PD and joint application design: a transatlantic comparison

The methodologies of Participatory Design (PD) and Joint Application Des ign ( JAD) have es tabl i shed themselves in Scandinavia and North America as. influential thrusts in software development, yet there is virtually no cross-fertilization. PD and J A D are s imul taneous ly similar, complementary, and contradictory. Consequently, a careful analysis and comparison would benefit those who teach and work in information systems development. Klein and Hirschheim [19] refer to such differences as Information Systems methodological pluralism. Pluralism offers the double-edged sword of offering choices, but leaving the practicing designer/systems analyst in a state of confusion. Like Klein and Hirschheim, we do not believe there is one correct methodology. We present this discussion and comparison of PD and JAD (which some have classified, erroneously, as "polarized views") in order to help researchers with cross-fertilization and to help practitioners understand their choices. JAD and PD are well-known methodologies for operationalizing user involvement and user participation. Both JAD and PD focus on facilitated interactions between users and designers wherein dynamic group techniques are employed for eliciting and refining ideas. They differ in points of user participation, participant identity, participant selection, technical staff and facilitator participation, team orienl-ation, structure, and development :speed. They also differ in their goals---JAD is intended to accelerate the design of information systems and promote comprehensive, high-quality results, while PD seeks to accentuate the social context of the workplace and promote workers' control over their work and their lives.