DYA - Dynamic Enterprise Architecture
Published March 3, 2022 | Version 20220303-v3
Working paper Open

Value sensitive architecture

Authors/Creators

  • 1. Sogeti Netherlands

Contributors

  • 1. Sogeti Netherlands

Description

Every action is a moral choice. Every design constitutes a subset of all theoretically available possibilities. This also holds for the design of a digital solution. A design always defines the behavioural choices of its users in some way: discouraging some behaviour and stimulating other behaviour. Technology cannot be neutral.

Value sensitive architecture is not only aware of the economical aspects of enterprise architecture design choices, but also of their impact on personal and public values.

In this whitepaper we introduce the main lenses to look at ethics and provide examples of the moral impact of design choices. We discuss how, by applying value sensitive design and an ethical matrix, you can take human values into account during the design process. At the end we place ethical thinking, sensemaking and enterprise architecture into relation to each other.

Files

DYA-whitepaper-Value-Sensitive-Architecture.pdf

Files (1.7 MB)

Additional details

References

  • Chatfield, K. (2018). An Ethical Matrix for Traditional and Complementary Medicine, pages 29–40. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
  • Cheng, A.-S. and Fleischmann, K. R. (2010). Developing a meta-inventory of human values. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47(1):1–10.
  • Crossan, M., Mazutis, D., and Seijts, G. (2013). In search of virtue: The role of virtues, values and character strengths in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4):567–581.
  • Ess, C. (2006). Ethical pluralism and global information ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 8(4):215– 226.
  • Foot, P. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review, 5
  • Friedman, B. (1996). Value-sensitive design. interactions, 3(6):16–23.
  • Friedman, B. and Hendry, D. G. (2019). Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Friedman, B., Howe, D. C., and Felten, E. (2002). Informed consent in the mozilla browser: Implementing value-sensitive design. In Proceedings of the 35th annual hawaii international conference on system sciences, volume 8, pages 96–99. IEEE.
  • Grayling, A. C. (2019). The history of philosophy. Penguin Press, New York, NY, USA.
  • Joerges, B. (1999). Do politics have artefacts? Social studies of science, 29(3):411–431.
  • Kaiser, M., Millar, K., Thorstensen, E., and Tomkins, S. (2007). Developing the ethical matrix as a decision support framework: Gm fish as a case study. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20(1):65– 80.
  • Kermisch, C. and Depaus, C. (2018). The strength of ethical matrixes as a tool for normative analysis related to technological choices: the case of geological disposal for radioactive waste. Science and engineering ethics, 24(1):29–48.
  • Krijger, J. (2016). Schaamteloos handelen. Master's thesis, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
  • Mepham, B. (2000). A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: The ethical matrix. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(2):165– 176.
  • Mepham, B., Kaiser, M., Thorstensen, E., Tomkins, S., and Millar, K. (2006). Ethical matrix manual. Technical report, LEI, part of Wageningen UR, The Hague, The Netherlands.
  • Oosterlaken, I. (2015). Applying value sensitive design (vsd) to wind turbines and wind parks: An exploration. Science and engineering ethics, 21(2):359–379.
  • Palazzo, G., Krings, F., and Hoffrage, U. (2012). Ethical blindness. Journal of business ethics, 109(3):323– 338.
  • Pereira, R. and Baranauskas, M. C. C. (2014). Value pie: A culturally informed conceptual scheme for understanding values in design. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pages 122–133, Cham. Springer International Publishing.
  • Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free press, New York, NY, US.
  • Schroeder, D. and Palmer, C. (2003). Technology assessment and the'ethical matrix'. Poiesis & Praxis, 1(4):295–307.
  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Advances in experimental social psychology, volume 25, pages 1–65. Academic Press, Orlando, FL, USA.
  • Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the schwartz theory of basic values. Online readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1):2307–0919.
  • Spiekermann, S. (2015). Ethical IT innovation: A valuebased system design approach. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
  • Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness. Penguin Books, London, UK.
  • Thomson, J. J. (1985). The trolley problem. The Yale Law Journal, 94(6):1395–1415.
  • Turilli, M. and Floridi, L. (2009). The ethics of information transparency. Ethics and Information Technology, 11(2):105–112.
  • van den Hoven, J. (2017). Ethics for the digital age: Where are the moral specs? In Informatics in the Future, pages 65–76. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
  • van der Stappen, E. and van Steenbergen, M. (2020). The ethical matrix in digital innovation projects in higher education. In 33RD BLED ECONFERENCE
  • Vinnari, M., Vinnari, E., and Kupsala, S. (2017). Sustainability matrix: Interest groups and ethical theories as the basis of decision-making. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 30(3):349– 366.