Augmented Play Spaces (APS) are (semi-) public environments where playful interaction isfacilitated by enriching the existing environment with interactive technology. APS canpotentially facilitate social interaction and physical activity in (semi-)public environments. Incontrolled settings APS show promising effects. However, people’s willingness to engagewith APSin situ, depends on many factors that do not occur in aforementioned controlledsettings (where participation is obvious). To be able to achieve and demonstrate thepositive effects of APS when implemented in (semi-)public environments, it is important togain more insight in how to motivate people to engage with them and better understandwhen and how those decisions can be influenced by certain (design) factors. TheParticipant Journey Map (PJM) was developed following multiple iterations. First,based on related work, and insights gained from previously developed andimplemented APS, a concept of the PJM was developed. Next, to validate and refinethe PJM, interviews with 6 experts with extensive experience with developing andimplementing APS were conducted. Thefirst part of these interviews focused oninfluential (design) factors for engaging people into APS. In the second part, expertswere asked to provide feedback on thefirst concept of the PJM. Based on the insightsfrom the expert interviews, the PJM was adjusted and refined. The Participant JourneyMap consists of four layers: Phases, States, Transitions and Influential Factors. There aretwo overarchingphases:‘Onboarding’and‘Participation’and 6statesa (potential)participant goes through when engaging with an APS:‘Transit,’‘Awareness,’‘Interest,’‘Intention,’‘Participation,’‘Finishing.’Transitionsindicate movements between states.Influential factorsare the factors that influence these transitions. The PJM supportsdirections for further research and the design and implementation of APS. Itcontributes to previous work by providing a detailed overview of a participant journeyand the factors that influence motivation to engage with APS. Notable additions are thedetailed overview of influential factors, the introduction of the states‘Awareness,’‘Intention’and‘Finishing’and the non-linear approach. This will support taking intoaccount these often overlooked, key moments in future APS research and designprojects. Additionally, suggestions for future research into the design of APS are given.
The promotor was Prof. Erik Jan Hultink and copromotors Dr Ellis van den Hende en Dr R. van der Lugt. The title of this dissertation is Armchair travelling the innovation journey. ‘Armchair travelling’ is an expression for travelling to another place, in the comfort of one’s own place. ‘The innovation journey’ is the metaphor Van de Ven and colleagues (1999) have used for travelling the uncharted river of innovation, the highly unpredictable and uncontrollable process of innovation. This research study began with a brief remark from an innovation project leader who sighed after a long and rough journey: ‘had I known this ahead of time…’. From wondering ‘what could he have known ahead of time?’ the immediate question arose: how do such innovation journeys develop? How do other innovation project leaders lead the innovation journey? And could I find examples of studies about these experiences from an innovation project leader’s perspective that could have helped the sighing innovation project leader to have known at least some of the challenges ahead of time? This dissertation is the result of that quest, as we do know relatively little how this process of the innovation project leader unfolds over time. The aim of this study is to increase our understanding of how innovation project leaders lead their innovation journeys over time, and to capture those experiences that could be a source for others to learn from and to be better prepared. This research project takes a process approach. Such an approach is different from a variance study. Process thinking takes into account how and why things – people, organizations, strategies, environments – change, act and evolve over time, expressed by Andrew Pettigrew (1992, p.10) as catching “reality in flight”.
MULTIFILE
A hospital visit is often an anxious and uncertain event for patients andtheir relatives. Patients are often concerned about a diagnosis and/or thetreatment of their disease in an outpatient or inpatient setting. In thesehospital settings, the impact of the environment on patients is still notwell understood. Knowledge regarding the inuence of the hospitalenvironment on patients is essential for facilitating the quality of healthcare. Understanding the experience of patients will allow designers anddecision-makers in hospitals to positively inuence the well-being ofpatients.The aim of this thesis was to gain an improved understanding about amore holistic experience and well-being of patients at specic focalpoints of the entire patient journey from the arrival, to the diagnosis, andto the actual treatment in a hospital. For example, results showed thatpatients sometimes experience diculties in finding their way to anoutpatient clinic, that nature projection during a CT-scan can reduceanxiety, and that (the opportunity of) interaction with other patients is apleasant distraction or, on the contrary, an invasion of their own privacy.Understanding patients' experiences during the patient journey enableshospitals to make more informed decisions about space and serviceswhich enables us to improve experiences and well-being of patients inhospitals.This thesis emphasizes the relations between the hospital environmentand the psychosocial and physical well-being of patients. The resultsshow that it is of great importance to listen carefully to patients’experiences and needs when designing a hospital as many of the resultsshowed individual dierences with patients that emphasize that one sizedoes not t all. The well-being of patients in future hospitals can beimproved by aligning the hospital environment with individual patientcharacteristics, needs, and preferences.
