Design isn’t just about tangible objects, it’s also about services and processes. This is where the Double Diamond Tool for Design comes to the fore. The Design Council devised the Double Diamond as a way of graphically explaining the design process. The two diamonds represent a process of exploring an issue and then taking focused action. The key elements of this model are:
Discover. The first diamond helps people understand, rather than simply assume, what the problem is. It involves speaking to and spending time with people who are affected by the issues. Define. The insight gathered from the discovery phase can help you to define the challenge in a different way. Develop. The second diamond encourages people to give different answers to the clearly defined problem, seeking inspiration from elsewhere and co-designing with a range of different people. Deliver. Delivery involves testing out different solutions at small-scale, rejecting those that will not work and improving the ones that will.
The latest iteration of the Double Diamond is available in a PDF document and is explained on the website and a video. Several different design organisations have taken this model and made it their own.
This model now has a fifteen year history. The Design Council has much more on their website about their Double Diamond and how to use it.
Finding out what older adults might want and need in their daily living experiences takes more than just asking them, especially if they have a cognitive impairment. Using creative methods, such as drawing and creating models, older people can express their needs in a tactile format. This also creates rapport with designers who can then devise better mobility, dining and leisure activities. This method is enjoyable for all participants.
This paper discusses co-design experiences with various stakeholders to explore latent needs of older persons in their daily living using a universal design approach. Through iterative use of creative methods, freehand sketching and physical models, older adults express their needs in a more accurate, tactile format.
Findings reveal that commonality of interest among older persons are important in building rapport among other participants. It also helps designers develop designs related to health care, mobility, dining and leisure activities.
Older adults and co-design
Older adults want the same designs as anyone else. Too often older people are gathered together under the umbrella of “the elderly”. This term assumes everyone is the same. It’s applied to people as young as 60 or 65 and every age after that. We can debate the terms but in the end, we are talking about people and design.
An article in Design Week challenges assumptions about older people and design. It reports on a study involving older people in design projects. They found older people “want what we want”. The ‘we’ in this context is young designers.
A key point is that people can live independently for longer if things are designed around their needs. In the end, age isn’t relevant. But designing inclusively is. That’s why devices designed specifically for older people are bought but often abandoned.
What does ‘ageing in place’ actually mean? For some it means staying put in the family home in their later years. For others it means staying in the same community.
Researchers at the University of Manchester developed a ‘village’ model of support based on those in the US. The residents came together to identify the services that they need and how they could be better managed. Storytelling was an integral part of the data collection. Ideas were generated for supporting ageing in place at a local level.
Front cover of the report
The report recounts the difficulties recruiting volunteers and participants as well as overcoming distrust of decision-makers. Access to formal and informal meeting places was also an issue.
Recommendations include building social infrastructure and strengthening organisations led by older people. The title of the report is, Community interventions to promote ‘ageing in place‘. This is a large file.
Co-designing with people living with dementia
A diagnosis of dementia used to mean staying home and being cared for. Those who work in the area of dementia are doing their best to change this view. But is the design community prepared to embrace people living with dementia? Paul Rogers reports in Co-designing with people living with dementiadisruptive design interventions to break the cycle of well-formed mindsets. The co-design method has provided ways for people with dementia to continue contributing to society and have fulfilling lives.
The co-design project was to create a new tartan design. Each person with dementia directed the researcher to co-create their digital design one colour at a time.
The Disrupting Dementia tartan project shows how co-design methods and tools can enable people living with dementia to make a significant contribution to society after diagnosis. Although dementia changes some aspects of a person, it does not affect their sense of self. Projects such as these not only inform designers, they also give a sense of inclusion and belonging to people with dementia.
From the abstract
This paper illustrates methods for co-designing with people living with dementia in developing a mass-produced product. The research was carried out in collaboration with Alzheimer Scotland using a range of disruptive design interventions. The aim was to break the cycle of we-formed opinions, mindsets, and ways-of-doing that remain unchallenged. The research has resulted in co-designed interventions to help change the perception of dementia.
People living with dementia can offer much to UK society after diagnosis. Co-designed activities and interventions help reconnect people recently diagnosed with dementia to help build their self-esteem, identity and dignity. Co-design processes help keep people with dementia connected to their community, thus delaying the need for formal support,
We worked collaboratively with over 130 people with dementia across Scotland in the co-design and development of a new tartan. The paper concludes with recommendations for researchers when co-designing with people living with dementia.
The paper reports on three design interventions using co-design activities with people diagnosed with dementia. The interventions offer innovations for co-designing with this group.
To move or not to move?
We expect to grow old, but because we don’t aspire to grow old, we rarely plan for it. “I’ll worry about it when the time comes” is a usual response. A report from AHURI looks at the housing situation for older Australians and some previous research is confirmed.
Most respondents felt their current home would suit them as they grow older, but they are not planning ahead. If they are, they lack information on how to go about it, what to look for, and what their options are other than age-segregated housing.
A significant proportion of respondents hadn’t thought about planning ahead for their living arrangements. This is one reason why we need the Livable Housing Design Standard adopted in all states and territories. It is in the 2022 edition of the National Construction Code and there is a handbook for designers.
It is often said that older people want to stay put, but this may not be the case for everyone. A study from Berlin, Germany looked at this issue in depth. While some of the findings might be specific to Berlin, the article raises interesting questions.
The researchers found that social class, gender, age and migrant history were not necessarily measures of movement behaviour. The top three reasons that emerged were: to have a smaller apartment, an obstacle-free apartment, and to have to a cheaper apartment.
Kat Holmes found the origin of include was to “shut in”. Similarly, the origin of exclude was to “shut out”. Maybe “inclusion” is not the right word for describing the inclusion of everyone in products, places and things. So what does inclusion actually mean?
Holmes explains in the video below, that the topic of diversity is discussed as gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, and race. Disability is usually mentioned last in the list, if at all. “But it is the one category that transcends all other categories”, she says. “Abilities are constantly changing”.
Holmes’ offers an alternative way for designers to consider diversity, and is based on her book, Mismatch: How Inclusion Shapes Design. An engaging talk for all upcoming designers in any field. And not just professional designers either. We all design things every day, so we all have a role to play.
Editor’s Note: I discussed this issue in a 2009 paper. Inclusion requires those who are already included to invite into the group those who are excluded. Semantics are important. What we need is inclusiveness – that’s where inclusion has already happened and there are no exclusions. Inclusion is a futuristic concept – it’s something we are striving for. It it were achieved, no further discussion would be needed.
Being able to find places easily is key to getting out and about at any age or level of capability. Online maps are becoming more sophisticated with interactive content and different layers of information. Graphics and colour are used to emphasise places and attributes. But not everyone can see certain colours. So, does your access map have the right colours?
The number of people with colour vision deficiency (CVD) is growing as some people acquire it as they get older. Map Design for the Color Vision Deficient provides a background to this issue and tools for selecting the colours when designing maps. You will need institutional access for a free read. A similar paper is available on ResearchGate.
From the abstract
The golden rule of map design states that one should carefully consider both a map’s purpose and its audience. Maps designed for the general public frequently fail to consider the portion of our population with color vision impairment or color vision deficiency (CVD), known more commonly as color blindness. Recent studies indicate that over 5% of our Caucasian male population are susceptible to congenital or inherited color vision deficiency.
CVD also can be acquired from chemical exposure, injury, illness, medication, and aging. With the exception of aging, little or no data exists on the number of people impaired by any of these non-congenital causes. Recent research has revealed that as many as 20% of those studied over the age of 72 suffer from a blue-yellow defect that increases with age to nearly 50% at age 90.
This acquired blue-yellow defect also is the predominant CVD for those suffering from chemical exposure. This chapter examines the effects of CVD and attempts to illustrate the impact of color choices on visually impaired audiences. It shows that the acquired CVD population is growing and suggests colors and alternatives in map design to minimize that impact.
Maps in shades of grey: is that what you want?
Map design usually relies on colour to convey information. But what if you can’t see all the colours? You get maps in shades of grey. Directional maps, such as street maps for example, use colour to indicate train stations and heritage sites. Geographical maps use colour to show height of land, temperature, and to separate land from water. And it’s not just maps – websites suffer the same issues.
Many of these are age-old conventions that designers follow. So how do you know what colours are best to use? The Colblinder website give examples of what geographic maps look like to people with CVD. It also has links to other references and a colour blindness simulation tool. Although this is about maps, it can also apply to websites and printed documents, such as guidelines, and manuals where pictures and graphics are used to inform and instruct.
For research on this topic Anne Kristin Kvitle’s article is worth a read. The article is titled, “Accessible maps for the color vision deficient observers: past and present knowledge and future possibilities”.
From the abstract
Color is part of the visual variables in map, serving an aesthetic part and as a guide of attention. Impaired color vision affects the ability to distinguish colors, which makes the task of decoding the map colors difficult.
Map reading is reported as a challenging task, especially when the size of stimuli is small. The aim of this study is to review existing methods for map design for color vision deficient users. The study identified two main approaches: pre-processing by using accessible colors and post-processing by using enhancement methods. Some of the methods may be applied for maps, but requires tailoring of test images according to map types.
Acceptable language regarding people with disability has changed, and standards continue to adapt as understanding and perceptions evolve. Many terms once widely used are now considered to imply inferiority and serve to marginalise people. The National Center on Disability and Journalismupdated their Style Guide in 2021. It provides alternatives to terms still seen too oftenin the media.
The guide also gives an explanation for why some terms are considered offensive, derogatory, and/or marginalising. Unless the context of the story relates to the disability, it might not be necessary to point to any kind of impairment. And think about illustrations and photos too.
Here are a few common terms to avoid:
Afflicted with: Implies that a person with a disability is suffering or has a reduced quality of life.
Able-bodied: Refers to a person who does not have a disability. The term implies that all people with disabilities lack “able bodies” or the ability to use their bodies well. Use non-disabled. Use person without disability.
Confined to a wheelchair: Describes a person only in relationship to a piece of equipment designed to liberate rather than confine. Use wheelchair user.
Stricken with, suffers from, victim of: These terms carry the assumption that a person with a disability is suffering or has a reduced quality of life. Use living with…
Demented: Refer to someone as having dementia only if the information is relevant to the story and a formal diagnosis has been made. Use “a person with dementia” or “a person living with dementia.” Do not use senile.
Special needs: This can be problematic where there are government funded programs for “special schools”. The term is considered stigmatising – use “functional needs” or describe the specific issue or disability. Everyone has needs.
Inclusive illustrations: What’s in a face?
It’s often someone other than the writer of an article that chooses a picture to go with it. Usually this is a stock photo that might not convey the intended message. Stock photos of older people are often patronising. They show young and old hands, or a young person looking lovingly at an older person. Most illustrations are far from inclusive.
Similarly, stock photos of wheelchair users often use non-disabled models and not real wheelchair users. An article and guideline from an illustrator discusses how to add diversity to your brand whether an organisation, service or a product. The title of the article is, Your Face Here: Creating illustration guidelines for a more inclusive visual identity.
Whether being used to distill complex messages or add a touch of whimsy, illustration is one piece that makes up a company’s visual brand identity.”
Also have a look at these stock photos of older people and see what you think. Note that they are all white and active – no diversity here.
Do’s and Don’ts of disability language
Language etiquette around the topic of disability seems to get some people tongue-tied. Fear of offending often results in just that. But so does using outmoded terms such as “handicapped”. So what are the do’s and don’ts of terminology and language use?
People with Disability Australia (PWDA) have a great guide. It gives a context to the importance of language and how it relates to dignity and respect. It is based on the social model of disability. That is, disability is not an individual medical problem. Disablement is the result of an environment filled with physical and social barriers.
Should you say “People with disability” or “disabled person?” It depends on the individual. However, government policies use the person first version – people with disability. The one to avoid is “the disabled” because it dismisses people and puts this diverse group into one category. The same can be said for “the elderly”.
Adaptations of the word disability, or euphemisms, should not be used either. Terms such as differently-abled, special needs, or handicapable sound clever but are demeaning. Other terms such as “all abilities” suggests the opposite – a special place for people with disability. If it is inclusive it shouldn’t need a “special” title. However, accessible features can be included in any descriptions of the place or service.
The PWDA guide gives an overview of ableist language and its impact, some advice on reporting on disability, and a list of words and recommended alternatives.
Disability is not about inspiration
One other important aspect of reporting on disability is what the late Stella Young described as “inspriation porn” in an entertaining TED talk. The portrayal of a person doing everyday things, or achieving a goal, as being inspiring gets the no-go signal. People with disability are often portrayed in the media as being “sufferers” or “heroes”. Rarely is either the case.
Design isn’t just about tangible objects, it’s also about services and processes. This is where the Double Diamond Tool for Design comes to the fore. The Design Council devised the Double Diamond as a way of graphically explaining the design process. The two diamonds represent a process of exploring an issue and then taking focused action. The key elements of this model are:
Finding out what older adults might want and need in their daily living experiences takes more than just asking them, especially if they have a cognitive impairment. Using creative methods, such as drawing and creating models, older people can express their needs in a tactile format. This also creates rapport with designers who can then devise better mobility, dining and leisure activities. This method is enjoyable for all participants.
Older adults want the same designs as anyone else. Too often older people are gathered together under the umbrella of “the elderly”. This term assumes everyone is the same. It’s applied to people as young as 60 or 65 and every age after that. We can debate the terms but in the end, we are talking about people and design.
Kat Holmes found the origin of include was to “shut in”. Similarly, the origin of exclude was to “shut out”. Maybe “inclusion” is not the right word for describing the inclusion of everyone in products, places and things. So what does inclusion actually mean? 
It’s often someone other than the writer of an article that chooses a picture to go with it. Usually this is a stock photo that might not convey the intended message. Stock photos of older people are often patronising. They show young and old hands, or a young person looking lovingly at an older person. Most illustrations are far from inclusive. 
Language etiquette around the topic of disability seems to get some people tongue-tied. Fear of offending often results in just that. But so does using outmoded terms such as “handicapped”. So what are the do’s and don’ts of terminology and language use?