Henry Asa's 6.1040 Portfolio

Appearance

Blog 3: Lecture 16 - Design That Matters II ​

Post-Lecture Thoughts and Reflection ​

I think that evaluating an idea/technology through the lens of an Impact Case/Study before pursuing that particular technology/idea is incredibly important. As outlined in the lecture slides, a common template for an Impact Case is:

  1. The problem of X is important because _____.
  2. Our solution to address this problem is Y.
  3. We believe Y is a good solution because _____.
  4. We will measure N to prove that Y is a good solution to X.

As mentioned in the lecture slides, an Impact Case can explain the cause-and-effect logic by which resources will be converted into the desired social results, and speaks to the broader importance of those results. With a well-evaluated Impact Case, developers can:

  1. Prove that they have an important goal.
  2. Prove that their activity, product, or intervention will have the intended result.
  3. Show that the intended result is the best option or will contribute meaningfully to the broader problem.

Looking at problems through this kind of a lens ensures that the product/solution that is developed is novel, uniquely suits the needs of those it will be impacting, correctly addresses the problems it is designed to address, and correctly identifies (or at least attempts to identify) those who might be consequently impacted.

It is impossible to consider all of the impacts, all of the potential uses (and misuses), as well as all of the different ways different groups might be impacted by a technology. However, by putting a non-trivial amount of time, thought, and effort into a technology, and truly considering all of the different impacts that technology might have on its users and non-users, the development of that technology could be driven with a semi-informed consideration of those who might be most impacted by its deployment.

In the TOMs example from class, the company did try to solve a problem, but their solution didn't actually solve (or even attempt to solve) the underlying issue. TOMs is a classic example of "giving a man a fish", whereas we're trying to build technologies that "teach a man to fish."