Inspiration comes in odd ways, and often it’s deeply personal in its origin. Most of the case studies presented by Design Kit came about when the makers discovered a lack of service or product for a particular audience that needed to be made. For myself, the lack of product was discovered personally- looking back at certain points in my college career, I could have used sexual education, and so could my classmates, the man who raped me, and so many others. These makers took a range of approaches to discovering the best way to solve the problems they were presented with. Some did interviews, personas, and user testing; others tested the product in trials to see how well it would do. Some had to do deeply technical and scientific research, consulting with experts in the field. In all cases, the makers adapted their techniques to the user’s needs and habits- for example, the financial literacy program noticed the spike in youth income around holidays and birthdays. No other financial literacy program would take this as significant- but the makers directing that case study were in tune to their users’ needs. A certain case study ran what Design Kit calls “Co-Creation Sessions,” which I would really like to incorporate into my research. This means directly involving users and the audience in the creation- which results in a better designed product, and invested users. Obviously, my case study will not need a relocation to a physical place (like many of the case studies presented), but I would like to directly involve my users (students at SPU, particularly younger ones). I want to involve users directly in the creation and testing steps of making the product, which will result in a more successful product and involved community of users.
I was particularly inspired to start this project by other sex-positive brands that remove stigma and shame from sex education and tools.
Works Cited:
Design Kit. www.designkit.org