In-depth
How ethnography is impacting the future of computing
  • | dtinews.vn | August 25, 2010 02:52 PM

Computing is going from the PC and desktop to a different world of digital signage, smart buildings and smart cars. IT companies need to take a distinctly people centric approach to compete in this world. Intel\'s Genevieve Bell is one of the people behind this movement. She has been likened to Steve Jobs, described as Intel’s secret weapon and named one of the 14 most influential women in IT. Find out more as Genevieve opens up with DTiNews about how her work in the field of ethnography correlates with Intel and the future of computing:

How would computers be different if they were designed by an ethnographer?

We probably wouldn’t even call them computers anymore – we now call computers mobile phones, smartphones, satnavs, even microwaves and washing machines. As we think about next generation, we won’t replace desktops and laptops, but the opportunities for research at the moment are around what the next generation of mobile devices and entertainment devices look like. We look into the human element of technology, taking into account the way we like to do things and interacting in ways that make more sense to us.

Is that increasingly taking into account more software?

Yes. Intel is changing – there’s definitely more of a focus at the corporate level on software. From investments in software shops, employing application builders, even the work on Meego with Nokia. We’re seeing a strong investment in a more holistic approach to technology. Intel is moving from a silicon company to a solutions company, from selling computers to selling computing.

Can you talk a little about what you call ‘feral technology’?

By ‘feral technology’ I mean that it’s non-domesticated, or even invasive. It’s based on the notion of feral animals in Australia, such as the once domestic rabbits or camels that have since escaped and gone wild. We’re interested in the notion that technology moves from being a contained, controlled thing to a way in which its behaviour has become unexpected. You could call it going viral. Look at the internet – 10 years ago 70% of users were based in the US. Now it’s less that 17%, and almost none of the most visited sites have remained the same. Expectations to the internet have evolved to be very different. Another example is what happens when smartphones become about more gaming than about productivity or communications, as is happening now.

What’s an example of feral technology?

One interesting thing is Facebook, and how it’s being brought back into the fold. Facebook shows how things can move in both directions. Facebook started out being engineered to be feral, but since then it’s success brings has brought it back to needing that control.

Can you talk about the Social Viability Measure and its development programs on things like mobile banking in Africa?

We’re taking a strong focus on ethnographic work and allying it with business and economic modelling, looking at how and why technologies are more and less successful. We’ve found it’s one thing to say, ‘this project will increase economic development’, but technologies are more successful if linked to people’s lives with emotional resonance, not national building. It’s about belonging to something bigger than yourself – not just economic or technical.

Is computing the same region to region?

There are absolutely both commonalities and differences. In Korea, for example, they invested very early and aggressively in a broadband network in the home, which meant they led the way in video downloads. Ultimately, that bolstered the education system, in areas like real time tutoring.There are different experiences in other places – often driven by cultural or aspirational factors. Bollywood in India is showing us a very different way to package content, and the IPL cricket league is showing us how multi platform packaging on mobile can be done. It’s all driven by different experiences.

Can you talk about Intel, Google, Sony, Logitech’s work on Smart TV? It’s led to computers working more like TV.

Prior to my current role, my job at Intel was to teach Intel to love TV. TV has its own reasons why people loved it – it’s not waiting to be turned into a PC. Our work was to get an understanding as to why and what people loved about TV, and driving silicon development based on that. We considered how you bring the internet into that environment in a way that respects that environment, to bring the best of broadcast and broadband together. People love it since it’s simple, tells a story they cared about, that they can talk about with friends – we needed to preserve that but include the choices available when you incorporate the internet. As for Smart TV, I think GoogleTV is just the first in the long run of ways to bring Internet and TV together. We’re at the cusp of seeing what the internet will look like and how it will change, and be changed by, TV.

The new lab you’re now heading up – can you tell us what we’ll be looking at in a year’s time?

If we’re successful 3 things will happen:

+ We create a different set of compelling stories about what the future looks like. A good example is the Smart TV story – mixing a bit of magic and a bit of reality.

+ Secondly, we will change the way Intel does everything – and how we think about everything.

+ Finally, we will see some physical objects in the market.

Genevieve is the director of Intel\'s Interaction and Experience Research Group. She holds a PhD in anthropology. Her study and work in the field of ethnography provides unique perspective into "hard" science from a social science point of view.

Genevieve is leading a new lab researching interaction and experience to determine what direction the Internet and technology market will go in the coming ten years.

Researchers in Genevieve’s team conducted a 2 year ethnographic study of programmes around the world that were using technologies to promote economic and social development (like e-learning or mobile banking for example). The study found that many programs are built purely around economics and technical relevance, but for a successful programme, societal aspirations, desires towards national progress and other social forces must be accounted for in order for technologies to meaningfully connect to people’s lives. As a result, the team has developed a process to enable governments, businesses, and non government organisations to gauge the ‘social acceptability’ of their technology and development programmes.

 

Leave your comment on this story