Fewer rules, greater engagement

Fewer rules, greater engagement

As part of last months State of Design Festival, Dan Hill, Senior Consultant with Arup ,was discussing some of the design innovations occurring around the world, and the potential they have to fundamentally change the way we interact with the physical environment.

One area he touched on that I found of particular interest was a traffic experiment in the city of Drachten, The Netherlands.

In 2002, all traffic signals were removed from a busy inner-city intersection that handles around 17,000 vehicles per day. The results can be viewed below…

I watched this short clip with a mixture of both fascination and horror as I waited to witness the imminent disastrous collision. However it never occurred, and Dan assured us that this intersection has proven to be essentially accident free!

The notion that a somewhat chaotic approach to traffic control, where anything goes and motorists, cyclists and pedestrians are left to sort out the rules amongst themselves initially seemed absurd. Yet upon further consideration this relaxation of the rules began to make more and more sense.

Perhaps, in many ways, it is actually the rigid rules and regulations of some activities that can lead participants to ‘switch off’. When expected to follow the prompts and directions prescribed to us by others, could it be the case that our level of engagement diminishes simultaneously?

When left to our own devices, armed solely with the desire to avoid smashing into something or someone else, we are suddenly required to pay attention, to increase our awareness and to apply a further level of consideration to our thoughts and actions.

Rolling this idea around in my head got me thinking about some of the unmoderated activity that happens everyday in our online research communities. The common assumption is that all of the real ‘nuggets’ of insight are derived purely from the research discussions we as moderators initiate.

However, when left to their own devices, our members not only initiate a great deal of their own discussions, but also show a great commitment toward ensuring the community runs smoothly; in many ways, they moderate each other. By practicing tolerance and embracing the different ideas and opinions of others, members prove to be very effective at creating a safe and harmonious place to interact.

Observing these interactions between community members is essentially very similar to observing Drachten’s traffic experiment. By removing the formal rules and regulations, and allowing individuals to navigate and negotiate themselves, we have the opportunity to gain a powerful insight into what they observe, what they pay attention to and how they respond.

Like this? Tell someone ...Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someone

2 Comments

  1. Love it. Your next challenge is to show that the rules of fluid dynamics also apply to online communities!

    I like to think of a nature reserve. If you want to set up a hedgerow where you can watch little brown furry things doing their thing, you’ll need to do a lot of groundwork (literally!) to ensure that the right plants are there, the right insects, the right weather conditions…early on, you’ll also need to keep making adjustments until the mice, voles, birds or whatever settle in. But as long as you keep butting in, they’ll always be a little bit wary of your presence. If you can let the weeds grow a bit and the leave the predators alone, you’ll start to see richer behavioural data, and perhaps things will start happening that you didn’t expect. It’s still a semi-artificial environment…it was landscaped in the first place, perhaps with non-native plants brought in – but if you can take a step back, the results might be more insightful.

    Reply
  2. Absolutely pent subject material , regards for selective information .

    Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>