PUBLISHED PAPER
PUBLISHED PAPER
about
Designing for Privacy in IoT enabled smart spaces
Generative Research: Design Probes, Co-Design Workshop and Survey.
Exploratory Research: Literature Review, Artifact Review, Case Study, Field Research, Interviews, Synthesis.
Design: Systems design.
CO-AUTHORS
methods
Generative Research: Design Probes, Co-Design Workshop, Survey
Exploratory Research: Literature Review, Artifact Review, Case Study, Field Research, Interviews, Synthesis,
Design: Systems design
Generative Research: Design Probes, Co-Design Workshop and Survey.
Exploratory Research: Literature Review, Artifact Review, Case Study, Field Research, Interviews, Synthesis.
Design: Systems design.
TOOLS
Illustrator, Photoshop, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Word, Miro, Figma, Keynote.
category
Design Research | Privacy | Co-Design
thesis title
Penumbra of Privacy: Designing with people-centered and place-centered privacy values in smart workspaces
the problem
Current privacy practices for IoT enabled smart spaces focus only on computing-centric narratives but ignore the sociocultural and behavioral aspects of privacy.
This paper presents two key ideas:
1) advocating a theory of change that complements the computing-focused approach (the umbra), with a broader approach based on human-centered experience and values, (the penumbra);
2) embedding this holistic privacy approach in the early stages of smart workspace innovation through a generative design process involving multidisciplinary stakeholders.
theory of change
Privacy considerations in 'smart' spaces should be a combination of people-centeredness, place-centeredness and data practices.
People-centered: closely aligned with the definition of human-centered to emphasize empathy for building occupants, but unlike the word human which reduces them to purely anatomical beings, it is more apt to capture the messiness of people’s lives.
Place-centered: does not mean geographical location or the physicality of a space. It has a phenomenological interpretation of how a particular space is used, what the associated social meanings, cultural notions, the relationships are held by its occupants, appropriate behavior, etc. (Harrison & Dourish, 1996). These meanings are what form memories, associations and communities and is an important definition to study privacy as it impacts the notion of control for individuals.
People-centered: closely aligned with the definition of human-centered to emphasize empathy for building occupants, but unlike the word human which reduces them to purely anatomical beings, it is more apt to capture the messiness of people’s lives.
Place-centered: does not mean geographical location or the physicality of a space. It has a phenomenological interpretation of how a particular space is used, what the associated social meanings, cultural notions, the relationships are held by its occupants, appropriate behavior, etc. (Harrison & Dourish, 1996). These meanings are what form memories, associations and communities and is an important definition to study privacy as it impacts the notion of control for individuals.
presentation at MIT, June 2024
I presented the project at MIT during Design Research Society (DRS 2024) conference, check it out below ↴
the outcome
'Designing with Privacy' toolkit for design and development of smart workspaces.
the outcome
Privacy Toolkit for design and development of smart workspaces.
The toolkit facilitates collaboration among architects, designers, IoT engineers, privacy professionals, and other relevant stakeholders. It offers 14 value-based privacy prompts for creating and refining a collectively agreed-upon privacy brief to guide the design and development of smart workspaces.
The toolkit contains:
The outcome of this research is the proposal for a multi-disciplinary approach to privacy for smart workspaces through a Privacy Design toolkit. The toolkit is recommended for a diverse array of stakeholders engaged in smart workspace projects, like architects, designers, IoT engineers, privacy professionals, building managers, etc. It contains:
• 7 core principles color-coded as per three stages of the process: conceptualizing (yellow), detailing (blue), and refining (orange) (figure 3),
• 14 privacy value cards framed as ideation prompts,
• Guidance on how to prepare and use the toolkit,
• Worksheets for scoping and ideation,
• Privacy brief preparation based on the multi-disciplinary team's ideas and prioritization.
• 7 core principles color-coded as per three stages of the process: conceptualizing (yellow), detailing (blue), and refining (orange) (figure 3),
• 14 privacy value cards framed as ideation prompts,
• Guidance on how to prepare and use the toolkit,
• Worksheets for scoping and ideation,
• Privacy brief preparation based on the multi-disciplinary team's ideas and prioritization.
Even though the principles and values were generated for shared smart workspaces, they are relevant for other shared contexts in the non-domestic realm, and may even be useful for the domestic context with critical reflection and adaptation.
Even though the principles and values were generated for shared smart workspaces, they are relevant for other shared contexts in the non-domestic realm, and may even be useful for the domestic context with critical reflection and adaptation.
Research METHODOLOGY
For the proposed theory of change to include human-centered experience and behavior in the privacy frameworks, I leveraged the Value Sensitive Design framework (VSD) developed by HCI scholars Batya Friedman and David G. Hendry in the 1990s. VSD advocates for the integration of moral human values early on and consistently throughout the technology creation process (Friedman & Hendry, 2019). Therefore the research question was
How might we integrate people-centered and place-centered privacy values in the design and development phase of creating smart workspaces?
I segmented this broad research question into two sub-questions with respective design research activities: 1) what privacy values must be considered, and 2) how might these values be leveraged to create privacy-preserving smart buildings? Refer to the following table for details:
The research emphasized that shifting the privacy conversation from software and data management approaches, to one focused on people and place at the front end of the design process, generated greater empathy in creators. It helped them visualize the lived realities of people whose data are collected and processed in a place, and discuss new ideas. This human-centered perspective also relieved them of the pessimism around technology and provided hope that early deliberation in the innovation process can reduce the burden for ‘fixing’ technology after the fact.
personal reflection
This work has been two and a half years in the making and is inspired my motivation to critically reflect on the tech-first perspectives. I have learned a great deal about privacy, but most importantly I have learned a lot about bridging the gaps. The hardest, and also the most interesting, part of this journey has been the lack of a shared vocabulary between different disciplinary perspectives. As a former practicing architect, current designer interested in emerging technology who has been working with privacy engineers, I have come to realize that these vocabularies are deeply linked with different mental models associated with specific disciplinary backgrounds. It is perhaps for this reason that my work is full of metaphors to help bridge these gaps, both in the tangible output (like the value cards) as well as in the farming of my work (like the title). I have fallen and risen multiple times in this process and even felt frustrated at times, but have also felt really inspired by the conversations with professionals across disciplines. Reflecting on these conversations has helped me draw the connections that have resulted in this work, some of which were captured in my thesis journal on Medium from September - December 2021. There are new ideas brewing in my head for how to take this work further and create an impact on what is termed as the ‘real world’ outside of academia, a place where I believe bridging gaps is important. I hope that this inspires others to push the boundaries of what we know, how we think and how we can question our own perspectives to integrate a different one.
This work has been two and a half years in the making and is inspired my motivation to critically reflect on the tech-first perspectives. I have learned a great deal about privacy, but most importantly I have learned a lot about bridging the gaps. The hardest, and also the most interesting, part of this journey has been the lack of a shared vocabulary between different disciplinary perspectives. As a former practicing architect, current designer interested in emerging technology who has been working with privacy engineers, I have come to realize that these vocabularies are deeply linked with different mental models associated with specific disciplinary backgrounds. It is perhaps for this reason that my work is full of metaphors to help bridge these gaps, both in the tangible output (like the value cards) as well as in the farming of my work (like the title). I have fallen and risen multiple times in this process and even felt frustrated at times, but have also felt really inspired by the conversations with professionals across disciplines. Reflecting on these conversations has helped me draw the connections that have resulted in this work, some of which were captured in my thesis journal on Medium from September - December 2021. There are new ideas brewing in my head for how to take this work further and create an impact on what is termed as the ‘real world’ outside of academia, a place where I believe bridging gaps is important. I hope that this inspires others to push the boundaries of what we know, how we think and how we can question our own perspectives to integrate a different one.
