Put it in perspective

Ok. It is holistic design. Ok, the situations and context are important. We all know that. How new is that? How different is this idea? Yeah, I think it is time for me to stop personal speculations, and to put the idea into perspective, to examine other related ideas, concepts and theories, and to see the relationships and differences it is from them.

So holistic design is to expand the scope of design, expand from a computer and a distributed system, to a setting, where the elements under design include the environmental and the social settings as well as technologies. But how should we include those elements beyond computers? Where and how can it apply? How practical is this idea?

Let's examine some relevant theories and ideas first:

Actor-Network Theory(ANT)
(From Thierry Bardini): "It evolved from the work of Michel Callon (1991) and Bruno Latour (1992) at the Ecole des Mines in Paris. Their analysis of a set of negotiations describes the progressive constitution of a network in which both human and non-human actors assume identities according to prevailing strategies of interaction. ... In the actor-network theory , both actors and actants share the scene in the reconstruction of the network of interactions leading to the stabilization of the system. But the crucial difference between them is that only actors are able to put actants in circulation in the system. "

This theory is to anaylze how a technology is shaped by a network system composed by both human actors and actants. It is from social construction point of view to study the formation of technologies and is widely used to analyze the stablization of frastructure. It is kind of backward analysis starting from the existing technologies, with concerns about forces towards the existence of technology. Holistic design also takes into account of elements beyond technology, which is similar to actor-network analysis, but it is concerned about design, not analysis. It starts from knowledge of computer and social science to design and create practices and experiences.

Activity Theory :
It is originated from Russian psychologists. (Bonnie A.Nardi From Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction) "It is a descriptive tool rather than a strongly predictive theory... The objective of activity theory is to understand the unity of consciousnes and activity. Activity theory incorporates strong notions of intentionality, history, mediation, collaboration and development in constructing consciousness."

It is tool for us to understand human activities, and since it is from psychology, it is pretty much concerned with the construction of consciousness and is kind of individual oriented, not social setting. While it is good tool for us to understand humans psychologically, and gives us some implications about how to design our computing systems(Since we need to consider human and design for human), it is kind seperated from design stage. It is like, "here is what we found about humans and activities, you should design according to that. " So when it comes to design, it still takes computing as the only resource to design for humans, which is different from how holistic design see design.

Participatory Design:
(Computers and Design in Context by Morten Kyng and Lars Mathiassen)"It refers to the pragmatic approach of direct collaboration between designers and users, and the more conceptual approach that incorporates complementary perspectives to help designers come up with better soluctions. "

It is about a methodogy or practice of design computings. It emphasizes how users and designers should work together, and the design process also involves uses at different stages to make sure the system is really designed what users want. It starts from tasks and functions, and examines in such way of design, the final system will be easy to use and easy to learn.

Situated Action:
(Plans and Situated Actions by Lucy A. Suchman) It arouses our awareness of another type of actions called situated actions different from planned actions, which is the model most of our computing systems base on. It helps me realize the existence of this action pattern and it is important to consider this pattern, but gives little clue about how - How should situated action play in the design of computing systems?

Technology and Experience (Technology as Experience by John Mccarthy, Peter Wright): It is good to see how technology is connected with experience, and there is good analysis with some everyday examples about why we feel certain way. It gives me a good vocabulary to talk about experiences, but when it comes to expain experince with technology, I feel it is limited and not so satisfied.

When I say holistic design, I don't mean that every time when we design computing systems, we should employ this approach, or concept. Most of today's computing systems are built to finish tasks, where usability is still their major concern, because it is task-centric, the purpose of good HCI design is the interaction between computer and human should not be in the way. In that case, Participatory Design as well as some HCI guidelines with some consideration of user experiences(depending on different situations, for example for a car sale support system) should be enough.

Where I am really concerned to use holistic design is in the area of ubiquitous computing and design for experience. Ubiquitous computing is to weave computings into our everyday fabric life, where functions and efficiency should not be the major concern anymore, usability is not enough, wheras experience, quality experience becomes critical issue. Since experience is so personal and context sensitive, we should really look beyond computers, and expand our scope of design to include elements of humans, settings, environments, timing and others to create quality experience.