In a blog post, D’arcy Norman (2017) reflects on the lessons learned in designing AV systems at the Taylor Institute (TI) at the University of Calgary. I have had the opportunity to tour the TI and have guest lectured in 2 of the rooms that D’arcy has described, so it was interesting to learn about the planning and design that took place to make the TI the place it is today. D’arcy highlights that flexibility and transparency were key design principles that informed each step of the design process. They took a user-centred design approach when considering how the technology could be used by staff and students considering flexibility, collaboration and creativity. One of the best elements of planning used for this project was the ‘letting go of control’ and openness to possibilities defined by the users.
Introducing this kind of flexible space and technology in the workplace could enhance collaboration, creativity and productivity. When considering this type of change, however, one would need to account for different roles and departments and the responsibilities and goals within each. In a classroom setting, everyone is there to learn the same thing and would have very similar goals. In a workplace setting, this would vary. Thought would have to be given to where and why people might interact with each other, how relationships could form, and how collaboration could transpire. More research into the organizational and human needs would be warranted in a workplace setting to inform the planning. Moreover, using a facilitative strategy that includes users in the design and planning process (Biech, 2007) could effectively promote ‘buy-in’ from the users.
One of the problems to be considered with this type of innovation and change in any setting is the sustainability of the technology. With technological innovation occurring at increasing rates, planning must include the maintenance, purchasing, and recycling of technological devices and software. This can be an expensive budget item and should be considered and included long-term for sustainable change.
References
Norman, D. (2017, March 11). Lessons learned: AV systems design in the Taylor Institute. D’Arcy Norman. https://darcynorman.net/2017/03/11/lessons-learned-av-systems-design-in-the-taylor-institute/
Biech, E. (2007). Thriving through change: A leader’s practical guide to change mastery. Association for Talent Development.
Hi Leah,
Thanks for considering how consultations and user design experience should be an important step in choosing and implementing learning technologies or space design. In your last paragraph you talk about how there needs to be planning for maintenance, purchasing and recycling – particularly for sustainability, when making these decisions. It made me wonder – who should be doing this? It is often done at a remove (ie by an IT department) from the educators who are using these technologies and who might have valuable input. How can we change that process?
Great points here. I never considered how difficult it would be to implement an AV system that would have people using it with different goals in mind. You said further research would be needed to discover these end-use scenarios in a workplace environment. What compromises do you think would have to made for such a must-use scenario?
I do agree that technology ages quickly, and the cost of replacing tech must be taken into account. Perhaps rooms with less technology are more beneficial and cost effective, where user’s might bring their own technology and a room just provides the baseline of audio visual technology.
Michelle – thanks for your comment. I think decisions for the use and discontinued use of technology could be made through participatory decision-making. I don’t think it should be IT alone. The people using the tech should be helping to inform these decisions and as you mention, would have valuable input. Perhaps this would increase the longevity of the use of technology; however, if other schools are implementing new technology regularly, it makes it hard for schools to justify staying “behind” in innovation and can lead to being seen as less innovative. This feeds into a more significant issue related to recycling processes and e-waste that is accumulating in third-world countries. It is a complex issue that, in my opinion, needs a culture shift on sustainable use of technology.
Michael – thanks for your comment as well. I think research would need to be done to understand how technology could affect people and their work. Maybe some technology is not worth the investment because it wouldn’t work the way it was intended with a particular group. For example, would collaboration carts work in a particular workplace based on their physical space and way of working? Do they really enhance collaboration (are they worth the investment)? I think we really need to understand how tech could be used by each organization and its unique needs rather than assume that it will work for everyone. I am not sure if I am getting at your question well, but I don’t think a ‘must use’ scenario works for everyone, and that is why research for understanding potential organizational use would be a good first step.