Responsibility by design (RbD) represents a logical extension of Security by Design and Privacy by Design, as I stated in my previous post. But what does that actually mean?
X by design is essentially a form of governance that addresses a specific concern or set of concerns – security, privacy, responsibility or whatever.
- What. A set of concerns that we want to pay attention to, supported by principles, guidelines, best practices, patterns and anti-patterns.
- Why. A set of positive outcomes that we want to attain and/or a set of negative outcomes that we want to avoid.
- When. What triggers this governance activity? Does it occur at a fixed point in a standard process or only when specific concerns are raised? Is it embedded in a standard operational or delivery model?
- For Whom. How are the interests of stakeholders and expert opinions properly considered? To whom should this governance process be visible?
- Who. Does this governance require specialist input or independent review, or can it usually be done by the designers themselves?
- How. Does this governance include some degree of formal verification, independent audit or external certification, or is an informal review acceptable? How much documentation is needed?
- How Much. Design typically involves a trade-off between different requirements, so this is about the weight given to X relative to anything else.
So is this “just” an engineering problem, to be “solved” by engineers taking on greater responsibility for a range of ethical issues? #ResponsibilityByDesign @rameshmedia says we should think of design more as a broader (democratic) conversation.
— Richard Veryard (@richardveryard) June 21, 2018
Check out @katecrawford talking at the Royal Society in London this summer. Just an Engineer.