+‍

Why & HOW did we define our values?



Batya Friedman & David Hendry, authors of Values Sensitive Design: Shaping Technology with Moral Imagination say that "...within lived life, human values do not exist in isolation...Rather in the complexity of human relations and society, values sit in a delicate balance with each other." Our collective values inform how we will interact with one another, work together, and respond to the decisions we make together.  

Believing work can best be accomplished when stakeholders' values are identified and aligned, we looked at the MISPERCEPTIONS people have about the food pantry industry, our FEARS about getting this work done well, and our HOPES for feeding people in Indianapolis. We used those thoughts and feelings to identify our shared VALUES, helping us understand not just our individual values, but what stakeholders across the entire food safety net value. This helped us to understand what values motivate the food pantry ecosystem and drive the behavior of the people who work in it.

‍
+

How did we identify opportunities?

We used a tool called a Thematic Apperception Test to help workshop attendees think objectively about what happens when pantry workers have many people to feed and scarce resources. You can find out more about the origin and uses of this tool here. Attendees were given this worksheet and asked what the pantry worker might be thinking as they try to serve all of the people in line. What strategies could they start to employ?

We first used participants' responses to this scenario to identify barriers in the food pantry environment and then asked participants how to turn those barriers into opportunities. They immediately took to the challenge and began to shift from emotional reactions to strategic thinking, identifying opportunities like collaborating with community partners, creating a backstock for future pantry days, and networking with other pantries for client referral.

‍
+

Why is ideation Valuable?

Our large group used a type of guided ideation process called DIVERGENCE to generate a list of potentially desirable design features for our prototypes. The instructions for ideation were to:
1. Be free of judgment of others' ideas
2. Be open to new possibilities
3. Offer as many ideas as you can think of that would be good to consider during prototyping

In the photo above, you can see the Green Team using our DIVERGENCE on the whiteboard behind them as a guide as they begin to CONVERGE, narrowing the list of features they wanted to include in their proposed design solution based on the values and opportunities we had identified earlier and what they considered to be most beneficial. Diverging first gave the team a wide field of ideas to start with as they began their prototyping work.  Learn more about the use of divergence and convergence for urban planning here.
‍
+

What is a Criteria Matrix?

A Criteria Matrix is a tool that allows you to evaluate multiple design solutions' relative merits simultaneously using an established set of criteria, which are linked to the predicted success of the design solution. This tool offers a mechanism for the objective review and comparison of potential solutions.

Each participant is assigned a certain number of points they can distribute in each section of the matrix. In our case, participants were asked to rank each prototype on a scale of 0-3 for each criterion. Participants' scores in each section of the matrix are added to score the prototype. The prototype that the group feels will most closely satisfy the evaluation criteria will achieve the highest score.
+

Why did we define the problem?

COLLABORATIVE ACTION RESEARCH IN DESIGN (CARD) PROCESS MODEL
We used the Collaborative Action Research in Design Process Model as a guide for how to frame the steps of our design process. The CARD Model was developed by the Herron School of Art + Design at IU Indianapolis, specifically with community development research in mind. The first step of the CARD process is to UNDERSTAND the problem space, followed by the second step, DEFINE the problem statement. Because our format for working together was a one-day workshop, we used background information that was provided during the session and workshop tools that were designed to generate group understanding to develop a shared sense of the problem space. We also agreed upon a pre-defined problem statement during the workshop: "How might we envision a third-party logistics enterprise that supports the food pantry ecosystem?" These activities set the stage for us to move into the CARD Process's iterative design loop, where we began to IDEATE, PROTOTYPE, and EVALUATE our design solutions. Now, we are making our prototypes available to the community for the PLAN and ACT phases.
001

Understanding
the Problem

Before we could begin working together, our group needed to understand and define the problem. Broadly, we understood the importance of asking the question:
‍"How might we decrease the burden on food pantry providers while also increasing the number of people they serve?"

‍Knowing that we needed to narrow the scope of the design workshop, we tightened the focus for our time together and defined the problem more specifically:
"How might we envision a third-party logistics enterprise that supports the food pantry ecosystem?"
‍

Why did we do this?
002

Defining our Values

At the beginning of the workshop, we identified Misconceptions, Hopes, & Fears about feeding people in Indianapolis. We used this information to identify shared values to keep in mind as we made design choices during the day:
‍

Effectiveness
Efficiency
Access
Dignity
Caring
Agency
Health
‍

Why WAS THIS IMPORTANT?
003

Identifying Opportunities

We reflected on the logistics challenges faced by pantries as they try to stock shelves and serve neighbors with limited resources. We identified the following opportunities to consider as we looked for potential solutions to these challenges:
‍

Strategizing
Redeploying resources
Connecting with other pantries
Creating backstock
Reallocating priorities
Creating better communication pathways
‍

HOW DID WE DO THIS?
004

Ideating together

Before we broke into teams for prototyping, our large group spent time ideating features that might be important in a logistics infrastructure for Indianapolis's food pantry system:
‍

Pallet carrying vehicles
Standardized data & order composition
Data availability
Adequate space & staffing at pantries
People trained to drive
Custom delivery software
Real-time inventory info
Pantry collaboration
Accommodation for outliers
Route optimization

Why was this valuable?
005

Prototype 1
Logistics HUbs

The "Blue Team" created a model for organizing logistics hubs throughout the city. This model attempts to create routing efficiency by managing delivery routes in geographic quadrants of the city and by eventually coordinating pickups from food sources and deliveries to pantries such that pantries could place orders from all sources and receive food on commonly expected days & times (think "Amazon Delivery Day").

Geographic
Route Optimization
Centralized
Ordering System
learn more
005

Prototype 2
Drop Zones

The "Green Team" created a model for optimizing the coordination of the ecosystem using as many free and low-cost resources as possible. They proposed inviting students to develop and maintain a custom ordering software to interlink food banks and pantries; they also proposed food banks seek out and utilize skilled volunteers (like retired truck drivers and mechanics) and begin delivering to common drop zones in various areas of the city, allowing pantries to pick up their food orders at closer access points.

Skilled Volunteers
Delivery Drop Zones
learn more
005

Prototype 3
Digital Interface

A third team from Luddy School of Informatics developed a digital prototype during the 2024-25 school year of a software interface that could be used by food banks, food donors (like retailers), and food pantries, for the purpose of inventory control and food ordering. Ultimately, they envision this interface also tying to logistics providers, who could queue orders for delivery as they are placed, similar to an Amazon Marketplace arrangement.

Custom Software
Design
Logistics Interface
learn more



‍



‍
006

Evaluating
the Prototypes

At the end of the workshop, each team presented their prototype ideas to the full group. We used the following criteria to evaluate each prototype, with each team member voting a score of 0-3 in every category:

Is it attainable?
Does it reflect our values?
Are pantries aligned with this concept?
Will suppliers buy in to the concept?

What is a Criteria Matrix?
007

Drawing
a Conclusion

Prototype 1: Logistics Hubs, created by the Blue Team, scored 66 out of a possible 84 points in the Criteria Matrix. Interestingly, all prototypes received a perfect score in values alignment. Prototype 1 actually received the lowest score in Pantry alignment, likely because some pantries may have to adjust their ordering and receiving schedules for this prototype to work. However, the group felt that Prototype 1 was the most attainable prototype and had the best opportunity for supplier buy-in.

Review the winning prototype
get in touch with us
2025 Copyright Amy Perry-Goldsmith