I’m going to briefly talk about some of the ideas from the book Information Ecologies. One of the main issues the authors wrote about is the way technology is thought about and discussed. They stress the importance of language when discussing technology–particularly the metaphors that shape the way we think.

Theory
The book’s ideas are related what I wrote about in my thesis paper. During my research, I had a difficult time resolving the word technology – a word that engineers, anthropologists, and everyday people use as opposed to product – a word that designers, and perhaps business people use. Technology usually refers to the collection of products we use that contain a variety of computational components. When we talk about technology, we are more often than not talking about digital/information/high technology. The problem I see is that just using the word technology usually implies a sense of inevitability–which the authors were trying to push back on.

By talking about the man made world in terms of a product, for example, saying interactive product, more responsibility can be give to the people that actually create them and make decisions about them. Designers, policy makers, and the communities that use the products don’t deal with pure technology in their everyday lives, but with products that have been intentionally shaped. Because of this, I’ve found the idea of a product ecology to be more grounded in the reality and language of everyday people.

Their argument about using an information ecology is useful and interesting. It balances the way that technologists might look at a situation that incorporates technology. It reaches out and makes connections between an idea that comes from biology to our everyday life. One of the most valuable things about it is that it gives a set of dynamic characteristics (system, diversity, coevolution, keystone species, and locality) that we can use to study, interpret, discuss, and think about. At the very least, it is a source of inspiration to think about things in a different way–even if it seems too abstract at times.

Practice
Why does any of this matter and to whom? Well, the ideas in the book can be useful to lots of people, but I’m going to stick specifically to designers. As the things we design become more complex and integratated into our contexts, I think it can become harder to tease out all the parts and think about them. To a service designer, this might seem obvious–that there is a complex system with lots of parts that need to be accounted for, not the least of which includes people with their needs and desires. But I still think that it can be useful in different stages that designers find themselves in, here are some quick thoughts:

• Researching: Generating interview questions around information ecology characteristics.
• Synthesizing: Grouping data collected during research around characteristics of the information ecology.
• Communicating: Building models based on an information ecology’s characteristics.
• Generating : Coming up with ideas that cater to a living, evolving system that fit with people’s personal values. Brainstorming around an information ecology’s characteristics.
• Refining: Fleshing out concepts that take into account the characteristics of an information ecology and referring back to them.

It might look a bit deterministic at first, but I’m not saying this should take the place of whatever a designer does already or that they should use it at every step of the process. It’s just another tool that can be used when needed. The authors go into detail–perhaps a bit too much detail–with examples involving libraries, schools, workplaces, classrooms, and hospitals. Being anthropologists, their focus is mainly on the researching aspect and less on the other phases of design.

I recently had the chance to make my way through the book Information Ecologies: Using Technology With Heart written by Bonnie Nardi and Vicky O’Day, both of whom are researchers interested in technology and people. I had seen the book referenced before, but never had the chance to sift through it. Looking back, it would have been a good resource for my thesis paper. This post is mainly a summary of the text, and in the next I’ll post my thoughts on its significance.

Theme
Information Ecologies is about changing people’s perspectives on technology. In particular, the concern relates to how technology is used in a local setting and how it impacts the ways in which we live, die, work, and play. Their goal is to create a balanced discussion about technology that allows people to be informed and actively engaged in settings that include technology.

Problem
The authors’ reason for writing this book is that current discussions regarding technology lack a balanced perspective, resigning people to a mindset that all that happens is simply inevitable. The consequence of this can be seen in three ways: the rapid pace of technology leads to an inability for humans to keep up, increased automation leads to a loss of human skill and judgment in technology, and mechanical efficiency as benchmarks for performance end up ignoring the richness of a full human being. These are all symptoms of technologies being deployed that lack “human heart.”

The authors attribute this partly to public discourse about technology. They see the language and metaphors used as limited and unbalanced. With this in mind, they look at current metaphors used and their shortcomings:

Technology as a Tool

• Metaphor: Something that fits the human hand and mind of individuals.
• Thinking about technology as a tool is useful when designing for human capabilities and cognitive needs, but it doesn’t take into account the social, organizational, or political setting in which it is used.

Technology as a Text

• Metaphor: A form that holds meaning and communicates something depending on its situation.
• It is useful for discussion about meaning and the roles of designers, implementors, users, etc… But it doesn’t take into account judgment creativity and values when people choose to act.

Technology as a System

• Metaphor: Phenomena of immense scope.
• It is the broadest perspective, but it can be overwhelming and wash out distinctions and details.

Argument
The authors present a fourth metaphor, an ecology, as their core argument:

Technology as an ecology

• Metaphor: A living system that includes complex relationships, diversity, co-evolution, keystone species, and locality.
• Takes into account the broader context but also includes the detailed complexity.

They see the metaphor of a living system as being more useful in discussion people’s relationship to technology–and it makes sense since people themselves are living things. Part of their motivation in using this metaphor is the association with something that is long lasting, changing, and requires the engagement and participation of those affected by it. In essence it says: people and their complexities matter.

Definitions

• Information Ecologies: local habitations in which we can reflect on appropriate uses of technology in light of our local practices, goals, and values. It is a complex system of part and relationships. It exhibits diversity and experiences continual evolution. Different parts of an ecology coevolve, changing together according to the relationships in the system. Several keystone species necessary to the survival of the ecology are present. Information ecologies have a sense of locality.
• Local habitations: Settings in which we as individuals have an active role, a unique and valualbe local perspective, and a say in what happens. Ex. Workplaces, houses, libraries, hospitals, community centers, churches, clubs, and civic organizations.

Take-away
Sometimes it was difficult to figure out who this book would be useful for beyond researchers looking for alternative frameworks regarding technology, but they give three main pieces advice for those looking to “evolve information technology.”

• Work from core values: understand what people care about and the emotions of people using technology.
• Pay Attention: Stay curious, wonder about things, and engage people in discussion.
• Ask Strategic questions: ask a full-range of open-ended “why” questions that relate to the particularities of a local setting.

I’ll close with a quote from the book that I found particularly interesting regarding the value of real examples in anthropological research and discussion:

Real examples show diversity and interconnections that summaries often conceal. When people give general accounts of how things work to outsiders, they usually leave out what is locally unimportant or little valued. But sometimes these hidden details, seen from different perspectives, emerge as crucial to the workings of an ecology (85)