Keywords

1 Introduction

Technology is set to play an increasingly important role in the lives of older persons, yet technology designs for finding innovative solutions for their real, lived problems are often conceived and developed without their input. This could be the consequence of designing generic artefact solutions for a wide range of users (adopting a functional paradigm) (de Cozza et al., 2017), or for general use across multiple situations (Venable, 2009), or when target groups of users with specific needs (such as older individuals) are hard to reach (Gibson et al., 2019). We approached the design of a technology artefact on the assumption that older persons are able to participate in the design of such artefacts (Franz et al., 2019). We hold, moreover, that if they are sufficiently included in artefact design and if their interests are addressed, the artefact will be useful to them and they will be more likely to accept it. We also assumed that, with rapid technological evolution, some form of digital divide will always be an issue (Francis et al., 2019) and that, to include older technology users, we needed to find innovative solutions. To this end, we followed the suggestion of Kelly and Westoby (2018) to adopt a both/and logic, on the one hand acknowledged the complexity of involving older end-users of technology in the design and development of a technology artefact, and on the other hand delivering a rigorous technology product as emphasized by Janse van Rensburg and Goede (2019).

This chapter reflects on the process of artefact development and suggests ways to involve older end-users. The discussion is organized around six types of behaviour associated with the purposeful sequence of actions to reach a desired outcome (convergent problem solving), as outlined by Kelly and Westoby (2018): (1) describe the problem; (2) define the problem; (3) relate to key people about the problem; (4) generate an action plan; (5) act to alleviate the problem; and (6) evaluate the effectiveness of the action. In our case, actions were directed towards the development of a technology artefact. To avoid repeating information, and because we draw here on content presented earlier in this book, we refer to relevant chapters for further details.

In the design and development of our technology artefact, the point of departure was that older individuals should participate in the design of the technology artefact (see also Smith et al., 2019). Participation of this kind is normally informed by the end-user’s accessibility, acceptance of technology, and competence to, in addition to an interest in playing a role in the artefact’s design. However, participation faces challenges when older end-users have limited competence in using the technology, and are expected to “know what they want, what the alternatives are, and have the strength and the resources to give voice to it and take the initiative” (Kelly & Westoby, 2018, p. 70). We found ourselves facing a dilemma: on the one hand we wanted to involve a cohort of older end-users with limited technology competence, and on the other hand we wanted to apply a process rigorous enough to develop a sustainable artefact with long-term use. We decided to deal with this tension by adopting a both/and approach. In the section that follows, we describe the processes to facilitate the participation of a cohort of marginalized older persons in the design and development of our technology artefact through the application of six sets of actions. These actions touch to some extent on elements of design science research (DSR) used in designing and developing technology artefacts.

2 Six Actions to Design a Technology Artefact

We start with a series of six convergent problem solving actions, as presented in the literature and as we applied them in our study in the context of the age-inclusive technological needs of our participants.

2.1 Describe the Problem

Technology solutions can be effective only if they “emerge from an accurate and sensitive reading of a situation” (Westoby & Botes, 2020, p. 82). The design of a technology artefact is normally informed by an awareness of the problem. From a DSR perspective, Gregor and Hevner (2013) refer to the need to understand not only what is required by the end-user but also the real-world technological area of concern and the solution that the technology needs to offer. We discuss briefly the problem that gave rise to the need for a technology artefact.

Population ageing and the ever-growing numbers of older people who require care and services are cause for concern, given the worldwide prospect of insufficient resources to address their needs (see Chap. 1). There is general agreement that technology can help to improve access to information, social connectedness, and social and civic participation (Neves & Vetere, 2019). However, the problem is that language, socio-economic differences, and historical and current conditions present challenges for older individuals’ access to information and services, particularly in the developing world and, in our case, specifically in South Africa.

Most older South Africans live in multigenerational families whose members share resources, including cell phones and the older persons’ state-funded pensions (see Chaps. 1 and 6). The significant uptake of technology by older South Africans presents underexplored opportunities to design technology artefacts that could, for example, offer them an eDirectory that provides up-to-date relevant information about local services. Such an artefact would also optimize the use and distribution of resources and help to improve municipal service delivery (see Chap. 2). If older users were to accept and use it, the artefact could provide further information and communication technology (ICT) interventions to address their needs and thus promote their health and well-being.

2.2 Define the Problem

The creation of an artefact requires a clearly defined problem or issue that needs to be addressed, and a solution that can potentially address the problem (Peffers et al. 2008; Peine, 2019). The problem statement should focus not only on the problem but also on the complexity that surrounds it (Hevner et al., 2004). A technology designer needs detailed information to show how the proposed technology solution are relevant to older persons, organizations, and the context for which the solution is to be designed. Therefore, in-depth understanding is required of the older end-users and their specific contexts and of what would constitute the most appropriate and relevant technology artefact.

To this end, we launched two data-collection initiatives to obtain baseline data about older individuals’ cell phone use and the social systems facilitating their use of technology, as well as the types of information about local services the older individuals would need to access. The questionnaire development and data-collection processes are discussed in detail in Chaps. 3 and 5 and the results are reported in Chap. 6.

2.3 Relate to Key People about the Problem

We identified three types of key people who would be needed to research and address the problem: a transdisciplinary team, a project steering committee (PSC), and a technology designer.

The need to cross disciplinary boundaries and to draw on different analytical boundaries (Kincheloe, 2001) informed the selection of a transdisciplinary research team. Experts from different disciplines provide multiple views and new ways of looking at a problem. In a transdisciplinary discussion about the development of a suitable artefact, experts compare methods, and from different social and theoretical assumptions they offer multiple perspectives. For these perspectives to be applied in developing a solution, they should be shaped into a shared reality (see Kelly & Westoby, 2018). Our community-based data-collection involved a transdisciplinary team who consisted of experts in law, public administration, demography and population studies, development studies, social work, psychology, language studies, biokinetics, information systems, and socio-gerontology. The socio-gerontologists—who focus on issues affecting the lives of older individuals by means of dedicated research projects or as practitioners—offered three primary resources: (1) conceptualization of the data-collection and the nature of the involvement of older adults in the study sites; (2) adoption of the role of “mediating the communications between technology designers and end-users” because they were familiar with the needs and situatedness of older end-users (Kanstrup & Bygholm, 2019 p. 30); and (3) through their group work expertise, facilitation of transdisciplinary collaboration towards a process of collective discovery (Kelly & Westoby, 2018).

The PSC was created to act as adviser for the research team to guide context-relevant and culturally sensitive behaviour and to oversee project implementation (see Theron, 2013). The PSC comprised two socio-gerontologists, two student fieldworkers, an older individual from one of the participating communities, and an information systems expert. The PSC oversaw project implementation, guided context-sensitive interactions with older participants, and facilitated the inclusion of older individuals.

Finally, a suitable professional technology designer was identified to apply various approaches to developing the ICT system required within the boundaries of end-user preferences and contextual realities; this role can involve research-based development methods such as DSR, and architectural frameworks such as the TOGAF architecture development model (Hevner, 2007; Tristiyanto & Kurniawan, 2017). We identified technology designers who could develop an artefact based on the findings of the baseline data collected from a cohort of older participants about their cell phone use and design specifications formulated by the PSC.

2.4 Generate an Action Plan

We engaged in specific research actions to make “the voices of marginalized groups heard by identifying and creating evidence of those who are rendered invisible” (Keating et al., 2021, p. 61), and to provide the designers with specific information, relevant to older end-users, prepared in a format that would inform the design processes (Peine, 2019). Research informs the design of technology artefacts (Hevner & Chatterjee, 2010; Orlikowski & Lacono, 2000; Vaishnavi et al., 2004/2019), and can take the form of a needs assessment, which presents evidence of the problem, issue, gap, or concern for which an artefact solution is sought (Gupta, 2011). Such a needs assessment typically: (1) determines the needs of the target audience (older individuals in our case) in order to develop appropriate technology solutions that are fit for purpose; (2) assesses the attitudes of the target audience towards technology; and (3) serves as a baseline to measure and evaluate the impact of the intervention (Peine, 2019; Tegart, 2019). It follows that, in designing the artefact, the people for whom it is intended should be taken into consideration in every aspect, to avoid a generic and unspecific outcome with limited applicability to (in our case, older) end-users (Dix, 2017). The literature confirms that if human factors such as cultural practices, social interactions, and human behaviour are not considered, the artefact has little relevance and use, apart from attracting academic scrutiny (Dix, 2017).

We involved targeted marginalized older end-users by conducting a needs assessment of their cell phone use and specific needs. Recognizing that they would require support in providing the required information, we trained student fieldworkers to facilitate the process through social engagement strategies, and to use technology to capture data as the participants provided it. In this way, the data-collection itself became a demonstration of technology use.

2.5 Act to Alleviate the Problem

Here we discuss our gap analysis, based on the findings of the needs assessment, and the conceptual design of the solution.

2.5.1 Gap Analysis

A gap analysis is used to understand the value of a potential solution by reflecting on the current system and comparing it with what a new solution might offer (Marra et al., 2018). A gap analysis includes mapping the assets and resources as well as the deficits of a particular user group in a specific context. An assets perspective includes identifying strategies, capabilities, processes, or technologies that could be used, or, if these are underperforming, examining how they could be revised to meet the goals of a planned intervention, while a deficit perspective focuses on whether or not end-users could be supported by the proposed artefact (Winch et al., 1998). Our gap analysis was performed from an asset as well as a deficit perspective.

From an asset perspective, several elements were noted.

  • There was significant access to cell phones even though they were mostly older pushbutton versions (see Chap. 6).

  • Older end-users used basic functions on cell phone devices, which could be optimized by incorporating similar functionalities into the newly designed artefact (see Chap. 8). For example, older persons were able to upload airtime on their cell phones. Similar steps could therefore be included, for example, for using the unstructured supplementary service data (USSD) code to access information.

  • Younger unrelated people (without a relational history) were able to support older persons’ use of technology and their access to information effectively (see Chap. 7).

  • Older end-users’ social networks could facilitate their competence in using technology.

  • When older individuals were supported effectively, they could use cell phones independently (see Chap. 8).

  • Regarding the optimization of resources, the artefact would be able to save older individuals time and money if they were able to use it to access updated service information or to provide feedback about service provision.

From a deficit perspective, we noted the following issues.

  • Older individuals obtained information by physically visiting service providers, which requires financial resources.

  • Older individuals depended on their close social networks to access relevant information using the facilitation of younger people. The relational dynamics between older and younger people were sometimes ineffective, particularly in informal interpersonal contexts in the private domain, and this could potentially compromise end-user access to information (see Chap. 7).

The findings of the needs assessment were broken down into definable requirements to inform the design of the artefact. A list of the design requirements was derived from the baseline data and included the following:

  • Technology should be available on different digital platforms;

  • The design must accommodate pushbutton as well as smartphones; and

  • The system should be self-sustainable to suit conditions where financial resources are limited.

2.5.2 Conceptual Design

Conceptual designs typically result from information sessions that form part of a participatory design approach. This approach includes non-designers (e.g. the target user group as well as subject matter experts) in the design of an artefact (Sanders et al., 2010). Including the target users as part of a participatory design approach improves the likelihood of a successful development outcome (Ngqoyiyana et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2019).

The functional requirements of an artefact are normally depicted by conceptual designs. These “are often conceived by brainstorming workshops with users and stakeholders to generate ideas” (Anvari et al., 2019, p. 63). Creating a conceptual design for an artefact is a key step in the development process for two reasons, according to Ngqoyiyana et al. (2020): first, it validates accurate understanding of the requirements (as stipulated by the target user); and second, it provides the developers with a reference document of what the artefact should resemble and the key functionality it should provide. Validation is normally achieved by talking to representatives from the target user group, compiling data on the requirements, creating a visual representation of the requirements (mood boards, storyboards, and wireframes), and demonstrating the conceptual design to the target group to determine whether their requirements were correctly understood (Wong et al., 2012). It is an iterative process and concludes when the target users are satisfied that the conceptual design addresses their needs.

The conceptual design for the development of a technology artefact for our purpose was achieved by unidirectional translation processes involving the technology designers and the PSC. The process unfolded as follows: during a brainstorming session, artefact designers and the PSC discussed the proposed technology artefact. This interaction informed the compilation of a software proposal document by the designers and the development of a cell phone application prototype. When it was ready, the designers demonstrated the prototype of the artefact to the PSC.

Chap. 8 presents a comprehensive discussion of the phases followed in our project to develop the technology artefact—it consisted of the Yabelana ICT ecosystem, with a website, a mobile application and a USSD code. The specifications of the artefact were limited to suit the type of cell phone technology with which our older end-users were familiar (pushbutton and smartphones), the purpose of the technology (to promote access to service and service information in their particular context); and the fact that the system had to be self-sustainable. On completion of the iterative development process, the application was submitted to Apple and Google and uploaded to the relevant application stores as a free resource. The artefact was released in the following ways:

  • To older individuals in the communities where data about their cell phone use had originally been collected (see Chap. 4);

  • Through workshops with local government officials, and with representatives of Age-in-Action, the biggest NGO involved in promoting the interests of older individuals in South Africa (see Chap. 3); and

  • In a policy brief developed for the Department of Public Service and Administration (see Chap. 3).

2.6 Evaluate the Effectiveness of the Action

Many options are available for evaluating technology artefacts. Most methods involve internal checks by the developer, expert reviews, and field tests (Peffers et al., 2012). Artefact evaluation normally starts with self-evaluation by the developer, who reviews it for apparent errors. Next, evaluation should include expert reviews and a one-on-one session with a target user or small groups of participants (which could take the form of a case study) (Gregor & Hevner, 2013).

Our artefact was first evaluated by the PSC, which suggested several improvements. Next, we involved older individuals and asked them for qualitative feedback in informal small group interviews, facilitated by younger people (student fieldworkers) (See Chap. 4). The student fieldworkers, who adopted a user-centred approach, facilitated the use of the artefact by applying various supportive strategies, starting with building safe connections. The older individuals made recommendations for improving the use of the artefact, but the designers were not able to address all the points arising in the feedback—for example, the suggestion to include more language options on the USSD code, or longer item descriptions—because of the limitations of the type of cell phone technology available.

3 Including Older Individuals in Technology Artefact Design: A Critique

The processes presented in this chapter captured the first attempt to include a cohort of marginalized older South Africans actively and deliberately in the design and development of a technology artefact. The difficulties were extraordinary: this group of end-users not only presented with low competence in cell phone use and low literacy levels, they also had limited financial resources, a preference for older pushbutton phones, and they depended on younger people to use their cell phones; relational dynamics around the cell phones sometimes compromised older individuals’ full and optimal use of cell phones. We took seriously the positioning of people towards engaging with technology, informed by Kelly and Westoby’s idea (2018) that “people generally do what they can with what they have” (p. 95). To support older participants’ inclusion in the design of an artefact, we involved trained younger student fieldworkers with similar sociocultural knowledge to engage with the older participants around technology by relating and interacting authentically. We capitalized on older participants’ eagerness to learn by involving them in the design of our technology artefact to promote their access to services and to solve real-life problems.

We approached the technology design mindfully aware to refrain from “design paternalism”, drawing on Peine (2019, p. 57), and were able to find novel ways to collect the baseline information from the intended older end-users. The data from our baseline study were critical for the development of the artefact, but direct contact with the older end-user would have been of additional assistance had we been able to involve them further, by way of an iterative process, as the technology artefact itself was being refined. In this instance, the conceptual design phase ideally offers multiple opportunities for designers to present different versions of the interface to the intended (older) end-users and allow them to select the options that appeal to them most. However, despite the fact that our end-users were offered the opportunity to comment on the final product only once because of time limitations, the revisions they suggested could nevertheless be incorporated into the further development of the technology artefact.

The involvement of the PSC in our project was crucial: its members provided important background information in terms of older end-users’ situatedness, indicated the most needed care and service needs of older persons, suggested appropriate ways to involve participants with technology, and served as translators of the technical designer processes between end-users and designers, which enabled the project to achieve a technology artefact suitable to promote older individuals’ access to information on cell phone devices. However, we found that we had over-estimated the extent to which a PSC was able to anticipate all the technology-related experiences of the older individuals in the communities selected for our project. In a future phase of Yabelana development, we plan to engage community leaders in further updates and improvements. We are aware that the impact of adopting technology depends not only on subjective experience but also on word-of-mouth among older individuals in their communities. If one or two trusted community leaders adopt and promote the use of the new technology, the likelihood is greater that its uptake will spread more readily to the rest of the community.

4 Recommendations

We present recommendations to support the inclusion of marginalized older individuals in technology artefact design from four perspectives: broader-contextual, local, relational, and technology design.

The inclusion of a cohort of marginalized older individuals requires a broader understanding of the changing population demography—on a global scale as well as how it emerges in a developing world context such as South Africa. The broader contextual understanding informs the need to find solutions creatively to include older individuals and to promote their access to health and social services against the reality of decreasing resources and their exclusion as a priority group.

In order to develop a technology artefact likely to be used in local contexts, gather knowledge about the specific target group’s sociocultural situatedness, and in relation to mobile devices, their preferences and perceived competence to use technology, and identify any facilitators who are supporting the end-users’ with cell phone use. This knowledge can be obtained from the literature, transdisciplinary expert opinions, and results of relevant research undertaken. The key message here is to present specific knowledge so that designers are able to develop an artefact suited to address the specific aim for which the solution is required. Socio-gerontologists or gerontechnologists can further support the inclusion of marginalized older end-users by facilitating unidirectional translational processes between end-users and designers.

Include older technology users through social engagement facilitation strategies in the design and use of technology artefacts. Trained younger people who are familiar with the sociocultural norms and customs can support older end-users’ adoption and use of technology more optimally. Uptake of this particular cohort of end-users can also be supported when an older individual in the local context champion the use and adoption of the technology.

Technical designers can support the inclusion of marginalized older end-users by using digital actions closely related to what the end-users are familiar with. Drawing on users’ existing knowledge of using technology can further support the uptake of new technology. Involving people in multiple methods of feedback or evaluation platforms will contribute to presenting a usable and refined technology artefact—thereby supporting the inclusion of the target group of technology users. When facilitators are involved to introduce the technology artefact, a good practice is to ensure that they have sufficient knowledge of the technology to explain the limitations of the artefact and to manage the expectations of the affected target users.

Recommendations to promote marginalized older individuals’ inclusion in technology artefact design are summarized in Box 9.1.

Box 9.1. Recommendations to Promote Marginalized Older End-Users’ Inclusion in Technology Artefact Design

  • Ensure a broader contextual understanding of the complexity around the inclusion of older individuals in technology.

  • Know the guiding international and national frameworks (e.g. legislative).

  • Present evidence related to the technology and service needs of older individuals in a particular context as specifically as possible. It could include access gaps related to material, skills in using cell phones, cell phone use, and competence (knowledge, skills, and attitude) (Francis et al., 2019).

  • Promote unidirectional translational processes between end-users and designers in accessible terms but with concrete implications for the artefact design.

  • Determine existing knowledge of older end-users to enable inclusion of design elements with similar functionalities so as to encourage user acceptance.

  • Establish an optimal relational space before introducing technology.

  • Introduce the technology artefact in an acceptable sociocultural manner and through facilitation for example, by trained younger people.

  • Use social engagement strategies to support older end-users’ use of technology.

  • Identify a member of the affected target group to champion the adoption of the technology artefact.

Recommendations for Designers to Include Marginalized Older End-Users in Technology Design

  • Present options for older individuals to consider that are close to their existing frames of technology reference.

  • Involve older technology users in as many evaluation platforms a possible, such as expert evaluation, subject-based experiments, prototyping, action research, and illustrative scenarios to demonstrate an artefact’s utility (Hevner et al., 2004).

  • Ensure that facilitators of the evaluation of the technology artefact have sufficient technical knowledge of the technology context to inform the older end-users of its limitations of the artefact and to manage the expectations of the affected target users.

5 An Open Ending

Rapidly evolving technologies present challenges associated with digital divides and inequalities, but also offer many opportunities for improving quality of life, and for promoting participation in society by marginalized groups, including older persons. Finding innovative technology solutions to satisfy a variety of needs should, therefore, not be limited to designing relevant artefacts; the process should also involve end-users’ active participation so that the technology becomes accepted as part of everyday life, especially by those who are hardest to reach and engage.

This chapter explains how our project moved beyond a problem of not knowing enough about older individuals’ cell phone use to obtaining accurate baseline data so that an appropriate technology artefact could be created to give them access to relevant and up-to-date information about local services. We made a point of listening carefully, and with empathy, to a cohort of marginalized older persons; by gaining their trust and confidence, and without manipulation, we facilitated their inclusion in the design and development of an artefact customized to their needs. We obtained information from the older end-users about the problems for which technological solutions were sought and translated it into doable design requirements. The result succeeded in satisfying the immediate needs of this community-based project. The process that it followed brings further benefits for other projects that attempt to create innovative technological solutions for assisting vulnerable or marginalized people who are left behind, because it demonstrates methods that they too can employ to involve such communities actively and productively in developing solutions that will genuinely work for them.