I’ve finished phase one with my first group of participants, which essentially was approximately 20 hours of observation, short interviews and the collection and completion of a survey that will measure the participants current levels of empathy. 

The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; Davis,1980), taps into four separate aspects of empathy, and its relationships with measures of social functioning, self-esteem, emotionality, and sensitivity to others is assessed. As expected, each of the four subscales displays a distinctive and predictable pattern of relationships with these measures, as well as with previous unidimensional empathy measures.

 - Measuring Individual Differences in Empathy: Evidence for a Multidimensional Approach, by Mark H. Davis, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1983, Vol. 44, No. 1, 113-126

I spent over two hours grading those surveys, I had no idea how long it would take. One problem was the form itself. I printed out the survey exactly how it was designed by Davis, without the grading system to make sure nothing would hinder the participants’ responses. Thus, I had to refer to another form and then back to the original to grade it. I’m thinking of ways to avoid this problem with my next group, like a transparency on top or something. 

I will meet with my second group this Thursday to conduct a department orientation to communicate why I’m there and involved in the department for a daily basis for a while. 

Classes also stated this week, and I’m seriously nervous about the time commitments for this semester. My super power of time management will be at the test! 

Hello everyone! My Christmas break was exciting and fun, riddled with baking and wrapping, as well as working my butt off to try and get my IRB Exempt submitted asap. I submitted it Monday and have not yet heard back, which is a bummer. 

My current schedule includes trying to recruit this coming Monday at a perspective company site, but if my form is not approved in time I will be unable to do any recruiting activities. Thus the bummer. 

In addition, I have also been examining the process of developing empathy, trying to figure out a way to allow other methods or processes to facilitate that development. So far I have three main sections or interactions that occur: The employee expresses, management observes and listens, management then responds or reiterates the expression, or replies with support or a solution. EXPRESS, REFLECT and RESPOND. Kind of catchy so far. 

My research process has also adjusted because of the ability of employees and management to be involved in this project and still make money or work. Thus, I will probably leave probes with each group or with management in order allow them to try the process, they will refine it, we will interview or talk about it, and then two more times they will go through this again. Therefore we will go through three iterations of this facilitated process, where I will collect their feedback through a probe then an interview (possibly in groups as well) refine it, and give it back. 

So far so good I think. I just need that approval back soon!!

Wow, the amount that I have dissected, defined and converged on that last few days has me spinning… But confident in my logic of both my revised research question and sub-questions. They are: 

Research Question

How might a toolkit enable management to develop empathy for employees in order to understand their experiences?

Sub Questions

How might a tool help employees evoke unconscious experiences and desires?

How might a tool enable employees to voice their current and aspirational experiences?

How might each tool within the toolkit enhance management’s ability to understand and process an employee’s personal narrative?

How might a tool measure management’s (the variables or production of empathy): understanding of employee’s feelings and behavior, ability to communicate with co-workers, as well as measure factors of their decision making process?

These are being critiqued as we speak, but from where I was say, Monday of last week and where I am now is more focused, less spread thin and more concentrated and, I hope, more articulate.  

I’ve had to let go actually forming new experiences for employees, which is my aspiration, in sight of how vital it is that employees (people) are able to realize hidden experiences and desires and communicate the conscious experiences and desires. Without these pieces, the development of empathy would not be possible. Empathy is my no means an individual interaction, and without the facts or information from the employees, management would still be in the dark. 

I’ve also let co-designing within the toolkit go, mainly because the idea was that employees and management were going to co-design the potential experiences together, and since I’m no longer including that exercise in my study, so goes co-design. I hope to one day understand and experience this process for myself, but for now, bye-bye. 

Time is running short and I still need to converge and simplify the information on my posters.  I’m going to do my best!!

This week has been the whirlwind I expected with the posters due for our poster day next week and proposals due the same day. What I did not expect was how little I understood about the purpose of sub-questions. 

The development of the sub questions gave me the focus of information that I was lacking within my proposal. Essentially, I feel like all I need to do now is condense my argument, include my audience within my limitations and incorporate the logic I’ve discovered with my sub-questions within the appropriate areas. I feel good, but very tired and a little run down. However, if I manage my time well I will be able to produce posters and a proposal that I will be very proud of. 

I’ve included pictures of my first draft of posters for your review, I have already decided that I am far too textual and need to show more visual information. 

I cannot wait until I can get a break!! 

So, I can literally count the days, minutes and seconds to when my proposal is due as well as the visual for poster day. 

Early today I was still trying to wrap my brain around sub-questions when angels from the sky named Terri and AM descended and explained in plain english the purpose ofsub-questions and walked me through creating one or two of them. All I can say is: Hallelujah!! Seriously, my guess is that because sub-questions had been a back burner issue for me I totally neglected their investigation until I realized that I running against a brick wall time and time again. 

I am excited about crafting sub-questions that make sense tonight, as well as finishing the last ten lit review entries, mapping out the matrix and then some refinement on my limitations and justification as I received feedback this week. 

I am exhausted in so many different ways, but I know that my classmates are too, and their energy and support, as well as the support from my family, is the inspiration that keeps me moving at the best 110 percent effort I can make. :)

After receiving feedback from Lee, Helen and the writing center, I am working on another draft of my proposal. Essentially the largest issues with my proposal is that is resembles a conversation instead of an argument, writing the connections between information and arguments within my Justification and then my Limitations, and most importantly, I need to stop stating facts and just lay out my argument. 

Why I love the Writing Center and why You should too: 

The Writing Center may focus more on style and hierarchy of information, but their focus allows my chair, Helen, to ignore style and focus on content, which is where I want her to focus. Moreover, style and hierarchy are still important factors within my proposal to consider.  One reason I really utilize the Writing Center is that when I make an appointment I am immediately assigned a Facility member because of my Graduate Level status, as well an an entire hour of their attention. They can answer my questions about citation, grammar, and organize my information. They do not have to be able to understand my content to understand which is more important to my argument. Why?? Because during my sessions I am forced to articulate my argument to Jaclyn, the facility member I’ve meet with almost every two weeks since September. I believe that I am confident of my material for many reasons, but the Writing Center, an outside perspective an expertise in writing, has helped me with this particular project. 

So, I’m feeling good about this proposal, I’ve heard many times, “Everything is there, you just need to write it out.” That comment makes me feel good too… 

One thing I also realized during the meeting with my chair is that my first few drafts were diverges of what I could communicate within my justification, limitations and research plan. However, I also just many secondary sources to write this section, probably because I was going through them at the time to include some of them within my lit review. 

It’s time to “hit the mattresses”, it’s time to focus my argument on building a case and using primary sources to do that. My primary sources state exactly my point, and with only 700 words to communicate the relevance and then the boundaries of my proposal, I need every word to count. 

I hope by the end of the weekend to have a new draft that is focused and strong, thus hopefully getting more feedback and another draft or two out by the end of next week, seeing that my proposal is due December 7. 

Something else that is weighing on my my schedule are the posters due by Thursday that I have not even had the time to start yet. I always feel pressure to be visually brilliant and have the hardest time approaching challenges like this one with so much expectation. But, like so many things in the last three years, its is not really about how I feel or what I think I’m capable of, I can and will do it, and it will be great-ish. 

Look for updates on my visual and further feedback on my new and improved proposal!

It’s crunch time. After going through Many Design Competency readings by authors such as Chris Conley, Richard Farson, Pelle Ehn and Liz Sanders, I’m beginning to see more elaborate relationships within between design, management, experience design and the consideration of everyday people. Because of this, I feel like I’ve taken several steps backwards, but good steps, like realizing a more appropriate path that could prevent becoming lost. 

This week I need to work through these new complexities and make serious decisions concerning HOW I will enable management and enhance employee experiences using the design competency, empathy, to develop informed context in order to influence those experiences. There is lots of research supporting many design research tools, such as generative tools, observation and prototyping, and even more so within co-design. However I’m also starting to see the value of process versus method, such as Liz Sanders idea of experience scaffolds. 

As much as I should be overwhelmed by the pure amount of things I have to accomplish, I am even more excited and hope to post a revised draft of my proposal by the end of this week. 

Hang in there, things are shaping up!

As a brief overview, I have located and finalized three main areas of my Thesis:

CONTENT: empathy

CURRENT DESIGN LENS: observation and generative tools

CONTEXT: management within an organization 

and then TO WHAT END: to improve employee experiences. 

In essence, my Thesis project is concerned with the lack of empathy (trend) especially within management in organizations, which is a need (problem). Through empathy, managers and upper management can perceive new opportunities and make informed decisions to improve factors that could enhance an employee’s experience.

Therefore, my current design lenses, observation and generative tools will evoke empathy through their application with both managers and employees. 

Saying all that, I’m spending all day and night tonight establishing how Design Thinking, Design Leadership and Transformation Design have a place within my Thesis work. 

 I believe that this will force me to reevaluate my current design lens and allow me to only make a stronger case for my current Thesis interests.