論文 / 著書情報
Article / Book Information
題目(和文)

専門知識の差により発言力が不均衡な集団におけるアイデア創出のための共創デザイン手法の開発

Title(English)

Development of co-design tools for collective ideation under a power
asymmetry context due to differences in expertise

著者(和文)

田岡祐樹

Author(English)

Yuki Taoka

出典(和文)

学位:博士(学術),学位授与機関:東京工業大学,
報告番号:甲第11210号,
授与年月日:2019年3月26日,
学位の種別:課程博士,
審査員:齊藤 滋規,西條 美紀,梅室 博行,野原 佳代子,藤井 晴行

Citation(English)

Degree:Doctor (Academic),
Conferring organization: Tokyo Institute of Technology,
Report number:甲第11210号,
Conferred date:2019/3/26,
Degree Type:Course doctor,
Examiner:,,,,

学位種別(和文)

博士論文

Category(English)

Doctoral Thesis

種別(和文)

要約

Type(English)

OutlinePowered by T2R2 (Tokyo Institute Research Repository)

論

文

要

約

DISSERTATION OUTLINE

Chapter 1 “Introduction” outlines the brief backgrounds of co-design and gives research objectives ofthis thesis. Co-design has been seen as a promising way of solving social wicked problems. Co-design
involves non-designers, who are not trained as designers, into the design process. Involving
non-designers leads to form power asymmetry due to differences of participants’ expertise. Therefore,
it is essential to develop new designated tools for better participation of non-designers. As designing iscultural dependent activities, development of the tools should take culture into account. Participants
may perceive the power asymmetry differently depending on one of their cultural value orientation,
sensitivity to unequal power (PDI: Power Distance Index). Therefore, this study aims to clarify
impacts of cultural difference, especially PDI, on idea generation and selection of co-design activities
in which people having different level of expertise of design and propose tools for the purpose.
Chapter 2 “Co-designing as a cultural dependent activity” links national culture and co-design process
by describing theoretical backgrounds of co-design, criteria proposed to measure national cultures inanthropology research and related studies investigating cultural difference and design process. This
chapter argues that it is important to investigate impacts of participants’ PDI on power asymmetry due
to expertise in idea generation and selection activities in co-design, especially in a high PDI context
such as Japan.
Chapter 3 “How co-design has been implemented in practice in Japan” explores what are barriers andhow professional designers deal with them by interview with professional designers who haveexperiences in both high and low PDI contexts. The interview found that the power asymmetry has
both positive and negative impacts on collaboration in design activities. As a positive side, people inwith more expertise can facilitate discussion, which leads to better discussion. On the other hand, inmost cases, people with less expertise become less active in design discussion because they areintimidated by the presence of people with more expertise. The interviews with designers suggested
that, in a high PDI context, the collaboration within a co-design group would be affected by thepresence of a person ‘with authority’ (e.g. a professional designer), while this would not be the case ina low PDI context.
Chapter 4 “Cultural difference and influence of power asymmetry due to differences in expertise onco-design” describes the impact of the power asymmetry in co-design workshop by focusing on
difference of PDI. The experiment was conducted with ten people from high power distance countriesand ten people from low power distance countries. In the experiment, the participants were asked togenerate ideas with and without professional designers. The impact of the presence of designers andcultural differences were analyzed by protocol analysis and participants’ perception of collaboration.
The results suggest that presence of design experts intimidates non-designers in high PDI groups,
which leads to less varieties of opinions were tended to be shared during idea generation.

Chapter 5 “Impacts of anonymity on idea generation and selection in co-design” describes anexperiment with twenty-four Japanese university students to investigate the impact of anonymity at
design discussion in groups with the power asymmetry. In the experiment, the participants were asked
to generate ideas and select an idea either in anonymous condition or in identified condition.
Anonymity was offered with a setup where each participants cannot see with each other. The result
suggests that anonymity do not have significant impacts on idea generation but do have significant
impacts of idea selection. To be precise, anonymity increased the number of comments regarding
negative sides of ideas, which leads to critical discussion.
Chapter 6 “Development of Tools offering anonymity for idea generation and selection in co-design”
reports development of two tools offering anonymity in order to investigate impacts of anonymity in acondition which is closer to practical design workshops. The author conducted an experiment with
sixteen Japanese university students. In the experiment, the participants were asked to conduct designtasks with and without the tools; one tool for idea generation and the other tool for idea selection. The
results imply that both of the tools have positive impacts on design activities. The tool for idea
generation significantly increased creativity of participants and the tool for idea selection increased thenumber of comments of both positive and negative aspects of ideas in idea selection.
Chapter 7 “Conclusion” discuss overall findings. The findings have the potential to inform thedevelopment of tailor-made co-design methods which are eventually expected to help designers andnon-designers collaboratively produce valuable outcomes for the society.

1. Yuki Taoka, Kaho Kagohashi, Céline Mougenot.

A cross-cultural study of co-design: The impact

of power distance on group dynamics in Japan, Co-design (in press)
https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1546321
2. Yuki Taoka, Kaho Kagohashi, Shigeki Saito, Céline Mougenot. A Proposal and Evaluation ofCo-design Tools with a focus on Anonymity, “Special Issue for KEER2018”, International Journalof Affective Engineering (in press)
https://doi.org/10.5057/ijae.IJAE-D-18-00009