We're about to meet Mia Ahlgren who works at the Swedish Disability Rights Federation.
We're going to talk about active participation in design processes.
Hello Mia, can you tell us a little about yourself?
My name is Mia Ahlgren. I work for an umbrella organisation,
for 46 organisations called the Swedish Disability Rights Federation.
We're not that many employees. That means you do many different things.
I work with, among other things, rights for people with disabilities,
we all do, but accessibility, universal design, standardisation,
and many other things. -Many different things.
There are many different terms or names for active involvement.
What do you use? Can you discuss these terms a little?
That's true, there are many names. "Design for all" has been used within the EU.
But then the Convention for rights for people with disabilities came.
They started using the term "universal design".
Those who did research on it tie it to the built environment and several principles.
But in the Convention it's more about involving users.
That everything new you develop should be made so that as many as possible,
can use it. Including people with disabilities.
It's also important to make sure that all people you involve are different.
We all have different qualities and one such quality could be a disability.
Why is it important to involve users and other stakeholders in development processes?
If you want to be certain,
that the things you create can be used by as many people as possible,
you need to involve those who are experts.
It is those who face obstacles that knows what doesn't work.
They can make sure the solutions are improved and reach all the way.
It is also important, if you're making a ticket machine for example,
that you involve those working with public transport.
So it will work the entire way.
How does one work with active participation, and what should one keep in mind?
I'd like to tell you, speaking of the Convention and rights, that theres another term,
about active involvement in decision making processes.
This is a civil and political right that organisations for people with disabilities have.
You need to be involved in political decision making processes.
You have to be, and there are guidelines on how this,
can be done in an effective and meaningful way. One should be involved from the beginning.
One should have the means to understand why you're involved and what you can do.
Most of all, what's very important is getting feedback on decision making processes.
So you know what you've participated in and contributed to,
and if you're not allowed to participate, why that is.
In the design processes that you're talking about,
there are similar conditions, one should be involved from the beginning,
and be informed of what your involvement has led to.
But it isn't a right in the Convention, defined as such.
There it could be more about individuals participating, rather than organisations.
But sometimes those processes overlap.
Who can be involved? Can everybody participate?
I also work with standardisation and there is a European standard. It is called "accessibility through universal design".
It deals with these development processes.
There we've said that one should start by involving,
those who can't use a product or a service. The so-called "non-users". They are aware of the obstacles.
I sometimes say "involve those who don't get to speak first".
That's when you put more focus on the questions that need to be solved.
User involvement could also mean to involve those who currently aren't users?
Yes, I think that's a good start. That makes it beneficial.
You fix things so more people can use it.
On top of it being a right to have access to all new developments.
Can you involve everyone?
There are lots of design methods to involve users.
There are numerous tools.
You have to use what's best suited for the target audience. You have to go over this together with the target audience,
so you're sure it's a good fit.
In Sweden we've worked on something called "Better together",
where you'd use different focus groups. Maybe this could be a good approach?
Others have looked into which types of involvement,
the user, or the presumptive user, gets the most influence over the process.
I think that's important, having influence over the process.
It could feel meaningless to only be able to try something that someone else made.
Speaking of design processes, which ones are best suited?
Are there times where you don't need or shouldn't involve users?
It could be a challenge finding people,
who have the conditions to participate that would also benefit from it.
If you create something, I think it's natural,
to involve those who are supposed to use your product.
Unfortunately, you sometimes don't do this,
until it's too late. I think that's a waste of money.
If you have the ability to do it, I think a lot of those,
who develop new things can benefit from it.
Then comes the other side of it, that I mentioned.
When it's on a community level, a political process,
user involvement is a must and you need to provide the means for participation.
What about text production and audiovisual production?
These are usually daily and you stress production.
How would one involve users in these processes?
Speaking of universal design, it's about everything new that people develop.
When you're improving a process or during development,
that's when you need to involve users.
They can't be involved in every instance, but should be when you're improving something.
One more thing, about universal design.
One solution does not fit all.
There should be a "menu" of solutions.
You can't point out what "dish" some people must pick.
Everyone has the right to choose.
It must be offered to everybody.
So that someone without disabilities can use it too,
because it could be beneficial in their current situation?
Absolutely, if you're somewhere noisy it helps to have the option to read a text.
What pitfalls would you say are prominent in this way of working?
It needs to be mutually beneficial.
When you involve non-users, potential users,
there has to be some kind of benefit.
It could be financial compensation or another sort of benefit.
You could work with an organisation that benefits from a development process,
that could help them in their daily function.
You have to make sure it's mutually beneficial,
and that people have the means to participate.
Nobody should make something meant for someone else.
Don't make the user a guinea pig. Create something together.
I want to bring up another thing, that I know is a big problem.
It's that you view people as their disability.
They aren't. All people have different qualities.
A disability is just one. We have different things we like.
If you're blind it's not guaranteed that you like podcasts.
Maybe you want to look for information in a text.
If you put a group together make sure there's a diversity,
of qualities, ages and so on. Don't view people as their disabilities.
Okay, one last question.
What is the factor of success in active involvement?
View the process from the users perspective. Users first, plain and simple.
Users first.