Designing for Changing Values (Event & Journal CfP)
I learned of the following research project via
Philos-L "The Liverpool List" Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool
[ https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy/philos-l/ @PhilosL ]
- with news of a call for papers:
Hodges' model is ideally to suited to critique of systems and socio-technical dimensions as previously described:
Jones, P. (2009) Socio-Technical Structures, the Scope of Informatics and Hodges’ model, IN, Staudinger, R., Ostermann, H., Bettina Staudinger, B. (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Nursing Informatics and Socio-Technical Structures, Idea Group Publishing, Inc. Chap. 11, pp. 160-174.
Plus, there are many posts tagged 'socio-technical' - hyphenated to emphasize the inter- multi- trans-disciplinary bridges that the model provides (some posts are also tagged 'sociotechnical').
The research project Designing for Changing Values provides encouragement here for the increasing relevance of Hodges' model:
How to Deal with Value Change in Sociotechnical System Design
"Not value neutral
A key insight from philosophy of technology is that technological artifacts and sociotechnical systems are not value neutral, but support or inhibit certain values. Several philosophical accounts for understanding the embedding of values in technological artifacts have been proposed and approaches like Value Sensitive Design, Design for Values and Responsible Innovation have been established for integrating values into technical design.
A theoretical blind spot
A blind spot is, however, the possibility of value change after a sociotechnical system has been designed. For example, when many of our current energy and transportation systems were designed sustainability was not yet a central value, and we are now struggling to incorporate this value into these systems. Progress in the field is currently inhibited by the lack of a philosophical theory of value change in sociotechnical systems.
Better design strategies
This project fills the gap by developing such a theory. It moves beyond the state of the art by proposing a dynamic rather than a static account of values, by developing insights in the dynamics of value change, by extending analysis about the embedding of values in technical artefacts to sociotechnical systems and by developing design strategies that aim at designing sociotechnical systems that can better deal with value change."
https://www.valuechange.eu/
I do wonder about the subjective-objective and qualitative-quantitative 'metrics' of value and values (and other metrics - change, complexity, emergence). In human and mechanistic terms there are marked differences too between value and values. Values are, should, must be, embedded in individual nurses and hence the domains of Hodges' model. This is how (in part) the model supports reflection, and critical thinking.
No surprise then being created for practice, Hodges' model is dynamic. The model can help capture and present an ongoing sequence of frames. Where were we? Where are we going? How have things changed? (This is
Hodges' model prompted the thought of 'holistic bandwidth', the call for papers on corpus analysis seeks examples of formal work. The model, initially blank provides a conceptual framework upon which to capture a conceptually situated corpus. The structure of Hodges' model is a foundation for a relational ontology that draws upon semantic distance between the model's two axes (as per the table below):
INDIVIDUAL <-> GROUP
HUMANISTIC <-> MECHANISTIC
Not just that but the synonyms that may apply. So for 'individual': person, patient, client, self, client, 'I', 'me', Peter, Chi, student, teacher and whatever role is applicable. This point is vital as there is a potential and workflow that runs from:
1. Neutral, blank, non-judgemental (the model as a template): the content - empty, null state.
2. The model's essential structure.
With a potential for conceptual explosion - from a basic (very simplistic) inherent corpus, to one that is explicit:
3. A response to a situation, a context.
4. That then changes according to events, aims, objectives, strategies, philosophical perspective (recovery, strengths, self-care), policy emphasis ...
In health and social care as suggested above we would hope that the model is employed to shift from the general to the specific - person-centred approach.
|
value(S) | VALUE(S) |
value(s) |
VALUE(S) |
This conceptual framework is not limited to strategy either, but can also encompass deliberation on operational and tactical concerns.
See also:
Jones, P. (2012). Exploring several dimensions of local, global and glocal using the generic conceptual framework Hodges's model. The Journal Of Community Informatics. 8(3). Retrieved from https://openjournals.uwaterloo.ca/index.php/JoCI/article/view/3034
Jones P. Exploring the relationship of threshold concepts and Hodges’ model of care from the individual to populations and global health. Rev Cuid. 2017; 8(3): 1697-720. http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.v8i3.464
orcid.org/0000-0002-0192-8965