Participatory Design and the Art of Baking Fairy Cakes

There was a lot of talk at the recent Design Council/Dott Cornwall Intersections conference about breaking down hierarchies and finding new ways to co-create and support social innovation.  I wholeheartedly agree with that idea, but I wasn’t the only observer to notice that for all the inspirational talk of doing things differently, a line up of overwhelmingly male, visually slick and resolutely assertive presenters appeared a little too familiar.   We all know that we can’t solve our problems with the same thinking that created them, so, if design for social innovation really is about change from the bottom up  is now a good time to mention the ‘F’ word, and I don’t mean fairy cakes?

I love the idea that designers can be catalysts for communities to support themselves in new and imaginative ways and that it is the end users that get to be the co-producers of those innovations.  One word I heard several times at Intersections was ‘permission’; that design led social innovations created a platform where end users felt allowed to participate confidently.  Yet, if we are striving for parity in the co-design of services, why do our co-creators need ‘permission’ to effect change within their own communities; and if we begin to operate without a hierarchy, does anybody have the right to give it?

As designers in a collaborative process with end users, ours is ultimately a service role, to encourage the conditions for the creativity of others to take centre stage.  To facilitate effectively is to step back, listen sensitively and nurture others ideas and input.  These are traditionally feminine attributes.  Talking through my own experiences of co-design techniques with a new friend at Intersections I realised that one of the most effective tools I had utilised in breaking down the hierarchical dynamic at workshops were home baked fairy cakes.  Initially I brought them as an extra incentive, but found that giving people a homemade cake said more than I could about how important I felt their presence and input was and created the conditions for positive engagement.

My concern with the development of design for social innovation as I see it presented is whether whilst understanding the need for parity between designers and end users, it is unconsciously adopting the very hierarchies it seeks to dismantle.  Feminism has devoted much attention to understanding how and why traditional organizational structures develop, questioning the validity of a system that allows elitist hierarchies to assume ascendancy.  Half a century after the first wave of feminism it still feels risky to question the status quo, even from the inside of a milieu purportedly questioning the status quo.  Yet, elevating the feminine aspect in current design evolution, from face to face engagement, to wider systemic reorganisation may be the key to breaking down hierarchy at every level, and in the face of an ever more competitive and stratified society could offer an alternative starting point where parity and fairness are intrinsic qualities, not aspirations.