This is where we chart our course and set the tone for the project. By reflecting at this phase, we're envisioning an approach for this project that optimizes for inclusive and equitable outcomes with an intersectional lens - and we're determining the budgets, timelines, etc. that we need to bring that vision to life. We're also setting expectations with stakeholders from the very beginning around the methods, mindset, and what "success" looks like to us.
Consider who within your organization and from the community should be involved in answering questions in this phase.
communities impacted
Who will be impacted by this project, directly and indirectly? Which communities will we engage and why?
What do we already know about these communities, including their needs and assets? What parts of our current knowledge are rooted in data vs assumption?
What biases and assumptions do we have about these communities? What others might we encounter as we involve more stakeholders? And how might we gather data that can challenge them?
How have we learned about these communities in the past? What sources have we consulted, and when?
How can we better understand the history of these communities and gather data that represents them and their leaders, without relying on community members to teach us?
potential outputs
LIST
Communities to engage
Assumptions and biases to check throughout the project
Create
Stakeholder map
Inventory of team norms, structures, who we typically engage
Understand
Background on the "problem" and communities
resources
problem definition
We're here to explore or create solutions to a problem. Who decided what that "problem" is?
How can we make participation more accessible and inclusive for different groups within thesecommunities? (e.g., wheelchair access, times of day, remote vs. in-person, etc)
What methods or activities might we use to engage with these communities in ways that feel safe, respectful, and meaningful?
How much power do we have in relation to the communities we’ll be working with? How can we share or shift that power?
How can we create spaces for community members to feel seen, valued, and safe to share their views with us?
How can we set clear expectations with community members around their role, the process, and outcomes? What unintended risks or consequences of participating can we address?
Are we prepared to follow the advice and expertise of those who are closest to the "problem"? If there is a conflict between community interests and project interests, how will we respond?
potential outputs
Create
Engagement plan that is culturally-responsive and/or trauma-informed
Understand
Your power relative to communities
Role and decision making power of community members
Types of relationships the team wants to build with stakeholders
resources
Within Kaleidoscope, we’re referring to accessibility as the ability for people to participate and meaningfully engage in the design/research process in ways that are considerate of their needs, which could include accommodations for disabilities or other individual circumstances that would otherwise prevent or hinder their participation.
Within Kaleidoscope, valuing describes acknowledging people’s contributions of time and expertise through appreciation, material compensation, and actions (e.g., naming them as contributors, hiring them for a formal role, etc.) It is important to be sensitive in how participants are valued; communicate with them in advance to ensure they will be valued in appropriate ways based on their individual circumstances and to request their consent.
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to safe/safety as conditions in which people feel they can participate, express themselves, and share their perspectives without fear of retribution or negative consequences.
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to inclusion as the process of integrating perspectives and contributions from diverse communities, as well as the qualities and features of a solution that meet the needs of diverse communities. When realized, inclusion will be reflected in participants' felt sense that they have fully participated in, authentically contributed to, and belong in the research/design process, and that their needs are well met by the solution that results from that process.
Within Kaleidoscope, context refers to the environment or situation in which a product or service is used, as well as the broader domain in which it exists (e.g., accessing primary care in a rural area, which sits within the broader domain of healthcare.) Defining the context enables us to examine the dynamic factors and forces within it (including social structures, institutions, political factors, policies, people, technology, and personal circumstances, etc) that influence the experiences of individuals and groups differently.
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to co-design as a partnership between those creating products and services and the people that will use or be affected by those solutions to understand, define, and solve a problem together, from planning through research and design to delivery.
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to communities/community members primarily as the people and groups who will be served or impacted by the product or service you are creating. Although people can share common needs, values, or goals, applying an intersectional lens helps us avoid oversimplification, homogenous labels, and limiting assumptions when we think about groups. (For example, in a group of parents, we would benefit from looking deeper to explore the experiences of mothers, and deeper still to learn about the experiences of mothers of color.) Sometimes you may work directly with community members, and other times you might work with community leaders and advocates who have established trust with the communities your solution is intended to serve.
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to power as the capacity to influence or control ideas, institutions, situations, other people, experiences, or outcomes. Forms of power can be visible (e.g., formal rules and structures), hidden (e.g., controlling who is part of a decision-making process), or invisible (e.g., shaping people’s beliefs). While power is often associated with authoritative figures, there is also power in groups of people, organizations, and systems. Power can be a result of privilege, including social advantages or respect given to certain groups. As people involved in the creation of products and services, we have a responsibility to examine our own power in relation to the people our solutions are intended to serve.
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to engage/engagements as inviting individuals or groups external to the immediate project team into the research and/or design process; types of engagement can range from consultation to methods that prioritize collaboration and sharing power (i.e., intentional actions to shift, grow, or rebalance power).
Within Kaleidoscope, we're referring to impact as the emotional, social, and material results of one’s interaction with products, services, and systems. These effects can be planned, anticipated, or unintended.
