Workshop Methods

Description

In this method, we introduce workshop participants and facilitators through analogy. For example, we all respond to the prompt: “if you were to describe yourself as an animal, what would you be?” We have used other analogies, such as superheroes (to increase a feeling of agency) and plants (when plants were relevant to the topic).

This method encourages self-expression and demonstrates vulnerability — both of which can help to establish trust, agency, and collegiality. It also primes participants to think in analogies, which is a key part of creative thinking. We have typically paired this method with another introduction to more explicitly establish the topic, such as Creativity Guidelines.

We have used this method in a number of our workshops [P2,P4 - P8]. Participants may see this method as high challenge because the analogy can seem silly. In our experience, leading the method by example can help to reduce the challenge and build trust with participants.

References

• S. Goodwin, J. Dykes, S. Jones, I. Dillingham, G. Dove, D. Allison, A. Kachkaev, A. Slingsby, and J. Wood. Creative user-centered design for energy analysts and modelers. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.

Description

This method reframes barriers as opportunities to spur creative thinking. First, participants identify barriers of the envisioned visualization tools. Next, they select the most pressing barriers and imagine that it has been removed. Then, they create ideas about what would be possible without that barrier in the way.

We have used this method in four of our workshops [P2, P4, P5, P8]. In our experience, identifying barriers is low challenge and helps to build interest because participants typically have ideas about why problems in their domain are hard. The barriers also provide useful information about the problem space to researchers. Asking participants to remove barriers increases the challenge. Because this method is performed in small groups, it can foster collegiality.

If this method is preceded by Wishful Thinking, then the know/see/do prompts can be used after barriers are removed.

Materials

• at least 2 colors of post-it notes to record the barriers and opportunities
• if preceded by Wishful Thinking, then 1 color post-it notes for barriers + 3 colors for know/see/do prompts

References

• S. Jones, P. Lynch, N. Maiden, and S. Lindstaedt. Use and influence of creative ideas and requirements for a work-integrated learning system. In IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE’08, 2008.

• S. Goodwin, J. Dykes, S. Jones, I. Dillingham, G. Dove, D. Allison, A. Kachkaev, A. Slingsby, and J. Wood. Creative user-centered design for energy analysts and modelers. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.

Description

This is the catchall method used in CVO workshops. It was first described by Osborn as “using the brain to storm a creative problem - and to do so in a commando fashion, with each stormer audaciously attacking the same objective.”

Although Osborn described unconstrained and unstructured ideation, we use a four step process to maintain focus on the topic that helps to preserve interest. First, we prompt participants with a topic. Next, we ask them to generate as many ideas as possible about it (often individually). Then, we may continue generating ideas in small groups. After that, we discuss the ideas and potentially ask participants to rank or sort them.

The prompt of this method can influence the challenge of generating ideas. We have used prompts that ask participants to identify: the current problems and successes of existing tools [P1]; the aspirations for envisioned visualization solutions [P1]; the good/bad aspects of current workflow [P3]; and the desired tasks and functionality of visualization solutions [P1]. The possibilities for prompts are practically infinite.

Materials

• post-it notes
• written prompt

References

• A. Osborn. Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative problem solving. Charles Scribener’s Sons, New York, USA, 1953.

Description

To lay a foundation for a creative atmosphere, we introduce guidelines for the workshop. These guidelines can reinforce the need for collegiality and trust in a successful workshop. Example guidelines include:

• All ideas are valid — record them!
• Speak in headlines and follow up with details
• Beware that facilitators may guide the conversation to stay on topic
• Switch off all electronic devices

Although this method is primarily passive, consider ways to encourage agency and interest. For example, it could be modified by having participants create their own guidelines for creative participation.

Materials

• list of guidelines on slides or handouts

References

• A. Osborn. Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative problem solving. Charle Scribener’s Sons, New York, USA, 1953.
• S. Goodwin, J. Dykes, S. Jones, I. Dillingham, G. Dove, D. Allison, A. Kachkaev, A. Slingsby, and J. Wood. Creative user-centered design for energy analysts and modelers. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.

Description

Organizers are often loathe to schedule downtime, preferring a packed schedule. But creative thinking relies on downtime. Downtime can result in divergence (creative ideas) or convergence (ranking). It can also help establish interpersonal relationships. We typically provide downtime between each method.

We recommend asking participants, perhaps through a specific exercise if time and the physical environment allows, to think about what they have learned and how this relates to their perspective on the project. Asking people to chat with somebody they do not know or have not met can be productive and spark interest, but may be a challenge to some. Nevertheless, it can foster information exchange, trust, and collegiality.

Topic relevance can be achieved by priming participants to contribute something about their domain that other participants do not know, or with physical prompts for discussion - visualization examples or summaries of domain work. Serendipitous conversations can also be effective.

In one of our workshops a WiFi connection problem caused us to halt the workshop methods [P2]. One participant set up a connection through their phone and the organizers’ reliance on them had significant effects on trust and agency. Other participants discussed the workshop and workshop themes while this was going on - probably with positive effect. Scheduled downtime works well, but this could easily be faked with some kind of imaginary problem (“can you just chat amongst yourselves while I fix the WiFi”).

References

• K. R. Sawyer. Explaining creativity - the science of human innovation. Oxford University Press, 2006.

Description

Just as the “Buy a feature” method asks participants to prioritize by limiting resources, Draw A Feature achieves something similar with a visual twist, by providing limited space and time in which workshop participants must sketch a key aspect of the visualization solution that could to be developed.

Drawing on large scale is effective, with the suggestion that one pen color be used for annotation that depicts interaction. The drawings could be used as a basis for discussion, with participants touring sketches displayed on the walls as sketch owners describe the features. They could be combined into system descriptions or used in an hierarchical ranking process.

References

• V. Kumar. 101 design methods: a structured approach to driving innovation in your organization. Wiley, 2012.

Description

This method is typically combined with a break for lunch. In this method, we ask participants to find a physical artifact from outside of the workshop that relates to the topic. Upon returning to the workshop, we describe and discuss the artifacts and ideas in a group.

The motivation for this method is as described by Goodwin et al. “The idea is that participants remove themselves from a task, take a mental or physical journey to seek images or stimuli and then bring these back to make connections with the task.” Discussions about the resulting artifacts can expand the ideaspace in surprising ways.

References

• S. Goodwin, J. Dykes, S. Jones, I. Dillingham, G. Dove, D. Allison, A. Kachkaev, A. Slingsby, and J. Wood. Creative user-centered design for energy analysts and modelers. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.

Description

Asking participants to reflect on what has been achieved is intended to be motivating and have a positive effect on agency. But feedback needs to be as smooth as possible, with little challenge that can threaten participation (particularly after a long day).

A visualization theme can be used here by providing an overview of the plan and leaving space for participants to complete bars alongside each activity in which they rate their experience according to particular criteria — e.g., the levels of creativity experienced, the degree to which the activity was enjoyable or useful, or perhaps even the TACTICs used to execute the workshop. The result is an agenda bar chart. Stickers could also be used in place of drawing on the agenda.

Asking participants to sketch the levels of divergence / convergence experienced on the agenda could help them reflect on what had been done and establish a sense of achievement.

Materials

• summary agenda or workshop activity plan
• pens
• colored stickers

Description

All participants are asked in advance to use a single indicative graphic to describe themselves and the current situation that we are dealing with. This is a spin on the analogy introduction question - “if you were to describe yourself as an animal, what would you be?” : “if you were to describe yourself with a graphic, what would you be? (and c an you show us?)”

This is an informative individual exercise, but the sharing and levelling is intended to promote collegiality. That participants are given a short and relatively open brief gives them some agency at the outset of the meeting.

Graphical introductions are straightforward to set up - a short reminder in advance of the meeting suffices. Participants are asked to talk individually to a graphical prompt that describes them and their current situation in light of the workshop theme. Digital graphics can be delivered in advance, but having participants draw on a whiteboard or flip chart also works well.

Leading by example and emphasizing that these are ‘fast forward’ style presentations helps lower the challenge and to get introductions completed with expediency. In terms of topic the emphases on graphics and the theme are intended to reveal some information about approaches to visualization and knowledge of it.

There are plenty of opportunities for creative spins on this approach given the particular context, environment and group dynamic. Another option is to ask participants to “Draw a bar chart, pie chart or scatter plot that describes the way you are feeling?”

Materials

• flip chart and/or whiteboard
• pens
• projector

Description

This method can be paired with any other method that involves group work. To achieve collegiality we ask participants to work in groups in many of our activities. This can also help us rank ideas as we combine groups that have worked on separate ideas and ask participants to collectively rank their results.

Groups can be mixed in all sorts of ways, but are usually best if they are diverse in terms of seniority, gender, background, skills. We try to mix in multiple ways throughout a session using particular structures — by organization (vis person vs. domain specialist), but also by personal characteristics. Birthdays are interesting — grouping by month, season, or day of the week (“on what day is your birthday this year?”) etc., helps participants to find things that they have things in common which can help establish interest and trust

In terms of the topic, there is scope for mixing according to particular graphics that resonate — perhaps by asking participants to stand near examples from a Visualization Awareness exercise that have been hung on the wall, or according to domain tasks that particular participants think need to be prioritized.

We try to ensure that people are not paired in groups to frequently - mixing groups and even using “pair up with pople you have not yet grouped with” as a grouping activity can be useful, but we should be sensitive to the fact that this may be a challenge for some.

Description

Mind maps are sketched networks of related concepts — visual representations that structure ideas. Creating mind maps can provide means through which participants can connect and contextualize ideas. Participants in our CVO workshops have used these to identify required features and to record and prompt analogy in visualization analogies.

This activity may come naturally to some participants but is likely to be more of a challenge to others and so it is worth considering as an optional means of recording ideas or as a group activity with a designated visual lead who coordinates the drawing. These options may help us manage challenge and vary levels of collegiality associated with this activity.

Materials

• paper
• pens
• visualization examples
• scissors, glue, tape, etc.

Description

In this method, we wrap up the ideas discussed. We also outline what will happen next with the artefacts and ideas, what will be the next steps of the collaboration, and what is expected of all stakeholders — this includes short term (e.g., please fill in the feedback survey in the next couple of days) and longer term (e.g., we hope you will be available for a feedback session in a few months time).

Description

In this short method, we prepare participants to provide us with feedback about the workshop methods and facilitation style. We have found that online surveys work well for collecting feedback, but that it is important to share why we think that participant feedback is valuable. We have asked for feedback to help us improve future methods, become better facilitators, and reflect on key ideas from the day.

Making clear that we will use the feedback to drive the collaboration forward can engender trust and collegiality with participants and facilitators.

Materials

• survey ready to send to participants after the workshop.

Description

This method is a semi-structured discussion to gain some initial feedback on how well the workshop went and the feelings of the group for the ideas produced during the day.

We have used prompt questions to encourage discussion such as “What has surprised you most today?”, “What do you know now that you did not know this morning?” or “What will you do differently tomorrow?”

Description

This convergent method provides information for researchers about which ideas the participants consider more important or potentially useful. At first, we task participants with drawing a story that synthesizes ideas from the day into a coherent narrative. Next, the storyboards are discussed and additional ideas are recorded.

However, we have some evidence that the activity is polarizing. The challenge involved in creating a story is likely to be very being personal and so efforts to ensure that all participants are either comfortable with and engaged in the challenge or excused and participating in alternative activity are important. Hence, this method could be used in tandem with other convergent, active methods, such as mind-mapping or brainstorming.

Materials

• blank storyboards
• color pens
• scissors / glue for collage of vis examples if running after vis analogies method

References

• K. Truong, G. Hayes, G. Abowd. Storyboarding: an empirical determination of best practices and effective guidelines. Proc. ACM DIS, 2006.
• V. Kumar. 101 design methods: a structured approach to driving innovation in your organization. Wiley, 2012.

Description

A facilitator reads a list of prompts, allowing participants 5 - 10 seconds to draw each idea. The prompts gradually increase in challenge, and include both concrete and abstract ideas. For example, we may ask participants to draw a line, a squiggle, a shape … then turn one of those drawings into a mountain, mode of transportation, a pet, a meal … Then, turn one of those drawings into a friendly mode of transportation, a helpful pet, a friendly meal…

After a few minutes of drawing, participants can be asked to find three pictures from around the room and create a story to introduce themselves or tell a story.

When facilitated effectively, this is a high-energy method that can engage participants — garnering interest in the workshop. It encourages agency as participants express themselves through sketching. Importantly, it also prepares participants to think visually, a key part of the topic.

Materials

• markers for drawing
• butcher paper or poster board

Description

This method is similar to Mind Maps, except that it explicitly involves ranking ideas by some metric, which could include impact, novelty, development cost, or interest. Ideas can be ranked by grouping or rearranging sticky notes, creating a list, or in many other ways.

Asking participants to rank ideas in small groups can promote collegiality. It may also increase interest as participants exchange ideas that they consider particularly important.

We have typically used this method to group and rank the ideas created in divergent methods, such as wishful thinking or brainstorming.

Materials

• markers for drawing
• butcher paper or poster board

Description

We present a curated collection of visualizations and ask participants to individually record analogies to their domain and to specify aspects of the visualizations that they like or dislike.

More specifically, first, we provide participants with paper handouts that contain a representative image of each visualization. Next, we present the curated visualizations on a projector and ask participants to think independently about how each visualization could apply to their domain and to record their ideas. Then, we discuss these visualizations and analogies in a large group.

The initial exercise gives participants time and space to act individually. Subsequent group discussions on these visualizations prompts additional collegiality, particularly if structured to ensure that all participate. Enabling participants to evaluate visualization possibilities and relate them to their problem domain is intended to engender agency. While problem specific data are unlikely to be used, the combination of domain problem and visualization solution makes visualization analogies an activity that addresses the topics of the workshop directly.

Although this method is primarily passive, participants report that it is engaging and inspiring to see the broad possibilities of visualization and relate visualization solutions to their problems.

Materials

• vis. presentation
• handouts with vis. images

References

• S. Goodwin, J. Dykes, S. Jones, I. Dillingham, G. Dove, D. Allison, A. Kachkaev, A. Slingsby, and J. Wood. Creative user-centered design for energy analysts and modelers. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.

Description

In this method, we participants to imagine or select either a scenario or user story and then develop sketches of a visualization solution that would be supportive of the kinds of tasks envisioned.

This method enables participants to establish process flow and suggest design candidates in a broad sense. Scenarios can be selected from a prepared list or preferably from examples developed in a preceding workshop method.

While this visual twist on more general Storyboarding activities has proved successful in some of our projects, this has not always been the case in our experience. Setting this as an individual task gives people agency, but working in groups may be more effective as sketching is likely to be seen as more of a challenge to some than others who are more willing to take it on.

We ran this as a group activity in the human terrain project with each addressing different scenarios [P3]. A domain specialist led each group and presented sketches of visual solutions to others at the workshop, including designers & developers.

Materials

• paper and pens,
• storyboard outline on printed sheets or flipchart to sequence sketches

References

• R. Walker, A. Slingsby, J. Dykes, K. Xu, J. Wood, P. H. Nguyen, D. Stephens, B. L. W. Wong, and Y. Zheng. An extensible framework for provenance in human terrain visual analytics. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.

Description

We have used this divergent, active method early in the workshop core. It is based on creativity methods to generate aspirations that we tailored to visualization by prompting participants with a domain scenario and asking the questions: ``What would you like to know? What would you like to do? What would you like to see?’‘

In the process of this method, we first introduce the prompt, and participants answer the know/see/do questions individually on post-it notes. Next, participants share ideas in a large group to encourage collegiality and cross-pollination of ideas. Then, participants form small groups and try to build on their responses by selecting interesting ideas, assuming that they have been completed, and responding to the know/see/do questions again — increasing the challenge. Finally, we lead a convergent discussion to highlight interesting ideas and to transition to the next method.

We encourage participants to record answers to the know/see/do questions on different color post-it notes because each prompt provides information useful at different points in the design process. Participants describe analysis tasks that they would like to do or envisaged insights they would like to know. Asking what participants would like to see is often more of a challenge, but ensures that a topic of visualization is established early.

Materials

• written prompt with know/see/do questions
• three colors of post-it notes for responses to each questions

References

• S. Goodwin, J. Dykes, S. Jones, I. Dillingham, G. Dove, D. Allison, A. Kachkaev, A. Slingsby, and J. Wood. Creative user-centered design for energy analysts and modelers. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2013.
• M. J. Hicks. Problem Solving and Decision Making: Hard, Soft, and Creative Approaches. Thomson Learning, London, UK, 2004