We had our status review, where our direction was checked. I was asked to buck up with my research and I realized that I should do put some more effort. The presentation also allowed me to get some critique on my work and gave me some ideas to follow.
As the interviews were done, I decided to document the findings and thoughts on a chart as well. The user profile was getting clearer as the research progressed. I also spoke to Shweta, a senior who’s recently concluded diploma project was in the same domain. As we chatted, She mentioned that the security guards in corporate spaces were aided with surveillance systems and communication devices to make their lives easier but there was still quite a lot of paper work that they needed to complete as part of their day to day tasks. The spaces I had chosen to interview so far were the educational institute and a apartment community.
My interviews showed me that in Indian society, the security holds an important place. If there’s no water or electricity, if the lift is not working or if you want an auto, if you want to assign cabs or wash cars, its the humble security guard who is called upon to do all these tasks. Perhaps this is because they are the most visible of the administrative workforce.
At the same time, due to this additional workload, the poor security guard ends up being overworked, and faces a low respect level.
So I started extracting information that I could use when designing the product. I split these into ‘challenges’ and ‘considerations’.
Right now, challenges consists of the facts that security guards are from a varied age group and a varied background. Considerations are the features that I would be considering as part of the design; self defence, communication, non intrusive.I shall update this list as this goes on.
As part of my primary research, I decided to conduct some interviews to kickstart of my design process. Before I could start, I came to know that a team from the junior batch had recently done a short interview with the security guard. I had a look at what they had done before structuring my set of questions. Looking at their set of questions and answers, I realized that my questions would need to be more about their tasks and less about their life. Salary and amenities were out of the scope of my project. I also got some directions to follow from reading their findings. My questions were mainly as listed below.
- What are the general shift timings and durations?
- What tasks are expected from you as a security guard?
- What tasks are you also supposed to be unofficially responsible for?
- Do you have any training or means of self defence?
- Do you have any communication device?
With these main questions outlined, I set out to find my answers.
“If this Toaster could talk” is an interesting writeup about how the Internet of things is going to affect us and our surroundings in the future.
The British Standards Institute (2006) defines inclusive design as “the design of mainstream
products and/or services that are accessible to, and usable by, people with the widest range of abilities within the widest range of situations without the need for special adaptation or specialized design”.
I chose the user profile of the ‘Security Guard’.
I want to look at this user profile from a point of the agency they belong to, their workplace as well as their occupational problems.
This user profile tends to have a more older, less technically inclined and less literate demography. It would be interesting to see how that adds as a challenge when designing the device.
After a lecture on the design process, we were left free to choose a user profile for the design project.
In the Library, I came across this issue[paywall] of Design Studies, where I came across some additional models like Sander’s Fuzzy Front End process and also the Cambridge’s Waterfall model of an inclusive design process[Free for me].