Issuu

George’s Decision

Case Study

Miguel Rodriguez

Collaborative Design 2023

PROJECT OVERVIEW

George’s World:

Thirty years from now, all children, from birth, are guaranteed a reasonable right to privacy, especially concerning the use and acquisition of their data and their image.

At the age of 18, each person must decide which particular aspects of this privacy they wish to extend into their adult lives.

Within this world, a young woman named George is approaching her 18th birthday, and soon, she’ll be making the most important decision of her life.

Project Goal:

Produce world-building assets in order to explore the contours of George’s world, which will help our client plan for the future within that space. They will be used for a series of futurecasting workshops.

Team CD:

The team consisted of Collaborative Design / Design Systems (CD/DS) graduate students from the Pacific Northwest College of Art (PNCA).

We utilized our skills and experiences in education, marketing, graphic design, project management, and workshop ideation for the successful completion of this project.

Team members:

• Miguel Rodriguez (Project Lead)

• Angie Bravo

• Brendy Hale

• Erin Fox

• Hafsa Aden

• Katie Vellman

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Who is George?

George is not real: she is a persona that we must create to explore data and privacy considerations in 2050.

However, our team aimed to make George a living person, as much as we could.

Persona Intent:

While the delivery of assets to a client is important, we wanted to center the design process from the start.

Even more, the creation of personas is incredibly tricky. The process requires consistent and continuous iteration, as well as a diverse and multidisciplinary team.

Because the creation of personas is rife with assumptions, stereotypes, and other design-related barriers, a creative team must be ready to tackle these problems head on.

Who is Interested in George?

While Futures Think! is a fictitious client, they guided our design decisions. They are a prominent think tank made up of individuals from several industries, including media, healthcare, government, and technology.

They perform research, publish articles and studies, and help draft legislation. All of their research and case studies are publicly available.

Mary Sherwin, our professor, acted as a representative and consultant for the project.

PERSONA FRAMEWORK

What Makes up a Person?

Before we delved into the creation of futurecasting assets, our team needed to develop our George!

We centered the following questions for our persona brainstorming workshop –>>>

• What is the importance of family and friends on a someone?

• How does race and ethnicity affect someone’s life?

• What role do governments or politics affects someone’s life?

• How important is independence? What does it look like?

• How do gender and gender norms affect someone?

• What is the importance of technology in someone’s life and activities?

• What relationships do people have with privacy?

• What role to traditions and culture play in someone’s life?

PERSONA FRAMEWORK

Brainstorm Activity:

Each team member individually answered the aforementioned questions, which informed the creation of 3 George personas.

Key themes included –>>>>

Privacy:

• Protection

• Safety

• Freedom

• Vulnerability

• Mental Health

• Control

• Headphones

• Voyeurism

• False Comfort

Technology:

• Communication

• Dissatisfaction

• Emergency Services

• Commerce

• Education

• Healthcare

• Convenience

• Entertainment

• Efficiency

Traditions & Culture:

• Building Community

• Identity

• Connection

• Expressions

• Creation of Norms

• Feeling Seen/Heard

• Celebration

• Negative

• Heritage/Roots

• Feeling Loved

PERSONA FRAMEWORK

Brainstorm Activity:

Each team member individually answered the aforementioned questions, which informed the creation of 3 George personas.

Key themes included –>>>>

Family & Friends:

• Support System

• Belonging

• Togetherness

• Coping Mechanisms

• Caretaker

• Role Models

• Lessons

• Shapes Self-worth

Government & Politics:

• Class Status

• Legality

• Opportunities

• Safety

• Access

• Rights vs. Privilege

• Policies

• Income

• Voting

• Ser vices

• Accountability Independence:

• Individual

• Financial Freedom

• Romantic Selection

• Influence

• Decision-making

• Choice

• Capability

Gender:

• Individual

• Financial Freedom

• Romantic Selection

• Influence

• Decision-making

• Choice

THE THREE GEORGES

Persona Creation:

Our team split into three groups, with each responsible for creating their own George persona.

Team members were encouraged to reference notes and themes from our brainstorming activity.

Additionally, I shared other persona creation tools to expand the team’s abilities:

• Creating the User Persona by Digital Natives

• Using Personas to Develop Awesome Experiences by Maureen Barlow & Donna Megquier

• What Makes a Person: The Seven Layers of Identity in Literature and Life by Maria Popova

Mary Sherwin’s Selection Crtieria for George:

1. Which George is most in alignment with Futures Think strategic planning and mission and values?

2. Which George has experiences/narratives that have been typically excluded from Futures Think consideration?

3. Which George’s decision could potentially spark more of a variety of world-building assets in comparison to others?

THE THREE GEORGES

SELECTING GEORGE SELECTING GEORGE

Mary Sherwin’s Selection: George Isioma is our persona! Mary provided feedback on each persona, and asked us to modify elements of George Isioma’s context.

In particular, she wanted us to be more in alignment with Futures Think’s needs for the futurecasting workshops.

Mary’s Reflections about George Nakamura:

• Interesting that she does not speak Hawaain

• Has a strong family thread

• She is too old for the project; she has already made her choice

• Liked that she is interested in becoming a nurse. Thinking about future generations

SELECTING GEORGESELECTING GEORGESELECTING GEORGE

Mary’s Reflections about George Escalade:

• What’s the drive for her nostalgia / affinity?

• Cognitive friction between becoming a car designer and distaste for modern technology

• Futures Think is not interested in hosting a workshop for someone not interested in tech

Mary’s Reflections about George Isioma:

• Interesting that she speaks Haitian Creole

• Weird that she doesn’t want her future classmates knowing about her ahead of time

• Wants the team to boost the excitement for tech. She needs to be pro-tech; technology = safety.

• Pull the world from the college campus i.e. she has not decided

• The improper use of data and technology is great

• Mexico City as a location is okay; how might other factors impact the environment and city?

SELECTING GEORGESELECTING GEORGESELECTING GEORGE

PERSONA ASSUMPTIONS

Mary guided the team through reflection activity in order to identify which assumptions (conscious and unconscious) we were using and operating with in the persona creation process.

I used these reflections to modify my asset-building approach and strategy.

• There’s still internet?

• There’s college at 18?

• Everyone goes to college?

• Someone could choose to not have a phone?

• Future is able-bodied?

• The U.S. is still united?

• Data is invasive?

• Generational influence?

• What about the effects of climate change?

• What does migration look like in 2050?

• Traditional families?

• George is a real person / human, and she is not an AI or android

• Traditional family units?

• Living situations?

• George fashion choices?

ASSET CREATION

Asset Selection:

Each team member was tasked with bringing at least one idea for a design sprint.

I tasked the team with using a process of elimination technique to narrow down the asset choices to three:

• George’s Sketchbook

• Mexico City Mural

• What Does Data Collection Look Like George’s World?

Other Asset Choices:

• Storyboard outlining George’s decision

• Trading cards based on persona information

• Drawings or prototypes of social media in 2050

• Testimonials or quotes from George

• Data degrees of separation in 2050

• Mapping of an ideal privacy agreement

• Futurecasting for technology beyond 2050 (using George’s world as a fixed foundation)

FINAL ASSETS

THOUGHTS AND REFLECTIONS

It’s All About the Process:

Exploring the contours of George’s world was fun and exciting, but it was also a difficult task for me because, in general, I dislike the concept and use of personas.

However, this project served as a learning moment, and I have a deeper appreciation of this design process. Working with and leading my team provided us the opportunity to explore a different approach.

Personas and Principles:

Even more, this project provided me new tools and insights into project management methods, skills, and techniques.

There is a breadth of resources that can help assist designers in shifting the paradigm of creation, and most of it is based on social justice and DEI principles.

I’m excited to learn more about these emerging and rising methods, and I hope to expand my persona vocabulary and comfort in future projects.

Next Steps:

In each project, we often wish for more time. George’s Decision was no exception, and I hope that at some point our team can further expand and iterate for this project because it was a cool and rewarding experience that elevated our individual and team skills!

Further iterations of the project would include:

• More time and resources in detangling assumptions throughout the process

• Creating more asset deliverables, with an emphasis on connecting each piece to tell a cohesive and interconnected narrative

• Exploring additional mediums i.e. film, audio, mappings, and more

• Identifying additional aspects of George’s world that we want to explore with more intent e.g. her siblings perspectives, locations that she frequently visits, her bedroom, and more

GEORGE’S DECISIONGEORGE’S DECISIONGEORGE’S DECISION