               Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




     Proposal to Conceive Multimedia Systems from a Value
     Creation Perspective and a Collaborative Work Routes
                           Approach

                     Carlos Alberto Peláez1, Andres Solano1, Toni Granollers2
           1
            Universidad Autónoma de Occidente, Calle 25 # 115-85, 760030 Cali, Colombia
                                   {capa, afsolano}@uao.edu.co
                  2
                   Universidad de Lleida, Pl. de Víctor Siurana, 25003 Lleida, Spain
                                       toni.granollers@udl.cat



           Abstract. Methodologies for the development of interactive multimedia
           systems traditionally apply the practices and lifecycles of user-centred design in
           conjunction with usability and accessibility practices guided by software
           engineering process models. This work contributes to the conception of
           multimedia systems through a new way of working using a set of work routes
           encouraging collaborative work. This new approach to conceive multimedia
           systems is centred on value creation and value-sensitive design, through a
           formal characterisation based on theoretical foundations. The results obtained
           from an evaluation of this definition, using a case study in an academic context,
           show that our scheme facilitates the conception and planning of factors such as
           the interactive multimedia experience and the responsible design of the
           solution.

           Keywords: User-centered design, Multimedia system conception, collaborative
           work for multimedia system design.



    1. Introduction

    The development of interactive systems (IS) and multimedia systems (MS) has
    traditionally been supported by the discipline of human‒computer interaction (HCI)
    and the methods of user-centred design (UCD) and interaction design (ID) [1]. These
    methods of UCD are based on the lifecycle, which forms part of the models of the
    software engineering process [2].
       The different methodologies for the development of IS and MS are studied using a
    systematic review method [3], and an analysis phase is proposed in which both the work
    team and the stakeholders begin a process of understanding the interests, needs, and
    opportunities that motivate their development. At UCD, this process suggests that it
    must be maintained throughout the system development life cycle. However, the




8
           Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




existing methodologies have generated few results related to specifying a phase in
which the suggested practices lead to collaborative work between stakeholders, using
creative and ideation processes for the conception of MSs. Likewise, there are few
works that have addressed the foundation and characterisation of MS, and these works
are not conceptually correlated with the studied methodologies.
   This work does not discuss the need to implement a design process for an IS, an MS
or a hardware‒software architecture model of an IS or MS, according to the
specification of the requirements of the stakeholders [4]. Instead, we respond to a gap
that can be identified in the conception of an MS, centred on value creation to
stakeholders.
   Our work is based on the fundamentals and methodologies of MS development,
design thinking, ethical aspects from the value-sensitive design (VSD) practices [5],
taking into account the interactive multimedia experience (IME) as the centre of value
creation by the MS in any use context. However, the proposal is not focused on aspects
of software design, but rather on the creative conception of multimedia systems, with
the potential to be applied to the design of generic solutions where the multimedia plays
a key role in the product design.
   Likewise, the proposal for the conception of multimedia systems does not replace the
traditional process for the conception of software. On the contrary, it is presented as a
resource that can be taken into account, in solutions where multimedia plays a key role
in the value creation for the stakeholders.
   The paper contains six sections. Section 2 presents background information on the
different definitions and existing methodologies for the development of an MS. Section
3 proposes a new approach to the definition of an MS that is focused on value creation,
proposing a formalisation for the characterisation of the MS. Section 4 offers a
methodological approach to the conception of MSs that is theoretically based on this
characterisation. Section 5 presents a case study, and specifies the hypothesis and
research method used in the practical application of the proposal. Section 6 presents the
results obtained from the case study. Finally, section 7 contains a discussion and
suggestions for future work in this area.


2. Background



2.1 Multimedia System as a concept

The use of the term ‘multimedia’ dates back to the mid-1960s, when music writer and
artist Bobb Goldsteinn coined it for the presentation of his show "LightWorks at
L'Oursin" in New York. This term referred to the technical nature of his experience,
which was based on light effects synchronised manually with images and sounds [6].
The term MS was subsequently used by authors such as Smith et al. [7], who did not
give a specific definition of the concept but used it in regard to academic practices




                                                                                            9
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 incorporating systems that enabled the use of new (at the time) media such as audio or
 video to support teaching‒learning processes within a classroom.
    Later, and in the 1980s, the term MS was reused by several authors such as Mock [8]
 to refer to different configurations of entertainment systems for home use; Calnan [9],
 who described it as a system based on hardware‒software architectures that enables the
 deployment of digital media; and other authors such as Mether and Bratton [10], who
 continued to approach the concept along the same lines as Smith et al., in relation to the
 educational context of teaching‒learning.
    However, the relationship between the concepts of MS and interactivity occurred
 initially in the discussions proposed by Shavelson and Salomon in field of educational
 research [11],[12], who concluded that the use of information technologies in the media
 must play an important role, through the interactivity between the user and the content.
    The concept of MS more closely approaches the context of computational sciences,
 through proposals such as that of Pina [13], who defines MS as "interactive systems
 with multiple codes". This author states that "[t]he integration of different types of
 information supported by different codes" consists of the key factor of this type of
 system, and concludes that the term ‘interactive MS’ is redundant.
    Recent definitions have focused on the concept of an MS in the context of computer
 science, including that of Steinmetz and Nahrstedt [14], who describe the importance of
 technological mediation in the capture, processing and presentation of digital
 information to the user, and the ability to support multiple forms of digital media.
 Cuevas et al. [15] offer a definition that remains focused on computer science, but
 which specifies the different types of digital media that can be managed by an MS.
    The approaches of Steinmetz and Cuevas in regard to the definition of an MS are
 integrated in the definitions set forth by Sampaio et al. [16] and Alkhalifa [17], who
 define it as "any type of electronic computer-based system" with the ability to present
 information via different forms of digital media (which may include text, sound,
 computer graphics, video and animations), and to use its functions for storage, search,
 recovery and data processing.
    In view of these definitions of an MS, and particularly in terms of its description as a
 technology-mediated system that manages digital media, there is a gap identified in the
 literature, and hence a need to define a set of attributes that are associated with value
 creation by an MS for stakeholders.


 2.2 Methodologies related to the development of Multimedia Systems

 There is a common trend in which the different methodologies for the development of
 MS are mainly focused on traditional practices of software engineering, systems
 engineering and their adaptation to UCD practices. This trend can be observed in
 proposals such as that of Cuevas et al. [15], who adapt an iterative and incremental
 process model of software engineering to UCD practices.
    Other methodologies based on software engineering and UCD for the development of
 software-based MulSeMedia (multiple sensorial media) systems use the model-driven
 architecture; for example, the scheme proposed in [18] is based on a form of digital TV




10
           Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




that offers other sensory perceptions in addition to audiovisual, such as wind, vibration
and light. Likewise, the MPIu+a methodology for the development of IS [19] defines a
set of practices that are focused on usability and accessibility, and are guided along an
iterative and incremental lifecycle for software development.
   Vilimek's proposal [20] for the development of multimodal systems through the
application of practices based on software engineering, which involves eight phases,
allows the work team to define the set of interaction modalities and their integration
with the system’s user interface, through a set of practices based on UCD.
   Other schemes use approaches originally based on systems engineering, such as that
of Leonard [21] for the development of MSs for flight entertainment. Boy [4] adapted
the traditional V model of systems engineering (with practices based on human‒systems
integration) for the development of different types of solutions, including multimedia
systems that were designed to fulfil specific functions as simulators in a human-in-the-
loop-system as part of the process of development of interactive mission-critical
systems in the aerospace industry.
   The methodologies for the development of MSs that have been studied, do not
specify a particular type of process, phase, method or practice that allow a previous
formal conception of the system. Even adaptations of the UCD methodology, in which
the design process is always focused on the user's needs, do not specify a guide for the
conception of the solution, meaning that the conception of the MS is dependent on the
experience and knowledge of the members of the team.
   With a focus on value-sensitive design (VSD) practices, Friedman et al. [22]
specified a set of 17 methods for the application of VSD practices. Many of these
methods are drawn from other disciplines, for example the social sciences and fields
such as anthropology, moral and social psychology. One of these methods focuses on an
analysis of values in technology, and due to its versatility offers ample scope for
adaptation to different contexts in which the solution requires the mediation of
information technologies, using ‘envisioning cards’ [23].
   Some recent experiments have used the envisioning cards method, such as that of
Ballard et al. [24] in which a card game named Judgment Call allows the player to
design interactive systems from an ethical point of view. These systems are based on
artificial intelligence techniques applied to facial recognition, based on fictional
scenarios. VSD methods such as envisioning cards offer a set of generic tools for the
analysis of values in terms of the ethical and moral aspects of technology, and do not
necessarily specify a workflow to guide the production team towards the specific
conception of a solution. Projects such as Judgment Call also adapt the application of
the method to a specific need for VSD analysis, without guiding the conception of a
general solution.
   The references analysed and described in this background review form part of the
previous research carried out in [3], and offer us an opportunity to work around a
conception of MS that is centred on providing value to stakeholders. VSD practices play
an essential role in meeting the needs, expectations, interests, and motivations of the
stakeholders from an ethical and moral perspective, thus driving the development of MS
in a responsible way. This study contributes to closing this gap, and addresses the
design of MS centred on value creation.




                                                                                            11
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 3. Definition of a Multimedia System

 Based on the above, we can show that the current definitions of an MS are focused on a
 description of the hardware‒software technologies, such as information processing, and
 the searching, storage, retrieval and deployment of digital information. However, none
 of these definitions is concerned with discerning the value contribution of an MS, which
 motivates interested parties to make a series of efforts towards the development of the
 solution. The above observation is based on the premise that the production of any type
 of MS fulfils a wider purpose than simply its conception, design, and technological
 development. Norman [25] calls for reflection on the definition of an MS that is centred
 on other attributes and is focused on value creation for stakeholders.
    To meet the need for a new definition of MS that is focused on the value it creates,
 this work follows two guiding criteria:
    C1: The potential for value creation that an MS can offer to stakeholders is mainly
 centred on the deployment of the IME. The storytelling, digital media, sensory
 perceptions, interaction modalities and all forms of technological mediation must be
 designed to create an IME that meets (and ideally exceeds) the needs and expectations
 of interested parties, especially the user.
    C2: To ensure the creation of value from an IME, its conception must include the
 ethics and the responsible design that takes into account the interests, needs, and
 expectations of the interested parties. These stakeholders are not only viewed as a
 collective, but also as specific actors influenced by the potential differences and value
 tensions that may arise between the representative instances of these interested parties.
    Based on the two criteria described above, and the theoretical reference for HCI,
 ethics, and responsible design, the following definition of a multimedia system can be
 proposed: A system that allows for value creation for interested parties through the
 deployment of an interactive multimedia experience, using an ethic and responsible
 design approach, and addresses the users’ needs, interests and expectations by
 influencing their human senses via storytelling using digital media resources.
    This definition emphasises the following:
 1) Value is created for the stakeholders due to the MS.
 2) The creation of value by the MS is focused on the generation and deployment of
      an IME, as a consideration that differentiates the MS from other ISs.
 3) The proposed value creation arising from the generation and deployment of an
      IME must be aligned with principles that are sensitive to human values as ethics
      and responsible design.
 4) Stakeholders (such as customers and sponsors) in the development of the MS will
      be able to achieve value creation as a result of the generation and deployment of
      a IME if it meets the interests, needs, and expectations of users.
 5) Finally, users will be able to perceive the IME via the stimulation of a set of
      sensory perceptions (auditory, visual, olfactory, gustatory, haptic, etc.), as well as
      through interaction with digital media resources that can only be made "tangible"
      by a hardware/software system.
    Different authors have used ontologies such as Zachman from Enterprise
 Architecture (EA), as a taxonomic tool applied to modelling software based solutions



12
            Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




[26], [27]. These works are conceptually consistent with the theoretical foundations of
the SEBoK guide [28], about the contribution of EA frameworks, to generate holistic
views for information systems modelling. Following these theoretical principles, and
because our definition for MS is centred in value-creation, we used the Archimate
modelling language for EA [29], to represent a scalable model of value creation for MS,
through and adapted motivation view of Archimate.
   Fig.1 represents the definition for MS from a value creation perspective, using an EA
motivation view, specifying the goals, stakeholders, principles high-level requirements,
and restriction, influencing the value creation from a MS. For the ethics and responsible
design approach, we are assuming the VSD theoretical approach as a valuable and
mature reference for our proposal.




Fig 1. Motivational view of the characterisation for the definition of multimedia system.

The modelling for the definition of the MS using the motivational view of EA,
contributes to the collaborative work of the teams, offering a common and unified
view, about the main attributes involved in the value creation from a MS.
   To achieve the goals defined by the MS definition (shown in Fig. 1), which are
related to enabling the creation of value via an IME, we established a set of efforts to be




                                                                                             13
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 produced and abstracted through a set of processes. We also defined a logical
 sequencing for how the MS characterisation should be applied. To carry out high-level
 modelling of the processes of MS characterisation (shown in Fig. 2), we used the
 graphical notation language of the EA standard, Archimate, and more specifically a
 process view.
    At the highest level of abstraction in Fig. 2, there is a triggering relationship between
 the multimedia system declaration process and the other processes of the user-centred
 design of the interactive multimedia experience, and the responsible design of the
 multimedia system.
    At a more concrete view, each of the processes described in Fig. 2 contains a set of
 work routes (workflows), process activities, and techniques for conceiving an MS
 focused on value creation. The details of the work routes, process activities, and
 techniques are discussed in Section IV.
    PR1: Process for declaring the mission of the MS, which is related to the dimension
 of value creation for the business objectives that are committed to the development of
 the MS. This contains the activities and techniques that allow for the identification of
 the business opportunity, the feasibility of developing the MS, its potential stakeholders
 and their needs and motivations.
    PR2: Process for designing a user-centred IME, which is directly related to the
 dimension of value creation for the user of the MS. This defines a set of activities and
 techniques that are related to the conception and design of the IME, based on a
 storytelling definition.
    PR3: Process for the responsible design of the MS, related to the dimension of value
 creation from the responsible design of the solution. This contains the activities and
 techniques that guide the responsible design, and focuses on the adaptation of VSD
 practices for the conception of the MS.




 Fig 2. Processes view for the characterisation of the multimedia system.




14
            Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




   Fig. 2 shows the triggering interrelation and workflow of the processes, lead to a
work product in the form of a plan for MS development. Following the definition from
TOGAF ADM for EA [30], the process defines a sequence of activities in order to
develop its contents. Likewise, the meaning from the Software Engineering discipline,
explains the process as a coherent set of activities for software production [2].
Considering the definition from both referents, in the next section, we are presenting the
set of activities and their relationship, that composing the processes specifically for the
characterisation of MS.


4. Multimedia System Conception

To facilitate the collaborative work, the set of activities of the processes for the
characterisation for MS are grouped in a set of four work routes. Each work route
fulfils an objective in the conception of the MS. The graphic representation of these
routes is an original proposal for multimedia systems based on the design thinking
work approaches suggested by Lewrick [31] as a visual representation for the
common understanding of the work to do. In addition, the workflow given by the
routes is a suggestion for help with the collaborative work for conceiving multimedia
systems and not a recipe that must be followed verbatim.
   The main purpose of conceiving an MS is to enrich the phase preceding the analysis
of requirements. This enables a better understanding of the stakeholders' motivations,
interests and needs, the potential for value creation and the feasibility of production, and
to conceive an IME that can best fulfil and exceed the stakeholders’ expectations.
Likewise, a better understanding of the stakeholders' needs is reached through the use
and adaptation of the VSD approach. The scope of the VSD practices in the MS
conception includes the identification of indirect stakeholders in the MS, specification
of value tensions between the MS stakeholders, and detection of any possible uses for
the MS that differ from those initially conceived by the system designers, since these
may allow for nefarious actions. The name and objective of the four routes is:
1) The Genesis route aims to recognise the (direct and indirect) stakeholders and
     the opportunities that identify customers and sponsors, motivating the
     development of the MS.
2) The Creativity route defines the basis of the story and the narrative universe in
     which the IME will be produced. The team determine the most suitable digital
     media, sensory perceptions, and interaction modalities, taking into account the
     emotions that the team wants to stimulate in users.
3) The Responsible Design route guides the team to identify value tensions
     between (direct and indirect) stakeholders, possible uses for the MS other than
     those initially conceived by systems designers, and policies and regulations that
     may influence or condition its design, among other VSD considerations.
4) The Assurance route allows for an estimate of the possible risks that may arise
     from the development of the MS and the design of the IME, as well as the
     possible methods and resources that adversaries might use to attack the MS, and
     their motivations.



                                                                                             15
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




    Each route provides a workflow, activities, techniques, and a RASCI (Responsible,
 Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) stakeholder matrix allowing the work
 teams to carry out the conception of the MS, to facilitate the understanding and the
 collaborative work between the members of the work team. Table 1 shows the
 stakeholders potentially involved in the conception of the MS.

 Table 1. Stakeholders involved in the conception of the MS.
 Abbreviation Stakeholder                                 Description
        S              Sponsor     Responsible for communicating the initial motivation for developing
                                   the MS, as result of a set of business objectives or community needs.
        U               Users      Stakeholders for whom the IME conception process has been carried
                                   out, including their interests, needs, and expectations.
        C            Customers     Stakeholders who are financing development of the MS or purchasing
                                   the final product for use.
        IS             Indirect    Stakeholders who are indirectly influenced (positively or negatively)
                    stakeholders   by the use of the MS within a company or community.
      MEA           Multimedia     Responsible for producing the view with the highest level of
                     Experience    abstraction of the IME that the system will offer its customers and end
                      architect    users. Leads the work on the conception of the story, the narrative
                                   universe, each of the components involved throughout the user
                                   experience cycle, and the rules and mechanics governing the IME.
        IA           Information   Responsible for the MS design in terms of the information
                       architect   architecture that is needed for the IME and which is used through the
                                   deployment of the multimedia content.
       HSA            HW/SW        Responsible for conceiving the MS architecture view at the
                      architect    hardware/software level, and for estimating the components that will
                                   be needed in the system.
       CPA            Content      Responsible for defining the architecture, the set of all digital media
                     Production    and their interrelations, taking into account the IME conception
                      architect    defined.
       TA               Test       Responsible for designing the testing strategy for the MS and its IME,
                      architect    during its conception and in the subsequent production process, from
                                   the most abstract views (linked to the value creation of the conceived
                                   solution) to the most specific ones (related to the hardware/software
                                   components of the system).
       OS               Other      These are experts in the subject matter in the use context, and
                    stakeholders   contribute to specific needs during the conception of the MS.
       PD              Product     Responsible for producing the concepts for the development of the
                      designer     physical components of the MS, taking into account the specifications
                                   defined from the design of the IME.


    Fig. 3 shows the Genesis route, which includes a total of 5 activities and 16 possible
 techniques (indicated by rectangles) for the collaborative work. Activities with a yellow
 border represent the starting points of the route workflows, while activities with a red
 border represent the end of a workflow iteration along the route. These activities in the
 Genesis route are mainly focused on the principles of the UCD [1] and the VSD for the
 identification of the indirect stakeholders [5].
    For the specification of the activities in Fig.3, Table 2 summarises the relationships
 between the activities making up the Genesis route and the processes to which they
 belong. It also provides recommendations for the work teams on each of the
 stakeholders´ role in each activity, based on a RASCI matrix. Table 6, presents the




16
                Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




specification of all the techniques used in the four routes. The colours yellow, blue and
pink in the routes, represents the processes PR1, PR2 and PR3, respectively.




Fig 3. Genesis route for identification of stakeholders and recognition of opportunities for the
multimedia system.

Table 2. Activities and RASCI Matrix for Genesis Route.
                                                                                                      Process
     Activity
                                          Activities in the Genesis route                          related to the
      code
                                                                                                      activity
     A1          Identify stakeholders involved in MS development: customers, sponsors,
                                                                                                          PR1
                 users, indirect stakeholders, and other stakeholders.
     A2          Identify opportunities based on the motivations and needs of customers and
                                                                                                          PR1
                 sponsors with regard to the development of the MS.
     A3          Carry out a contrast analysis of the needs of customers and sponsors vs.
                                                                                                          PR1
                 those of potential users of the MS.
     A7          Identify and analyse users' interests, needs, and expectations, and the
                                                                                                          PR2
                 problems they wish to solve through the solution.
     A15         Identify and classify potential indirect stakeholders in the development of the
                                                                                                          PR3
                 MS.
   Activity                                                 Stakeholder
                    S     C       U     IS       MEA         IA     HSA        CPA      TA           OS      PD
      A1            A     C       C       C         R                                                C
      A2            A     C                         R         C       C          C       C
      A3            A     C       C       C         R         I        I         I        I           C         I
      A7            A     C       C                 R         I        I         I        I           C         I
      A15           I     C       C       C        A/R        I        I         I        I           C


   Following the conventions of Fig. 3, the Fig. 4, 5, and 6 illustrates the workflow,
activities, and techniques in the Creativity route for the conception of the IME, the
Responsible Design route, and the Assurance route, respectively. Tables 3, 4, and 5,
specifies the activities and RASCI matrix for each route. In the Creative route and under
the UCD approach, we adapt principles of the conception of multimedia experiences,
based on general design thinking practices of Kumar [32] and UX storytelling practices
[33].




                                                                                                                    17
                Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




  Fig. 4. Creativity route for the conception of the interactive multimedia experience.

  Table 3. Activities and RASCI Matrix for Creativity Route.
                                                                                                      Process
  Activity
                                        Activities in the Creativity route                         related to the
   code
                                                                                                      activity
             Conceive the structure and flow (narrative, temporal, events) of the story to be
       A8                                                                                                PR2
             developed from the problem to be solved.
       A9    Design the IME, based on the story and the identified problem(s).                           PR2
             Analyse and define the types of digital media based on which the production of
      A10                                                                                                PR2
             multimedia content will take place.
             Identify the different sources and processes of transforming information that occur
      A11                                                                                                PR2
             because of the conceived IME.
    A12      Conceive the sensory perceptions and interaction modalities required by the IME.            PR2
    A14      Analyse and test the conceived IME.                                                         PR2
Activity                                                  Stakeholder
                    S        C     U        IS      MEA         IA      HSA       CPA      TA       OS         PD
      A8           A         C     C        C          R         C        I        C        I       C           I
      A9           A         C     C        C          R         C        I        C        I       C           I
      A10          A         C     C        C          C         C        I        R        I       C           S
      A11          A         C     C        C          C         R        I         I       I       C           I
      A12          A         C     C                   R         I        C         I       I                   I
      A14          A         C     C                   C         C        C        C        R                   C


     For the Responsible Design route, we are taking into account of practices related to
  the VSD, specifically from a generic method as the envisioning cards proposed by
  Friedman and Hendry [23].




       Fig. 5. Responsible Design route for the conception of the multimedia system.




 18
               Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




Table 4. Activities and RASCI Matrix for Creativity Route.
                                                                                                    Process
    Activity
                                  Activities in the Responsible Design route                     related to the
     code
                                                                                                    activity
                Analyse and identify the laws and regulations in force at global, national and
      A17                                                                                               PR3
                regional levels, which may influence the design of the MS.
                Identify factors related to the indirect and long-term effects that may occur
      A18                                                                                               PR3
                because of the use of the MS.
                Identify and classify patterns in contexts and the potential influence on
      A19                                                                                               PR3
                behaviour due to the future use of the multimedia system.
   Activity                                               Stakeholder
                   S     C      U      IS       MEA         IA      HSA     CPA        TA          OS         PD
      A17          C     C                         I        A/R       I       I         I          C           I
      A18          I     C      C        C        A/R        I        I       I         I          C
      A19          I     I      C        C        A/R        I       S        I         I          C          I


   The set of activities of the Assurance route are based on the generic principles of
the IT Governance [34] and Project Management [35] focused on the analysis of
viability, taking into account the VSD analysis, software and system engineering
principles, and adapted for the multimedia system conception.




Fig. 6. Assurance route for the conception of the multimedia system.


Table 5. Activities and RASCI Matrix for Creativity Route.
                                                                                                Process
    Activity
                                      Activities in the Assurance route                      related to the
     code
                                                                                                activity
                Make a preliminary estimation of the hardware/software architecture
      A13                                                                                               PR2
                technologies and physical objects required to ensure a high-quality IME.
       A4       Estimate and classify the risks associated with the development of the MS.              PR1
                Estimate the available and necessary resources for the development of the
       A5                                                                                               PR1
                MS.
                Carry out a viability analysis for the development of the MS, and compare
       A6       this with the innovation opportunities it generates for its clients and                 PR1
                sponsors.
      A16       Analyse and identify the impact of the motivations, resources, and methods              PR3




                                                                                                                  19
                Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




                 of potential adversaries that may decide to attack the MS.
     Activity                                             Stakeholder
                     S      C     U     IS      MEA          IA      HSA    CPA        TA        OS      PD
        A13          A      C      C               C          I        R     I          I                 S
        A4           A      I                      R          S        S     S                     C      S
        A5           A      I                      R          S        S     S          S          C      S
        A6           A      C                      R          I        I     I          I          C      I
        A16           I     C      C      C         I       A/R        I     I          I          C

 Table 6. Techniques adapted for the conception of the multimedia system.
                                                              Practices and disciplines that
 Technique
                            Technique name                       describe the origin of the
    Code
                                                                        technique
      TDM1        Trend analysis
      TDM2        Convergence mapping                                    Design thinking [32]
      TDM3        SWOT analysis
      TDM4        Identification of stakeholders                         Design thinking [31]
      TDM5        Value analysis                                         IT governance [34]
                  Risk breakdown and analysis associated with MS
      TDM6
                  development
      TDM7        Analysis for risk identification                       Project management [35]
      TDM8        Analogue resource identification
      TDM9        Ascending identification of resources
      TDM10       Canvas creation                                        Design thinking [31]
       TDE1       Ethnographic analysis                                  Ethnographic techniques [36]
       TDE2       Interviews with stakeholders                           Human-centred design [37]
                  Observation and analysis of the cognitive, social,
       TDE3       cultural, emotional and physical aspects of human
                                                                         Design thinking [32]
                  beings
       TDE4       User/customer process mapping
                                                                         User experience (UX) storytelling
       TDE5       Experience simulation
                                                                         [33]
      TDE6        Database of user observations
                                                                         Design thinking [32]
      TDE7        Video as support for ethnography
      TDE8        Definition of personas                                 Design thinking [31]
      TDE9        Production of metaphors and analogies
                                                                         UX storytelling [33]
      TDE10       Storyboard creation
      TDE11       Mapping of compelling experiences                      Design thinking [31]
                  Matrix for the preliminary definition of the type of
      TDE12                                                              Design thinking [32]
                  digital media
                  Classification of information for the multimedia
      TDE13
                  experience
                                                                         Information architecture [38]
      TDE14       Design for content and information structure
      TDE15       Wireframe creation
                  Asymmetric grouping matrix between sensory
      TDE16       perceptions, interaction modalities and digital        Design thinking [32]
                  media
                  Creation of the journey map for the multimedia
      TDE17                                                              UX storytelling [33]
                  experience
                  Analysis and preliminary definition of software
      TDE18                                                              Software engineering [2]; systems
                  architecture technologies
                                                                         engineering [39]; product design
                  Analysis and preliminary definition of architecture
      TDE19                                                              [40]
                  hardware technologies and physical objects
                  Prototypes production of user behaviour against the
      TDE20
                  multimedia experience                                  Design thinking [31]
      TDE21       Concept prototypes
      TDR1        Identification of indirect stakeholders                Value-sensitive design [5]




20
            Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




                                                                    Practices and disciplines that
Technique
                              Technique name                          describe the origin of the
  Code
                                                                              technique
    TDR2      Identification of value tensions
    TDR3      Relationships that transform
    TDR4      Non-directed use
                                                                 Value-sensitive design [22]
              Analysis of the motivations and resources of
    TDR5
              adversaries and the impact of the system on people
    TDR6      Identification of policies and regulations
    TDR7      Analysis of user responses
                                                                 Design thinking [32]
    TDR8      Identification of patterns


   Each technique showed in Table 6 have a set of steps, bringing the team a guideline
to complete the collaborative work needed to achieve the objective of each technique.
As example, Fig. 7 show the recommended guidelines for the TDE17.




Fig. 7. Recommended guidelines for the TDE17 technique.

   The expected outcomes of the work done in the routes for the conception of the MS
are a set of work products relating to the implementation of the routes by the teams.
Work products are classified into three groups: i) specifications for the MS mission, ii)
specifications for the user-centred IME, and iii) specifications for the responsible design
of the MS. The overall set of work products defines the plan for development of the MS
(see Fig. 2). The work products form the basis of subsequent activities related to the pre-
production and production of the MS, and provide a guide for the design-to-
development handoff engineering process.




                                                                                                 21
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 5. Case study

 In this section, we focus on analysing the evidence obtained from applying the routes
 for the conception of the MS, based on the following hypothesis:
    H1. The members of the team can achieve high levels of clarity and criteria
 unification in the work involved in the conception of the MS due to the use of the work
 routes.
    Both, the clarity and criteria unification in the work involved for the conception of the
 MS, are key elements contributing to the collaborative work.
    The research methodology of the case study was based on the recommended
 guidelines defined by principles of the design science research methodology [41], and
 the qualitative research methods adapted for software engineering [42].
    Over a four-month period, 18 practitioners with experience as junior developers in
 MS and a tutor with PhD studies and senior experience in the evaluation of usability and
 interactive systems development worked on four different projects related to the
 conception of an MS. These individuals were at a university with about 8,000 students
 that was highly accredited by the Colombian Ministry of National Education, and which
 had offered an undergraduate program in Multimedia Engineering since 2008.
    The 18 practitioners formed four teams, each with four or five participants. Each
 practitioner assumed either one or two roles in the team (architects), as shown in Table
 II. Each team was asked to undertake the following four challenges related to the
 conception of an MS over a period of four months:
    CH1: Identify the stakeholders and the opportunities (based on the interests,
 motivations, needs, and expectations of the stakeholders) that the MS can offer.
    CH2: Conceive the design of an interactive multimedia experience.
    CH3: Conceive a responsible design for the MS.
    CH4: Carry out a viability analysis for development of the MS.
    Each team was given the choice of whether or not to use the MS conception routes
 for each challenge. Just one team can applied traditional methodologies that were
 different from the routes on each challenge, and for one time along the four months.
    This way of working allowed the greatest possible number of practitioners to work on
 the routes defined for the conception for the MS, and also took advantage of the
 extensive experience of both the practitioners and the tutor in other practices and
 methodologies focused on the UCD and the development of the IS, in order to carry out
 a comparative analysis.
    For the evaluation of each challenge, the case study used a set of surveys composed
 of open and (mainly) closed questions. Each of the team's practitioners and the tutor
 answered these four surveys anonymously after the end of each challenge.
    The surveys used a five-point Likert scale for questions related to the usefulness of
 the routes and methodologies or the practices that were used to achieve each of the
 challenges set for the MS conception. The Likert scale contained the following options:
 very useful, useful, relatively useful, not very useful, and useless. Meanwhile, for
 questions related to the team's agility in terms of the learning of the activities and
 techniques of the route, the five Likert levels were strongly agree, agree, slightly agree,
 disagree, and strongly disagree.



22
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




   To enable a comparative analysis between the outcomes obtained for each challenge
and the statement in H1 as result of applying the routes, a set of 19 impact factors was
defined for all the challenges. These impact factors were to be analysed for each
challenge by all the participating teams, including the team that used different
methodologies or practices. As sample, the impact factors for CH2 are shown in Table
7, following the code used in the study case, from IF5 to IF11. The agility of the team in
terms of the appropriation of the route's activities and techniques was an impact factor
evaluated for all the challenges.

Table 7. Impact Factors for the analysis of outcomes vs. hypothesis statement for CH2.
                                        Impact Factor
IF5 Useful for the storytelling collaborative design of the IME.
IF6 Useful to produce alignment between the IME conception, and the interests, needs, expectations and
motivations of the stakeholders.
IF7 Useful for the conception of the characters, events, objects, spaces, and times involved in the IME.
IF8 Useful in choosing the most appropriate digital media for the IME.
IF9 Useful in choosing the most appropriate sensory perceptions for the IME.
IF10 Useful in choosing the most appropriate interaction modalities for the IME.
IF11 Agility of the team in terms of applying the Creativity route or other methodologies or practices.


   To evaluate the population standard deviation, we carried out separate analyses for
the teams that applied the routes for the MS conception and the team using other
methodologies and techniques. The tutor's evaluation was included in both measures.
Following the recommended guidelines of Sauro [43] for the evaluation of the survey
results using a Likert Scale, the equation used to calculate the population standard
deviation is given in Equation (1), and was applied for each impact factor:
                                                                                                    (1)


N is the number of total practitioners applying the route in each challenge plus the tutor,
or the team using other methodologies or practices plus the tutor. µ is the arithmetic
mean of the results obtained from the questions for each impact factor.


5.1 Limitations of the case study

   The limitations of the case study are related to the homogeneity in the professional
experience of the practitioners and the tutor, supposing a restriction in the validity of the
obtained results using the work routes for conceiving a multimedia system, only to
professionals with junior and senior experience as developers of multimedia systems.
   This study recognizes different validation experiences on methodological approaches
related to the development of multimedia systems, but a limited amount of previous
experiences specifically focused on their conception.




                                                                                                      23
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 6. Results

 Following the guidelines of the case study, each team applied three of the four routes for
 the MS conception or other methodologies or practices for each of the challenges. Fig. 8
 shows the results for the population standard deviation for the 19 impact factors making
 up the four challenges. The variable σ1 (blue line) represents the results for the teams
 using the four routes for each challenge, while σ2 represents the results for the teams
 using traditional methodologies and practices to complete the challenges.
    The variation in the population standard deviation from the study of the 19 impact
 factors indicates that the values tend to the mean results from the surveys for the four
 challenges. Nearly 58% of the results obtained for σ1 were in the range 0.3 to 0.5 while
 21% had a value of zero. For σ2, 84% of the values were in the range 0.3 to 0.5.




 Fig. 8. Population standard deviation for the impact factor of the four challenges.

 As an example of the results obtained, the practitioners asked a survey of 18 questions
 about their experience with the use of the Creativity route to complete the challenge
 CH2. The results highlighted that more than 86% of the practitioners reported success
 with the Creativity route in terms of achieving the impact factors IF5 to IF10, although
 almost 85% of them selected “agree” rather than “strongly agree” for the agility of the
 team applying the activities and techniques of the Creativity route (IF11).
    Fig. 9 (left side) shows the average results for the seven impact factors of CH2 from
 the survey responses of the practitioners of teams and the tutor. The values of the
 population standard deviation σ for the impact factors of teams using the Creativity
 route were zero (IF9), 0.41 (IF5, IF7, IF10), 0.35 (IF6, IF8), and 0.67 for IF11.




24
            Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




Fig. 9. Average results for the impact factors in challenge CH2 for teams applying the

creativity route (left side) and teams applying the traditional UX and UCD practices (right side)
   Meanwhile, the right side of the Fig. 9 is showing the results of the impact factors for
challenge CH2, when the practitioners applied the agile UX storytelling [33] practices
with a UCD methodology as MPIu+a [19]. They reported having difficulties to achieve
good results for the impact factors of CH2. Instead, they obtained a greater agility using
the storytelling practice and the interactive system development methodology, due to
their existing familiarity with these approaches. The values of the population standard
deviation σ for the impact factors were 0.37 (IF7, IF8), 0.47 (IF5, IF6), and 0.5 (IF9,
IF10, IF11).
   This results showed the high value perceived by practitioners when assessing the
impact factors, as a result of applying the Creativity route to conceive the interactive
multimedia experience, in contrast to other traditional methodologies and practices used
as UX storytelling and MPIu+a.


Conclusions and future work

In this study, we propose a new definition and a characterisation of an MS centred on
value creation for its stakeholders. The IME, through an envisioning of the theoretical
VSD approach for the responsible design, provides the basis for value creation and the
motivation for the conception of the MS. The set of work routes provides the basis for a
collaborative work for the conception of the MS, through a practical point of view.
   The results of surveys carried out as part of a case study demonstrate the contribution
of these routes to the process of conceiving an MS, in terms of providing clarity to the
team members regarding the work that needs to be done to meet the challenges, using a
set of workflows, activities, and techniques. Likewise, the practitioners achieved criteria
unification in the collaborative work involved in the conception of the MS.
   The values of the population standard deviation for the 19 impact factors of the case
study tended to the mean for each of the four challenges. From these results, we




                                                                                                25
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 recognise that the practitioners of the different teams had very similar perceptions about
 the contribution of the routes, activities, and techniques to the fulfilment of the impact
 factors and the success in each of the challenges.
    When the survey results for the tutors are compared to the averages for the
 practitioners in all the teams, it can be seen that there is a similar and favourable
 perception of the usefulness of the routes in terms of completing the challenges.
    For the Creativity route, the results show a significant contribution in the case study
 to the conception of the IME, in contrast with the results obtained using traditional
 methodologies or practices. We observe the main contributions of the route in the
 collaborative work for the design and integration of the storytelling, the narrative
 universes, the digital media, sensory perceptions, and interaction modalities, which are
 more suitable for the value creation in terms of the UX.
    The case study showed that the practitioners in the team that used traditional
 methodologies in challenge CH2 had serious difficulties in aligning the IME with the
 needs, interests, and expectations of the stakeholders. These difficulties were increased
 when the team tried to define and align the digital media, sensory perceptions, and
 interaction modalities that were best suited to improve the UX.
    Although the practitioners and the tutor had a high level of knowledge of several
 methodologies and practices for conceiving storytelling centred on the UX, these
 traditional methodologies did not offer the level of detail provided by the Creativity
 route for the conception of an IME and all its specified elements along the route.
    However, although the results demonstrated the contribution of the work routes to
 success in all the challenges of the case study through a collaborative work, both the
 practitioners and the tutor reported that there was a need to improve the performance of
 the team in terms to improve the agile learning of the workflow, activities, and
 techniques of the routes.
    Finally, this proposal contributes to enabling a collaborative work environment
 between the team members to conceive a MS. Still, future work is required to improve
 an agile approach for the learning and appropriation of the work routes, and future
 studies to evaluate the impact of the initial competencies of the team members' roles in
 the collaborative work.


 References

 1.   A. Dix, J. Finlay, G. D. Abowd and R. Beale, Human-Computer Interaction. England:
      Pearson, 2004.
 2.   I. Sommerville, Sofware Engineering. Pearson, 2016.
 3.   C. Peláez, A. Solano, T. Granollers and C. Collazos, "Methodologies and trends in
      multimedia systems: a systematic literature review," in International Conference on
      Human-Computer Interaction, 2019.
 4.   G. A. Boy, Tangible Interactive Systems. Suiza: Springer, 2017.
 5.   B. Friedman and D. Hendry, Value Sensitive Design: Shaping Technology With Moral
      Imagination. Boston, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2019.
 6.   R. Albarino, "Goldstein's LightWorks at Southhampton," Variety, vol. 213, p. 12, 1966.




26
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




7.    M. D. Smith, M. Schagring and L. E. Poorman, "Multimedia systems: A review and report
      of a pilot project," AV Communication Review, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 345-369, 1967.
8.    T. D. Mock, "Integrated multimedia system for home control: The consumer electronics
      BUS (CEBUS)," in GLOBECOM'86, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference:
      Communications Broadening Technology Horizons, Houston, 1986.
9.    R. Calnan, "Island: A Distributed Multimedia System," in IEEE/IEICE Global
      Telecommunications Conference, Globecom 1987, Tokyo Conference, Proceedings, vol. 2
      of 3, pp. 744-748, England, 1987.
10.   C. Mether and B. Bratton, "A multimedia system to teach basic AV equipment operation
      and graphic production," TechTrends, Vol. 32 no. 6, pp. 15-16, 1987.
11.   R. Shavelson and G. Salomon, "Information technology: Tool and teacher of the mind,"
      Educational Researcher, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 4-4, 1985.
12.   R. Shavelson and G. Salomon, "A reply," Educational Researcher, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 24-
      25, 1986.
13.   A. R. Bartolomé Pina, "Multimedia interactivo y sus posibilidades en educación superior,"
      Revista de Medios y Educación, vol. 1, pp. 5-14, 1994 (In Spanish).
14.   R. Steinmetz and K. Nahrstedt, Multimedia Fundamentals, Volume 1: Media Coding and
      Content Processing. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2003.
15.   I. Cuevas, P. Díaz Pérez, M. Á. Sicilia Urbán, A. Vara de Llano, A. Colmenar Santos, P.
      Losada de Dios, F. Mur Pérez, M. A. Castro Gil and J. P. Arroba, Sistemas Multimedia:
      Análisis, Diseño y Evaluación. Madrid: Editorial UNED - Universidad Nacional de
      Educación a Distancia, 2004 (In Spanish).
16.   P. N. Sampaio, I. A. Rodello, L. M. R. Peralta and P. A. Bressan, "Customizing
      multimedia and collaborative virtual environments," in Encyclopedia of Networked and
      Virtual Organizations. Hershey, New York, Information Science Reference (animprint of
      IGI Global), 2008, pp. 377-384.
17.   E. M. Alkhalifa, "A cognitively-based framework for evaluating multimedia systems," in
      Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, 2nd ed. Bahrain: IGI Global, 2009,
      pp. 578-582.
18.   M. de Sousa, R. Kulesza and C. Guimarães Ferraz, "A model-driven approach for
      mulsemedia application domain," in Proceedings of the 22nd Brazilian Symposium on
      Multimedia and the Web, pp. 111-118, 2016.
19.   T. Granollers, "MPIu+ a. Una metodología que integra la ingeniería del software, la
      interacción persona-ordenador y la accesibilidad en el contexto de equipos de desarrollo
      multidisciplinares," Ph.D. dissertation, Department d’Informática i Enginyeria Industrial,
      Universitat de Lleida, Lleida, 2004. Accesed on: September 10, 2020.[Online]. Available:
      https://mpiua.invid.udl.cat/docs/Tesis_Doctoral_Toni_Granollers.pdf (In Spanish).
20.   R. Vilimek, "More than words: Designing multimodal systems," in Usability of Speech
      Dialog Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2008, pp. 123-145.
21.   S. Leonard and J. I. Olszewska, "Model-based development of interactive multimedia
      system," in Cybernetics (CYBCON), 2017 3rd IEEE International Conference on, pp.189-
      194, 2017.
22.   B. Friedman, D. G. Hendry and A. Borning, "A survey of value sensitive design methods,"
      Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 63-125,
      2017.
23.   B. Friedman and D. Hendry, "The envisioning cards: A toolkit for catalyzing humanistic
      and technical imaginations," in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors
      in Computing Systems, pp. 1145-1148, 2012.
24.   S. Ballard, K. M. Chappell and K. Kennedy, "Judgment Call the game: Using value
      sensitive design and design fiction to surface ethical concerns related to technology," in
      Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference, New York, 2019.




                                                                                              27
             Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.49, 2021, pp. 8 - 28




 25. D. Norman, Emotion Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. New York: Basic
     Books, 2004.
 26. F. D. Giraldo, S. España, W. J. Giraldo y Ó. Pastor, «Modelling languages quality
     evaluation by taxonomic analysis: a preliminary proposal.,» Revista Ingenierías
     Universidad de Medellín, vol. 15, nº 29, pp. 159-172, 2016 (In Spanish).
 27. M. L. Villegas, C. A. Collazos, W. J. Giraldo y J. M. González, «Towards an activity
     taxonomy (ATx) from separation of concerns in use case modeling,» Revista Ingenierías
     Universidad de Medellín, vol. 16, nº 30, pp. 97-114, 2017.
 28. R. Pineda, B. Lawson, R. Turner, “Value of Service Systems Engineering”, pp.603-608, in
     SEBoK Editorial Board. 2020. The Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge
     (SEBoK), v2.2 R.J. Cloutier (Editor in Chief). Hoboken, NJ: The Trustees of the Stevens
     Institute of Technology Systems Engineering Research Center, the International Council
     on Systems Engineering, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
     Computer Society.
 29. I. Band, T. Ellefsen, B. Estrem, M. E. Iacob, H. Jonkers, M. M. Lankhorst et al.,
     "Archimate 3.0 Specification," The Open Group, 2016.
 30. The Open Group, The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Amersfoort-NL: Van Haren
     Publishing, 2018.
 31. M. Lewrick, P. Link and L. Leifer, The Design Thinking Playbook: Mindful Digital
     Transformation of Teams, Products, Services, Businesses and Ecosystems. New York:
     Wiley, 2018.
 32. V. Kumar, 101 Design Methods: A Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your
     Organization. John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
 33. R. Baker, Agile UX Storytelling. Crafting Stories for Better Software Development. Plano,
     Texas, USA: CA Press, 2017.
 34. ISACA, COBIT 5: A Business Framework for the Governance and Management of
     Enterprise IT. Isaca, 2012.
 35. Project Management Institute, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 6th
     ed. Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute, Inc., 2017.
 36. R. V. Kozinets, "The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in
     online communities," Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 61-72, 2002.
 37. IDEO, Human Centered Design Toolkit. IDEO, 2011.
 38. L. Rosenfeld, P. Morville and J. Arango, Information Architecture: for the Web and
     Beyond. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2015.
 39. B. P. Douglass, Agile Systems Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, 2015.
 40. K. Ulrich and S. Eppinger, Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill,
     2016.
 41. G. Geerts, «A design science research methodology and its application to accounting
     information systems research,» International Journal of Accounting Information Systems,
     vol. 12, nº 2, pp. 142-151, 2011.
 42. M. Genero, J. A. Cruz-Lemus and M. Piattini, Métodos de Investigación en Ingeniería del
     Software. Grupo editorial RA-MA, 2014 (In Spanish).
 43. J. Sauro y J. Lewis, Quantifying the User Experience: Practical Statistics for User
     Research, Waltham, MA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 2016.




28
