Almost like being there; the power of personas when designing for foreign cultures

Abstract

Much research on personas focuses on how to develop and use personas, less on the validation and concrete value of them in the development of products for cultures far away from the actual design site. This article illustrates how such a validation was accomplished through producing a film and it provides an in-depth case description of how personas were developed and used. When designing a waste management system for soft plastic for a small village in India, personas were developed and applied by the designer to maintain a user-oriented focus throughout the participatory design process. During a three-month stay in the village, personas based on real people and the villagers’ everyday life and practices were developed by getting to know people and their ways of life through the use of ethnographic methods (observations, interviews, workshops and a film). The personas created a substantial understanding of the users’ individual needs, interests, values and emotions and helped to overcome the physical and cultural distance, enabling a strongly contextualised design.

Keywords:

• Personas
• foreign culture
• participatory design
• qualitative methods
• waste management system
• development country

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the time and effort given by the interviewed inhabitants of the village and that all have given their consent that the above information including photos may be used for publication. We also much appreciate the valuable comments of the reviewers of this journal.

Notes

1. Much of the current debate on personas relate to the fictitious part but also seems to reflect that there is still no clear definition of what the method involves. Common understanding is that the persona is a description of a fictitious person, but whether this description is based on assumptions or data is unclear and opinions also differ on what the persona description should cover. Furthermore, there is no agreement on the benefits of the method in the design process; the benefits are seen as ranging from increasing the focus on users and their needs, to being an effective communication tool, to having direct design influence, such as leading to better design decisions and defining the product’s feature set (Nielsen 2014). Like Nielsen (2004), we believe personas based on real-life people and real-life use situations possess the ability to represent true usage situations and create empathy for people, instead of being mere figments of the designer’s imagination on how people might behave.

2. There are, of course, many different ways of making personas. In a review of the types of personas, seven different kinds were identified (Floyd, Jones, and Twidale 2008, 4), the most common ‘the Cooperian personas’, developed on in-depth ethnographic research and used and maintained throughout the design process, but often discarded when the design activities are finished. Another common way of using personas is to base them on more quantitative material. Here, the amount of personas is often high: Pruitt and Grudin (2003, 4) develops up to 50 personas, which makes these personas more representative but likewise increases the risk of being superficial with less possibility of being engaging. Nielsen (2004, 2007, 2011) also suggests few personas rather than many; she claims that a representative picture of users is difficult to get from only a few personas, but if a few reflects the diversity in the field adequately (referred to as ‘saturation’), few are often more efficient and practical (Nielsen 2007, 73).

3. Since our aim was the development of the personas and the concrete application by a single designer for an applied project, steps referring to an organisational use of the personas were excluded (steps 3, 7, 8 and 9 in the Nielsen model). Some steps were combined (5 and 6, on persona descriptions and use situations resp.) to match the personas with their present lives and current plastic waste practices. Step 10 (how to keep the personas dynamic) was kept and one on validation included, because Vestergaard had to leave India and finalise the design in her home country without the possibility of testing the final concept, highlighting the importance of having the personas validated while on location.

4. People participating in the project were seen as agents, experts in their own lives and knowledgeable about their practices. This view directed the selection criteria, where Vestergaard tried to ensure that as many voices were heard as possible and that people would not be placed in an awkward situation from participating or that the suggestions might be harmful to some, following the ethical rules on conducting qualitative research as stipulated by American Anthropological Association 2009 (see http://ethics.aaanet.org/ethics-statement-1-do-no-harm/, downloaded 22 June 2015). The qualitative research was performed in accordance with Kvale (2008). All interviews were recorded on mobile phone, but not fully transcribed due to heating causing PC breakdown, and entirely unstable electricity, workshops were video filmed. Analysis of the interview data was done by listening for keywords, by making affinity diagrams and a semantic analysis (checking for frequency of words) and a priority game with participants (‘which problem is the biggest?’, etc.). Photos were used in various ways: To get an initial idea of the place and people’s waste practices; in personas; in workshops to generate design suggestions. Participants for workshops were selected according to interest, making sure that a variety in age was present but also selected according to gender since waste quickly appeared to be a female issue. Though household waste may be a female domain, it was something everyone could relate to and hence it was easy to engage both genders in the project. Informants were selected for interviews according to different age, gender, income, work and education. The aim was to gain a broad view of people’s waste practices and needs.

5. Naturally, the audience may have been too polite to criticise, but since they themselves felt ownership for the film, it is assumed that the personas were authentic. Also, the personas had been used during workshops where critical comments were gained too. The film can be seen on YouTube, http://youtu.be/68WF-tQFuOc.