# What Do I Need to Design for Co-Design? Supporting Co-design as a Designerly Practice

**Authors:** Shruthi Sai Chivukula, Colin M Gray  
**arXiv:** [2210.02986](https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.02986)  
**Date:** 2022-10-06  
**Summary page:** https://www.summarizepaper.com/en/paper/2210.02986v1/

## Key points

- Lack of comprehensive descriptions regarding the knowledge that guides designers in designing co-design experiences
- Adoption of co/auto-ethnographic and Research-through-Design approach
- Four multi-dimensional facets: Rhythms of Engagement, Material Engagement, Ludic Engagement, and Conceptual Achievement
- Three roles: designer, researcher, and facilitator
- Examples from virtual co-design workshops to illustrate the proposed framework
- Development of intermediate-level knowledge to support future research and design efforts in co-design
- Framing co-design as a designerly practice
- Contribution of valuable insights into the knowledge required by designers for effective co-design experiences
- Structured approach for considering aspects of engagement and achievement in co-design processes.
- Implications for practitioners and researchers interested in enhancing participatory engagement through effective co-design practices.

## Summary

In their paper titled "What Do I Need to Design for Co-Design? Supporting Co-design as a Designerly Practice," authors Shruthi Sai Chivukula and Colin M Gray explore the knowledge required by designers to effectively create co-design experiences. While co-design practices have been utilized for many years to facilitate participatory engagement in design work, there is a lack of comprehensive descriptions regarding the knowledge that guides designers in designing these experiences. To address this gap, the authors adopt a co/auto-ethnographic and Research-through-Design approach, reflecting on their design decisions, outcomes, and challenges related to two virtual co-design workshops. The authors propose four multi-dimensional facets and three roles that should be considered when designing co-design experiences. The four facets include Rhythms of Engagement, Material Engagement, Ludic Engagement, and Conceptual Achievement. These facets provide a framework for understanding the different dimensions involved in creating meaningful co-design experiences. Additionally, the three roles identified are designer, researcher, and facilitator, highlighting the diverse perspectives and responsibilities necessary for successful co-design. To illustrate their proposed framework, Chivukula and Gray provide examples from their own experiences in conducting virtual co-design workshops. Through these examples, they develop intermediate-level knowledge that can support future research and design efforts in the field of co-design. By framing co-design as a designerly practice, the authors emphasize its importance as a distinct area of expertise within design. Overall, this paper contributes valuable insights into the knowledge required by designers to effectively design co-design experiences. The proposed framework provides a structured approach for considering various aspects of engagement and achievement in co-design processes. This research has implications for both practitioners and researchers interested in enhancing participatory engagement through effective co-design practices.