A Design Thinking proyect.

Lee este artículo en Castellano ➡ AQUÍ

What is polarization? How is it affecting our way of living and our society? What are the main problems derived from it? and most importantly…What can we do to mitigate it if needed?

“The result of polarization is that we end up with narrow views of very broad and complex issues.”

This verbatim gives us in a nutshell the main issues derived from polarization but let’s get to the nitty gritty and understand the whys behind it through a design thinking process.

Polarization refers to radically antagonistic positions that are placed at the two extreme poles.

We can categorise it in three main phenomena:

1. Differences in political stances among the citizens.
2. Differences in the programs and ideologies of political parties.
3. Feeling rejection towards a person who does not belong to their own group, based on their values or political ideas.

The latter has been coined as ‘affective polarization’ and this is what we were mostly focusing on when beginning the research Polarización, síntoma de una sociedad en crisis

Affective polarization is the phenomenon where individuals’ feelings and emotions towards members of their own political party or group become more positive, while their feelings towards members of the opposing party or group become more negative.

MAIN PROBLEMS

Let’s take a look at some of the main consequences i deducted from the initial desk research and netnography:

• It leads to an absolute confrontation with others, resulting in the disappearance of communication and, even worse, the loss of acknowledgment of a shared reality.
• Social media and digital platforms accentuate this confrontation and create what is known as the “filter bubble” (this refers to when internet users are exposed exclusively to information and opinions that align with and reinforce their existing beliefs).
• It demonises dissent and diversity.
• Spaces for meeting and debate are disabled and are no longer places for interaction.
• There are factors such as economic interests and inequality, which serve as sources of polarization.
• It leads to blockage and the loss of the basic elements of sociability and social cohesion.

The list could go on and on, but polarization isn’t always negative and we could potentially use it to our advantage, however we will get to that part eventually.

THE RESEARCH

It was important to understand the public’s opinion on this matter so we launched 122 surveys and these were some of the results obtained:

• A significant majority of 87.7% agreed that our society is becoming increasingly polarized, and the negative consequences continue to escalate.
• When asked how they respond when they come into conflict with another person, 37.7% reported feeling frustration and uncertainty.
• And lastly when asked about their interactions with people who hold opposing ideas/values, 52.9% responded with curiosity and empathy, while the remaining responses varied greatly, including conflict, yielding, or imposing their own viewpoint.

In order to go deeper into the “whys” we conducted six interviews and one focus group with professionals from various fields including: psychology, politics, philosophy, education, and mediation. The experts were selected from Spain, the United Kingdom, and Brazil to provide a broad perspective on the matter.

“We are constantly in motion. There will be times when you’ll hover around feeling like a jerk because you might need it, and there will be times when you’ll hover around feeling like such a good person that you can’t stand yourself.”

These are some of the key ideas we obtained from the focus group:

• Polarization is not always negative; in cases of profound reflection on significant issues, radicalization may be necessary, as seen in certain social movements. The term “radical” etymologically refers to the root and implies addressing issues from their core.
• Polarization is being instrumentalized to radicalize the most dangerous elements of society.
• Psychologists insisted that non-verbal communication is crucial, and we should learn to set boundaries not only through words but also through body language as this is a skill we haven’t developed enough in our society.

“In political frameworks, there are no spaces for dialogue; you attend a political rally to applaud.”

• There is a need to learn how to deal with conflict in a healthy way, as conflict is a part of society. The problem lies in how we approach it.
• Traditional education tends to polarize. Moreover, it often becomes boring and tedious for students, as it consists of long hours of passive listening without opportunities for participation or more engaging learning methods.
• There are working methods that utilise polarization as a resource to find common ground and points of agreement. From there, understanding can emerge, and there is space for reconciliation.

A lot of information i know, this was my brain after the research 😅 but bare with me, the best part is yet to come.

KEY POINTS

Let’s synthesise all this information in to four main insights:

So now the question was…

How can we create a space to learn about conflict resolution and practice both verbal and nonverbal communication in a way that is engaging and attractive, thus encouraging public participation?

THE USERS

You guessed it.

Our users are a diverse group of individuals in terms of age, culture, gender, and religion and more.

They live in small, medium or large communities; neighbourhoods, towns, schools, work groups, or any other social context where they have to coexist with others who hold different ideas and values from their own.

COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS

After reaching some conclusions from the research and defining our users it was essential to compare and evaluate existing programs that utilised polarization as a tool to mitigate its effects and assess their outcomes.

During the benchmarking process, we came across other facilitation services which employ measurement programs focusing on power dynamics and conflict resolution, leading to remarkable outcomes. However, we found that their visual presentation evoked traditional educational imagery, which we weren’t interested in based on previous research.

For this reason, we conducted a second benchmarking of current initiatives on digital platforms such as YouTube and tabletop games that aim to foster meaningful dialogues and challenge stereotypes.

We noticed that these initiatives have a more playful image and utilise game dynamics, which aligns with the intention of developing a more engaging educational model. However, there seems to be a lack of mediation aspect to create safe spaces and ensure that these situations do not escalate into violence.

LOOKING FOR ANSWERS

With all this information in mind we began the ideation process through “How Might We” questions and prioritize solutions through an impact/viability matrix.

Using the SCAMPER technique, we arrived at the following solution:

A mediation service that offers guided sessions facilitated by professionals using game dynamics through polarization as a tool to address it.

HOW WOULD THE SERVICE WORK?

In order to make this happen, our business model would rely on three key collaborators:

1. Team of experts

A team of four conflict resolution professionals that would be responsible for managing the sessions. They would also need to specialise in sign language in order to make our service as inclusive as possible.

Additionally, we would collaborate with two partners whose methodologies and games we would incorporate:

2. We’re Not Really Strangers

A tabletop card game with thought-provoking questions about self-perception and others.

3. Jubilee

A YouTube channel with 8 million subscribers that produces videos promoting discussion and challenging stereotypes with dynamics such as “Middle ground” or “Spectrum”. Collaborating with Jubilee would allow us to reach a wide audience already familiar with their platform, increasing the likelihood for people to recognise our games and be more willing to participate.

HOW COULD WE ACCESS IT? AND… WHO IS IT FOR?

We would create a minimalistic website where our service would be offered for it to be hired.

It is aimed at both public and private spaces and it could be hired by; public institutions, schools, private companies and more.

In an increasingly globalised world it is essential to learn how to live and collaborate with people from different countries and cultures, making this type of service highly valuable.

The service is divided into three game areas or stations drawn from our collaborators. They are designed to be simple and fully adaptable to any space, whether it’s a shopping center, a busy street, or an office.

THE NAME

The name of our service is “The intersection Point”, it symbolises all those meeting points and the common ground we share, even in our differences.

The logo will be represented by the acronym TIP (a piece of advice) in tune with the facilitating aspect of the project.

USE OF COLOR AND TYPOGRAPHY

For the color scheme, we took inspiration from a deck of cards from an old game, since card games represent spaces of community, leisure and debate. However, we wanted to give it a more modern look, so we opted for vibrant and luminous tones.

Orange and black will be the main colors for the brand. Orange, according to color psychology, primarily represents joy, enthusiasm, and fun, appealing to the playful aspect of the service.

On the other hand, blue which would be our secondary color inspires security and trust, and it is related to the educational part of it.

As for the base colors, we selected white and a light cream that evokes tranquility and balance, which is the objective we aim to achieve in mitigating polarization.

By using this color combination, we ensure double AA on accessibility.

THE PROTOTYPE

Like we’ve mentioned before steaming away from traditional education aesthetics was one of our objectives and that’s why we created a high fidelity prototype. We aimed for clean and minimalistic aesthetics with no room for distractions, whilst maintaining a playful element to it. The illustrations were specifically made for this project by my colleague Carlos Moreno.

This is what we came up with 🤗

The website starts with a landing page featuring a hero section that explains the main objective of the service.

In the games&methodologies section the aesthetic is aligned with the playful aspect, using cards to discovered the methodologies.

This section explains who the service is aimed at, both public and private spaces as we previously mentioned.

This section gives some information about our team of facilitators that we could explore more in depth when clicking the “learn more” button on each facilitators card.

And lastly here we can see how the adaptable game stations would work. It would be a very simple setting of a few chairs and tables, the card decks and some lines on the floor for our Spectrum dynamic. The idea is for the game stations to maintain the brand’s style.

Let’s see what the interactive prototype would look like:

COULD WE ACTUALLY MITIGATE POLARIZATION?

We don’t know but we can certainly try.

Polarization is a highly complex phenomenon, and it requires addressing it from multiple perspectives rather than relying on a single exclusive approach. Continued research with real users, and testing would be crucial in understanding the most effective way to iterate the service.

Some experts believe that this emotional affective polarization that solely relies on absolute confrontation with the other will gradually lose momentum, as it is quite cyclical, and at some point, the public will grow weary of it.

Regardless we are at a turning point in society where our identities are merging with technology and our connections are being heavily impacted by it. It is important to develop tools to ensure we educate ourselves on how to use it responsibly and deepen understanding within communities.

Quoting the Paradox of tolerance by Karl Popper

“In order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.”