Page 1

Co-Design: Danish Football Enthusiasts

Co-design - Understanding and Involving users Digital Media & Design IT-University - Copenhagen, Denmark Jonas Kristjansen ( jokr@itu.dk ), Casper Aarup Rasmussen ( casa@itu.dk ), Sara Tarby ( stac@itu.dk ), Adrian Ross-Thompson ( arot@itu.dk ), Kristoffer Dahl Villadsen ( kdav@itu.dk ), Thomas Charles Rohleder ( tcha@itu.dk ) Characters: 44986

Abstract The following paper explores how the use of data-gathering and co-design methods among football enthusiasts shapes our concept design. This is interesting in order to understand the different methodological approaches to co-design. The theoretical framework of the paper deals with understanding and involving users in the process of design. The conceptual scope is aimed at making statistical information during live broadcasting of football matches easy accessible. The co-design methods used during our design phase have helped us understand our target group and their needs. Furthermore it has helped us conceptualize their sketches.

Keywords: Field observations, Focus group, Future Workshop, Design Games, Co-design, Football enthusiasts.

1


Table of  contents   1.  Introduction  ......................................................................................................................................  3   1.1  Research  question  ...................................................................................................................................  3   1.2  Research  plan  ............................................................................................................................................  3   1.2.1  Target  group  ...........................................................................................................................................................  3   1.2.2  DECIDE  Framework  ............................................................................................................................................  4  

2 Theory  ..................................................................................................................................................  5   2.1  Observations  .............................................................................................................................................  5   2.2  Focus  Groups  .............................................................................................................................................  6   2.3  Collaborative  design  ...............................................................................................................................  6   2.4  Future  Workshop  .....................................................................................................................................  6   2.5  Creative  prompts  .....................................................................................................................................  8   2.6  635  Method  ................................................................................................................................................  8  

3 Methodology  .......................................................................................................................................  8   3.1  Observations  .............................................................................................................................................  8   3.2  Focus  groups  ...........................................................................................................................................  10   3.3  Future  workshop  ...................................................................................................................................  10  

4. Findings  .............................................................................................................................................  11   4.1  Observations  ...........................................................................................................................................  11   4.2  Focus  Group  .............................................................................................................................................  12   4.3  Future  Workshop  ...................................................................................................................................  13  

4. Analysis  &  Discussion  ...................................................................................................................  15   4.1  Concept  ......................................................................................................................................................  16  

5 Conclusion  .........................................................................................................................................  18   6  References  .........................................................................................................................................  19   7  Appendix  ............................................................................................................................................  20    

2


1. Introduction Danmarks Radio (DR) is testing the new service danskkulturarv.dk (Danish-culturalherritage.dk) and the site is currently in beta mode. They gave us the following task: ``Try to examine ways you can enhance the experience of cultural heritage so it becomes more relevant and more useful than ever. They want us to give them insights about how “kulturarv’’ can make use of cultural heritage. Enable users to experience the cultural heritage. Sustain the value by interacting with users. Enhance the users’ ability to contribute to the cultural heritage´´ (DR). To complete this task we chose the target group of football enthusiasts, since we were inspired by the many videos of full matches with the national team through time. What is more Danish culture than football? To make ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’ more relevant to our target group we needed to understand who the users are, what do they need and how can we make a relevant concept that might attract them to use the data from ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’. To understand our users we conducted observations around the many aspects of watching football, big matches from the top of the league, amateur matches and finally watching the game on the television both at the bar and at home. This helped us formulate a clear target group thus to understand them better we invited representatives to a focus group. Observations and Focus group are data-gathering methods and to shape our design concept in the right way we used the co-design method Future Workshop to make ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’ relevant and interesting to them.

1.1 Research question “How does the use of data-gathering and co-design methods among football enthusiasts shape our design concept which uses data from ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’?”

1.2 Research plan 1.2.1 Target group For this project we have chosen a target group of football enthusiasts. This means that they should have a basic knowledge of football and be interested in it. They play football, watch football or in other ways incorporate football in their daily life. The target group’s age range is 25-40 years. We have based our target group on some observations and the material that ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’ could provide. From the start of this project we were told that we were supposed to enhance the experience on ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’ so that it becomes more useful than ever. Based on that information we

3


went on the website to see what kind material they could provide. What we found was that they had a vast archive of old football matches that could be seen and old radio material to listen to. We decided based on the material that it should be football enthusiasts we wanted to design for. After we had done the initial research on ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’, we did some field observations to see how people behaved while watching or playing football. Our observations were conducted the following places: a football field, a sports bar and a football match between ‘FC København’ and ‘FC Nordsjælland’. We heard how the observed talked about football and noticed different connections between people. Based on this we decided that the target group should be men, age 25-40. The reason for using a target groups comes from Kuniavsky: “You are making a product for some reason. You have decided that some people in the world can make their lives better with your idea. (...) Maybe it’s to get them information they wouldn’t have otherwise. Maybe it helps them connect with other people. Maybe it entertains them.” (Kuniavsky. 2003, p. 17) Our target group was somehow vague in the beginning of our process, the further we got through the design funnel; we were able to specify a clearly formulated target group. We had no way of ensuring that our target group would have any interest in what we were doing. However after finishing co-design sessions and after having conversations with these men, we know that at least a few representing individuals are interested of something new and that ‘danskkulturarv.dk’ can provide it.

1.2.2 DECIDE Framework DECIDE framework is a way to organize our design process (Sharp, Rogers and Preece, n.d. p. 625). It helps the designers keep focus and plan the different interviews and workshops. D - The Goals: Our goal was to use the content presented by DR to increase interest in ‘Danskkulturarv.dk’ among the Danes, more specifically our target group. Our focus was to create more interest in the history of Danish football. Furthermore we wanted to gain insight into the football enthusiast’s opinion about media coverage. E - Questions: We wanted to explore how the target group access information about football? And how do they use it? Do they use post-match coverage, web, forums, and newspaper or talk to each other? What do they talk about during the game? Finally we wanted to know what kind of information they were looking for, regarding football? Statistics? Video? Pictures? Plain text? History or current happenings?

4


C - Methods: The methods we conducted are as follows: 1 Observations before initial brainstorm. 2 Focus group for getting an insight into the users. 3 Design Games / Future Workshop for co-creating with the users. I - Practical issues: Some of the practical issues we initially thought about were as follows. It would be difficult getting in touch with our target group, due to the fact that they might be busy doing the weekdays. We wanted to find somebody who was enthusiastic enough so that they would willingly participate in the workshop. Get a nuanced picture and not just supporters of one team because the concept should contribute all in the target group. One of the biggest issues would be to find the right angle of implementing cultural heritage. D - Ethical issues We have no ethical issues regarding our methodology, the concept or in relation to our target group. Football is such a common interest among Danes hence it is no issue to talk about. E - analyse, interpret and present the data The considerations we made about analysing our data were to focus on the implementation of the users in the design phase.

2 Theory In the following section we will describe the theoretical foundation, which the paper is based on.

2.1 Observations Sharp, Rogers & Preece (2011) explains the qualities behind observations and how it is a useful data gathering technique; “Observation helps designers understand the users’ context, tasks, and goals.” (Sharp, Rogers & Preece, 2011, p. 321). One of the reasons for why observation is a useful tool, is when people are asked to explain what they do it can be difficult for them to include everything in their explanations - ‘What they say, isn’t necessarily what they do’. By doing a field observation the true story can be discovered (Sharp, Rogers & Preece, 2011).

5


2.2 Focus Groups “Focus groups are structured group interviews that quickly and inexpensively reveal a target audience’s desires, experiences, and priorities.” (Kuniavsky 2003, p. 201) The researcher has an active role as moderator. During the focus group interview the moderators are responsible for making sure that the participants feel comfortable. Thus they reveal their inner thoughts and feelings about the subject and so forth illuminate social dynamics within the group (Kuniavsky 2003, p.227). The focus group interview is very handy in the beginning of the design funnel; hence the research team can quickly and inexpensively gain access to large amounts of qualitative data about the user and about their context. The output is usually opinions, feelings and social dynamics. The purpose of the focus group interview is not to generalize but to provide insight into how people perceive situations and how they relate to their subjective world (Kuniavsky 2003, p.201).

2.3 Collaborative design “Collaborative design naturally encourages divergent thinking. Diverse stakeholders bring a broad range of perspectives, helping you see the problem from many angles in a short timescale”. (Bowles, Cennyd and Box 2011, p. 51) Collaborative design is a design technique, which focuses on the user needs and provides great insight into what the actual user sees as “their design”. Collaborative design is a sort of umbrella term; which covers the different methods such as Participatory design, Innovation with users, Co-creation, Collaborative sketching, Drama and theatre, Design Games and Future Workshops.

2.4 Future Workshop The objective of the Future Workshop is to create a proposal of a possible solution to an unsatisfactory situation. The output of the method is an overview of the present situation and possible ideas for improvement. Finally the method will take the ideas through a realisation process, making the solutions for the situation realistic (Bødker, Kenser & Simonsen, 2004). “The aim of a Future Workshop is for all participants to gain a shared understanding of the problematic situation, to experience how others perceive it, to give structure to the expressed ideas for improvement” (Bødker, Kender & Simonsen, 2004) It has been defined how to conduct a Future Workshop by Bødker, Kender & Simonsen (2004). This is done in five phases: Preparation, critique, fantasy, realisation and follow-up.

6


In the preparation phase the project group is to formulate a theme of the Future Workshop. This theme can be chosen a research question, a general problem or a situation that requires a solution. A suitable room with a comfortable atmosphere and enough space for all the participants including space for dividing the participants into small groups. The layout of the Future Workshop is made and explained to the invited participants by a chosen foreman. The task of the foreman is to coordinate the Future Workshop and keep track of time. This phase it also meant to loosen up the participants. In the critique phase every participants are asked to critique the chosen theme in keywords. It is up to the foreman to engage the participants, but longer argumentations are not allowed. The main goal of this phase is to have the participants share their experiences and create new connections upon what needs to be changed. The shared experience gives the participants a sense of cohesion and of not being alone with the criticism. This phase ensures a foundation on which the work phases can be shaped . When all of the keywords have been written down, and the time is up or the participants cannot introduce other critique points, the participants are to vote for a critique point. The keyword that received the most votes is to be worked on, in the fantasy phase. (Bødker, Kender & Simonsen, 2004) In the fantasy phase there are no limits for the participants. They are to work with the chosen discussed themes and create an utopian solution with no restrictions. It is important that the foreman takes responsibility in making the participants think creatively and with no restraints. The utopian themes created in fantasy phase are then to be worked with in the next phase. The realisation phase, in this phase the utopias are to be evaluated to find out if they can be realised. This phase brings back criticism to point out conditions or barriers that make the utopias difficult to apply in practice. This will sort out the most unrealistic utopian themes and create more concrete solutions. In the follow-up phase the design team is to make a report of the critique visions and plans. Kensing (2003) defines the qualities of the Future Workshop as a method that focuses on how to get the job done without bringing economics and technical issues into context. It is a way to get the users involved in the design and make them contribute their knowledge upon problems. It is therefore the specific users that the designs are done for rather than the average users. This creates a better understanding of the users cognition and practice, making the Future Workshop method a way to acquire a qualitative understanding that traditional methods does not cover (Kensing 2003).

Â

7


2.5 Creative prompts Creative Prompts are inspirational triggers, which should help the participant’s let loose and come up with creative ideas (Bowles, Cennyd and Box, 2011). A Creative Prompt can be different artifacts, environments or sensory stimuli. “These stimuli can bring two apparently unrelated ideas together to suggest a new avenue of exploration” (Bowles, Cennyd and Box, 2011, p. 61).

2.6 635 Method 635 method (Rohrbach, 1969) is an alternative method of brain writing. The concept of this method is that all the participants get a paper where they write an idea, then every five minutes the paper circles to the next person around the table; which then writes his own thoughts on the idea. The session ends when the participants get their original paper with ideas back. The method is great for idea generating and helps the participants avoiding creative barriers.

3 Methodology During our co-design process we used field observations and focus groups methods. These methods provide insight about the target group. First we conducted the field observations. Afterwards we executed the focus group. The two aforementioned methods provided insight into the target group and the social dynamics within it. Also they served as foundation for the later Future Workshop. During our Future Workshop we used two-Design Games “635 method” and “Collaborative sketching”. These methods served to stimulate the creativity of the participants in order to produce an output in the form of some ideas. All the qualitative data from the aforementioned methods was gathered in Danish since it is the native language of all the participants. We have only translated the parts of the transcription, which we used in the paper into English.

3.1 Observations According to Sharp, Rogers & Preece (2011) theory on a spectrum from passive to participating observation, the design team has covered the two varieties of the method. We decided to make several different field studies because of the numeral places, where football enthusiasts enjoy their interest. This turned out rather successful. Being passive observers, the design team was able to see and follow football enthusiasts without intervening. By being a participating observer, on the other hand, the team was able to ask questions and be let into the inner circle and thereby witness the social norms and values of football enthusiasts.

8


When wanting to explore the target group, it was decided to do field observations in three places: The stadium where football enthusiasts watch professional football games live on the spot, the bar where they watch professional football games live on a screen and on the field where they play in smaller amateur teams. Note taking was used during all of the field studies and these were read and considered by the entire design team (Sharp, Rogers & Preece, 2011, p. 328). At the stadium it was possible to sit close to other people without being noticed. The field research was about finding what kind of a place a stadium was and writing down issues about the size of the big screen and noticing how and when to buy beer and food et cetera. Here it was possible to do a Fly On The Wall data gathering (Raijmakers, Gaver & Bishay 2006, p.230), since we were not revealing our intentions with being there. If we are distinguishing between low and high amounts of participation it is difficult to label with aforementioned spectrum by Sharp, Rogers & Preece (2011, p.326). We were participating in the activities of the game, watching the game as everybody else did it, and we did indeed experience the game through the eyes of a football enthusiast. We did not interact with others, thus being outsiders observing the subjects, who were watching the football game. The game was between ‘FC København’ and ‘FC Nordsjælland’. During the observations at the sports bar the design team were observing others watching a game while watching it themselves. This time it was in the company of two football enthusiasts, who were well aware of the design groups attentions of being there, hence we were able to ask questions about why and how they were watching the game. This was also an opportunity because of the less “live” experience of the game. Special happenings are being shown again in slow motion in television compared to the live experience at Parken, where moments can be lost if you look away from the field. We frequently asked questions about the context they were in, but mostly we just observed and tried to do, whatever the enthusiasts did. On the spectrum from passive to participant (Sharp, Rogers & Preece, 2011) we were insiders, thus participant observer. The observations were done at Brazil Bar; a sports bar in Frederiksberg near Copenhagen where fans of Aalborg Boldklub meet often to watch football matches together. The same two subjects, who invited the design group to watch a football game in the bar, both play for the same amateur football team. The team trains and play matches against other teams once a week. What differs from the other two observations, contextually speaking, and the live professional match was changed to the amateur game, where the subject was doing something else but watching and commenting. This time there was a clear understanding on who was the outsider and passive observer (Sharp, Rogers & Preece, 2011) which to some degree makes it impossible for the observer to go unnoticed, but she was well aware of not interrupting nor asking questions about why the subjects did what they did in the game.

9


3.2 Focus groups The observations served as foundation for our focus group. By observing the target group before the focus group, we were able to gain some knowledge about them, and we were able to find some general assumptions, which in turn, could be used during the focus group. After we specified our target group, we assembled a focus group consisting of four members of the target group. We had two moderators guiding the participants through the desired questions and topics (Halkier 2008 & Kuniavsky 2003). We conducted the focus group at the gymnasium where the football team practice. The interview was done in Danish since it is the native language of the participants. The point was to have the participants discuss the following subjects given by the moderators in order to provide insight for elaboration during our later Future Workshop. During our focus group we would lead the discussion into the following themes: ● Media usages ○ Newspapers, subscriptions, app’s, TV-shows, radio, websites ● National matches vs. club matches ● Which kind of information do the participants read about football ○ How often do they seek out this information ○ How often do they watch football matches

3.3 Future workshop The focus Group interview together with the observations served as a foundation for the Future Workshop. Which general themes were to be discussed during the Future Workshop? We invited some football enthusiasts to come to the IT-university to participate in our Future Workshop. When they arrived, we played a video of an old football match from the 80’s between Denmark and Albania on the projector in Design Lab, where we conducted the workshop. These Creative Prompts quickly got the football talk going while we were welcoming them; the surroundings we provided for them should help the participants access a more creative way of thinking. After gathering around the table and coffee was poured we started the intro phase by asking them about their latest football encounters, with topics such as: “When did they last watch a match, the best goal and about fair play situation in Champions League?”. We started the critique phase by asking them about what they missed in current tv coverage of live matches, pre-match information about football and older football video clips. The phase was a verbal brainstorm while facilitators were taking notes. In the fantasy phase we conducted a more creative brainstorming session, where we let the participants use the “635 method” to generate ideas. When the participants were done with the idea generation, they had formulated four ideas. The ideas were further developed by the other participants by cycling the papers. During the final phase of the “635 method” they presented the ideas to each other thus they could combine them into two ideas. The participants were

10


asked to choose the final idea, and subsequently divided into two groups and were told to do a collaborative sketch on the interfaces. We tweaked and modified the Design Consequences (Bowles, Cennyd and Box, 2011) so it would fit in the realisation phase of the Future Workshop. Lastly they would present their idea to each other, this presentation of their collaborative sketch helped us understand what they felt were important.

4. Findings The following section will present the findings from the aforementioned methods.

4.1 Observations At the stadium, Parken at Østerbro, we observed cheerleaders on the big screen and pissoirs were to be found close to the seating area. We observed many grown men with their sons, around 7-13 years of age. Men attended the game in pairs, but they barely interacted during the game. They were very concentrated and only spoke in matters of yelling at players on the football field. Some of the men were singing and chanting songs during the game and the songs had incorporated special hand gestures and other ways of expression, making the crowd look very synchronized and intense from a distance. People acted aggressively and emotionally expressive during the game, they left the stadium in a calm and steady manor. Former players from FC Copenhagen's history were referred to on the big screen. At the amateur match, at the Kløvermarken football field, we observed how emotions were expressed very loudly during the game, especially when responsibility for certain events had to be distributed (ex. the discussion of whether or not there is a free kick or not). The members of both teams, those on the field playing but also the individuals who either were substitute players or just watching because of injuries, they had a very professional attitude towards the game. The two teams were archenemies for the ninety minutes of the game. Their conversations in the half time and during the game involved tactics about the match. Nobody sang songs or used synchronized battle cries during the game as opposed to the match at the stadium. At Brazil Bar at Frederiksberg, fans of the football club ‘AaB’ met to watch matches together. Christoffer ”Gof”, Kasper ”Rudi” and Fie were at the bar to watch the team, which they do regularly. Gof and Rudi talked about the year 2008, a golden age for their team, while watching the game. Gof was wearing a retro AaB shirt from the eighties, and he and Rudi could answer most questions about their team, being well educated in that part of their national heritage. He talked about AaB’s proud heritage compared to the other team, Esbjerg. One of the usual guests had updated himself at the social networking site Twitter and told the others in the bar about their team players comments regarding the current game. They interacted with each other, both friends and strangers; they had technical discussions about the game, using professional terms and phrases. Playing schedule and all sorts of informations were to be found among fellow AaB fans and not at individual smartphones. Gof owned an iPhone 4 and Kasper had an 11


older iPhone, which they did not use during the first half. They used Gofs phone during second half of the match though, when it was certain, that AaB would lose. They used an official Superliga App and shared one phone, still being social. The crowd was synchronic in their reactions. More than once they all yelled, ”bold!” (Annex 1) at the exact same time. One man had brought his little daughter, who was wearing an AaB shirt herself, and he was teaching her about ”us, the red ones” and ”the yellow ones” and how Jesper Lange (Esbjerg player) is a ”very, very, bad, bad, bad, man” (Annex 1). After the game, which AaB loosed, Gof and Rudi evaluated and agreed, that the players on the team were too young and inexperienced and that the team could need some of the old golden ages players like Peter Würtz. They used the app, when they could not agree on his age.

4.2 Focus Group To gain a better understanding of the users and their needs, we did a focus group session with our target group. Here the talk quickly went on to how they watched the matches and what they did before, during and after. The participants talked about how they did not check up on statistics before watching a match, but when they play an online manager game, the statistics did become interesting to them:

“Actually there was a lot of tactics, when you really started battling,(…) – down the road, you could see what each player was doing in the closed groups, (…) The day before matches, the tactical screen got locked so other players couldn’t see what one where doing and then it would be time to actually play with tactics” (Bjørn, Annex 3). They talked about their own lower league team, where they keep statistics about themselves manually. ”… We updated the match statistics of the team by us self, who got the most votes after each match, who scored the most goals, or everyone who scored and every assist when we remember it...” (Bjørn, Annex 3) This illuminates that the participants like divers statistics. In this case they used the information to give an annual award and decide which player have to do the laundry the following week. After this talk we continued with the old football clips and if they were interested in seeing them again, but here the participants made it clear, that the hours-long pre-match coverage before every national game already gave them many old football clips. "But it is not information or clips which I obtain by myself, they are being pumped into our heads every time there is a match which just is a bit similar something which happened before."(Alan, Annex 3) This made a transition to a discussion about how they wanted more funny clips instead of all the old successful clips.

12


”I don’t have a great need to see John Faxe strike it in the ass again, it has been shown to us several hundred times…” “… I personally think it would be fun to watch some funny clips, from the European championship finals, with all the other shots John Faxe had on target where he failed to get the ball near the goal. He had 60 finishes during the UEFA 92, in which he did not score any goals, like a cavalcade…” “… I think it is funny, because nobody every shows it on TV, I never get to see it” (Thor, Annex 3) After this they proceeded to talk about how they would like to see some of the old commentaries, like when Jan Mølby said the national team was the poorest in 25 years (Annex 3). Finally they came back to the statistics in the games, where some more detailed statistics were preferred: “I would like to have more statistics like they have it in basketball, there are loads of statistics and probably many in American football too, but I do not watch it that much.” (Alan, Annex 3) They would like to have this information to settle arguments, as when the commentator said that x player had had a bad day, but actually he ran 10-11 kilometres during the game. The moderator asked the participants how they knew when any given match was played “We find somewhere, anywhere. TV has it.” (Thor, Annex 3) “It is just as easy to Google ‘’FCK and Liga’’, then it finds it.” (Rasmus, Annex 3) “I don’t have any preferences. I could just watch some TV-program and find it the day after. It irritates the hell out of me. Does Stuttgarten play? Can’t remember if it’s home or away?” (Thor, Annex 3) The participants found all of their football information all over the Internet; they used all kinds of different solutions. The focus group ended by talking about their own favourite teams and how they would not miss the Danish team competing in Champions League, even though all odds were against them what if they missed a sensation?

4.3 Future Workshop During the three phases of the workshop the participants had many ideas on how their experience with football could be improved. The first phase was a brainstorming session where they had to criticize what they missed about old football clips and football broadcasting nowadays. They enjoyed nostalgic clips but mostly the clips that they had not seen before or could not remember. They talked about how they would love to see clips of the beautiful play up to the goals and not just the goals. These football enthusiasts loves the game, so a thing like good

13


defensive playing was also a theme, just like they mentioned that it was a long time since they last seen the dribble-skills of Michael Laudrup. Finally they criticized the absence of funny and strange clips as when the Danish national team kept losing during the first decade of the twenty first century and Elkjær strangling another player in the eighties (Annex 6). In the fantasy phase where the 635 method was used to create ideas that could be used for the project with no restrictions. ●

The first idea was a database with tactical ideas about how the teams play. It could be a warm-up to upcoming matches about things that could be important to that match. How does the player’s move amongst each other, where could possible problems appear and where do the good runs come? (Annex 6). The idea was to give the sofa-coaches what they wanted and also a way to settle an argument between friends. Possible features could be commentaries from the teams coach, old team tactics and line-ups, how the tactics change if other players come on and expert-verification of the data.

Two ideas were pretty much the same, with an app that could collect all statistics in one place. Besides the current score, the league standings and goal scorers, the app could provide information like second assist (the second last pass before the goal), form curves and cross-referencing with earlier games. A feature about this app should be that it could be connected to the TV so the statistic could appear there next to the current match. Possible features here could also be old video clips, an extra layer of graphic and tactics.

A third idea was a video streaming service that could be indexed after goals and the build-up play. It should contain interviews with old players before the match and have all the build-up to the goals. The search engine should be quite big and the video player should have the possibility of user inputs - let them mark their clips with hash tags. These are clips that you can find on YouTube but they are almost all-poor quality and with strange music in the background.

The last idea was a service that compares statistics and live odds. Here users should have the ability to comment on them and the service should also contain the line-ups for the upcoming match. This should be animated in an intriguing way and should have the feature of watching goals and profiles from earlier matches. Finally you should be able to see interviews with the coach each time right after the match have started, to get his answer to why he chose this line-up.

In the realisation phase where the participants and the design team discussed the ideas and how some of them could be combined. This led up to two different ideas - one that was appbased and one that was browser-based. The group was divided into two minor groups to polish these ideas and make a collaborative sketch about a possible interface.

14


The App based idea was an extended live score service, with the score in the top. Scrolling down the screen you would get statistics and scores from other games. Then there would be a list of players from the game with information and history about them. After this there would be a small match-history between the teams with video clips. To make the App easy to use it should only be a scroll app - normally this service requires clicking back and forth (Annex 6). The browser-based idea was based on the first idea from the fantasy phase with tactics. It should be very interactive and contain your favourite teams. Since it would be an app for football nerds it should have some examples and be very user-friendly so it would not be too complicated to learn. There should be some discussions about the tactics, but the program will be based on information from experts. The purpose is to enjoy all aspects of the game and see what the single player does and not just the star of the team. An idea is that it could be used for football teaching as well.

4. Analysis & Discussion We analysed our results of each individual method to increase our understanding of the different method and how the results changed our way of looking at the ideas, the target group and our process. Therefore we will analyse the observations we made, our focus group session and finally the Future Workshop to get closer to a design concept for Danskkulturarv.dk. The point with the observations was to narrow down our target group to a group of people that could appear as ‘first movers’ to our design. In other words, a stereotype group of people that could represent ‘the Danish man’. During our observations at the Superliga match we saw many fathers with their children. The observed kids ranged from 7-13 years old. This led us to think about a target group of fathers, with the focus on ‘transferring football history/culture to the younger generations’. The fathers would take their kid to the stadium to let them experience the atmosphere and share their passion for the team. However, at the amateur game there was shouting on the pitch about tactics and positions. Even though it is a low-league game, the players were very serious about the game; they used tactics learned from watching high-league TV matches. This indicates that the target group could be people who watch football regularly and are interested in tactics and statistics. Finally at the bar, the fans watching the game shouted at the screen instead of each other and through that they got a sense of belonging together. They could discuss elements of the game with people at the bar. This indicates to us that the shared cultural identity when it comes to football was high while watching and discussing football and statistics together. The people that were most involved were those were enthusiastic about one of the teams playing. Therefore we chose that the target group should be men that were enthusiastic fans of a team and enjoys watching the matches on TV. Looking at this later on also confirmed some of the design ideas created in the following methods.

15


Moving on to the focus group session, the point was to increase our understanding of the selected target group, what did they miss about football in the media and what they think was great? Here the participants first mentioned that they were not really interested in the statistics, but when we got deeper into the questions it quickly came through that statistics were needed. These facts and numbers where interesting to the target group when it came to teams they were following. For example if their favourite team was playing, they placed a bet on the game or they played a manager game based on the match. They indicated that when you watch the match with friends these statistics become usable for discussing the game thus the user can ‘win’ arguments over their friends. So looking at this, the statistics gives the possibility of having a ‘game within the game’, where the users can discuss something and provide evidence through the statistics while watching the match with one’s favourite team. The users indicated that they would enjoy watching old football clips they have not seen yet; here the emphasis is on fun and intriguing moments. They have no need for watching the clips with friends though, but instead the clips are good for creating a personal prelude to the matches and to get entertained during a slow paced game. Finally the participants used very different methods for finding information about upcoming matches, some used the Internet, and other used text-TV and searched on the smartphone. Therefore the participants will need a concept with more statistics during the TV coverage, to be engaged more in the culture concerning football. Hence the discussion with one’s friends is an important part of the experience. The participants are not always watching the games with others and here they will need some kind of entertainment, and funny clips could be a solution, and finally they need a place to gather all the information about the games. The outcome of the Future Workshop is described in the findings section, but the participants used the first phase to confirm much of our analysis of the focus group session. The participants were still in need of statistics when socialising with fellow football fans. The clips were more for entertainment use. The fact that they would like some clips that are not just fun but also appreciates many aspects of the game is interesting. This shows that our design should also include clips that have dribbles; defensive play and good build up plays towards the goals. The ideas they created in the fantasy phase also had all the elements of this and in the realisation phase the two ideas were created. They are both very interesting to proceed with, but we chose to select the App based idea since it is the idea that contains most aspects of our findings in all of the methods.

4.1 Concept We chose to develop on the app based concept, hence the output of the workshop regarding the app was very detailed, in addition the app fulfils the needs of the target group, according to the qualitative data which we were able to gain from our methodological approach. The concept is aimed towards home usages, intended to provide an extra screen of information while the users are watching football on the television. The app can provide a basis for discussions between football enthusiasts or it can be used as a tool of datasets, which the users would not normally access during the matches.

16


“You are making a product for some reason. You have decided that some people in the world can make their lives better with your idea. (...) Maybe it’s to get them information they wouldn’t have otherwise. Maybe it helps them connect with other people. Maybe it entertains them.” (Kuniavsky. 2003, p. 17) The app contains the following features: match score, match history, team statistics, player statistics and live tables. All of the content in the app is easy accessible. All the data regarding a match is displayed in a single screen thus the users are not distracted by abstract menus while watching the game. To execute the aforementioned app, DR will need to involve third parties in order to incorporate statistics, which is not accessible through Danskkulturarv.dk. The concept is reliant on the third party to contribute with data material; otherwise the concept is not realisable. The concept in itself does not use much data from Danskkulturarv.dk, but it is the concept our target group stumbled upon, first at our focus group where they wanted statistics as in NFL. Second in our Future Workshop the target group made an app that corresponded with ideas from the focus group.

Figure 1 & 2. Sketch of the concept. The concept draws together many of the findings in the methods, with the statistics and the video clips as being the main functionality. This way, the ability to both use the app with friends and to use it when you are alone is available and thus connecting all the aspects of enjoying football. The culture of football engages the watcher by letting him get immersed in the game and follow his favourite team and to let him discuss the games with his friends. As indicated by the participants, much of the core of football is also winning the game, either by playing yourself or by watching your favourite team win. This App will contribute to this by letting the users win discussions by providing evidence via statistics.

17


5 Conclusion “How does the use of data-gathering and co-design methods among football enthusiasts shape our design concept which uses data from Danskkulturarv.dk?� Through our design process we found that the data-gathering method of observations were good to narrow down the target group, and to provide insight before the focus group. The data-gathering method of focus groups however specified the target group completely and at the same time gave us ideas about the concept and helped us to understanding their view of football culture. Finally the co-design method Future Workshop elaborated on the problems that our target group had and gave concrete solutions to these. Together the findings from all of the methods shaped our final concept. We wanted to explore how Danskkulturarv.dk could gain a wider appeal to the population and chose the niche football enthusiasts. To understand what that meant and whom we should examine, we did some observations of some football games, on top level, on amateur level and on a sports bar. From this we defined the target group as men who were fans of a football team and watched football regularly. These we made a focus group session with and after analysis of the results, we found that the users needed more statistics when watching football games with friends. Besides this the users would like some football clips that were not just glorious moments of football history but also clips that were a bit funny. Finally we designed with the target group in a Future Workshop session and got through to two final ideas. This ended up with the final concept consisting of the most important findings from the methods. This concept is an App with live-statistics and video clips that let friends engage more in the football matches and let the user, that watches matches alone, get more entertained. We believe this concept will contribute to the Danish culture of football.

Â

18


6 References Bowles, Cennydd and Box, J. (2011). Undercover User Experience Design. New Riders, pp. 5167. Bødker, K., Kensing, F., Simonsen, J. (2004). Participatory IT Design. MIT Press, pp. 32-51 + 270-277. Halkier, B. 2010. Focus Groups As Social Enactments: Integrating interaction and content in the analysis of group data. Halkier, B. 2008. Fokus groups. 2nd ed. Kensing, F. (2003). Method and Practices in Participatory Design. ITU Press, pp. 281-294. Kuniavsky, M., 2003, Observing the User Experience: A Practitioner's Guide to User Research, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco Rajimakers, B., Gaver, W. W., and Bishay, J. 2006. Design Documentaries: Indspirring Design Research Through Documentary Film. In Proceedings of the 6th Conforence on Designing Interactive Systems. (University Park, PA, USA, June 26 - 28, 2006). DIS ‘06. ACM, New Yorke, NY, 229-238 Rohrbach, B., "Kreativ Nach Regeln - Methode 635, Eine Neue Technik Zum Lösen Von Problemen", Absatzwirtschaft, 12, No.19, 1969, pp. 73-75. Sharp, Rogers and Preece: ``Interaction Design´´ 2nd ed. Chapter 13: DECIDE a framework to guide evaluation. pp. 626-643

19


7 Appendix The appendix can be located here: www.jkristjansen.com/co-design/ 1

Observations - Field Notes

2

Focus Group - Topic Guide

3

Focus Group – Transcript9

4

Future Workshop - Topic Guide

5

Future Workshop - Creations and sketches

6

Future Workshop Sound File

20

Co-Design:Danish Football Enthusiasts  

The following paper explores how the use of data-gathering and co-design methods among football enthusiasts shapes our concept design. This...

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you