Monday, January 30, 2006

Designing for Cooperation

There are two potentially interesting field in which I’d like to explore for my degree project. One is a Map Of Cooperation. Which would be a graphical representation of pretty much all I have written in this context report. It would provide a useful overview and guide that could be applied to emerging systems, new economic models and business plans. It can be helpful in trend forecasting and could be an ‘Open Source’ model of design that is updatable. Therefore this map would especially useful for the marketing and advertising industries. At this stage I am not sure whether it will resemble a game map such as Civilization that expands as the population grows. Alternatively, which is the more feasible option would be to create a map of cooperation on which people could ‘walk through’.
The other field would be designing tools that enable cooperation which brings us back to my original concept of cooperation; Communicate, Motivate and Enable.

Communicate, Motivate & Enable

While cooperation as an essential part of being human is being freely taken advantage of in the online business world. The most successful businesses on the Internet are those, adopted and take advantage of the human characteristics that people ‘Want’ to cooperate. Google and Amazon are good examples of new businesses that succeeded through sharing rather than competition. Many, very different organizations also share this ideology Thinkcycle.org = ideas sharing, DIYFixit = information sharing. Cybertown is about making contact and creating new relationships. Online gaming sites like Sim, allows people to gather into virtual communities and create new environments so on.

Our cooperative nature is also being utilised within earthly confines. Charity organizations like the great Ormond Street Hospital, put plastic bags through people’s letter boxes with a request “Please donate your unwanted clothes” printed on them and a drawing of a crying child’s face. (pic. 3) It communicates clearly as well as motivates and enables in the same time. I think this is a most apt example of how Cooperation can be utilized and in some cases, exploited.

There is an entire university course on this subject of cooperation in the U.S. at Stanford called the ‘Literacy of Cooperation, I wish I new about it earlier. Here is a section from their .pdf document entitled “The Cooperation Project”

“New knowledge about the nature of cooperation could alleviate suffering and create wealth. Toward those ends, the Cooperation Project (CP):
Catalyzes interdisciplinary study of cooperation through workshops, seminars, and online knowledge communities.
Maps the findings emerging from cooperation studies onto graphical representations and visual interfaces.
Educates the perceptions of practitioners in person and online with workshops, conceptual toolkits, games, and simulations.
Applies this knowledge to real world problems in partnership with practitioners.

Problems of health care, economic development, political and interpersonal conflict, environmental sustainability, resource allocation, disaster relief, urban planning, civil society, democratic governance, technological innovation, intellectual property, public education—the most critical problems of our time—involve social dilemmas and institutions for collective action that are not yet well-understood.
Evidence from biology, sociology, economics, political science, computer science, and psychology suggest the feasibility of building an interdisciplinary framework for understanding cooperation.
”www.rheingold.com/cooperation/CooperationProject_3_30_05.pdf
Cooperation is an essential part of human nature the above evidence attests to this. Therefore, it is important to understand it and consciously incorporate it into our lives as well as into Design. Cooperation, combined with Communication, Motivation and Enabling would shape the grounding of a solid and worthwhile Design Degree Project. I would like to rise to that challenge and create something meaningful and beneficial to society.

Six Principles

As the Internet enabled a parallel shift in the way we cooperate to resemble more the original, instinctual and voluntary ‘Want’ type. In this newly defined model, the nature or description of ‘Want’, ‘Need’ and Must have completely changed too. This is in part, due to the fact that Cyberspace is an environment that we can control to a much larger extent and it does not directly affect our survival. To understand cooperation in Cyberspace we need a closer look into the nature of the Six Principles that enables it.

Emergent Democracy “refers to the Internet phenomenon change of the geopolitical landscape to increasingly reflect more democratic principles. It is used in the context of defining a political rift in the current world order between the interests of corporate-run business and the public, and to describe the new abilities of the public to organize with a newfound realistic capability of transcending the preexisting and established order.….'Emergent democracy' defines the ability for the public to represent itself in union—such as to permanently alter the nature of political and economic institutions to better reflect the common interests of a public unified on a worldwide scale.”
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_democracy)

Knowledge Economy The following definition comes up when you type the term into Wikipedia:
“Knowledge Economy refers to the use of knowledge to produce economic benefits. The phrase was popularised if not invented by Peter Drucker as the heading to chapter 12 in his book The Age of Discontinuity (1969, Heinemann, London)”.
Advancingknowledge.com provides a more detailed, although not very coherent view. “The generation of knowledge is traditionally conceived as a process internal to single entity. But it is increasingly a product of networked entities, often differently situated yet motivated to find new solutions to specific problems, needs, and circumstances – and, in many cases, to reveal these solutions to others. Enabled by technology, knowledge moves quickly within these networks – across firms, institutions, borders, and distances. While scientific research has long been characterized by unfettered circulation of discoveries and the ability to build instantly on these discoveries, distributed models are gaining importance and becoming essential to the larger fabric of the knowledge-based economy.”

“Open Source describes general practices in production and development which promote access to the end product's sources. It is regarded by some as a philosophy and by others a pragmatic methodology…”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
The Open Source movement, it seems to me to be, permeating every sector of our society. The way we shop; Sainsbury’s advertising with recipe suggestions is also a way of information sharing for profit increase. Television programming usually reflect these changes in attitudes. The demanding viewer requires programming to follow the changes in sociological trends. One of the ways that television responded to the open source trend by largely increasing in make over shows, where the presenters now give tips on “how not to decorate” as well as how to do it correctly. What does an aspiring property developer must do to succeed so on, all of which skills were previously ‘bought’ not shared. Television and media not only responds but also in turn also largely influences this progress. This brings us to the core theme of my project. Cooperation is a basic life skill that helps us work successfully in groups and interact harmoniously with others. The creation of Cyberspace and the development of the Internet have enabled us to be true to our nature when it comes to cooperation.
The other three principles Trust, Symbiosis and Freedom I believe to be self-explanatory when associated with cooperation.

Allowed to Want again

We ‘Want’ Again
The parallel shift in cooperation I mentioned at the previous chapter, begun in the very recent history with the development of Internet based communication, cooperation moved into Cyberspace. (The term was coined William Gibson in his science fiction book the Neuromancer in 1984.)
“The idea of a computer network intended to allow general communication between users of various computers has developed through a large number of stages. The melting pot of developments brought together the network of networks that we know as the Internet. This included both technological developments, as well as the merging together of existing network infrastructure and Telecommunication systems. The earliest versions of these ideas appeared in the late 1950s. Practical implementations of the concepts began during the late 1960s and 1970s. By the 1980s, technologies we would now recognise as the basis of the modern Internet began to spread over the globe. In the 1990s the introduction of the World Wide Web saw use become commonplace.”
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet)
In Cyberspace there is a different, virtual reality where people seem “Want ” to cooperate again. This parallel, I feel is to be significant in the future of humanity.
Internet is what enables us to interact with each other in cyberspace. I have established six principles of the ‘Want To’ type of cooperation. There are perhaps more and there are many sub categories. There are two reasons for sticking to this number; one is that these six are the crucial foundation blocks of the human interrelations in Cyberspace. The other is that six is within our channel capacity. This is a concept in cognitive psychology that indicates the amount of information our brain can store. The six principles are Freedom, Trust, Symbiosis, Open Source, Knowledge Economy and Emergent Democracy. These can be viewed as a pyramid that works best when it is in the same time inverted.
Emergent Democracy is based on Knowledge Economy that can only operate successfully on the basis of Symbiotic relationships. The necessary Freedom to make this workable was enabled by the inclusive nature of cyberspace and it's lack of geographical or cultural confines. But also on our inherent ability to trust. Most people want to trust and be trusted and willing to give this credit to others, but most importantly it is what people desire, ‘Want’ to do.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Want, Need & Must

Cooperation is intuitive and essential part of human nature. It is most successful when it is enabled, rather than controlled, symbiotic, meaning it is mutually beneficial for all concerned and can be realised to it’s full potential for smaller groups of up to 150 people. (I will also explain this last, very specific statement)
The following is the distilled answer to my questions about the nature of cooperation. This chapter will support the above statement and outline my journey to towards those conclusions.
I have divided the subject into three sections, which seems to loosely correlate to the history of cooperation as well. Please note that although I have made distinction, the theoretical line between the three different sections are blurred. For the reason of ease and simplicity I will refer to them as
• ‘Want’ under which I mean ‘Voluntary/Unconstrained’
• ‘Need’ means ‘Voluntary/Advantageous and
• ‘Must’ or have to which is Necessary/Compulsory.
Obviously these categories can be argued when relating to certain activities. Like if the caveman goes hunting alone it is his choice because he has a choice. If his friend goes with him that would be cooperative effort that is voluntary, but it is also advantageous and could be looked at as necessary even. But for all intents and purposes these arbitrary boundaries will suffice in order to be able to coherently illustrate the context.
This way cooperation is mapped right up till the twentieth century, when an interesting parallel shift has taken place, but more about that later, when we will see that these definitions will become more distinct.

The following is a brief description of the three section or types of cooperation, Want, Need and Must.
Firstly, We ‘Want’ to cooperate because we like to do so. It makes us feel good and gives us a sense of belonging. This period was characterised by instinctual but deliberately cooperative behaviour that we can still often observe in animals such as apes and monkey’s ‘groom’ each other, dolphins play group games in small groups. They recognise their ‘friends’ and ‘do’ things for one an other. The same characteristic also applies to people.
"Most of human evolution took place before the advent of agriculture when men lived in small groups, on a face to face basis. As a result human biology has evolved as an adaptive mechanism to conditions that have largely ceased to exist. Man evolved to feel strongly about few people, short distances and relatively brief intervals of time; and these are still the dimensions of life that are important to him" writes S.L. Washburn evolutionary biologist in Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point.
I am basing the ‘Want’ on my observation that human beings as well as highly intelligent, social animals, actually ‘like’ to do things for each other and choose to do so while not necessarily expecting return, other than perhaps affection and a sense of belonging. As part of a close-knit group we are more aware of each other’s needs. But there is a limit to how many others we can respond to this way. Here the shift towards the next type of cooperation begins.
Tipping Point continues on the subject; “British anthropologist Robin Dunbar begins with a simple observation. Primates – monkeys, chimps, baboons, and humans – have the biggest brains of all mammals. More important, a specific part of the brain of humans and other primates – the region called as the neocortex, which deals with complex thoughts and reasoning – is huge by mammal standards…So what does correlate with brain size? The answer Dunbar argues is group size. If you look at any species of primate the larger their neocortex is, the larger the average size of the group they live with.
Dunbar’s’ argument is that brain evolve, they get bigger, in order to handle the complexities of human relationships… The figure of 150 seems to represent the maximum number of individuals with whom we can have genuinely social relationship, the kind of relationship that goes with knowing who they are and how they relate to us. Putting it in an other way, it’s is the number of people you would not feel embarrassed about joining uninvited for a drink if you happened to bump into them in a bar.”
At this point we have arrived at the second section, the ‘Need’. Cooperative behaviour was essential in making the leap from hunter, gatherer groups to agricultural societies. From building of sophisticated all weather dwellings to the communal management of livestock, harvest and trade, sophisticated cooperation was necessary. As population grew, society became more complex. The Tipping Point chapter goes on saying that when groups get larger than 150 people become strangers to one another. “At 150 something happens, something indefinable but very real – that somehow changes the nature of community overnight. - In smaller groups people are a lot closer. They knit together, which is very important if you want to be effective and successful at community life…” This explains why and how the third section “Must” came about in this story of cooperation. Over 105 people require a greater measure of control. “At a bigger size you have to impose complicated hierarchies and rules and regulations and formal measures to try to command loyalty and cohesion.” Says Dunbar. People ‘Must’ cooperate most of all above ‘Want’ to or their ‘Needs’. And they do. Political leaders such as dictators like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao have mastered the control to extreme levels where people’s wants and needs were altogether oppressed in order to enforce a greater measure of cooperation. Under dictatorship, people ‘Must’ cooperate. Post war democratic movements freed many nations from imposed oppression. But it’s individual attitudes that collectively begun to make the difference. Human nature can only be superficially controlled and just for brief periods. In the end our wants and needs will always overcome control. Our history proves this.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Design Idea - CoBike

Cooperation is still the main theme of my project. The idea for a bicycle came from watching some videos about children playing. Autistic children did not interact but were completely absorbed in their own play, while the other children would get involved in eachother's activities. Cooperative play that requires communication, negotiation and decision making, may be able to teach important social skills. Social awareness begins to develop from two year of age, which is also the age when tricycles are being used. Tricycles also improve spatial awareness and provide a good foundation for learning riding the bicycle. Therefore I have designed the CoBike tricycle for the 2 - 4 age group. This bike can be ridden by two children. Through alternate pedal pushing and joint steering, they must communicate and cooperate in order to successfully ride this tricycle. Whether cooperative toys work or not in the improvement of social skill is purely a theoretical speculation on my side as I have no specific research on the subject. However, it is evident that children do prefer to play together and seem to learn through playing. I further speculate that the act of physical cooperation becomes a part of the children's subconscious mind. I would like the opportunity to try this theory on all children and especially those on the autistic spectrum. The illustration shows the design. The CoBike has wide seat to accommodate two children as well as wide pedals to fit both feet. The CoBike has not been built, only the sketches and this model drawing exists at present and I am working on a scale model a present.
(sorry for the following disclosure but there are people out there who "didn't know" this;) The concept idea is registered and in part the property of UL Goldsmiths College. Illegal copying the idea will result in legal action.