extension of the imagination. Murray says that designers should ask questions of themselves in a type of spatial brainstorming or fantasy thought experiment. The information can be used to design surveys, interviews, focus groups and market research (Murray,
Inventing Medium 95) when designing interfaces and programmes. Space is defined in this context as being conceptual, a bridge between designer and artefact, artefact and user. Lev
Manovich in the Language of New Media argues that navigable space can legitimately be seen as a particular kind of interface to a database, for example as in adventure games like
Myst and Doom. The term cyberspace is sometimes used and defines users navigating through scientific data sets and computer data structures (Manovich 251). The fictional world creates an area where rules of reality can act as a parallel to the rules of the fictional world.
116
For Manovich it is interesting to note how computer culture has spatialized representations
and experiences where the library has become cyberspace, and the narrative a way to travel
through space (Manovich 252).
A clear metaphor for the workings of this space is the world of non-realist film such as those representing worlds in the future. In a film such as Avatar, we suspend disbelief in order to take part in an imaginary space that has its own perception of reality. The filmmakers can create a new world, called Pandora in this case, and give context to this world by surrounding the characters with an imagined social, economic and cultural system. It is an “addition to the empirical world” and is what Dindler calls “a literary fictional world”. It is fairly uncontroversial to argue that these “literary” narrative structures are also used in the film world. In a movie film like Avatar, the suggestion is that while it is the designers have dramatized the thematic action, the characters’ actions are motivated by the their own intentions: that is, their own objectives to wish to do or get something (Stanislavsky, Building
Character 123–124).
We can also see a certain degree of “slipperiness” between character and writer in the notion of diegesis. This term was originally defined as the telling of the story in which the writer presents events indirectly by summarising a character’s thoughts. The use of the term has somewhat changed through the ages, and it is now commonplace for the story in which the action of the narrative takes place to be called the diegesis (Galloway 36). A fictional world can be more or less mimetic of the author and viewer’s experience depending on how far it deviates from the empirical world. Therefore, fiction can create a freedom to imagine and create. It permits an escape from the preconception that imagination relies on remembering the past (schema) in order to present the future.
117
In mobile device design there are a few fictional spaces. The first is the design space. This consists of both the physical environment that the designer works in and the conceptual space
that the designer occupies when imagining the design. The second is the physical space of the mobile device, where it is used and imagined to be used by designers. Finally, there is the conceptual space, which is created by the interaction between user and device, a space that is created when the user uses the mobile device.
Conceptual space, then, is created by the practices of the user. In the theatre of design, mobile
devices can be seen as props. These “props” are integral to the way that the fictional world is created and act as intermediaries to incentivise the imagination. Similarly, for Goffman the
props were for the “spate of human action to be played out before, within, or upon it”
(Goffman, Presentation of Self 22). In relation to mobile device design, props can take the
form of physical reminders such as a foam mock-up of a designer’s concept of a mobile
device, which allows other designers to integrate their concepts and ideas into it and also
allows interplay of the affordances of the device. Props can also be structural underpinnings,
concepts that help support the construction of a particular narrative.
When technology companies design their mobile devices, the main prop is a prototype of the
device. For example, in Nokia’s usability testing of the mobile device, paper prototypes were
created simulating user interaction between the subject and printouts of screen designs. A
human moderator acting as a computer updated the interface pictures when a paper button
was pressed. This then created a user centred design approach where “idea, creation, sharing
and assessment are intertwined” (Lindholm, Keinonen & Kiljander 179).
The other function of a prop is that it focuses one’s attention. The more attractive the prop, the more it will concentrate human attention. Actors on the stage have known this for years, and in the early twentieth century, Stanislavski argued “in order to get away from the
118
audience you must be interested in something on the stage” (Stanislavsky 75). In An Actor
Prepares Stanislavski talks about his experience when rehearsing for Othello and becoming so absorbed with picking up a nail on the stage that he then forgot to think about anything on the other side of the footlights (auditorium), that being the audience. For Stanislavski, intense observation can create a sense of desire and this then leads to an action, for instance wanting to pick up something or look at an object very closely. The prop has created both a desire and point of focus. A space now consists only of the actor and the prop.
For Huizinga, play has the similar attribute, and is observed when a player is intently focused on a game. When discussing the practice of children making a secret game, Huizinga affirms that a conceptual space exists for “inside the circle of the game the laws and customs of ordinary life no longer count” (Huizinga 12), as the game “absorbs the player intensely and utterly” (Huizinga 12). This intense focus, like Stanislavsky’s, is built on a carrier that is the objective or goal for an activity.
Such an absorptive use of mobile devices is noteworthy since it is very common to see people pinching and zooming on the screen of their devices. It is this intense focus and “submersive nature” of the interaction and design that creates a conceptual space. A part of this space is the fictional space that has to a degree been mediated by the prop. Although the users are somewhat free to use their imagination, I would argue that the fictional space for participatory design could be further extended in order to allow for greater design and interaction opportunities.
4.3.4. Extending the fictional space
The fictional space is a useful concept to understand how designers design mobile devices.
Dindler’s main concern was to create a fictional design spaces that would create truly
119
participatory design. However, there is no reason not to extend this idea into the area that is
constructed by the actor when interacting with an artefact. The fictional space of narrative is
created when the user interacts with the artefact. The term interaction is often overused and
instead of using it again, I want to borrow the word “agency” as used by Janet Murray.
Agency is both participation that encompasses free choice and activity. It is explained by
Murray that “agency is the satisfying power to take meaningful action and see the results of our decisions and choices” (Murray, Hamlet Holodeck 126). The human being who is
interacting with a digital artefact therefore experiences making something happen in a
dynamic and responsive way. It is significant because the actor desires a particular
experience; the communication process takes place when the experienced response is equivalent to the designed appropriate response. Therefore, agency is the capability to do things.
An example of this experience is the creation of a virtual space, for example, when visiting a
tourist spot such as a river. It is possible to use a mobile device and an appropriate app (such
as the Museum of London’s Streetmuseum app), it is possible to display what that area would
have looked like in the 1850s. In order for this to happen, the device connects to the Internet
via wireless “hotspots” or cellular data transfer through the phone service provider. A
“hotspot” is a site that acts as an access to the Internet by a wireless local area network
(LAN). Once the application on the screen is activated, photos of the river from that period
with people, boats and shops from the period are shown on the mobile device screen. A
mixed reality has been experienced.
Today, people can experience online travel in their own living room. Some sit down with
mobile devices and use Google maps to take them to a different country (Murray, Inventing
Medium 172-173). They experience walking down a street and to explore different towns as
120
online tourists. They visit virtually in order to test whether they want to make a future “real” trip. By doing so, they are also creating a fictional space. This space is now within the cognitive space of the “interactor”. The interactor is a human being that is experiencing and interacting with a digital device (Murray, Inventing Medium 11) and acting within a system.
The cognitive space has similar principles to those found in narrative psychology, which was developed by Jerome Bruner in the 1980s. Bruner contends that actors understand artefacts in terms of cause and effect rules. The actors then use logic, intentions, motivation and behaviour in order to structure a story. The narratives can be reflexive, self-told or told through an agent.
For a considerable time, marketing and advertising industries have told stories so that they can provide lifestyling spaces for the actor to pursue and to yearn to belong to. As discussed in the previous chapter, Sony created the Walkman and symbolically transformed it by creating identification between the consumer and the artefact. Lifestyling was then enacted through customising the device to suit a niche market. For example, the sport Sony Walkman was an outdoor waterproof device, with solar power for camping (du Gay et al. 67). Thematic differences can also be seen in the outdoor, the sports and business models of the mobile device. Each artefact and campaign told a story that an actor could participate in, and the narrative would form part of his or her personality.
Silvan Tomkins is a psychologist who developed script theory, an extension of affect theory in which human emotions are categorised into “affects” (McAdams 13). Tomkins’ script theory of personality argues that individual humans “organise their emotional life in terms of salient scenes and recurrent scripts” (McAdams 13). It is analogous to film, in which a series of shots determine a sequence. However in script theory the thread that links each event is the
121
affect motivated by experience to these events. In other words, the script informs human
actions.
People are seen as explaining their differences as thematic and their identities as narrative
form. This links back to the view held by STS, that artefacts also have biographies, and so both human and non-human actors, it can be argued, are formed by narrative.
When navigating through a menu of a mobile device or the spatial connection between the abstract of the user’s mind and/or the designed behavioural response of the application code in a mobile device, this process of themes and identities is acknowledged as the basis of the
narrative within this conceptual space.
4.3.5. The use of story to create fictional space
As discussed in the preceding section, the conceptual space is often associated with narrative.
Stories are created for marketing purposes through lifestyling a consumer device and stories
have connections with creating personalities and themes to provide a structure to events. This
section looks deeper into the role of stories and how they create the fictional space.
A narrative is a retelling of something that has happened and that happening is the story. In
the broadest sense they both work together, story and narrative intertwined. The combination
can be defined in this work as presenting a sequence of events in space and time related by
cause and effect with the cause encompassing an intent and motivational drive (Bordwell and
Thompson 65). Storytelling is an ancient activity, and can be seen as a cognitive map that
joins meanings and events together. In the context of this thesis, stories are useful in that they
can explain not only a way we interact with ourselves but also the relationship between
consumption and the mobile device.
122
Du Gay et al. talked about the language of advertising and marketing as an attempt to create identification between the consumer and a product (du Gay et al. 65). It inscribes a meaning that the consumer will identify with and it does this (identification) by speaking or communicating with the consumer. For du Gay et al it addresses the consumer as a “sort of person” (du Gay et al. 66) but this “person” also brings along a story.
Early oral stories and creation myths (symbolic stories of how the world began) represent ways to explain the world. Many oral stories and creation myths express the importance of community over the individual. Robert Bringhurst, one of Canada’s most revered poets, believes that the form of the novel arose from the birth of the city (Noah Richler, “A Short
History of Story”). The novel championed the individual human over the community and the individual wins something or seeks to achieve the greatest possible result for him or herself.
They can be seen maximising their own advantage in order to “win the girl” or “conquer the land”. On the other hand, in the stories of communal hunter gathering societies, the individual ends up sharing something, and learning the importance of observing certain rules or rituals that, when they are followed, will make sure that “the salmon will flow, the moose will be ok and food will be plentiful”(Richler). In other words, stories reflect the way that we see the world back at ourselves. The vocabulary is culturally biased and the content says a lot about certain values of society. This is true about not only the content of the narrative, but also its form. The different forms of stories, and the way we move through them, tell us how we interact. For instance “creation myths” name the world, cautionary tales tell about the way we should move through it; and, when one society comes into contact with another, the “epic” is used to defend each society and to justify its place and right to exist through describing its history.
123
The mobile device and the consumer also have stories to tell. Discussed in chapter two, the mobile device was seen as a cultural object and Sony used lifestyling of their Walkman in their marketing and advertising to consumers. The Walkman was seen representing a story about urban youth or an imagined country life to lovers of the outdoors. Equally, the brand of the company can inscribe a story to the consumer. For Jean Burgess, the iPhone is a moment in the history of cultural technologies (28). She believes a transformation has taken place and that Apple marketing represents the iPhone as a platform (39). Apple does this through advertising and by telling of the endless possibilities of the device’s usability through personal stories about consumers creating music, drawing on it, watching a video or taking pictures. The stories tell of the device’s versatility and usability and so mobile devices represent a biography.
While it can be argued that narratives are an essential component to understanding how meaning becomes associated with a technology, it is also important to understand how narratives work. The first step of any story is to name the characters in the story and then set them tasks. This is true of human beings and applies to technology, too.
For instance, IBM developed a computer system called Watson in 2011 that used natural language in a particular way. It named and compiled lists of plausible answers to complex questions that were used in our language including puns and riddles. Then another script or algorithm would rank the answers based on the degree of evidence that supports each answer.
The more algorithms that support the answer the higher the ranking and therefore the more confidence allocated to that particular answer (IBM).
In her work in interaction design, Murray calls this “encyclopaedic affordance” – where large information resources are assorted and classified and labelled with a vocabulary by programmes in devices (Murray, Inventing Medium 418). The gathering of information is one
124
step but when the list is made, narrative meaning fills the gaps. The meaning can be an
expectation, presumption, an attempt or a known factor that is a reflection of the culture of
the designers who make them.
The human mind attributes different weights to the items on the lists and then contributes to
the connections that the story provides. We make connections as infants and then as
inhabitants of different societies. Sometimes they become unconscious and habit forming. In
The Brain that Changes Itself, Norman Doidge argues that mental habits are tracks that are
laid down in the brain by repeating the same behaviours over and over again. He believes that
neuroplasticity – the way the brain actively changes neural pathways and synapses due to
some factor like behaviour or environment – is limited by the brain’s unwillingness to lay
down new tracks. Like tracks and ruts in often-used paths in snow, habits are formed (Doidge
209).
However, the brain is not just a collection of habits. It is also able to reflect on information
and find out what is important. It then extracts themes from the lists. The sorting of this
information in our brains is very similar to the way the way we categorise conventions of
representations and genres. But do brains tell stories? Is our urge towards storytelling
biological or cultural? Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University,
believes that our narrative urge is related to the pleasure centres in our brain (Richler). We
dupe our brains into getting secondary pleasure from simulations of reality: “We are good at
simulating, getting pleasure on the cheap” (Richler). Why do we keep on recreating stories
about love, violence and status, when we already have so many of these? Perhaps this is
because stories offer a particular way of looking at the causal structure of the world – and
allow us to enter into these situations as a type of “thought experiment”.
125
Thought experiments are also seen in the design of mobile devices. The mobile is usually
prototyped, made as a working model, and a number of scenarios are conducted to test the
device’s usability and ease of use. The scenarios are created stories and they are used to put
the mobile device into a number of situations for testing purposes. This role of prototyping
testing the device is that of the user experience designer and will be discussed in the
following chapter.
Previously in chapter two I proposed that actors navigate and map places and artefacts as a
way of referencing them and this was known as schema. This is supported by Doidge’s argument that the brain maps the world and through this mapping, we self-regulate things such as our mood, attention, and physical temperature (Doidge qtd. in Richler). The narrative is a way of regulating our emotions, about framing our life. Narratives provide a way to keep our self in a safe state, secure from threats. Bringhurst argues that, “[i]n the end it is that stories may be the genuine inhabitants of the world and that humans are not really in charge – not at the top of the food chain so to speak” (qtd. in Richler). So perhaps humans are necessary only because stories depend on us for their existence and therefore their reproduction. Be that as it may, for humans, if we don’t tell stories, we lose our way
(Bringhurst qtd. in Richler). To put it another way, we will get lost without the map of a story.
This section has discussed how stories help us to understand the relationship between consumption and the mobile device. A number of points have emerged, for instance advertising has used stories to inscribe meaning, to be identified by consumers, into a mobile device. This is evident with lifestyling of the Walkman or the Apple brand representing itself and the iPhone as a story about versatility and usability. The device is designed to tell a story
126
and therefore has its own biography. The device is also tested for consumption by creating
scenarios or short stories to see how the device performs under a variety of situations.
On the other hand company strategies are involved in creating a story for their devices. The next section discusses how Apple defines its own narrative. It does this by defining it own
technological ecosystem that helps to produce the mobile device culturally. It revolves around how the mobile device is represented and its identity.
4.3.6. Apple Products and the walled garden
Currently, there is a foregrounding of the connectivity facility of mobile device artefacts, and
this is particularly true of Apple products. The dominant usage of these artefacts is to
communicate information, and to do so they must talk to each other. For Apple, the space for
them to talk in is called iCloud. Cloud computing allows data to commute between devices.
However, the space also has boundaries. Apple mobile devices create a “walled garden” and
own the experiences that are played out within it (Chesher 98), The “walled garden” refers to
the way that a company such as Apple controls everything from the hardware to the software
on its devices and with the company acting as a vigilant overseer. This closed system of
Apple mobile devices has been essential for the control of the branded Apple space. This
space is very important to the company. This can be seen in the fact that Apple filed a lawsuit
against Microsoft in 2013 about its trademark claim for the concept of its own space of the
“App Store” (Savov). The claim focussed on justifying that the term “App Store” was
particular to Apple, rather than a generic concept. The Apple space is a stage with a set and it
is guarded territory, fenced to a degree highlighted by a series of controlled functions in the
“App Store” and the regulatory guides involved in the design of the applications (Apple, iOS
Human Interface) as well as interaction and connection by all apple devices with Apple.
127
The particularity of this performance as a consumer object ensures for the consumer that all
conversations between devices will be heard, documented and retrieved, though only in
Apple’s walled garden environment. In this case, design makes sure that the consumption of
these artefacts and the information that they generate takes place in a ritual-like space that is
controlled by Apple.
Another way that a company can define itself is through the design of its mobile device
operating system. Samsung in this case created its own narrative that identifies the company
through an open platform and suggests freedom of choice to the consumer but it is still
uniquely closed in the consumption process.
4.3.7. Samsung Bada
Analysis of mobile device competitor Samsung reveals a different ritual space. This mobile
device is based on an Android and “Bada” platform that was unveiled in 2010. Bada
(meaning “ocean”) is a smartphone platform, and Samsung was planning to release its source code, in order to foster uptake of the system. However, it was announced that this platform would cease to exist in 2013. In the Android developer space for instance, Samsung state they are only providing additional support and a guide in 2013. The “app” developers and the
Samsung designers on this open platform (Android OS is backed by Google in 2005) rely on
global recognition by social participation in order to support the platform. This recognition
creates spectator attention for the openness of its platform. In fact, the organisation created a
smoke screen through the development of Bada so as to take the attention away from other
matters, such as their own closed app development program, interface design and research
into a closed system, Samsung customised version of Android (Kendrick).
128
Here, Samsung is building a ritual-like activity of an open standard operating system that is
facilitated through a community. In this activity there is a necessity for numerous variations because of the many different mobile devices, manufacturers and designers and screen sizes that are being designed for. The risk with open standards is that they are so open that they
allow a great congregation of people who may not be able to talk to each other and
consequently that they lose designers, who are in an open space without a starting point.
Samsung could be seen as allowing people into the churchyard but guarding its church door.
Then when people get in to their church they may not be able to communicate with each
other. It is this effort that defines its closed networked congregation for communion.
4.4. Consumerist rituals
So far, by looking at the relationship between du Gay et al.’s cultural circuits and Julier’s
domains of design culture and the mobile device, the device can be seen as a socio-cultural object. The mobile device has meaning represented by language and metaphor and a narrative exists that establishes a relationship between the device and consumption by creating identity.
Having established the mobile device as a cultural consumer artefact, the final section of this
chapter applies the work of Rook, discussing how consumer designed ritual-like activities
attach meaning to the device. In the context of this thesis, Rook’s work provides an
important bridge between ideas about consumption and ritual.
However before examining Rook, there are two terms that need some clarification. The
consumer ritual in this work is understood to be more oriented toward the buyer and their
audience and can be interpreted as a ritual of consumption when it involves the acquisition of
consumer goods (Glide 622), while a sales ritual is concerned with the marketing and selling
129
strategy inherent within many companies. An example of this is seen in the following section
about the Apple Company and in the Apple store in section 4.4.5).
For Rook, rituals are dramatic enactments. This analysis has its roots in Goffman’s
dramaturgical work, in that they both use metaphors in order to establish a critical language
for use in analysis. Like a number of researchers, Rook uses the construct of ritual in order to
conceptualise and interpret consumption. Rook breaks down ritual experience into four
tangible components: the ritual script, the ritual artefact, the ritual performance role, and the
ritual audience (253).
4.4.1. The ritual artefact
Rook’s first component is the ritual artefact. We can see a consumer object (the mobile
device, for example) as an artefact that can become active in a ritual setting. Such an artefact
communicates to its users and the larger society through symbolic messages that speak of the
consumer’s identity and social status. The artefact can be linked to rituals in a number of ways: for example, through the use of mythological characters, icons, logos or even particular colours. Mobile device manufacturers create “temples” in which the “ritual artefact” of the mobile device can be displayed and consumed. For Apple it is the Apple Store, for Nokia the
Nokia Centre, and for Sony the Sony Centre.
The “temple” of the Apple Store is a telling example of this phenomenon. Apple carefully styles the place in which its objects are displayed and sold. Apple Stores are minimalist temples that have an airy atmosphere with plenty of space for people to try out different devices. As they are usually situated in very busy urban environments, this emptiness sets their space apart from the mundane chaos of the street. The Apple Store’s design includes the use of wood, stone, glass and steel. Their logo is always prominent, and its placement in the
130
store is similar to that of a crucifix in a church. A consumer is immersed in white, the
company’s distinctive colour.
Apple now also sells its products in department stores, which are spaces that it has little
control over. When this idea was first mooted in 1999, Ron Johnson, vice president of
merchandising at Target, declared, “most people don’t know Apple products. They think of
Apple as a “cult” (Isaacson 370). Over time, the department stores have picked up this “cool
cult”, usually creating spaces within their shop that replicate the same distinctive Apple feel.
Like Apple Stores, these are spaces where people can interact with the artefacts, continuing
the focus on communing and sharing the experience of consuming these branded products.
Figure 4-4. The Apple store Tokyo (2011) Figure 4-5. Consumers learning about devices in the Apple store
4.4.2. The ritual script and performance
Rook’s second and third components are ritual script and performance. In rituals, the script
acts as a cognitive map; it identifies artefacts to be used and the behavioural sequence to be
131
undertaken. Ritual scripts can be informal, such as families watching television together,
scripted civic rituals, rites of passage or religious ceremonies (Rook 253).
The ritual script can be seen in a literal way on a wall at the Apple headquarters campus in
Cupertino. It represents the company. Du Gay et al. sees these practises as the “articulation of production and consumption” as Apple, like Sony, strives to be a “global” corporation (du
Gay et al. 78). The words of the founding father Steve Jobs are a guide to the artefact through the Apple experience and philosophy. The plaque is a symbol that embodies value, feelings and histories of ideals and loyalty (Bell, Perspectives and Dimensions 265- 266). It is a reminder of the human spirit on a stone for remembrance. It can be seen as an artefact prompting a ritual remembrance of both brand and founder (fig. 4.6).
Figure 4-6. Quotation from the founder of Apple, Steve Jobs at the entrance of the Apple headquarters in
Cupertino (2013)
The individual’s role in determining the shape of the performance of ritual activity can be extensive or very limited. An activity like a wedding ceremony is highly scripted, and individual expression is highly limited. However, unscripted rituals such as those involving
132
etiquette or gesturing are usually accompanied by the freedom to participate or not. The human performer’s role in any ritual activity can be either active or passive.
Steve Jobs, the late CEO of Apple, was a master of performance and his performances associated with the release of new products were usually memorable. The aspects of these performances that had the most impact were his storytelling devices, and his use of Apple’s
“magical artefacts” in his highly scripted presentation of these objects. Books were written describing his successful presentation style and technique (Gallo 140). Such a use of storytelling is hardly new: it is a technique that is used routinely by political and religious leaders. In particular, priests routinely deliver stories in their sermons, communions, and prayers. For Apple, though, the advent of the internet means that their temple is virtual and worldwide, with Apple presentations (like the Apple developers conference) being available everywhere via online video links to the Apple website or via twitter feeds.
Ritual-like activity can be seen as a ceremony consisting of a series of acts or procedures prescribed by convention (fig 4.7).
Figure 4-7. Crowds of people line up in a procession to buy the iPhone 4s (2011)
A distinction can be made between ceremony and ceremonial rule. Extending the sociologist
Erving Goffman’s concept, ceremony involves a special occasion that carries with it a sense
133
of importance, or marks the significance of something. On the other hand, ceremonial rule is
secondary. The significance and has been reduced through repetition to become somewhat
conventionalised. The use of the word “ceremony” here encompasses rites of passage inextricably tied together by a communion and a state of order. Design companies have design scripts whereby rules and/or established procedures are adhered to.
Some of the company ceremonies of design are culturally driven. The cultures of various producers of mobile devices are usually viewed as having different identities depending on the point of view of the viewer and the facts that surrounds the organisation. For example, for some Europeans, Sony had been viewed as characteristically Japanese, while the Japanese had treated Sony with suspicion as being “cosmopolitan” or “foreign” in its work style.
Just as artefacts have their own culture, so do corporations. When examining the Sony
Walkman, Paul du Gay suggested that to understand the distinct practices in the Walkman’s production is a way of understanding Sony, since the “culture of production” is an “integral part of the company way of life that informs intra-organisational decision and activities... But it also informs the perceptions of outside observers” (43).
Over time these representations of actions become routine, a convention, a company ceremony. The roles are played out in the society of the company and they are repeated, creating institutionalised behaviour. It can be seen by the routine of ritual-like activity through its “front” because in the theatre of design, the routine constitutes a way that the performance is “socialised and modified to fit into the understanding and expectations” of the society that presented it (Goffman 35). Meaning becomes embedded in society. Conceptions of reality are socially constructed and soon become embedded in the everyday interactions of the members of a particular company. The members of the company then interact with each other mirroring behaviour and the ritual-like routine continues.
134
The mirroring of behaviour from human to human is what social psychologists call symbolic
interactionism. George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) was an American philosopher; psychologist and sociologist explored this territory and grounded it in a mix of pragmatism and social behaviour. His general tenet is that from early childhood, our parents and friends tell us things about ourselves, such as “you are a good boy”, “you are a loner”, and “you are a good writer”. Over time, people respond to this input by developing themselves based upon these judgments. People imagine how they appear to others and adjust themselves to suit the imagined judgements (Watson et al. 65).
The mirroring and co-creation of personas can be seen in the design process of the mobile device. The creators of these artefacts rely on imagining who the user is and how the user will use the device. The model is built from feedback or trends, and as seen earlier in this chapter, how story and narrative work together with the persona to create a relationship for the consumer to identify with. Mirroring behaviour also involves the design of the interface back stage, software design and responses to feedback and trends.
Ceremony or routine exists between the user and artefact, in the form of ritualised activity.
The navigation through the menu, checking for messages and messaging, updating the device with new contact information or finding a new recipe in a text-based program constitute a series of procedures in a social convention ( Ling, "One Can Talk” in 1997; Katz, Perpetual
Contact in 2006; Campbell and La Pastina "How the iPhone Became Divine" in 2010).
Similarities can be seen between the role of the actor in theatre and mobile design in that both rely on performative behaviour. Richard Schechner, researcher into performance, underscores that through repetitive enactment a performance becomes refined, and a ritual unfolds from the procession of rehearsals, workshop, blocking scenes and the performance (57). This is
135
much like the designed behaviours and repetition in procedures that feature in both the design
of and the designed operation of mobile devices.
4.4.3. The ritual audience
Rook’s final component is ritual behaviour. Ritual behaviour is often linked to ideas of the
magical, the mystical and mythical. According to Rook, this can be seen in rituals such as
gambling, meditation, and the performing arts (Rook 254). In the case of the mobile devices, the technology is “made magic” through aesthetics and design interfaces, which make a highly complex, mediated experience “just happen”. Apple Stores have a particularly strong
relationship to the magic and the mystic. The evangelical Apple staff assists users to
“experience the magic”. Group events, such as the launching of a new Apple product, are
constructed around a scripted release of a new mythical artefact into the marketplace.
The magical and mythical are not just related to religiosity, but are also associated with
aspects of superstition. Lucky clothes, special numbers and talismans are all part of mystical
ritual activities. We can also see rituals of aesthetic consumption, such as those seen in
theatres, operatic and popular music concerts, which are all “considered as spiritually
elevating and their consumption is highly ritualised” (Rook 254).
Companies create ritual-like activities such as Christmas deals, or half price days that
encourage consumers to buy artefacts. They use artefacts such as flags, costumes and music
in their stores to pick up on pre-existing civic rituals. They also take part in the ritualistic
reinforcement of family bonds, cementing the purchase of artefacts as a part of being a family
(such as at Christmas, or for Mothers’ or Fathers’ Day). Significantly, while Apple does take
part in such general civic rituals to some extent, it very rarely takes part in the consumer
136
ritual of “the sale”, but instead is heavily invested in the ritual of “the launch” of a new
artefact.
Individual rituals are also demonstrated in the way in which the mobile device enables us to
routinely and almost magically check our messages, schedules and meetings. We also join with our devices in order to fill in time or to escape the present. The “information” that we gain from such interactions most often has little value, and instead the checking of our mobile device is a ritual-like practice that gives structure to our everyday routines.
4.4.4. Public ritual and technology
The gatherings of people in communion with each other can often be interpreted as a public
ritual and it is closely associated to Rooks ritual audience. A public ritual, as can be seen in
events as varied as Christmas, Easter, April Fool’s Day, Valentine’s Day, St Patrick’s Day,
wine tastings and computer fairs, has a consistent system at play. These events are centred on
the use of artefacts and consumption of products. They also have a ritual script, a role for
participants and audience members, and a pre-ordained use of said products.
One could argue that the Apple World Wide Developers Conference is such a public ritual. It
is a unique annual event where information is sought by and from developers, as it is the
place where new artefacts are unveiled. Training in the use of new software code and the
development of application programs is one aspect of the conference. There are also keynote
presentations made to a loyal audience. The 2012 event was somewhat different from the
previous conferences as the charismatic leader, Steve Jobs had recently passed away, but it
also heralded a change in that software and services were made more significant than the
hardware of technology (Fortt par. 2). One reason for this change could be the impact on
consumption and economics because of the immense popularity of the iPhone and iPad
137
mobile device. The event is a showcase of Apple’s products, and is elevated to mythical
status because of the difficultly of obtaining tickets (tickets sold out in 12 hours in 2011), and
the fact that attendees have to sign non-disclosure agreements for the sessions they will
attend.
4.4.5. The Apple Store as ritual-like activity – theatre of distribution
The aforementioned jigsaw analogy of how the elements are connected to create a unity
highlights the extent to which mobile device companies have created a “full lifestyle experience” for mobile device use through marketing and advertising. The “closed circuit” of a production of culture is acutely apparent with the Apple Store and its success in creating a type of “temple culture”.
In Hong Kong, the Apple Store is a place where one can buy a mobile device, learn how to use it, to service the device, to connect with other applications and even to personalise one’s device. People of all ages and genders gather there for formal guidance and personalised tutelage under the Apple logo.
Figure 4-8. The Apple store in Hong Kong (2012) Figure 4-9. Consumers in the Apple store, Hong
Kong
138
The logo is very visible (fig. 4.8) and is seen as a symbol of technological control and identity. It is also seen as a place to commune, the iconic glass and metal building being a reiteration of the thematic setting of the mobile device.
Figure 4-10. Formal training class, Apple store Figure 4-11. Apple staff ceremonially offering guidance
The Apple staff wear blue uniforms and are scattered among the floors to help people. Their performances are profoundly evangelistic. The “Apple evangelist” is not a new term; it was first coined by ex-employee Guy Kawasaki (109) to describe a form of marketing strategy which, as Paul du Gay notes in respect to the Sony Walkman, is a way in which production and consumption are brought together. Nevertheless it is the correlation of the Apple evangelist with the ritual of Apple usage that is of importance here. The closed circuit of production, such as that manifested by Apple, is a deliberate engine to create a cultural
(lifestyle) experience. Boundaries are created so that Apple products will not interact with other devices not of the same company. This closed circuit creates a particular sense of identity. It illustrates a “temple culture”, wherein if a consumer purchases a mobile device in the temple space of the Apple store, they also claim membership into the Apple tribe. Such an argument has previously been put forward by du Gay, in relation to the Sony Walkman
139
and its association with the “Tribe of Youth” (du Gay e al. 39). The loyalty of Apple’s tribe
comes from their simple and unified brand profile.
It is consumer ritual-like activity where production meets consumption through a “culture
industry”, a term used by Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno when they established that
industry, commerce and art had been fused together (107).
4.5. Conclusion
The mobile device is manufactured as a consumer object. It is also a socio-cultural object
since we have constructed a meaning for it represented by language, metaphor and by using
narratives. To do this, the designer constructs a consumer device that is fundamentally
involved in ritual-like activities.
This chapter has established the relationship between ritual-like activities, the mobile device
and consumption. It has also established how the device is linked to cultural production and
the consumption process and reveals particular consumer ritual-like activities involving the device. The theatre of design is seen in the ritual-like activity of distribution involved in the
Apple Store.
Where chapter three examined ritual and ritual-like activities as a concept and then introduced the theatre of design as a conceptual framework, chapter five will look at the production of the mobile device. It will do this by highlighting the role of the designer and it will examine how designers embed meaning in the mobile device that leads to the ritual-like activities, using the concept of the theatre of design discussed in chapter three and Goffman’s view of ritual that was explained in chapter two.
140
5. Production and the Mobile device
5.1. Overview
Chapter four argued that manufacturers construct mobile devices as consumer objects through ritual-like activities associated with consumption. It did this by introducing the device as a socio-cultural object, centering the discussion on the Sony Walkman and Apple and how identity is of value in the consumption of the device. The mobile device as a consumer object within the broader cultural studies of consumption and everyday life makes the connection between STS and cultural studies. Following this, the chapter discussed the mobile device as a cultural object and examined ritual-like activities that attach meaning to the device.
Chapter five works together with the previous chapter by underlining that ritual-like activities and performances are tools for understanding the relationship between society, the consumer and the mobile device. It does this by looking at how designers discreetly embed meanings relevant to the social milieu when designing the mobile device that lead to these ritual-like activities. One way to look at this point is through the concept of the “theatre of design” that was previously defined in chapter three. This theatrical metaphor draws upon Goffman’s view of ritual seen in performances. In this view, designers are like writers, directors, and set designers all working backstage to create a design for the front stage.
This chapter starts by defining what is meant by design in the context of the present argument. It starts with a broad definition of design and then discusses the relationship between form and function in design before considering mobile device design more specifically.
141
Having defined these points, the chapter goes on to look at designers: their teams, process
and approaches to design. Designers are crucial because the designer is the creator of the
device and “[embodies] culture in the things that they design” (du Gay et al. 62). Boradkar in
Designing Things has gone one-step further, suggesting that the [designer’s] purpose is to improve the human condition (135). More conservative fashion designers and authors such as
Dreyfus in Designing for People, Papanek Design for the Real World, and Whitely Design for Society outline design as an activity that has the potential of making positive societal impact.
This chapter examines the ways that designers can have an influence on how mobile devices are used, and that this influence may involve making the mobile device more oriented towards the consumer rituals discussed in the previous chapter.
5.2. Design - What is Design?
The word design itself is quite an ambiguous term. It can be used in many ways: as a field or discipline, as a profession, as an activity and as an artefact (Heskett 3–4; Julier 40).
Nevertheless, it is possible to accept that designers of mobile devices are the shapers of technology that mediate human experiences and practices (Balsamo 12). The mobile device is designed in order to help actors to realise their intentions; it also contributes to the nature of human interactions and interpretations. Mobile devices are objects, but they are also objects of our desire, of our need, and of our want. To study such a “thing” is, in fact, to study human culture and relationships. Our relationship with designed things has long history, as about 2.5 million years ago, tribes of the genus Homo habilis fashioned arrowheads out of material around them (Boradkar 1). Design creates things, and creates relationships that entwine and link the object and the user. Geertz, for instance, calls these links “webs of significance”
(Geertz 5). In a way these “things” – which can be termed as artefacts or devices and even
142
gadgets – have shaped our world as we have shaped them. Designers can consequently be
defined as communicators, people with the goal of fashioning things better so that we can
have meaningful interactions with the world (Boradkar 1; Krippendorff 26).
The significance of the designer within the social and economic sphere has become more
visible over the years. One figure that has powerfully demonstrated this in recent times is
Jonathan Ive. Ive is the lead industrial designer of Apple’s products, who has now become a
household name and received a knighthood for services in the design industry. Design has
been a very important aspect of Apple’s success and one that they recognise from a consumer perspective as adding value to their mobile devices (“Jobs at Corporate”).
The designers of mobile devices are varied and include the product designer and the engineer
designer responsible for the hardware and mechanics. The product designer brings all the
elements together to create an aesthetic experience that the user desires or needs. But the
design of the mobile device does not stop when the “official” stage of design by the
manufacturer ceases. Today, users generate their own aesthetic experience by applying a
“skin” (fig. 5.1) over the designed surface of the mobile device, in order to create a
personalised design.
Figure 5-1. Rabbit "skins" cover for a mobile device, Singapore
143
Tim Brown of IDEO, one of the most successful design companies in the United States,
believes that everyday people are all designers and design is therefore a fundamental human
activity (T. Brown). People design films, art, software, safety pins, space shuttles, and mobile
devices, cars, clothes, food, cosmetics, drugs, buildings, services, and so on. But they can
also be said to design their lives by their use and aesthetic display of objects as part of a
larger cycle in design.
Paul du Gay’s study of the Walkman discussed in chapter four introduced a central artefact
and an expression of modern culture that was based on a cycle of five cultural processes:
production, consumption, representation, identity and regulation. This well-known study has
been used and adapted by many cultural theorists, but it is the space between the cycles that
is of most interest here.
For a cycle to work it needs a force, much like a spinning wheel needs a force to set it into
motion. If there is an action there is a reaction, be it physical or cultural. However, in the case
of the mobile device, there are physical forces at work, but there are also psychological,
social and cognitive forces that provide the necessary action. The equivalent can be said of
performance. In Goffman’s studies of “front stage” performances, actors on stage act, listen
and react to each other (Presentation of Self 22). In the same way, artefacts and their designers and their users all “play off” one another.
When people have lived amongst designed artefacts or have designed artefacts themselves, they become aware of “types” of artefacts. These types can be seen as frames. Framing is a memory structure that helps us to quickly perceive an artefact without having to explicitly observe everything about our world and the artefact all the time (Murray, Hamlet Holedeck
210). For instance, if we have a lot of information about a mobile device we do not have to reconstruct the concept of the device from the start. We know that it needs power and we
144
know where the power cable will need to be plugged in to the device to charge it. In a way we have framed a shortcut that defines a category for the artefact, in this case “how to charge a device”.
The framing of the mobile device is also a consequence of the interplay of the social, historical, spatial, economic factors that make up the “given circumstances” that affect how the consumer frames the artefact. The concept of given circumstances in the theatre of design are used in performance by theatrical performers, here referring to the creation of a role. It means that the narrative, its facts, events, time and the place of action, conditions of life, setting, atmosphere and clothes are taken into account by the actor to prepare and fulfil a character (Stanislavsky, An Actor Prepares 54). Similarly, by using the same concept and by looking at how artefacts, device users in turn, then affect their circumstances themselves.
An evaluation of the aesthetics and meaning of mobile device design only reveals the tip of the iceberg. It needs to be supplemented by other analytic strategies that include social and cultural factors. For example, for Nokia, the focus of the “given circumstances” that was their climate of design was on user need. Their definition included “environmental settings, cultural values, economic possibilities, legislative regulations, religious beliefs, or language- related interpretations… [that would] have a potential influence on mobile communication and the design of communication products” (Lindholm, Keinonen & Kiljander 98). Cultural end user studies provided a way to attain a global user interface that echoes the workings of
STS, in which the focus is on the interaction between people and things (Shove 8; Moggridge
593). However, the web of relationships that define an artefact’s social utility is complex. It is motivated by an action-reaction process which leads to a “socially constructed meaning of a product [that] influences or determines how it will be accepted by the audience” (Lindholm,
145
Keinonen & Kiljander 93). It is determined by a number of factors some relating to the new century that we live in.
The 21st century, while often referred to as the “digital age”, is also often called the
“information age”. But we are not just inundated with information; we are also inundated with meaning. Design’s ability to help us recognise information and meaning has evolved around a presumption that “form follows function”(Norman, Emotional Design 70;
Krippendorff 5; Verbeek 25). However, what something’s “function” is can be difficult to define. The concept of form follows function shows a sense of function as evolutionary. In the same way that Darwinist understandings of the natural world see the “design” of life forms as following the functions required by environment and circumstance, so the form of an object is seen to be produced by its surroundings and social context. The dominant discourse of design is that the primary function of artefacts is practical. However, we could also argue that fiction is a function of artefacts, and so form follows fiction.
Here, I am following Heskett’s argument that design is often based on dreams and aspirations rather than merely practical concerns. When considering this point further, manufacturers collaborating with retailers have already created various levels of user profiles to categorize the multiple groups of mobile device users into what are called “personas”. Narratives are then created to describe these personas, for example the user’s interests, job, or financial status, so that designers can visualize and therefore engage their target user through design
(Naha 43). Design has become significant for that user. So there are two aspects to the concept of function: that of significance and that of utility. Utility is determined by how things work to solve problems, while significance comes about from how forms take on meaning through use by design. Heskett claims that, “the roles and meaning assigned to them
[design] often becoming symbols or icons in patterns of habit and ritual” (27). If this is so
146
then there needs to be an understanding of the association between form and function within design that results in the concept of utility and that of significance.
5.2.1. Form and function as narrative in design
Form and function are main components to the design, but I propose that there is another aspect, that being the involvement of a narrative. The narrative of an artifact, which is formed from both a corporation’s identity and the individual artefact’s identity, creates a “story” that the user wants to be a part of.
To be part of the narrative, the user assumes a role in it or is associated with the story. When we watch Star Wars or a James Bond film, we want to be the character either battling the dark side, or being suave and cool like a secret agent. The same force is at work in our relationship with artefacts. A consumer of an artefact hopes to be associated with, for example, a celebrity who happens to hold a Sony mobile device, so that he or she can adopt the lifestyle and the personality traits of that person. If a famous golfer, such as Tiger Woods, uses the new Nokia Lumia, then the assumption is that everyday consumers believe that they can be associated with the Tiger Woods’ story. This story is not simply about being a great golfer, or a successful African-American, but rather about being a “self-made man” who is successful within a competitive field. This can apply to traditional advertisements as well as to product placement, a practice often used by Apple. For example, Chief of Marketing at
Apple Phil Schiller testified in an Apple versus Samsung patent trial in 2012 that “we love to see our products used by stars” (Edwards par. 4).
Narrative representation can be used as a taxonomy that places an individual in a relationship with culture, and a way of associating the identity and lifestyling in relation to the artefact with the consumer. Users identify with a number of aspects of the story of the artefact: the
147
fictional world created with the artefact as central focus; experiences that are recalled as
mnemonic stories with the user as a central character; and corporate stories involving brand
identification. The association is made through the designed artefact (prop) and through the
designed story that surrounds the device. In this way, we can be seen as directing ourselves in
a role and playing out a part of a scripted story. Mobile devices made by Apple, Nokia, Sony,
Samsung and many other companies engage us to be part of their story, inhabit their lifestyle,
and move through their mise en scène. Boradkar describes the extreme as a type of fetishism
where the “obsession of possession” is highlighted in the vein of object worship (Boradkar
249). Du Gay et al. regards this as advertising where the object is represented in a particular
way to draw associations and identities (32-33).
If form follows function, and a function of narrative is the creation and regulation of emotion, then it can be argued that form follows emotion. Aesthetic form also drives an emotional response. For utilitarians, the art of form has been a mere leisure activity that exists when
“people generate enough material surplus to free up time and consciousness for the non-
essentials” (Molotch 54). In such an argument, it is recognised that aesthetic properties do not
make the car go any faster, the aircraft fly higher or a bicycle ride more smoothly; for the
mobile device the colour of its casing doesn’t help with its connectivity.
However, humans are always involved in both aesthetic and utilitarian engagement with other
human and non-human actors. And indeed, it is impossible to separate the two. The design of
mobile devices is informed by both aesthetics and utility throughout the entire process. At
first glance, it may seem as if the design of such “technological” objects is more influenced
by practical concerns such as the capacity of certain materials.
The form of a completed mobile device is shaped by the function of materials, factory set up
as well as the feedback from consumers. Likewise, when it comes to the design of the
148
interface, the form and its consequent aesthetics are shaped by the function of the user interaction. For example, Nokia describes the future of its design by saying they are working on the most natural form of the touch screen interaction model. But it still adds something radically new, which takes away the physical key, and replaces it with a gestural interaction that is also very easy to use with one hand.
Aesthetics communicate to our emotions. When it is visual, the pictures have an affective connotation. A memory of an artefact’s aesthetics acts like a landmark that establishes our priorities of what to think and what order those thoughts might take. An example of this is the desktop metaphor, where aesthetic visual landmarks establish a sequence of associations of,
say, putting a file into the trashcan on the desktop of a computer. As Molotch argues, “affect
makes objects into utilities of the mind” (69). Pleasurable sensibilities and aesthetic curiosity
motivates discovery and facilitates recall.
A clear example of the interplay between aesthetic and practical consideration is the
evolution of the motorcar industry. The car was marketed as a fun, leisure object for the
wealthy, rather than primarily being a way of transporting people and goods. The battle
between the Model A. Ford and General Motors was won on aesthetic grounds, with the latter
becoming popular because of its two tone colour and changes in body style. The streamlined
look had the knock-on effect whereby new dies were made to mould the new shapes. This ultimately made the car more aerodynamic, lowering labour costs and decreasing the number of its parts (Molotch 62-64).
Molotch argues that the reason people have difficulty delineating form and function as
separate elements is that they are, in fact, inseparable (70). Artefacts are always
simultaneously material and emotion, story and experience, function and form. A user can
see a mobile device as wonderful because it works in that they can download wonderful
149
applications from the App stores and because it is so wonderfully pretty and nice to hold. We
are not driven by aesthetics only in the case of non-essential objects like Mobile devices. We
have to eat, sleep and drink. If the food we eat looks tasty we want to eat it. We can see the
importance of aesthetics in the example of Japanese designed bento boxes. Kenji Ekua and
David Stewart believe the consumer has the habit of visually enjoying the things in the bento
box first and then enjoying the act and etiquette within the structure of consuming the food in
the parts of the container (4). The design form illustrates how ritual-like activities and art are equally important as the taste of the food.
5.2.2. Designing a Mobile Device
The mobile device is the centrepiece for Heskett’s “symbols or icons” leading to ritual-like
activities. The device encapsulates a variety of elements and will be viewed from the
perspective of product design and its designer. The main reason for taking this perspective is
that the product design is a holistic approach that brings together all the individual designer
elements so the device feels complete, rather than a collection of components “stuck
together”. The selected list of the type of designers needed to produce a mobile device have
been garnered from a range of sources from design to communication scholars (Winning
Across Global 174- 247; Isaacson 340-347; Jony Ive 165-200; Goodwin 16-32). In broad
terms, the designers required for the production of the mobile device are as follows:
1) Industrial designer
This element in the design process is “where art meets science” (Naha 177). The industrial
designer works closely with both the mechanical engineering side as well as the interaction
design teams. This designer usually overlaps with the product designer and their function is
150
to find solutions with usability, ergonomics and form while taking into account the marketing
and sales side of the mobile device.
2) Mechanical engineering designer
Mechanical engineering designers work with the industrial designer to construct mechanical
solutions to build the device. To do this requires looking for the correct tooling suppliers and
site support at the manufacturing plants for mass production.
3) Visual designers
These designers build from ideas that lead to the visual “look” of the device. The ideas can be
related to architecture, photographs, and landscapes or anything that can give a feel and
emotion to what the device could look like. The information is displayed on what is usually
referred to as a “mood board”. The output is a prototype or “mock-up” of the mobile device
without any software or electronics inside. Types of textures and materials are important to
these designers who keep a wide collection of samples.
4) User experience designer
The portfolio for this designer can be seen as three distinct types of design activities. The
graphic user interface (GUI) design involves the display area. Everything from navigation
and menu systems to revealing screen displays by swiping left or right are the domain of the
GUI design. Next, is the usability scenario analysis where storyboards of particular use
scenarios of a mobile device are simulated in everyday activities like sitting in a taxi or
waiting in an airport lounge playing games and are noted for reference. Finally, these
designers deal with the user interface (UI) platform design where only the points of contact between device and user are considered. Touch, audio inputs, sight elements such as the camera and the finger recognition button are all considered.
151
5) Hardware engineering designer
The hardware architecture is the priority for this designer and involves areas like power supply, the component procurement such as the electronics, chipsets, circuit boards, display, keypad touch screen and speakers. They look at a variety of trade-offs involving processing power, graphics performance and the form factor parameters.
6) Software platform designer
The software platforms, such as mobile OS, Android, Microsoft, and Symbian are the domain of the software platform designer. These designers also consider the applications that are to be used by the mobile device while working with the marketing and the user interface team so that the functionality of the system is not compromised.
7) Brand and company designer
The value and identity of the company is its brand, coupled with how well it is communicated. The designer needs to continually assess the company’s position and what the company stands for and ensure that these elements are embedded into the mobile device. It could mean the correct use and scale of the company logo or the correct colour of the devices. For example the Apple range of iPhone 6 is only available in black, silver or gold.
The product designer brings the team of designers together with a preoccupation on problem solving and working within the constraints set by the company, the brand design, marketing, materials and current technology in order to make the most desirable mobile device for the consumer (see section 5.3.1)
So far this section has described the work of design and provided a fundamental understanding of what design is. It has discussed the aspect of form and function in the
152
narrative in design by extending chapter four’s discussion of story and narrative found in the mobile device and its consumption. Finally, the type of designers needed to make a mobile device was discussed. The following section will look deeper into the role of designers and the design team.
5.3. Designers
There are many ways to design and the design team is organised by particular constraints imposed by the concept, company culture or habit used in designing the mobile device. This section will introduce the design team and the different processes that are options for the designer. The inclusion of this overview about designers and their design approaches provides a context of the design process and foregrounds the design process with the theatre of design.
5.3.1. The design team
Integral to design, as seen above, is the design team and their roles and the designer of great influence is the user experience designer. The user experience designer is involved in two areas of work. First, there is the system behavioural aspect, which covers details of areas such as whether the screen should scroll left or right. The system behaviour designer works closely with the industrial designer on how the aesthetic and physical design communicates the systems behaviour and the development of physical controls (Goodwin 16). The user experience designer can also have responsibility for communicating the design to the engineers, mediating about details and where each part of the design fits into the overall scheme of things (Lindholm, Keinonen, Kiljander 145; Goodwin 18).
The visual interface and information designer is responsible for conveying the brand of the device and the visual appearance of the design. Usually this designer gives a visual direction
153
to the design, refining visual specifications such as colour or typography on screen. They
share their work with the industrial designer when it involves the hardware of the device
(Saffer 172–173).
The industrial designer is sometimes referred to as the product designer and is responsible for
the hardware. They share the visual designer’s responsibility for endorsing the brand’s aims
and objectives by creating a distinctive look and feel for the device(Isaacson 344). They work
closely with the interaction user experience designers on the form and interaction framework.
They also work closely with the mechanical design engineer.
There are three areas of design engineering: electrical, mechanical and software systems.
These engineers are entrusted with making the device work and fulfilling its technical
requirements.
Although these are the primary roles within the design team, roles in particular organisations
are apt to change. For instance, since the 1990s the interaction design team at Nokia consisted
of an interaction designer, a graphic designer and a marketing representative ( Lindholm,
Keinonen, Kiljander 145). The team also has a software implementation designer, and if the
design has a different form, then a product designer is also essential. Nokia also created a
position called “the localiser”. This person ensures consistency in the interface of the various
Nokia models that are released in different markets across the world. That is, while the
language and terms of the device had to be familiar to users in their own languages, and there
was priority given to respecting the language of the user, the text also had to fit on the screen
and the manuals had to be compliant with Nokia’s company policy ( Lindholm, Keinonen,
Kiljander 97). In 2011, the design of the Nokia N9 was created by a team of industrial designers, user interface designers, user experience designers and packaging designers.
154
Nokia believe in teamwork, with Frank Nuovo, vice-president of Nokia saying in 2000
“teamwork gives birth to new ideas”. He also argued that Nokia should set trends and not follow them (Steinbock 275). In comparison, the Apple design strategy emphasises individuals. The main protagonists have been Jobs and Ive, whose actions indicate a design- led process rather than Nokia’s user-centred approach. For example, the iPhone design was changed near the end of its completion by Jobs who insisted that the design should be all about the display. In the initial design, the glass was set into the aluminium case, and Jobs felt that the design of the case was competing with the display. The new design ended up with a glass display that goes right to the edge (Isaacson 472). The design of the device also illustrates Jobs’ obsession with being in control. For instance, the screws were changed to tamper-proof Pentalobe screws on the back plate of the iPhone 4 when Apple learnt that third party repair shops were opening the back of the device (Isaacson 473). Apple’s design shuts down options over the lifespan of the artefact.
The interpretative flexibility of the screen and an intuitive aesthetic prompted a change in the next iPhone to be thinner, with a better ergonomic feeling in the hand. This design also gave prominence to the touch screen, leading to the plethora of devices with large screen displays
(Borries et al. 94) such as the Samsung Galaxy II or the Nokia Lumia 920 in 2012.
The iPhone has been shaped by the desires of a particular designer (O’Grady 135). Although the design process at Apple was autocratic, the quick changes in design could only be achieved by fostering a culture of collaboration. All departments, from design to hardware to software and content, were integrated. This means that processes enacted therein were collaborative. Hence, the meaning that the designer wished to embed in the technology were to a certain degree emergent and flexible, because of the social and cultural processes intrinsic in all aspects of design.
155
5.3.2. Design process
The typical development time for mobile devices is between six to 18 months. Samsung and
LG have developed, launched and sold mobile devices in their domestic Korean market in six
months, while Motorola and Nokia had taken 18 months for a global market (Naha 39).
Generally world leaders in manufacturing can take up to two to five years to launch a new model because they include research and development teams that anticipate the future trends and impact on the mobile device design.
There are four main categories of mobile device design. User-centred design imagines that the user knows best what their needs, goals and preferences are, and it is up to the designer to find out and meet their requirements (Lindholm, Keinonen & Kiljander 219; Goggin, Cell
Phone Culture 47). Activity-centred design doesn’t focus on the user’s needs, but rather on the behaviour that surrounds the task (Hembrooke and Gay 53). It is generally rooted in a psychological framework called activity theory that is premised in the philosophy that the designer knows best. Put into context for the mobile device, the device changes what the user does, and then in a feedback loop, what the end users does and wants changes the design of the mobile device.
Systems-centred design has the system as the focus and the performance of the network is emphasised over the desires of a particular user. This means that there is a network of connections that have a goal to achieve whilst interacting with the user. Designer-centred design is where the designers use their own judgement and experience to decide what the user wants or may want. It can be seen in the design of devices such as the Apple iPod designed by lead designer Jonathan Ive. A state of sharing and exchanging of ideas takes place with the designers in all of these design systems, as it does in the theatre of design, a performance to a
“social front” or audience where the audience evaluates whether it fits in, with what Goffman
156
termed the “common official values of the society in which it occurs” (Presentation of Self
35). These acts can be thought of as types of action and reaction and create a sense of
exchange or communion.
The realm of the user experience designer and the product designer concerns the interface
that is understood to be the external appearance of control and feedback for an interactive
artefact. For example, Microsoft’s Xbox interface is achieved through the game controller
and, for a mobile device, interface is achieved through the icons and apps on the touch
screen. However the design of technology interface has now evolved beyond mere
appearance and includes feedback and user expectations and should be more clearly defined
as “interaction design”. The term is flexible, and so accommodates the social and cultural elements as well as technical and visual components of the design (Murray, Inventing
Medium 11). In summary, the focus in interaction design is not only on the intermediary between the human and machine but is also now inclusive of the system and code that encapsulates the cultural environment of the human/mobile device interaction.
Interaction encompasses both a sense of “inner connectivity” between the design process and the artefact and also the relationship between artefact and user. Klopfer, Squire and Jenkins
(64-75) describe a number of properties in handheld computers that produce particular affordances within the educational sector. They include social interactivity where data can be exchanged face to face; context sensitivity where data is gathered on the device dependent on location, environment and time; and connectivity that connects handhelds to data collection devices, to other handhelds and to a network that has created a shared environment. It
suggests that there are a number of interactions taking place and connectivity is but one very
important property.
157
Tactility is one area of engagement where the feedback reminds the users that they are in the act of coding a text, and the QWERTY keyboard is another that plays a role, such as a creator of textual code, which will be transmitted to another device to be decoded by another human operating another device.
The process of transmission and reception of the message is reminiscent of James Carey’s transmission model of communication, discussed in chapter three. Human beings are necessary to make both engagements function. They are motivated by the experiences of feedback and can use the affordances of the keyboard to send a message. The idea of emotion, connectivity and feedback evokes an action. Consequentially ritual-like activities can be seen as an action that carries a symbolic message to the initiator.
Figure 5-2. Connectivity indicating the various stages
There is a curiosity revealed by the above diagram (fig. 5.2). It reveals that there is a line down the mobile device that is the “no one’s land” of interaction with the mobile device. In
158
fact, that line represents a point of negotiation between two aspects of the interaction: the designer’s part in designing an interaction backstage (see Goffman 3.5 and 4.3.3) and the
user’s part of using the device in the front stage.
If a user were to use an application such as Facebook on a mobile device, he or she would be
making use of the affordances of the site and would “connect and share with the people in
your life” as indicated by Facebook on their website, which would require the user to
negotiate with the mobile devices visual icons, screen presence and feedback systems that
continually reinforce the user’s decisions and actions. The process itself reveals the
negotiation partially as a cognitive agreement between the user, the device and Facebook
(Martin 23)
The concept of connectivity is powerful and the slogan that mobile devices connect everyone
is enticing. Nevertheless, an important case can be made about this “no one’s land” and the
role of control in the particular form of connectivity enabled by a mobile device. If a user is
incessantly interacting with a mobile device, the user still has the choice of flicking the
switch and turning the hardware off. In other words, the user can discontinue the connectivity
in a way that cannot be done in psychological connection with another human who is in the
same physical space. It is this sense of control that governs the notion of communion both to
and with a mobile device. For computer scientist and social science theorist Paul Dourish this
type of connectivity is described by him as embodiment, where it possesses and acts through
a physical manifestation of the world. It is a phenomenon that occurs in space and time and
therefore connectivity is defined by Dourish as an “embodied interaction”. This interaction
takes into account the interplay that is illustrated in figure 5-2 (Dourish 101-124) and is seen
as the creation, manipulation and sharing of meaning by interaction with artefacts (126)
159
However, the idea that mobile device usage is ruled by a cognitive agreement that acknowledges the user’s control over artefact interaction is only part of the story. Many artefacts start with a conscious interaction, but over time, the human actor accepts its presence and then invisibility occurs. For instance, the power plug needs humans to make it function, but once it is plugged in, there is a sense of familiarity that makes the fact that a device is plugged into the wall fairly invisible. One no longer sees it but it is still working back stage. Obviously, this is even more pronounced when one cannot see the interaction. For example, a wireless network is only noticeable when it is first turned on. Otherwise, its presence is accepted and its functions are made invisible – until something goes wrong with the network.
The word communion, which was discussed in chapter three, suggests that elaborate processes are at play in our relationships with mobile devices, such as personalising, aesthetic appreciation, listening, pressing, touching, selecting, organising and reflecting. But beyond the interaction design and performance between individual users and the mobile device, Steve
Jobs asserts that there needs to be a sense of communion that brings the various components of technology together into one coherent product “story”:
You need a very product–oriented culture, even in a technology company. Lots of
people have tons of great engineers and smart people. But ultimately, their needs to be
some gravitational force that pulls it all together. Otherwise, you can get great pieces
of technology all floating around the universe. But it doesn’t add up to much. (Steve
Jobs qtd in Burrows)
To pull it together, design teams have their own narratives and processes enabling them to work in this ritual-like state of communion contained either in a user centred design or a designer centred design. The next section will discuss these two design approaches.
160
5.3.3. User-centred design
To design artefacts for others to use calls for designers to observe and understand the actions
that users undertake, and the meanings that they hope to get from those actions. This can
require designers to be in dialogue with users, or invite them to participate in the design
process (Saffer 33). This approach is referred to as user-centred design (also referred to as human-centred design) (Boradkar 167).
As Klaus Krippendorff has suggested in The Semantic Turn, people acquire the meaning of artefacts by interacting with them. In this paradigm, form follows meaning rather than function. For him, an object such as a cup or pencil is purely an interface. The meaning of the artefact in use is then “the range of imaginable senses and actions that users have reasons to expect. Ideal interfaces are self-evident and intrinsically motivating between users and their artefacts” (83).
Krippendorff, noted that artefacts should be designed so that their interfaces are easily narratable and fit in to social and communicational relationships (147). This means that design teams have their own narrative that provide a direction that a design will go in. For example, the “artefact begins to live in the narratives that stakeholders tell each other and enact, in effect making the artefact available for use or preventing it”(148). The
“stakeholders” in the creation of an artefact can either be convinced to go along with the
design or they will oppose the idea in the early stages of ideation. This opposition influences
the initial designer. The meaning that artefacts acquire in use is largely framed in language.
Design teams usually use metaphor in order to translate concepts into formal characteristics.
They often do this by using objects that are already in existence. For example, I could say that I would like a design to be like a Lear Jet, the Sony PlayStation 3 and a kettle all rolled into one.
161
One could argue that there is a kind of ecology of designed artefacts. Objects are born, diversify into sub-species, adapt, reproduce, evolve or disappear. Mobile devices have built- in obsolescence. Their technology is outmoded as soon as they are born. However this technology is adapted and transmitted into another mobile device, hence creating another species and so the evolution goes on. For instance the Apple iPhone 3 gives birth to the 3g, which gives birth to the 3gs, which leads to the 4. If the purpose of design is to solve problems, then only the fittest (artefact) will survive out in the wilds of social usage.
Successful designs replicate themselves through viral transferral. It is difficult to define what success could be in the world of the mobile device, but their continued existence in the human/mobile device ecosystem relies on their interactions with humans. That interaction is ensured through the cultural transmission of symbolic meaning. The mobile device’s design becomes intertwined with the shared values of a community. The mobile device not only creates changes in society, but also must act in ways that are useful and meaningful to humans in order to survive.
Such a view of the role of design builds on the idea that humans are still ruled by their biological instincts as hunter-gatherers, and their most primary instinct is for survival. These tendencies are certainly alive and well within the mobile device design culture, and have become somewhat embedded in devices. The physical appearance, sound, texture (tactility), weight and functionality are created in order to allow the survival of the artefact and its user in the social landscape. However, it could also be argued that humans are fundamentally social, as Gazzaniga does in his work on the “social brain” in “The Social Brain: discovering the networks of the mind”(Gazzaniga 99). We can see the importance of sociability in the interactions between the device, its designer and the world of physical and social reality in which it exists. Such tendencies are incorporated by the designers into the artefacts and then inevitably played out by the user. It is fairly uncontroversial to argue that mobile device
162
technologies emerge around the demands of human communication, and also shape and are
shaped by this demand.
The human being is able to create meaningful forms that embody metaphysical significance.
It is possible for people to invest objects with intense personal meaning. The human capacity
to invest psychic energy into objects is powerful. The activity is referred to as “cultivation”
(Csikszenthalyi and Rochberg-Halton 13). In the past, such cultivation has most often been
seen to be at work in the user’s interactions with the object. However, the future of artefact
analysis lies is in the “understanding of the interplay between designers’ intentions and the
user’s needs and perceptions” (Heskett 36), and the design of cultures of use.
Human Centred Design (HCD) methods have proven themselves useful in providing a
structure in which to research, ideate, iterate and produce design (Boradkar 167- 168).
However, it is less constructive in the consideration of the model of the theatre of design. To
make it more useful will require a broader understanding of HCD, which can be achieved by
acknowledging its close association with ritual, performance and the embedding of design.
The use of audience evaluation and their expectations of a new product is a familiar
technique in many consumer-facing industries: in film, test audiences have been used to see if
all the correct narrative devices and designs are fulfilling the audience expectations of what
they want, need and desire from the film. The designed mobile device “controls” the user in just the same way as a film might be seen to control the audience. Norman, in discussing how design effects our emotion points out that “all the theatrical arts engage the viewer both cognitively and emotionally”(Emotional Design 123) building a relationship to the emotion in design. For instance in Jon Boorstins’ analysis of film, movies appeal on the emotional level as visceral, vicarious and voyeur; this categorization bears a great similarity to
Norman’s three levels of engagement in design: reflective, behavioural and visceral level
163
described earlier in this chapter. Boorstin’s “vicarious” level corresponds well with Norman’s
“behavioural” where as Boorstin says “the vicarious eye puts our hearts in the actor’s body; we feel what the actor feels…” (Boorstin 67) and Norman’s behavioural where pleasure is found in effective use of a designed object. The voyeuristic level is that of the intellect, standing back and observing and reflecting like a prying observer watching out of human curiosity (Boorstin 13). The similarity is so great that Norman borrowed the term “visceral design” from Boorstin to replace his own term of “reactive design” (Emotional Design 123).
The point is that just as the movie director can manipulate the shots in film to manipulate the way the viewer feels, the designer is aware of how to create an emotion in the design. This creation of control begs the question of whether human interaction with a mobile device is, or can be, a truly interactive process. The answer would involve an in-depth analysis and a possibility for further research. However, what is significant in the relationship for our purposes here is what I wish to refer to as cognitive outsourcing. This is the dynamic that involves an artefact being the centre of cognitive activity, appropriating part of the processing of information or cognitive skills that was once primary to the user. The design has become a dependent extension of the actor, in the same way as Marshall McLuhan argues technologies and media are “extensions of man” (McLuhan 7). Marshall McLuhan was a renowned philosopher of communication and known for his studies in media theory and for calling attention to the overlooked role of the medium in communication that resulted in the expression the “medium is the message (McLuhan 8)”. This expression was derived from
McLuhan’s belief that it is the “medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action”(McLuhan 9). It is the difference between watching the news on TV, the Internet or in a newspaper, not the content of the news itself.
The concept of “extensions of man” was McLuhan’s claim that inventions are an aspect of the human dimension and therefore come from our own experiences. The extensions that
164
McLuhan was referring to were inventions, or media, because they extend human
experiences while also increasing our human capacity (McLuhan and Moos 293). The human
brain can store information while the mobile device can store and retrieve a considerably
greater amount of information. The mobile device is the extension of memory in the human
brain.
But the question is whether objects can perform. Let us take the example of test-driving a
new car. The salesman is eager to hear what the driver thinks. The driver anticipates the
question and tells the salesman the car didn’t perform that well. Here, the driver is saying that the car has, in fact, “performed”: that is, it has been “doing” something, which can be judged against an assigned value; there is a value of expectation based upon fulfilling a criterion. Jon
McKenzie thinks objects can perform. In Perform or Else, McKenzie discusses the relationship between cultural, organisational, and technological performance. The early chapters discuss the difference that exists between the three paradigms while the later chapters apply the paradigms to the Challenger space shuttle accident that includes a number of thematic associations with the concept of challenger, (i.e. something that “challenges”).
McKenzie’s belief is that the associations become stratified where the cultural, organisation and technological work together. Technological performance for computers can refer to the technical effectiveness of the application or program (97). The effectiveness is based on the object’s performance to a criterion of designed specifications. The effectiveness of these specifications is also bound by a cultural dimension that is determined by the constraints such as cost, safety, and characteristics of materials that were selected by the designer (116). A trade-off exists between the technological performance and the cultural performance, whether it is cost, or determined by other constraints.
165
Thus, many artefacts do perform (E. Bell; McKenzie; Schechner; Boradkar; Goffman).
However, it must be the recognised that people’s interaction with the artefact is fundamental
to how the meaning of “performance” is understood (Boradkar 246).
In the theatre of design, the term director can be freely interchanged with the term designer.
The designer is responsible for the whole production of the event. In film, theatre and media
arts, the phrase “from script to screen” is one familiar to the makers of a film or television programme. In chapter four, the way that Rook used the term ritual script when referring to a sequence of behaviour that consumers undertake was discussed. This is the same for the
mobile device’s performance. The artefact has a script, and the script takes the artefact
through its story. The mobile device also contains ways that “block out” movement and so
position actors on stage. There is a front stage area (what is being performed with the user)
and a back stage area (what is going on inside the device). The “costume” and “makeup” are evident on the “skin” of the device, and display that device’s character or identity within a cultural production sphere.
The user of the device is also using the mobile device as a prop within their particular social performances. There are many simultaneous on-going performances at work here and they can be as simple as the user being preoccupied by looking at the screen of their device in an act to avoid engaging in conversation. These performances are facilitated by communication.
An example of communication of a non-human actor would be a kettle that whistles to say that it has boiled, or a car that tells the drivers about the performance of their car and whether they are driving economically. The interaction is governed not by intuition, but by the learning of a system of meaning. In the case of a mobile device, such a communication is facilitated by a designed sound indicating a message or a flashing icon. The mobile device is
166
performing by using signals: the device is talking to the user. The human actor needs feedback and without it the communication loop is not complete.
The question is whether humans communicate to inanimate objects and whether these artefacts communicate back. Do designers embed something of themselves into the artefact that they are designing and do these devices indirectly communicate that to the user?
Certainly, corporations do create their own signature and designers who are incorporated into the design plan then use the company’s design language to inform the artefact. The design language is then embedded into the artefact to make it have a specific character or personality
(Boradkar 136).
Making a mobile device a character can motivate the creation of a desire for the artefact. For example, the Apple iPhone has been marketed as something to fall in love with, with marketing catch phrases such as “Why you’ll love an iPhone” or “iPhone 5. Loving it is easy.
That’s why so many people do” (Debaenst).
Figure 5-3. iPhone 5 campaign (2013)
Of course, this creation of desire specifically addresses a desired engineered outcome, rather than a real use outcome.
167
5.3.4. Designer-centred design
The way that designers can “talk” to users is usually understood as being through the device.
This is what Norman called the “system image”, which is the designer’s model of the
interface with the device. The mediator (communicator) acts like a metaphor that translates a
set of inputs into a set of outputs, or vice versa. In most cases, the mediated interface is either
a model or image of a system. It is a sort of translator that offers a way in which a designer
can talk to a device or through the device to the user. If we accept Norman’s paradigm, the
mediator is the way in which the user’s model (which is the user’s expectation of the device)
and the designer’s model (which is the perception of the user and the device by the designer)
come together and integrate. The designer creates a system image, which hopefully satisfies
the user’s model.
Problems occur when there is a misalignment between the designer’s perception of the user and the actual users. For example, in 2010, bankers from British bank Standard Chartered in
Singapore switched from corporate Blackberry to Apple iPhone. The Overseas Chinese
Banking Corporation had previously done the same, suggesting that it could “provide our colleagues with another option to access their office email and sync their contacts, notes and calendar while on the move… [They] can enjoy the features and content available on their iPhone without the hassle of carrying another device in order to access office email” (Lim).
Here, we can see that Blackberry’s imagining of their user as primarily interested in their primary design features, such as security and push emails, while in fact their users were more interested in a fully integrated device.
Norman points out that many have suggested designers work best when they design for each other: that is, when they are professionals designing for other professionals or themselves
(Emotional Design 82). They will then be able to design well because they know what they
168
need. These designs tend to be simple. Good behavioural design, design that is centred on the performance of an artefact and the user’s ease of interaction with it, must be integrated into the design from the beginning. It is not successful when added as an afterthought. Therefore behavioural design starts with knowing all about the user’s needs (Emotional Design 83).
However, users can’t know what their needs are going to be in the future. For example,
Apple’s CEO said “customers can’t tell you about the next break through that’s going to happen next year that’s going to change the whole of the industry. So you have to listen carefully” (Lubenow and Rogers).
The best way to know what a user will need is not to randomly survey users as to what their needs are or might be in the future, but rather to practically observe the user with a prototype, noting their performance and behaviour on the user’s own stage, that being their everyday environment (Norman, Emotional Design 83; Lindholm, Keinonen & Kiljander 206; Lidwell
194; Wagner 82).
Reflective design concerns the message, culture or the meaning of the product. A designer creates an identity for a user and through that device’s own identity, this personal identity is then transmitted to the user. Norman recognises this in his visceral, behavioural and reflective design models, which reflect a sincere and important understanding of the design paradigm.
These levels are part of the brain, for instance the visceral level makes fast judgments on everyday life such as what is good and bad, what is safe or dangerous and alerts the muscles for action (Norman, Emotional Design 22). For design it relates to the human’s initial reactions based on sound, feel and look, like food arranged on the plate in a pleasant way by a chef or the feel of an iPhone. The behavioural level is not conscious; for instance the piano player can play notes with their fingers while reflecting on the higher level of the music and its emotions all at the same time. In relation to design it is all about use and how function
169
comes before form (Norman, Emotional Design 70). The contemplative part of the brain is
the reflective level and signals a message about culture and meaning of a product or its use
(Norman, Emotional Design 83). For instance the design can be about self-image of the user, like carrying the latest, hard to get mobile device or it can be about reflecting on the positive aspects of its use.
But Norman’s design models are made more difficult because designers no longer fit into one category. A designer can now be a mixture of an artist, an engineer, entrepreneur, thinker and anthropologist. They can come from such diverse disciplines as the fine arts, technology, computing and economics (Dykes, Rodgers, & Smyth 101).
The diversity of the type of designers as well as the various design processes that are needed to produce the mobile device is an important aspect in this section. It highlighted the necessity for a type of communion where information is shared between designers, and a design process where they engage with either the user or other designers to score interactions into the device. Underlying this section is that behaviour is fundamental as seen in Norman’s concept of designing emotions, but also in the way that mobile devices do perform suggested by Jon McKenzie and also how they were examined through the theatre of design.
The next section will go deeper and examine the mobile devices performance where designers add value by embedding interactions and behaviours when designing the mobile device.
5.4. Embedding value
Affordances, experiences, emotions in design, and human computer interaction are a few of
the ways that value is embedded into design. These features will be discussed in this section
170
including how company strategies can embed a designed experience in the production of the
mobile device.
Viktor Papanek claimed, “all men are designers. All that we do, almost all the time is design,
for design is basic to all human activity” (3). Tim Brown from IDEO also supported this claim in his design studios (T. Brown). But it is in the ritual-like activity of designing mobile devices that we see the intrinsic value of design inherent in a variety of humans that is then
applied to concepts of utility and of communication.
The way an object communicates to the user or indeed communes with the user in turn gives that object value. Design value is embedded into the artefact but is also read by the user. It represents a sign and then we respond by giving value to it (Lash, Economies of Signs and
Space 4). The most common conceptualization of value is as an economical or financial state.
Other states can include emotional value, technological value, design value and political
value.
Embedding can therefore be seen to fall into two particular camps that of embedding by
designers while the other is embedding by users. Designers can embed digital technology into
everyday artefacts such as smart phones or into home systems to control the security, lights
and temperate of an apartment. Alternatively embedding can take place at the start of the
design process with designers making devices desirable for the consumer (Naha 162).
Desirability in this case is the blending together of software and hardware design as an
expression of the needs and desires of the consumer. The designers hook into the user’s
expectations and the design may involve everything from selecting the colour and materials
of the mobile device to the feedback from the touchscreen and by the user. According to
Naha the visual and material designers analyse the level of moisture on the touchscreen and
how gloves affect the interface while the brand designers are concerned with embedding the
171
company’s story into the device (190). Affordances (see 5.4.1) are another way that designers embed, more specifically embedding cues for people who use the device. Designers therefore become preoccupied with embedding content and the appropriate action into a device so that the function of the mobile device can be immediately understood by the user
(Almquist and Lupton 7).
One aspect of user embedding can be seen as a process of embedding technology into society. Ling and Yttri believe that this is the case where more and more mobile devices are invading our routine behaviour. Users are embedding technology into everyday situations. A great deal can be said for the design/ user dichotomy where designs and users configure each other. So by embedding devices in practices, users can give new possibilities for action and therefore users can influence the embedding and functioning of technologies (Verbeek and
Slob 79).
In his seminal work The Social Life of Things: commodities in cultural perspective, Arjun
Appadurai argues that value is integral to the biography of things (1). His entire book is based on the premise that actors construct the world by shaping and manipulating the material world. However, of more interest here is the interaction between actors and the material world, specifically the reaction of actors that is caused by an object. For instance, imagine a human with a car. Humans design cars. A particular car shapes the human experience in a particular way. The car provides shelter, transport (movement), and from its size, style and decoration conveys a social message about the identity of the person who drives it. Without the car, much of our daily life would be different.
Consequentially Appadurai examines the way in which objects have value and the workings of the creation and exchange of commodities. The process of how the artefact came to hold its particular value is of great interest when it comes to the mobile devices’ performance
172
characteristics, that is, how well they achieve their goals and provide aesthetic value. These
performance traits can be an aspect of the technology and material. For example, the Apple
iPhone 5 became slimmer due to the decrease in the size of components such as the LTE
(long-term evolution wireless communication network technology for transferring data at high-speed) being on one chip instead of voice and data occupying two processing chips, the smaller size of the camera, and the screen and the aluminium being bevelled by a machine that creates extremely precise fitting. Value can be seen in both the technology of creating the device as well as the device itself and what it represents.
There is a design ritual that foregrounds the notion of size. The emphasis is so great that
Samsung has developed a number of mobile device tablets in a variety of sizes. There can be practical value in the creation of a small artefact (it is light and easy to carry), but the social meanings of smallness are variable. Having a small, light mobile device can be problematic as this connotes that a device is flimsy and not robust. On the other hand, weight gives a
sense a workmanship, sturdiness and good quality. For example, car doors are given extra weigh so that they “clunk” when shut, thus communicating safety (Norman, Emotional
Design 67). The iPhone and iPad mobile devices are made with aluminium casing in order to embed a visual sense of quality, even though they are heralded as lightweight ("Apple
(Egypt) - IPhone 5 - Learn About What It Took to Make IPhone 5"). This gives a tactile sense of solid construction and embeds the value of the object visually. Here we can see how
“quality” is a symbolic construct.
The symbolic work of making products “meaningful” is key to the process of designing.
Therefore, interaction between designers and the artefact is significant, and the quest to make mobile devices more meaningful centres on interaction design. Designers are “frequently hired to embed tangible though in other respects mysterious elusive qualities and emotional
173
values into the products on which they work” (Shove 9). While some designers use design to
embody emotional value, others like Fiona Raby and Tony Dunne use it as a medium to
stimulate debate in areas such as the role of technology as medium, as product and as a
critique of society (Moggridge 591–593). If design is examining the role of technology as a medium, it will bring the aesthetics and function of the artefact to the forefront. If it is using technology as product, it finds new ways to bring that product into our existing social, cultural, economic and technological ways of life (593). If designing technology as a critique of society, the artefact will reveal the social and ethical implications of technology.
The “Silverline” scheme was one that was designed with ethical and social concerns in mind.
In late 2012 in Singapore, a country known for its technologically literate population, consistent government regulation in many public arenas, high standard of living, and high mobile phone penetration rate (Castells et al. 10), a government social project was started called “Silverline”. The programme, run by the main government telecommunication company Singtel, collected used iPhones, kitted them out with special elderly-friendly applications and distributed them for free to seniors. One app was an emergency alert for ambulance or police, another was used to record moods so volunteer staff could keep track of the seniors, and another could detect if they fell over (Leong). On the surface, it seems like a good idea. However there were privacy concerns (iPhones being used to monitor the whereabouts of the elderly) and well as concerns that this scheme was a “soft sell” for commercial interests.
If there has to be one overarching principle behind successful mobile device design it is in the creation of an experience. CEO of Nokia, Jorma Ollila said in 2000 that Nokia was an
174
“experience industry … We are in business, which offers people experiences. In this
regard, we compete with entertainment, candy, fashion and retail clothing. People
expect communication to be an experience” (Steinbock 275).
Apple’s creed was very similar. According to CEO Steve Jobs, “we want to make great products, because we care about the user, and because we like to take responsibility for the entire experience” (Isaacson 563). For these CEO’s, the value of the mobile devices is significantly linked to the adoption of experience. The following section will look at experiences as a way that designers embed value to make the mobile device oriented toward a consumer ritual-like activity. It will examine elements such as interface interaction, emotion and aesthetics in the device.
5.4.1. Affordances
Affordance is derived from a term used by James Gibson in 1966. It was further developed in
1979 in the so-called “Ecological Approach” to design. Donald Norman made the term popular in his books Emotional Design and The Design of Everyday Things. Affordances mean that all objects behave and appear in a particular way that is abstracted by actors in order to form a mental model. For example, a white board affords writing and erasing whatever is drawn on the board by being a certain height off the ground. A door handle affords turning and then pushing or pulling a door that may open, and a crucifix affords holding and prayer.
In the statement above, we can see how affordances offer an indication of how to commune with an object or a feature and it is clear that the designer can enlist a number of techniques to embed designed emotion in the visual aesthetic.
175
Mobile devices are distinctive in their shape and afford the pushing of buttons and
interaction, and define the function. However, the design of empathy in order to afford
emotions has been an integral component in their design.
Interestingly, the creation of an emotional response is connected to the paradigm of the
ritualization of identity and status. The instability of affordance of an emotion created by a
mobile device can be the result of the customisation or personalisation of that device. For
example, in fig. 5.4 and fig. 5.5 below, customisation has interrupted the embedded ceremony
created by the designer. The Zen-like calmness originally afforded by the iPhone has been
radically eroded, and instead a new ceremony of luxe status display has begun.
Figure 5-4. iPhone encrusted with diamonds Figure 5-5. iPad 24 karat gold cover valued at HK$23800
So there is a particular interpretative flexibility that is allowed by mobile devices. The design of a simple hardware platform in Apple, Nokia and Samsung mobile devices allows designs to be readily adapted. The adaptiveness, says Jean Burgess in her study on the Apple brand and its relationship to the consumer, is traceable back to the launch of the App store in 2008 and from this point it signalled that Apple strongly emphasized the mobile device as a platform (39). But personalisation of the platform occurs across two levels, as Larissa Hjorth points out; it can be done by both the user and the industry (190). The user or designer’s participation in a template culture of personalisation is perceptible and the phenomenon
176
follows Rook’s elements of consumer ritual defined in the previous chapter, in which the
ritual artefact communicates through symbolic messages and speaks of the consumer’s
identity and social status. Throughout the centuries, the fundamental form of a Christian crucifix has remained the same, while the surface of the object is customised. Mobile devices, especially iPhones, invite such a surface customisation while at the same time keeping the ritual-like activities that we perform through the interaction with “apps” relatively locked down.
5.4.2. HCI and form
Interaction design has been with human beings for centuries. Chapter two discussed the
invention of the Morse code, which required the design of a system of use. Similarly, in a
television studio there are many devices that need to interact with both each other and with
the user in order to work together to transmit pictures and audio. The cameras, the
communication talk back system, the cameraperson, the audio engineer, and the microphones
all need to have their interaction designed. Interaction design can simply be understood as the
process of interaction between human beings and an automated system, but has become far
more prevalent since the proliferation of computing technology.
In the 1960s, the interaction between humans and computers was enacted via punch cards. In the 1970s, Xerox PARC created the Xerox Star interface, that had features ranging from
“windowing, icons and desktop metaphors to WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) text”(Norman 47). This process of interaction was built upon Joseph Bruner’s conception of the three types of learning mentalities: enactive (doing), iconic (image) and symbolic (Barnes
365). The visual nature of this interaction was intended to grab the interest of the actor in the process of “doing” information input and manipulation with the computer. However, the visual communication aspect is so powerful that it is easy for people to get distracted. Visual
177
icons were used as a bridge to the symbolic, an important element that provided a context and
creates connections between ideas and thoughts (Kay qtd in Laurel and Mountford, Art of
Human-Computer 196). The 1980s then saw a new emphasis being placed on the user. In
1979, Steve Jobs visited Xerox PARC and was shown the development of the Star computer
(Barnes 368). In 1983, Apple led the way with their “graphical user interface” (GUI) computers “Lisa” and “Macintosh”. The era of the personal computer had begun. The greater memory and power available for computers also meant an increase in the number of video and arcade games. The 1980s saw bulletin board systems like the WELL and Prodigy emerge, that enabled people to send e-mails to each other via modems through telephone networks (Saffer 14). According to Dan Saffer, the 1990s was the time in which the formal discipline called interaction design began. Saffer argues that it was really the advent of commercial, public internet that changed the relationship of humans to computing devices
(16). At this time, sensors began to be built into devices and microprocessors were becoming smaller. So the 2000s saw the start of gestural interfaces and touchscreen devices such as
Nintendo Wii and, eventually, the Apple iPhone.
According to Janet Murray, it is the human rather than the technological device that should take precedence in interaction design. She contends that any human-made object is part of a culture and its meaning is created through the social activities, thoughts and actions of people
(Inventing Medium 1). Though Murray aims to centralise the role of graphic designers and industrial psychologists in her argument, this concept is also useful to capture a bigger picture of the context and connotations of particular design choices (Inventing Medium 2). Whether of a humanistic bent or not, interaction design is always dependent on a multidisciplinary environment. For example, Dan Saffer argues that, “[t]he best products involve multiple disciplines” (22). Marc Rettig suggests that interaction design is more than software development and graphic design with “a dab of psychology and a human factor … It needs
178
filmmaking and theatre, biology, counselling and therapy and a new branch of linguistics”
(Rettig 19).
Interaction design is a way of bringing the human’s physical world and the mobile device’s
technological world closer together. An important way to close the gap between the two
worlds is to provide good interaction design that has reassuring feedback (G. Smith xv). The
feel and the use of one’s senses as one touches or types on a device confirm the relationship with the device.
However, mobile devices talk and interact with one another as well. In the 2011 Apple World developer’s conference, a particular phrase was conspicuous. When Jobs talked about a new operating system that would affect everything from iPhones to iPods and iPads, he said “we can’t wait to see what our developers do with its 1,500 new APIs” (Mitra par. 2).
An Application Programming Interface (API) simulates the rules or guidelines that software programs inside a device follow in order to talk to each other. In a way, it acts as a mediator or interface between different software programmes. It helps devices to communicate by using the same language, living contextually in the same environment. It can be called a culture of communication within an artefact that is human-made and representative of the designers on a social and culture model. Delving deeper into the world of the programme designer ecology will reveal applications or thematic performances, libraries of information and vocabularies where created software characters called programs interact. These applications program characters to act out a script that has been written through “routines”,
“object classes” and “protocols”. From an outsider’s viewpoint, this is another world, a theatre of technology that has its own actions, settings, stages, languages, goals and behaviours. The designers have made this interface technology in their own form; it has been extrapolated from their social world in order to make sense of this technological one.
179
However, an API is in not designed to interact with humans, but rather with other programs
and artefacts. The key to this is communication, and the question is whether such non-human
actors still behave in anthropomorphic ways. Whether programs and devices are created to
“talk” to humans or not, they must always talk to the humans who make them, and be able to
make sense of human behaviour. Indeed, Apple keeps on returning to such anthropomorphic
metaphors to translate its concepts. For example, at that 2011 Apple conference, the Apple
CEO told Apple followers that the hardware is the brain and sinew of the product, and the
software is its soul.
5.4.3. Experience design
The emergence of the field of experience design is the combination of a number of
disciplines such as economics, psychology, sociology and communications. Design research
has made large steps in the past decade to solidifying itself as a major field of academic
research and theory building.
However, experience design is not new. Hilary McLellan, in her journal article “Experience
Design”, points out that it has been around for centuries and can be seen in the way that rituals, ceremonies, dramas and even architecture were all designed to provide a kind of experience (59). Today, different media are providing different kinds of experience. This has led to a greater importance being placed on effective design. McLellan’s research leads us to
the theory that economics is a key factor in experience design. However, there are clearly
other factors that are also involved, such as entertainment, education, aesthetics, and
escapism.
The comparison between the theatre or film and mobile technology is intriguing. There is a
common denominator in the way in which experience is designed, and a possible link
180
between the role and relationships between designers and artefacts will be described later in this section with reference to Norman and the film analysis of Jon Boorstin. There are also lessons to be learnt from previous technologies, and the way that they are applied to the new suggests that old hierarchies of knowledge are still ever present in the mobile device.
The constant challenge that designers face in the technology of mobile devices is not the technology itself but finding ways to give meaning and by doing this to put humanity (life) into the products. The success of Apple can be seen to stem from its ability to do just that.
One way it does it is by creating a performance space in which its artefacts are displayed: that is, through the Apple store (discussed in chapter four). In such a place, mobile devices are in the “costume” of their product packaging. The human actors on this stage do indeed judge a mobile device by its cover. As then marketing director Mike Markkula said in 1977, “[w]e may have the best product, the highest quality, the most useful software… if we present them in a slipshod manner, they will be perceived as slipshod; if we present them in a creative, professional manner, we will impute the desired qualities” (Isaacson 78). The presentation of these experiences is performed in the theatre of design as a point of distribution for the mobile devices in its stores.
5.4.4. Emotion in design
Japanese designer Naoto Fukasawa was born in Yamanshi, Japan in 1956. The importance of
this designer is that many believe he and Dieter Rams (Klinke 44) were the main influences
behind both the ubiquitous Apple product design and in creating a minimalist feel in the
world of electronics in general. In Japan there is a word that means without thought or simply
“without” (mu-fi) and this is the emotion that Fukasawa attempts to express. He believes that
“thinking takes time; feeling is immediate”(Alessi 3).
181
Design is emotional and it incorporates both the designers’ state of mind as well as the anticipated result in the behaviours of the user. Donald Norman (21), a firm disciple of using emotion in design, believes that the responses can be broken into visceral processes or
automatic responses, behavioural processes whereby the user is unconsciously controlled as
their brain enacts habits and routines in its everyday behaviours, and finally, the reflective
which according to Norman is at the highest evolutionary level. This level enables humans to reflect, and remember – in other words, to contemplate. The processes within design for
Norman can be described as being both “bottom up” processes, viscerally driven by
perception and “top down” processes driven by thought. The process is derived from the way we see pictures and read meaning in them. It is a constructivist psychology in which the
conclusion is drawn from the perceptual input. For instance the perception of colour is drawn
from the “bottom up” process that is fast and involuntary (Bordwell 31). A “top down”
inference is a process like recognising a familiar face in a crowd. The process is based on
assumption and expectation relying upon past experiences, context, prior knowledge and
problem solving to recognise the friend’s face (Bordwell 31).
The examination of how films are understood by audiences mainly concerns how this process
works and is related to the neo-formalist school suggested by David Bordwell’s Narration in
the Fiction Film. The account contains a clear guide to the cognitive process in film theory
that is grounded in constructivist theory of psychological activity (30). In other words,
perceiving and thinking are active, goal-oriented processes. Both film and design systems include top down and bottom up approaches to explain how users perceive information and the type of cognitive processes that they undergo. The system is useful in order to analyse what is “going on” in the reading and receiving by the user/audience. But cultural aspects of the reading experience do not exist in this equation. However, Norman understood that cultural influences do have a huge impact on both behavioural and reflective functions
182
(Emotion Design 22). The use of a film theory approach is handy to understand the
mechanics of the system like Boorstin’s analysis, though it would benefit by being framed by a social constructionist approach. Critics of this approach support a claim that neo-formalism
is only used to illustrate a new alternative way of seeing things.
5.4.5. Aesthetics and sound
Throughout this study, mobile devices have been determined to be both a communication and
sophisticated informational device. It is evident that a device is able to operate voice
functions, as well as a suite of other information extensions such as messaging, playing
games, and accessing applications and the Internet. For instance, Nokia sees the device as a platform for entertainment, commerce and tools for information management and media consumption (Lindholm, Keinonen & Kiljander 6).
Just as the theatre of design can be used as metaphor for ritual-like activities and technological design, the metaphors used for the mobile device can help us to understand the
relationship to behaviour, communication and interaction. This could lead to unduly
anthropomorphic understandings of the mobile device, but that can be managed by prefacing
the statement with “what if”, as in “what if mobile devices were imagined to have bodies like humans?” This allows objectivity by providing a context and flexibility to explore new perspectives concerning both human and device interaction design. This is a decent strategy, as Michael Ruse argues, as metaphors are used all the time in science and for their direct contact with human emotions (273).
According to Prasad Boradkar, aesthetics continues to be one of the least examined areas within design studies and deserves more serious attention. Aesthetic manipulation can be seen in style. Style is a central area for design and is not explicitly exploited in terms of form,
183
colour, texture and material. It incorporates emotion in politically determining what a
designed object should outwardly signify (267). Style plays a critical role in class distinction, identity and subculture, seduction of users, and the development of a corporate image. In this highly visual world, the aesthetics of an image is of increasingly greater importance.
The qualities that mobile devices display can be seductive. They can be used as a manipulative force to create a false sense of need in the user’s mind. The designers’ objective can be to create beautiful things in order to serve the economies of the companies that make them. According to a Marxist point of view, the aestheticisation of commodities is just another way to further capitalistic wealth and to disregard the feelings or wants of the user
(Haug 50).
It creates a desire so great that people will go to extremes to buy the artefact. However, beauty can also be used to enhance and create a pleasurable ecology that emerges from a balance between form and function.
Therefore beauty or viscerality is the signature of a company and the creation of a particular
“look” creates its own culture. As Boradkar argues, “[a]ll forms of culture production whether painting, architecture, film or literature bear an imprint of the creative mind as well as the environment within which the artefacts are created” (136). It is true to say that Sony,
Apple, Nokia and Samsung have their own cultures, rituals and politics. The complexities of meaning that are needed to unravel the cultural “mix” do call attention to the need for new types of design research in order to delineate, relate and convey understanding.
5.4.6. Designing by sound
So far we have seen how the language of the designer is expressed through visual communicative design. I briefly want to mention sound, and footnote the “voice” of the
184
mobile device. The voice or even sound can be used as a starting point in this examination of
the system of performance in design-centred work. I have no desire to interpret the sounds
and their effect on the user as Christian Licoppe’s study of mobile phone ring tones provides
an excellent study into the categorising of particular groups according to their choice of
customised tones (Licoppe 141). Instead, I am looking at the distinctive “voice” of the mobile device. Most performers have described methods of voice and sound as a key way to create a character. The character has mannerisms, both physically and psychologically driven. But they also rely on a number of “given circumstances” when creating a character that is, so to speak, that character’s “backstory”. Laurence Oliver, who was a master of acting technique,
established a technique that by using voice one could establish a character (Cole and Chinoy
411 and Olivier 79). Ray Winstone has also reflected on the use of voice in the creation of
character. He prepares for his role through getting the accent of the character he is playing.
Winstone says that when you “play someone with an accent it changes your whole body
language ...it’s the accent first then you add the historical stuff as you build it up ... and
bouncing off the other actors and the director” (Winstone). In other words, finding the voice
of the character will automatically motivate one’s physical behaviour, and then the background and the given circumstances of the character are added into the mix. For instance, if an actor plays someone who is a quiet speaker then the body quietens and the physical behaviour and gestures are used minimally.
Finding the voice of the artefact creates for the designer the appearance and physical
attributes of the device. Similarly with theatre actors, tone creates a physical behaviour
(Stanislavsky, Building a Character 135). The accent of the device creates the object’s visual
appearance; its clothing, shape, its texture, voice and its emotion reflectively give designers
and consumers reason to identify with, and to create identity through self-image, as discussed
in the previous chapter. Therefore, manufacturing the design of performance with a device is
185
creating a character out of an inanimate object, and sound could be used productively to
create a persona for an object. We have also seen in chapter 4 and in this chapter that
personas create a story, a narrative that also helps the consumer to identify with and to
experience the design of the device.
5.4.7. Company design strategy: mobile device – package design
The experience of opening a package carries with it expectation and excitement. When a
child opens a box she is often excited not so much by the toy but by the box itself. The
possibilities of what one can do with a box far outweigh the toy that is inside. When
designing a full mobile device experience, the “costume” of the mobile device must also be designed: that is, the packaging. The distinctive packaging both prominently displays the mobile device and serves as an identity marker, for example, of Apple products. As I discussed earlier, Zen philosophy and Japanese design have both been important to the designers of Apple products and experiences. For the Japanese, the visual display is as important as the contents. A good example of this principle is the bento box (refer to fig. 5.6
and fig. 5.7), in which different compartments are made to house the meals in different components. The Japanese Bento box is packed full of information and is said to have originated in the tea ceremony banquet. Bento means portable and the concept has been used ever since the Edo period began in 1603. Before that time, food such as rice was wrapped in leaf or seaweed or lunch containers made out of leather or wicker baskets. Lunch boxes evolved and were included as part of the cherry blossom season and subsequently were named “cherry blossom – viewing – lunchbox”. Also they became popular for theatre-going where wealthy patrons would give elegant lunchboxes to their favourite performer. The custom became a ritual of status for theatregoers. The bento box is now ubiquitous in Japan,
186
and the most popular lunch today is known as the makunouchi lunchbox (Ekuan and Stewart
194).
Figure 5-6. Japanese Bento boxes, Kyoto Figure 5-7. Visual detail in Bento packaging, Kyoto
1. Shipment packaging 2. Package enclosure 3. The Apple box with display
187
Figure 5-8. A comparison between packaging of Apple boxes and Bento boxes in fig. 5.9.
There are striking similarities to the package of the Bento lunch box and the packaging of
Apple mobile devices. There is also the excitement created by unwrapping each layer of
packaging (refer fig. 5.8). The white colour of the mobile device package is also significant.
It speaks not only of Apple’s distinctive corporate colour, but also of the robust minimalism of Zen philosophy. The visual display of the mobile device works to heighten emotion with the unpacking of the mobile device, making it seem like a distinctive and “special” ritual.
Figure 5-9. A Japanese Bento box arrangment that is symmetrical and divided into four squares
188
Saying that the package design was completely a Japanese inspiration is simplistic; other creative influences are also evident.
Figure 5-10. The iPad instructions contained in package
The iPad smart cover package and instructions can also be seen paralleling other companies such as IKEA – the Swedish “do it yourself” furniture shop.
Figure 5-11. The instructions for IKEA Grundtal wall shelf (Inter IKEA systems)
189
Figure 5-12. IKEA store package shelves and boxes
The influences of package design from other sources do strongly suggest that most ideas are
built upon previous ideas, and the central process of contemporary design is to take two or
more known ideas and put them together to create a new product. Some critics believe that
for Apple mobile devices, that’s what the idea of “thinking different” was all about - hybridisation being the seed of invention. For example, the iPad smart cover could be seen as a hybridisation between a magnetic enclosure and Japanese Origami (the 17th century
traditional art of folding paper).
Nevertheless all design builds a relationship between the user and the device. The study of
human performance in relation to human-machine relationships can be traced back to 1949
when scientific management and methods of looking at office furniture to improve worker
190
comfort led to the founding of the Ergonomic Research Society. This was an interdisciplinary
organisation with members ranging from anatomists, physiologists, engineers, and so on
(Bayazit 23). This event marked the beginnings of an interest in design research. The 1980s and 1990s saw growth in design research, which was encouraged by demand from American
industry. Philosophies and theories of design research are constantly being re-evaluated. This
is evident in conferences such as the Ohio Conference on Doctoral Education in Design,
which made an appeal for research in education and design (Doctoral Education in Design).
Designers of the iPhone had their influences, from the philosophy of Heidegger, which
argued that objects fade into nature until they are used, to Braun designer Dieter Rams, who
saw objects as “silent butlers” that would be there when you need them and not went you
don’t (Boradkar 31). These designers are but a few influences that have affected Jonathan
Ive, the designer of this device. Rams design principle – that good design is innovative,
useful, aesthetic, understandable, unobtrusive, honest, long lasting, thorough,
environmentally friendly and as little designed as possible – underlies the design of Apple
mobile devices (Borries et al. 58). But there are other influences or parallels of influence
from Japanese aesthetics. One exponent of this field, Naoto Fukasawa, is significant,
especially his philosophy of how an object is embedded in the environment. His philosophy
results in the design aesthetics that vanish when the artefact is used (Gromley121–123). In
the context of a mobile device, this means that the device is invisible when the functions are
present. For instance the design of the mobile device usually becomes secondary to the act of
engaging in a phone call or when one is browsing the web. The user will not be completely
aware of the shape of the device, the texture of the buttons or the tactility of the screen as
these design features will be in the background to the devices function. However, when there
is a functionality problem the design will move to the foreground.
191
5.5. Conclusions
This chapter has described how mobile devices are designed and the processes that the designers follow to produce them. The chapter opened with an overview of the differences between art and design and introduced the product designers and the team of designers who are key to the production of the mobile device. These designers were seen to frame the device with a number of given circumstances that are contained within the theatre of design such as culture and economics that in turn influenced the designers. Personas, personalisation and narratives were other ways that help designers to engage the consumer; these elements underlined Rook’s ritual script and the theatre of design. The chapter then discussed function and form and how significance and utility assign roles and meaning to design.
Finally, the chapter examined how designers embed value into design by affordance and emotion that create an experience in design. The experience was designed from a number of elements that ranged from the packaging of the device to the aesthetics of the device to human-computer interaction.
The possibility that designers can discreetly influence how mobile devices are used by designing the device to be more oriented toward consumer ritual-like activities can be significant. The following chapter interrogates designers to ground this conceptual approach and determine how ritual-like considerations can inform or direct their design process.
192
6. Methodologies and methods
6.1. Overview
The previous chapters have developed the case for understanding the design of mobile
devices and that ritual-like activities maybe embedded subtly into the consumer device. It did
this by using the concept of the theatre of design earlier discussed and developed through
chapter’s three to five, which established ritual and performance as a concept to view the
relationship with technology. This framework was interdependent upon the research, in other
words the theatre of design emerged from an interplay between the research and analysis and
the literature.
Chapter five examined the processes of mobile device design and argued that designers
engage in ritual-like activities in the production that affects the consumption of the mobile
device. It did this by first looking at how designers design mobile devices and the processes
they adopt to produce a mobile device, such as user-centred or design-centred design. After
establishing the designer’s work in the production process, the chapter discussed embedding
value into the design by establishing aesthetics, affordances and emotion as major influences,
including the company or organisation’s relationship with the process that designers engage in.
Chapter six and seven will examine five people who are currently employed as designers for
high profile mobile device manufacturers and are experts in their fields. These designers were
interviewed about their approaches to designing mobile devices, and their responses were
analysed. This evidence is presented to ground and augment the theoretical perspective
developed through chapters two to five, and to provide insight into the mobile design process.
193
This chapter discusses the methodology that was used to set up, conduct and record the
discussions with designers about their process and design philosophy. It describes the
grounded theory, which formed the overall methodological approach and discusses how the
data was collected from these key informants. The chapter finally discusses the way this data
was analysed by using a combination of manual coding and computer-assisted data analysis.
Chapter seven will interpret the results from the key informant interviews and then detail the
findings.
6.2. Research Methodology
The goal of this study was to obtain deep, detailed information that would provide in-depth insight into the designer’s process rather than broad information that could be used to generalise the results. To do this required a solid and reliable research methodology, and an explanation of why a grounded theory approach was used to guide the collection and analysis of data, and why key informant interviews were used as a specific data gathering strategy.
This chapter begins by considering the methodological elements of grounded theory and its relevance and reliability in this study. The section will then discuss the relationship between technology and grounded theory methodology (see 6.2.2) and its usefulness in this work.
Following this, the next section examines how the data were collected, the use of key informants as a strategy for selecting interviewees, and the way the interviews were conducted with the consideration of any ethical concerns that may exist. The final section will describe the two ways of analysing the data, one being the primary mode of analysis by using a manual coding system, while the other is a computer-assisted data analysis system.
The use of one system checking another will present a description in line with
194
methodological triangulation that ensures the work is robust, reliable and valid in the two
processes (Lunenburg and Irby 104).
6.2.1. Grounded Theory
Grounded theory is an inquiry strategy that situates the researcher and research in the world
of experience. In other words, it is a guideline to collecting empirical data like interviews or
case studies but it is also a way to analyse this data by using manual coding to then make
connections to the research paradigm or the theoretical question that is at hand.
Not entirely unlike other qualitative processes but a related approach which is frequently used
for analysis of interview data is narrative analysis. Narrative analysis is an inquiry that
revolves around the life experiences as narrated by those who live them (Chase 421). The aim
of the analysis is to gain insights into a person’s understanding of the meaning of events in
their lives. According to Susan Chase, some researchers emphasise what people’s stories are about, that is their plots, characters and sometimes the structure of their content (421).
Narrative stories are usually gathered in the form of interviews but also through observations, documents, pictures, and other sources of qualitative data (Creswell 92). The analysis is usually made about what was said, and the nature of the story being told.
The choice of grounded theory over a narrative analysis approach is rooted in a few notable differences that made it a better fit for the thesis. The focus of this study concerned the views about design and designers held by the key informants (see 6.3.2) rather than an exploration
into the individual informant’s experience. Where narrative analysis was more in tuned with the stories that were being told by the individuals and “how” these stories were told, the thesis needed to explore the process about design, rather than developing a narrative about a key informant’s life (Creswell 125-126). Another factor was the tendency to generalise from
195
specific stories to very broad concepts (Chase 421) which would only lead to a generalised
analysis.
That said, the strength of narrative analysis is certainly its suitability for studying the individual or smaller groups of people. However, by using key informants and their particular expertise and experience, is what made them more valuable in a grounded theory approach about design.
As noted earlier, in this thesis, chapters two to five developed a conceptual framework that utilises a ritual-performance based metaphor (theatre of design) to understand mobile device design and usage (see section 5.2, 5.3.3). Grounded theory offers a way to take this otherwise purely conceptual framework and make it more tangible by anchoring it to the real world. In
other words, it offers a way to ask whether the ideas developed in the preceding chapters
have any foundation in observable phenomena. Grounded theory consists of a systematic and
flexible guide for collecting and analysing data - interviews in this case. It helps to construct
concepts grounded in the data itself. Qualitative research therefore relies on the collection of
field data followed by analysis.
The fill or “fit” (Corbin and Strauss 305), which deems whether the findings are relevant to both the interviewees and the intended research professionals, was reoriented toward exploring how meaning and understanding that meaning is ritually and technologically embedded through design. The other reason that this research method was chosen is the interpretative natures of both qualitative research and grounded theory, which gave this research strength through flexibility. It achieves what Charmaz terms “saturation”, the point at which fresh data and research no longer sparks any new theoretical insight or categories
(Charmaz, Constructing Grounded 113; Abma and Widdershoven 671).
196
Grounded theory differs from other methods because of its constant comparison of data and through its interplay with empirical material, interviews in this case, all at the same time.
This interplay can be seen in the repeating stages of sampling, analysing, reflecting, coding of data, memoing and interpreting the material, aiming to develop a general relationship between concepts. Constant comparison is the key that separates grounded theory from positivist theories that consider that there should be a pure division between data collection and analysis (Suddaby 634; Charmaz, Constructing Grounded 5).
Like most subjects, grounded theory is best understood historically. Grounded theory was presented in 1967 by Glaser and Strauss in The Discovery of Grounded Theory as a way to fill the gap between theory and research, and to legitimise this strategy as a robust qualitative research approach and not just a precursor to quantitative methods (Charmaz, Grounded
Theory 514).
The motive was a reaction by Glaser and Strauss against the extreme positivism that had pervaded most social research around the late 1950s to 1970s (Denzin and Lincoln 15;
Suddaby 633). On a deeper level, it was stimulated by their view that the social and natural sciences did not deal with the same type of subject matter (Creswell 106). There have since been a number of developments based on Glaser and Strauss’s initial proposal. One development saw Strauss teaming up with Corbin (Strauss and Corbin) to develop a behaviourist method of analysing research, which insisted that motivations and actions could only be studied through the analysis of observable phenomena (that is, behaviour). This approach was an understandable proposition, since it reflected Strauss’s view that grounded theory should be verifiable.
Taking a different path, Glaser advocated a more open-ended method that does not force a framework such as preconceived questions into the analysis and gathering of data (Glaser and
197
Strauss 842). His view was that grounded theory should generate theory and not just be a descriptive method of verification. This signals Glaser’s departure point from Strauss and
Corbin’s approach, which Glaser described as full “conceptual description”(Glaser and
Strauss 7, 21).
Regardless of their differing approaches to the application of theory, both versions agree with
the broader goal of what is in all respects an interpretative research paradigm where theory
has far reaching range, according to Ritzer and Goodman in Modern Sociological Theory and
that emphasises understanding rather than explanation.
Overall, the reasons for using grounded theory as an approach in the context of this research
are due to:
i) its iterative process by which one becomes more and more grounded into the data
in an effort to understand people’s experiences in a richer way;
ii) its flexibility that one does not need to subscribe to positivist or objectivist
assumptions;
iii) the complementarity with other approaches of qualitative data analysis (Charmaz,
Constructing Grounded 9; Denzin and Lincoln, Sage Handbook 248 ; and, its
ability to enable the formation of concepts and themes to be linked in a
substantive way to formal theories, as in this case the link to science and
technology studies.
Grounded theory is an iterative process through which the researcher goes back and forth
between different sources of data (interview data, observations, diaries and journals to name
but a few) followed by the categorising of that data. The categories consist of what Corbin
and Strauss refer to as open coding, because to name and define concepts one must open up the text to expose the ideas and meaning contained within the data (102). The coding can be
198
line-by-line or section-by-section and leads to comparing data followed by the next stage of categorization. What emerges from the open code is a “core” phenomenon that was caused by
a number of factors and strategies (Charmaz, Constructing Grounded 48) that raises the
question of what is going on here.
Data is compared to codes and then codes with other codes and finally data and codes are
grouped into categories. This iterative process eventuates with the categories becoming
concepts and concepts are then compared with other concepts (Charmaz, Grounded Theory
361). Peter Rich, in his 2012 analysis of a post-professional development experience, included a study of grounded theory analysis and concurred with the value of an iterative process. Interview data taken from his participant, Mrs Black, was the third in a series of interviews in his collection. He found that in a top-down method, themes and units that had already been coded had already influenced his initial analysis of the interview. The bottom- up method resulted in a more faithful representation of the data because of the constant comparison between codes and categories (Rich 19).
This comparative and cyclic nature is conducive for the researcher to be immersed in the data and creates a richer experience for the researcher and with the data. It allows each step of the process, whether it is collecting data or the analysis of that data, to inform the next step. The result leads to further questions and inquiry until a point of saturation is reached and a new direction emerges. The constant comparing at each step keeps active the engagement between the researcher and the data that has been collected and the analyses that have been made thus far (Charmaz, Constructing Grounded 178; Rich 3).
The second point refers to the flexibility of grounded theory and that it can be situated either with an objectivist or a positivist slant. The dichotomy between positivism’s “realism” that holds reality as both real and practical, and constructivism, which is centred on a meaning
199
that is generated by individuals and groups suggest that grounded theory can adopt a middle
ground. Grounded theory’s flexibility can be seen in the roots of the theory’s beginnings in
1967 when Glaser and Strauss journeyed a more objectivist path, followed by interpretivism
with Strauss and Corbin teaming up in 1990 and then 2006 Kathy Charmaz applying a
constructivist perspective ( (Fedoruk, Gardener, and McCutcheon 68; Charmaz, Constructing
Grounded 129; Corbin and Strauss 9-10).
The third point indicates how grounded theory can complement other approaches of data analysis. For instance, some researchers like Clarke wanted to supplement the basic process of grounded theory in what she refers to as addressing the “differences and complexities of social life”(553) with a post-modern turn and in doing so refers to her approach to grounded theory as situational analysis. This approach relies on social situations as a unit of analysis and accounts for situational, and social arenas for collecting and analysing data as a map.
Broadly speaking, it is a method by which the researcher becomes not only an analyst but also a cartographer of sorts (571).
Another approach is Goulding’s comparative study of ethnography, phenomenology and grounded theory. These methodologies were applied to strategies in market research and
Goulding found that grounded theory’s appeal was the allowance for a wide range of data, the most common being in-depth interviews, observations and memos (Goulding 297). But its potential for Goulding was its ability to go beyond consumer behaviour because of its interactional element (304) that indicated the researcher being well grounded and immersed in the data.
More recently Kathy Charmaz, in Constructing Grounded Theory takes another, less
structured approach to grounded theory that exemplifies the flexibility of this methodology.
The difference between Charmaz and her predecessors is that she advocates a constructivist
200
and interpretivist perspective by ontologically maintaining a relativist position. This means
that within a broad framework, reality and truth are understood as contextualised within a
certain time, place and culture (Charmaz, Construcitng Grounded 129). By doing this,
Charmaz advocates that the focus is on the argument and the nature of the theory (Creswell
254) and not on theory per se.
6.2.2. Technology and grounded theory
The previous section illustrated Grounded theory as flexible and one of its attributes is that it
complements technology (Charmaz, Constructing Grounded 9; Denzin and Lincoln, Sage
Handbook 248). Rich, for example in “Inside the Black Box: Revealing the Process in
Applying a Grounded Theory Analysis” applied grounded theory to his study of technology in the classroom because its flexibility allowed him to arrive at a third type of qualitative report, one that focussed on arriving at the findings rather than theory creation (1-3). This section extends the discussion about grounded theory’s versatility and usefulness in various fields of technology and reasons the methodology is useful, for example, in data collection.
The section finally draws in STS, suggesting that grounded theory can be centred on experiences of the interviewees because it adopts a set of practices and principles that fit well with STS as technology studies are topic-focussed approaches to method.
The procedure of qualitative research or its methodology is reported by Creswell (45) as being inductive, emergent and is shaped by the researcher’s experience in collecting and analysing the data. For Corbin and Strauss, qualitative research is defined as “any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification” (Corbin and Strauss 17). In the same way Bauer, Gaskell and
Allum suggest that qualitative research avoids numbers, but deals with interpreting social realities (Bauer et al. 7).
201
The value in using grounded theory methodology with other subjects has not been widely understood despite many papers in the social science disciplines and in nursing that have described the use of grounded theory (Adolph, Hall, and Kruchten 487). However, grounded theory has now been gaining popularity in a number of technology-driven areas, like in the field of software engineering (Coleman and O’Connor 2007; Crabtree, Seaman, and Norcio
2009). For example, Hoda et al. (2011) has investigated the merits of grounded theory in studying the social side of software engineering; the area of technology and teaching sees
Kemp et al. examining the use of online teaching and institutional strategies (Kemp et al.
2014).
Apart from the procedures in the method which are similar to those in other grounded theory studies, (these include sampling, data collection, textual coding, finding the core category, the iterative process, coding and then sorting out the categories and applying a framework), it is the question of why it should be applied at all that is of the most interest. Grounded theory for
Hoda et al. allows the study of social interactions and behaviour. It is also useful when studying seldom-explored areas such as the social aspects of software engineering.
Grounded theory also supports a number of concepts and categories, which have been seen as having immediate interest or “grab” for practitioners of software engineering (Hoda, Noble and Marshall 1–4). The other appeal is that it is a good starting point for interpretation because of its flexibility; for instance in Adolph’s case, the study was aimed at understanding the social processes that were involved in influencing software team performance. In this study Adolph moved from theoretical sampling, by which the selection of interviewees emerges from categories and informed by hypotheses, to a “judgmental” sampling where the selection is based on the interviewee’s knowledge and professional judgement (Marshall,
"Sampling for Qualitative" 523). The main reason was that the lack of any data to analyse
202
when first starting out makes it somewhat difficult to start using a hypothetical sampling procedure (Adolph, Hall, and Kruchten 498).
But, the use for this study is by the connection of grounded theory to science and technology studies such as the study by Humphrey, Karnowski and von Pape that examined the users perspective on mobile media with the conclusion that the mobile internet was taken for granted (1-31). The main point is that STS draws on many disciplines in the social sciences and humanities to illustrate the ways that science and technology shape and are shaped by society, politics and culture. The involvement of older adults using information technology is an area that illustrates this kind of shaping and for White and Weatherall (2000) was the focus of their study. The aim was to explore the reasons that older adults use personal computer technology (White et al. 374) while allowing the adults to express their opinions without imposing premature categories onto the informants.
Significantly, while previous research in this area showed that older people could use information technology and feel positive about it, their study showed that some older adults are not comfortable interacting with information technology but “use it to facilitate their own interests and goals” (White et al. 383).
White et al. use grounded theory because the results could be centred on the older adults’ experiences and opinions and could also provide a framework for further research (White et al. 383). In summary, I have shown what grounded theory is and its value in qualitative methodologies by describing the iterative process and its constant comparisons as key.
Grounded theories are also flexible in their ontology and can also complement other qualitative analysis. Finally, I have shown how science and technology studies have had success by incorporating grounded theory as part of their methodology.
203
The vast majority of science and technology studies take “a topic focus approach to method” asserts Gary Bowden (67); he goes further to affirm that researchers use methods of their particular academic disciplines to study science and technology. Coutard et al. “STS and the
City” discusses the urban landscape from architecture to utility companies while Brian
Marick’s “A Manglish Way of Working” discusses software development in Andrew
Pickering’s The Mangle in Practice.
Marick suggests that the topic-focussed approach implies that the topic holds the study of science and technology together and therefore no single method is unique to the STS field.
By accepting Bowden’s approach, I hold that this study of mobile devices can be effectively undertaken using a grounded theory strategy. The research method consists of a version aligned with Kathy Charmaz’s interpretation of the original concepts of Glaser and Strauss, a view that grounded theory should be viewed as “a set of practices and principles, not as prescriptions or packages”(Charmaz, Constructing Grounded 9). In this work, analysis of data consisted of focused coding of the interviews allowing a synthesis of the data that is very much in line with traditional grounded theory in order to initially gain larger explanations of the topic.
In figure 6.1, double-headed arrows denote the constant comparisons between categories and concepts, characteristic of the iterative process in grounded theory. It also illustrates the synthesis of the interview data into findings.
204
Figure 6-1. Framework of grounded theory and CAQDAS strategy
6.3. Data Collection
This section deals with a key aspect of grounded theory approach. It is about the gathering of data from the participants who have experiences, opinions and understand processes in design that are necessary before grounding it into the preceding chapters’ argument and framework.
205
After outlining the method in collecting data, the section will then discuss what are key
informants and their importance in this study, including the sample size and selection of the
informants that is based on Marc-Adélard Tremblay’s key informant technique.
The section concludes with the interview methods and the ethical considerations that were
observed during the data collection and analysis.
6.3.1. Method overview
The main method of data collection in this study is interviewing. The aim of this study was to
explore the possibility of ritual-like activities embedded in the design of mobile devices by
designers, which indicates social significance about mobile technology and the ways that
mobile devices are constituted as social objects. To fulfil the objective, it was necessary to engage experts, specifically, key designers of mobile devices, to explore their processes in design and production.
The interviews were conducted as a series of semi-structured one-on-one discussions with each participant. The selection of the participants was initially based on judgemental sampling, based on this study’s previously discussed methodology.
Therefore, participants were chosen because they were well informed about design, technology, software, and had some general knowledge about operating systems such as
Apple iOS, Android OS, Blackberry and Nokia’s Linux based system. It soon became apparent that because of these and some other particular attributes, for instance being leaders in their company’s design division, the participants could be described as key informants
(Marshall, The Key Informant 92).
206
6.3.2. Key Informant Interviews
One of the major proponents of key informant interviews was Marc- Adélard Tremblay. For
Tremblay, the interviewee is an expert or an “ideal informant” in the area of study (Tremblay
692). This interview technique is found in a number of fields ranging from health care
(Marshall) to policy concerning the utilization of location-based mobile phone emergency services (Aloudat and Michael) , technology and adolescents (Mason and Ide) to tourism
(Wan).
The flexibility of grounded theory allows judgemental sampling to work well with key
informant interviews. Key informant interviews focus on experts in a field of study, usually
occupying positions of authority (Marshall, The Key Informant 92). Key informant interviews
are part of this study’s method for two main reasons. Firstly, the focus of this study is on
designers because of their integral part in shaping the mobile device. Few studies have
focussed on the designer’s opinions and experiences and have concentrated primarily on user
behaviour. Secondly, because of the involvement of designers who were experts in the field,
it was apt to concentrate on them in-depth as key informants.
Key informant interviews were primarily used for anthropological work since the technique
is well suited to qualitative work though in the past it was generically termed as “unstructured
interviewing”. The technique though does have structure as Tremblay pointed out in The Key
Informant Technique: A Non-Ethnographic Application (689) whereas the interviewee is
given freedom, the researcher still attempts to cover the topics under analysis. Or simply put,
the researcher creates a “conversation with a purpose”(Holloway 94).
Following Tremblay’s (692) criteria for selection of the ideal informants, the designers were
seen as having:
207
1. exposure to the area and information to be researched: this could be seen as the
informant’s access to the information. In this study, all the participants had or were
working for major companies. Marko was head of design for Nokia and Ruth was
senior material manager for Nokia (Asia Pacific), Michelle was a product designer
(Orcadesign), Angrra was head of his own development studio (Gratif) specialising in
mobile devices, and James had been a Sony Ericsson designer before moving to head
of product development for Dyson. All were decision makers and had access to
information about technology and design.
2. knowledge of the specific information in a meaningful way: All the participants were
active in designing products and all suggested other sources of information about
design.
3. willingness and ability to impart knowledge.
4. ability to communicate the knowledge in an intelligible way
5. sense of impartiality.
Points 3, 4, and 5 ensured that all participants were willing to talk about their work and experiences in an understandable way. Throughout the process, there was no appearance of bias toward the companies that they worked for and they were willing to even suggest new material, products or designers to review. Michelle Wong suggested particular aesthetics that stemmed from design companies like “Qualy” from Thailand and US company “IDEO”. These attributes were seen as fulfilling criteria points number 2, 3 and
4.
In the case of Ruth Ng, a Senior Material Designer for Nokia Design Asia-Pacific, point 3 led to suggestions to investigate the work of Japanese designer Naoto Fukasawa.
Furthermore after comparing data (see 6.4) from participants there was a need to follow- up with another interview (James Braithwaite and Anggra) to fill a gap and then to return
208
to evolving the study. Creswell talks about this as a feature that defines grounded theory
from other methods (106). It is the iterative process of going back and forth with the data
that makes Charmaz’s view on grounded theory research fluid, interactive and open
ended (178) and why this method was particularly suited for this kind of study.
6.3.3. Sample Size and Selection
The sample size was five people with a sixth participant who consulted for Vertu, a luxury mobile phone company, declining after his consultancy business had just become bankrupt.
The appropriate number of selected key informants was dependant on judgement sampling and on a size that “…adequately answers the research question” (Marshall, Sampling for qualitative 523). The selected sample was a group of experts from whom the most could be learned from their different skills (Merriam 2002; Polkinghorne 2005). Therefore the size was deemed adequate when a point of “saturation” had been reached (Strauss and Corbin
148; Bluff 155). For example, when no new categories or information had emerged from the interviews, correspondingly the participants began to say nothing new. The other reason is that the study required the participants to be experts in specific areas of work such as visual design or product design and to hold high profile positions.
The key informants were difficult to find and access because of their various specialisations and geographic locations such as Finland, China, United Kingdom, and Singapore. The head of Nokia was located and contacted through work that this author had conducted with
Nokia’s marketing department in Asia. A meeting was fortunately arranged with the head of design because he was interested in the idea of ritual-like activities being embedded by designers in design. A meeting was arranged with him in Finland. Other designers were found through a university contact with the designer from the vacuum machine manufacturer
Dyson’s. The designer had also worked for Sony Ericson. Three other designers and
209
companies were contacted either by email or telephone call but declined to participate in the research with no reason given. Apple was contacted but their company human resource department replied with an email stating that their policy forbids any contact with their designers or staff to talk about their work for Apple.
All the designers that did agree to be interviewed talked willingly and feely about design and about the companies that they had worked or were working for, some eager to continue discussing the topic at a later time. However, one participant did not want to talk too deeply about the company he was affiliated with for fear of possible negative repercussions but was open to discussing other companies and people. Another participant was slightly guarded on some issues that concerned future design in their organisation.
210
Table referring to the key informants and their areas expertise
Name Position Design Field Product Range
Marko Ahtisaari Head of product design Industrial design Nokia Range of
for Nokia consumer goods Visual design
Founder of Satama (i.e. mobile devices and User experience design Interactive accessories…)
Brand and company Founder of Blyk Advertisement mobile design network CEO of Dopplr
James Braithwaite SVP Ninja Engineering Industrial design Consumer goods
& Research and Visual design (i.e. mobile devices development (Sony Ericcson), Mechanical Lead design at Sony vacuum cleaners, Engineering Ericsson fans…)
Hardware design Head of product
development at Dyson
Head of Engineering
China at Dyson
Michelle Wong Lead Designer Orca Industrial design Consumer goods
211
Visual design (i.e. household
appliances, graphic art,
phones, electronics…)
Ruth Ng Senior Designer at Industrial design Consumer goods and
Nokia China Electronics (i.e. mobile Visual design devices and accessories Senior colour and Material design for Nokia, Sony material designer at Ericsson, Samsung, Microsoft Canon…)
Designer at OSM
Anggra Sastriawan Founder and Head of User experience design Mobile application
Gratif development Software platform
Senior engineer design Information and
Nixdorf technology services Engineering hardware
Senior R & D engineer design (Apple, Channel News
at T-est Asia, MediaCorp, Brand and company Starbucks…) design
Figure 6-2. Key Informant profiles
The tenor of qualitative study, especially grounded theory, is one of rigour and scientific credibility (Creswell 143). Therefore it was far better to have a small number of credible key experts than a large number of general designers for this study.
212
Nevertheless, it is still an arguable point that better research can be conducted by including larger numbers of informants. In particular, some “quantitative researchers often fail to understand the usefulness of studying small samples” (Marshall, Sampling Qualitative 523).
The difference in the number of informants is contained within what the aim is of the study.
For some studies, it is to verify a theory or analyze a representative sample of the population, such as Helfenstein’s report from Finland showing that users are more pragmatic in mobile design (200); for others like this study, it is advantageous to find understanding and explore significance. Put another way, some studies may deal with the “what” question while others with the more humanistic “why?” (Creswell; Corbin and Strauss; Charmaz; Bluff).
The number of interviewees in qualitative studies in grounded theory research varies but some tend to be small. For example, Weatherall and White chose six adults to participate in their grounded theory study of older adults and technology; Clegg used seven people consisting of patients and relatives; Rich interviewed four teachers in a study about the process in applying grounded theory analysis.
The small sample size in this study led to in-depth interviews lasting at least one hour. The exception to this timeframe were two interviewees who because of a new enquiry discovered during their research interview process concerning the production chain and time of design when producing a particular mobile phone required a follow up interview to verify the information.
6.3.4. Interview Method
The interviews were conducted either face to face or by telephone or conference call.
Following Corbin and Strauss’ (28) practices in conducting interviews in grounded theory,
the participants had full knowledge that they were being recorded and data file recordings.
213
The audio file was transcribed by the author of this thesis for the purpose of organising, analysing and checking the accuracy of interview informants. It was also helpful in clarifying an idea. Laurel Richardson in “Writing: A Method of Inquiry” supports this procedure, believing that writing notes is also a process of discovery in that by doing it, “… we discover new aspects of the topic and our relationship to it.” (923). Note taking served this author with yet another purpose: it helped to formulate follow-up questions to direct to the key informants during the interview that assisted them to clarify their ideas, provide an example to illustrate their point and to assist the author to discover a new aspect about the subject. The notes were also integrated into the manual coded document and formed the basis of the summary about each informant (see fig. 6.3) and into the transcript in the form of the occasional follow up questions (see fig 6.4).
214
Software Designer – Anggra
Anggra has been a software designer for ten years. He was not educated in programming though came from a mechanical engineering background. A challenge is to bring the mechanical side into the mobile devices like the iphone.
In developing application for Apple there are particular guidelines that need to be followed, particularly in the human interface area. If not the application is most likely to be rejected.
However you can be creative within the framework and this lets all users have similar experiences. If not then the sense of expectation and satisfaction will decrease.
Figure 6-3. Summary of informants that illustrates integration of notes from before and after interview
Q But you have been in mobile technology and technology like that for ten years, roughly ten years.
A For the last three or four year and I have been also working for a platform a
Mackintosh Desktop. At that time there were no iphones.
Q So you have found that one of the things I think about is from your background what do you bring to your work and have you found that a lot of things that you have done you bring into what you are doing at the moment in technology?
A Well that is an interesting fact I was not educated in programming in IT, I studied mechanical so I learned these kind of things as an interest. I see this kind of thing as fun.
Figure 6-4. Line of questioning taken from the interview transcript
215
1. Details of the designer’s background
2. Whether that has informed their work
3. What makes good design?
4. Function, form, content
5. Client and designer expectation
6. Cause or result design
7. Specific design process and methodology in their work
8. Design interaction and mirroring of social behaviour
9. Device/ artefact becomes iconic, symbolic
10. What relationship exists between user and designer through the artefact?
11. Shape social behaviour through shaping technology
12. What of yourself do you bring to a design?
13. Philosophy of a design – and artefact
14. Design ritualization and device ritualization
15. Designing subconscious emotional cues
16. Embedding design
17. Customization and personalization
18. Future trends
Figure 6-5. Areas of questioning that guided the interview
The interviews were semi-structured in that a list of points that acted as prompts were followed during a discussion, rather than an interrogation being conducted (refer Fig. 6.5).
The aim was to elicit the participant’s interpretation of views, ideas and their own experiences, going from general fact to the specific such as the informant’s recollection of a particular situation or events that would illustrate their point. Leading questions were avoided
216
and if they were asked, it was only necessitated by an attempt to foster rapport and trust
(DiCicco‐Bloom and Crabtree 316). The semi-structured style lent itself to a loosely guided exploration and the follow-up questions enabled trust and created the texture of a conversation that facilitated self-discovery. According to Tremblay, this kind of interaction is a feature of the key informant technique (Tremblay 690).
The interviews provided an initial categorising of the meanings and views of the participants through in vivo coding (Charmaz, Constructing Grounded Theory 55). Reflecting on the transcript, the technique allowed a summary to be written by using the participant’s words to act as a headline for an initial category that encapsulates the meaning of their view.
Additionally, the summary was helpful because one could mark a speech for further analysis.
Earlier it was noted that constant comparison is a key strength of the grounded theory method. Taking this feature further as a comparative tool between the interview categories and with the textual analysis conducted by Leximancer software (Smith and Humphreys 262–
279), the method was fully supported.
6.3.5. Ethical Considerations
Compared to other kinds of research, ethical considerations in this work were few. The main
point of concern was related to the subject of informed consent and lack of anonymity.
The participants all agreed to the use of a recorded digital device and acknowledged that they
were free to discontinue the interview at any time. They also acknowledged that there would
be no attempt by the researcher to hide their identity, however they could make comments
“off the record” and that the information would be removed after reviewing the interview
transcripts.
217
This study was approved by the Committee for Ethics in Human Research of the University
of Canberra and outlined that the participants were all united by their work in design and
mobile technology and were all speakers of English, though these were not criteria. All of the participants were contacted by phone and invited to be part of the study. Informed consent forms that were approved by the Committee for Ethics in Human Research of the University of Canberra and NEAF were then sent and were signed by the participants. The informed consent forms took into account the issues of privacy and confidentiality disclosing the
purpose of the study so that the participants were aware of what they were saying and the
context in which they were saying it.
All the data is secured and encrypted on a hard drive and will be kept at the University for
five years, in accordance with the NEAF guideline. Full details are available in the appendix
of this thesis.
6.4. Data Analysis
The data analysis procedure consisted of
i) coding interview material manually in a flexible grounded theory approach
ii) computer-assisted coding using Leximancer text analysis software
This multi-method route created:
i) validity and consistency
ii) a form of triangulation.
Triangulation is primarily used to give a position or define a location. In this context, it will
help alleviate bias and give us a greater ability to scrutinize the data. Its origins were in the
field of social sciences and usually involved differing data sets.
218
Note taking during the interviews, transcripts and summaries resulted in manual coded
themes triangulated (Denzin and Lincoln 5) with the computer-aided software and in this
study as an example both described “experience” as a high level theme. Secondly, the data
sources varied in the times, place and setting. The key informants were located
geographically in different parts of the world and in different time zones. The variance aided
the trustworthiness of the study by negating the possibility of atypical data. Also the diversity
among cultural and professional backgrounds of the key informants increased the data
triangulation (different sources) and therefore the accuracy of the study.
6.4.1. Summarising interviews
The interview transcripts were read and then the key ideas and concepts were summarised
and written down as in a report, with a heading that encapsulated the main point. This was
done so as to “get close” to the content in the interviews and to define the points succinctly
for reference. Figure 6.6 is an example of one of these “reports”. In an indirect way it is
similar to memoing the data, but where memoing allows the researcher to put all his or her
ideas, perceptions and observations taken from the interviews down as explicit notes (Hoda et
al. 13), the summaries only use the transcripts and collates the material, which helps him or
her to become more familiar with the interview material. Charmarz believes a number of
coding strategies can be employed including sorting, synthesizing and summarizing data
(Methods in Social Justice 363).
This research incorporates this approach as a preliminary strategy before manual coding and it assists to find overall themes that can then be compared with the manual code that is discussed in the next section.
219
Ruth has been an industrial designer for five years and presently works for Nokia in Beijing.
The process for Nokia is very driven and this is markedly from the marketing
department. The marketing department use different types of research to “predict” what
people want and trends in the competition. Profiling users therefore is quite paramount
and the marketing department will construct a product brief. The brief defines the
category type of user, cost for consumer, cost to manufacture features and even as far as
what it should look like. Designers therefore work within constraints set by this
particular department. Consumption is quite important, as the production cycle is much
cost driven.
If a device has not been popular it is difficult to pinpoint what went wrong as there are
quite a number of factors ranging from design, the features, distribution and reach, to
another device does the same and is cheaper. The prototyping and feedback when testing
the device is usually the responsibility of another department not the design department.
Ideally the designer should be more involved in this process rather than just getting the
feedback, however it does depend on time.
Interaction – designer- device - emotion
From a design perspective there is a belief that there does exist an interaction between
the designer and the artefact. The reason for such a connection can be due to the length
of time each designer works on creating his or her artefact and this duration brings an
emotional quality with it.
Figure 6-6. Extract taken from summary of Nokia designer Ruth Ng
220
6.4.2. Manual coding
I use the word “coding” not as a way to disguise quantitative analysis as qualitative analysis, but rather to define what the data is about. It is a means of naming segments of information
with a label that categorises and organises the interview material.
This method of coding for grounded theory evolved first from Glasser and Strauss in 1967
but was then extended by Charmaz in a new perspective where data analysis is less structured
and based on developing implicit meanings about categories (Cresswell 106). This means
gerunds and active phrases were used as codes, such as “physician control” (Charmaz,
Methods in Social Justice 368). In this example active phrases that are contained in the
interview data that encapsulates the meaning of the point. The analysis of any grounded
theory method will have elements extracted from the collected data (interviews in this case)
tagged with codes, which then become concepts and then categories.
The example below takes the actual answers given in the interview and breaks them into
segments of information labelled with a broad concept or theme. All participants’ answers are then coded under a common theme or concept. Corbin and Strauss label this cross cutting of data with concepts as “axial coding”. Open coding is the looking at the interview transcripts and exposing any meanings or thoughts contained in the text, while axial coding aims at reorganising the data that was opened up into categories. It became apparent in my coding process that there is an indistinct merge between “open coding” and “axial coding” as blocks of data were delineated, as well as concepts being merged (Corbin and Strauss 195).
However, this result did provide validation of Corbin and Strauss and Strauss’s later admission that “the distinction between the two types of coding are “artificial and for explanatory purposes only” (Corbin and Strauss 198).
221
The next step in my study was then to compare and review the coded document with the
summary of the individual participants. An example of this is listed below in fig 6.7
Guidelines – Design – Experience Design
Anggra
“Yes for our products first thing is we have to follow certain guidelines and the human
interface of your projects, or your applications. We have to follow certain rules that are
already set up by Apple so we have to follow that first if you want to have customisation so
then we can record that. We have to follow the guidelines because if we do not do that your
apps might be rejected by ....”
“Because everyone wants to have a similar experience from applications for their users you don’t want to have a user with a separate issue so one way when they use one is totally different way we don’t want to have that so this is why we have to follow the rules.”
Perception & perspective: In answering whether they mirror behaviour “I am not sure
whether they have their own research on this but I think they have a lot of things on how is
the best way for the users to use their devices and applications.”
Immersive behaviour-experience: “Well examples for now last time you only have your
iPhones you have the smaller screens and now you have the iPad which have bigger screens.
You have to think of how these behave with the smaller screen on the iPhone and the bigger
screen and you have to see that for the iPad you can have a more immersed experience, you
can put on more things, you can do more things on the iPad but in the basic essence so you
can have the same functions so whether you use the iPhone or iPad they don’t feel totally
222
different.”
“Probably they want to keep some things to be uniform so I don’t know. For me something that they only think is for the best for the users and we don’t want to have to accept too many variations. Just for example the start up screen or the log on screen of the iPhones you cannot really add much to it. You cannot put in your contact number in case your phone is lost. You cannot put the web information so people have to sort of do a jailbreak to do customisations”.
Signature: do you believe that you have passed something of yourself into a device or a
program or part of your personality? I know it sounds a bit, sort of a little bit out there, but I
think....
A Somehow there is something of my own signature.
Q Yes that’s good, your own signature.
A I tend to be more conservative on the designs. I try to be more following the rules
instead of to do things. Another thing is I have to think of the outside effect because some
people like to do customise interface elements and sometimes it doesn’t work well so I try to
avoid that……
223
Ruth Ng
Company ceremony design: “Okay, I think the process is very much driven but the processes
in the company that I’m working with now, so it’s mostly- actually it’s driven a lot by the business you need which is the marketing department. So usually we have this group of people who do consumer research, market research and they kind of try to predict what people want and what’s out there in the market, what’s out competition so what we should offer to consumers, and yeah” “Yeah, and then with that they come up with the brief, the product brief. They will define the type of group, how much the device should cost, how much it should cost to manufacture, what features it should have, how it should look like and things like that, and so when it comes to the designer we kind of work within the constraints of this product brief” –
Nokia design limitations: “Definitely because I think when you’re talking about a big
organisation you are talking about manufacturing even millions of such devices, and so
whatever - it’s very cost driven in a way because when you think of ten million phones that
will be sold and if each phone will cost one cent more it means one cent less profit, and
times one million that’s significant of ten million you see, so quite cost driven, yeah, but it’s
my scope of work”. Political and economic limitations “yeah
Emotion Design: “Yeah and I think definitely, I think for most designers it should be that
way because in a way it is our creation so even though we didn’t create the entire thing, but
it’s a product that you’re stuck with for a few months or even one year, so you definitely feel
a connection to it. “I think in general in motion and design, can be applied in quite a lot of
ways. For example the other day I was at my friend’s place and she has this spoon with a
224
smiley face on the handle, so it’s like punch out eyes and smiley face, and it makes you
smile. So I think things like that can actually evoke emotion in whoever is using the object.
And in particular Nokia phones are emotions. I think a lot of it has to do with how it feels in
your hand when you are using the device. So for example of the device is made of like
maybe stainless steel and it has a lot of sharp edges and when you hold it it feels cold, it
makes you feel more professional and it makes you feel more business-like in a way; you feel more high-tech. But if the phone is designed with more curves and maybe is made of; it has a warm colour, maybe it is like orange, and when you are using it you kind of feel younger. So I think in a way that is emotion in hand phone design. And of course there is the interface, the user interface, the software. So that’s another aspect. But if you are talking about just hardware, then I think the materials and the shape.” Materials: Usually what we do
is, when we start the program, there’s specific target group, for example if it’s targeted at
youth, so the software and hardware will know that it is targeted at youths, and then of
course then we work towards this same direction in both designs. And that’s how it’s aligned
usually….
Figure 6-7. Manual coded documents from the interview transcript
The method provided a quick and robust way of comparing individual participants’ answers
and also referencing specific quotes while at the same time providing a platform to scrutinise
the answers.
Lists were then compiled including headings that would provide a code to cross-reference
the material. An example of this is listed in figure 6.8, below.
225
Anggra
User interface and experience
1) Designing applications
a. Creative
b. Screen size
c. Icons
d. Social trends- twitter, Facebook in the apps
e. Design trends – created by people- designers
2) Guidelines are mirroring a perception of user a. Designers sometimes want to direct or educate user in operation/navigation
Figure 6-8. Partial example taken from Anggra’s list of themes and concepts
6.4.3. Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (CAQDAS)
In addition to manual coding, computer-assisted qualitative data analysis played a supportive role. CAQDAS was applied to the interview transcripts in order to provide an additional level of analysis of the data by checking for inconsistencies or gaps. The software used for this was
Leximancer. Leximancer is a software program that presents a visualisation of the meaning of content in a text by first extracting concepts from the text and then graphically mapping relations between the concepts (Smith and Humphreys 2006). A concept is a set of words that travel together in the text expressing the author’s, or in this case, the key informant’s thoughts. For example, in this study, the selected concept “mobile” travels around with the word “phones”.
226
Since the 1990s computer-aided qualitative discourse analysis software has provided the
means for a semi-automated analysis of conversation, interview and mass media (Fielding
and Warnes; Krippendorf; Feldman and Sanger). Presently we see the merging of
relationships with the merging of analysis of text and visualisation (Risch et al. 2008).
Leximancer is a data-mining tool that was used to analyse natural language data harvested
from transcribed interview data. It then displays the extracted information, and enables a visual representation of the main conceptual structure in a document map. The use of grounded theory complements other approaches such as data analysis with Leximancer software (CAQDAS). It has also been used in other studies ranging from communication strategies used by health givers (Cretchley et al. 2010); to software approaches in understanding value (Hansson, Carey, and Kjartansson 2010); to reporting human error in the maritime environment (Grech, Horberry, and Smith 2002).
The use of this software provided a means to classify, organise and analyse the interviews effectively and helped to search across the data comprehensively, leading to the identification of themes and concepts. CAQDAS is mostly used when large amounts of data needs analysing but in this case, it encouraged a closer look at the interview data and the meaning behind each sentence (Creswell 224). In this study, CAQDAS is being used because it:
1. is a constant comparison tool assisting in grounded theory analysis of the transcripts;
2. generates and recognises themes that may have been otherwise overlooked or missed;
and,
3. can identify concepts by visually exploring textual information.
To start analysing the transcripts with this tool, the interview transcripts, which were in a
Microsoft Word document, must first be loaded into the program in the control panel. It is
important to label the participants or speaker correctly, if not the interviewer questions will
227
also be extracted and analysed in the data causing inaccurate results, since the interviewer is
not the one being analysed in this study. Once the loading is complete, Leximancer will
generate concept seeds on its first pass of the interview transcripts. These concept seeds
represent the starting point of a concept and Leximancer identifies these by looking for words
that most frequently appear in the text.
The next stage is to generate a thesaurus, in which other words are developed for the concept
seeds that constitute evidence in the concepts. The evidenced words occur commonly in
contexts where the concepts are being discussed, for instance the concept “phones” occur with words like “antennae”, “curves” “chat” and “affect”. The Learn Concept Thesaurus was turned off when the text sample was relatively small, and it allowed hand coding to be used from the grounded theory manual coding. The running of the project will present a concept map with the related concepts and a thesaurus created from the concept.
A number of important features are conveyed through the concept map that helps in presenting the analysis of the interview transcripts:
1. Primary concept
2. Relative frequency of concept
3. Direct relationship (strong/weak associations) between concepts (co-occurrence)
4. Similarity in content where concepts occur (concept clusters)
6.4.4. CAQDAS methods and analysis
A first cut analysis was used for discovering themes by uploading the transcribed interview
data. The analysis was run without any editing or configuration such as file tagging or
changing to maximum themes. Prose test settings were set to “0” for the colloquial
228
conversation dialogue that characterised the interview data. Prose test is a setting that allows
for mixed data such as interview data and webpage material. The initial analysis involved
both individual and grouped analysis. The individual setting identified the differences of
concepts and themes between interview participants while the group setting identified
concepts common to all the participants. An example of a Leximancer map is listed in fig. 6.9
below.
Figure 6-9. Leximancer map of individual first cut analysis of James
The sample above is set with the analysis functions to normal themes and normal concepts.
The coloured spheres represent themes and the dots are concepts. The lines represent
connections. The themes are heat mapped in order to indicate importance. The “hottest” or more important theme is red and the next hottest is orange, and so on according to the colour wheel. The concepts are written with an upper case first letter when they are usually
229
associated with proper nouns including people’s names, and in a lower case when referring to concepts such as actions, objects and so on. (Refer to fig. 6.10)
Theme Connectivity
people 100%
design 92%
phones 78%
time 48%
Ericsson 44%
work 28%
user 19%
suppose 14%
trying 07%
interesting 05%
screen 04%
goes 04%
Figure 6-10. Sample of tables analysis of James based on first cut and concept mapping
Following this, a more deliberate planned analysis was set up in order to drill down into the
data. This consisted of tags for the names of the interviewees and modification of terms to
maximise the emergence of concepts and themes. Singular and plural words were merged and
common function words (e.g., and, not…) were excluded. Concept editing was checked to
see if interview files were uploaded and then the category of “all concepts” was selected for
the mapping function.
230
Here, themes are regarded as a collection of related concepts. When people speak, they use
words that cluster around a particular topic. The clusters are used as groups and move
together in a text in order to form concepts. The themes capture high-level ideas and trends.
The interviews can therefore be analysed systematically at a lexicogrammatical or hermeneutic level. This means that the link between grammar and groups of words and phrases can be studied in depth. The “connectivity” is a score indicating the relative importance of the themes. The analysis software builds a list, called a thesaurus, of closely related words that are then semantically connected to a concept, and then measures links between these concepts, identifying relationships. Theme circles group the clusters of concepts and each theme is named by the most prominent concept in that group. These are indicated by the largest dot in the theme cluster.
Leximancer’s analysis was highly consistent; as the same results were produced no matter how many times the data set was coded. After being identified, the themes can also be renamed if the researcher wishes. However, I preferred to do this manually in conjunction with undertaking a comparison of my manual coded analysis.
Following the analysis of the first cut of all individual participants, I performed a drill down of data by “reclustering” themes, studying maximum concepts and killing interviewer data.
The individual data were also used to check and make comparisons to the manually coded
data revealed earlier. It was also useful in revealing inconsistencies between the participants
themselves.
It was clear from the analysis that a relationship existed between people, phones, design and look, industry and markets and technology. The user and the interface were determined to be close together conceptually. An example of such a map is listed in Fig. 6.11.
231
Figure 6-11. Leximancer map set to maximum concepts and interview data culled
The final analysis was to group all participants together so as to undertake a comparative study of data. In this selection the settings were created for normal themes and maximum concepts and to kill interviewer data because it was unnecessary to have the questions analysed.
232
Figure 6-12. Leximancer concept map set to normal themes without interviewer and ALL informants
Theme Connectivity people 100% design 82% phones 47% interface 37% interesting 25% things 24% use 24% experience 16% device 13% pattern 05% question 02%
Figure 6-13. Sample tabled analysis of ALL participants
233
The usefulness of the analysis is twofold: it defines themes, but it also finds connections to
other concepts. In the tables above, “experience” was clearly a concept which otherwise may have been overlooked (16%). However, this concept was also highlighted in the manual coding of the interviews and its proximity to the category of “design” did draw attention to its significance. The full complement of samples and analysis of interviews are contained in the
Appendix.
When comparing data with the manual coded material, I found it necessary to create a table.
The table allowed for easy reference of each participant by colour coding that is illustrated in the table below.
Figure 6-14. Example of categories and concepts manually tabulated
The concepts were renamed after scrutinizing all interview data. Then headings were made
on the manually coded document with the pertinent interviews grouped under the most
234
appropriate headings. It was also essential to reorganise the data in relation to the research
question and therefore not to lose the connection to what is being explored.
Throughout the analysis, there were intense periods of “mulling over” information and others of “swimming with information” that could be made into categories. The frustration was indicative of a point of saturation in the categories and is in line with other user’s experience of grounded theory (K Charmaz, Constructing Grounded Theory 113).
The final step was then to reintegrate categories into core categories after discovering particular patterns in the themes and concepts. The movement backwards and forward
between the categories and the data during each stage of sorting raised the conceptual level of
the analysis. It was a way of finding the best fit for the data. The disadvantage however was
the continuing preoccupation of not forcing the interview data into preconceived codes.
The use of complex coding and comparisons in order to find objectivity did highlight three
interesting points. Firstly theoretical codes are useful in clarifying and sharpening analysis
and building a tenacious self-awareness of not imposing a forced theoretical framework onto
the analysis. Secondly it confirmed Charmaz’s concept of the “objective transparency” (K
Charmaz, Constructing Grounded Theory 69) of interview data as an interpretative method
within an empirical world; and finally, the process acts as a stepping stone to a deeper
meaning and a springboard for ideas.
6.4.5. Individual data analysis
One area worth mentioning is the comparison of individual data analysis. On the concept map
below, the analysis can be seen to find boundaries of the interview data. The distribution of
the individual was interesting because even though there was a discrepancy in the various
concept maps, there was a suggestion that each participant spoke about the same thing in
235
quantitatively different ways. In the figure below, the red colour indicates the file tag of
individual participants. The tags illustrate that the participants were either from varying types
of design fields or were more involved in different aspects of design. The relationships did
show that the participants had links with homogenous concepts and themes. The links were
made through various pathways. For instance in fig. 6.15 we can see that James talks about
“people” through “markets” and “technology” while Anggra links “devices” to “people”.
Figure 6-15. Individual interviews mapped with concepts and themes
A final working through of the texts ensured that a comparison was made between the
manual categories and the Leximancer analysis. This led to samples being made and
categories being defined and then connections being made with the literature.
Finally, a few of the primary categories found in this analysis were listed: People, Device,
Interface, Experience, and Use; the full list will be discussed in the following chapter. The coding categories provided a hierarchical scheme that later led to relationships forming in the
236
sub-codes. The list presented not a definitive view but rather a starting point for the integration of codes and the notes, and primary source material.
6.5. Conclusion/Summary
This chapter has discussed the research methodology and why grounded theory was selected
as the primary research approach for this study. It has highlighted that its flexibility lends
itself well as an approach to work with technology, society and designers as the focus. Kathy
Charmaz’s perspective of grounded theory allowed for a less structured approach that
supports this study’s mixed data analysis that uses both manual coding and computer assisted
qualitative data analysis.
Key informant interviews was the choice technique of data collection and this section
discussed how expert designers as a sample led to in-depth interviews that aided the study’s depth of data and the trustworthiness of the data due to the use of triangulation.
Finally, both manual and computer assisted coding by using Leximancer was explained, illustrating the strengths and weaknesses in both systems and how one analysis, computer assisted analysis in this case, can complement the primary method of manual coding.
The following chapter will discuss in detail the findings of the data analysis and reveal the concepts that were found in the data.
237
7. Findings
7.1. Overview
The previous chapter discussed how the interpretative nature of a grounded theory framework coordinates well with using key informants with a manually coded and interpreted approach.
It also examined how Leximancer analysis software can provide support to the manual coding approach and with the interpretation of the interviews by validating the results. The advantage of this specific computer-assisted text analysis is that it is stable and affords reproducibility. Stability in Leximancer is such that no matter how many times the transcripts are reprocessed the data are consistent and can be said to have high level coding stability
(Rooney 410). Reproducibility is seen in the consistent way that the text is classified, given the same coding scheme. Consistent classifying will result in a consistently constructed concept map. The concept map can be calculated a number of times and each new map can be inspected for consistency.
The reliability and depth needed in the analysis determined the use of manual coding as the primary mode of analysing the results and demonstrated how key informant interviews assisted in the research process. It can also assist in drilling down into the themes and to verify the classifications and data.
This chapter will interpret the findings from the interviews. It will do this by interpreting the combined results from the primary mode of manually coded interview transcripts and the secondary method provided by the Leximancer software data analysis.
The analysis and interpretation of the key findings found that the data suggested themes and concepts. This chapter has been organised into sections that deal with different aspects of the findings and have therefore been grouped together under these themes and concepts.
239
7.1.1. A note on interpretation of leximancer graphics
The previous chapter discussed how the Leximancer map was interpreted in two ways. The
first was to consider where concepts are in relationship to each other and the second was to
refer back to the interview excerpts to understand the relationships that had been initially
formed through manual coding. Content analysis can be done either as a conceptual
(thematic) or relational (semantic) analysis and Leximancer uses both in this study. The
interviews were first interpreted from a grounded theory approach where themes were identified and then followed by Leximancer identified concepts that suggested how these
concepts interrelate. The result is an overall ranking of concepts as well as indicating how
strong the associations and semantic similarities are between the concepts.
Secondly, if there are two concepts that the researcher wants to investigate, “pathways” are
used that focus on the strongest links between the two concepts. It is also a way that
Leximancer reveals stories that emerge from the interviews as a way to check the primary
analysis and interpretation of the interviews that resulted from a grounded theory approach.
From a data perspective the best way to think about the relationship of pathways is that they
describe correlations and the probability of the path taken that joins these concepts together.
The pathways are significant from an interpretative perspective because they reveal other key
concepts that exist along the path and they act as intermediaries, like bridges, that may have
otherwise been hidden.
The coloured circles reveal groups of related concepts with the concepts that are most
frequent and connected appearing in red, followed by orange, yellow then green and blue. A
concept represents words or phrases, or a collection of words (fig. 7.1).
240
Colour Frequency and connectivity
Highest
High
Moderate
Low
Lowest
Figure 7-1. A colour coded table indicating frequency and connectivity in the combined Leximancer and interpretative coded map
Groups of concepts that cluster together are referred to as “themes”. Theme names are the dominant concept in each group.
For clarity, the definitions of terms used throughout this chapter will prefix the name of the theme with a t, separated from the theme name by an underscore. For instance, the theme
“people” will be represented, as “t_people” and the concept or word referred to by the theme will be “people”. If the word starts a sentence, it will follow normal practice and be upper case, “T_people”.
241
7.1.2. Main Themes
Fig. 7.2 shows a graphic representation of the analysis of interview transcripts from all the
key informants provided by the grounded theory thematic coding approach supported by a concept map from the Leximancer system. It provides an overview of the main concepts and relationships between theme and concept and between each informant.
The themes capture high-level ideas or trends; in this analysis, there are 11 themes:
1. People 4. Interface 7. Use 10. Pattern
2. Design 5. Interesting 8. Experience 11. Question
3. Phones 6. Things 9. Device
We can identify that the most prominent themes in order of their significance are the theme
t_people (red) has 100% connectivity and t_design (orange), has about an 82% connectivity
score. The connectivity score indicates the theme’s relative importance in respect to other
themes. 82% is a percentage of the total connections made to all concepts from the analysed
interviews and is considered high. The next is t_phones (yellow) with 54%, t_interface with
37% (green) and t_interesting (green) at 25%. In fig. 7.2 it is clear that the t_people is the
over-riding driver from the interview data.
242
Figure 7-2. Leximancer concept map of ALL informants
7.2. Summary of Findings
The purpose of this thesis is to explore a way to talk about mobile technology, ritual and
design and by doing so to provide an understanding of whether designers discreetly embed
ritual-like activities into their designs of mobile devices.
The research from interpreting the interviews found that among all of the themes, “people”
was the most prominent and that there were a number of points related to this theme that
could be divided into key aspects.
243
• Social in design The social in design defines the social in the mobile device
• Social interaction is determined by the industrial design team
• The difference in design is seen expressed in identity, cultural
demand and functionality
• The social in design is a pattern that defines the interface
• Ideas motivate the social in design to create emotion
• Interaction, interface (screen, form factor) distribute emotion
• Sharing and exchange is a practice integrated in a company People and market strategy
• Sharing and exchanges of information influences the
relationship between people within the design of the mobile
device
• Market integration can cause tension and constraints in design
244
• Interaction is a designed social practice in mobile device Work and interaction design
• The interface acts as a visual border that enables a designed
social practice
• Design teams design the social practices as personal
• Designers and companies create experiences
• Social practice is influenced by the aesthetic of a designed Concept of look “look”
• Screen form is a dominant influence
• The pattern is a script or blueprint designed to create an order The pattern (routine) of operations, experiences and material forms
• The pattern is influenced by specific social profiles
• The pattern is both software and hardware
The key finding that was seen across the themes was the concept of the “social in design”.
The social in design linked “people”, “design” and “mobile technology” together and was involved with interaction and a number of other aspects in design including the “pattern”.
245
“People and market” revealed both tension and expectation when designers, marketing and company strategy integrate.
“People and work” was indicated as a concept because of its various meanings. For instance, it can be understood to provide a hierarchy among designers and it can also establish the integration of various design departments working together, which was related to the previous concept, people and market.
“Work and interaction” was seen in the context of the mobile device’s design or in the design team’s process of design. Designing social practices as personal means that the device can be either personalised by the user or can be taken by the user as personal.
The research found a relationship among the above sections, and therefore all were integral to people. The “pattern” is a significant finding and was active in design, interaction, interface and experience.
7.3. Theme: people
T_people are connected with all the main concepts and are therefore central to design, technology and the mobile device. “People” was identified in the manual coded findings with references to designers. Though on first viewing this sounds rational, it is only by digging under the surface and interpreting the interviews that other connections are revealed. For
Anggra, it was related to trends and that designers and people create trends, while Ruth discussed the roles of marketing and profiling.
Looking deeper into this particular theme reveals a cluster of related concepts: “time”,
“work”, “market”, “technology”, “look” and “example” all grouped around the theme t_people, forming a cluster. These could also be verified by looking through the thesauri of words that define a concept and indicate how strongly particular words are related to that
246
concept. However the importance these related concepts are to t_people is determined by
what the informants said about design and the close proximity when analysing the concept
map; therefore people, market, work, look, and technology are closely related.
7.3.1. People and market
Taking the most significant of these concepts, the lines between the concepts indicate the
most likely connections between concepts. The connection between the “people” and
“market” is an expected norm when considering some of the associations made between
people, the market, and the distribution of the mobile product.
For example, when interpreting the interviews Ruth reveals the value of the association with marketing and advertising when referring to her work with Nokia:
So we usually have this group of people who do consumer research, market research
and they kind of try to predict what people want and what is out there in the market…
For James, though, it is related to complicating the design of the mobile device:
We don’t really know what people want because we can’t really segment the market,
so we’d just better keep squeezing all this other stuff [applications and buttons] in just
to make sure that we keep everyone happy. And then they [mobile device] become
more complicated.
Anggra says that when he designs applications, he is steered partially by the market in his
design process:
… and my own requirement and even the market requirements and I couldn’t see why
the fashion requirements, so then [I] start doing the wide framing for testing…
247
What is noteworthy is not necessarily the importance that market information has to both the design and to people involved in mobile production, which was mixed, but to the importance and reliance on the exchange and sharing of ideas.
The streams of information were either company-driven or consumer-driven and in James’ case this can complicate the design of the device. The key informants needed to make informed decisions about a design and this information was supplied by either marketing and consumer research departments who “kind of predicted what people want” mentioned in
Ruth’s case or by Anggra having his “own requirements”, “market requirements” and
“fashion requirements” in relation to software development.
However, the involvement of marketing departments did impose limitations on designers’ work because of the product brief. Ruth referred to this when discussing Nokia’s design process:
They [Marketing department] will define the type of group, how much the device
should cost, how much it should cost to manufacture, what features it should have,
how it should look like and things like that, and so when it comes to the designer we
kind of work within the constraints of this product brief.
The product brief is a company strategy influence based on branding, economic and market prediction and highlights the streams of information referred to earlier as company-driven, informing the design team.
However, working within constraints did not affect the ability to share and exchange, which played a major influence in the relationship between the market and people. For example, when looking specifically at the marketing of a device, let’s call it distribution, then the idea of “sharing and exchange” is related to what Ruth calls integration.
248
…they think of Apple and they know it’s iPhone, they are not confused about a lot of
different models, and the way that it’s integrated, like the user interface and the
industrial design and the marketing and everything is integrated and that’s a very clear
message about what this phone can do…
The important points to draw from this analysis are:
• The practice of sharing and exchanging information influences the relationship
between people and the market in the design of the mobile device; and.
• These influences are in some cases integrated and revolve around a company strategy.
7.3.2. People and work
The concept of “work”, however, is predominantly related to labour, a job or toil and a relationship to “people”. Ruth laid out this relationship when discussing the production process:
So usually, there are two designers working on one product, but then you have inputs
from the mechanical people, whether they are able to materialise the design, because
it depends a lot on whether we can get production on this…
But “work” was sometimes referred to as a function or the operation of an object. James refers to this function when he was at art school.
… and always interested in how things worked and making things, you know, that I
enjoyed.
Therefore, when looking at the concept of “work” and “people” it does necessitate interpretation based on the word’s context in the interview The dependence on strictly using computer analysis can sometimes lead to general statements, and highlights the need to first
249
analyse and interpret the interviews so that the data will produce effective and meaningful
results (see also section 7.5).
Another example to consider is that it could also have different contexts that can be
misleading.
Who would have thought about using "swiping" action? As a working designer, we
have to be aware of these technological changes, as this will also affect the design of
other products
For Michelle it was how a designer established herself in a hierarchy of designers referring to
herself as a “working designer”.
The interview findings therefore suggest that work is contained within the social aspects of
the design process and closely linked to both producing and creating.
7.3.3. Work and interaction
Also noteworthy is that the most-related word based on its relationship and its co–occurrence to “work” as a concept, is “interaction” and not the concept of “people” to which one might assume there would be a closer relationship. The concept of interaction is used in the context of: 1) design of the mobile device and, 2) interaction as a team in the design process.
When interpreting the interviews Marko’s involvement in interaction design demonstrated this relationship.
I don’t think it’s a new discipline. So it’s not as if it…Well, I think when I started,
there wasn’t a place to go to study it, so you worked on it, in the early days of the
web, and focal interaction design, we worked on actually in the companies. Nokia
helped, we had one of the better teams at that point.
250
Ruth however, thinks there is still a way to go in working together within an organisation’s
design process, and on another level she continues to illustrate the co-occurrence of “work” and “interaction” but seems to view “interaction” as a social practice.
Well at the moment I think we don’t work as close as I think we should. We are in
different departments and we kind of just do our own job and then put them [devices]
together, although we do align along the way, like the colours, the overall feel of the
phone, maybe it’s youthful or it’s professional or things like that, but because we are
in different departments we don’t really interact that often.
Analysing Ruth’s comments poses the question of the nature of the association that connects
“work” to “interaction” when designing mobile devices. Interestingly, this led to a
comparison with the Leximancer analysis where the results were unexpected and revealed that it was not a direct path and the path followed the same route even if “interaction” was chosen instead of “interface” (see fig. 7.3)
251
Figure 7-3. Leximancer concept map indicates the pathway taken from concepts of "work" to
"interaction" follows the same path to the "t_interface"
The understanding of interaction design of the device and interaction in the design process
both lead to the “t_interface” revealed in both the interview analysis and indicated in fig. 7.3.
The assumption that one can draw is that interaction of a device by design is a social practice.
Michelle refers to this when considering what is personal in design.
Personalisation is ok, it has always been around. However you can have a lot of
interaction with a photocopier but you can also be quite detached to it. The more you
carry the product or device the more you both interact and it will affect you. The
things that you carry identify who you are.
James also claims this is a type of social practice and included the interface as the way the
practice is delivered.
252
…the challenge is going to be that interface with the person and making it a
comfortable interaction where they can have it, take it or leave it, whenever they
want.
The relationship between work and the concept of “interaction” establishes that social practice is a theme. It also highlights that designers are designing for developing social
practice (communication) therefore creating dependency of the device through social
practice. To verify this finding, an examination of possible differences between “people” and
“work” was used to reveal any variables when finding the correlation to “interaction”.
Also in fig. 7.4 observed “people” instead of “work”.
Figure 7-4. Leximancer concept map showing the pathway from a concept of "people" to "interaction"
253
Again the designers follow the same path observed in fig.7.3 as in fig 7.4, from “people” to
“interaction”, indicating the similarity between “work” and “people”.
Another similarity found in the interview analysis supported by both concept maps reveal that
“design”, “industrial”, “team” and “look” are key concepts.
Marko supports this connection in the manually coded interviews when discussing his work
on interface design.
And at that point, there wasn’t really much work – on local interface design, in fact,
even the idea that industrial design was a competitive factor in mobile phones was
something that Nokia largely pioneered.
According to James the industrial design team would make the hardware to create the interaction.
So, generally you start off with hardware, a PCBA (Print Circuit Board Assembly)
layout, which have been designed to fit in the schemed layout that the industrial
designers would have provided. So that ought to include in the PCBA and hardware
and the screen and all the core electro mechanical functionality and then they would
work with a mechanical team who would work on packaging essential plastics and
mechanics of however that’s held, including the battery, any ancillary and electro
mechanical parts on the antennas, vibrating motors.
What this means is that “people” is associated with t_design and t_design with the concept of
“interaction”. Similarly, when examining the concept of “work” it too will follow the same path and show a relationship to “interact”.
254
This, significantly, indicates that interaction is a designed social practice in the mobile device.
A closer look at this interaction in fig.7.4 also reveals that the red circle t_people is intersecting the green circle t_interface, suggesting there is a close association between these two themes. When looking more specifically at these concepts, the path that takes the strongest (low-cost) link is how the concept of “people” to “look” is key to t_design. The t_design is clustered with the “industrial” and “team” and the path finally leads to
“interaction”. Interpreting these findings based on a pathway as the most probable correlation between a beginning and final concept suggests that the relationship is designed, personable and a social practice. This practice is heavily influenced by an aesthetic of appearance or
“look”.
Marko notes when referring to design that design has influenced the t_people, and indicates that observation and looking is a key to the first stage before designing an interaction.
If you look around at people using the devices, they are often, even with other human
beings around, they will have their head down, pinching and zooming and in fact, I
think largely the industry has failed in design.
James indicates the visual importance of the interface to the user
I mean, when the customer sees a mobile phone and gets very excited about the user
interface on iPhone, that’s really the very top level design and interface that [is what]
they’re exposed to.
The “Nokia” concept seen in t_interface is next in the analysis and found to be a related name
– similar to other proper noun concepts, like iPhone. Other name-like concepts can be locations and people and on the map are represented with a capital first letter. The “Nokia”
255
concept is related to other concepts like “team”, “social”, “interface”, “industrial”,
“experience”, “interaction” and “pattern”, “screen” and “look”. The importance of the
pathway of the Nokia concept is that it creates the “interaction”, indicated in fig. 7.5.
Figure 7-5. Leximancer concept map showing the pathway from a concept of "work" to "interface" via
"interaction" in mobile technology design
However, when the path from the concept and t_people to the concept and t_interface is
chosen, the relationship is direct, as seen later in fig.7.6.
On the contrary, “people” does not go through the same path in its relationship if the concept
of “interaction” was selected instead.
256
Figure 7-6. Leximancer concept map showing the pathway taken from the t_people to t_ interface
The analysis of the interviews suggests that “people” need something to interact with to form an interaction, also seen here in fig.7.6. Secondly, designers design interactions because as seen in fig. 7.5, if “interaction” is the end point, then the relationship changes, as it needs a design team creating an interaction.
If this were to include the path that “people” takes to an “experience”, it again follows via the overlapping of t_design to the concept of “Nokia” and then to the concept of an “experience”.
This path indicates that designers and companies create experiences.
Marko indicated this when discussing the remodelling of Nokia design.
….Nokia combined competencies in industrial design, interaction design, and these -
this brand experience design into one team.
257
…and then we’ll make a design choice. So this is one dimension. The other has to do
with the actual tactility of the experience, and what again, certainly more theoretically
is called multi-modalities.
This finding supports the key points that:
• Interaction is a designed social practice in mobile device design;
• The interface acts as a visual border that enables the designed social practice;
• Design teams design the personal; and,
• Designers and companies create experience.
7.4. Concept of Look
“Look” in the manual coded interpretation of the interviews revealed it is a visual aesthetic related to screen size, affordance, shape and colour. However the Leximancer findings suggested that it indicated how the social practice is influenced and it was associated to interacting with the interface.
The findings at a deeper level when examining the concept of “look” suggest that people are initiators of the experience of a device. James Braithwaite, designer of the Ericsson T10 speaks about the customer’s point of view when designing mobile technology.
…its got to do what it says on the box and its got to look good sitting in my cupboard
at home. But you know the industrial design look of it is a powerful tool to try and get
people to get excited and interested in the product.
The relationship that James referred to is a designed look. For Nokia, says Marko, the look resulted from a combination of a number of areas.
258
Nokia combined competencies in industrial design, interaction design and these – this
brand experience design into one team… I know that the team and for myself, is that
we design interfaces that give people their head up again.
Apart from the “design” and “look” that have formed connections to a concept of
“experience”, the results from the interviews revealed an interesting correlation. The close relationship between “technology” and “people” can be seen thematically from both the interviews and by their close proximity in the concept map (see fig. 7.2). But, even though there is a close relationship between technology and people, there is also a tension. James indicated this tension between technology and people when discussing “design”.
There’s a fine line between being immersed in it [technology] and being comfortably
detached from technology and I don’t think we’ve really worked out what that is. I
think as designers and technologists, I think we’d love people just to totally immerse
themselves in it all the time and have that instant gratification and communication all
the time.
James talked about the balance that people must make between the immersion and detachment with technology. The findings also suggest that although technology and people are in close association with each other, the best correlation between them was the influence by “look” (also see fig.7.7) that created an immersive experience with technology.
259
Figure 7-7. Leximancer concept map showing the correlation between "people" and "technology"
The analysis of the manually coded interview material suggests that, Marko believes that our relationship with technology starts from people being in the present and like James, that we can also alienate ourselves from being human through technology.
My thought was how can you actually bring more of the interaction off the glass,
make it understandable yet still gestural, and essentially give people their head up
again, so they can – physically as in the social interactions that they had, because
that’s fundamentally related… we need to be present. And people that are present, that
involves things like iPhone and other things. This forms more super-performing
teams, if you want to take an efficiency angle at it. This is not me saying it’s bad that
people are no longer looking themselves in the eye, this is rather – if you want to put
260
it this way, we’re alienating ourselves from what it would be to be more human by
using technology like that.
The alienation of the human actor from being human through the use of mobile technology is
associated with the reliance and integration of technology to people. Similarly, the concept of
“people” to “technology” via the “look” in the design of mobile technology is for product
designer Michelle, a reason why design is more than just beautifying a technological object;
it becomes emotional.
Design is not about making things pretty but about a more subtle way. For example, if
I am designing a bottle which has a bath product in it the bottle is a tool to sell the
bath liquid. Design is about giving a product an identity. It is also about problem
solving most of the time, for example what kind of material to use. Emotion in design
happens most of the time. Sometimes, it is not to do with the product it can be
package design, as with Apple, or service design. What you are trying to do is
recreate feelings in the user. The feeling of opening a box or package for the first time
that a product is in; recreate memories.
However an overall conclusion supported by examining all the interview transcripts manually
and in conjunction with the thesaurus and concept tabs in the Leximancer software, finds the
“look” is connected and associated to a number of the concepts.
261
Figure 7-8. Leximancer concept map revealing the association of all concepts with "look" that is contained in the t_people.
The red lines in fig. 7.8 indicate the connection of “look” to other related concepts. The
software does have a Prose Test feature that restricts the number of stop words in a sentence
and so acts as a partial filter, but it is still worth remembering that CASDAQ should be used
as a tool, as discussed earlier in chapter six.
Reflecting on the manual analysis of the interviews, “look” is used to infer the examination, exploration or observation of something. This can be seen when Anggra discusses the software buttons on the Apple iPad and iPhone.
….on the iPad you would have thought people would notice the buttons on the
bottom but nobody could find them so the buttons are quite small. It is different from
262
the iPhone because you see one glass is everything. People thought where is this
function, and we is just say there is the button have a look at the bottom but they
never noticed it.
It is also mentioned by Michelle when discussing other technology design companies.
Have a look at a Thai company called “Qualy”, these products that are very tongue in
cheek. Design is definitely growing in Singapore.
“Look” also infers the appearance of something. Ruth describes the production process in mobile technology design.
….they come up with the brief, the product brief. They will define the type of group,
how much the device should cost, how much it should cost to manufacture, what
features it should have, how it should look like and things like that, and so when it
comes to the designer we kind of work within the constraints of this product brief.
The concept of “look” is therefore quite fundamental for connecting people to an interaction, to technology, to design, to images and to ideas. Designing experience needs an action provider or object of delivery and the findings suggest that the concept, “t_designers” was used to create it. It is also worth remembering that “Nokia” represents a creator of design and is therefore retained in the t_design seen in fig 7.9. It is also worth noting that in this figure, the focus is placed on the most significant themes by reducing the number of themes. On a larger level, people need design to create an interaction/interface to experience. Design and designer is embedding both the process to deliver an experience, but also the experience itself.
The interviews have indicated, the aesthetic of “look” is a key finding and is connected to the interface and designers and initiates interaction. Social practice is influenced by the aesthetic
263
of a designed “look” and can be considered as the visual aesthetic, a carrier of an experience as well as an experience itself.
7.4.1. Prominence of themes
The interview analysis grouped the most prominent themes together and was congruent to
particular findings gathered from the leximancer system. The most obvious being people,
design, interface and pattern (see section 7.6).
Figure 7-9. Leximancer map showing the themes when reduced to the most prominent themes
The themes in fig 7.9 show a reorganisation of the concept map to emphasise the most
prominent themes when imposing a limit on the themes. By doing this the selection assisted
in finding overlapping concepts and concentrating on specific themes. Therefore it provides a
way to compare both data sets by finding the similarities and differences with the earlier fig.
264
7.2. By doing this it would find instances when concepts were so similar that they could be defined together. The order of prominence is t_people (red), t_design (orange), t_interface
(yellow/green), t_phones (green), t_pattern (blue) and lastly t_question. The next themes that are prominent after t_people and t_design are t_interface and then t_phones. However, whereas there was a distinction between t_device and t_phones in the previous concept map seen in fig.7.2, now there is no boundary. The significant similarity between them allows both “phones” and “device” to be conceptually clustered together as “t_phones”. The primary analysis of the interviews and the map reveals, however, a number of overlaps, for instance, the main t_people would subsume t_interesting and t_things because of their close proximity to each other, just as t_phones subsumed “device” and “user” was subsumed with t_interface seen in fig. 7.9. This indicates the device and user can be taken as a relationship together.
Taking the concept and t_question first, it was found to be to be associated with curiosity and is a stop word used in the interview transcripts.
For example, Marko says about Apple and there design teams use “question” in a rhetorical form.
Johnny Ive has a great team there, and but they don’t do the software. From my
understanding, its ultimately Jobs [who] did the software. So then the question is, they
kind of join in one person. And I don’t know the culture well enough, so call it sort of
previous in the industrial design team and some current colleagues came from the
software side there.
This comment highlights that “question” is used as conversation filler. Also its positioning on the map indicates a distance from other relationships. The theme itself therefore warrants close scrutiny, resulting in a lower priority in the findings and analysis and therefore it is deemed to be redundant.
265
When examining t_people in fig. 7.9. it is valuable to see the important relationships that this theme has with a number of concepts, like “probably”, “idea”, “technology”, “guess”,
“interface”, “interaction”, “different”, “things”, “market”, “team”, “social”, “mobile”,
“interesting”, “look” and those contained in t_pattern like “experience”, “software”, “doing” and “Apple”.
7.5. The Pattern
The interviews revealed that pattern is related to the creation of an order of behaviours that form a template that can be repeated in design, like a blue print of responses. Marko’s description of Nokia’s N9 and the pattern designed for their interface and interaction.
…the point with the N9 was to introduce a new pattern, and it was driven by the
belief that we can design a better way to use a phone. And it’s driven by this thought
that in the current industry, we’re still in a period much akin where the automotive
industry was in the 1890s. If you recall your automotive history, cars had tillers then.
Backward tillers. The steering wheel took about 15 years to become the dominant
user interface design of the automobile. And I think we’re designing a better
interaction pattern… It’s better for one-handed use.
Apple as a concept was also clustered in the t_pattern because of its relationships to
“experience”. Ruth believes that interaction and data profiling is the next step for building an experience.
…the future design is sort of going, it’s going to be…, this integration is very
important – is it going to go one step further where the user and the device are
behaving together? I think so, definitely it is the next step for, in terms of
experience. And I don’t think it’s a secret that a lot of companies are going to, for
266
example recently there is this news that Apple is collecting data from its users, and
even like Facebook, they collate your data and then they customize the ads according
to your profile.
Michelle considered that Apple products are innovative within the interactive experience.
OK, I do see the trends of moving towards the usage of iPhone and iPad and I agree
that Apple has definitely changed the whole interaction experience of with these
products. There are very few companies who dare to go in this direction. Who would
have thought about using "swiping" action?
Marko also defines the pattern as bringing both the hardware and software together to create
simplicity to use the device.
… the most ambitious kind, where you’re doing an entire new pattern, combining
holistically innovating hardware and software together. There are – like I talk about
that in the Copenhagen talk, but essentially, something like an amazing pattern such
as a revolutionary pattern in some ways, like the iPhone, a single screen surface and
app folders, and one mouse click, which is fantastically simple also, very constrained.
The t_pattern in the analysis of the interviews suggests both integration and experience. For instance Anggra is a firm believer when it comes to Apple’s iTunes helping to differentiate the mobile experience from that of other mobile technology companies.
It is a full complete experience of the user so everything is integrated. You don’t need
to see how to do this and how to do that you see it in one place you get music, you get
movies, you even get books in one place it is integrated. … it is easier for us so we
don’t have to run around everywhere to get a lot of things done, yeah.
267
The findings also stressed that the t_pattern is instructions for the concept of “doing” or
creating, which was highlighted by Marko in his discussion on the way that Nokia designers
should work by observing what people “do”, “doing it”, and “simplification”.
… but the pattern itself will not come from bottom up, from atomic observation of
what people do. That has to be – that’s a designers act, to hit on maybe first 15
different canvases for the simplification and then you prototype all of them and then
you keep iterating. So the pattern won’t come just by taking a video camera and doing
stenography. You need a designer’s point of view in it.
The t_pattern is also “software” related, as seen in fig 7.9. Both hardware and software come
together in design for specific target groups, claimed Ruth.
Usually what we do is, when we start the program, there’s specific target group, for
example if it’s targeted at youth, so the software and hardware will know that it is
targeted at youths, and then of course then we work towards this same direction in
both designs. And that’s how it’s aligned usually.
Supporting the manual interview analysis, the t_pattern also derives its name from the most dominant concept in a coded cluster and is shaded blue on the concept map, fig. 7.9. It intersects with the design and the interface within the analysis.
The interview data provide evidence that the concept and t_pattern is inextricably linked to a number of concepts even though it is not as prominent as other themes. For Marko it is crucial for the production of consumer mobile devices:
…I think when you’re doing mass scale products, you have to – I mean, we’re better
off operating in the mainstream of technology use. You need to make sure that – [in
the] line in the N9, we introduce a new way to, the overall interaction pattern phase.
268
So in order to go home, you just swipe the lens of the screen, below the physical
model, and this was…
The pattern is a key finding and is indicative of a type of script or template for hardware and software design. It includes scripting behaviors, like “swipe the lens of the screen” that create a routine of operation and experience. The findings also indicate that the pattern combines both hardware and software to deliver an overall experience. It is the link to experience that is integral and underlies many of the findings. For instance, the pattern is a script or blueprint designed to create an order (routine) of operations, experiences and material forms.
7.6. The social in design
So far, we have found t_people to be the primary theme. This theme is followed in importance by the relationship of t_design and t_interface.
The findings revealed “phones” is also a central theme, which is not surprising, but the relationships between it and other concepts are. For instance, when looking at the associations between “people” and the “social”, the findings suggest that there is no strong and direct association with “design” but it is through “phones” or “mobiles” via “different” that finally makes the link to the “social”.
Taking the concept of “design”, one sees a similarity to the previous path to the “product”
(the mobile device) leading to “people” that is “different” and this is then associated to
“social”. This analysis finds the social in design and defines the social in the mobile device.
For Ruth, this is related to experience and feel.
…think this is a very important aspect of the design of a mobile phone because it’s
such a small device that it has to feel good in your hand and it has to be convenient as
269
in you need to feel good about pressing the buttons, you need to have feedback on the
buttons
However taking the concept of the “team” in design and its association to “social” the
findings suggest that the connection is through the t_interaction before leading to the “social”
within the interface. This finding suggests that the industrial design team is responsible for
the social interaction.
Marko, for instance, had various design roles through which design led to the touch
interaction technology interface. The experience preceded him introducing a social network.
…including having design strategy in the industrial design organisation and some
complex reworking’s of the organisation, there’s been a lot of work on NXC (Not
eXactly C a simple language for programming) and touch interaction at that
point. And then I left Nokia after my first time to be an entrepreneur, and I was in the
launch team of a start- up called Blyk, (“free” ad-supported mobile network) which is
still running, it involves quite a bit. The idea was to introduce free mobile services,
free text and minutes in exchange for dialog based advertising. The new model for
telecom, the new business model for telecom…
Besides t_people, the t_design is considered an important and prominent driver. The findings suggest that it is related to concepts such as “industrial”, “team”, “software” “look”, “pattern,
“interaction”, “idea” “talking”, “product” and “interface”. As a theme, there are direct relationships to “product” and “industrial”.
When talking about designing a product when he worked for Ericsson, James was clear about this relationship and his involvement in the mobile device.
270
My involvement was right from the start, sitting down with the industrial designer,
looking at his sketches and layouts and then converting that and discussing with him
about tweaking and changing it and converting that into a real life product.
Michelle was also part of the process from design to product, though expectations varied with particular cultures.
The design process is in-house and relatively flexible. As opposed to a Japanese firm
which was my previous job where they expected designers to be more like engineers
and they concentrated more on the technical side of product design. If anything it was
more administrative.
“Product” design therefore was high in its connections to all the concepts under the t_design, but also with other themes and their concepts like, “look”, “technology”, “software” and
“market”. The highest concept with a 39% likelihood of a co-occurrence existing with
“product” is the “idea”. The evidence words in the thesaurus that define “product” are production, products, conception, technical, and emphasis to name the most significant. To summarise from the data so far it can be determined that:
• The social in design defines the social in the mobile device; and,
• Social interaction is determined by the industrial design team.
“Idea” is well defined in the Leximancer thesaurus by words like ideas, media and relationship. The evidence for this is seen in the manual coded interview transcript. James associates idea with products when he is discussing how the branding and marketing departments began work with the designers.
They came in right from the start, from the initial contact and the emphasis was on
how are we going to sell it? It is a great idea, this is worth it but is there a market and
271
how are we going to sell it, so that is part of the initial evaluation when you design a
product.
The path linking “idea” to “product” is located through “technology” and then through “look”
before arriving at “product” seen in fig 7.10.
Figure 7-10. Leximancer map indicating the concept of "idea" and the pathway taken to the concept of
"product"
For Ericsson designer James, there were occasions when there was tension from ideas in
design to forming the product when trying to create emotion in the functionality of a mobile
device.
The trouble with Ericsson is a very sort of functional based business. These were
great ideas that we always bounced around and had fun with, but at the end of the day
272
you write down a specification of what you want the product to do from a very
detailed, technical level and actually that is quite interesting. You don’t really capture
these emotional, industrial designed look and feel aspects in the design specification.
They tend to be left out to hard and fast technical aspects which deliver a measurable
result, whereas the industrial design doesn’t do that and doesn’t really feature in that
specification of the product…. I mean, the answer is yes, it was designed to make
people feel sympathetic. I mean, when I was in China working for Ericsson we tried
to design mobile phones that would appeal to the Chinese person…
The third most prominent theme was t_ interface and Leximancer determined that it had 41% connectivity to other themes. Interface was clustered with the concepts “user”, “use”,
“screen”, “interaction”, “feel” and “social”, “important” and “iPhone”.
The most connected was “user”, however this was more to do with the compound word “user interface” that co-occurred in blocks of texts in the interview transcripts. For example, James talks about designing for the Chinese market and illustrates the use of this compound concept.
On the user interface a little panda comes up and sings a song or something like
that. It’s really getting under the skin of what the Chinese people want.
The words “user” and “interface” could be merged and “user” is therefore deemed irrelevant since it did not contribute meaning to the concept maps if taken singularly.
The “feel” was the next highly associated concept in t_interface. Marko made a link to emotional design but also made a connection to two concepts, “pattern” and “screen”.
And it feels direct, because we’ve come from either the pattern of previous Nokia
phones and Google, I’m talking about touch screen interfaces now, and then the
273
conversely, the iPhone pattern. We’ve finally gotten rid of the mouse button. There’s
no physical button you need to press of the screen “click-click” to have something
happen on the screen.
For Ruth though, feel is an interface that results in an interaction, as when she discussed designing the Nokia phone.
And in particular Nokia phones are emotions. I think a lot of it has to do with how it
feels in your hand when you are using the device. So for example of the device is
made of like maybe stainless steel and it has a lot of sharp edges and when you hold
it, it feels cold, it makes you feel more professional and it makes you feel more
business-like in a way; you feel more high-tech.
The “screen” in t_interface was also highly related to “pattern”. This was very clear when
Marko discussed a meeting he had with Japanese designer Naoto Fukasawa about the Nokia design.
…I said you think our subconscious has developed enough that you apply the same
thinking, mainly, finding the most natural pattern, also to the interface design of a
product. … oh, maybe now that we have the touch screen, that is so natural and direct.
The importance of the connections made between “interface” and “interaction” is summed up succinctly by Ruth when she talked about the future of designing mobile technology.
I think it’s quite hard to say but I think definitely thinner, more efficient, longer
battery life, things like that are a given that I think every brand is trying to improve,
but I think the emotional part is important. I think in the near future, maybe not too
distant the interfaces may be made to be more human and emotional I think, so when
274
you are interacting with a phone you are kind of interacting with a friend instead of a
device.
The findings also associated the “interface” to “people” and to “phone”, for example when
Ruth commented about the iPhone and its success because of integration of hardware,
software and distribution.
Okay I think what makes it good is the way - sorry, it’s the way that, yah I imagine
it’s simple, people understand it, they think of Apple and they know it’s iPhone, they
are not confused about a lot of different models, and the way that it’s integrated, like
the user interface and the industrial design and the marketing and everything is
integrated and that’s a very clear message about what this phone can do, and so
people are not confused and, yeah they know what to expect from the phone and they
just get what they want yeah.
The interviews highlight that the social in design is seen to have
• Ideas that motivate the social in design to create emotion; and,
• Interaction and interface (screen, form factor) distributing emotion.
Phones (Green) are the fourth most relevant theme with 38% connectivity with other themes
and concepts. As mentioned earlier, “phones”, “device” and “mobile” are concepts all
contained within t_phones.
Examining a knowledge pathway from “device” to “phones” indicates a path that travels
through “different” before going to “mobile” and ending at “phones” in fig 7.12. The
numerous converging concepts highlight the change that occurs within the mobile- device- phone technology. Ruth, in her discussion on “apps”, congregated these designed objects together.
275
Yes I think so, it’s increasingly more important and of course the phone, the role of
the device is to facilitate use of these apps as easily as possible I think, and I think the
phone is supposed to help organise all these apps, all the nice - whatever the
consumer needs to do on the cell phone well enough so I think that increasingly
becomes - that is going this direction increasingly I think.
Figure 7-11. Leximancer map showing the convergence of device, phone and mobile under t_phone and the pathway from device to phone
The interview findings show that the concept of “different” represents many facets, ranging from the difference in material that is used in the designing of the device to the different uses and varying perceptions by different cultures of the device. James, for instance, discusses the material used but then also leads to the ways the device can be used.
276
…I mean there are so many different types of engineering plastics around now with
so performances that you can ... well generally with mobile phones it is all PC-ABS,
it is all the stock standard engineering plastic, but with all the products around the
world now, the performance of plastics ranges enormously now with everything from
sort of glass filled polycarbonates to fine...
PC-ABS that is referred to by James is short for Polycarbonate and Acrylonitrile Butadiene
Styrene and is a thermo plastic. PC-ABS is heat resistant, has superior strength and is a flexible material allowing it to flow for production moulding (Wang et al. 1).
Ruth extends that “difference” also includes the different cultures perceiving the device in various ways.
Yes actually there is quite a few difference when it comes to different cultures how
they perceive a mobile phone. For example someone in Europe has grown up with
technology since they were young and they appreciate aesthetics that maybe someone
from China doesn’t and vice versa, because they’re from such different backgrounds.
Ruth also sees that perception is important but from the perspective of identity and how the mobile phone influences the way people are perceived.
As designers we profile people. Some products can have personalities, for instance
LG has a washing machine. The Korean version sings to you after it finishes the
cycle.
However, James sums up in the various differences by suggesting they exist because of the various demands that are placed on designers.
277
Well, I think yeah, it is interesting but I think if you look at a mobile phone it has to
satisfy so many different demands for people. This is a conversation about
functionality and doing what it says it does.
The difference in design is that is seen to be expressed in identity, cultural demand and
functionality. It is a tension from the norm that highlights both perceptions and demands.
7.7. Limitation and strengths to coding and software analysis
The comparative strengths and weaknesses of using CAQDAS and concerns faced by
researchers in using such software are not new. Kelle, for example, believes that computers
are helpful in the organisation and management of textual data though unsuitable for analysis
of text (446). That being said, some software is extremely difficult to learn and therefore to
use effectively to establish a deep textual analysis. If the research is more oriented to either
conversation analysis or nuances within a linguistic method, which must take account of
physical gestures and vocal gestures, then Leximancer would not be the appropriate software.
This was highlighted when looking at the concept of “work” and “people” where it was
important to take into account the words context. Here James was referring to the time when
he was at art school.
…and always interested in how things worked and making things, you know, that I
enjoyed.
Another example that essentially points to some instability of computer-assisted software
used for analysis concerns the concept of “look” in this thesis. For instance, some variants of
the word “look” can be too highly connected because they appear as filler words in spoken
conversation; that is they are essentially stop-words. These stop-words are frequently occurring words with weak semantic information. Other words are “and”, “of”, “sort” and
278
“think”, underlining why checking with manual coding and an examination of the words
context in the interview transcripts is necessary. James illustrates this point in an excerpt
below where a degree of discernment is necessary when using analysis software on the
interview transcripts.
…technology gave such huge benefits that the industrial design when you look at it…
“Look” in this context is being used as a verb and a filler word in the texture of a
conversation.
Nevertheless, where the strength in manual coding was its reliability and ability to find clarity
in contexts, I found the software useful to provide a visual snapshot of the overall field.
Relationships were also evident with the software though a deeper linking of ideas emerged
from a manual reading that enabled the researcher to “get in touch” with the interviewee data.
The main advantage of the use of this software was to minimise bias and to act as a
complementary approach to the primary manual techniques of analysing the same data.
7.8. Conclusion
This chapter analysed and interpreted the key informant interviews and revealed a number of
important aspects in the designs of mobile technology. One of the most significant was the
presence of social themes, specifically the social in design. Though it was initially understood
as pedestrian because the social in design is also indicated within the main theme of people,
what was not obvious were the number of relevant specific sub themes. Each of the main sections suggested social themes like sharing and exchange, social in design, the visual aesthetics (look) and the pattern were to remain consistent across all of the key ideas. The social in design is interesting because it does describe a designed ritual like pattern and an
embedding of that pattern to create an experience for the user. Digging under the surface of
279
these key ideas is the recurring presence of experience, emotion, sharing and exchange, and affordances that supported the conceptual framework and was linked to both the performative ritual and the designer’s interviews. The finding is supportive of the view held by James
Carey, that communication can be seen as a ritual activity through which societies are created, transformed and maintained that was earlier discussed in chapter two.
In the areas that concerned people and the market, and work and interaction, designers discussed how they created experiences together with their company and these influenced the designs. The sharing and exchange of information between each other but also with consumers was significant. Designers would design social practices that would result as designed interactions in the mobile device through the interface. The interface consisted of types of screen and the form factor of the mobile device; the goal was to create and distribute emotion and create engagement with users of the device. The aesthetics of how the device looked had an influence on the social practices and uses of the device. These social practices were created and written into a pattern like a designer’s blueprint and it determined a sense of order in the design process and within the design of the software and hardware of the mobile device. The following chapter will discuss and integrate these findings into the main theoretical work to establish a conclusion.
280
8. Conclusion - The Value of Ritual
8.1. Introduction
This thesis set out to explore the relationship between mobile technologies and society by re- examining ritual-like activities and performance as an approach in the design of mobile devices. The motivation for this understanding was the desire to develop a better understanding of the relationship between people, technology and the design processes that shape the devices.
The thesis aimed to find a new way to talk about mobile technology, ritual activity and design. By doing this, it sought to find a new perspective from which to examine mobile technology in society and, through exploration, to examine to what extent designers discreetly embed ritual-like activities through their design or within the design process when designing mobile devices. It also discussed the nature of these activities in design and their possible influences.
To frame this question, it was necessary to develop a conceptual framework that would examine the thesis argument. This framework, developed in chapters two and three of the thesis drew from James Carey’s work on ritual and communication as a key to link technology with ritual while Erving Goffman’s work on ritual and performance provided a way to develop the framework further. This ritual performance oriented framework was called the theatre of design, and it examined secular ritual activities, mobile technology and design in a new light. The rituals and interactions that performed the theatre of design:
• The ritual artefact like the designed mobile device (see 4.4.1- 4.4.2) • The performance - the ritual artefact, the designer of the artefact and the company producer of the ritual artefact (see 5.3.3)
281
• The set or space for engagement - the company store for distribution, the community space (see 3.4-3.5, 4.4.1) • The creation of the story - the myth, the narrative about the device (see 4.3.6) • The ritual script the blueprint for performing bits of behaviour. It is like programed behaviour appearing as a habit or ritual (see 4.4.2) • The community - audience and the social engagement performed by the designed mobile device (see 4.4.3 – 4.4.4) • The interaction or engagement – interface, mobile device back and front stage (see 3.2.1) • Ritual ceremony - sharing and exchange of ideas (see 4.4.2) • The director - designers, the company manager (see 5.4.7)
The thesis also invigorated older theories that had much value to offer and supported the argument throughout the thesis. Indeed, these older theories underpin the conceptual framework on which the entire thesis is based.
Beyond developing a conceptual framework, chapters six and seven needed to ground the theoretical work in practice. Five key informants were interviewed in-depth, and their responses analysed using a combination of manual coding as the primary method of analysis and computer-assisted analysis to supplement the work.
The most prominent theme that emerged from the study were social themes involving
“people”. The simplicity of the view however did validate the belief that people are genuinely interested in people. All the designers discussed people in various ways, which through analysis could be categorised into five aspects:
• the social in design;
• people and market;
• work and interaction;
• concept of look; and,
282
• the pattern.
The study found that these aspects were congruent to the theatre of design. The designer’s
belief of community and engagement was relatable to the social in design. The ritual
ceremony and the set space can be seen in the findings about people and market with a nod to
community, ritual ceremony and the creation of narratives about the device (ritual artefact).
The designer’s involvement in the aesthetics concerning the form factor and the look and feel of the device relatable to the performance while the designers pattern exhibits the ritual script, the engagement and the performance of the device. The concepts of affordances,
emotion, exchange and experience and sharing supported the conceptual framework and were linked to performative ritual-like activities. The “social in design” aspect confirmed this when the designers discussed interaction and interface as distributing emotion and that the design process determined the social interaction in the design of the mobile device (see 8.5).
However, the understanding of the social for designers are experiences that create emotions and therefore they are unaware of any design ritual.
Within the design process defined by the categories of people and the market and work and interaction, the practice of sharing and exchange influenced both company strategy and the design teams. Interaction was seen as a designed social practice that supported the study’s findings of sharing as a ritual-like activity but also the designed social practice as an affordance. Designers also described how both designer and their company create experiences in the mobile device. The pattern was a script-like blueprint that created an order or routine that also concurred with the use of affordances in design and the ritual activity. The relationship with the pattern and Rooks consumerist ritual script are supported by the conceptual framework of the theatre of design.
283
Marko from Nokia relates one aspect to our engagement with the mobile device and the pattern
… new pattern, combining holistically innovating hardware and software together …
One is, first of all, the only way to design, at least the only way I know, and the only
way I actually did it, for a new pattern, is you have to sketch in code.
But this idea that by touching the physical environment for the basic things that you
do, I think, is the key and so the search for the pattern doesn't stop on the glass. The
pattern is a thing that is much broader than that…
The conceptual framework built on affordances as creating experiences was also seen in the concept of the look as screen form and aesthetics engaged together. The relationship confirmed a trio involving affordances, the pattern and ritual performance.
This chapter will now summarise the thesis and then discuss the empirical findings in relation to these theoretical themes. It will then discuss the recommendations for further research and the limitations of this study before concluding.
8.2. Summary
This section maps out how the chapters were structured and the issues and themes that were discussed in the theoretical research and their relationship with the findings established in the previous chapter and the argument of the work. The goal is to tie the strands of the thesis together and to emphasise the overall conclusion.
Chapter two introduced the broad approach of the thesis, in which technology is seen as part of society. Here, scholarship around science and technology studies was informative. The main argument taken from this is that technology is more than just a part of society; rather, it
284
was what makes society possible (MacKenzie and Wajcman 23). Interviews with the key
informants seem to provide broad support for this perspective, as they reported that their
experience in designing mobile devices is strongly defined by a social practice in design. The
introduction of science and technology studies made technology approachable from a human
and social perspective. It also introduced a number of threads to support this approach, one
strand by Pinch and Bijker who viewed technology as being shaped by a social process in a
framework that socially constructs technology. The other strand was Latour’s actor-network theory with a view that all non-humans and humans are indistinguishable and connected by a series of networks to create one large sociotechnical system. The strength of this concept was that it could entertain all things into a social network however it became difficult to distinguish the social from the technological.
Social construction theory, with its interpretative flexibility and social groups, was useful and played an important part in the later chapters when the production of the mobile device was discussed, for example in relation to the screen size of the device and to the social group consisting of designers. A common view amongst the informants was that screen form was a dominant influence within the concept of the “look” and a way that social practice was distributed through design.
The main theme common to STS in a social construction approach, is that the relationship that gives meaning to technology, such as mobile devices are determined by stories (Pinch,
“The Social Construction” 428) and include biographies created from their history and identity.
By approaching this theme, the history of the mobile device was discussed from the standpoint of defining the mobile device as both a technical object and a cultural object.
285
The discussion of the mobile device as a cultural object drew from the technology evident in
the emergence of the smart phone and revealed that success of a device was not always
associated with its technical sophistication. One example saw social groups at work, as
designers removed keyboards and replaced them with touch screens that were evident in
tablet PCs that soon became the Apple iPhone and iPad. Paul du Gay and his study of the
Sony Walkman saw culture with consumption and production representing a number of
major elements in the circuits of culture that would later be discussed in chapter four and five.
However, it was the similarity between the Sony Walkman and mobile devices, particularly the Apple iPhone that saw personalisation and identity in what Sony called lifestyling, as one of the elements in the thesis. A comparison between the key findings and concepts suggested that in developing interaction in the mobile device, design teams design the mobile device to
be personal, that is personal to use and also customisable by or for the user. The designers use
a pattern that is influenced by specific social profiles, and designs can be produced
specifically for that profile and experience.
Before asking whether designers are embedding ritual-like activities into the design of the
mobile device it was necessary to introduce James Carey’s work on ritual and communication
as a key concept that links technology with ritual.
Chapter three found ritual to be a complex perspective with many facets (Hillis 47), but with
technology and society established in the previous chapter, ritual was framed in sociology by
Durkheim and Turner and extended into culture and communication by James Carey, Erving
Goffman and Randall Collins. Ritual, seen in this thesis as a secular phenomenon, was
recruited as a key idea in this thesis via Carey, who suggested that communication as a ritual
is where “reality is produced, maintained, prepared and transformed” (Carey 24). This theme
286
gave rise to a theoretical implication by Elizabeth Bell. Bell noted that this communication
model represented “shared beliefs” like communion and had engaged in ritual-like activities
such as “talk, identities, bodies, relationships, communities, cultures and technologies and
performances” (Bell 8). One of the issues that emerged from the findings suggested that
sharing and exchange of information was a practice integrated in both company strategy and
was an influence within the relationship between people within the design of the mobile
device. This communal practice exists between design and ritual-like activities.
With the key theme of ritual seen in communication supported by Carey’s argument that
technology is embedded in ritual as it is in art and culture, and Bell’s claim that it represents
shared beliefs that support technologies, cultures and performances, the use of performance
as an approach to explore ritual-like activities in society and technology is rational.
Erving Goffman’s use of dramaturgical metaphors provided a structure that could effectively
put technology (here, mobile devices) under the microscope, but in a different way.
Goffman’s work had already been seen in Brenda Laurel’s examination of human and
computer interaction Computers as Theatre, discussed earlier in section 3.4.1 and which
focussed on frame analysis and the narrative structure within the interface. The use of the
theatre of design extended Laurels use of theatre as only a metaphor for the interface. It could
be used to discuss design and ritual performance in the broader context of technology and
culture.
The sociological approach in Rich Ling’s New Tech and New Ties, discussed a “parallel front
stage” in the interface within mediated communication (see 3.4.1) and although a minor point
still clearly demonstrated that Goffman’s front stage work could now be extended into exploring design and technology. Lings work primarily examines how ritual is used in
287
interaction mediated by mobile communication however by building on his work about ritual enabled the design of the mobile device and its effect on social cohesion to be examined.
The introduction of the theatre of design that had emerged through an interplay between the research, analysis and the literature developed the framework further and in chapter four, the approach connected ritual-like activities, seen as performances, with emotional value and as
Bell had claimed, “shared beliefs” with technology. Theatre of design acted as a metaphor that gave us an understanding of how objects perform to the user as an affordance, and how interactivity is a type of sharing within the mobile device. It drew on Goffman’s front stage, back stage metaphor as a way to understand the process. Designers could be seen as directors, set designers and performers of the mobile device. A type of script was found in the mobile design that the case studies called a pattern. The pattern created an order (routine) of operations, experiences and material forms. It can be inferred that affordances, too, are designed and can be considered to be involved in ritual-like activities. The script like pattern was not isolated to only hardware design but also software design and could be observed in the design of interaction and the interface.
Chapter four established the device as a socio-cultural object and that ritual-like activities and performance are useful in examining technology and society. It did this by exploring the mobile device as a manufactured consumer object. The connection between technology and culture, established in the earlier chapters, affirmed the relationship between the Sony
Walkman and mobile devices when incorporating du Gay et al.’s concept of cultural circuits and Guy Julier’s domain of design culture. The theme of identity and lifestyling, seen earlier in chapter two, was drawn into the argument, including the way that mobile devices were represented in the consumption process through branding and company philosophy. This representation was later implied as a consumerist ritual. Rook’s ritual script linked the circuit
288
of culture back to the concept of ritual and united the idea of meaning-making activities, which involved production and consumption within the theatre of design.
The study has indicated that the broader relationship social in design defines social aspects in the design of the mobile device and the device can be seen as cultural object because we have constructed a meaning for it. The current findings support this, and seen in companies like
Nokia and Apple as marketing (branding) in the way the mobile device was represented in production (du Gay et al. 43). However, the research suggested that the practice of “sharing and exchange” was integral to a company strategy, though a note of caution is due, since the integration of marketing divisions can also cause tension between the design teams. The tension resulted in constraints imposed in the designs and were caused by aspects like finance and material resources. The study also showed that tension and differences in design was expressed as identity, cultural demand and functionality. Those withstanding both designer and company create experiences and emotions by creating a “pattern”. The use of interaction facilitates this designed social practice in that not only designers but companies too, have embedded their philosophy as pattern-like script that leads to routines of consumerist ritual behaviour.
The theatre of design saw designers designing within a conceptual space and that through
this, a kind of fictional space is created. The use of stories in marketing and distribution were
tools used to sell a mobile device and the structure of a story script acted as a ritual script of
designed behavioural response in either system software or affordances in hardware design.
By examining the Apple products there is a strong suggestion that control is imperative to
create a “walled garden”. The walled garden is a ritual-like space, and is trademarked and is represented in a distinct way. The way that Apple is represented can be considered by du Gay et al as the ways in which the identity of Apple as a company is continually created and
289
recreated (4). The “app store” is an example of this representation where the distribution of designed consumer objects interact only with similar designed consumer objects to perpetuate its identity. For Rook this is a consumerist ritual (253). It can be understood through the theatre of design where the Apple stores are like theatres of distribution, a place of ritual-like activity involving the mobile device as a ritual-like object. It had been suggested by Rook it was a public ritual involving a ritual audience (Rook 254) The findings support this idea but extend it to include the social in design. This defines the social in the mobile device and therefore social interaction and practice. The “people and market” category revealed a practice of “sharing and exchange” also discovering that designers and companies create experiences that create public ritual activity.
Both Carey’s ritual in communication and Bell’s “shared belief”, support this when the mobile device is defined as a sociocultural object, designed to be a consumer device and involved in ritual-like activities.
The relationship between production, designers and the design process in chapter five argues whether designers take ritual-like activities and performance into account when designing mobile devices. The results of the analysis of the key informant interviews show that there are four main themes: people, concept of look, the pattern and the social in design that influence the relationship referred to above.
The social in design, apart from defining social practice in the mobile device, is a pattern that defines how the interface is made. Concurrently we have seen earlier how the pattern is like a script or blueprint designed to create an ordered routine of operations, experience and material forms. An implication of this is that the pattern represents a narrative. The narrative and design hypothesised in chapter five explained how form and function are involved in the design process. It defined function as possessing both significance and utility. Significance
290
came about from how forms take on meaning in the design process, as well as utility by how
the design works to solve a problem (Heskett 27).
The pattern and people, work and interaction also govern function and form. The pattern that
is a poor script or the poorly performed script is indicated by an interface that is low in
usability or the functions are unresponsive and cannot perform their role. James discussed the
earlier model iPhones as poor.
I mean, if you look at the first few I think the design was okay and then there were
sort of fundamental errors with it like you can’t change the battery and actually it
doesn’t sit flat on the table, you notice. It wobbles around, so you can’t really type.
The most obvious finding is the significant degree of sharing and exchange of information
that influences the relationship between people within the design of the mobile device. This
was evident in the integration of marketing and design divisions at Nokia. Form and
significance further support the aesthetic of look and interaction as a designed social practice
in the mobile device, because the aesthetic of the look considers the form factor of the device
and how screen form is a dominant influence. It also considers how interaction is a designed
social practice by the designer between the device and the consumer.
The designed social practices are seen in lifestyling a device; companies create fictional worlds that contextualise persona like the “outdoors” person or “be creative” person and this becomes like a designers script. Equally, the form in the design of a mobile device is a powerful visual aesthetic because of its ability to communicate to our emotions. Design itself is an emotional activity, which incorporates the designer’s state of mind, as Donald Norman explained in Emotional Design.
291
This thesis has identified that the social in design is motivated by ideas from designers and companies as experiences that create emotions. The emotions are distributed through interaction design, the interface that acts as a visual border that enables social practice, the pattern or script, and the concept of look, which controls social practice and screen form.
Designing a mobile device revealed that there were many designers designing various elements that needed to come together by the sharing and exchange of information. This social group of designers all had a shared belief in designing, in a ritual in communication that underlines the study, the pattern or script of ritual-like routines of activity and interaction as a designed social practice. The theatre of design called it a community. The community is what James stated was how the iPhone was successful.
…the Nokia boss called it a sort of microsystem. You have to have the whole
ecosystem around the phone to make it a success and Nokia doesn’t have that and
Ericsson don’t have that and Sony don’t have it… they never managed to seamlessly
integrate all these aspects.
Designers embed value by affordance, emotion and experience when producing the mobile device. In general, therefore, the social in design is seen in affordances. Appadurai argued that value is integral to the biography of things and just as humans shape objects, these objects that were designed can shape the human experience in a way (1). The social in design is indicative of this and the shaping can be seen in ritual-like activities described through the thesis.
In conclusion it is emotion, experience and affordance that are keys to the broader aspects of design such as the “concept of look”, “the pattern”, “work and interaction”, “people and the market”, and “the social in design”. Significantly they all concerned “people” and this was
292
integral to emotion, experience and affordances in a design and the design process that determined ritual-like activities in a mobile device.
8.3. Recommendations for further research
The main goal of this thesis was to find a new way to talk about mobile technology through design and through an exploration of ritual-like activity in technology.
The work then discovered an understanding about whether designers discreetly embed ritual- like activities in their design when designing mobile devices.
The key strength of the study was that it explored a new perspective on science, mobile technology and culture. A future study using a ritual perspective to investigate the emergence of new devices such as wearable technology like the Apple watch, smart textiles and health technology devices would test and consolidate the work by offering new insights into culture and technology design. These insights pose questions about the physical closeness of the technology and its influence on the personal but also on the involvement of a ritual-like activity with space. It also questions the value of technology as a tool and when it ceases to be a tool and becomes either a ritual or something else.
The future of this research would examine the way that consumers engage in ritual and utilise the affordances built into their devices. This work would provide a better understanding about consumer behaviour and influences. Expanding the research on how we embed value can determine what particular values and their associated ritual-like activities, consumers respond to or do not respond to. Rooks consumer ritual was used in this study to perform the theatre of design, but future studies should engage with finding other particular rituals that equally respond to the theatre of design and reveal a different perspective when designing technology.
293
Another direction concerns the methodology. The analysis of the interviews was a grounded theory approach with computer software analysis used to supplement and to validate the findings. However, I see great value in becoming more designer focussed.
The findings revealed that people and their involvement with the market creates a sharing and exchange practice that influences the relationship between users and designers with the design of the mobile device. The question concerning the influence of the designer’s background, geographical location, education and cultural schema on design is rich and untapped. Future research could benefit from the use of a number of different approaches specifically a narrative analysis of the interviews given by the designers. This type of analysis would concentrate on a smaller sample size and the individual stories told. It would emphasise the freedom for designers to make culture in the overall practice of consumption.
The application of the work is valuable not only to devices but also to the services that are coupled with the technology. These would include television or movies streamed online by companies like Apple TV and Netflix. These services incorporate a company strategy and the performance-oriented ritual framework can examine the social practices involved within this strategy of production and consumption. Beyond company strategy, these online services provide video and audio content that is designed to be engaged with by consumers and this engagement may have embedded in it a ritual-like activity such as “binge viewing”.
Technology company culture is reflective of a number of social practices, and these practices suggest types of rituals. Certainly there has been consistent scholarly research in the areas of organisational management, but the application of this work can provide give a greater understanding of the types of rituals that exist in a work-oriented environment. Goffman’s work, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, defined by how pubic identity is performed;
294
identity has informed the theatre of design and this approach can equally illuminate the use of social affordances and their experiences and emotions in a company culture.
This thesis has also reinvigorated older theories and in a way that has moved the debate slightly forward on their value today slightly forward. It has identified that there is still much to learn and value in the older theories and they too have provided a new perspective on technology when coupled with different approaches. It would be a fruitful area for further work to reinvigorate Victor Turners concept of social dramas and apply it to conflict resolution involving human computer interaction.
The discussion of the concept of the theatre of design applied Huizinga’s work in the conceptual space but it would be valuable to explore his themes of play (Homo Ludens) in more detail, focussed on play as a ritual-like activity and whether it is centred on control when applied to technology and society in design. The results have offered rich information and of special interest is the relationship between ritual performance, affordances and the pattern and how it has been embedded in design. I believe that this would be a fruitful area for further research.
Specifically, if the relationship between each is centred on whether or not ‘control’ is a main motivational force that underpins the design ritual and how it functions in all manifestations economically, politically, socially and culturally.
Finally, Steve Woolgar’s notion of the configuration of users by designers (59) did not take into account users and organisations (Mackay et al. 752). The designers being constrained by groups within organisations was reflected in this study where design teams design social practices as personal while working within companies to create experiences governed by markets. The integration was found to cause tension and constraints in design and could be a direct influence on “configuring users” and therefore the performance ritual in design.
295
Taking this one step further is the semiotic approach to the relationship between performance
ritual and the emergence of “technological scripts” (Akrich 208) which is territory certainly
worth exploring especially when considering the theatre of design and mobile devices have
revealed that there is a social practice and a pattern contained within the design of mobile
devices.
In summary the research in this thesis found diversity where meanings that are embedded in a technology are “flexible” and emerge in the design and use of a technology. That is, meaning is an emergent and ongoing characteristic attributed to various social practices and processes.
8.4. Limitations of the study
This study has offered a different perspective to view mobile technology and evaluate the
process of design and its impact on society through sampling key informants. The key
informants were experts, but as a direct consequence of this methodology, the study
encountered a number of limitations, which needed to be considered. The sample size was
small because only experts were sampled. Though this limits the generalizability of the study,
and thus is in some respects a limitation, it proved invaluable in providing very rich, specific
and insightful interview data.
However, discussed in the previous section was to use a narrative approach that is more
suited to the smaller sample size and this would offer a different perspective about the life of
the designer and their stories.
One must be mindful that the theatre of design, which is used as metaphor that represents
reality, governs the conclusions reached in this thesis. It is not reality but it does however
provide an opportunity to recognise certain semblances that are familiar and not so familiar
that makes us reflect critically on our culture and technology in design.
296
The limitation of this performance-oriented ritual approach is that it could be considered as a
universal Western ideal. The possibility of delving into social practices and ritual needs one
to be mindful of other cultures and societies, because we should not characterize the theatre
of design as representative of all societies and cultures. The main reason is that it is too
complex to be reduced to a simple universal principle. That said there are similarities that are
suggested between cultures and these act as a guides to using the approach in technology and
design.
This thesis looked at design from a production and consumption context. It is possible since
designers were the main focus of the study that consumers don’t actually engage with mobile
devices in the way that designers intended. On the one hand this perspective is interesting and
would require further research into how and why objects can be used differently from their
intended purpose. On the other hand, if a design has precisely defined its use it would be a
perfect design, which would require no incentive or creativity to improve upon it. Both these
limits define quite interesting arguments on the value of ritual activities and are worthy of
future exploration.
8.5. Conclusion
This study set out to explore the relationship between mobile technologies and society by re-
examining ritual-like activities and performance as an approach in the design of mobile
devices.
The results of this study indicated that there are ritual-like activities in the design of mobile technologies. The thesis found that designing mobile technology demonstrates the social in design. Designers strive for making devices social by integrating social practices into both the hardware and software of the mobile device. This integration is seen as social themes in
297
design determined by designed affordances and patterns, and facilitates repeatable behaviour that results in a ritual-like activity. The industrial design team determines these social interactions in the aesthetic of a designed look in the form factor and the screen and the applications on the screen. The interface acts as a visual border that facilitates the designed social practice that has been developed by designers, design teams and companies. It is embedded and the designer can manipulate the user’s behaviour in the ritual performance.
Marko, the head designer of Nokia confirms this when discussing the immersive behaviour and the heads down behaviour of users with mobile devices.
I think largely the industry has failed in design, I know that the team, and for myself,
is that we design interfaces that give people their head up again. … My thought was
how can you actually bring more of the interaction off the glass, make it
understandable yet still gestural, and essentially give people their head up again, so
they can – physically as in the social interactions that they had, because that’s
fundamentally related.
Michelle’s case it was swiping action
Who would have thought about using "swiping" action? As a working designer, we
have to be aware of these technological changes as this will also affect the design of
other products.
The process is complex, but the social practices are scripted as a pattern and this feeds into
the consumerist ritual-like habit, while validating the conceptual framework of the theatre of
design. The pattern is an interplay of designed experiences, software and hardware operations
and material forms influenced by specific social profiles. This interaction and the interface
distribute emotion motivated by the need to develop the social in the design of a mobile
device. Designers therefore understand the social as experiences that create emotions.
298
For example, James, designer for Ericsson and Dyson attributes it to making people feel
empathy.
We’re sort of designing products to make people feel emotions rather than to feel that
practical side of it and one of the things I looked at was a mobile phone that gave off
emotions, rather than a telephone call or something. You designed it so that you’d
dial someone’s number and if they had one of these things in their pocket, it would
warm up or it would vibrate. You don’t know who’s rung you, but you think,
someone’s thinking of me. So, trying to communicate those emotions rather than
voice driven facts, you know, whatever.
Within the broader science and technology studies these findings validate its principle where
the “the technological, instead of being separate from society, is part of what makes society
possible” (MacKenzie and Wajcman 23). The social groups are equally important and play a
role in determining the shape of technology as the designers understand this as experiences
that create emotions for these groups, that lead to the acceptance of one technology over
another (see 2.2, 2.2.1).
The social in design as a practice is the sharing and exchange of information that influences
the community, specifically the relationship between people and is integrated by company
strategy, designer, the process of design or the market. Social practice therefore is a shared
belief that is significant of a performance ritual-like activity. This thinking is in line with
Carey’s ritual in which “reality is produced, maintained, repaired, and transformed” (Carey
24) and extends his ritual and communication into technology. But it is also aligned with the
work of Elizabeth Bell who notes that “shared beliefs” are engaged in ritual-like concepts of
“talk, identities, bodies, relationships, communities, cultures and technologies and performances” (8).
299
A practical implication is that designers are one of the reasons people consume mobile technology. The designers are influenced by a number of factors including company strategies but are also responsible for the presence of a performance ritual in their designs.
They are not necessarily aware of the ritual but they are aware of embedding emotion to perform and create empathy, social interaction and building a community (ecosystem). The success of the performance ritual in design was not only seen in the designers designing the mobile device, but it was seen in the designing of a community or “ecosystem” that is part of the device.
The thesis has examined mobile device technology and explored how it becomes more social in design by designers embedding influences into the mobile device that play out as a performance ritual. Another key motivation for this is because the mobile device has evolved and become more integrated into human lives. It is because of this that the performance ritual has become more valuable now as a different and fresh way to examine technologies and design in our society.
300
9. Bibliography
Abma, Tinke A. and Guy A. Widdershoven. "Evaluation as a Relationally Responsible
Practice." The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Ed. Norman K Denzin and
Yvonna S. Lincoln. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2011: 669-680. Print.
Adolph, Steve, Wendy Hall, and Philippe Kruchten. "Using Grounded Theory to Study the
Experience of Software Development." Empirical Software Engineering 16 (2011):
487-513. Print.
Agar, Jon. Constant Touch: a Global History of the Mobile Phone. Cambridge: Icon, 2004.
Print.
Agence France- Presse. "Apple Sells One Million iPads in a Month." AFP 2010: n. pag. AFP.
Web. 3 May 2010.
Agence France-Presse. "iPhone Sales Drive Record Quarter for Apple." AFP 24 Jan. 2012: n.
pag. AFP. Web. 16 Aug. 2012.
Akrich, M. "User Representations: Practices, Methods and Sociology." Managing
Technology in Society: The Approach to Constructive Technology Assessment. Ed. A.
Rip, T. J. Misa, and J. Schot. Pinter, 1995. Print.
Alessi, Chiara. “A Letter to and from Naoto Fukasawa.” DOMUS. Architecture, Design. 14
April. 2011. Web. 17 Sept. 2013.
Almquist, J and J. Lupton. Afford Meaning: Design- Oriented Research form the Humanities
and Social Sciences. Design Issues 26.1 (2010) 3-14. Web 2015
301
Aloudat, Anas, and Katina Michael. "Toward the Regulation of Ubiquitous Mobile
Government: a Case Study on Location-based Emergency Services in Australia."
Electronic Commerce Research 11 (2011): 31-74. Web. 25 Aug. 2014.
Appadurai, Arjun. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Print.
Apple. “Apple Reports Third Quarter Results.” Apple.com press release. 2010 Apple
Reports. Web: 21 July. 2011
"Apple (Egypt) - IPhone 5 - Learn About What It Took to Make IPhone 5." Apple. Apple
Inc., 2015. Web. 26 Jan. 2015.
Apple. "IOS Human Interface Guidelines: Design." Apple Developer. Apple, 8 Mar. 2015.
Web. 8 Mar. 2015.
Arthur, Charles. “Samsung Overtakes Nokia – and Possibly Outsells Apple’s iPhone." The
Guardian. 2013. Web. 12 May.
Assiter, Alison. "Althusser and Structuralism." British Journal of Sociology 35.2 (1984): 272-
296. Print
Balsamo, Anne. Designing Culture: The Technological Imagination at Work. Durham: Duke
University Press, 2011. Print
Banks, John. "The iPhone as Innovation Platform." Studying Mobile Media. NY: Routledge,
2012. Print.
302
Barnes, S. B. “Bridging the Differences Between Social Theory and Technological Invention
in Human-Computer Interface Design.” New Media & Society 2.3 (2000): 353–372.
Web: 5 Apr 2013.
Bauer, M. W., G Gaskell, and N.C. Allum. Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and
Sound. London: Sage Publications, 2000. Print
Bayazit, Nigan. “Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research.”
Design Issues 20.1 (2004): 16–29. Web: 11 June 2011.
Bell, Catherine. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1992. Print.
---. “Constructing Ritual.” Readings in Ritual Studies. Ed. Ronald L. Grimes. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1992. Print.
---. Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Print.
Bell. Elizabeth. Theories of Performance. LA: Sage Publications, 2008. Print
Berker, Thomas. Domestication of Media and Technology. Maidenhead: Open UP, 2006.
Print.
Bijker, Wiebe. Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical
Change. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1997. Print.
Bijsterveld, K. T. "Book Review: Researching Society And Culture, Doing Cultural Studies:
The Story Of The Sony Walkman." Science, Technology & Human Values 24.2 (1999):
290-94. Print.
303
Bluff, Rosalind. "Grounded theory: the methodology." A-Z of Qualitative Research in
Healthcare. Ed. Immy Holloway. London: Open UP, (2008): 147-167. Print.
Boradkar, Prasad. Designing Things: a Critical Introduction to the Culture of Objects.
English ed. New York: Berg, 2010. Print.
Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art: an Introduction. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1993. Print.
Bordwell, David. Narration in the Fiction Film. London: Taylor & Francis Books Ltd, 1997.
Print.
Borries, Friedrich von et al. “Apple Design in Conjunction with the Exhibition Stylectrical.
On Electro-Design That Makes History, Museum Für Kunst Und Gewerbe Hamburg,
August 26, 2011 - January 15, 2012.” Ostfildern, Germany: Hatje Cantz. Print.
Boorstin, Jon. Making Movies Work. Los Angeles: Silman-James Press, 1990. Print
Bourdieu, Pierre. Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1984. Print.
Bowden, Gary. "Coming of Age in STS: Some Methodological Musings." Handbook of
Science and Technology Studies. Ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C.
Peterson, and Trevor Pinch. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, (1995): 64-80. SAGE.
Web. 14 July 2014.
Brissett, Dennis, and Charles Edgley. Life As Theater. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction
Publishers, 2005. Print.
304
Brown, Barry, Nicola Green, and Richard Harper. Wireless World: Social and Interactional
Aspects of the Mobile Age. London: Springer, 2002. Print..
Brown, Tim. Designers- think big! TED Conference, Jul 2009, Oxford. TED.com, 2009.
Web. 25 May 2012.
Buckley, Peter and Duncan Clarke. The Rough Guide to iPods & iTunes & Music Online.
NY: Rough Guides, 2006. Print.
Bull, Michael. Sounding out the City: Personal Stereos and the Management of Everyday
Life. Oxford, 2000. Print.
---. Sound Moves: iPod Culture and Urban Experience. London: Routledge. 2007. Print
Burgess, J. The iPhone moment, the Apple brand and the creative consumer. Studying Mobile
Media eds. Hjorth, Burgess, Richardson. New York: Routledge, 2012. 28–42. Print
Burrows, P. "Voice of the Innovators: The Seed of Apples Innovation." Business Week
12 Oct. 2004: n. pag. Web. 2010.
Butler, J. Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge, 1990. Print
Callon, M. “Techno-economic Networks and Irreversibility.” A Sociology of Monsters:
Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. New York: Routledge, (1991): 132–
161. Print.
Campbell, Heidi A., and Antonio C. La Pastina. “How the iPhone Became Divine: New
Media, Religion and the Intertextual Circulation of Meaning.” New Media & Society
12.7 (2010): 1191 –1207. Print.
305
Campbell, Scott, and Tracy C. Russo. “The Social Construction of Mobile Telephony: An
Application of the Social Influence Model to Perceptions and Uses of Mobile Phones
Within Personal Communication Networks.” Communication Monographs 70.4 (2003):
317–334. Web: 6 Dec. 2011.
Carey, James. Communication as Culture : Essays on Media and Society. New York:
Routledge, 2009. Print.
Caron, André. Moving Cultures : Mobile Communication in Everyday Life. Ithaca: McGill-
Queen’s University Press, 2007. Print.
Castells, Manuel, et al. Mobile Communication and Society: a Global Perspective. A Project
of the Annenberg Research Network on International Communication. Cambridge
Mass.: MIT Press. 2007 Print.
Charmaz, Kathy. "Grounded Theory Objectivist and Constructivist Methods." Handbook of
Qualitative Research. Ed. Norman K Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2nd ed. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications, 2000. 509-535. Print.
---. "Grounded Theory Methods in Social Justice Research." The Sage Handbook of
Qualitative Research. Ed. Norman K Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 4th ed. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications, 2011. 359-380. Google books
---. Constructing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 2006.
Print.
Chase, S. E. "Narrative Inquiry: Still a Field in the Making." The Sage Handbook of
Qualitative Research. Ed. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks:
Sage, 2011. 421-34. Print.
306
Chesher, Chris. "Between Image and Information." Studying Mobile Media: Cultural
Technologies, Mobile Communication, and the Iphone. Ed. Larissa Hjorth, Jean
Burgess, and Ingrid Richardson. New York: Routledge, 2012. 98-117. Print.
Clarke, Adele E. "Situational Analyses: Grounded Theory Mapping After the Postmodern
Turn." Symbolic Interaction 26.4 (2003): 553-576. Print.
Clayton, Nick. “SCOT: Does It Answer?” Technology and Culture 43.2 (2002): 351–360.
JSTOR Web: 29 March 2013.
Clegg, Angie. "Older South Asian Patient and Carer Perceptions of Culturally Sensitive Care
in a Community Hospital Setting." Journal of Clinical Nursing 12.2 (2003): 283-290.
Print.
Cole, Toby, and Helen Krich Chinoy. Actors on Acting: The Theories, Techniques, and
Practices of the World’s Great Actors, Told in Their Own Words. New York: Crown,
1970. Print.
Coleman, Gerry, and Rory O’Connor. "Using Grounded Theory to Understand Software
Process Improvement: A Study of Irish Software Product Companies." Information &
Software Technology 49.6 (2007): 654-667. Print.
Collins, Randall. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
2004. Print.
Corbin, Juliet M, Anselm L Strauss. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles, California: Sage
Publications, 2008. Print.
307
Coutard, O., and S. Guy. "STS and the City: Politics and Practices of Hope." Science
Technology & Human Values 32.6 (2007): 713-734. JSTOR. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
Crabtree, C. A., C. B. Seaman, and A. F. Norica. "Exploring language in software process
elicitation: A grounded theory approach." Proceedings of the 2009 3rd International
Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement: October 15-16,
2009. --. Washington: IEEE Computer Soc., 2009. 324-335. Print.
Creswell, John W. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2013. Google file
Cretchley, Julia, David Rooney, and Cindy Gallois. "Mapping a 40Year History With
Leximancer: Themes and Concepts in the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology."
Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology 41.3 (2010): 318-328. Print.
Crowley, D and Paul Heyer. Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society.
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon Pearson, 2010. Print
Csikszenthalyi, Mihalyi, and Eugene Rochberg-Halton. The Meaning of Things. UK:
Cambridge University Press, 1981. Print.
Davies, Chris. “Apple ‘Safari Pad’ Became iPhone, Hints at Upcoming Web Tablet.”
phonemag, 2008. 4 March. Web: 22 July 2010.
Debaenst, Sebastien. "Apple Airs New IPhone 5 Campaign." Tech Info and News. N.p.,
17 Mar. 2013. Web. 26 May 2014.
Denzin, Norman K, and Yvonna S. Lincoln. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2000. Print.
308
---. The Landscape of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, 2008.
Print.
---. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publication,
2011. Print.
Dewey, J. and A.F. Bentley. Knowing and the Known. University of Minnesota: Beacon
Press, 1949. Print.
DiCicco-Bloom, Barbara, and Benjamin F. Crabtree. "Making Sense of qualitative research:
The qualitative research interview." Medical Education 40 (2006): 314-321. NTU.
Web. 6 May 2014.
Dindler, Christian. The Construction of the Fictional Space. CoDesign. London: Taylor and
Francis, 2010. Print.
Doctoral Education in Design: Proceedings of the Ohio Conference, October 8-11, (1998).
Pittsburgh, Pa. Print.
Dodig-Cmkovic, Gordana. "Shifting the Paradigm of Philosophy of Science: Philosophy of
Information and a New Renaissance." Minds and Machines 13.4 (2003): 521-36. Print.
Doidge, Norman. The Brain That Changes Itself: Stories of Personal Triumph from the
Frontiers of Brain Science. Carlton North, Vic.: Scribe Publications, 2009. Print.
Douglas, Mary, Baron Isherwood. The World of Goods. London, New York: Routledge,
1979. Print
Dourish, P. Where the Action Is. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001. Print.
Dreyfuss H. Designing for People. New York: Allworth Press, 2003. Print
309
Drucker, Johanna. “Humanities Approaches to Interface Theory.” Culture Machine 12
(2011): 1–20. Print.
Du Gay, Paul, et al. Doing Cultural Studies: the Story of the Sony Walkman. Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage Publications, 1997. Print.
Dumitrescu, Andrei. "Technological Ritual". In: International Conference on Manufacturing
Systems. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Romane, (2004): p.4.
Durkheim, Emile. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. London: George Allen & Unwin,
1964. Print.
---. Readings from Emile Durkheim. London: Routledge, 2004. Print.
Dykes, Thomas, Paul Rodgers, and Michael Smyth. “Towards a New Disciplinary
Framework for Contemporary Creative Design Practice.” CoDesign 5.2 (2004): 99–
116. Print.
Edwards, J. “Apple’s Biggest Marketing Secret Was Revealed In Federal Court - Business
Insider.” Business Insider. 5 August 2012. Web: 8 August 2012.
Ekuan, Kenji, and David B Stewart. The Aesthetics of the Japanese Lunchbox. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 2000. Print.
Evans, Steve. “Apple Feels iPad Benefit with Another Massive Quarter - News - Mobility.”
Computer Business Review - Mobility News, 2010. Web: 21 July 2010.
310
Fachner, Jorg, and Sabine Rittner. "Ethno Therapy, Music and Trance: An EEG Investigation
into a Sound-Trance Induction." States of Consciousness: Experimental Insights into
Meditation, Waking, Sleep and Dreams. Ed. Dean Cvetkovic and I. Cosic. Heidelberg:
Springer, (2011): 235-256. Springerlink. Web. 24 May 2014.
Fallan, Kjetil. Design History: Understanding Theory and Method. New York: Berg, 2010.
Print.
Farley, T. “Mobile Telephone History.” Telektronikk 101.3/4, 22. (2005).Web: 1 October
2012.
Fedoruk, Maria, Andrew Gardener, and Helen McCutcheon. "Discovering Constructivist
Grounded Theory's fit and relevance to researching contemporary mental health
nursing practice." Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing 30.2 (2013): 66-74. JSTOR.
Web. 30 June 2014.
Feldman, Ronen, and James Sanger. The Text Mining Handbook: Advanced Approaches in
Analyzing Unstructured Data. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Print.
Fernandez, James W. "Persuasions and Performances: Of the Beast in Every Body…And the
Metaphors of Everyman" USA: Daedalus 101:1 (1972): 39-60.
Fielding, N. and Warnes R. "Computer-based qualitative methods in case study research."
The Sage Handbook of Case-Based Methods. Ed. D S Byrne and Charles C. Ragin.
London: SAGE, 2009. 270-288. Print.
Fogg, Ian, Thomson Husson, and Michelle de Lussanet. App Stores Plug A Critical Gap In
Existing Mobile Internet Strategies. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research Inc, 2009.
Print.
311
Fontana, Andrea, and James H. Frey. "The Interview: From Structured Questions to
Negotiated Text." Handbook of Qualitative Research. Ed. Norman K Denzin and
Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2000. 645-672. Print
Fortt, Jon. “The Big Thing at Apple’s 2012 Developer Conference.” CNBC - US business
news. 8 Jun 2012. Web: 2 Aug. 2012.
Fortunati, Leopoldina. “Mobile Telephone and the Presentation of Self.” Mobile
Communications. Vol. 31 (2005): 203–218. Print.
Focault, Brooke and Jay Melican. The Digital and the Divine: Taking a Ritual View of
Communication and ICT Interaction in Usability and Internationalization, HCI and
Culture. Springer Berlin/ Heidelberg. (2007): 74-82. Print.
Fukasawa, Naoto. Naoto Fukasawa. New York: Phaidon, 2007. Print.
Gallo, Carmine. The Presentation Secrets of Steve Jobs: How to Be Insanely Great in Front
of Any Audience. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.
Galloway, Alexander R. The Interface Effect. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2012. Print
Game, Jonathan Arakaki. “Communication, Culture, and Technology: An Internet Interview
with James W. Carey.” Journal of Communication Inquiry 22.2 (1998): 117 –130.
Print.
Gazzaniga, Michael. The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks of the Mind. New York:
Basic Books, 1985. Print.
Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. London: Fontana Press,
1993. Print.
312
Gibson, James J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum,1979. Print.
Gikas, Mike. “Lab Tests: Why Consumer Reports Can’t Recommend the iPhone 4.”
Consumer Reports, (2010). Web: 21 July 2010.
Gilde, Christian, et al. "Examining The Boundary Conditions Of Customer Citizenship
Behaviour: A Focus On Consumption Ritual." Journal Of Strategic Marketing 19.7
(2011): 619-631. Business Source Premier. Web. 3 Feb. 2016
Gitelman, Lisa. Always Already New: Media, History and the Data of Culture. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 2008. Print.
Glaser, Barney G, and Anselm L. Strauss. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for
Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co, 1967. Print.
Goffman, Erving. Communication Conduct in an Island Community. University of Chicago,
Department of Sociology, 1953. Print.
---. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books, 1959. Print.
---. Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books, 1971.
Print.
---. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-face Behavior: Deference and Demeanour. New
York: Pantheon Books, 1982. Print.
Goffman, Erving, Charles C. Lemert, and Ann Branaman. The Goffman Reader. n.p: Malden,
Mass.: Blackwell, 1997. Print.
313
Goggin, Gerard. Cell Phone Culture: Mobile Technology in Everyday Life. New York:
Routledge. 2006. Print.
---. “Adapting the Mobile Phone: The iPhone and Its Consumption.” Continuum 23.2 (2009):
231–244. Web: 15 Dec. 2012.
---.. “The iPhone and Communication.” Studying Moble Media: Cultural Technolgies,
Mobile Communication and the iPhone. London: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Goodwin, Kim. Designing for the Digital Age: How to Create Human-Centered Products
and Services. Indianapolis: Wiley Pub, 2009. Print.
Goulding, Christina. "Grounded Theory, Ethnography and Phenomenology: A Comparative
Analysis of Three Qualitative Strategies for Marketing Research." European Journal of
Marketing 39.3/4 (2005): 294-308. Print.
Gouldner, Alvin Ward. The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. New York: Basic, 1970.
Print.
Grech, M. R., T. Horberry, and A. Smith. "Human error in maritime operations: Analyses of
accident reports using the leximancer tool." Proceedings of the Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society: 46th Annual Meeting. Baltimore: Human Factors and Ergonomics
Soc., (2002). Print.
Grimes, Ronald. Rite Out of Place : Ritual, Media, and the Arts. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2006. Print.
Gromley, Antony. "Thinking About Naoto Fukasawa." Naoto Fukasawa. Ed. Naoto
Fukasawa. London: Phaidon, 2007. 116-124. Print.
314
Haas, Christina. "On the Relationship Between Old and New Technologies." Computers and
Composition 16 (1999): 209-228. Print
Hansson, Thomas, Greg Carey, and Rafn Kjartansson. "A Multiple Software Approach to
Understanding Values." Journal of Beliefs & Values-studies in Religion & Education
31.3 (2010): 283-298. NTU. Web.
Haug, Wolfgang F. Critique of Commodity Aesthetics: Appearance, Sexuality, and
Advertising in Capitalist Society. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1986. Print.
Helfenstein, Sacha. "Increasingly Emotional Design for Growingly Pragmatic Users? A
Report from Finland." Behaviour & Information Technology 31.2 (2010): 185-204.
SpringerLink. Web. 27 Feb. 2012.
Hembrooke, Helene, and Geri Gay. Activity-centered Design: An Ecological Approach to
Designing Smart Tools and Usable Systems. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004. Print
Heskett, John. Design : a Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Print.
Hillis, Ken. Online a Lot of the Time: Ritual, Fetish, Sign. Durham [NC]: Duke University
Press, 2009. Print.
Hinton, Sam. Towards a Critical Theory of the Internet. Diss. La Trobe University, 2005.
Print.
Hjorth, Larissa, Jean Burgess, and Ingrid Richardson. Studying Mobile Media: Cultural
Technologies, Mobile Communication, and the iPhone. New York, NY: Routledge,
2012. Print.
315
Hjorth, Larissa. "IPersonal - A Case Study of the Politics of the Personal." Studying Mobile
Media: Cultural Technologies, Mobile Communication, and the IPhone. Ed. Jean
Burgess, Ingrid Richardson, and Larissa Hjorth. New York, NY: Routledge, 2012. 190-
212. Print.
Hoda, Rashina, James Noble, and Stuart Marshall. "Grounded Theory of Geeks." Conference
Proceedings : 18th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs : October 21st -
23rd, Portland, Or, Usa: Proceedings. PLoP' 11. USA, Portland N.p., 2011. 1-17.
Print.
Holloway, Immy. Basic Concepts for Qualitative Research. London: Blackwell
Science, 1997. Print.
Hopkins, Mary Frances. "The Performance Turn and Toss." Quarterly Journal of Speech 81,
2 (1995): 228-36.
Horkheimer, M and Adorno, T.W. Dialectic of Enlightenment. 1947. Stanford Univ Press,
2002.Print.
Hornby, Albert. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English: International
New Students’ Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. Print.
Hughes, Neil. “Apple Denies Creating Artificial Product Shortages for Hype.” Appleinsider,
2010. Web: 21 July 2010.
Hughes, T. Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins Univ Press 1983. Print.
Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens: a Study of the Play-element in Culture. London: Routledge,
2008. Print.
316
Humphreys, Lee, Thilo Von Pape, and Veronika Karnowski. Innovations in Mobile Use.
Proc. of International Communication Association, Singapore. Singapore, 2010. 1-31.
Print.
IBM. "IBM100 - A Computer Called Watson." IBM - United States. N.p., 14 Jan. 2011. Web.
16 June 2015.
IBM Knowledge Center. “IBM WebSphere Voice Server Information Center.” Glossary.
2011. Web. 8 Dec. 2011.
Infosecurity. “Infosecurity - Middle East BlackBerry Security Problems ‘a National Security
Issue’ Claims RIM’s co-CEO.” Infosecurity. 2011. Web. 8 May 2013.
Inter IKEA Systems. “Ikea Grundtal.” Ikea Assembly Instructions, 2011. Print.
Isaacson, Walter. Steve Jobs: a Biography. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2011. Print.
ITU. "International Telecommunication Union : ICT Facts and Figure 2011", International
Telecommunication Union. ITU, Geneva, 2011. Print
ITU. "International Telecommunication Union: Country profile 2013". International
Telecommunication Union. ITU, Geneva, 10 March 2015. Web. 2013.
Jenkins, Eric. "My iPod, My iCon: How and Why Do Images Become Icons". Critical
Studies in Media Communication, Vol 25, (2008): pp 466-489.
Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture. New York: New York University Press, 2008. Print
Jenkins, Henry and K.D. Squire. "The Art of Contested Spaces" in L. King (Ed.), Game On!
London: Barbican press, 2002.
317
Jobs, Steve. "Steve Jobs: The Next Insanely Great Thing." Interview by Gary Wolf.
Wired Feb. 1996: n. pag. Print.
Jobs, Steve. "Apple CEO Steve Jobs at D8." Interview by Kara Swisher. All Things Digital
Conference. N.p., 3 June 2010. Web. 2 Apr. 2013..
Jobs, Steve. “Apples Launch Event for iPad2.” iPad Launch. Yerba Buena Center for the
Arts; San Francisco, 2011. Live event.
"Jobs at Corporate." Apple. Apple Inc., 20 Dec 2014. Web. 26 May 2015.
Jones, Paul. "Technology Is Not The Cultural Form? Raymond Williams's Sociological
Critique Of Marshall Mcluhan." Canadian Journal Of Communication 23.4 (1998):
423-454. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 12 Feb. 2015.
Julier, Guy. The Culture of Design. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2008. Print
Kahney, Leander. The Cult of iPod. San Francisco: No Starch Press, 2005. Print.
---. Jony Ive: The Genius Behind Apple's Greatest Products. New York: Penguin, 2013. Print
Katz, James. Perpetual Contact : Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Print.
---. Magic in the Air: Mobile Communication and the Transformation of Social Life. New
Brunswick N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 2006. Print.
---. “Mobile Communication and the Transformation of Daily Life: The Next Phase of
Research on Mobiles.” Knowledge, Technology & Policy 19.1 (2006): 62–71. Print.
---. ed. Handbook of Mobile Communication Studies. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 2008.
Print.
318
Kawasaki, Guy. Enchantment: the Art of Changing Hearts, Minds and Actions. London:
Portfolio Penguin, 2011. Print.
Kelle, Udo. "Computer -Assisted Qualitative Analysis". Qualitative Research Practice. Ed.
Clive Seale et al. London: Sage Publications, (2004): 443-460. Print.
Kemp, Andrew T., et al. "Technology And Teaching: A Conversation Among Faculty
Regarding The Pros And Cons Of Technology." Qualitative Report 19. (2014): ERIC.
Web. 4 June 2015.
Kendrick, James. "Samsung Android: Better than Google's Android". ZDNet.com, 2013.
Web: 28 Sept 2013.
Kilker, J.A. "Shaping Convergence Media: 'Meta-Control' and the Domestication of DVD
and Web Technologies" in Convergence: The International Journal of Research into
New Media Technologies. SAGE, (2003). Print
Klinke, Harald. "Strategic Design." Apple Design. Ed. Sabine Schulze and Ina Grätz.
Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz, 2011. 42-53. Print.
Koblentz, Evan. "How It Started: Mobile Internet Devices of the Previous Millennium."
IJMHCI 1.4 (2009): 1-3. Print.
Kopytoff, I. "The cultural biogrpahy of things: Commoditization as process". in: The Social
Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 1986. Print.
Korhonen, Timo O., and Antti Ainamo, eds . Handbook of Product and Service Development
in Communication and Information Technology. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2004. Print.
319
Krippendorff, Klaus. The Semantic Turn: a New Foundation for Design. Boca Raton:
CRC/Taylor & Francis, 2006. Print.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1980. Print.
Lanxon, Nate. "Historic Cannibalism, iPhone Is Obsolete, Talking Tissue Box." WIRED UK
Podcast. Wired UK, May 2013. Wired.co.uk. Web. 2013.
Lash, Scott. Economies of Signs and Space. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications,
1994. Print.
Lash, Scott. Critique of Information. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications,
2002. Print.
Lastovicka, John and Nancy Sirianni. "Truly, madly deeply: Consumers in the throes of
material possession love". Journal of Consumer Research 37. 2 (2011)
Latour, Bruno. "Technology is Society Made Durable" in A Sociology of Monsters; Essays on
Power, Technology and Domination. New York: Routledge, 1991. Print.
---. We have Never Been Modern. Trans, Catherine Porter. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
University Press, 1993. Print.
---. “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.”
Critical Inquiry 30.2 (2004): 25–248. Print.
Laurel, Brenda, and S. Joy Mountford. The Art of Human-computer Interface Design.
Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub, 1990. Print.
320
Laurel, Brenda. Computers as Theatre. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing, 1991.
Print.
---. Design Research: Methods and Perspectives. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003. Print.
Law, John. Power, Action, and Belief: a New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, 1986. Print.
Law, John, Arie Rip, and Michel Callon. Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology:
Sociology of Science in the Real World. London: MacMillan Press, 1986. Print.
Lawler, John. Metaphors We Compute By. University of Michigan, 1999. Lecture.
Lee, Dong-Hoo. "In Bed with the iPhone." Studying Mobile Media. Ed. Larissa Hjorth , Jean
Burgess and Ingrid Richardson. New York: Routledge, 2012. 63-81. Print
Leong, Wai Kit “Used iPhones to Enhance Lives, Safety or Needy Elderly.”
channelnewsasia.com. 2012. Web: 10 Oct 2012.
Levy, Steven. The Perfect Thing : How the iPod Shuffles Commerce, Culture, and Coolness.
New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006. Print.
Licoppe, Christian. “The Mobile Phones Ring.” Handbook of Mobile Communication
Studies, 2008. Web: 3 December 2012.
Lidwell, William. Universal Principles of Design. Berverly Mass: Rockport, 2010. Print.
Lim, Angela. “Bankers Dial Out Blackberry for iPhone: The ITCOM Week.” 25th May 2010
Web: 27 November 2012.
Lindholm, Christian, Turkka Keinonen, and Harri Kiljander. Mobile Usability: How Nokia
Changed the Face of the Mobile Phone. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.
321
Ling, Richard. “One Can Talk About Common Manners!: The Use of Mobile Telephones in
Appropriate Situations.” Themes in Mobile Telephony Final Report of the COST 248
Home and Work group. Stockholm: Telia, 1997. Print.
---. New Tech, New Ties: How Mobile Communication Is Reshaping Social Cohesion.
Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 2008. Print.
Ling, Richard S, and Per E. Pedersen. Mobile Communications: Re-negotiation of the Social
Sphere. London: Springer, 2005. Print
Ling, Richard and Brigitte Yttri. "Nobody Sits at Home and Waits for the Telephone to
Ring"in Micro and Hyper-Coordination through the Use of the Mobile
Telephone,Telenor Forskning og Utvikling FoU Rapport, 30.9 1999.
Linzmayer, Owen W. Apple Confidential 2.0. San Francisco. No Starch Press. 2003. Print
Lubenow, Gerald C., and Michael Rogers. “Jobs Talks About His Rise and Fall.” Newsweek
29, Sept 1985. Print.
Lunenberg, Fred, & Beverly Irby. Writing a successful thesis or dissertation. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press - SAGE, 2008. Print.
Mackay, H., C. Carne, P. Beynon-Davies, and D. Tudhope. "Reconfiguring the User: Using
Rapid Application Development." Social Studies of Science 30.5 (2000): 737-57. Web.
MacKenzie, Donald A and Judy Wajcman. The social shaping of technology. U.K; Open
University Press, 1999. Print.
Malmgren, Carl D. Fictional Space in the Modernist and Post-Modernist American Novel.
Lewisburg, Pa.: Bucknell UP, 1985. Web.
322
Manning, Philip. Erving Goffman and Modern Sociology. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford UP,
1992. Print.
Manovich, Lev. The Language of New Media. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001.
Print.
Marick, Brian. "A Manglish Way of Working: Agile Software Development." The Mangle in
Practice: Science, Society, and Becoming. Ed. Andrew Pickering and Keith Guzik.
Durham: Duke UP, 2008. 185-201.Print
Mariscal, Judith, and Carla M. Bonina. "Mobile Communications in Mexico: Policy and
Popular Dimensions." Handbook of Mobile Communications Studies. Ed. James E.
Katz. MIT Press, 2008. 65-78. Print.
Marshall, MN. "The Key Informant Technique." Family Practice 13.1 (1996): 92-97.
National Institute of Education Library. Web. 8 May 2014.
---. "Sampling for qualitative research." Family Practice 13.6 (1996): 522-525. Print
Martin, Corrine. "Mobile Internet in France: Between Innovation and Social Contexts of
Media Reception." Singapore Internet Research Centre. Proc. of Innovations in Mobile
Use, Singapore, Singapore. 2010. 1-26. Print
Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. Capital; a Critique of Political Economy, Vol 1. New
York: International, 1967. Print.
Mason, D. M., and B. Ide. "Adapting qualitative research strategies to technology savvy
adolescents." Nurse Researcher 21.5 (2014): 40-45. Web. 23 July 2014.
323
McAdams, D. P. “The Role of Narrative in Personality Psychology Today.” Narrative
Inquiry 16.1 (2006):11–18. Web. 3 Aug. 2012.
McCracken, G. Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Consumer
Goods and Activities. Bloomington, IN: Indianna University Press, 1998. Print
McKenzie, Donald and Judy Wajcman. The Social Shaping of Technology: How the
Refrigerator Got Its Hum, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, 1999. Print.
McKenzie, Jon. Perform Or Else From Discipline To Performance. London : Routledge,
2001. Print
McLellan, Hilary. “Experience Design.” Cyberpsychology & Behavior 3.1 (2000): 59-69.
Print.
McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: the Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1965. Print.
McLuhan, Marshall and Michel Moos. Media research: technology, art, communication.
Amsterdam: G & B Arts, 1997. Print
Melrose, Susan. A Semiotics of the Dramatic Text. London: Macmillan Press., 1994. Print
Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002. Print.
Meyers, Justin. “Watch the Incredible 70-Year Evolution of the Cell Phone.” Business
Insider - Business news. 6. (2012) Web: 11 Sept. 2012.
Meyrowitz, Joshua. No Sense of Place: the Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Print.
324
Miller, D. Material Culture and Mass Consumption. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987.
Mitra, Malini. New Version of iOS Includes Notification Center, iMessage, Newstand, Twitter
Integration Among 200 New Features. Cupertino: Apple PR, 7 Jun 2011. Print.
Miyata, Kakuko, Jefferey Boase, and Barry Wellman. "The Social Effects of Keitai and
Personal Computer E-mail in Japan." Handbook of Mobile Communication Studies.
Ed. James E Katz. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2008. 209-222. Print.
Moggridge, Bill. Designing Interactions. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press, 2007. Print.
Molotch, Harvey Luskin. Where stuff comes from: how toasters, toilets, cars, computers, and
many other things come to be as they are. New York: Routledge, 2005. Print.
Morita, A., Reingold, E and Shimomure, M. Made in Japan: Akio Morita and Sony, London,
Collins, 1987. Print
Moritz, Michael. Return to the Little Kingdom: Steve Jobs, the Creation of Apple, and How It
Changed the World. New York: Overlook Press, 2009. Print.
Murray, Janet. Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 1997. Print
---. Inventing the Medium: Principles of Interaction Design as a Cultural Practice.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2012. Print.
Naha, Abhi and Peter Whale. Essentials of Mobile Handset Design (The Cambridge Wireless
Essentials Series). UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Print.
Nokia. “Nokia - Nokia 9000 Communicator Makes a Visible Appearance in ‘THE SAINT’.”
Press Releases - Press - About Nokia, 1997. Web: 18 May 2010.
325
---“Nokia Lumia 900 - Nokia - Singapore.”, 2012. Web:16 July 2012.
Norman, Donald. Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. New York:
BasicBooks, 2005. Print.
Norman, Donald. The Design of Future Things. New York: Basic Books, 2007. Print
Null, Christopher. “iPhone 4’s Signal Strength Drops If ... Touched.” Yahoo News. Site, 24
June 2010. Web: 21 July 2010.
O’Grady, Jason D. Apple Inc. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2009. Print.
Olivier, Laurence. On Acting. London: Sceptre, 1987. Print.
Olsen, Jan-Kyrre Berg, Evan Selinger, and Søren Riis. New Waves in Philosophy of
Technology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Print.
Papanek, Victor. Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change Revised
Second Edition. London: Thames and Hudson, 2006. Print.
Pfaffenberger, B. "Technological Dramas." Science Technology & Human Values
17.3 (1992): 282-312. Print.
---. "Social Anthropology of Technology." Annual Review of Anthropology 21 (1992): 491-
516. Print.
Pinch, Trevor. “The Invisible Technologies of Goffman’s Sociology From the Merry- Go
Round to the Internet.” Technology and Culture 51.2 (2010): 409–424. Web. 10
September 2013.
326
Pinch, Trevor and Wiebe Bijker. “The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How
the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.”
Social Studies Of Science. 14. 3 (1984): 399-441. Sage Publications. Print
Pinch, Trevor and Karin Bijsterveld. "Special issue on Sound Studies: New Technologies and
Music." Social Studies of Science. 34.5 (2004): 635-648. Sage Publications. Print.
Pinch, Trevor, and Frank Trocco. Analog Days: The Invention and Impact of the Moog
Synthesizer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2002. Print.
Pixell, Roman. Why Apple's Newton Failed in the Marketplace: A Retrospective. Paris:
Worldwide Newton Conference, 2004.
Polkinghorne, Donald E. "Language and Meaning: Data Collection in Qualitative Research."
Journal of Counseling Psychology 52 (2005): 137-145. Print.
Rappaport, Roy A. “Ritual, Sanctity, and Cybernetics.” American Anthropologist 73.1
(1991): 59–76. New Series.
Ray, Vin. The Television News Handbook: An Insider’s Guide to Being a Great Broadcast
Journalist. London: Macmillan, 2003. Print.
Rettie, R.“Mobile Phone Communication: Extending Goffman to Mediated Interaction".
Sociology 43.3 (2009): 421–438.
Rettig, Marc. Interview by Dan Saffer. Designing Interaction. 2010. London, New Riders.
Print.
Rich, Peter. "Inside the Black Box: Revealing the Process in Applying a Grounded Theory
Analysis." The Qualitative Report 17.49 (2012): 1-23. Web. 2014.
327
Richardson, Adam. Innovation X Why a Company's Toughest Problems Are Its Greatest
Advantage. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010. Print.
Richardson, Laurel. "Writing: A Method of Inquiry." Handbook of Qualitative Research.
Ed. Norman K Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications, 2000. 923-948. Print.
Richler, Noah. "A Short History of Story." Your World. BBC Radio, 2011. Web. 2012.
Risch, John, Anne Kao, Stephen Poteet, and Y.-J. J. Wu. "Text Visualization for Visual Text
Analytics." Visual data mining 4404 (2008): 154-171. SpingerLink. Web. 14 July 2014.
Ritzer, George and Douglas Goodman. Modern Sociological Theory. Boston: McGraw-
Hill, 2004. Print
Rook, Dennis W. “The Ritual Dimension of Consumer Behavior.” The Journal of Consumer
Research 12.3 (1985): 251–264. Print.
Rooney, David. "Knowledge, Economy, Technology and Society: The Politics of Discourse."
Telematics and Informatics 22 (2005): 405-422. Elsevier. Web. 10 Jan. 2015.
Rothenbuhler, Eric. Ritual Communication: from Everyday Conversation to Mediated
Ceremony. Thousand Oaks Calif: Sage Publications, 1998. Print.
Ruse, Michael. Darwin and Design: Does Evolution have a Purpose. Cambridge, Mass:
Harvard University Press, 2003. Print.
Saffer, Dan. Designing for Interaction: Creating Innovative Applications and Devices. 2nd ed.
London: New Riders, 2009. Print.
328
Savov, Vlad. “Apple Sues Amazon for App Store Trademark Infringement.” engadget.
Technology news, 21 March 2011. Web: 11 Apr. 2013.
Sawyer, P. H., and R.H Hilton. "Technical Determinism: The Stirrup And The Plough." Past
and Present 24 (1963): 90-100. Jstor.org. Oxford Journals. Web. 12 Feb. 2015.
Schenchner, Richard. Performance Studies: An Introduction. NY: Routledge, 2008. Print
Schurman, Kyle . “PDAs & Mobile Access Devices.” Smart Computing. (2001). February.
Web: 18 May 2010.
Scott, S. “Revisiting the Total Institution: Performative Regulation in the Reinventive
Institution.” Sociology 44.2 (2010): 213–231. Web: 11 Sept. 2013.
Segan, Sascha, and Mike Kobrin. "Motorola ROKR E1." PCMAG.COM. 9 Sept. 2005. Web.
2 Feb. 2015.
Shannon, Claude Elwood, and Warren Weaver. The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
Urbana: U of Illinois, 1964. Print.
Sharp Corporation. "2000: Mobile Phone Share Increased | Sharp Corporation." Sharp
Global. Sharp, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2012.
Shove, Elizabeth et al. The Design of Everyday Life. New York: Berg. 2007 Print.
Silverstone, R and Hirsch E (eds). Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in
Domestic Spaces. London: Routeledge. 1992.
Sismondo, Sergio. An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. UK: J Wiley and
Sons, 2010. Print
329
Smith, Gillian Crampton. “What Is Interaction Design?” Designing Interactions. Ed Bill
Moggridge. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 2007. Print.
Smith, A. E., M. Grech, and T. Horberry. Application of the Leximancer text analysis system
to human factors research. UQ, 2002. Web. 22 2014.
Sony Corporation. “Sony’s History -- Through The Eyes of the Company’s Leaders.” Sony
Corporate Information. Archives, 2010. Web: 22 April 2010.
Snow, C.P. The Two Cultures. Canto ed. London: Cambridge UP, 1993. Print
Srivastava, Lara. “The Mobile Makes Its Mark.” The Handbook of Mobile Communications
Studies. Ed. James E. Katz. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 2008. Print.
Stanislavsky, Konstantin. An Actor Prepares. Trans. Elizabeth Hapgood. London: Eyre
Methuen, 1980. Print.
---. Building A Character. Trans. Elizabeth Hapgood. London: Eyre Methuen, 1981. Print.
---. Creating A Role. Trans. Elizabeth Hapgood. London: Eyre Methuen, 1983. Print.
Steinbock, Dan. The Nokia Revolution: the Story of an Extraordinary Company That
Transformed an Industry. New York: AMACOM, 2001. Print.
---, Winning Across Global Markets: How Nokia Creates Strategic Advantage in a Fast
Changing World. New York: Jossey-Bass, 2010. Print
Suddaby, Roy. "From the Editors: What Grounded Theory Is Not." Academy of Management
49.4 (2006): 633-642. Print.
330
Summers-Effler, Erika. “Ritual Theory.” Handbook of the Sociology of Emotions. Springer
US. (2006): 135–154. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Print.
Tofel Kevin. C. “A Visual History of Mobiles: Past, Present and Future — Mobile
Technology News." 2012. Web: 16 Sept. 2012.
Toroian, Cassandra. “Apple’s iPhone 4 Problems Are A Blessing In Disguise.” Forbes, 2010.
Web: 21 July 2010.
Tremblay, Marc-Adelard. "The Key Informant Technique: A Nonethnographic Application."
American Anthropologist (1957): 688-701. Print.
Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Adline, 1995.
Print.
Verbeek, Peter-Paul. What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and
design. University Park, PU Press, 2005. Print.
Verbeek, Peter- Paul and Adrian Slob. User Behaviour and Technology Development:
Shaping Sustainable Relations Between Consumers and Technologies. Netherlands:
Springer, 2006. Print
Vogelstein, Fred. Dogfight: How Apple and Google Went to War and Started a Revolution.
New York: Sarah Crichton, 2013. Print.
Volti, R. "Reuniting History and Sociology Through Research on Technological Change."
Bulletin of science, technology and society 23: 6 (2003): 459 - 464. Print
331
Wagner, Annette. "Prototyping: A Day in the Life of an Interface Designer." The Art of
Human-Computer Interface Design. Ed. Brenda Laurel. Reading, Mass: Addison -
Wesley Pub. Co., 1990. 79-85. Print.
Wan, Yim K. "Assessing the Strengths and Weaknesses of Macao As an Attractive Meeting
and Convention Destination: Perspectives of Key Informants." Journal of Convention
& Event Tourism 12 (2011): 129-151. Web. 25 July 2014.
Watson, David L, Gail DeBortali-Tregerthan, and Joyce Frank. Social Psychology : Science
and Application. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman, 1984. Print.
Watts, Harris. On Camera: Essential Know-How for Programme-Makers. London: Focal
Press, 1997. Print
Weber, Max. The Sociology of Religion. Boston: Beacon Press, 1993. Print
Wheeler, William. Integrating Wireless Technology in the Enterprise. Boston: Digital Press,
2004. Print.
White, Jo, and Ann Weatherall. "A Grounded Theory Analysis of Older Adults and
Information Technology." Educational Gerontology 26.4 (2000): 371-386. Web.
13 July 2014.
Whitely, N. Design for Society, London: Reaktion Books, 1993. Print.
Wikipedia. "Timeline of Apple Inc. Products." Table. Wikipedia. N.p., 24 May 2013. Web.
4 Jan. 2014.
Williams, Jenny. “RIM Urges Blackberry Users to Disable Javascript after Web Browsing
Vulnerability Revealed.” ComputerWeekly.com., 2013. Web: 8 May 2013.
332
Williams, Raymond. Communication. London: Chatto & Windus, 1966. Print
Williams, Raymond, and Ederyn Williams. Television: Technology and Cultural Form. 3rd
ed. New York: Routledge, 2003. Print.
Williams, Rosalind. “The Political and Feminist Dimensions of Technological Determinism.”
Does Technology Drive History?: The Dilemma of TechnologicalDeterminism. Ed.
Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. Print.
Winstone, Ray. "Film: Tracker." Interview by Francine Stock. Film Programme. BBC. BBC,
London. 29 Apr. 2011. Radio.
Woolgar, Steve. “Mobile Back to Front: Uncertainty and Danger in the Theory—Technology
Relation.” Mobile Communications 31 (2005): 23-43 Springer. Print.
---. "Configuring the User: the Case of Usability Trials", in J Law (ed) A Sociology of
Monsters. London: Routledge, (1991). Print
333
10. Appendices
10.1. Appendix A: NEAF approved letter of participation and
consent form
Participant Information
Informed consent First, thank you for agreeing to participate in my research. If anything in this document is unclear, please ask me to clarify it for you.
Project Title Designing a Culture of Use: The technological design ritual and performance in mobile informational devices.
Researcher Kym Campbell Lecturer PhD student WKW School of Communication & University of Canberra Information Faculty of Design and Creative Practice Nanyang University of Technology Canberra Singapore
Project Aim The project aim is to investigate and develop an understanding between designer and their technological artefacts through a multidisciplinary approach in order to highlight techniques of ritual and performance inherently embedded in a design process and in mobile informational devices
Benefits of the project The project will benefit the wider community by its contribution to the knowledge and understanding of technology and science studies and to improve societal knowledge factors especially from a multidisciplinary standpoint of the social ecology in which we live.
Project Outline The research project is called “Designing a Culture of Use: The technological design ritual and performance in mobile informational devices”. It is a four- year project that will culminate into a PhD thesis for the University of Canberra.
The research consists of around 8 to 12 interviews with individuals who play a major role in the design of technological devices with a focus on the main mobile companies. The interviews are designed to help the researcher discover information about the designers, and the interaction and embedding process. You have been selected because your role and position within the Global design industry provides a unique "insider's view" of the industry that is simply not available through other sources.
Participant involvement This research takes the form of a single audio-recorded open-ended interview that will last for around one hour at a place of your choosing or through telephone or Skype. An open-ended interview is one where the interviewer asks only general questions designed to help you talk about your experiences and impressions. An open-ended interview is more conversational and less formal than other interview techniques.
335
With your permission, the interview will be recorded on a portable digital audio recorder. If you do not want to be taped then let the interviewer know and he will take notes instead. Following the interview, the tape recording of the interview will be transcribed.
There may be some risks to you in being part of this research. In any interview there is a possibility that you could disclose information that may be damaging to you or your organisation in some way. For example, you might say something that offends another person, or that might compromise your relationship with your colleagues or the industry more broadly.
To help reduce these potential risks, you will be offered a copy of the interview transcript for review. You will be sent a copy of the transcription, along with a stamped, self-addressed envelope so that you can amend the transcript as you see fit and send it back to the researcher. Once you have edited the transcript, your edited transcript will become the primary source material for the research. Because the study is interested in industry and social perceptions, only the final edited version of transcript will be used in the research.
Your participation in this interview is entirely voluntary. You are free to discontinue the interview at any time. You can also demand that all records of the interview be destroyed. You can withdraw at any time up to eight (8) weeks after you have reviewed the interview transcript (beyond this time material may be in press and may not be able to be withdrawn).
Confidentiality During the course of the project, only one party (aside from the researcher) will have access to the audio and transcript information: 1. a third party will be employed to transcribe audio recordings of interviews All research carried out by University of Canberra a researcher is subject to the Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988. Any information supplied by you to the researcher cannot be used for any purpose other than that stated in this consent form.
Anonymity Because the information you provide will be of a detailed nature, your responses will probably identify you to others who know you, even if your name was removed from material. Because of this, no attempt will be made by the researcher to hide your identity. If you do not wish to be identified, or if you wish certain comments to be made "off the record", you should let the researcher know, either during the interview, or upon reviewing the interview transcript.
Data Storage At the first practical opportunity following the interview, digital audio recordings will be removed from the audio recorder and stored in an encrypted form on the researcher’s computer.
After the project is complete, the transcriptions and audio files will be encrypted and stored on digital media in a secure location at the University of Canberra for five years. After this time, audio recordings and transcriptions will be destroyed unless you indicate that you are happy for them to be used in other research projects.
Ethics Committee Clearance The project has been approved by the Committee for Ethics in Human Research of the University of Canberra, Australia.
Queries and concerns Any questions regarding this project may be directed to the Primary Investigator (Mr Kym Campbell of the Faculty of Design and Creative Practice at the University of Canberra or by email: [email protected] or at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore [email protected]
336
Project Title
Designing a Culture of Use: The technological design ritual and performance in mobile informational devices.
Consent Statement
I have read and understood the information about the research. I am not aware of any condition that would prevent my participation, and I agree to participate in this project. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about my participation in the research. All questions I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction.
Please indicate whether you agree to participate in each of the following parts of the research (please indicate which parts you agree to by putting a cross in the relevant box):
Participate in an interview with the researcher
Agree to be recorded
Name………………………………...... … Signature…………...... …………………… Date ………………………………….
A summary of the research report can be forwarded to you when published. If you would like to receive a copy of the report, please include your mailing address below.
Name………………………….....………. Address……………………………………….………………….. …………………………………………………….....………………
337
10.2. Appendix B: Leximancer result of normal themes and
maximum concepts of all participants
339
10.3. Appendix C: Leximancer results of normal themes and
maximum concepts of individuals
Anggra
341
James
342
Marko
343
Michelle
344
Ruth
345
10.4. Appendix D: Summarised raw interview transcripts and
manual categories
Guidelines – Design – Experience Design
Anggra
1. “Yes for our products first thing is we have to follow certain guidelines and the human interface of your projects, or your applications. We have to follow certain rules that are already set up by Apple so we have to follow that first if you want to have customisation so then we can record that. We have to follow the guidelines because if we do not do that your apps might be rejected by ....” 2. “Because everyone wants to have a similar experience from applications for their users you don’t want to have a user with a separate issue so one way when they use one is totally different way we don’t want to have that so this is why we have to follow the rules.” 3. Perception & perspective: In answering whether they mirror behaviour “I am not sure whether they have their own research on this but I think they have a lot of things on how is the best way for the users to use their devices and applications.” 4. Immersive behaviour- experience: “Well examples for now last time you only have your iphones you have the smaller screens and now you have the ipad which have bigger screens. You have to think of how these behave with the smaller screen on the iphone and the bigger screen and you have to see that for the ipad you can have a more immersed experience, you can put on more things, you can do more things on the ipad but in the basic essence so you can have the same functions so whether you use the iphone or ipad they don’t feel totally different.” 5. “Probably they want to keep some things to be uniform so I don’t know. For me something that they only think is for the best for the users and we don’t want to have to accept too many variations. Just for example the start up screen or the log on screen of the iphones you cannot really add much to it. You cannot put in your contact number in case your phone is lost. You cannot put the web information so people have to sort of do a jailbreak to do customisations”. 6. Signature: do you believe that you have passed something of yourself into a device or a program or part of your personality? I know it sounds a bit, sort of a little bit out there, but I think....
A Somehow there is something of my own signature.
Q Yes that’s good, your own signature.
A I tend to be more conservative on the designs. I try to be more following the rules instead of to do things. Another thing is I have to think of the outside effect because some people like to do customise interface elements and sometimes it doesn’t work well so I try to avoid that.
347
7. Custom- signature: “Still within the guidelines so once you do a custom elements you have to care of a lot of things, small things which might not work in all applications for example you design an interface in portrait applications then when you bring to landscape it will be totally messed up so you have to take care of things before you do custom designs. So I try to avoid that. 8. Popularity of Iphone in Singapore: “Well you can see whenever you take the public transport or everyone is holding iphones. For me I am assuming about 70% of population.” 9. Directing user function: “Sometimes. We sometimes we have to educate the users on how to do certain things and okay hey this is the better way to do things instead of long convoluted ways and sometimes it is the other way round and we have to see normally how people expect things to be done.” 10. “Sometimes we are a bit confused and sometimes, how could I put it, probably it is more convenient for them. We think it is correct but according to this it is not but probably it is more convenient so we just shrug it off or we just try to follow that.” 11. Signature: “People thought where is this function, and we just say there is the button have a look at the bottom but they never noticed it.”It is like poetry you can find out okay who is the writer or yeah, yeah. 12. Roadmap – the content provider “Yes usually by clients. 13. Technology evolves by itself or shaped by users: “You know if you are checking the trend so yes for some other companies probably check by the people because things would be different. We create the trends yes.” 14. Antennae problems iPhone 4: “But the problem is this real but how severe depends on your infrastructure or telephone your environment so for as far as developments I suppose it doesn’t really affect our work or our products and it seems to be all right unless it is really the hot features or the iphones all of the iphones are going to be recalled probably and for me it is not really very much a problem for us. We in Singapore I don’t think it is really an issue it seems the telephone infrastructure is very good.” 15. iPad versus PC: “Yes it is like you see this small iphone but you see bigger on ipad so a lot more opportunities for the ipad. You can apply it to more fields for example. Last time it was only for mobile normal end users and now industry is using ipad where they use it internally or they use it to serve customers for example and edit with the cost is cheaper than a full fledged desktop PC so it is an alternative for example across system in medical fields, for nurses. Portability vs one place: “Yes. It is more convenient, more cost effective.”
Ruth Ng
1. Company ceremony design: “Okay, I think the process is very much driven but the processes in the company that I’m working with now, so it’s mostly- actually it’s driven a lot by the business you need which is the marketing department. So usually we have this group of people who do consumer research, market research and they kind of try to predict what people want and what’s out there in the market, what’s out competition so what we should offer to consumers, and yeah” “Yeah, and then with that they come up with the brief, the product brief. They will define the type of group, how much the device should cost, how much it should cost to manufacture, what features it should have, how it should look like and things like that, and so when it comes to the designer we kind of work within the constraints of this product brief”
348
– 2. Nokia design limitations: “Definitely because I think when you’re talking about a big organisation you are talking about manufacturing even millions of such devices, and so whatever - it’s very cost driven in a way because when you think of ten million phones that will be sold and if each phone will cost one cent more it means one cent less profit, and times one million that’s significant of ten million you see, so quite cost driven, yeah, but it’s my scope of work”. Political and economic limitations “yeah 3. Emotion Design: “Yeah and I think definitely, I think for most designers it should be that way because in a way it is our creation so even though we didn’t create the entire thing, but it’s a product that you’re stuck with for a few months or even one year, so you definitely feel a connection to it. “I think in general in motion and design, can be applied in quite a lot of ways. For example the other day I was at my friend’s place and she has this spoon with a smiley face on the handle, so it’s like punch out eyes and smiley face, and it makes you smile. So I think things like that can actually evoke emotion in whoever is using the object. And in particular Nokia phones are emotions. I think a lot of it has to do with how it feels in your hand when you are using the device. So for example of the device is made of like maybe stainless steel and it has a lot of sharp edges and when you hold it it feels cold, it makes you feel more professional and it makes you feel more business-like in a way; you feel more high-tech. But if the phone is designed with more curves and maybe is made of; it has a warm colour, maybe it is like orange, and when you are using it you kind of feel younger. So I think in a way that is emotion in hand phone design. And of course there is the interface, the user interface, the software. So that’s another aspect. But if you are talking about just hardware, then I think the materials and the shape.” Materials: Usually what we do is, when we start the program, there’s specific target group, for example if it’s targeted at youth, so the software and hardware will know that it is targeted at youths, and then of course then we work towards this same direction in both designs. And that’s how it’s aligned usually. 4. Design emotion embedded in the visual aesthetics: “I think yeah to an extent definitely, I think that’s why industrial design’s about, it’s to convey something through the shape, through the curvature or the colour or the texture. I mean I think that is the ultimate goal of a designer, or industrial designer”. “I think when you design something beautiful you are definitely attracting the person, the consumer, you are kind of seducing the consumer, I mean I think that is a successful design to draw in your consumer, but I don’t really understand the question actually, manipulate the emotions you mean?” 5. Best design phone: “I think iPhone.”” I think, okay the whole package. It is the packaging, the way that’s marketed and the user interface is definitely one of the best in the market I think”.” Okay I think what makes it good is the way - sorry, it’s the way that, yah I imagine it’s simple, people understand it, they think of Apple and they know it’s iPhone, they are not confused about a lot of different models, and the way that it’s integrated, like the user interface and the industrial design and the marketing and everything is integrated and that’s a very clear message about what this phone can do, and so people are not confused and, yeah they know what to expect from the phone and they just get what they want yeah. I think that’s the…” 6. Prototyping:” Yeah we do that but not by the design department, it’s done by another department, so they will definitely do testing and make sure it works, that maybe focus groups like it and things like that. “I think ideally we should but because this separate department they will actually facilitate the whole testing and then provide
349
feedback to the design department. So we do get feedback. Ideally designers should be involved but I think that because it’s not an ideal role and we have a lot of things to do so we can’t really afford to spend time on this, yeah”. 7. Apps made device: “Yes I think so, it’s increasingly more important and of course the phone, the role of the device is to facilitate use of these apps as easily as possible I think, and I think the phone is supposed to help organise all these apps, all the nice - whatever the consumer needs to do on the cell phone well enough so I think that increasingly becomes - that is going this direction increasingly I think. 8. Schemata of designer embeds personality: “Yeah I think a lot depends on the company culture as well, I mean if the company or the brand that you are working for values innovation, or whether they value efficiency or things like that, I think it makes a lot of difference to how the devices turn out as well”. 9. Signature: I think, only very iconic designers will be able to have that kind of signature. Yeah, like for example if we’re talking about, even for Apple, you don’t really have one designer behind it, you have a team of a lot of people behind it, and you just know that it's Apple, you don’t really know who is the designer. So I think for most electronic devices, it is a lot of people behind one device. And if you are talking about just one designer, it’s usually like an iconic designer, maybe Naoto Fukasawa, and he sometimes collaborates with some companies to design something, and you can see his signature on it. But that’s because he’s a very prominent designer and he has that kind of stature and influence on a particular direction. 10. Design outcome (feedback) “] Let me think. I think as a designer, the question is probably whether the user actually gets the intention of the designer. Because sometimes we assume that people react to certain things, but because of cultural differences or even because as designers sometimes we are too into details, we can tell the difference between Ruth and B, but actually maybe to a layman, you can’t tell the difference. So things like that. So that is something that I would like to know, so whether they actually get the intention behind what we do, and whether they even notice the softer designs, the details here and there, and whether it makes a difference to their experience. Whether the design intention is transferred to the end user.
James
1. Social constructing designers: “from a young age really, 14, 15 in school and always interested in how things worked and making things, you know, that I enjoyed”. “It’s a sort of common trait I think, yeah. Sort of general interest in how things work and wanting to make other things work like that I think. Everything from trying to make rockets when you’re 14 to taking apart radiators or trying to fix your dad’s TV when it’s broken.” “Well, I knew I wanted to do sort of a technology based thing, so I did end up doing maths and physics at a level and then did design and technology and art as well. So, there’s two strands there. And then, I wasn’t really sure where to go with that, but went and ended up going to Brunel University and did industrial design engineering.” 2. User versus mechanical technological design: “. Probably not I don’t think. I think you’ve still got to have the fundamental knowledge of how things work to give the benefits to the customer. What interests the customer is how things work and the interface, you know. Generally they’re not interested in the technology; it’s what it does for you. But to deliver that, you’ve got to understand the fundamentals of how it works and how you can deliver that.” “Yeah, yeah, that’s right. Yeah. I mean, when the customer sees a mobile phone and gets very excited about the user interface
350
on iPhone, that’s really the very top level design and interface that they’re exposed to. Everything below that, all the chips and bits and mechanical bits that go into it as well, they’re not interested in that and that’s really probably 90% of the work that goes into getting it working. I don’t know, I’m probably being a bit unfair. I mean, I’m sure the operating system is Quite complex and now a days is. Quite complex and there’s a lot goes into it, but there’s a lot below it that the customer doesn’t see. And I don’t think you could be a pure user interfaced designer without understanding what else goes into it, but I don’t know. Maybe I’m wrong”. 3. Culture Walkman: Walkman . The walkman was sort of mid-80s, wasn’t it, when that really came out. Eighty-six, something like 85 maybe. Yeah, I guess, it’s a strange thing that though because it was sort of market leader. It was the first one into the market, so it sort of sets the market. They could probably have made it look like an apple or a banana or something and put it into the market and that would have been the sort of look that would have succeeded, because it was the technology that people were interested in because it gave them such a huge benefit over anything that had been designed before. 4. Technology versus design: Phillip Stark’s stuff is, you know, proposed benefits to the customer with actually no technology behind it whatsoever and actually, it doesn’t actually work. 5. Design versus functionality: It sort of depends on how you market it I think. You can spend a lot on marketing and you can sell something that’s not very good. That’s changing as well with bloggers and the internet and all that sort of thing. You get a more honest opinion than you used to in the old days and that sort of vested interest from reviewers to give a good write up for things. But nowadays I think people need to be a lot more careful about releasing dodgy products because the feedback from places like Amazon, all those sort of things, can be quite severe. 6. Design outweighs the benefits: “Well, having worked in the industry, walkman’s a good example where the technology gave such huge benefits that the industrial design when you look at it, probably wasn’t an influencing factor if people were going to buy it or not. But as the market matures and more people get into the market and the technology benefits diminish, because it’s declining benefits as everyone else jumps on board and they’re all innovating and the advances in technology get less and less, people rely more on differentiating through the things that can be quickly changed or can change people’s experiences with the product, which are industrial design and these are interfaced and whether the fundamental technology behind it probably doesn’t really change that much. So, I mean, Ericsson’s quite a good example of that, because it’s sort of refused to recognise that in many ways, which is why Ericsson sort of went downhill, is that it always sort of believed all the time that the consumer was always interested in the technology behind the product and was always going out and selling its products based on better reception, better acoustics, all these technological advanced things and better battery life, all these things which are all really great, but actually at the end of the day the customer was really interested. And that’s why Nokia overturned Ericsson, was because it was promoting, well the user interface is great and you can change the cover to look all these funky new colours and designs and snap on covers and all that sort of stuff. So, it was sort of proof of that argument if you like, that the customer wasn’t really interested in the benefits of the technology or even being educated about the technology and the benefits and just weren’t interested. They just wanted to know if I press that button I can get to what I want really quickly and then I can snap on a different colour and I’ll look really cool with my mates. And that was it.
351
And actually, the Ericsson phones are much far more advanced than Nokias in terms of technology behind them, but that didn’t sell the product. 7. Stages of design: So, I guess the product is sort of born out of a sort of a partnership with marketing, who were talking to their sales region and then the people who sold the product to understand what the customer wants, combined with the industrial designers who can work in two ways. One is to sort of be proactive and come up with ideas and say, “Customer’s going to want this.” They don’t know. But this is what they’re going to really want. They’re going to want a flip phone with a vibrating alert or something. Something the customer’s never known they wanted. So those are sort of combined into a sort of brief, combing those different aspects and prioritising what features need to be in the phone, what size it needs to be, what functionality it needs to have. It’s usually an evolution of a platform. So, in the background there will be platform developers that will be developing new hardware systems. At the time it was 3G was the new thing, so although there were no phones on the market with 3G on, they were all developing the hardware and the devices that would support 3G and the user interface that would *0:34:58.3 or whatever it is, the operating system that would sit on top of it. And then out of those platforms they’d lay on top of it a specification for a phone, at which ever point the platform was in development. So you’re always kind of restricted by what you can do by what’s available. It was great to have these ideas and even at that time, thinking of simple screen devices with user interfaces, but if you don’t have the memory or the computing power to do it you can’t deliver it. So, there’s a very pragmatic discussion as to what do we want, let’s prioritise it and how can we fit it onto the platform we’ve got available at the cost we want to sell it. So, those go hand-in-hand and go through sort of iterative debate and prototype development and discussion to deliver a scheme that people are happy with. And the cost is very influential at that time. I mean, actually the mobile phone market is kind of a commodity market in many ways. The numbers are huge and the market share and profitability is very much driven by the price that you sell the phone for. It was then, not on what features have you got on the phone. The new phones with the new features would go in a very high price, high segment of the market and be taken up by early adopters and then as the technology becomes cheaper and filters down, then that technology is filtered down into the low cost products. So, you define a product, spec, cost, time, then that goes into the second phase if you like, which is the product development phase where all those aspects, software, hardware and mechanical, go through the iterative process of being integrated together.
So, generally you start off with a hardware, a PCBA layout, which have been designed to fit in the schemed layout that the industrial designers would have provided. So that ought to include in the PC *0:37:26.2 and hardware and the screen and all the core electro mechanical functionality and then they would work with a mechanical team who would work on packaging essential plastics and mechanics of however that’s held, including the battery, any ancillary and electro mechanical parts on the antennaes, vibrating motors. Any of these other things that would plug into it basically, be managed by the electrical mechanical team and then go through that series of iterations to the point where you’ve got enough resolution and detail and product where you’re happy. It’s been thoroughly tested throughout the world in market trials and then you detail it up and draw it up, then it goes for tooling. So, generally the longest time is for tooling, is all the plastic parts and the mechanical parts. Then they set up a production line and it goes through pre-
352
production phases. I guess it could take about two to three years I suppose to get a new phone onto the market.
8. People: Yeah, it is. I suppose in a new phone, put it in a sort of completely new platform development, there’s probably a hundred people, maybe 150 people, something like that. 9. Investment: Yeah, huge amount of investment. The tooling. Because the sort of numbers you’re looking at, I think the last phone I worked on in Ericsson was the T10. I don’t even remember it. It was the first sort of youth market phone that Ericsson did; blue, yellow and green covers on it and I think they sold 25 million of those. But they sell 25 million in the space of about 18 months, so you have sort of probably 10 production lines running in different factories around the world and multiple sets of tooling and the management of material supply into those factories is just huge. A massive, massive investment. 10. Don’t sell: No, that’s right. Yeah. And usually that’s because someone else has come up with something that’s a little bit revolutionary. Everyone goes, actually no, I don’t really want that. I want that new thing that you never thought of, which is why you really want your industrial designer team to be sort of kind of not be that influenced by marketing and markets. You want them really thinking about the creative new ideas that are going to get people excited about new technology and benefits it’s going to bring them, because no one else has and if you can deliver that, you’ll do so much better than all the competitors. 11. Feature saturation: I think 99.9% of the rest of the world does the same I think, until the iPhone came along and then everyone’s checking their bank balances and all the rest of it. But the iPhone’s quite interesting like that, because it’s easy. You can decide to have that feature or not and actually you can delete it. You can download some really obscure program that allows you to switch the lights off at home or something and decide to take it off, whereas before, it was all these features that have been jam packed and squeezed into phones because that’s what everybody wanted. And we don’t really know what people want because we can’t really segment the market, so we’d just better keep squeezing all this other stuff in just to make sure that we keep everyone happy. And then they became more and more complicated. The user interface becomes more and more complicated and all these features get buried in these layers of menus and sort of complicated settings to the point where, for God sake, I can’t be bothered with any of this. I’ll just use it to make a phone call. 12. Personality design: Yeah, I think you can. I think you can, but it’s very difficult for them to break out of that mould. I mean, James: Dyson’s a good example. His products, you know, they look like Dyson products, usually because they’re all the same colour. But no, they do have that sort of look about them, sort of an industrial look. But the trouble with that is it’s very difficult to break out from that look. As soon as someone else starts bringing one something that’s very industrial look you can sue them and get them for design rights and all the rest of it, but after a while those sort of avenues for protecting your look and feel run out and you need to start re-inventing yourself. 13. Industrial look: Yeah, I think you can. I think you can, but it’s very difficult for them to break out of that mould. I mean, James: Dyson’s a good example. His products, you know, they look like Dyson products, usually because they’re all the same colour. But no, they do have that sort of look about them, sort of an industrial look. But the trouble with that is it’s very difficult to break out from that look. As soon as someone else starts bringing one something that’s very industrial look you can sue
353
them and get them for design rights and all the rest of it, but after a while those sort of avenues for protecting your look and feel run out and you need to start re- inventing yourself. 14. Industrial look: Yeah, absolutely. I think there’s a strong marketing message around the industrial look as well. It’s letting you know, my product works. I’m not too interested in conning you with how it looks. It does all it says on the box, for this function. And consumers are getting more sophisticated these days and they do like to see how things look, but what they really read is the benefits. What they really want to read on the box is what does it actually do for me and I think from the customer point of view, it’s got to do what it says on the box and it’s got to look good sitting in my cupboard at home or sitting on my desk at home. But you know, the industrial design look of it is a powerful tool to try and get people to get excited and interested in the product, in a sort of very crowded market with similar products. That’s one of the differentiators that makes you stand out. 15. First impression: Yes. It’s a first impression. It’s what makes someone excited about it, subconsciously, that I love the shape of that bottle and the graphic on the label is really pure and simple or whatever it is. It sounds very superficial but it’s a very powerful motivator for when people have got a choice of 20 bottles in front of them and they’re all selling the same thing. How do you tell what to buy. 16. Polyphonics. Yeah.[the senses] Yes. That’s very much so, yeah. The feel and the warmth of it and how it sits in your hand. Noise is becoming more and more important. I’m sure it still is important in mobile phones and in general product development. Customers are very, very sensitive about noise these days, everything from, you know, if you’re clicking down the flip on the phone does it go in a nice wafty movement and nice quality feel or is it a few clicks and a grunchy bit at the end, or when I twist it does it feel solid, does it sound solid…. And there’s a lot of work goes into making products sound just right. And that covers not just sound but how it feels when you put it on the table or how it clicks when you put it up. How that little flappy thing goes, you know, all that is very audible quality. It’s all about feel at the end of the day and the audible aspect is high frequency right through to clunking of the thing when you drop it on the floor. It is a very powerful human sense. 17. Product cycle – ceremony of life and death: Well I guess what I have seen is that those designers who have been very successful are the designers who are able to look holistically at the whole product life cycle. I think the days have gone where you did sort of pigeon hole the front end and industrial designer. He sort of sits in a nice office with green sofas and sky lights and comes up with genius ideas. I think for a designer, or certainly a front end designer to be successful, he’s got to understand the full product cycle and the life cycle of the product in the market, which is not an easy thing to do because he’s also got to detach himself from that and come up with blue sky ideas that means he can identify a feature that’s going to get people excited that no one’s ever thought about, but to do that, he’s got to map it within the context of the real world structure and to know whether something’s going to be successful or not. Whether someone’s already tried it or not and what did that do in the market and know where he can get his market information from and be very sort of data driven in decisions they’re making about whether something’s going to be successful and how much it’s going to cost them. What the likely downsides are. So it’s less experimental I think nowadays. It’s more experience and data driven assessments of ideas and concepts and technology. 18. User design high expectations: I think so, yeah. I think so. Definitely mobile
354
phones, because mobile phones are such a new market. I mean, really it’s only become mainstream in the last 15 years, hasn’t it? So yeah, absolutely. How, I don’t know. I mean it is a market that is evolving so quickly. I mean only two years ago Nokia was unassailable and now they’re off the map and Apple are there because they were in there at the right time and the right place and saw the opportunity. And I’m sure Apple are looking over their shoulder as well, because no one knows where the next big idea’s going to come from. It all seems quite unpredictable. Especially in an environment with electronics and software where you can make changes very quickly and develop new products relatively quickly compared with others. 19. Successful: T10 Yes. I think it’s probably the T10. The Ericsson T10. That’s a difficult one that. They’ve all been kind of challenging and successful, but I think that I was most proud of that one because that was the first product which I was sort of responsible for, rather than being a part of a small team developing a larger project. I was responsible for delivering that. So, delivering it and then seeing it going to market. Although it wasn’t a terribly complex project, it was just being responsible for all of it and seeing it and being there and getting it into market and seeing it launched. 20. Dyson design stages: To a certain extent James: is very much the chief industrial designer, or the chief engineer, so I mean in terms of the look and the feel of the product it’s really James: who drives that, but the technology in it and the implementation and integration of that is, you know, it’s me who influences that and makes it happen. I mean the job I’m doing out here in the far east, where we split it now in Dyson is that the UK sort of does the design and development up to the point where you detail design it and you put it into manufacture. So for the last year, I haven’t really been involved in that front end of the design and development. I’ve been very much involved in the manufacturing side of it, which is rather interesting because you get into the nitty gritty detail of how you actually get something into production and manufacture it, which is actually quite difficult and I think people probably forget about, you know, get the nice idea at the front and it’s a bit like, well just start making it. So that’s been interesting for a couple of years to do that, but I think it would be interesting to get back into the front end design and development of products. So in that sense, no. In Singapore, no, we can’t really influence the design and the fundamental technology, but the packaging and the engineering detail that goes into it to make it manufacturable, we do that out here. 21. Economic driven design: Absolutely, yeah. It’s all about cost really and reliability. I mean, that’s the other aspect that people don’t really consider, is reliability of products. And more so I think in the market place now you see products with warranties on them and a few people are a lot more discerning and I’m sure they are with mobile phones as well about them lasting more than six months before they fall over. I think probably customers are getting much more demanding in the quality of the products that they get nowadays, because they’re not cheap you know. Dysons aren’t cheap and mobile phones aren’t cheap. I think people are prepared to pay the price, whatever, to show that they earn a lot of money. Social status. But I think that’s changed a bit now. 22. Next stage developments: Well I would like to think there would be a huge anti information revolution (laughter) it is just there is so much information instantly available that it has become intrusive. I mean, maybe there would be a way for people to make it less intrusive and they may get people to control that. I don’t know the answer to that one, I know a lot of people complain about always on, you have always got your iPad, you have always got your mobile. The computer on the
355
desktop, you know my life is taken over by just checking my emails all the time and taking phone calls and seeing what is going on at work and I am not even on any of these things like Facebook and those sorts of things and I don’t want to do that. But those people that are on it, it just takes over their lives. I can’t see that people need any more facilitation in their lives for communication. It seems like the technology has got to evolve to make it more manageable in terms of, you do not have to access it or really feel like they have to access it all of the time. Maybe some intelligence in the systems that enables people to have to select themselves, maybe the devices select the information and make what is relevant so it is not intrusive in your life…. ? I think people always want to be seen with it, don’t they, so there will always be a requirement for them to look at whatever is contemporary at the time. I mean, you know you can never project where that is going to come from, I mean the iPod and that sort of visual aesthetic is certainly not new, and it is from dita rams and that started work in the 1960s and 1970s and .... 23. Device of future will be more concerned with the filtering of information rather than the information overload of today. 24. Sceptical about the device being wearable or part of you such as plugging it in to your head. 25. Turning point: Big turning point of design was the acceptance of plastics. 26. Deiter Rams design foundation for apple.
Michelle
1. Design process; The design process is in-house and relatively flexible. As opposed to Japanese form which was her previous job where they expected designers to be more like engineers and they concentrated more on the technical side of product design. If anything it was more administrative 2. The design process at Orca is based on ‘Design thinking” which is the brainchild of IDEO in the US. They do workshops together where they do a quick brainstorm session, followed by small creative exercises; these can be scenario or game related. The creative design process then includes quick prototyping. You can even be expected to design something that is half finished or half a prototype. 3. The Prototyping involves two stages 1) Products that you haven’t seen before or haven’t used. This requires you to put yourself into the shoes of the user. 2) Next stage you bring things to the client or users. 4. Design: Design is not about making things pretty but about a more subtle way. For example if I am designing a bottle which has a bath product in it the bottle is a tool to sell the bath liquid. Design is about giving a product an identity. 5. It is also about problem solving most of the time, for example what kind of material to use. Emotion in design happens most of the time. Sometimes it is not to do with the product it can be package design as with Apple, or service design. What you are trying to do is recreate feelings in the user. The feeling of opening a box or package for the first time that a product is in; recreate memories.
K: Bento box and Apples simplicity in packaging
6. You have to be honest and truthful. Bad design doesn’t sell and with consultancy you can have a product that looks good but doesn’t meet the client’s requirements. Such as the bottle of bath product. The material looks good but is too expensive. 7. Personalisation and customisation Skin products for Asian skin or dark complexions.
356
Products or devices that you have around with you more become more personal. You interact with them more and therefore affect you or you affect it. This leads to personalisation and customisation which is a normal process for people who interact with a device or product more. (This means having it with you most of the time). Personalisation is ok, it has always been around. However you can have a lot of interaction with a photo copier but you can also be quite detached to it. The more you carry the product or device the more you both interact and it will affect you. The things that you carry identify who you are. 8. Design profilers; As designers we profile people. Some products can have personalities, for instance “LG”? has a washing machine. The Korean version sings to you after it finishes the cycle. A Korean/ Japanese song. The washing machine gives a performance and has a personality.
K; Products can have a character/ identity.
9. Have a look at a Thai company called “Qualy”, these products that are very tongue in cheek. 10. Design is definitely growing in Singapore.
Marko
1. Nokia Company process: Essentially the design of the software, and all the user interfaces, the core user interface as well as the services that would integrate there, as well as elements in the experience of the Nokia products that run across the entire portfolio. The most notable example is all of the packaging design. Because Nokia ships over 400 million phones a year, so there’s significant communication aspects and the experience of the products begins with the packaging, as well as a very significant environmental dimension to that, because how we design the package structurally directly affects how many things are in the air. We have to give box packages that are already assembled before they go to the factory for example. So three areas; industrial design, user experience design, and packaging. My own background is – I think for these kind of roles, all of the paths are quite different. Everything I’ve learnt about – like my own career has been in the – between general management and running start-ups and then in doing design and particularly in doing design of software and surfaces. 2. Social construction of designer – multi disciplinary: What I did was I studied at Columbia University in the city of New York, and my studies were in philosophy, in economics, and in music. And at that time, if you can imagine, I started teaching in 1991 I guess, 1990s, but at that time we’re talking about the very, very early days of – you’re going to the mid-'90s of the worldwide web, the first browsers, a lot of electronic texts at schools. So I started using technologies in teaching humanities and in teaching philosophy and then from those experiences, this was when the web was just starting up, I don’t know where you were when you first saw a mosaic browser, and what – then – but I started working on interaction design of worksites and software at that time, and then instead of pursuing a career in university, I went directly into some of the start-up consultancies that were forming around that time. And at that point, there wasn’t really much work – on local interface design, in fact, even the idea that industrial design was a competitive factor in mobile phones was
357
something that Nokia largely pioneered. But after a certain point I was hired to join a team in Nokia that was looking into disruptive futures and then president of Nokia *00:04:10. From there I was in various design roles, including having design strategy in the industrial design organisation and some complex reworkings of the organisation, there’s been a lot of work on NXC and touch interaction at that point. And then I left Nokia after my first time to be an entrepreneur, and I was in the launch team of a start-up called Blyk, B-L-Y-K, which is still running, it involves quite a bit. The idea was to introduce free mobile services, free text and minutes in exchange for dialog based advertising. The new model for telecom, the new business model for telecom. And then I founded, co-founded a company called Dopplr which was a social media, and in fact for the worlds’ most frequent travellers, the idea was to go for sort of the social aspect of the worlds’… so you could say – let’s say you visit Singapore, and the services where you like to go in Singapore, but you have also visited London and Melbourne. It would then – and you have marked some places – you would then be able to recommend where places similar to you as well as your network would go if you visit Tokyo. So that kind of social aspect of recommendations based on the data of the world’s most frequent travellers. And then two years ago, a little under, Dopplr was acquired by Nokia and then I joined, and for the first time Nokia combined competencies in industrial design, interaction design, and these – this brand experience design into one team. And design reports to the CEO, so I report to Stephen Elop. That’s a quick summary from philosophy and music to – I didn’t really discuss music. I had a parallel percussion lively music while I was at, in university. 3. Inspirations: I think so. It’s interesting you mention Fukasawa. I had not met him until last summer, and I’m an admirer of his work. I think there’s something – I mentioned actually walking around in the *00:15:23 Foundation arranges a symposium every other year on design. And he was speaking there and after his session we took a walk in * and went to * summer home which is the experimental home in *. I don’t know if you know * architecture, but * is an experimental summer home, and experimental means it was like a prototype house. So * would order bricks from this manufacturer that – and literally there’s a wall laid out in different brick and tile, so he’s literally tried out materials and techniques on this summer house. It’s quite an extraordinary place, and we were walking in the garden, talking about this very topic last summer. Obviously I knew what we were about to ship this year, at that time we were very far along in it, but I couldn’t tell him. But I think deeper than; like my short answer to your question is by the way yes, but I think your interpretation of Fukasawa is probably – may require another layer, which is simplicity is yes one thing. But he has a very particular point of view. Which I’m not sure I share, but I think it’s interesting. So he thinks that it’s not so much the simplicity, but actually design is about finding the most natural form of interaction between a human and an object that there is, and it’s a kind of platonic view, meaning that that exists for any major phase of technology. This most natural way that people interact with an object. And once you find it, you’re done. So you aren’t really – this is something, I guess, another lens or filter on that is what him and *[Jasper Morrison]00:17:23 have called supernormal. So I think, my question to him was, do you think, and he believes that this is because the human subconscious has developed in a way that makes it possible for there to be these kinds of most natural or archetypical designs. One of my favourite designs of his, some would it’s not modern design at all, I don’t know if you’ve seen the recent pen sketches by Fukasawa? You have seen those, that he’s drawn?
358
4. Design process of NP: Duration: … So it – under two years, before. And quite some under. And I think if you look at designing a whole new design as an interaction pattern and the hardware and launching that at scale, it’s not about making another – a kind of cheap copy of an existing pattern, which we can do much, much faster. So that’s about the time frame, a year and a half. 5. Revolutionary design: particular kind of project, which is the most ambitious kind, where you’re doing an entire new pattern, combining holistically innovating hardware and software together. There are – like I talk about that in the Copenhagen talk, but essentially, something like an amazing pattern such as a revolutionary pattern in some ways, like the iPhone, a single screen surface and app folders, and one mouse click, which is fantastically simple also, very constrained. I don’t need to go into that now, you can really see it in the talk relatively clearly out there. But there’s been no innovation in that pattern in the last four years. So no marked innovation. So that has been enough to do a radical breakthrough, but essentially the pattern is just now feeling very dated and constrained, and that’s very clear from the feedback of people who use it. It’s very simple, but it’s also very constrained. Similarly, the other big pattern, which is the pattern of Google’s phone as well as many Nokia phone, like the Nokia 700 is multiple home screens with personalisable content on it like the weather widget or things like that. Number of physical keys from which you flip to another screen where you have application. And this pattern as well has not seen any significant change or innovation in the last four years. And the point with the N9 was to introduce a new pattern, and it was driven by the belief that we can design a better way to use a phone. And it’s driven by this thought that in the current industry, we’re still in a period much akin where the automotive industry was in the 1890s. If you recall your automotive history, cars had trailers then. Backwards pillars. The steering wheel took about 15 years to become the dominant user interface design of the automobile. And I think we’re in the middle of that period. And I think the N9 shows that you can design a better interaction pattern. Better in what sense? It’s better for one handed use. I go thought that in the video, why it is stronger. But… 6. Natural form: . I think we have hit on the most natural form of the touch screen interaction model. But it still has, it adds something radically new, which takes away the physical key, and replace it with a gestural interaction that’s also very easy to use with one hand. Therefore, we decided not to mess with all the other metaphors, because we’re introducing radical departure in one area. But we did introduce – we play more on familiar patterns from, not the desktop world, I would think, from the browser world. So have one – there are three new phones use, once you swipe the way of TVs and the videos, particularly the short, two minute video. And one of them is just an *00:25:04 but that’s actually the least of least consequence. In the design. Two other screens. One is an activity screen, where all your notifications are at the top, but then it’s like activity screens for something like Facebook. Or Twitter, or Renren, or Juju, or any – pick your local flavour. This is the user interface that has been the fastest growing pattern on the internet of the last five years, due to the rise of social networking in the different forms. And the other view, the third view in the operating system is that deals with all open applications in chronological, historical order. And this view is again familiar from browsers. So I would say that the metaphors we used have been contemporary web metaphors rather than old desktop metaphors. Which, by the way, it’s a very interesting point, you say. I’m not going to make much of this, but I think most of the two current dominant best patterns would be, certainly the IOS is partly basic because of the desktop mess. And the
359
widgets and homescreens feels like the internet of eight years ago. It’s not a modern internet metaphor. It’s a very dated internet metaphor. So more from the internet than from the desktop. So I hope that answers. But you need to play enough the familiar patterns. It’s like music, you improvise on every dimension, you will loose the listener; sometimes that’s maybe what you want to do, but I think you need to choose which parameters. We chose a radical departure in the pattern. And then, plays to very familiar and quickly growing interfaces in the online world. In the world. 7. Nokia methods of Design: One is, first of all, the only way to design, at least the only way I know, and the only way I actually did it, for a new pattern, is you have to sketch in code. 8. So you have to sketch prototypes competently and again, a lot benefits of that is a theoretical literature about the importance of prototyping and all the rest. I’m more interested in the practical application of it, but basically, it meant that the entire pattern was, as a working prototype, there was very little documentation or description of what we were trying to do in word or in movies or in any other – but literally, there was a prototype, and it constantly evolved, and any time we had a major design decision, we would prototype the alternatives and live with it for a few days, and the design team, potentially show it to confidential outsiders to get some feedback. But as important was the designers themselves would live with it for a while, because you’re talking about a pattern that will be used over days, not just and for hours. That kind of spot study, kind of a more traditional useability study or user feedback session so the continuity of use is important to get a sense of – and then we’ll make a design choice. So this is one dimension. 9. The other has to do with the actual tactility of the experience, and what again, certainly more theoretically is called multi-modalities, so the different senses and modes for these, the UI, and they’re in particular we could do a lot of work in the N9 on the haptic feedback so the user interface itself, when you start application, do that, it has no haptic feedback. You can turn some of it on if you would like, but it’s very smooth. So it doesn’t, it’s really like, it feels, it’s extremely responsive but it doesn’t give. But when you pull up a virtual keyboard, like you’re typing a message, we designed a very subtle haptic, so actually the entire – as you’re touching the keys, it is giving very snappy feedback via the vibration in the device that you are typing. And I think that allows us to improve on the experience of virtual keyboards, which still, in my view can improve a great deal. So we spent a lot of detail, a lot of attention to detail on the haptic feedback, but that doesn’t mean it’s all over the UI, it’s only where it’s particularly relevant to know that you have just pressed a key. 10. Technology: ubiquitous where it is so integrated in our lives that the technology is – we can’t see it? 11. Focussed Attention – Submersive (immersive): Right now, most of the testing interfaces that are out there are…
360
interaction. You don’t have to hit the precise touch target and pay a lot of attention. As often times you need to. And focus more on that. My thought was how can you actually bring more of the interaction off the glass, make it understandable yet still gestural, and essentially give people their head up again, so they can – physically as in the social interactions that they had, because that’s fundamentally related. The latest research in microsociology and high performing teams that we believe in *00:43:35 or other things that we need to be present. And people that are *, that involves things like iPhone and other things. This forms more super-performance in, but you want to take an *. This is not me saying it’s bad that people are no longer looking themselves in the eye, this is rather – if you want to put it this way, we’re alienating ourselves from what would be the more human side, using technology like that. 12. Controlling interruptions: if you can solve that in an elegant way, I think it *00:45:12. Even though this is not a thing that people would immediately clamour for. They wouldn’t say, like, say, could you, could you give me this. Once they get it, they will recognise how good it is. And they will then keep it. So you’re right. I’ll tell you, it would not be fun if it were easy.
Ceremony – cultural understanding - identity
Anggra
1. Why popular: “Probably because of fashion. Fashion icons or something because it is a cool thing to hold an iphone”. 2. Brand vs functionality: “I think there are a few stages for the first few earlier there was a thing called usability and those people who were in the forefront of technology they like to try new things and find it good and probably the second stage is those people found from people the usability is good and then the last people are the ones that are the followers who are the ones who think that they are fashion icons. I see it in that way but then they are some other last people who think ‘oh because too many people are using it, I don’t ‘want to use it.’ 3. Shaping technology: “Well some people I guess see what their friends in the market now because a lot of people now for example a lot of people are getting into Austrade and WINS and similar kind of things and some people so for the market place they see where the trend goes so they try to quit. 4. Trends: “Yes, for example some of our apps are Newsapps and some people do not share the news that they read but now these are standard features that they want you to have. To share your news with other people on Facebook, Twitter.” 5. Future: holding -personalisation “20 years is quite long, long in terms for IT. Even five years is classed as very long. So I am not sure what the ratio is but I think it is more people will hold these and these are standard items for people. Even now mobiles phones in Singapore is more than 100% transmissions or 1% holding ... 6. Habit forming - ritualisation: “Well first I need to know why it is requested and my own requirements and even the market requirements and then I couldn’t see why the fashion requirements then start doing the wide framing for testing and probably we have to do better testing and the users and get their feedback and then after it has been released then follow up and if there are any issues back from the real users and you do improvements”. 7. Tracking: “Yes because sometimes you are doing tracking of user behaviour using
361
certain features”. “We track certain features of their applications. See why the number of ticks or why the stats for so we keep track of those things.” “Yes sometimes, yes there is a trend. Which one is the more users using certain ways and less people using certain.... “ 8. Design and culture: “Probably yes. Yes. An example for okay this example is a language. Some countries you read from right to left so you have to prepare that sort of stuff for example you do for [Wikiis] okay for example if you switch to another language then some of the characters have been cut off so you have to take care of that and then I think some of the
Ruth
1. Multidisciplinary: “It has become modern, just the hardware. In fact the software is as important, or even more important I think, because it’s mostly about the interface, how you interact with the software but of course the hardware is important, but the software is equally not as important I think” 2. Design culturally specific: “Yes actually there is quite a few difference when it comes to different cultures how they perceive a mobile phone. For example someone in Europe has grown up with technology since they were young and they appreciate aesthetics that maybe someone from China doesn’t and vice versa, because they’re from such different backgrounds. You’d be surprised at how they perceive - their perception of aesthetics is very different, and in China, India, Europe especially yeah. I think China and India are quite different in their own aesthetics from the rest of the world.” 3. Nokia in China: Okay Nokia still has a bigger market share but I think iPhone is getting traction here and just like it is getting traction in a lot of other countries, so you see a lot of people using both over here, but I think that the branding is very different so the people’s – I guess they target at different segments as well because iPhone doesn’t really target at the lower tier cities, the emerging market, so that’s a very different market that Nokia is very strong in. “Actually something to take note is that because Chinese, they need to write Chinese characters so sometimes you have to take that into account, so that really makes a huge difference between a Chinese consumer and someone who maybe types in English, so they have different needs in the mobile phone because of their cultural background”.
362
4. Cult: “I think iPhone is kind of achieving that, but I don’t think the cult status is from the industrial design but it’s through the software, the applications, like for example I have an iPhone and I have this application called WhatsApp so I can chat with my friends who have this application as well but it’s not exclusive to iPhone, you can download it on other phones, so I would think the cult status is more from the applications. 5. Apps made device: “Yes I think so, it’s increasingly more important and of course the phone, the role of the device is to facilitate use of these apps as easily as possible I think, and I think the phone is supposed to help organise all these apps, all the nice - whatever the consumer needs to do on the cell phone well enough so I think that increasingly becomes - that is going this direction increasingly I think. 6. Is it a phone”: “Yeah it has become more like an organiser or a PDA or a mini computer, but on the other hand I think; because you did already state in your research what is your specific area in the sense it’s a broad area of telecommunication devices right? 7. Future: “What do I think? I think it’s quite hard to say but I think definitely thinner, more efficient, longer battery life, things like that are a given that I think every brand is trying to improve, but I think the emotional part is important. I think in the near future, maybe not too distant the interfaces may be made to be more human and emotional I think, so when you are interacting with a phone you are kind of interacting with a friend instead of a device. 8. Ritual as in personality: “I think not really. I think for me maybe also more emotional in a sense that when I approach a new project I think there’s no standard steps that go through my mind to start the design but it’s more like what is jumping out at me as a starting point because we need a starting point for everything and sometimes it could be something about the target market, it could be something I saw yesterday, it could be something I read last week, so for me I don’t think that is a ritual.” 9. Design ritual: “I think definitely I think it could be possible I guess, but it could be a little too steep I think if you just follow the ritual. Is it like - I don’t know I’m just thinking you are just thinking of a computer program that can - that you can program to come up with a design after you put in all the information and you just let the [glitch] the info and then it produces a design. 10. Design instils ritual in consumer: “I think I’d call that an addiction, not a ritual. “I think, for example the people who keep checking Facebook, whether they have responses from friends, it stems from emotion, they want to be popular, they want to be accepted, they yearn to maybe have people who admire them or things like that, so I stem from something quite deep emotionally so that this ritual can be established. Yeah I’m not sure industrial design can do that, I think it has to be more interaction design and everything”. 11. Ecosystem company culture: I wasn’t working for Sony Erickson, I was working for an agency that was appointed by Sony Erickson. So in that case, at least back then Sony Erickson outsourced some designers. But they still control kind of the direction. So you can see how sometimes it’s even not done by an internal designer. So usually there may be two designers working on one product, but then you have inputs from the mechanical people, whether they are able to materialise the design, because it depends a lot on whether we can get production on this, the skill of production, the distribution and things like that. So there are a lot of factors that goes into one product. But if you are talking about from an industrial design point of view, usually maybe two designers, with inputs from maybe one manager or two
363
managers, things like that.
James
1. Ceremony of influence:” Well, I’d say James: Dyson was quite a big influence, although he wasn’t very well known. There were David Carter, who is a professor at the Royal College of Art, who is very well known and quite a big influence at that time. He ran the course at that stage as well. I’m trying to think who else there was around. Danny Vile, who was a very famous industrial designer at the time. I’m trying to remember people’s names. The guy who did the fold-up bike. He was always around at that time coming into the course and the lectures. What’s his name? Mark Saunders. “I suppose those guys were an influence because they were always there and many of them were cheaters I guess, who had been very successful in their careers and I suppose from where I’d come from, which was probably a more technological background and engineering background, was to look broader at things, like the commercial aspects and the viewpoint of the customer and getting into the market place and testing ideas and understanding what would work and what wouldn’t work. Because, I think as a student then you tend to look a bit arrogant and you’re always thinking you’ve got the best thing since sliced bread, so you know, which was great having that sort of energy and enthusiasm and their influence was really in directing that in the right way and asking the right questions and keeping a little bit of pressure in the right direction. 2. Social Construction of designer: And I guess there were people outside of the RCA who were an influence as well, but I think more than the people, it was probably the products that were around that were more influential at that time and the internet was coming on board and in sort of the mid-90s was starting to become a big thing and that was just opening a lot of people’s ideas on how that new technology can solve the world’s problems. So, a lot of people were very interested in ideas and now it’s sort of mainstream and working, but then were people come up with an idea and go, “How in the hell’s that going to work?” There was nothing around that could make that work, you know. So, there’s a lot of that going on which was quite exciting, but as I’ve said, a lot of arguments at the same time. It’s going to work. This is going to happen, see in 10 years time. It’s going to be brilliant. The product, I think and the technology that was around, was more influential and sort of the banter between the students and a lot of courses going on there. There’s a very sort of rich environment for people for coming up with new ideas and talking about stuff and bouncing ideas of each other and copying other people’s ideas, you know, that sort of environment, which you don’t really get in the professional workplace so much. 3. Japan: Yeah. Well actually, I went to Japan for six months for a short period. I went to work for a company called Saka su yi jue shi that did garden furniture, as a result of winning a design competition at the RCA and then went to work with James: Dyson. He’d just set up his factory in Chippenham doing vacuum cleaners. 4. Japan culture and simplification: Yeah, I think so. I think there is definitely different aspects that are brought into the design. Difficult to put my finger on exactly what it is. I mean, if you’re looking at sort of the aesthetics of it, the industrial design of it, I suppose it’s the sort of nuances from what is around then at the time. Because we’d look at something that a Japanese person had designed and think, well that doesn’t really look like, because we view it in the context of our environment and where we live. For example, at that time they were designing some fencing for public spaces
364
that was very sort of high-tech. It was sort of machined aluminium universal joints with extruded aluminium posts, which was a very sort of industrial look, you know, very pure, hard-edged industrial look. And I remember thinking at the time, that’s really ugly, you know. That would never fit in an English village with picket fencing and all the rest of it. But, I actually haven’t been there, you know, watching how they all loved it and the environment where these were going to be placed and the sort of general Japanese psyche of high-tech, hard-edged industrial look was good. And then I think that changes over time as well. I think that’s changed quite a lot over the last 20 years. So, the influence around the world is all mixed up, you know. I think there’s a lot more cross-fertilisation. 5. I think there’s definitely more focus in China now on delivering products that are more tailored to the Chinese market, for example, cars. I think you’ll find that a lot of cars now, like Jaguar and those sort of cars that are designed and built in the UK, actually a lot of the design influences and details are driven by what Chinese consumers want, rather than western consumers. 6. Creating a culture: Yeah, that’s right. The Nokia boss called it a sort of micro eco system. You have to have the whole eco system around the phone to make it a success and Nokia doesn’t have that and Ericsson don’t have that and Sony don’t have it. Although Ericsson’s embedded in Sony, they’ve never managed to seamlessly integrate all these aspects. 7. Apple culture: Well Apples are strange like that, because I think people sort of eulogise about the design of Apples, but as I say, I kind of think they’re okay, but they’re sort of designed to look, first impressions, wow that looks great. Sort of aluminium and very fine details, but actually below that which is your interface with it and how you pick it up and interface with it and put it down on the table, hasn’t been very well thought out at all. And yeah, I think it’s quite common with Apple stuff actually. 8. That’s what apple have done so brilliantly, is to say our phones are so brilliantly designed. Look. And you go, wow, yeah. And then you have a go with it and you go, fuckin hell, it really is annoying. But they seem to have done quite well despite that, whereas I think a lot of other companies this was done the other way around. Ericsson or Nokia for example – actually I think Nokia are not terribly good either, but I think Ericsson spent a lot more time trying to work out the layout below the sort of industrial design, that how big does someone’s finger have to be to be able to press the button and how does it feel nice and can I put it on the table and can I plug that in. Anyway, that was not answering your question. 9. Product cycle – ceremony of life and death: Well I guess what I have seen is that those designers who have been very successful are the designers who are able to look holistically at the whole product life cycle. I think the days have gone where you did sort of pigeon hole the front end and industrial designer. He sort of sits in a nice office with green sofas and sky lights and comes up with genius ideas. I think for a designer, or certainly a front end designer to be successful, he’s got to understand the full product cycle and the life cycle of the product in the market, which is not an easy thing to do because he’s also got to detach himself from that and come up with blue sky ideas that means he can identify a feature that’s going to get people excited that no one’s ever thought about, but to do that, he’s got to map it within the context of the real world structure and to know whether something’s going to be successful or not. Whether someone’s already tried it or not and what did that do in the market and know where he can get his market information from and be very sort of data driven in decisions they’re making about whether something’s going to be successful and how
365
much it’s going to cost them. What the likely downsides are. So it’s less experimental I think nowadays. It’s more experience and data driven assessments of ideas and concepts and technology. 10. Social status and identity [larger in Asia than Europe] With the product they buy, yeah. Very, very much so. It’s all about the what you wear and the phone you use and the car you drive. I mean, you get that in the west, but it’s overdrive over here I think, which is why all these companies are doing so well, you know, BMW and Swiss watches, because people just pay whatever to get those products to show how successful they are. 11. T10 culture changes: China not successful for the newer model because of the re- modification of the t10 nothing new. T10 china version had a panda on the opening screen.
Michelle
1. Personalisation: Skin products for Asian skin or dark complexions. Products or devices that you have around with you more become more personal. You interact with them more and therefore affect you or you affect it. This leads to personalisation and customisation, which is a normal process for people who interact with a device or product more. (This means having it with you most of the time). Personalisation is ok, it has always been around. However you can have a lot of interaction with a photocopier but you can also be quite detached to it. The more you carry the product or device the more you both interact and it will affect you. The things that you carry identify who you are. 2. Trends: OK, I do see the trends of moving towards the usage of iPhone and iPad and I agree that Apple has definitely changed the whole interaction experience of with these products. There are very few companies who dare to go in this direction. Who would have thought about using "swiping" action? As a working designer, we have to be aware of these technological changes, as this will also affect the design of other products. Already, we can see that many things thought impossible in the not so long past have now become the norm. (e-books, paperless stuff, etc) You might think this is strange but I do not own either of both products. Not that I do not feel that they are not good, but I have a personal challenge wondering how long I can do without these items. That being said, it was a big big challenge to do an app when I had no experience then using the iphone on a full time basis. What happened during the project was that I was using a set to test the app.
Marko
1. Nokia Company ceremony: Essentially the design of the software, and all the user interfaces, the core user interface as well as the services that would integrate there, as well as elements in the experience of the Nokia products that run across the entire portfolio. The most notable example is all of the packaging design. Because Nokia ships over 400 million phones a year, so there’s significant communication aspects and the experience of the products begins with the packaging, as well as a very significant environmental dimension to that, because how we design the package structurally directly affects how many things are in the air. We have to give box packages that are already assembled before they go to the factory for example. So three areas; industrial design, user experience design, and packaging. My own
366
background is – I think for these kind of roles, all of the paths are quite different. Everything I’ve learnt about – like my own career has been in the – between general management and running start-ups and then in doing design and particularly in doing design of software and surfaces. 2. Nokia Culture of design: One is, first of all, the only way to design, at least the only way I know, and the only way I actually did it, for a new pattern, is you have to sketch in code. So you have to sketch prototypes competently and again, a lot benefits of that is a theoretical literature about the importance of prototyping and all the rest. I’m more interested in the practical application of it, but basically, it meant that the entire pattern was, as a working prototype, there was very little documentation or description of what we were trying to do in word or in movies or in any other – but literally, there was a prototype, and it constantly evolved, and any time we had a major design decision, we would prototype the alternatives and live with it for a few days, and the design team, potentially show it to confidential outsiders to get some feedback. But as important was the designers themselves would live with it for a while, because you’re talking about a pattern that will be used over days, not just and for hours. That kind of spot study, kind of a more traditional useability study or user feedback session so the continuity of use is important to get a sense of – and then we’ll make a design choice. So this is one dimension. The other has to do with the actual tactility of the experience, and what again, certainly more theoretically is called multi-modalities, so the different senses and modes for these, the UI, and they’re in particular we could do a lot of work in the N9 on the haptic feedback so the user interface itself, when you start application, do that, it has no haptic feedback. You can turn some of it on if you would like, but it’s very smooth. So it doesn’t, it’s really like, it feels, it’s extremely responsive but it doesn’t give. But when you pull up a virtual keyboard, like you’re typing a message, we designed a very subtle haptic, so actually the entire – as you’re touching the keys, it is giving very snappy feedback via the vibration in the device that you are typing. And I think that allows us to improve on the experience of virtual keyboards, which still, in my view can improve a great deal. So we spent a lot of detail, a lot of attention to detail on the haptic feedback, but that doesn’t mean it’s all over the UI, it’s only where it’s particularly relevant to know that you have just pressed a key.
Connectivity – external - interface
Anggra
1. Directing user function: “Sometimes. We sometimes we have to educate the users on how to do certain things and okay hey this is the better way to do things instead of long convoluted ways and sometimes it is the other way round and we have to see normally how people expect things to be done.” 2. Tracking: “Yes because sometimes you are doing tracking of user behaviour using certain features”. “We track certain features of their applications. See why the number of ticks or why the stats for so we keep track of those things.” “Yes sometimes, yes there is a trend. Which one is the more users using certain ways and less people using certain.... “”Those things sometimes make sense but sometimes it doesn’t make sense but well we have to explore, is that the right way that they do ...” 3. Signature: “Like how we organised the interface we thought it was the best way, for
367
example, the buttons arrangements for example you expect okay one is obvious on the ipad you would have thought people would notice the buttons on the bottom but nobody could find then so the buttons are quite small. It is different from the iphone because you see one glass is everything”. “People thought where is this function, and we just say there is the button have a look at the bottom but they never noticed it.” 4. Integration and itunes and a differentiator: It is a full complete experience of the user so everything is integrated. You don’t need to see how to do this and how to do that you see it in one place you get music, you get movies, you even get books in one place it is integrated.” “Yes it is easier for us so we don’t have to run around everywhere to get a lot of things done, yeah.”
Ruth
1. Manipulation, politics: Okay I think from the industrial design point of view, that is just the hardware point of view, you can manipulate visually how someone perceives a feature. For example if the phone has a screen that is not quite the biggest in the market but you design the phone in such a way that it makes the screen look bigger maybe, or if the device is not that thin but you design it in such a way that visually it tricks the eyes to perceive it as thinner than it actually is because of some curves or you know, things like that, I think that’s possible but in terms of manipulating them to buy it, I think that”…” Yeah, but of course if they’re attracted to it visually, I think that’s the first step”. 2. Engagement: “Yeah definitely. I think this is a very important aspect of the design of a mobile phone because it’s such a small device that it has to feel good in your hand and it has to be convenient as in you need to feel good about pressing the buttons, you need to have feedback on the buttons. For example like a qwerty phone, you’re not just talking about just touch phones, qwerty phones, the keys are very important because that’s the purpose of a qwerty phone, to be able to type fast and accurately and yeah, so all these are very important. So we defiantly need to consider that from the start”. 3. “There’s definitely a department that do the software, the human interaction. We call it the user interface design. Well at the moment I think we don’t work as close as I think we should. We are in different departments and we kind of just do our own job and then put them together, although we do align along the way, like the colours, the overall feel of the phone, maybe it’s youthful or it’s professional, or things like that, but because we are in different departments we don’t really interact that often.
James
1. Actually I think the design’s okay. I mean, if you look at the first few I think the design was okay and then there were sort of fundamental errors with it like you can’t change the battery and actually it doesn’t sit flat on the table, you notice. It wobbles around, so you can’t really type. And actually typing’s not great, you know. Actually the detailed functionality is okay. I mean, there’s better phones on the market, but these are interfaced. They link with iTunes and they link with this application store. The user interface is very straightforward and easy to use. 2. Wearable:No, no really, because we found that people don’t really want to wear the same jacket every day. And actually, when they go walking through a park and they’ve got their sunglasses on, they actually get pretty pissed when this thing comes up and says that you’ve got a phone call. There’s a fine line between being immersed
368
in it and being comfortably detached from technology and I don’t think we’ve really worked out what that is. I think as designers and technologists, I think we’d love for people just to totally immerse themselves in it all the time and that instant gratification and communication all the time instantly. I can’t see that happening, because humans are animals and whether we know it or not, we need space and time to think. Well, I do anyway. I find that I can happily live without an iPhone, because I don’t need that continuous interface. I had a Blackberry phone for a while and Jesus, that would really piss me off. James: little red blinking light that tells you you have an email message in the middle of the night and then you’re there, God, I can’t do this anymore. I just don’t need this constantly on. 3. Polyphonics. Yeah.[the senses] Yes. That’s very much so, yeah. The feel and the warmth of it and how it sits in your hand. Noise is becoming more and more important. I’m sure it still is important in mobile phones and in general product development. Customers are very, very sensitive about noise these days, everything from, you know, if you’re clicking down the flip on the phone does it go in a nice wafty movement and nice quality feel or is it a few clicks and a grunchy bit at the end, or when I twist it does it feel solid, does it sound solid. 4. Ceremony of economic driven design: Absolutely, yeah. It’s all about cost really and reliability. I mean, that’s the other aspect that people don’t really consider, is reliability of products. And more so I think in the market place now you see products with warranties on them and a few people are a lot more discerning and I’m sure they are with mobile phones as well about them lasting more than six months before they fall over. I think probably customers are getting much more demanding in the quality of the products that they get nowadays, because they’re not cheap you know. Dysons aren’t cheap and mobile phones aren’t cheap. I think people are prepared to pay the price, whatever, to show that they earn a lot of money. Social status. But I think that’s changed a bit now.
Marko
1. Interaction: I don’t think, it’s a new discipline. So it’s not as if it… Well, I think when I started, there wasn’t a place to go to study it, so you worked on it, in the early days of the web, and focal interaction design, we worked on actually in the companies. Nokia helped, we had one of the better teams at that point. And then of course, I guess, the one important bit of context over the top left
369
pattern. Better in what sense? It’s better for one handed use. I go thought that in the video, why it is stronger. But… [metaphors for touch screen]I think when you’re doing mass scale products, you have to – I mean, we’re better off operating in the mainstream of technology use. You need to make sure that – line in the N9, we introduce a new way to, the overall interaction pattern phase. So in order to go home, you just swipe the lens of the screen, below the physical model, and this was – I’ll come back to it, but this is what I said to Naoto Fukasawa in the garden at *00:23:42 experimental summer home. I said you think our subconscious has developed enough that you apply the same thinking, mainly, finding the most natural pattern, also to the interface design of a product. Which he has done much less of… Than… And he’s kind of pious, and he’s like, oh, maybe now that we have the touch screen, that is so natural and direct. And I told him then, Naoto Fukasawa, I come to see you in Tokyo next year. 3. Submersive and attention: Right now, most of the testing interfaces that are out there are…
Connectivity – Internal
Anggra
1. Web OS” It is a new OS brought out by Palm and bought over by HP its for mobile phone service so it is the trend now is iphone OS or android.”
Contexts - Perspective and perception
Anggra
370
1. Mirroring perception or feedback: “For Apple I think it is more who do more of the controlling factor instead of getting feedback so they are. They listen to feedback but not very often, yeah only when people voice things up, then they start to listen.”
Ruth
11. Context of unsuccessful design: Definitely the designs of the devices that did do as well as projected but it depends a lot on a lot, but I mean it depends on a lot of factors. I think it’s hard to pinpoint what is wrong, what went wrong, for example it could be the design, it could be the features or it could be that this competitor product that do the same thing but cost less, or even the distribution where maybe a competitor was able to reach to a consumer before you or things like that, so it’s actually quite complex and yeah, so it’s hard to pinpoint what is the cause of the failure because there’s so many components and parts that makes up a product. 12. Design outcome (feedback) “] Let me think. I think as a designer, the question is probably whether the user actually gets the intention of the designer. Because sometimes we assume that people react to certain things, but because of cultural differences or even because as designers sometimes we are too into details, we can tell the difference between Ruth and B, but actually maybe to a layman, you can’t tell the difference. So things like that. So that is something that I would like to know, so whether they actually get the intention behind what we do, and whether they even notice the softer designs, the details here and there, and whether it makes a difference to their experience. Whether the design intention is transferred to the end user.
James
1. Culture contexts: Yeah. The reasons I don’t really know and that sort of stipulates because Japan economy was doing very well and they’re all really into high-tech and selling it and new cars and the general Japanese mentality was all about success and forward thinking and industrial looking products that sort of reflected this success. Whereas in the UK, I think it was more sort of comfort with the familiar I think maybe. 2. Walkman . The walkman was sort of mid-80s, wasn’t it, when that really came out. Eighty-six, something like 85 maybe. Yeah, I guess, it’s a strange thing that though because it was sort of market leader. It was the first one into the market, so it sort of sets the market. They could probably have made it look like an apple or a banana or something and put it into the market and that would have been the sort of look that would have succeeded, because it was the technology that people were interested in because it gave them such a huge benefit over anything that had been designed before. 3. Design Intention: “Well, there’s always been cases where we’ve been designing it to make people feel empathy. I’m trying to think of an example. I mean, most of that work was really done at the Royal College of Art, where sort of designing products to make people feel emotions rather than to feel that practical side of it and one of the things I looked at was a mobile phone that gave off emotions, rather than a telephone call or something. You designed it so that you’d dial someone’s number and if they had one of these things in their pocket, it would warm up or it would vibrate. You don’t know who’s rung you, but you think, someone’s thinking of me. So, trying to communicate those emotions rather than voice driven facts, you know, whatever.
371
And I guess that followed on a little bit into Ericsson about trying to introduce that sort of functionality into mobile phones. The trouble with Ericsson is a very sort of functional based business. These were great ideas that we always bounced around and had fun with, but at the end of the day you write down a specification of what you want the product to do from a very detailed, technical level and actually that is quite interesting. You don’t really capture these emotional, industrial designed look and feel aspects in the design specification. They tend to be left out to hard and fast technical aspects which deliver a measurable result, whereas the industrial design doesn’t do that and doesn’t really feature in that specification of the product. That’s a very difficult one to answer that. I mean, the answer is yes, it was designed to make people feel sympathetic. I mean, when I was in China working for Ericsson we tried to design mobile phones that would appeal to the Chinese person and I remember having this conversation with the director of Panda, who was a joint venture company at the time. So, what do China’s people want in their phones? What makes them feel like it attracts to them? And he said, “Just make it look like a Japanese phone.” I said, “Right, okay. Well, what do the Japanese want on their phones? What makes them feel like they really love their phones?” He said, “Well, it’s got to have a lot of chrome on it and it’s got to have some nice little start up scripts on the front. On the user interface a little panda comes up and sings a song or something like that.” It’s really getting under the skin of what the Chinese people want. But then if you went into the market and we asked people what do you want and go to the store in China where they sell thousands of these phones and go, well what do you want and what do you like and why do you like it? So, I like that one with the chrome on because it looks expensive and looks like a kind of a prestige thing. The more flashy it looks, the more I look like I earn more money than you. China was a fairly unsophisticated brief, if you like, to try and make a phone that someone would want to buy, whereas in the west it’s probably a bit more sophisticated. 4. Identity – personalising: Well, I think yeah, it is interesting but I think if you look at a mobile phone it has to satisfy so many different demands for people. This is a conversation about functionality and doing what it says it does. Put that to one side. Actually the reasons why people buy a mobile phone are numerous. It wants to reflect how much they earn and it wants to give them sort of emotional support. They want it for entertainment. It will do as an alarm clock in the morning, I don’t know. There’s a toy to play with a dog and there’s so many different ways that people can use their mobile phones and how they become emotionally attached to it for whatever reason. But I can see that’s such a huge opportunity for people to allow people to tailor it to sort of match their personality and what they use it for. So, it is interesting, which I find iPhone quite interesting because it’s such a bland block, you know. It’s just a square, black block with a black screen on it and it’s sort of characterless and emotionless and yet people love it and I mean, I suppose you can snap covers onto it, but the only thing you can really do to it is just change the standby screen or whatever. The colours on the screen. But I guess that’s where the iPhone is so successful is because you can download all these apps and you can make it do exactly what you want it to do. It’s very expensive for a start. It already ticks the boxes of making, you know, social status and all the rest of it and you can totally adapt it to be a really funky alarm clock or ring your cat up at home and feed the dog or whatever, all these things, you know, check the bank balance and all these things you want it to do it does for you.
372
Michelle
1. Problems: You have to be honest and truthful. Bad design doesn’t sell and with consultancy you can have a product that looks good but doesn’t meet the client’s requirements. Such as the bottle of bath product. The material looks good but is too expensive. 2. Economics K: economics and politics is a factor Yes you are restrained by economics and social factors come into account. For instance in different regions of the world may require measurements in mls rather than ounces on a feeding bottle
Marko
1. Design Success: There’s never a guarantee with a – first of all, there’s still other dimensions that have nothing to do with the users that determine success in mobile telephones. Including operator interest in product, different software platform, emphasis and choice. One great example is the – I think many people in the design and technology community vote that Palm’s web OS was a significant innovation. And it did not succeed. And so but I wouldn’t put that up to users not liking it. There were perhaps some issues with the marketing of it but I would just say that there are also dimensions that have nothing to do with user adoption and joy and desire and all the rest that affect success. Which in that case had a lot to do with channel and finding and many other things. However, obviously the then, when you’re far enough, *00:35:54 so if you’re inventing an essential simplification and a pattern, you of course observe people before you start doing it. But the pattern itself will not come from bottom up, from atomic observation of what people do. That has to be – that’s a designers act, to hit on maybe first 15 different canvases for the simplification and then you prototype all of them and then you keep iterating. So the pattern won’t come just by taking a video camera and doing stenography. You need a designer’s point of view in it. Once you have then settled on that, of course you keep testing, testing, testing constantly. And that’s the same thing we did with the N9 and having seen now hundreds of sessions of feedback on it, I’m convinced that the user adoption side of it is definitely – people sense that it has the following quality – once you see it, you wonder why anybody did it a different way ever, before. Like why didn’t somebody think of this earlier, because this is natural. And then when you go back, let’s say you, hypothetically, you were an iPhone 4 user, and after using the… using the… 2. [social ritualism] mass is relevant, if the social interaction aspect of mobile phones will not go away. What’s certain is it will change shape. What shape it changes to, I don’t – I talked a little bit about the activity stream. Facebook will certainly evolve, what the activity stream is like, because it’s become like a noisy firehose, that they need to – and which they will, no doubt, evolve, to be something more relevant, but even there, I think those modes will change. And it will be interesting to see which companies will be able to ride the waves, and of course, some big ones, including a company like Facebook can impact how we would interact by changing their platform because they have so many users, but that still doesn’t mean that people can’t walk away, and go to something new. So I think that’s perhaps the thing that – it’s the social functionalities in the big devices that may change quite a bit. The ritual surrounds them, and like you said, how present people can be. But this is in a way,
373
just the same thing that we said to each other over the last hour. Not having something deeply new. But we take that approach. I don’t think – I wouldn’t say a term like ritual are central bits of the vocabulary, I think the key thing for us, and this isn’t just a theory, it’s an everyday thing, is when you’re making the design choices, you live with the artefact in prototype form. So you literally prototype, you sketch in codes, so that you can then make better decisions and actually understand what the brief was. So you have to build – if you want to use the idea for it, build the thing, but that’s the general designer’s sense, and I’m just saying that the same applies to – we’re all familiar with some form of industrial design, there’s prototyping and material, but the same applies, if not more, to the interaction design and the patterns.
Simplification
Anggra
1. “Okay it is easier as it is instant on and you so you don’t have to wait for it to boot up. Somehow it is more specialised. Uses for split functions and it does it well. It is not a generic multi purpose device which you have to learn a lot of things or if you design your application well so minimum training for your staff.” 2. Users like simplicity: “Yes. If you do it simpler, easier and with better things, rather than they follow fashions and they don’t really work...” 3. Nokia: “Well like they say if you try to be a master of all trades you will never be very good at one thing so if you try to be good at all things but you are not very good at it so. Unless you are moving towards a certain platform for example for me once the conventions begins probably we will see more things, more interesting things yes.” 4. Web OS: “It is a new OS brought out by Palm and bought over by HP its for mobile phone service so it is the trend now is iphone OS or android.
James
1. Japan culture and simplification: Yeah, I think so. I think there is definitely different aspects that are brought into the design. Difficult to put my finger on exactly what it is. I mean, if you’re looking at sort of the aesthetics of it, the industrial design of it, I suppose it’s the sort of nuances from what is around then at the time. Because we’d look at something that a Japanese person had designed and think, well that doesn’t really look like, because we view it in the context of our environment and where we live. For example, at that time they were designing some fencing for public spaces that was very sort of high-tech. It was sort of machined aluminium universal joints with extruded aluminium posts, which was a very sort of industrial look, you know, very pure, hard-edged industrial look. And I remember thinking at the time, that’s really ugly, you know. That would never fit in an English village with picket fencing and all the rest of it. But, I actually haven’t been there, you know, watching how they all loved it and the environment where these were going to be placed and the sort of general Japanese psyche of high-tech, hard-edged industrial look was good. And then I think that changes over time as well. I think that’s changed quite a lot
374
over the last 20 years. So, the influence around the world is all mixed up, you know. I think there’s a lot more cross-fertilisation. 2. Feature saturation: [ I use for telephone] I think 99.9% of the rest of the world does the same I think, until the iPhone came along and then everyone’s checking their bank balances and all the rest of it. But the iPhone’s quite interesting like that, because it’s easy. You can decide to have that feature or not and actually you can delete it. You can download some really obscure program that allows you to switch the lights off at home or something and decide to take it off, whereas before, it was all these features that have been jam packed and squeezed into phones because that’s what everybody wanted. And we don’t really know what people want because we can’t really segment the market, so we’d just better keep squeezing all this other stuff in just to make sure that we keep everyone happy. And then they became more and more complicated. The user interface becomes more and more complicated and all these features get buried in these layers of menus and sort of complicated settings to the point where, for God sake, I can’t be bothered with any of this. I’ll just use it to make a phone call. 3. Devices are getting simpler in their design. Ipod design, nothing is really new. Some of the designs have been informed on from the past. Design is simply problem solving – using design models for information management in order to make access and productivity simpler is feasible
Marko
1. Essential simplification: [essential simplification]. Which acts like – that runs like some sort of thread through the design. This is true of extraordinary buildings, great product design. And this essential simplification is partly a conceptual exercise and from my point of view, it’s really the same thing that you do in philosophy and design. That some people, those that haven’t studied philosophy would look with a blank stare, what’s – it’s different, it’s something very – but you’re of course – the difference is – just excuse me. So I think they’re very similar. The sort of work. I think it has influenced a lot. Music is maybe, I think, I’d say, sort of with the essential simplification. Let me give an example. I don’t know – have you – if you’re familiar with our recent launch of product, the N9? So I urge you for a lot of the thinking that I’m sharing with you, I urge you to look at the video I just did of a talk at Copenhagen Design Week. They’re 35 minutes long, but if I give you a web address, would you write it down? 2. the essential simplification on
375
– and so I admire his work. I do think that there is a tendency for reduction, and then, *00:18:42 has this saying that the role of the designer is to bring a gentler structure to life and then he was definitely, I talk a little bit about this in the Copenhagen talk, that architecture being a human fundamental so I’m interested in making those things better that people use 50 to several hundred times a day. Hence the interest in the swipe gesture as a way of simplifying how you use a phone. But you’ll see in the N9, we did a lot of work to reduce and take away, but still maintaining flexibility. 4. Natural form: I think we have hit on the most natural form of the touch screen interaction model. But it still has, it adds something radically new, which takes away the physical key, and replace it with a gestural interaction that’s also very easy to use with one hand. Therefore, we decided not to mess with all the other metaphors, because we’re introducing radical departure in one area. But we did introduce – we play more on familiar patterns from, not the desktop world, I would think, from the browser world. So have one – there are three new phones use, once you swipe the way of TVs and the videos, particularly the short, two minute video. And one of them is just an *00:25:04 but that’s actually the least of least consequence. In the design. Two other screens. One is an activity screen, where all your notifications are at the top, but then it’s like activity screens for something like Facebook. Or Twitter, or Renren, or Juju, or any – pick your local flavour. This is the user interface that has been the fastest growing pattern on the internet of the last five years, due to the rise of social networking in the different forms. And the other view, the third view in the operating system is that deals with all open applications in chronological, historical order. And this view is again familiar from browsers. So I would say that the metaphors we used have been contemporary web metaphors rather than old desktop metaphors. Which, by the way, it’s a very interesting point, you say. I’m not going to make much of this, but I think most of the two current dominant best patterns would be, certainly the IOS is partly basic because of the desktop mess. And the widgets and homescreens feels like the internet of eight years ago. It’s not a modern internet metaphor. It’s a very dated internet metaphor. So more from the internet than from the desktop. So I hope that answers. But you need to play enough the familiar patterns. It’s like music, you improvise on every dimension, you will loose the listener; sometimes that’s maybe what you want to do, but I think you need to choose which parameters. We chose a radical departure in the pattern. And then, plays to very familiar and quickly growing interfaces in the online world. In the world.
Use_ Engagement – (Interface)
Ruth
4. Manipulation, politics: Okay I think from the industrial design point of view, that is just the hardware point of view, you can manipulate visually how someone perceives a feature. For example if the phone has a screen that is not quite the biggest in the market but you design the phone in such a way that it makes the screen look bigger maybe, or if the device is not that thin but you design it in such a way that visually it tricks the eyes to perceive it as thinner than it actually is because of some curves or you know, things like that, I think that’s possible but in terms of manipulating them to buy it, I think that”…” Yeah, but of course if they’re attracted to it visually, I think
376
that’s the first step”. 5. Engagement: “Yeah definitely. I think this is a very important aspect of the design of a mobile phone because it’s such a small device that it has to feel good in your hand and it has to be convenient as in you need to feel good about pressing the buttons, you need to have feedback on the buttons. For example like a qwerty phone, you’re not just talking about just touch phones, qwerty phones, the keys are very important because that’s the purpose of a qwerty phone, to be able to type fast and accurately and yeah, so all these are very important. So we defiantly need to consider that from the start”. 6. “There’s definitely a department that do the software, the human interaction. We call it the user interface design. Well at the moment I think we don’t work as close as I think we should. We are in different departments and we kind of just do our own job and then put them together, although we do align along the way, like the colours, the overall feel of the phone, maybe it’s youthful or it’s professional, or things like that, but because we are in different departments we don’t really interact that often”. 7. Personalities: “Yeah we always give them personalities to kind of have, we need to have a big picture of what this phone should be, so that personality is given right from the start from the marketing team actually, and of course the design team will fine tune it or add more, or give our own feedback or suggestion, and we try to have a personality so that everything can be aligned to that.” Schemata of designer embeds: “Yeah I think a lot depends on the company culture as well, I mean if the company or the brand that you are working for values innovation, or whether they value efficiency or things like that, I think it makes a lot of difference to how the devices turn out as well. 8. Characters: The voice “I think it is but at the moment I think there are tests done online whereby they will test which phone is the loudest, or if this phone is louder compared to the other competitor and they compare all sorts of things because the competition is just so great. So I think every single specification is important to - well you may not need to be the best but you had to make sure you are not one of the worst in terms of each and every respect, so I think definitely. “And the quality of the voice, that depends on the mechanical team. So it’s really a lot of people involved”. 9. Evolution of device: “Yeah I think because this device has evolved quite a bit since the early days, and I think this emotional thing will be important in the future because - this is becoming more important because that is usually where we get too technological, we will want to get back to something more human and that can be something to differentiate yourself from the competitors.
James
5. Actually I think the design’s okay. I mean, if you look at the first few I think the design was okay and then there were sort of fundamental errors with it like you can’t change the battery and actually it doesn’t sit flat on the table, you notice. It wobbles around, so you can’t really type. And actually typing’s not great, you know. Actually the detailed functionality is okay. I mean, there’s better phones on the market, but these are interfaced. They link with iTunes and they link with this application store. The user interface is very straightforward and easy to use. 6. Wearables: No, no really, because we found that people don’t really want to wear the same jacket every day. And actually, when they go walking through a park and they’ve got their sunglasses on, they actually get pretty pissed when this thing comes
377
up and says that you’ve got a phone call. There’s a fine line between being immersed in it and being comfortably detached from technology and I don’t think we’ve really worked out what that is. I think as designers and technologists, I think we’d love for people just to totally immerse themselves in it all the time and that instant gratification and communication all the time instantly. I can’t see that happening, because humans are animals and whether we know it or not, we need space and time to think. Well, I do anyway. I find that I can happily live without an iPhone, because I don’t need that continuous interface. I had a Blackberry phone for a while and Jesus, that would really piss me off. James: little red blinking light that tells you you have an email message in the middle of the night and then you’re there, God, I can’t do this anymore. I just don’t need this constantly on. 7. Yes. It’s a first impression. It’s what makes someone excited about it, subconsciously, that I love the shape of that bottle and the graphic on the label is really pure and simple or whatever it is. It sounds very superficial but it’s a very powerful motivator for when people have got a choice of 20 bottles in front of them and they’re all selling the same thing. How do you tell what to buy. 8. Polyphonics. Yeah.[the senses] Yes. That’s very much so, yeah. The feel and the warmth of it and how it sits in your hand. Noise is becoming more and more important. I’m sure it still is important in mobile phones and in general product development. Customers are very, very sensitive about noise these days, everything from, you know, if you’re clicking down the flip on the phone does it go in a nice wafty movement and nice quality feel or is it a few clicks and a grunchy bit at the end, or when I twist it does it feel solid, does it sound solid. And there’s a lot of work goes into making products sound just right. And that covers not just sound but how it feels when you put it on the table or how it clicks when you put it up. How that little flappy thing goes, you know, all that is very audible quality. It’s all about feel at the end of the day and the audible aspect is high frequency right through to clunking of the thing when you drop it on the floor. It is a very powerful human sense.
Marko
1. The essential simplification on
378
brick and tile, so he’s literally tried out materials and techniques on this summer house. It’s quite an extraordinary place, and we were walking in the garden, talking about this very topic last summer. Obviously I knew what we were about to ship this year, at that time we were very far along in it, but I couldn’t tell him. But I think deeper than; like my short answer to your question is by the way yes, but I think your interpretation of Fukasawa is probably – may require another layer, which is simplicity is yes one thing. But he has a very particular point of view. Which I’m not sure I share, but I think it’s interesting. So he thinks that it’s not so much the simplicity, but actually design is about finding the most natural form of interaction between a human and an object that there is, and it’s a kind of platonic view, meaning that that exists for any major phase of technology. This most natural way that people interact with an object. And once you find it, you’re done. So you aren’t really – this is something, I guess, another lens or filter on that is what him and *[Jasper Morrison]00:17:23 have called supernormal. So I think, my question to him was, do you think, and he believes that this is because the human subconscious has developed in a way that makes it possible for there to be these kinds of most natural or archetypical designs. One of my favourite designs of his, some would it’s not modern design at all, I don’t know if you’ve seen the recent pen sketches by Fukasawa? You have seen those, that he’s drawn? 3. Ok. So I’m a huge admirer. He has just recently been doing these line drawings, and one of them is an umbrella stand which is basically just a slit in the floor parallel to the wall. Yeah. So, someone recently asked me, in Beijing, actually, is what’s your favourite piece of interaction design and that’s what came to mind. So – and so I admire his work. I do think that there is a tendency for reduction, and then, *00:18:42 has this saying that the role of the designer is to bring a gentler structure to life and then he was definitely, I talk a little bit about this in the Copenhagen talk, that architecture being a human fundamental so I’m interested in making those things better that people use 50 to several hundred times a day. Hence the interest in the swipe gesture as a way of simplifying how you use a phone. But you’ll see in the N9, we did a lot of work to reduce and take away, but still maintaining flexibility. 4. [N9] And it feels direct, because we’ve come from either the pattern of previous Nokia phones and Google, I’m talking about touch screen interfaces now, and then the conversely, the iPhone pattern. We’ve finally gotten rid of the mouse button. There’s no physical button you need to press of the screen ‘click-click’ to have something happen on the screen. And everything is direct. It’s that sense of directness. When you swipe away an app, you’ll notice that’s when you try it yourself, and you’ll see there’s a video, the application just glides away like a piece of paper, revealing the home screen in the background. And it’s so direct, it’s this quality is what makes it… And I think it’s also the fact that you can just, with your thumb, with one hand, you can just swipe from the edge of the screen, it has a very visceral quality.
Integration
Ruth
1. I think this is becoming more and more important. I think that before Apple, before the iPhone, this integration was not so much of a focus for a lot of other brands, but
379
now I think a lot of brands are increasingly seeing the importance of the total experience of the product. I’m afraid that I can’t really tell you what is in the pipeline, but well I can say that it is definitely getting more important, and you will see it in a lot of phones in the future. 2. Communion: Behaving together: I think so, definitely it is the next step for, in terms of experience. And I don’t think it’s a secret that a lot of companies are going to, for example recently there is this news that Apple is collecting data from its users, and even like Facebook, they collate your data and then they customise the ads according to your profile. I think this is becoming more and more common, and in a way it’s the only way to go to customise the experience for each and every user. So I think in future it's going to be very, it will be used in a lot of platforms I think. For example if you go out maybe your GPS knows your location and it will start recommending restaurants around the area according to your taste and things like that. And I think it is going to be more popular in the future, this kind of technology.
James
1. Convergence: Yeah, I think so. Yeah. And it is a sort of convergence of iPods into the phone and the camera into the phone that have been done very neatly. Convergence has always been a problem with devices because there’s never been a sort of one-stop shop to get your music or get your applications or get your games, download the internet. There’s always been very unintegrated ways of doing it and I guess the iPhone’s the first mainstream one that was able to integrate all that functionality into a fairly seemless user interface. There are probably key ones in there that really drove people. There’s the iTunes, because the iPod was hugely popular. The internet 3G on the phone started to become mainstream and low cost, so people could easily get onto the internet and do what they need to know. And applications through iTunes store, you know, was a brilliant idea. One-stop shop for your music and all your applications through the internet. 2. Well, I think people have been driving towards it for years. I mean, people have been talking about it since I joined Ericsson; a convergence of all these things. And people have always been struggling to get things like GPS onto phones. When I was working at Ericsson I was working with a bunch of engineers trying to get some locations working on mobile phones. I think you come to a point through developing technology where all the pieces start to fall into place and it requires less resources to implement them because the hard work’s already been done and I think the iPhone and Apple were sort of at the right place at the right time to sort of bring those elements together, having always had an eye on it. Actually, Apple had always been looking at these sort of devices. I remember when I was at the Royal College of Art they brought out a tablet, sort of single screen tablet which you could write and it did writing recognition and you could get on the internet with some very complicated code that you could program into it and you could possibly send faxes and all that sort of stuff. So, it’s always been there, but the actual effort to get it working well, it takes a huge amount of investment. Millions and millions of pounds. So, for one company to take all that on and say, right, we’re going to a telephone and iTunes location devices applications, some online store where everyone can go and then we’ll make it world wide and successful. 3. No. I don’t think you could plan that. No. I think you’d probably know that that’s what you want to do. But to get iTunes running and that investment was a huge gamble, because a lot of other people are doing it as well. So, when you have a site,
380
you know. There were loads of sites around at that time doing it. It’s just the way that Apple did it seamlessly with the iPod. It made it very effective. 4. Future wearable: That’s an interesting question. There’s more and more convergence with stuff and I guess there’s always the debate about wearable device, you know, miniaturisation. I’ve worked in projects in companies where we’ve looked at sort of iPhone devices in your glasses. Sort of wearable computers with head-up displays. No, no really, because we found that people don’t really want to wear the same jacket every day. And actually, when they go walking through a park and they’ve got their sunglasses on, they actually get pretty pissed when this thing comes up and says that you’ve got a phone call. There’s a fine line between being immersed in it and being comfortably detached from technology and I don’t think we’ve really worked out what that is. I think as designers and technologists, I think we’d love for people just to totally immerse themselves in it all the time and that instant gratification and communication all the time instantly. I can’t see that happening, because humans are animals and whether we know it or not, we need space and time to think. Well, I do anyway. I find that I can happily live without an iPhone, because I don’t need that continuous interface. I had a Blackberry phone for a while and Jesus, that would really piss me off. James: little red blinking light that tells you you have an email message in the middle of the night and then you’re there, God, I can’t do this anymore. I just don’t need this constantly on. 5. Convergence and integration: I feel there’s room to go in sort of the whole convergence and integration of technologies, but yeah, the challenge is going to be that interface with the person and making it a comfortable interaction where they can have it, take it or leave it, whenever they want. And unfortunately, I think we sort of always see it as people in their own free time using these devices, but actually most of them are worked in the workplace. That’s the environment where it really drives new technology and sort of communication speeds and band width and all that sort of stuff. So, people can be on all the time, but I think that work environment is where you’re probably going to see a bit of a kickback I think, because I see it now with people who are just overloaded with constant stream of contact, whether it’s with an iPhone, on the internet or Blackberry or video conferencing. You’re always accessible all the time. And you’ve got email, phone, video conference, internet, hotmail. So yeah, do I think there’s going to be a kickback? I hope so, because if it keeps going on at this rate I’m going to explode. I don’t know, maybe the younger generation are quite comfortable with it. I mean, I wouldn’t say I’m old but over 40, but 15, 20 year olds. Maybe that just becomes more natural for them to be constantly on.
Ecosystem
James
1. Creating a culture: Yeah, that’s right. The Nokia boss called it a sort of micro eco system. You have to have the whole eco system around the phone to make it a success and Nokia doesn’t have that and Ericsson don’t have that and Sony don’t have it. Although Ericsson’s embedded in Sony, they’ve never managed to seamlessly integrate all these aspects. 2. Culture ecosystem planned or phenomenon: Well, I think people have been driving towards it for years. I mean, people have been talking about it since I joined
381
Ericsson; a convergence of all these things. And people have always been struggling to get things like GPS onto phones. When I was working at Ericsson I was working with a bunch of engineers trying to get some locations working on mobile phones. I think you come to a point through developing technology where all the pieces start to fall into place and it requires less resources to implement them because the hard work’s already been done and I think the iPhone and Apple were sort of at the right place at the right time to sort of bring those elements together, having always had an eye on it. Actually, Apple had always been looking at these sort of devices. I remember when I was at the Royal College of Art they brought out a tablet, sort of single screen tablet which you could write and it did writing recognition and you could get on the internet with some very complicated code that you could program into it and you could possibly send faxes and all that sort of stuff. So, it’s always been there, but the actual effort to get it working well, it takes a huge amount of investment. Millions and millions of pounds. So, for one company to take all that on and say, right, we’re going to a telephone and iTunes location devices applications, some online store where everyone can go and then we’ll make it world wide and successful. “No. I don’t think you could plan that. No. I think you’d probably know that that’s what you want to do. But to get iTunes running and that investment was a huge gamble, because a lot of other people are doing it as well. So, when you have a site, you know. There were loads of sites around at that time doing it. It’s just the way that Apple did it seamlessly with the iPod. It made it very effective.”
Marko
1. Nokia Design ecosystem: we continue to innovate. So the N9 is the beginning of the fruit of that kind of approach. It’s definitely the kind of way I think it should be done. It doesn’t mean the two – the interaction design teams and the industrial design teams are working on the same product, they need to sit side by side, and have coffee every day. That’s not necessary, but they’re literally, first of all, they’re in the same team, and they collocate so take an example. So the N9, you lose the buttons when you say hey it’ll just be a display a piece of glass, and we’ll make the UI work. Unless you have the compelling design for this derived the product is a nonstarter. And so it – if – unless you do actual design, by… I strongly believe it, and beyond belief, I mean that we just act according to it. And I think that’s one innovation, even compared to, in long term, I mean, I don’t, and this is maybe outside the scope of the interview, because I’m talking about other companies, I see this division as nearly all companies, and even at great hardware-software integration companies like at Apple, there’s an extraordinary industrial design practice, which is one of, I think is one of the best product design teams there is on the planet. I really doubt our industrial design team have copied – only one, but they have, ‘Johnny Ive’ has a great team there, and but they don’t do the software. From my understand, it’s Jobs does the software. So then the question is, they kind of join in one person. And I don’t know the culture well enough, so call it sort of *00:33:30 or in the industrial design
382
it’s for us to show. I think the N9 is an example of what can happen when you work this way. It’s only the first example. I think there’s many more exciting things to come from there. So you point to the right thing. It’s something fundamentally, in my belief, about what’s contemporary. What modern design practice is.
Designing the T10 – ecosystem and ceremony of company design
James
1. Yes, my involvement with the project in the early stages was to work with the Ericsson industrial designer at that stage, who was based in Lund. I was put on the project to work with him to bring his interpretation of the product into production, really. My involvement was right from the start, sitting down with the industrial designer, looking at his sketches and layouts and then converting that and discussing with him about tweaking and changing it and converting that into a real life product. 2. Different people: Yes, you work with people from every aspect as it were, from the start and it might be an industrial designer at the start through to design engineers and mechanical engineers and electronics hardware engineers. There would be production guys and a relatively full sort of matrix organisation of people including marketing and finance and commercial. Yes it sort of pulls together the whole picture of the product and it is the project managing and controlling of that. My responsibility was to make sure all of those functions are coordinated and doing the right thing at the right time, and making sure that that vision right at the start, ends up as the right vision at the end. It doesn’t always, because you have to make compromises and decisions along the way which you need to bring everyone in on to agree on a decision, including the people right at the start and the people right at the end to make sure that you do have something that is the right cost and the right spec at the end. 3. Vision: No, it was his vision really, I mean the product ... well what came about was an opportunity to do a cheap, a very cheap youth end market phone, so I suppose that concept was generated by myself then the business took that on and worked with it and with the industrial designers to come up with a concept they could work with on the existing platform, to develop it into a low cost youth market phone. 4. Target culture: Well I am just thinking particularly with the T10 that was kind of ... I mean my involvement was trying to find that youth market and what that means, and the look and the feel of the phone wasn’t really what I was doing. My stage was to be given to the industrial designer to say ‘right, go and tell us what youth market means and apply it to this platform.’ While I had obviously done that, I came in with him and said ‘all right well that’s those pretty pictures and this would really work’ or ‘that doesn’t look great because it is going to be too expensive’ or ‘that is going to be difficult to manufacture’ or ‘we will have problems with this, blah, blah, blah’. So the industrial designer really went away and talked about what does youth market mean. 5. Aesthetics: Yes my involvement in what looks okay and doesn’t look okay is really coming from the perspective of the practical manufacturability really. The designer might say ‘well that has a nice radius edge along that side of the phone’ and I think it looks really great and gives it a real contemporary look. Where he gets those looks from, he might get them from anywhere, probably from looking at magazines and he would cut out images of what was around at the time and now everyone is cutting out
383
images of iPads and iPhones and using those, but whatever it was at the time, I can’t remember. I think actually what they were using at Ericsson a lot was like a camera that was the sort of aesthetic and the visual language that people were ... because they were a very tough and robust image of well engineered and expensive, and that was what they were trying to translate and starting to try and translate that aesthetic into the mobile phone which nonetheless didn’t really sit that well with the youth market, because it was not that youth market. It is not really associated with cameras so what they used to generate that sort of youth look would have been contemporary images at the time. Pull the images and the colours and the look and feel, the shapes, the angles of walkman telephones or cars or computers or fashion and try and integrate that as well as trying to maintain the vision and the aesthetics of Ericsson, you know, so it doesn’t lose that Ericssonness and there is a definite look through the Ericsson phones. You see it in cars, they have a sort of family image of cars and you try to keep that look of Ericsson going through that family of phones until someone decides we need to really throw it up in the air and change it again. Then there will be another aesthetic event of Ericsson phones images and then they will come along and they will try and marry the youth market with that aesthetic, with that look. 6. Shape was dependent on what the youth was said to be as well as the colour for youth and vibrancy.Big turning point of design was the acceptance of plastics.People still like wearing but technology will need to become more ubiquitous and make decisions to simply the information load. 7. Youth culture demands: [Fashion accessory] Yes there was an element of that at that time. I mean with the youth, the phone at that time with the way they had gone was all with bright colours and mobile phones had always been black and grey and the colours was a very important aspect of it and a lot of research had gone into the fashion and colours of that time in a range of about five or six phones. There was pink, a putty yellow and all of these specific colours that were very fashionable at that time and a lot of them were a year or two years old before the models changed. I suppose that was the sort of wearable aspect of it and that particular phone was difficult. It was pretty constrained because the form factor was based around a platform that already existed. The PCV, the key pad and screen and the position of the antennae and all that stuff, was pretty defined so then you don’t have a lot of flexibility around a mobile phone without make it L shaped or making it fit around your arm or curve it around your waist or all of this sort of stuff. You are pretty confined to using the sort of visual cues or visual stimulus to try and encourage the buyer to interpret our language and what it is trying to say, and feeling that motion and association with it. 8. Functionality control: [You] No, not really, no in later reiterations of it when it went over to China and that was really, purely on the full screen at that time mobile phones were very small, black and grey LCDs and no graphics, pure text so the menu operation was very basic and that sort of gradually evolved to have things like an Ericsson came up on screen and funny sounds. You know the sort of short musical sequence that came up when you switched the phone on and that sort of stuff and I think we evolved into have a Panda rolling across the screen when you first switched it on and we went for the Chinese versions. It was all very sort of basic bitmap images, so no, no I didn’t really have a lot of involvement with that, it was just very superficial. 9. Conception to product launch: It was probably about two years, a year and a half to two years I think by the time from the initial discussions through to product launch.
384
10. In reflection: Yes there were aspects of it that from a production point of view that didn’t work out that well because of the design changes around it and the constraints of the form factor, which I talked about. We had to make some compromises in how the parts were tooled which meant that some of the plastic parts were ... it was a flip phone so it had a flip on it, and so the slip marks and some of the injection mouldings and the surface features weren’t maybe as crisp and as sharp as I would have liked them to have been. Some of the covers didn’t work very well and there was a sort of putty yellow one which looked a bit like baby sick which they didn’t sell many of at all, so some of the colour choices were a bit suspect. Some of the colour choices couldn’t be moulded because you would get variations in the moulding process which means you would have one part with less or more plastic because of the moulding process and pressure and temperature and moulding site and all of the rest of it. They could actually come out in different colours from one part to the other, so that is always a difficult thing to manage in the manufacturing process. The early stages was all concepts, generations, initial prototype things were a lot more straight forward and easy to manage than the back end of it by the time you got to back end you had made all of your choices and decisions and you would have to live with them. Usually getting a product into production is very labour intensive and that’s it, just very labour intensive and there are a whole lot of niggly problems and issues that you have to solve to get it out but unless it is at wrong end for you, it was more at the front end. 11. Manufactured: Everything was made in Sweden, yes at that stage we had a factory in Enköping and it was a subcontractor who bought the parts in; the plastic parts were moulded and obviously some of the electronic components would have come all around the world, but yes PCB and 7B and the product 7B was eventually moved out to China and I went out to China with it to sort of transfer that production and manufacture out there. 12. Culture markets: Well I went out there actually to develop mobile phones for the Chinese market so again based on the principle of what we had done with the T10 we took platforms that Ericsson had and took them out to China and repackaged them. We worked with a joint venture company called Panda to redesign the package to make it a Chinese phone. Actually the transferring with the T10 structure was pretty straightforward because you just basically picked up the production and shipped it over to China and put it in a factory and run it, you know. You would have sort of negative problems with trying to get things working with electricity suppliers and workers and all that sort of stuff, but it was all still doable. 13. China piracy: Yes there was a piracy thing there and replica phones on the market which don’t say Ericsson but they say Ericsson or something you know, although they got even more blatant than that. They would just have direct copies with Ericsson written on them, you know, and it is just blatant, blatant copying and China was going through a trauma at that stage but what impact that had upon Ericsson and profitability in China, I don’t know what the outcome was, but all companies lived with it, I suppose 14. Branding and marketing Production and representation: They came in right from the start, from the initial contact and the emphasis was on how are we going to sell it? It is a great idea, this is worth it but is there a market and how are we going to sell it, so that is part of the initial evaluation when you design a product. The initial milestone you go through is to say ‘great idea guys, let’s put a business case around it.’ The marketing guru will come and scope out how many, what the market is like, does the youth market want to buy a mobile phone? Nokia are already selling millions of
385
them so ‘yes’ and so how are we going to do it, and how are we going to brand it and what claims are we going to make around it? 15. [Input on you (designer)]: Generally not on the product no, they may do on some of the start up screens and interfacing screens and some of the branding of the product, but mainly on the box and packaging as well they would probably get more involved in terms of the visions and the claims on the box. … Yes they are aware and they have observed the different stages of the product going through the milestone stages and getting close to starting to spend a lot of money, which is when you get into tooling and ordering production equipment and all of that sort of stuff. Then there is more of a focus on ensuring the marketing aspects of it like the launch, the volumes that they are going to sell, which colours are they going to sell, which
386
those people that are on it, it just takes over their lives. I can’t see that people need any more facilitation in their lives for communication. It seems like the technology has got to evolve to make it more manageable in terms of, you do not have to access it or really feel like they have to access it all of the time. Maybe some intelligence in the systems that enables people to have to select themselves, maybe the devices select the information and make what is relevant so it is not intrusive in your life.
The Nokia N9
Marko
1. particular kind of project, which is the most ambitious kind, where you’re doing an entire new pattern, combining holistically innovating hardware and software together. There are – like I talk about that in the Copenhagen talk, but essentially, something like an amazing pattern such as a revolutionary pattern in some ways, like the iPhone, a single screen surface and app folders, and one mouse click, which is fantastically simple also, very constrained. I don’t need to go into that now, you can really see it in the talk relatively clearly out there. But there’s been no innovation in that pattern in the last four years. So no marked innovation. So that has been enough to do a radical breakthrough, but essentially the pattern is just now feeling very dated and constrained, and that’s very clear from the feedback of people who use it. It’s very simple, but it’s also very constrained. Similarly, the other big pattern, which is the pattern of Google’s phone as well as many Nokia phone, like the Nokia 700 is multiple home screens with personalisable content on it like the weather widget or things like that. Number of physical keys from which you flip to another screen where you have application. And this pattern as well has not seen any significant change or innovation in the last four years. And the point with the N9 was to introduce a new pattern, and it was driven by the belief that we can design a better way to use a phone. And it’s driven by this thought that in the current industry, we’re still in a period much akin where the automotive industry was in the 1890s. If you recall your automotive history, cars had trailers then. Backwards pillars. The steering wheel took about 15 years to become the dominant user interface design of the automobile. And I think we’re in the middle of that period. And I think the N9 shows that you can design a better interaction pattern. Better in what sense? It’s better for one handed use. I go thought that in the video, why it is stronger. But… 2. Time: We haven’t talked that much publically about it, but what I can say is it was the project I did once coming there, from… So it – under two years, before. And quite some under. And I think if you look at designing a whole new design as an interaction pattern and the hardware and launching that at scale, it’s not about making another – a kind of cheap copy of an existing pattern, which we can do much, much faster. So that’s about the time frame, a year and a half. 3. Interface and form: . I think we have hit on the most natural form of the touch screen interaction model. But it still has, it adds something radically new, which takes away the physical key, and replace it with a gestural interaction that’s also very easy to use with one hand. Therefore, we decided not to mess with all the other metaphors, because we’re introducing radical departure in one area. But we did introduce – we play more on familiar patterns from, not the desktop world, I would think, from the browser world. So have one – there are three new phones use, once you swipe the way of TVs and the videos, particularly the short, two minute video. And one of
387
them is just an *00:25:04 but that’s actually the least of least consequence. In the design. Two other screens. One is an activity screen, where all your notifications are at the top, but then it’s like activity screens for something like Facebook. Or Twitter, or Renren, or Juju, or any – pick your local flavour. This is the user interface that has been the fastest growing pattern on the internet of the last five years, due to the rise of social networking in the different forms. And the other view, the third view in the operating system is that deals with all open applications in chronological, historical order. And this view is again familiar from browsers. So I would say that the metaphors we used have been contemporary web metaphors rather than old desktop metaphors. Which, by the way, it’s a very interesting point, you say. I’m not going to make much of this, but I think most of the two current dominant best patterns would be, certainly the IOS is partly basic because of the desktop mess. And the widgets and homescreens feels like the internet of eight years ago. It’s not a modern internet metaphor. It’s a very dated internet metaphor. So more from the internet than from the desktop. So I hope that answers. But you need to play enough the familiar patterns. It’s like music, you improvise on every dimension, you will loose the listener; sometimes that’s maybe what you want to do, but I think you need to choose which parameters. We chose a radical departure in the pattern. And then, plays to very familiar and quickly growing interfaces in the online world. In the world. 4. Technology of future: Device for a little while, and you go back to the iPhone 4, it’ll feel… The pattern on the N9 feels like technology from the future. And it will feel quantative. 5. Interface: And it feels direct, because we’ve come from either the pattern of previous Nokia phones and Google, I’m talking about touch screen interfaces now, and then the conversely, the iPhone pattern. We’ve finally gotten rid of the mouse button. There’s no physical button you need to press of the screen ‘click-click’ to have something happen on the screen.
On the copenhagen conference for N9 – Patterns of Interaction
Marko
1. A word about inspiration, these are sketches by Albert Alto, the great Finish architect. Albert Alto was an architect of monumental proportions as well as human scale and he said that the role of the architect and designer is to give a gentler structure to life and he was certainly the architect of big human fundaments and from my point of view I'm interested i making tangible improvements and making better those things that people in the domain th I work with in Nokia design or the things that people do 50 to 100 times a day. I am less interested in wow features that you use every 90 days and never remember after that and it' these incremental improvements and designing a better way to use a phone that motivates m and the team. Observing people and then finding these and that's one of the central tenants behind the work on the M9. 2. The market: The phone market currently is so over mediatised and so hot. It's so covered constantly by the media. They were sometimes under the false impression that actually all the innovation in the core design of the phone is already done. That it's really just about adding the 537th feature or cloud this or that or Eco system this or that but that in the core
388
patterns all the innovation has already been done. I think nothing could be further from the truth. 3. The same as the auto industry: . I think we are much more in a situation in the industry which is the position that the automotive industry in the 1890s, the car industry. I don't know who remembers their automotive history very well but cars in the 1890s had tillers. the tiller, backward tiller and it took 15 years for the automotive industry to settle on the steering wheel as the dominate user interface design for a car. Interestingly a lot is happening in the user interface of a car at the moment being of digitalisation maps and new electronics in cars but still we have not lost the steering wheel and even in the highest in racing cars there is certain aspects of it. The stick shift or the shift gears are in a different place but the steering wheel it took 15 years. We are in the middle of that period in phones where we have not yet found it so this is first of all important to frame that there are other options and there are ways to design a better way to use a phone. 4. Nokia’s take on the iPhone: The first one is the pattern of the IPhone. 2007 remarkable innovation so what's the pattern. It is multiple screens of aps or folders. A relatively familiar old metaphor from the computing industry and one button, one remaining mouse button there. The model is extremely elegant and simple and loved by many people. Simp yet extremely constrained and let me give you the example so let's use an architectural metaphor, floor plan of a house and if you want to go from the kitchen to the dining room you know how you go via the front door. You want to go after dinner from the dining room to the living room you know how you go via the front door. Extremely easy to remember and understand but feels a little bit silly after a while. It's evolved a little bit over time that you can now press the buzzer on the front door twice and then you can skip on one leg from the dining room to the living room. Who here uses IPhone multitasking so double press? Who here used an IPhone? My point exactly. All right, so it's an added feature that most people don't use on a daily basis because it is a part of the essential constraint so clearly we can improve on that pattern. You're not supposed to say this out loud these days but clearly there is a better design than that possible. That's the first model. 5. The other candidate: the multiple home screens with widgets pattern and these are all, what language is that, but essentially the idea is this. Multiple screens, home screens, which you can personalise over time with widgets which are either live information, think of stock charts or weather widgets or what your friends have been doing recently widget and then short cuts to your quickest applications or communication with particular people and the be of this pattern is that the personalisation is so organic and easy that it happens over time an you end up just using the devise through these home screens. There are multiple physical keys often four or more and they are not consistent or consistently placed so it's quite difficult - between products. So it's quite difficult to understand sometimes how these products work and in this model particularly I think people are using a very, very small fraction of the features and power of the interface. There's some way of flipping to anothe screen on which you have the applications and grid and you can start applications or pin them to the home screen in some way…. This is the pattern famously of Android and Symbian and so Nokia also plays in this pattern and the pattern we've just launched with th Nokia 700 Symbian Belle is, in my view, the most accessible, easy to learn and snappiest version of that pattern there is on the market but this is still just one. This is the other dominant pattern, so two. 6. Problems one-design two patterns: The biggest task in the design of the n9 was first to mak room for the possibility that there is a better design of how you can use a phone and these two patterns. One person when we were discussing the design said to me but it doesn't hav personalizable home screens with widgets on it so it's not a smartphone. Do you notice wh the question means? It means that you have restricted your imagination to a pattern already
389
And how did we then start to look for the pattern. 7. N9 Goal: goal to design a touch screen interface and the patterns I've spoken about are mainly touch screens now and I realise that's a narrowing of our focus and I can answer questions about other things, physical keyboards, text keyboards and other things. But here we set our self a task to design an all screen phone with no physical keys and why did we d that. We knew two things from observation of people. The first was that people want large screens no matter what size of phone they have. 8. Observations from people: We knew two things from observation of people. The first was that people want larger screens no matter what size of phone they have. These products are still way too big when they are in the pocket and way too small when they are out of the pocket. So if we could design an elegant overall experience for just a screen with no physical control keys on the interface it would allow us to make a larger screen to product face ratio on any product and what they would allow us to do is for any product size we would have more screen essentially. 9. One handed use: . The other thing we observed is people wanted even if they did not explicitly state this when given it they were very happy about it is a design for full mobility and what do I mean by that? It's something actually Nokia historically has been very know for, it's the kind of Kung Foo smooth use, you're on the one handed use, text the friend, I'm coming, put it in the pocket, get on the bicycle, go. One handed use. 10. Immersive Head Down: Most touch screen user interfaces are immersive today. That mean they require much more of our attention than they ought to and what does that mean in practice. It means you'll see couples in restaurants here in Copenhagen, too I don't know how long they may have been together, it's their dinner out away from the kids or however and they're down romantically pinching and zooming. Head down. So my goal and I'll be very open here, I think the n9 is just the very first step in what can be done to improve this. 11. Head Up: My goal is to give and the team's goal is to give people their head up again so the can be more present to the world around them. Why do I say that? What is that important? Back to Albert Alto, big human fundamentalist, so human being have the ability to within a fraction of a second make each other feel like they are welcome. It has to do with a multitude of things and I'm not talking, I'm not saying these comments in a manipulative point of view, I am saying the latest research on microsociology, this is fact and well researched, is that it evolves certain things like eye contact, certain physical things that we do subconsciously. We all know the feeling. 12. First was bigger screen on any device. The other is design for true mobility and for heads up. It means better one handed use. Better sloppy interactions so that you can use it almos blind. I don't mean physically visually impaired but almost blind so that the design princip isn't make things more beautiful and smaller and requiring precision so that you have to kin of - and most user interfaces are actually going into that direction, more visual, more small touch targets and that was the starting point these two things, all screen user interface so we get larger screen, more space for the content to shine and then design for true mobility. 13. Material: But it all starts here is if we look at how the display in the glass flows seamlessly into the body of the product of this all screen interface. It gives a clue into how we've solv this new pattern and it all starts with one simple gesture, a swipe. So the essential simplification on which everything is based in the user interface is a swipe from the edge o the screen… 14. Essential Simplification: essential simplification on which everything is based in the user interface is a swipe from the edge of the screen and let me just show an example it's here as well but you can see it. 15. Screen interface: when I want to go home all I do is I swipe from any edge of the screen. I literally just swipe the application away. That's the essential simplification on which
390
everything is based so there is no physical home key. There is no digital home key. No thing you have to press to go home. But whenever you're in an application you swipe from any edge of the screen to go home. We have made the waking up the devise just a double tap so you can press the power key but otherwise you just double tap and then swipe. That means you can wake it up with one hand without having to reach for any keys. Now this is what I'm interested again in things that people to do 50 to 100 to 200 times a day and improving those on a daily basis. So everything is based on the simplification but it doesn’ stop there. 16. Three most important things: We then looked at the three most important things that people do with a modern phone every day namely you start activities, you start doing something. Some people call it launching an application but you start doing something. You get notifications incoming. I have a missed call from a friend. I have five new emails. Here is new text message calendar entry. These notifications as well as social network updates. So notifications, being notified of the world and third is switching between activity something that most phone designs have not yet succeeded at and for each of these we've designed on recognisable view of home, the home screen. So home has three views and they proceed in carousel and let me walk through them because I think this is important more so that you understand what goes into making a holistic pattern that hangs together in an elegant way. 17. Example: I swipe away from the edge of the screen just like I did. I am here and I swipe away and it reveals the first of the home screens and this is familiar to everyone, it's the application grid. You can move applications around and you can start any application just by taping and the applications slide in from the side, from one of the sides. There's a little bit of magic on which side it comes in. It depends on what you've done in the past and so but it slides in and the home recedes into the back. What I call cartoon physics is the physical model of the user interface so whenever you slide away the back appears and this the first screen easy to understand. 18. Notifications: the top you have your persistent notifications like missed calls, text message emails and then below the pattern is the activity stream which is the fastest growing user interface pattern of the internet of the last five years which is familiar from Wren Wren, Q Facebook, Twitter, all of these networks. The newest thing is at the time so we combine in one place. First order notifications and any information from social networks as well as RS feeds, anything that has time stamped information and because people are very familiar wit this interface from social networks it's just a natural way of grouping everything that you need to keep up to date is here. 19. Open Applications level: . Its open applications. So this has in the order that you have use them the applications that you have just used and I'll just show you here. So I was here jus in the clock, then there was the gallery, camera gallery. If I now go to the phone, I don't know if you can see the dialler still, I'm dialling, I go away, it's now first. So the newest on is always at the top and it makes it extremely easy to pick up where you left off. Why? Because oddly given the kinds of creatures we are, our recent past is an oddly good predict of our future intent. Just like the call log on a phone which Nokia is very well known for, f one of its first designs that where you were recently communicating is a good guess to whe you might want to communicate to and the same goes for applications. You can view this view in either a big view with four or four up or nine up. These are the real live application and then there's a lot of little engineering magic to put the applications to sleep when you're not using, having been using them for a long time. So there are these three views to home which go around in carousel so all you need to learn is swipe away in carousel and this last point is very important and I think you in the audience can appreciate this. When you swip away you go back to the view of home from where you came. So if I go from the open applications view to the clock and swipe away I come back to this view. If I go to it from
391
this view I come to this view so I don't always have to go through the front door of this application grid like in other patterns. This makes the user into the model, the pattern, very fluent. It just feels like you're flowing and the only way - I trust that the only way you will really believe that is by using it. But this subtle difference, how did we make that call for example, we prototyped both and the design team lived with it for about a week as well as sharing it with outsiders. 20. Fluidity and patience: That kind of a fundamental pattern choice you have to live with for a while and understand whether it's actually making things better. It was completely clear from that experience that the fluent version which some would argue it's a little bit harder t understand because it' very easy to always go through the front door from the kitchen to the dining room yet it ends up being for fluent and you actually do not lose your sense of place and the only way to know that is you sketch and code and try, try and try, iterate and so on So this fluidity is the key. 21. Industrial design: What this kind of pattern allows us to do is it allows us to radically reduc and refine the industrial design because there are no physical keys on the front of the product. It allows us to essentially construct the product from two parts, slightly simplifying. So the front read of the product is a complete rectangle, hard rectangle. You'd expect it almost to be like a hard edged box with sharp edges but nothing could be further from the truth. Then the back is extremely organic. One extruded shape, tapered ends with kind of pillowy shape which actually arcs back to a lot of classic, very, very early Nokia products but this pillowy organic shape camera detail in the end, extremely difficult produc to manufacture. I'd say it's an example of extreme product making. We assemble the displ into the body which I'll discuss in a moment. It's like fitting a boating into a bottle. We loc it in. That allows us to do a completely seamless integration of the display into the body of the product. 22. The display and the glass itself, it's a laminated deep like display in curved glass so we literately, it's what is sometimes is called two and a half dimensional glass so essentially its curved to really accommodate the swipe gesture on the side beautifully. We laminate the display and this means that when the user interface is live it really feels like the interface is on the surface of the product and why is that important other than some sort of juicy marketing story. It is because this user interface is the first example of a fully direct user interface. We have finally gotten written of the mouse key so there is nothing off the scree that you need to press to have something to happen on the screen. No more to have something happen there. Everything happens here and therefore anything we can do to improve the impression of naturalness and directness of the interface that it's physically rig there, right on the surface, helps that experience and so it's driven from that perspective. 23. Body and material: Finally, the mono body itself is a single piece of polycarbonate. We precision machine and the polymer is inherent colour so the polymer is itself coloured. That means when it wears it wears elegantly. It's not painted plastic in any way. We coat it for sort of UV protection and other things and we're constantly evolving how we can improve this. Why polycarbonate? Well it allows us to of course give this, very functionally, it allows us much better antenna performance than the competitor and some of that has already been going around the web from our customers in terms of antenn performance. This is of course the obvious shot but unlike competitor products you don't have to hold it any way. I mean the antennas work and so no death grips of any kind. 24. Interface and colours and camera: It allows us to do multiple colours. We'll be doing much more colour in the portfolio. Some may view that as just a kind of simplistic view into this market but as more and more complex phone evolve they become - right now if you really look at what's out there, there are black and grey rectangles with rounded corners and butto
392
and not a lot of choice really. Two patterns in that. With this pattern we can do something that is a foot print that is recognisably different while remaining quite organic on the other end. This has a real tension though the product as a whole. Two details about it and this is the only place we'll venture onto the feature level because ultimately I think the pattern is what cuts through on a daily level and is interesting is the camera. No doubt many of you u on a daily level. The camera on a phone has become the replacement of note taking now. it's the way of documenting quickly. Instead of writing down a phone number on a sign, yo take a picture of the sign. So having a very quick camera is essential with enough resolutio This is 8 megapixel *0:25:16.5 [coral] size. The aperture is F2.2 so better low light conditions for those of you that do more photography and from my evidence I don't have al everything from competitors, but the fastest shot to shot time of any camera. What I mean by shot to shot time is if, let's see, if I go from here and I take a shot of that screen, bang, next shot, next shot, next shot and so that's *0:25:54.1 [coral] size, 8 megapixel. The other we have spent a great deal of effort on the mapping and location and navigation experience on the n9 so free pedestrian so walking and driving navigation in more countries than any competitor and also in local languages. 25. Location in the interface: the place of location in the user interface will grow and if you imagine what's happening in that event feed which is now your social network updates or your RSS feeds. Anything that's time stamped information that might be close by to you provided you have given permission that's event's feed allows for a place to surface locatio information in a new way and make it relevant. Again it's another form of notification in th future. 26. Natural integration: while I think we've hit on a very, very interesting new pattern and whe you try it you'll see how responsive it is and fast and natural it feels. In some way we are still playing in the same game of one display with touch and we've just - we have made it better in a very recognisable way better. But I ultimately think that the next design questio is how natural interaction evolves beyond the glass and there is a lot of experimentation rig now in gaming of different kinds, the consoles for control of gaming, gestural interaction o different kinds but again here what is the essential simplification like the swipe. If that is th new pattern of how direct we can make a touch interface what can we do? So just as a firs stage of that which is not the answer but it's the first taste this comes with NFC embedded and we've also shipped speakers, the Nokia 360 speakers, but any NFC, near field communication, is the technology that's held here so I'm listening to - here what do I have? Beasty boys, so I'm listening to Sabotage here, I don't know why. A psychologist can explain that and then I come to the speaker at home. Tap on the speaker and music continu wirelessly Bluetooth. I don't have a speaker with me today but just believe me it works completely. It just that tight interaction. 27. by interaction of the glass. I didn't have to pick menus here. I didn't have to pick menus there. The speakers themselves are stereo. If you have two of them they will handshake an clock over Bluetooth so you have wireless stereo pair speakers if you want that as well. Bu the key thing here is you just tap and then once you're done, you tap, music continues here, you can go. But this idea that by touching the physical environment for the basic things tha you do, I think, is the key and so the search for the pattern doesn't stop on the glass. The pattern is a thing that is much broader than that. So the one thing I wanted to say because th hasn't been always completely clear also in the media is that over the next year we introduc actually two patterns into the market. One of the pattern of swipe in the n9 which continue in multiple products in our portfolio and then other is the pattern of windows phone which I'm not going to go into detail here with n9 which is tiles and panoramic views of applications so not siloed applications but anything that you can use with your camera like filters are all in one big panoramic view. It is very beautifully graphics designed but these
393
two patterns are both the beginning of multiple products in our portfolio including in the case of swipe much more accessible price points. 28. Social responsibility: These three areas reporting to the CEO. In the packaging designer ar alone we're shipping over 400 million boxes a year. So the footprint and the mechanical design of the packaging, the structural packaging, has not only a huge cost impact but it means one choice can mean hundreds of more aeroplanes flying every day if you think abo that so we take it extremely seriously. But the place where the responsibility starts most of all, I would say, is actually in our constant goal to connect the next billion people with affordable technology and bring them on to the internet and to the scope of communication because what's clearly known is that if you can provide affordable access and affordable more access to information that again increases sustainable choices of those people. I don't mean to just do a trick. It's just in general as an industry while we here at design week may think otherwise overall there is less interest in the zero to 10 year old phone out there in the market from a story point of view than there is in an expensive phone like the n9. From a media and storytelling point of view it's not possible to launch that from the bottom up. 29. Social responsibility: am as interested in the team who is interested in designing the zero to 10 year old phone and anything we can do to cut and including how can we make patterns from the high and very accessible as well. So that's the first point is how do we - the bigge impact, we have social responsibility wise is actually making the next billion affordably connected and spreading information so that's more because ultimately we look at it across the whole value chain. Those of you that are close to the phone industry know how comple the supplier chain and all of that is and how we have to look responsibility at the whole chain. Ultimately it's all of our business including yours. If we could change the conversio rate of currently 3 percent of Nokia phone owners recycle their phone. If we could move that even somewhere from zero to 10 percent significant for the environmental impact. 30. Ecology: The n9 is one of our most ecological products. We've done eco certification and publishing of our products for 10 years at least so we lead in that are but it still has significant personal choices that all of you have to make and let me raise the one most important one. I ask you to unplug your charges from the wall. Nokia's latest charger whe the phone is plugged in it saves 90 percent - has 90 percent less load but standby power on some calculation and these calculations are always complex, standby power wasted from charging accounts to about two thirds of the overall footprint if you like of a product during its life cycle. What do we do? Nokia products uniquely or almost uniquely prompt meanin compared to competitor products prompt you to unplug the charger when you unplug. We don't have yet statistics on what the conversion on that prompt is but essentially when you unplug it, it says, why don't you unplug the charger so it shows the slide cut figuratively every time you unplug and if you do that then we're looking at two thirds of the footprint o phone from the full life cycle point of view in terms of energy consumption. 31. Future technology: I am extremely proud and the team is very proud of it. We also know th 137 things that could be better or we think we know and so we're of course sweating how t improve those and what behaviour but our goal was to make the next level of what the new natural is in terms of phone interaction. That when you put it down it feels like technology somewhere from the future and how natural it is and everything else feels like older technology.
394