How might we develop a mindset and practice to better navigate boundaries in a way that empowers minority communities like the Gullah Geechee to take more direct control of their cultural legacy.
Develop
Ideation
Sometimes designers might encounter limitations throughout their process that encumber all the possible qualitative work before designing a solution. Because of this, thoughtful action may be required. This was true in the case of this study. As previously mentioned, engagement with the Gullah Geechee community was challenging.
I never reached a point in the process where I felt I’d successfully gained their trust or built enough lasting connections. This eventually led to an inability to successfully incorporate co-creation into the entire design process and solution.
It also limited the opportunities of generating ideas with and for the community. This required me to revisit all of my research, primary and secondary with community members and design experts. I approached this process with a new mindset of the sixteen design principles and their respective ‘stage’. The aim of this was to identify patterns and connections that emerged through a synthesis of all deeply rooted data. Not only did this included interview recordings, it was also a deeper dive into fields of study that tied directly back to the design principles. Principles on authenticity and understanding biases, micro-moments, and cultural differences were reinforced through literature around cross cultural competency and diversity. Principles on the needs of both designers and community members were synthesized with research on Asset Based Community Development and effective design tools like The Collective Action Toolkit. Then, the principles on community agency and effective design facilitation aligned with practices and processes on co-design and co-creation. Finally, principles regarding social and environmental connections were viewed through a systems lens with further research on topics like biomimicry and biocultural systems. My primary research and design principles also echoed much of what my findings were through the literature.
After revisiting my research, I conducted an ideation session. I followed a three-step sentence structure, I want to design… for… so that they may… While doing this activity, I had to evaluate any idea’s respectfulness toward the Gullah Geechee culture. This was heavily influenced by my challenges in community engagement and presented questions around what types of solutions would be appropriate given the level of ongoing collaboration yet still address the issues and questions I was presenting. Ideas that were generated included:
I want to design...
an app for designers and community members so that they may build trust, connect, and respectfully collaborate from a distance.
a space (virtual or physical) for the community members and designers so that they may develop relationships built on trust.
an event for multicultural partners so that they may learn from each other.
a reflection guide for designers so that they may check their biases.
a checklist and contract for multicultural partners so that they may build, evaluate, be accountable for, and maintain trust.
a toolkit for community members and non-design partners to learn more about themselves and to communicate more effectively.
a guide for designers so that they may thoughtfully develop a collaborative project with a community.
an urban micro-intervention for the community and outsiders so that they may increase cultural awareness from the outside.
a collaborative toolkit for designers and community members so that they may have a tool to present to project outreach that clearly express how to clearly express how to effectively and successfully collaborate with their community.
Define
Redirecting
Building trust and community engagement with the Gullah Geechee community was an ongoing challenge for this study. Several months were spent trying to form a close connection to the community, with ongoing attempts to identify and partner with a community liaison and community groups. Due to a lack of engagement, compounded by and resulting from the limitations to this study mentioned below, I was forced to reflect on my process. By doing this, I was able to look at some of the challenges I faced and question their origins. Questions like:
Is the lack of engagement from the community a result of how they see me?
Am I effectively expressing the value of design to the community?
What do other designer’s do when faced with these challenges?
This led me to the difficult realization that I needed to reroute my process; outwardly, it didn’t make sense to continue efforts of connecting to the community without being overbearing. I decided to take a step back and look at the process of this study itself. There were too many questions that emerged from and about the process that I couldn’t confidently answer. This presented an opportunity to add design experts to the focus of my primary research. It also required me to limit my methods of research to mainly interviews, also influenced by the limitations to this study.
Research Overview
In total, I reached out to twenty-nine individuals and organizations, twenty of which were Gullah Geechee and nine design experts. From the twenty Gullah Geechee individuals and organizations I reached out to, only three provided feedback and engagement. Of the four Sensitizing Toolkits mailed to Gullah Geechee community members, one was completed and returned. Additionally, two interviews were conducted, one with a Gullah Geechee community member and the other with a professional on Gullah Geechee culture and collaborations. Out of the nine design experts contacted, four responded and were interviewed. All of the interviews were conducted through Zoom with the exception of one, which was conducted through email.
Total primary research consisted of: Gullah Geechee Community- 1 toolkit,
2 interviews, 3 field visits, 2 lectures, and 1 tour;
Design Experts- 4 interviews.
Design Experts
Analysis
After conducting primary research with community members and design experts, each group’s collection of feedback was analyzed. Interpretive data from the Sensitizing Toolkit had to be handled more thoughtfully and then categorized based off of insights from Liz Sanders. The toolkit that was received back serves as a beautiful representation of the community. The participant truly spent their time reflecting on the questions and activities, even using materials that were not included in the toolkit itself. All other data was easily transferable for the affinity mapping process.
Affinity Mapping
In total, roughly 400 data points were recorded for community members and design experts together. Of the 200 data points (yellow) for community members, 52 clusters were identified by underlying meaning (blue), then 15 clusters by area of concern (pink), ending with 8 key insights. And of the 200 data points (yellow) for design experts, 66 clusters were identified by underlying meaning (blue), then 18 clusters by area of concern (pink), also ending with 8 key insights. This resulted in a total of sixteen key insights from the primary research phase.
Gullah Geechee Findings
The eight key insights below are a result from the Gullah Geechee community member’s data analysis. They represent the patterns or themes that emerged from the primary research with the community, including interviews, a toolkit, field visits, lectures, and a tour. Each insight includes rich feedback directly from the community that centers around the questions and topics of study. The eight key insights are as follows:
Design Experts Findings
The eight key insights that resulted from design expert data analysis represent the overall patterns or themes that emerged from the primary research phase with design experts in social innovation. The eight key insights are as follows:
Discussion of Findings
Following the primary research phase, I was able to fill in some of the secondary research gaps identified in the Methodology chapter pertaining to the Gullah Geechee community. This was conducted through feedback that was gathered from diverse community members and stakeholders of the Gullah Geechee culture. Each research gap falls under a theme that was drawn from the primary research analysis.
TRUST:
How is the Gullah Geechee’s trust outside, as well as inside, of their community?
BARRIERS:
What types of boundaries do the Gullah Geechee recognize?
What are the main challenges the Gullah Geechee culture faces?
CROSS-CULTURAL EXCHANGE:
Are the Gullah Geechee willing to work with mainland culture/outsiders?
What are some instances of the two cultures successfully working together?
What can these cultures learn from one another?
What do the Gullah Geechee value most about their culture?
SKILLS:
What skills do the Gullah Geechee currently possess?
How are the Gullah Geechee willing to adapt each skill?
Although these gaps were filled, I still felt as though the primary research conducted with the Gullah Geechee community was not enough to allow me to proceed to the ideation phase. As previously mentioned, community engagement was an ongoing challenge. One that, if unable to overcome, would halt a co-design process between myself and the community, although the Sensitizing Toolkit yielded rich insights, creative expression, and lived experiences. This is where the design experts came into the process of this study.
By reflecting on my own process of engagement and co-design with the community, I was able to see this entire process as a form of prototyping toward successful multicultural collaborations.
The data provided by design expert’s answered questions around the challenges and complexities of collaborative projects. Both groups of data, community members and design experts, went through the process of affinity mapping separately. From this, strong commonalities were found between what the community members and design experts both said. They included issues around trust, ways toward successful collaboration, the need to check biases and assumptions, and more.
Discover
Research
In the Discovery phase, initial research included deep secondary research which was crafted into a Literature Review for this thesis. Following secondary research, research questions were identified as well as limitations that were faced throughout the Discovery phase. Methods toward primary research with the Gullah Geechee community were then conducted, leading to an analysis of the design process and an emergence of a more adaptable approach.
Literature Review
Research Questions
Following secondary research, the research questions were revisited and revised due to some of the questions being answered through the literature. While some of the revised research questions may seem as though they can be answered through secondary research, it must be noted that when dealing with marginalized communities such as the Gullah Geechee, it is important that they be heard and function as the primary source of research and action throughout the entire process when possible.
What does the future preservation of the Gullah Geechee culture look like?
How can the Gullah Geechee’s expressions of culture be adapted and utilized toward sustaining their cultural community?
How can the Gullah Geechee and mainland culture generate some form of equitable reciprocity through participatory design?
What boundaries do the mainland and Gullah Geechee cultures consist of?
What forms of flow are the mainland and Gullah Geechee willing to share and receive?
Limitations
Through my secondary research and initial community engagement, the limitations to my study became clearer. I determined five limitations that include history, resources, white privilege, community liaison, and COVID-19.
Field Visits
The final research approach was crafted through preliminary research and community engagement, much of which involved field visits to St. Helena Island, South Carolina. Aside from field visits, additional site visits, lectures, and presentations were attended.The first field visit to St. Helena Island included a tour of one of the few remaining Gullah Geechee Praise Houses, lunch at Gullah Grub café, and a lecture on Gullah linguistics by Sunn m’Cheaux at the famous Penn Center (who would soon after join my thesis committee).The second field visit was conducted, in part, to connect with Queen Quet- Chieftess of the Gullah Geechee Nation.
Problem Statement
The Gullah Geechee culture is facing economic and cultural hardships brought on by the pressures of development, tourism, changing job markets, population shifts, and lack of ‘outsider’ awareness. This is compounded by the social realities of segregation, racism, and social inequality. The problem lies in understanding how cultures may collaborate across boundaries like trauma and mistrust. Designers also face problems around successfully expressing the value of design to such communities, building trust, and navigating power structures.
Opportunity Statement
By better understanding the flows between multi-cultural boundaries, symbiotic relationships may be formed with participatory design that hopes to create ongoing community resilience and reaffirm a sense of self and place. The opportunity exists in developing a mindset and practice for designers to navigate these contentious boundaries in a way that empowers minority communities like the Gullah Geechee to take more direct control of their own cultural legacy.
Sensitizing Toolkit
A generative research approach was taken forward, staying under the umbrella of participatory design. Generative research is a research approach that brings the communities directly into the design process in order to ensure that their needs and dreams are met for the future. One method in gathering research is through the use of a sensitizing toolkit- a package that is sent out to participants in order to bring the topic alive. Allowing the designer to gain a deeper understanding of the community and empathize with his/her participants. In the case of this thesis, the toolkit explored how the Gullah Geechee see the future of their culture. Through that developing rich insights and innovative concepts. Each toolkit contained of a workbook- thoughtful questions and prompts to be creatively answered, materials to express their experiences and understanding, a vulnerability card- a way in which I openly introduced myself, my ask, and my personal shortcomings, and a cultural gift- a token of appreciation from my culture to theirs.
Multicultural Collaborations
When the pressures of development and globalization are met with the social realities of isolation, race, and economic inequality how is a culture to be preserved? The majority of this study and its research has focused on the dichotomy between the Gullah Geechee culture and mainland culture. Particularly, in hope of understanding how some form of equitable reciprocity may be created between the two while maintaining their respective sense of self and place. Recent efforts have been made toward increasing the awareness and preservation of the Gullah Geechee culture. However, the community still faces many challenges that threaten their livelihood and cultural sustainability.
TEAM: Alex Fogleman
TIMELINE: September 2019 - September 2020
FIELDS: Contextual Research, Multicultural Collaborations, Cultural Competence, Participatory Design
MORE COMING SOON...
Process
Early in my process, insights emerged from literature that required me to think about potential challenges I might face. Many of which were birthed from the dichotomy I was researching. By acknowledging this, I maintained a mindset that the design process had to be conducted with the utmost respect. It was hoped that through further research and community involvement, the history, skills, traditions, languages, folktales, and voices of the Lowcountry could somehow find their ongoing place between both Gullah Geechee and mainland culture. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Later in my process, limitations including COVID-19 and the national unrest around racial injustice compounded many of the challenges I already faced. I had to be adaptive and responsive in my approach. At the heart of this study was the Gullah Geechee community. As previously mentioned, I maintained a mindset that if I was not able to truly put the community at the center of the work, I would have to rethink my approach. With community engagement being an ongoing challenge, I was forced to step back and reflect on my process.
It soon became clear that the design process of this study was a prototype in and of itself toward identifying ways in which multicultural collaborations could successfully be created.
This directed my study to include design experts on the matter. I wanted to understand how designers in the field of social design addressed challenges such as these. This led to a wealth of information on challenges like noticing our biases, navigating power dynamics, bridging mistrust, building empathy, connecting to communities, and more. This new direction also brought to the surface new connections and patterns that could not only benefit marginalized and vulnerable communities but designers as well.
The process can best be expressed through the visual below. Following the typical design development process- Discover, Define, Develop, and Deliver, this diagram represents the fuzzy front end of the process which is often messy and chaotic in nature. Throughout this study, the 'fuzzy front end' was where the most attention and effort were placed, aiming to include co-creation at every stage.
DISCOVER
DELIVER
DEVELOP
DEFINE
Deliver
Design Solution
Field Guide to Multicultural Collaborations is an adaptable tool that helps individuals navigate multicultural collaborations through mixed methods and disciplines. A hundred-page journey through five stages—authenticity, vulnerability, connectivity, porosity, and hybridity, the field guide is not intended to be a linear process. On the contrary, it’s an interconnected flow between stages that requires the user to bridge gaps and build connections in the process.
Findings from research with design experts echoed the sentiments of the community. Current projects that dealt with the complexity of multicultural collaborations, particularly those involving race and racism, need to slow down. There is a need for designers to be more thoughtful in their approach and really question what it is they are doing.
The design experts also expressed that the type of study I was attempting to conduct did have merit and held potential to create awareness around the trials and tribulations of design projects aiming to address such wicked problems. So, while some may technically believe this study ‘failed’ at answering the main research question around equitable reciprocity between cultures, the value of this study lies in the process of its entirety. The solution presented for this study aims to equip designers and community members with the tools and mindset to better navigate the complexities of multicultural collaborations.
The five qualities presented in Integral Urbanism and the overarching principles for this study’s design principles (i.e. Translucent Acculturation) are offered as a state of departure. As a guide, their insights hold the potential for cultural differences to be bridged while forming lasting social connections. It allows new ways of thinking and being to flow as people and activities converge. It requires us to rethink how we perceive and interact with our boundaries and embraces the pluralism of cultural diversity.
The Field Guide to Multicultural Collaborations is a shift from binary oppositions. It values the practice of diversity and interdependence in the hope of creating a clear vision. A vision that looks to the multiple rather than the singular, to creative expression, to social and ecological complexity, and to multicultural collaborations.
The field guide puts the community in at the center of collaborations and acknowledges the importance of relationships and processes. It has the ability to create spaces of synergy and harmony where diversity and differences meet. A space of connectors, and collaborators. It requires the user to think as a dividual, someone who is fluid, dynamic, and capable of adapting to change. Inspired by community members, design experts, and best practices, this field guide is a collection of principles, tools, and tips to guide designers and community members through the process of multicultural collaborations and co-design.
The framework is arranged into five parts- Authenticity, Vulnerability, Connectivity, Porosity, and Vulnerability. The approach was created to be adaptable and provide designers and community members a collection of tools and processes that allow them to reflect, navigate power dynamics, check their biases, open up to one another, value diversity, and create long lasting multicultural relationships through creativity and action. I will now explain the main parts, principles, exercises and guiding mindsets that are the foundation to this solution. In total, The Field Guide to Multicultural Collaborations is 100 pages filled with over 30 exercises that stay true to the findings and insights gained throughout this entire study.
Future Opportunities
The Field Guide to Multicultural Collaborations was designed with its future use in mind. It was designed to be an adaptable tool that could be used across a diverse range of stakeholders. Original ideas for the solution included a heavier focus on technology and how that could play into addressing issues around social distancing. This remains the main suggestion for future development of the solution itself. If it were to also be accessible in a digital format, it would be easily accessible to a broader audience, in turn possibly impacting the processes of design that need to be addressed. Other ideas for the solution were placed in the ‘bike rack’ for future development due to limitations around time and resources.
The biggest opportunity, for the sake of this study, would be for The Field Guide to Multicultural Collaborations to be applied directly to the Gullah Geechee community. The discussions following my defense seemed promising in connecting back to the community and seeing how my solution may be adapted for their future use.
The field guide was not only designed with the Gullah Geechee in mind but also it is structured around their stories and lived experiences. Through discussions with my committee members, other potential opportunities presented themselves around additional collaborations with the Gullah Geechee community.