{"id":15905,"date":"2018-08-28T15:31:09","date_gmt":"2018-08-28T14:31:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/marvel7077.wpengine.com\/?p=15905"},"modified":"2020-11-12T12:24:57","modified_gmt":"2020-11-12T12:24:57","slug":"designing-ethically-pt-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/marvelapp.com\/blog\/designing-ethically-pt-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Designing Ethically Pt.1"},"content":{"rendered":"

Companies can no longer afford to ignore the ethical ramifications of their products. Here\u2019s how designers can pave the way for ethical decision-making in\u00a0tech.<\/h2>\n

This is the first part of a two part series. Check out <\/em>Designing Ethically Pt. 2<\/em><\/strong><\/a> for a deeper dive into the nitty-gritty of evaluating problem statements, forecasting \u201cunforeseen consequences,\u201d and monitoring your product\u2019s ethical progress.<\/em><\/p>\n

For an alternative to this 13-minute read, check out the <\/em> site for a more digestible version of the framework, toolkit, and more!<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Today, it seems like there is a tech scandal every week. Uber, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Snapchat, and others have been making the rounds in the media for their wrongdoing. Now don\u2019t get me wrong \u2014 scandals are by no means a new phenomenon for companies. However, with the pervasive power of social media (quite ironic in some cases), these tech giants are starting to get called out for their lapses in judgment.<\/p>\n

The days of reckless tech need to come to an end.<\/strong> I\u2019m no Luddite by any means, but I do think that taking time to consider the ethical consequences behind decisions is necessary. There\u2019s just too much at stake today with the complexity and reach of our accelerating, technological advances. There\u2019s also the fact that we often don\u2019t know what we don\u2019t know\u2026until it\u2019s too late.<\/p>\n

For giggles\u2026but also to get you into the \u201cethical design\u201d mindset.<\/p>\n

We are at a point where technology is advancing so quickly that governing bodies <\/strong>cannot keep up<\/strong><\/a>. <\/strong>Any regulation we see today seems to happen after the fact<\/a>, when the damage has already been done. While \u201cregulation\u201d may sound scary to companies, it has its place in society for a reason. If the government cannot catch up, then companies themselves need to shoulder some ethical responsibility and regulate themselves.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Why should designers care\u00a0though?<\/h2>\n

As designers, we have fought tooth and nail for a seat at the table. Some of us are still fighting the good fight. We are fighting because we realize the impact of our work. We are fighting because we know<\/em> that we can exact measurable improvements. We are fighting because we believe that human-centered decision making is of utmost importance.<\/p>\n

<\/div>
<\/svg><\/div>

\"And what is more human-centric than making ethical choices that will ultimately help users and society at\u00a0large?\"<\/p><\/span><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Excerpt from John Maeda\u2019s Design in Tech Report\u00a02018<\/a><\/p><\/div>\n

Designers have the privilege (and burden) of wielding a lot more power than we ever had in the existence of our profession. Now and even more so in upcoming years, we will be designing products that have the ability to dramatically influence millions of users. In John Maeda\u2019s Design in Tech Report 2018<\/a>, we see that the important design decisions of the future will<\/em> be focused around incredibly advanced technology that, depending on its application, can save countless lives or wreak havoc. Our unlicensed influence<\/a> as designers has been compared to that of licensed doctors and lawyers. With that amount of power comes an enormous amount of responsibility as well.<\/p>\n

With this framework, I will show you that ethical design is necessary, possible, and beneficial. <\/strong>The structure of this framework is as follows:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Ethics 101 for Designers:<\/em><\/strong> Exactly what it sounds like, this section is a basic ethics primer for designers.<\/li>\n
  2. Redesigned Design Process: <\/em><\/strong>This section introduces a new design process that encourages preemptive forecasting of ethical problems.<\/li>\n
  3. What\u2019s Good: <\/em><\/strong>In order to apply the new design process, you need to have a baseline understanding of what is ethically good vs. bad in a product.<\/li>\n
  4. Sustaining Ethical Design: <\/em><\/strong>My thoughts on how to keep ethical design relevant and at the forefront for every company.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Ethics 101 for Designers<\/h2>\n

    What is\u00a0Ethics?<\/h3>\n

    Ethics generally refers to an established set of standards that allows us to determine right from wrong. These standards give us the ability to figure out what we should<\/em> and should not <\/em>do. It is important to note that what is ethical does not always correspond with what is legal.<\/strong> After all, slavery was legal at one point\u2026but that does not mean it was ever ethical.<\/p>\n

    Schools of Ethical\u00a0Thought<\/h3>\n

    There are several perspectives when it comes to deciding what is ethical. The two that I think are most applicable to the process of designing a product or experience are:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Duty-based: <\/strong>Also referred to as Deontological ethics, this system asserts that motives matter more than the outcome when it comes to deeming the \u2018goodness\u2019 of such action. Philosophers like Immanuel Kant and Sir David Ross<\/a> defined certain duties to uphold. In any case, a<\/strong> good way to think about duty-based ethics is that it is intent-oriented.<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n
    2. Results-based: <\/strong>Also referred to as consequentialism<\/a>, t<\/strong>his system evaluates actions based on their outcome. An outcome that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people is deemed good, and validates the action that produced it. A good way to think about this is that it is results-oriented.<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The thing with philosophy is that oftentimes life is way too complicated to just stick with one ethical mindset. Most people tend to subscribe to a mixed model where they apply both duty-based and results-based ethics on a case-by-case basis.<\/p>\n

      And that\u2019s exactly what we can do with how we design. When you think about it, the actual life cycle of a product has two dimensions. There\u2019s the part where observations about society are made and a problem is identified (that\u2019s the intent part). Then, there\u2019s the iterative part where solutions are ideated and eventually shipped to the public (that\u2019s the results part).<\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

      Redesigned Design\u00a0Process<\/h2>\n

      What happens if we apply this intent\/results paradigm to our design process? What would that look like? The fact of the matter is that our current design processes do not actively encourage us to really consider the intent and results of what we create. And even if designers do have concerns about the two, oftentimes our voices are drowned out by the prioritized voices of shareholders. However, if we intentionally redesign our own process, perhaps we can enact more of an internally organic change and develop the wherewithal to defend our choices.<\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/a>

      Stanford d.school<\/a>\u2019s Design Thinking\u00a0Process<\/p><\/div>\n

      Today, we see many design frameworks and processes that have been successful in defining north stars and outlining methods for delineating problems and developing solutions. What these frameworks share in common (when applied by businesses) is that they are often built on a motivating foundation of making more profits.<\/p>\n

      Rarely do you see an ethical component factored into the equation. I would argue that it is imperative for anyone in a decision-making role to prioritize ethical considerations. Companies today are so large and unwieldy that there can be disastrous consequences if they do not validate the ethical consequences of their actions.<\/p>\n

      By applying the intent\/results paradigm to the typical design process, we have a new, in-depth process that proactively seeks to 1) evaluate the ethical validity of the selected problem and 2) ensure that the designed solution is not ethically unsound.<\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      You\u2019ll see that there are a few new steps integrated into this model. I\u2019ll go into a bit more detail on the new steps but as for the original steps, they can be found in Stanford d.school\u2019s Design Thinking process<\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Intents Phase \u2014 New\u00a0Steps<\/h3>\n

      Evaluate: <\/strong>This step is critical and involves analyzing the problem statement seeing it if it is even ethically worthy of being addressed. For example, if your company is trying to develop a tool to hurt thousands of people for the sake of advancing some agenda, you might want to heavily reconsider.<\/p>\n

      The thing is, most companies will have crafted a pitch for their product that seems ethically sound. That\u2019s how they convince venture capitalists to invest and how they get users to jump on board. It\u2019s normally in the results phase where things go haywire. In general, the intents phase is rarely the problematic part, but it always is good to have a system of checks and balances in case defining an ethical problem statement is not obvious.<\/p>\n

      Results Phase \u2014 New\u00a0Steps<\/h3>\n

      Forecast:<\/strong> Take a look at the ideas you\u2019ve generated with your team. For each idea, figure out any ethical weak spots or any potential ways that your product can be exploited in an unethical way (either by users, the company itself, investors, etc.).<\/p>\n

      Ship: <\/strong>After you\u2019ve tested your product thoroughly, send it out! This is by no means a novel step, but just serves to indicate that this framework looks beyond the scope of the traditional process.<\/p>\n

      Monitor: <\/strong>Almost as crucial as forecasting, monitoring is simply the act of continually checking in with your shipped product to see if any ethical problems occur so your team can quickly mobilize to solve them.<\/p>\n

      This framework is not meant to guarantee perfection. Mistakes will be made. But a significantly higher percentage of them will be caught before they can wreak havoc. The iterative nature of the design process as it is allows for designers to refine the way they evaluate, forecast, and monitor. Furthermore, this ethical design framework will introduce a necessary way of thinking twice (or thrice) before acting\u2026something that the tech world seems to have forgotten.<\/p>\n

      What\u2019s Good?<\/h2>\n

      First things first, before you apply the design process, you have to know what is good and what is bad. On a fundamental level, designing ethically means ideating solutions with three key concepts in mind: autonomy, transparency, and safety. <\/strong>Together, these three qualities empower users and ensure for trustworthy products.<\/p>\n

      Autonomy<\/h3>\n

      Autonomy is crucial. And by autonomy, I\u2019m referring to user autonomy. We as humans like to feel like we are in control of our technology, and not the other way around. When we don\u2019t feel that way, it can get incredibly frustrating. A desirable and good product gives users the ability to make deliberate choices about how they interact with the product.<\/p>\n

      Knowing that I have the option of tipping drivers on a ride-sharing app is a positive attribute for autonomy. Knowing that I can rate a bad driver under 3 stars (and receiving confirmation that this rating notifies the company about the driver) is also a positive attribute for autonomy.<\/p>\n

      Providing autonomy includes other features such as: allowing users to customize their experiences with settings, designing helpful \u201copt-in\u201d and \u201copt-out\u201d choices for users, avoiding dark UX tactics that take advantage of users, etc.<\/p>\n

      Note: in providing autonomy to one user, you must make sure that does not allow the user to infringe upon the autonomy of other users (or non-users).<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Transparency<\/h3>\n

      Transparency is just as important. Users have a right to know what they are signing up for when they agree to use a product. Oh, but that\u2019s what the Terms & Conditions are for! <\/em>Sometimes, that\u2019s not enough.<\/p>\n

      For example, when using a complex product such as Facebook, I want to know how I can control my privacy settings. Currently, Facebook is undergoing major criticism for playing a huge role in the data breach involving Cambridge Analytica<\/a>. In a different scandal, previously, there was the case of the college students<\/a> who did not realize that by joining a queer choir group on Facebook, they were unintentionally \u2018outing\u2019 themselves to their homophobic families. Users should always have a clear understanding of what the product does and how it works.<\/p>\n

      Another example that is pretty timely would be the perpetuation of fake news on social media. Companies that spread misinformation need to seriously redesign their algorithms and make sure that they are flagging incorrect content.<\/p>\n

      Safety<\/h3>\n

      Safety for the user is another incredibly essential quality. Safety includes many aspects: sanctity of life, inclusion, privacy, and emotional well-being.<\/p>\n

      For example, it was revealed that Instagram strategically withholds \u201clikes\u201d from certain users<\/a> in an attempt to get them to feel disappointed about their photo\u2019s popularity and check in more consistently with the app. Talk about emotional manipulation.<\/p>\n

      Another example of safety in regards to inclusion is Airbnb\u2019s struggle with racism<\/a> towards people of color on its platform. No person of color should be made to feel like they are excluded from a product; and no person using a product should be allowed to exclude others via said product.<\/p>\n

      In a more futuristic (and controversial) example, if someone purchases an autonomous vehicle, are they guaranteed to have their life protected and prioritized in the case of an accident? What about a non-user, like a pedestrian? There is more urgency than ever for figuring out an approach to this problem, given that just recently, one of Uber\u2019s test cars killed a pedestrian<\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Not sure if I\u2019d want this adorable kid to design my future autonomous vehicle\u2026<\/p>\n

      Sustaining Ethical\u00a0Design<\/h2>\n

      So how can we ensure that ethical design is not only preached, but actually practiced? There\u2019s still a long way to go, but I\u2019m optimistic that change will occur.<\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

      Redefine how we measure\u00a0success.<\/h3>\n

      In the Calvin and Hobbes comic above, Calvin notes, \u201cIn the real world, people care about success, not principles.\u201d It\u2019s easy to forget that ROIs and KPIs are not the only things that matter nowadays. Ironically, some of the very products that have been criticized for their ethical mishaps have been the conduits for a counterpart to monetary currency: social currency<\/em>. Companies can no longer afford to ignore the ethical ramifications of their products. Remember the #DeleteUber<\/a> scandal, when the ride-sharing company got put on blast and lost 200,000 users for undermining the protest against Trump\u2019s Muslim Ban? How about the mess that Facebook has gotten itself into? Looking back, when would have been a good time for Zuckerberg to heed the warnings that perhaps, just perhaps<\/em>, the social network had gone a bit too far?<\/p>\n

      Inclusive and diverse teams are imperative.<\/h3>\n

      This is no longer a cherry on top, this is the goddamn sundae. Time and time again, studies<\/a> have shown how having inclusive and diverse teams improve collective decision making. Having a variety of different<\/em> thinkers who are all empowered<\/em> to speak in the brainstorm session makes a world of a difference. Recently, it was shown that facial recognition systems were biased<\/a> in that they identified white men significantly better than they identified women of color. I wonder what the teams that created those systems looked like. This could have huge implications as facial recognition is being used more and more in law enforcement; in a country that already brutalizes certain people of color, this could be disastrous. Furthermore, when conducting the empathize phase of your design process, it is critical to make sure that the teams conducting and contributing to the research are representative of the user demographics as well. Participatory design<\/a> is a great way to bring the users into <\/em>the researching realm, so as to offer authentic insight.<\/p>\n

      In the future, I hope that everyone on a product team undergoes ethics training.<\/p>\n

      Product teams need to have a designated ethicist.<\/h3>\n

      I\u2019m hoping that in the future, prioritizing and applying ethics will be second nature to anybody in any position. However, in the present, that simply is not the case. Our education system has not prepared us for this. Consider that just recently, a computer scientist at Harvard was asked about the ethical consequences of artificial intelligence and responded by shrugging and saying, \u201cI\u2019m just an engineer<\/a>.\u201d Given the rapid pace at which advanced technologies are developing and the vast consequences that they can have, \u201cI am just an [insert position]\u201d is no longer an acceptable excuse. If you are contributing to creating a product in any <\/em>manner, you are responsible for its effects on others. At the end of the day, nobody is neutral <\/em>and doing nothing is not neutral<\/em>. <\/strong>Companies need to invest and make sure that they have ethicists on each product team and in the boardroom. These ethicists would ideally be divorced from any \u201cbottom line\u201d motivation or profit incentive. That gives them the freedom to zoom out, forecast, and monitor while imparting that type of mindset on their coworkers.<\/p>\n

      Ethical practices need to be emphasized and prioritized in the boardroom and\u00a0C-suite.<\/h3>\n

      This should be so obvious, but as we have seen, that is not always the case. Corporate social responsibility is not just a catchphrase; it needs to be implemented across all channels of a company. It\u2019s not enough to talk the talk these days. Company executives need to maintain transparency around their products and show that they prioritize stakeholders (and non-stakeholders) just as much as they prioritize shareholders.<\/p>\n

      Pay it forward by applying this ethical design framework.<\/h3>\n

      A designer once told me that he chooses to work for companies that prioritize users on an ethical level, which I think is a great and empowering mindset. However, if you are a junior designer and currently do not find yourself in a position where you can easily choose a more ethical employer, consider advocating to apply the methodologies outlined in this framework on your current team. It is never too early to strengthen and assert your voice as a designer. As designers, we have a head start when it comes to taking an ethical approach in our process. The vocabulary is already there for us. After all, this framework is simply a detailed exploration of using design thinking to create human-centric solutions.<\/p>\n

      Thanks for reading! Check out for the full framework, toolkit, and more. I would love to hear your thoughts on ethical design in tech, either via the site or in the comments below or @katherinemzhou<\/a> or @ethicallydesign<\/a> on Twitter.<\/p>\n

      I am incredibly lucky to be surrounded by so many inspiring people who not only have been so generous with their time but also believe in advocating for more ethical design in tech. This framework would not be possible without the following:<\/p>\n

      Nathaniel Axios<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Sarah Brooks<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Nicole Coumes<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Zoe Fuller-Young<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Jordan Higgins<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Barry Lam<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Twesha Mitra<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Anna Miyajima<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Steph Salileng<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Francesca Tang<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Melissa Wu<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Tanya Xu<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Michelle Ye<\/em><\/a>, and my family.<\/em><\/p>\n

      This article was originally published on Kat's Medium page<\/a>. <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      Companies can no longer afford to ignore the ethical ramifications of their products. Here\u2019s how designers can pave the way for ethical decision-making in\u00a0tech. This is the first part of a two part series. Check out Designing Ethically Pt. 2 for a deeper dive into the nitty-gritty of evaluating problem statements, forecasting \u201cunforeseen consequences,\u201d and monitoring your product\u2019s ethical progress…. Read More ￫<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":246,"featured_media":15907,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[482],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15905","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-design-thoughts"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\n\n\n\n\t\n