The InstaBooth: Making common ground for media architectural design

Media architecture has emerged from and relies upon a range of different disciplinary traditions and areas of expertise. As this field develops, it is timely to reflect upon the ways in which designers of different disciplinary stripes can be brought together to collaborate in a design process. What are the means by which design teams can establish a ‘common ground’ where design work can take place while recognizing the diversity of ways of working those different disciplines bring to the process? A co-design approach has been the fundamental backbone of the InstaBooth project, which has brought together a multidisciplinary design team of academics and practitioners. The intention of this project has been to explore the combination of digital and physical interactions within a small media architecture installation to intervene with urban environments and public places for the purposes of community engagement. It is by exploring the design process of the InstaBooth project that we highlight the value of multi-disciplinary collaborations, the lessons that can be learned, and the struggles and hurdles along the way. This paper highlights the iterative process of design, the materials and physical prototypes that were employed to ultimately create a working version of the InstaBooth, a media architecture that evolves as users push its boundaries and take ownership of the installation. The concept of the InstaBooth continues to develop not only as more data are collected on its mechanics and potentials through observations, interviews and workshops, but also as more and more users engage with the installation in their individual ways.

Youth programs in remote Indigenous communities: Context matters

A diversity of programs oriented to young people seek to develop their capacities and their connection to the communities in which they live. Some focus on ameliorating a particular issue or ‘deficit’ whilst others, such as sporting, recreation and youth groups are more grounded in the community. This article reports a qualitative study undertaken in three remote Indigenous communities in Central Australia. Sixty interviews were conducted with a range of stakeholders involved in a diversity of youth programs. A range of critical challenges for and characteristics of remote Indigenous youth programs are identified if such programs are to be ‘fit for context’. ‘Youth centred-context specific’ provides a positive frame for the delivery of youth programs in remote Central Australia, encouraging an explicit focus on program logic; program content and processes; and relational, temporal, and, spatial aspects of the practice context. These provide lenses with which youth program planning and delivery may be enhanced in remote communities. Culturally safe service planning and delivery suggests locally determined processes for decision-making and community ownership. In some cases, this may mean a community preference for all ages to access the service to engage in culturally relevant activities. Where activities are targeted at young people, yet open to and inclusive of all ages, they provide a medium for cross-generational interaction that requires a high degree of flexibility on the part of staff and funding programs. Although the findings are focused in Central Australia, they may be relevant to similar contexts elsewhere.

Do SMEs cluster around innovation activities? Discovering active, incremental and opportunistic innovators

Do SMEs cluster around different types of innovation activities? Are there patterns of SME innovation activities? To investigate we develop a taxonomy of innovation activities in SMEs using a qualitative study, followed by a survey. First, based upon our qualitative research and literature review we develop a comprehensive list of innovation activities SMEs typically engage in. We then conduct a factor analysis to determine if these activities can be combined into factors. We identify three innovation activity factors: R&D activities, incremental innovation activities and cost innovation activities. We use these factors to identify three clusters of firms engaging in similar innovation activities: active innovators, incremental innovators and opportunistic innovators. The clusters are enriched by validating that they also exhibit significant internal similarities and external differences in their innovation skills, demographics, industry segments and family business ownership. This research contributes to innovation and SME theory and practice by identifying SME clusters based upon their innovation activities.