[community] communicating inclusive design en masse

Treviranus, Jutta jtreviranus at ocadu.ca
Thu Jul 7 18:11:47 UTC 2016

Thank you Lucian, I love the way you have articulated this. 

I do not believe we can any longer (if we ever could) separate the solid and the digital world. My view of the digital is that while it is still emerging or in flux we have greater opportunities to influence the direction and conventions before they are propagated .. and that the digital may provide new opportunities to disrupt current inequities and barriers. 

We are in a reality, in a real life, where the digital is pervasive, I don’t think we can turn that back. We need people with inclusive values to help guide where we go with this reality. 


> On Jul 7, 2016, at 1:46 PM, Lucian Timofte <luciantimofte at gmail.com> wrote:
> To me, "We all are connected" is an axiom of life, regardless we
> acknowledge this or not. Exclusion comes when people do not acknowledge the
> 'wires' (visible and invisible) which connect one to another. Exclusion in
> design happens because exclusion in real life happens. But even 'inclusion'
> or 'exclusion' are limited concepts. They get meaning through context.
> To me, the proposal #1 ("We all are unique") and #3 ("We all are
> connected") can naturally merge into a single proposal: "We all are unique
> and connected". I would not be afraid of paradoxical wording.
> However, reviewing Jutta's video, I wouldn't be fully honest to salute the
> 'A-ha' moment of it without making few notes.
> I think Inclusive Design with its emphasis on the digital realm is at risk
> of divorcing from the 'solid' world. If this tendency is real, inclusive
> designers must acknowledge two things:
> 1. Perhaps Inclusive Design is a hat too large and it needs to be
> cosmeticised around the digital realm (like Digital Inclusive Design). And
> this is perfectly fine and compliant with the objectives of the Inclusive
> Design as defined by Jutta). If not, the thing number 2 comes into place.
> 2. Inclusive Design as is now, it cuts the branch under its feet. A
> self-sustainable digital environment is utopian though.
> Lastly, as inclusive designer, theologian, thinker, parent (and not only),
> while I applaud the good will, intentions and objectives within the
> Inclusive Design field, I would like to hear more debate around 'media
> ecology' (Jutta mentioned in one of her recent conferences about cobra
> effect created by Inclusive Design).
> Sincerely,
> Lucian
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Treviranus, Jutta <jtreviranus at ocadu.ca>
> wrote:
>> Thanks Dana and Jim,
>> When I first came up with the 3 dimensions I wanted the 3rd dimension to
>> reference the need to be cognizant of the systemic impact of design
>> decisions… to realize that no design decision is made in isolation..that we
>> are evermore connected and entangled… that we need to consider the larger
>> and connected context of our designs. The first dimension focuses on the
>> individual, the third dimension focuses on the system and the context. Here
>> is where ripple effects, curbcut phenomena, complexity theory, etc. come in.
>> Also the three dimensions of inclusive design are created in the context
>> of a world changed by digital systems and networks.  In this context we are
>> increasingly entangled. It is very difficult to do anything in isolation,
>> but we can also easily recruit a diverse crowd to assist.
>> The one liners were intended to be headers and then mnemonics for more
>> nuanced and applied descriptions of the dimensions.
>> thanks
>> Jutta
>>> On Jul 6, 2016, at 1:39 PM, Jim Tobias <tobias at inclusive.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Dana.
>>> Yeah, I'm not sure how 'we're all connected' is central to the message.
>> It's obviously true, but may be hard for some to relate to, and thus create
>> some skeptical distance? (I'll confess that's my reaction at times.)
>>> Instead, we could tie into 'needing everyone's unique contribution' by
>> saying how important it is that we be *able* to connect with
>> anyone/everyone. That is, the positive externality of the 'network' being
>> more valuable to each of us, the more people we can communicate with
>> through it. That would reinforce the importance of auto-personalization,
>> because you won't know in advance who you want to connect with, or what
>> their favorite mode or method will be.
>>> I would love to see this as a visualization that shows technology
>> changing over time, and individuals also changing over time, and attempting
>> to massively reach out to each other through the flux. Imagine 2 nearby
>> merry-go-rounds; each rider is the brass ring for another rider. Then pull
>> back and see more merry-go-rounds in other dimensions; some riders are
>> people, some are digital thingies. Connections and accomplishments flash
>> around and expand the scope.
>>> Buffy Sainte-Marie background music track!
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3uY3-O09sQ
>>> ***
>>> Jim Tobias
>>> Inclusive Technologies
>>> +1.908.907.2387 v/t
>>> skype jimtobias
>>> @inclutech
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: community [mailto:community-bounces at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca] On
>> Behalf Of Ayotte, Dana
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 1:07 PM
>>> To: Treviranus, Jutta <jtreviranus at ocadu.ca>
>>> Cc: Inclusive Design Community <community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca>
>>> Subject: Re: [community] communicating inclusive design en masse
>>> Hi Jutta,
>>> Regarding the 3 dimensions characterization, I think the first two are
>> clear. The third “we are all connected” has got me thinking - this idea
>> doesn’t seem to be clearly captured in how we’ve described the third
>> dimension of “Broader Beneficial Impact<
>> http://idrc.ocadu.ca/about-the-idrc/49-resources/online-resources/articles-and-papers/443-whatisinclusivedesign>”.
>> Currently it stresses broader impact/interconnectedness of people and
>> systems/virtuous cycles of inclusion. I think these ideas can be
>> extrapolated to encompass “we are all connected”, but I don’t think it’s
>> obvious from our definition. It seems that either we need to rethink or add
>> to the definition we currently have (this makes most sense to me - and
>> makes me think of the cause and effect exercise), or come up with a
>> different one-line characterization (which I’m having trouble doing!).
>>> Regarding the video, I agree with some others - I love the simplicity of
>> it. Perhaps it could be a bit shorter/more concise.
>>> Dana
>>> Dana Ayotte
>>> Inclusive Designer
>>> Inclusive Design Research Centre
>>> OCAD University
>>> www.idrc.ocad.ca<http://www.idrc.ocad.ca/>
>>> www.ocadu.ca<http://www.ocadu.ca/>
>>> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Treviranus, Jutta <jtreviranus at ocadu.ca
>> <mailto:jtreviranus at ocadu.ca>> wrote:
>>> I’ve been trying to distill our inclusive design theory into simple to
>> understand and quickly communicated chunks for the large scale workshops
>> (4000+ participants) planned by some of our partners.
>>> What do people think of characterizing the 3 dimensions as:
>>> 1. We are all unique
>>> 2. We need everyone’s unique contribution 3. We are all connected
>>> Also, would anyone be willing to create a more professional version of
>> this piece I threw together many years ago:
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VxQEPw1x9E
>>> thanks
>>> Jutta
>>> ________________________________________
>>> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca) To manage
>> your subscription, please visit:
>> http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community
>>> ________________________________________
>>> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca) To manage
>> your subscription, please visit:
>> http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community
>> ________________________________________
>> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca)
>> To manage your subscription, please visit:
>> http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community
> ________________________________________
> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca)
> To manage your subscription, please visit: http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community

More information about the community mailing list