When you ask “how much do you think co-creation is possible in real time work?” I think the better question is “how much do you think conscious and deliberate co-creation is possible in real-time work?” I say this because co-creation is a given: the end product is the result of all the input, decisions, and work of everyone involved – designers, programmers, users, and anyone else in the process. (We could even take a bigger step and say that society, culture, and history are stakeholders in the process, but I will leave that discussion alone for now).

The case that I am making is that the people within organizations should recognize the roles that they play in the creation and design of the product, as well as how other roles affect the overall design and production process. It isn’t enough to just focus on one small piece of the process – I believe that organizations need to create atmospheres that draw attention to the consequences and responsibilities inherent in the process of creating products. Doing so will create much better communication, innovation, and accountability within these organizations.

And how will I create this atmosphere? Well, I don’t really have grand plan and I don’t know the steps involved. I believe those will depend on the particular organization and their current state, which may be a very healthy one in terms of design. However, I can list some key things that I think are important:

have the ability to adapt – to see beyond your own training and perspective
be humble but not meek – be comfortable with being wrong and confident in being right
be a good listener – not just the words people say but the feelings and values they convey
learn what empathy is – feel connected to the people around you in a human-centered way

And above all be patient. There are no quick solutions.

It makes me wonder at what point cultural or social ethics play a role in this. It seems as if a personal code of ethics about Facebook didn’t occur until after Zuckerberg’s magic ability was allowed to run amok – and by that time the personal code of ethics could only be defined by what Facebook had already become.

Sadly, if a hacker creates a tool or service that makes money, I guess there is no way to stop them from becoming rock stars and giving their sense of ethics, legit or not, influence over our lives. Maybe we just let them play, and in the meantime create competing designs and services that provide what that they provide – but in a more human-centered way.

If so, I think you are onto a great idea. I think often times, we as designers, forget that we are designing for another, and make assumptions about what we think is “good” for other people. In fact, we can be way off base … even forgetting that their is no action or even design that exists that is truly good or bad….

Indeed we do have a new paradigm in production of goods and services where all it takes is one talented person to create a service that millions of people use to connect with the rest of the world. However, as one comment to that linked post said,

“Part of the solution may be not having central figures involved in operating these systems.”

I wonder if that is possible to do with a company/service like Facebook. In a messed up kind of way, it is like the world is full of magicians who can create wonderful magic things that others can’t. The problem is that they don’t want to share this magic power, and they think that this magic power gives them the right to carry out their vision of the future that other people just aren’t “magical” enough to see.

Maybe I got carried away there – but I would like to know what you think.

here’s an article you might be interested in:
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2010/05/14/facebook-and-radical-transparency-a-rant.html

I checked their website http://www.apple.com and in vain found no link or any sort of information what Apple inc is and their values.

I was able to glean something from Microsoft where they claim that their values are “As a company, and as individuals, we value integrity, honesty, openness, personal excellence, constructive self-criticism, continual self-improvement, and mutual respect. We are committed to our customers and partners and have a passion for technology. We take on big challenges, and pride ourselves on seeing them through. We hold ourselves accountable to our customers, shareholders, partners, and employees by honoring our commitments, providing results, and striving for the highest quality.”

One interesting thing here is should companies take a stance when industry keep changing as technology grows? And if they do take a stance or claim that they have value, how do they show that they are adhering to the set of values in their products?

I totally agree with the exceptional value of a design involving various stakeholders. The post was very well written to get me involved into the discussion.

My question or concern would be as to how much do you think co-creation is possible in real time work? Just like anything what do you think can be the closest alternative way to create designs when co-creation is costly or impossible?

And it will be even more great if you could elaborate how you will create “an atmosphere for co-creation” or at least some key things which you believe are important in co-creation.

Gold: “Second, I will recognize that everyone has valid input – and work to understand that point of view so that we can have exchanges instead of arguments.”