smart homes and user va lues
Transkript
smart homes and user va lues
SMART HOMES AND USER VALUES GREGER SANDSTRÖM ULF KEIJER Editors The Urban International Press SMART HOMES AND USER VALUES Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer, Editors 187 Pages, 11 chapters The Urban International Press First published 2007 The Urban International Press Gateshead, The United Kingdom Copyright © The Urban International Press Smart Homes and User Values ISBN 1 - 872811 - 08 - 06 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording or in any information storage or retrieval system without permission in writing from the publishers. The publisher makes no representation, expressed or implied with regard to the accuracy of the information contained in this book and cannot accept any legal responsibility of liability for any errors or omissions that may be made. ISBN 1 - 872811 - 08 - 06 Cover and Layout Design: Emre and Esra Akbil - info@ed-zine.com Layout and DTP Work: Ahmet Daghan Önkol - daghanonkol@hotmail.com Technical Editing: Yonca Hürol, Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC. To order this book go to: www.openhouse-int.com or e-mail carol.nicholson@ribaenterprises.com , SMART HOMES AND USER VALUES Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer, THE EDITORS Dr Greger Sandström Dr Greger Sandström, PhD (eng.) and BBA, is employed by JM, leading developer of housing and residential areas in the Nordic region, joined the research group at KTH in 2001. His doctoral thesis is very much oriented towards the theme of the present book, Smart homes and User values. Greger Sandström represents a figure seldom present in research, a profound industrial experience and a clear zest for research in its proper sense. Dr Ulf Keijer Dr Ulf Keijer, D.Sc. and M.LL. has worked, since the beginning of the 1990s, with research and development on information technology and its societal implications in various field. Of primary regard has been issues concerning user benefit from IT and its applications. Since 1997 Ulf Keijer serves as professor and research team leader at the Architectural School at KTH within a programme named IT-supported Service Infrastructures in the Built Environment. i ii CHAPTER 1: HOW TO UNDERSTAND THE BOOK 1 2 4 1 Content Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer 1.1. Introduction 1.2. The history of Smart Homes 1.3. Structure of the book 7 9 11 14 16 19 23 24 24 CHAPTER 2: USER VALUES OF SMART HOME FUNCTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL LIVING 7 Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer 2.1. Introduction 2.2. Useful technology 2.3. The study objects 2.4. Choice of method for the evaluation 2.5. Results 2.6. Discussion 2.7. Conclusions 2.8. Acknowledgement 2.9. References 27 39 42 43 27 28 30 CHAPTER 3: MAINSTREAMING SMART TECHNOLOGY FOR OLDER PEOPLE: CONSUMER VIEWS AND WIDER IMPLICATIONS Alison Bowes and Gillian McColgan 3.1. Introduction 3.2. The West Lothian programme 3.3. Evaluating the West Lothian programme 3.3.1. Housing with Care - clients' and carers' perspectives 3.3.2. Home safety services - clients' and carers' perspectives 3.3.3. Staff experiences and perspectives 3.4. Conclusions 3.5. Acknowledgements 3.6. References iii 65 67 CHAPTER 4:SMART HOME TECHNOLOGY: ON THE MOVE TO AMBIENT AND INVISIBLE INTELLIGENCE 45 Ilse Bierhoff and Ad van Berlo 4.1. Introduction 4.2. Smart Home Environment 4.2.1. Hierarchal classes of smart homes 4.2.2. The residents 4.2.3. Smart home applications and services 4.2.4. Standardization 4.3. Smart Home Projects in the Netherlands 4.3.1. Common used applications and services 4.4. Evaluating Smart Home Projects 4.4.1. The evaluated projects 4.4.2. Methods of evaluating 4.5. Results of the evaluations 4.5.1. The building process 4.5.2. The installation of smart home technology 4.5.3. Applications and services 4.5.4. Communication towards the residents 4.5.5. Communication towards relatives, nursing staff and call centers 4.5.6. Service 4.5.7. Utility, usability and accessibility 4.6. Conclusion 4.7. References 69 69 69 71 73 75 76 77 78 80 81 57 56 52 45 45 CHAPTER 5:SMART HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE - USER PERSPECTIVES AND PROFESSIONAL DILEMMAS Malcolm J. Fisk 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Northern Ireland 5.3. Policy Context 5.4. The 'Going Home, Staying Home' Project 5.5. The Tyrone and Fermanagh 'Telecare' Project 5.6. Evaluation Outcomes 5.7. The Northern Ireland Projects in Context 5.8. Dilemmas that Affect the Spread of Smart Technologies 5.9. Conclusion 5.10. References iv CHAPTER 6:AUTOMATED BEHAVIOURAL MONITORING AS A VARIATION OF SMART HOME Anthony P. Glascock and David M. Kuznik 6.1. Introduction 6.2. Design Principles 6.3. What to Monitor 6.4. System Development 6.5. Technological Description 6.5.1. Residential system 6.5.2. Web-based remote monitoring site 6.6. Field Test 6.7. Reliability and Validity 6.7.1. Reliability 6.7.2. Validity 6.8. The Pyramid 6.9. Pilot Study 6.9.1. Care Provision 6.10. Testimonials 6.11. Conclusion 6.12. Acknowledgements 6.13. References 83 83 84 86 87 88 90 91 93 95 100 101 103 103 111 113 115 107 107 CHAPTER 7: POST OCCUPANCY EVALUATION OF DIGITAL HOME IN KOREA 107 Yeunsook Lee 7.1. Introduction 7.2. Background 7.2.1. The Housing Market in Korea 7.2.2. Development of Housing with Added Value 7.2.3. Digital Services and Emergence of Digital Living 7.3. Overview of the Studied Digital Home 7.4. Method 7.5. Results 7.5.1. Description of the Participants 7.5.2. Use of Digital Functions 7.5.3. Preference for Digital Functions 7.5.4. Attitudes toward Digital Home Yeunsook Lee and Hyunjeong Lee 8.1. Introduction 8.2. Background 8.2.1. The History of Korean Housing 8.2.2. Housing Supported by Information and Telecommunication Technologies 8.3. Method 8.4. Results 8.4.1. Demographics of the Respondents 8.4.2. Use of Digital Home Services 8.5. Preference of Digital Home Appliance and Controller 8.6. Use of Internet and On-line Services 8.7. Attitude toward and Perception on Digital Living 8.8. Conclusion 8.9. References CHAPTER 8:USE OF COMPUTER-BASED SERVICES AND PREFERENCES FOR DIGITAL HOME SERVICES IN IT-SUPPORTED APARTMENTS IN KOREA 7.5.5. Internet Use 7.6. Conclusion 7.7. References 141 132 132 135 136 139 123 119 121 v CHAPTER 9: INTEGRATED SYSTEMS IN SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES AN INCOMPLETE INNOVATION 141 143 143 146 148 149 151 153 157 162 162 162 129 130 123 123 Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer 9.1. Introduction 9.2. The innovation concept 9.3. The competence bloc theory 9.4. The study object 9.5. The Swedish construction market 9.6. The organisational model of the Smart Living development 9.7. Method 9.8. Results 9.9. Discussion 9.10. Conclusions 9.11. Acknowledgement 9.12. References vi Mats Edenius 10.1. Introduction 10.2. Notes about the smart home concept, scientific view and methodology 10.3. To adapt to an unstable system 10.4. The importance of transparency and its profound effects 10.5. The complexity of a smart living system 10.6. Epilogue 10.7. References 10.8. Appendix 179 165 166 168 170 173 175 176 177 CHAPTER 10: HOW TO BRING ´SMARTNESS´ INTO A ´SMART HOME´ SYSTEM 165 CHAPTER 11: LESSONS LEARNT AND CONCLUSIONS CONTRIBUTORS 188 187 Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer INDEX 2 measurement on their residential premises. In this chapter three particular housing projects equipped with a number of IT functions will be described. The projects were developed in Stockholm, Sweden, between 1999 and 2002. They all show characteristics as to be recognised as smart homes, even integrated smart homes. The projects were Vallgossen with in all 126 flats, Ringblomman with 59 flats, and Smart Living which comprises six detached single-family houses. The Smart Living will be elaborated in chapter 9 further on. Typical examples of IT based functions are alarm systems detecting fire, leakage and intrusion, measurement of energy consumption for each separate flat, lighting control, security camera at the front door, electronic keys, bookings of common facilities (e.g. the common laundry room - a typical Swedish facility) and reception boxes. Regarding scope and content, these three projects are much alike but their designs USER VALUES OF SMART HOME FUNCTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL LIVING Greger Sandström and Ulf Keijer 2.1 Introduction In the end of the last century a huge optimism prevailed around the concept of Smart Homes, in Sweden and elsewhere. Building developers and real estate companies wished to become a part of the smart homes development along with the prospering IT-industry. Buzz words like 'future living' and 'connected homes' were aired in many boardrooms those days. The developers' interest was based primary on the assumption that homes equipped with the visionary IT label would be easier to sell on the market. The smart technology should either be installed from the beginning or be offered as an option. Real estate companies saw an opportunity to lower their administrative costs by modern technology, in addition to the opportunity to let or sell their flats more easily. Another typical argument of the age was that a real estate company would gain goodwill by appearing as an environment-friendly enterprise, offering individual energy 8 differ. The projects were at the time, without doubt, the state-of-the-art of what was offered on the open housing market in Sweden considering the range of applications. And so far, more than five years later, anything similar regarding the comprehensiveness - is hardly seen on the market. Largely, the availability of technology defined the adopted functionality of the installed IT equipment. At this point of time there was limited knowledge in general of the consumers' opinions and perceived user values of smart functions in homes. In order to gain further experience and knowledge about the potential residents' appreciation of different IT functions, a Swedish housing developer and the Royal Institute of Technology, started a research project characterised as "Smart Homes - Buying Motives and User Values". The aim of the study was to evaluate and analyse user values of installed smart homes technology in real homes. The questions to be examined concerned what kind of technology the residents really ask for and what demands the residents put on different IT solutions, their design and functionality. Central concepts in the survey were usability, usefulness and accessibility. Usability uncovers when a product is used. Usefulness characterises the ability of a product or a service to support the user in fulfilling a task or satisfying a need. Usefulness and usability are easily confused. A product or a service can be demanded by a user and appear useful to him or her on first sight. Still in practice it remains useless. It may depend on the fact that the user GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER does not understand how he or she is supposed to use the function. It can also be out of order or not available when asked for. One could say that the function is not accessible. Accessibility is complementary to usability in order to attain usefulness. The first evaluations in Vallgossen and Ringblomman were carried out in 2002. Twenty households were interviewed once or twice when they just had moved in. In all 31 interviews were completed. The households revealed full satisfaction with their new dwellings. From other research it is a wellknown phenomenon that respondents seldom express criticism on their own significant purchases, including that of their choice of dwellings (SOLOMON, BAMOSSY and ASKEGAARD, 1999). They have invested much money and they will generally stick to their decisions. Further, when the members of the households were asked to judge the IT functions, they were generally very positive, also if the households had not used them. A number of respondents stated that they probably would use more of the functions when they had got used to them and understood them better. The results showed that the foremost factors for buying a new flat principally were three: "the location in the urban area", "the floor layout" and that the purchase was a "brand new production". As to the IT functions, they were not the conclusive reason for buying these flats, the households considered them rather to be a boon. There was no extra charge for the IT functions in comparison to other flats of similar sizes and location. Worth mentioning is that a User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living substantial number of the residents that actually bought these flats were IT professionals of different categories or were otherwise skilled IT users. It is reasonable to assume that these buyers were interested in the offered IT functions more than an average consumer. It can also be assumed that these persons appreciated a value, or as it were said: "fun", to have a home with a technology that distinguishes it from homes in general. If not being the decisive reason for the purchase of the flats, the IT functions still were considered to be important. Functions increasing safety (e.g. alarms) and saving time (e.g. booking of common facilities) were most valued. On the other hand, the possibility to energy conservation and the access to single non-integrated functions were less appreciated. A comprehensive report of the 2002 interview round is presented in SANDSTRÖM et al. (2003). The remaining part of this chapter will be devoted to a description of the abovementioned smart home projects in connection with the 2005 user evaluation and the results thereof. To the authors' knowledge few, if any, similar evaluations are available that monitor the residents' long-term use of installed IT functions in their homes and their views of them. In addition another task is to use these evaluations to outline and examine a model considered suitable for evaluations of IT functions in the home environment. 2.2. Useful technology 9 Introductorily three central concepts were mentioned for the study: usefulness, usability and accessibility. The notion of usability has shifted over time from focusing only on the man as a user over to perceiving the product and its use in a context. Most methods and techniques, like usability and system development methods, take notice on the connection between a product's expected usefulness and the design of the product, often however rather superficially. Usability is not an objective, observable and intrinsic product quality such as colour or a specific technical function. Instead, usability is a quality that comes into being at the very moment the product is used. The international standard ISO defines usability as: "Usability is the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use."(ISO 9241:11) Further ISO defines effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction and context of use as: Effectiveness: 'Accuracy and completeness with which users achieve specified goals.' Efficiency: 'Resources expended in relation to the accuracy and completeness with which users achieve goals.' 10 Satisfaction: 'Freedom from discomfort, and positive attitudes towards the use of the product.' Context of use: 'Users, tasks, equipment (hardware, software and materials), and the physical and social environments in which a product is used.' Figure 2-1 Relationship between usefulness, usability and accessibility when evaluating smart home systems. GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER These definitions are certainly valuable as they make it possible to discuss usability in order to attain to an unambiguous understanding of the concept. The ISO definition involves some essential aspects, more important for the user than what is commonly discussed regarding the usability. The concept usefulness is also a part of 2-1 the ISO definition of usability. Usefulness can be cost effective it is defined to offer usefulness to defined as what the user wants to achieve with the resident. a product, i.e. the user's goal. Usefulness But in order really to offer usefulness, explains if a product or a service helps the user such a function demands usability and to satisfy a need or solve a problem. accessibility. The concept usability includes One has to bear in mind that the ISO aspects of both physical/technical and cognitive definition originates from the development of usability. Physical/technical usability involves ergonomic requirements for office work, chiefly aspects of the feasibility to expand, integrate, concerning human work in front of a visual individualise and upgrade the function or the display terminal. Earlier experiences from system. Cognitive usability refers to how easy it evaluations of IT in homes suggest that usability is to understand, to learn and to use the and accessibility in combination realise function. Intuitiveness is a key property to usefulness and may offer benefit to the user achieve the desired easiness in these respects. (SANDSTRÖM, 2003). A tentative model The concept accessibility includes describing the relationships between these technical aspects such as response time, set-up concepts is shown in figure 2-1 below. time and availability. Availability consists of upConcepts discussed below refer to the figure. time, mean-time to repair and mean-time If a new function in a home enhances comfort, between failures. According to IEEE Standard improves easiness, increases safety or is more Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology Mean time to repair (MTTR): The expected or observed time required to repair a system or component and return it to normal operations. Up-time: The period of time during which a system or component is operational and in service. Set-up time: The period of time during which a system or component is being prepared for a specific operation. Availability: The degree to which a system or component is operational and accessible when required for use. Response time: The elapsed time between the end of an inquiry or command to an interactive computer system and the beginning of the system's response. (610.12-1990) these components are defined as (www.ieee.org): User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living Figure 2-2 Vallgossen. 2-2 11 Mean time between failures (MTBF): The expected or observed time between consecutive failures in a system or component. It is important to remember that usefulness can only be achieved if the goals of both usability and accessibility are met, not just one of them. This is symbolised by two dashed lines connecting them in figure 2-1. In addition, the model has to be placed in a context, represented by the grey area in figure 2-1. The context involves aspects such as trust, culture, knowledge, gender, economy, etc. The user must feel trust while applying the function. If not, it will not be usable, at least in the way it was designed for. The trust concept is complex. According to CHOPRA and WALLACE (2003) trust is an attitude held by an individual. It is influenced by the personality of the trustor (the resident) and by the attributes of the recipient (the function), and it in turn influences the behaviour of the trustor, but it is equivalent to none of them. Trust is an attitude composed of two parts: confidence in positive outcomes, and a willingness to modify one's behaviour in expectation of those outcomes. Thus an integrated definition of trust recognises it as the union of three elements: a trustee (the function) to whom the trust is directed, confidence that the trust will be upheld, and a willingness to act on that confidence. 2.3. The study objects In the central parts of Stockholm, two residential 12 housing units, Vallgossen and Ringblomman, were constructed during 1999-2002. These projects were characterised by modern architecture and design, and, very specifically, by an advanced set of IT functions aiming to support the inhabitants in their daily living. Vallgossen, figure 2-2, comprises 126 flats in all. The sizes vary from 44 to 144 square meters. Ringblomman, figure 2-3, comprises 59 flats in total. Here the flats' sizes vary from 46 to 185 square meters. The first occupancy in Vallgossen took place in September 2001 and in Ringblomman in February 2002. Regarding the IT system in Vallgossen, all 126 flats have a set of basic functions of type 1, see table 2-1, while 21 flats have some additional, more advanced functions, type 2. Another two specific flats served as test units for assisted living, SANDSTRÖM and KEIJER (2003). These latter flats will not be commented upon further here. All 59 flats in Ringblomman 2-3 2-1 Table 2-1 Description of the IT functions in Vallgossen and Ringblomman. Figure 2-3 Ringblomman. GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER have the same IT functions, similar to the type 2 ones in Vallgossen. All functions are more or less integrated, meaning that a central system controls the functions and authorises them to influence and interact with each other. The IT system in the flats is called "the home network". For a detailed list of the IT functions in User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living Figure 2-4 Description of the communication between a flat and the Internet and the home network. 2-4 Vallgossen and Ringblomman, see table 2-1. The IT system in Vallgossen and Ringblomman was developed by the company e2-Home, a joint-venture between two major enterprises, Ericsson and Electrolux, in Sweden. Electrolux wished to develop their white goods products into solutions for e-homes, i.e. smart homes. Ericsson was thinking about network solutions for residential users in its Home Communication Concept (MADSEN and ULHØL, 2002). So the companies established on equal footing in October 1999 a new company called "e2-Home". It was to take care of their joint interest based on the Home Communication Concept (HCC). The idea was to offer a number of applications on a communication platform. The platform was based on an open standard, the OSGi, for homes designed for "Intelligent Living". The market for the platform, however, did not develop according to expectations; the jointventure company went into trouble and presently has a low profile on the market. Today, the maintenance and the support of the home network are taken care of by a third company. In late 2004 the joint-venture company initiated discussions with the residents in Vallgossen and Ringblomman to replace their IT system with a 13 simpler one, based on the web. The IT system is located at two main places: the main server site and the home network. The main server site is the back-end site of the system and contains the central servers. It is the centre of services, and handles all information and administration of the system as a whole. The home networks service each single flat. The access network connects the main server with the home networks. The residential gateway is the heart of the home network. It controls all of the home devices and exposes them to the main server site. It collects home information and status data on home devices and sends them to the main server site. In addition, it handles local functions in the home network. This structure offers the support organisation a possibility to remotely control the residential gateway and the touch screen in the home network. In figure 2-4, a communication schema is shown. Further, in each flat there are two different wire-based networks, one for the home network and one for the Internet. They are connected via a common access point for all flats located in the basement. The access point is connected to the access provider (AP) who directs the user to the home network or the Internet. The home network functions are controlled via a terminal in every flat. During the construction phase it was planed to equip the flats with a refrigerator with a touch screen. This product was never manufactured and was replaced by a laptop computer in Vallgossen and by a touch screen placed on the wall in 14 Ringblomman. Figure 2-5 shows the home network screen in Ringblomman and Vallgossen. It displays the picture that appears when the resident clicks on the magnet-like icon "My Home". Here the resident can get information regarding safety functions like alarms for fire, burglar and leakage, the status of the flat energy measurement, the indoor temperature, etc. Figure 2-5 The home network screen. Left at the top of the figure there are four circles which symbolise magnets. They are called Calender (Kalender), My Home (Mitt Hem), Bookings (Bokningar) and Information (Uppgifter). GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER 2.4. Choice of method for the evaluation The focus of the study is on the relationship between man and the built environment. The focus on the user is further accentuated with the application of a Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE). POE is an established method applied in evaluations of built environment (PREISER et al., 1988). Two evaluation design alternatives were considered for the study: one based on 2-5 User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living qualitative methods and another requiring quantitative data. Qualitative methods permit the evaluator to study selected issues in depth and in detail, generally by direct interviews of a limited number of respondents. With a quantitative approach it is possible to capture data of a larger sample of people, often, however, to the expense of a reduced set of problems to be asked about. This gives a broad, generalised set of findings presented succinctly. By contrast, qualitative methods typically produce a vast amount of detailed information about a distinctly smaller number of people or cases. The latter increases the understanding of the studied cases, however reduces the possibility to generalise the findings underpinned by statistical analysis. If one wants to achieve some form of generalisation, the sample need to be randomised in some sense. Case studies, on the other hand, become particularly useful where one needs to understand a unique situation in depth, and where it is possible to identify cases which contain rich information. For the present study, Vallgossen and Ringblomman are the objects for case studies, and consequently a qualitative method was chosen. Unstructured interviews can provide the interviewer with a wider range of qualitative data than more structured types of interviews. The essence of unstructured interviews is to understand rather than to explain (DENZIN and LINCOLN, 1998). As this was a new field of evaluation it was considered important to understand the respondents' experiences in connection with the introduction of new 15 technology. Unstructured interviews were chosen to give a wider perspective of the adoption and use of these new services. Examples of questions asked are the following: z what IT functions have been useful in your daily life? z how often does your household use the IT functions in the home network? z could the functions have been designed differently? z what demands should a resident put on the technology? z does this technology add some value to the household living in the flat? The assessment of the usefulness of the functions was not estimated in monetary terms, rather by soft values like safety, easiness and comfort. The purpose of the study was to investigate if and how the residents' behaviour regarding the separate IT functions changed over time; thus, their long-term use was placed in focus. The objective was to interview the same households once again that were interviewed in 2002. However, a number of households had already moved. In addition to the ones staying six new respondents were selected. So, respondents V7, V8 and R5, R6, R7, R8 were not interviewed earlier, see table 22. The households chosen for the study represent the most frequent categories of households and flats in Vallgossen and Ringblomman. 16 2.5. Results The 2005 evaluation showed two distinct types of results. First, there were concrete results from the interviews, providing opinions and attitudes related to the installed technology. Second, knowledge and experiences from the performance of the leading actor for the smart home development, the joint-venture company, could be collected. This latter type of result became useful in order to understand and interpret the answers of the respondents. In table 2-3 below, all results are Table 2-2 Data over the selected households and their flats. GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER 2-2 displayed in a condensed form. In the following some typical and interesting results from interviews with different residents in Vallgossen and Ringblomman are presented, as comments to the table. Vallgossen - experiences 2005 The interviews in Vallgossen took place in February 2005, some three and a half year after the completion of the flats. As said, the purpose was to gain knowledge about the households long term use and experience regarding the IT functions. User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living The most useful function controlled by the home network was the booking opportunity for the common laundry facility. No comparable interest was shown for any other available function of the home system, such as the calendar, e-mail and e-notes. The away lock and functions activated by the away lock were largely appreciated. It offered a feeling of safety albeit few consciously comprehended the function as such. They locked two locks at the front door as an old habit - not in order consciously to activate the away lock. The electronic key to the entrance door and common spaces offered a feeling of safety, too. Some households mentioned that even if the person they meet is unknown, e.g. in the basement, they were certain that that person did have access and was allowed to be there. All respondents in Vallgossen stated that they had had no problem accessing the home network. At the beginning some problems occurred, which became less pronounced later on. The respondents revealed that they probably would use more of the available functions if the set-up time had been shorter. One particular household pointed to the disadvantage of using a laptop computer to cancel a false alarm, as it takes several minutes only to start the computer; a screen on the wall with a fixed connection to the home network would have been a much better solution, according to the view of this particular respondent. Ringblomman - experiences 2005 The results from the interviews of the 17 households in Ringblomman are presented in this section. The interviews took place in January and February 2005. The most useful function in the home network according to the respondents was the booking system for the common laundry facilities, including the indication of the status of the washing machines (in use or out of use). Another useful function was the broadband connection to the Internet. Opinions regarding other functions differ. Some appreciate the alarm system and the away lock, but some others do not. One respondent looked at the energy consumption recorder every day; other households did not pay any attention at all to this particular function. The function to control lights in the home was found to be good. However, as the system did not control every outlet in the flat it appeared to be imperfect, especially as often wrong outlets were the controllable ones. The respondents did not use the calendar, e-notes or e-mail due to difficulties in using the touch screen for writing. Only one of the respondents used the reception box, however, only for returning things to friends when they are not at home, not for shopping deliveries for which it was intended. Most respondents use the home network every day to look at the indoor temperature, the weather forecast and the clock. The use of the terminal and the home network has diminished over time, chiefly due to its low reliability. For example, the individual energy measurement was often faulty, as was the weather forecast. The respondents did not trust the displayed information and therefore 18 they did not use it. The reason why they use the weather forecast is more out of curiosity, e.g. to compare the weather forecast on the TV with the one predicted by the home network. The temperature controlling system did not meet the respondents' expectations either. The residents were told that they themselves could create a comfortable indoor climate and preset different temperatures in different rooms, which proved to be impossible in practice. Due to the open floor layout, with the influence of the heat level of adjacent flats, and the sunshine influx the controlling system became confused. Opinions related to the electronic key were patchy, too. Most respondents appreciated the electronic key for the lobby and for common spaces, however, not for the front door. They reported that they felt uncertain about its proper functionality, which could turn out to be really crucial if they would not be able to enter their homes at all. The maintenance of the technology was reported to be a problem, too. The cost for repair and maintenance is a factor that generally turned out to be too expensive. Another reported problem was that the residents were not able to identify the responsible body for the electronic key system. The responsibility seemed to be shared between several actors to the inconvenience of the end user, e.g. raising questions as follows: z is it the company that developed the electronic key system? z is it the company that installed the electronic key system on the construction site? 2-3 Table 2-3 The households' opinions of the home network in Vallgossen and Ringblomman. GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER z is it the company that installed the front doors? z is it the company responsible for the integration of the electronic key system into the home network? User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living Discussion These questions of where, or with whom, the responsibility of maintenance rested were not answered during the whole time of occupancy being surveyed. Another reported disadvantage with the home network was the long response times. The response time was regarded to be too long for several otherwise desired functions, e.g. the security camera at the front door and the automatic hall lamp, which turned on the lamp when the away lock was deactivated. Sometimes - however, not always, it took several minutes after the residents entered their home before the light was on. 2.6. In this section the households' revealed opinions about the technology in their homes will be reviewed along with the different components constituting the model of the concept usefulness described in the introduction to this chapter and depicted in figure 2-1, which is referred to in the following discussion. Usability The overall usability is separated into two distinguished structures, viz. physical/technical usability and cognitive usability. Further the physical/technical usability consists of the user's ability to expand, integrate, individualise and upgrade the function. Ability to expand Some of the respondents would appreciate a 19 possibility to expand the system on their own, typically by installing new functions. This would improve possibilities to choose between functions and to differentiate the functions by price. One respondent mentioned that it seemed to be a bit peculiar that no new services had been launched during the time of their occupancy. Ability to integrate A fact is that the home network cannot be integrated with other systems or applications. Many of the respondents have electronic calendars, e.g. mobile phones or PDAs (Personal Digital Assistant). But, since the calendar in the home network cannot be synchronised with other electronic calendars they did not use it. On the other hand, if they were able to synchronise, it would have been a very useful function. KLAMER (2002) reported similar findings. No resident used the e-mail function. One reason is that one could not read or send attachments. Another reason was that the respondents already had one or several other email addresses and had no use for more. Ability to individualise Most of the respondents mentioned they would have appreciated if they could have been able to select their own service package and only pay for the selected functions. On the other hand, as one of the households of Ringblomman remarked, this may lead to a situation when no one pays for any function. However, it was markedly emphasised 20 that the idea with a home network is a good one. This kind of technology will indeed become more common in the future, but this particular system has not fulfilled the demands on uptime and response time. Ability to upgrade Most of the respondents pointed to the fact that it should have been possible to put a larger responsibility on the resident for the maintenance of the technology, e.g. for upgrading and booting the system. But, at the same time, there must be a possibility to call a serviceman, if the fault cannot be remedied by the residents themselves. The resident needs the opportunity to choose whether to take on the responsibility for the maintenance or not. It should not be possible to force a resident to take this responsibility if he or she does not want to. Cognitive usability The graphical user interface (the GUI) of the home network was generally perceived to be intuitive, easy to learn and to remember. Most of the respondents never used the manual. They knew what to do when sitting in front of the screen. In the late 1990s a group at North Carolina State University proposed seven general principles of universal design (STORY et al., 1998). These principles were intended to cover all areas of design and are equally applicable to the design of interactive systems. One of the principles is about simplicity and intuition, regardless of prior knowledge or GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER experience, language skill or level of concentration of the user. The design needs to support the user's expectations. It should not be unnecessarily complex and should be organised to facilitate access to the most important areas. These principles was fulfilled to a great extent with the particular graphical user interface installed in Vallgossen and Ringblomman. One should bear in mind that similar principles was known much earlier though. KEIJER (1980) cites JONES (1978) who emphasised that the manmachine dialogue should simulate the human dialogue as much as possible, in terms of expectation, prediction and implication. The possibility of experimenting with the program was considered an important possibility. Finally, the user interface should be designed in order to generate over all confidence. The user needs to feel that his problem or desire is in safe hands; he or she will, if the user interface is systematic, predictable and consistent. Accessibility The terms affecting accessibility are response time, set-up time and availability. In addition availability consists of up-time, mean time to repair and mean time between failures. How these terms affect accessibility will now be discussed, based on the results from the 2005 interviews. Response time The response time of a function turned out to be an important component of the accessibility of the home network or a function. Two typical examples are the security camera at the front User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living door, available both in the Vallgossen and the Ringblomman, and the touch screen, installed in Ringblomman only. The respondents in Ringblomman pointed out that it took too long time to engage the security camera. The time lapse between the moment a visitor activated the security camera till the residents were able to reply was long enough to cause a visitor to believe that the resident was not at home. The idea with a camera picture of the person who wants to pay a visit was found perfect, but the system was too slow to be useful. The usefulness of many functions in the home network was influenced by the poor writing possibilities of the touch screen. Using the touch screen to produce an e-mail or an appointment in the calendar was tedious. Many of the residents in Ringblomman would have preferred a separate keyboard. In Vallgossen, the reason for not using these functions, on the other hand, were due to a boringly long set-up time. Another kind of revealed dissatisfaction with the response time was the residents' inability to perform their tasks by using the home network. Many of the respondents in Ringblomman mentioned that it took too long time to browse around. It ought to be as fast as an ordinary PC, otherwise it was not interesting. Set-up time Set-up time is defined as the time required for the users to gain access to the functions in their home network. The respondents made clear that the hardware, i.e. the laptop computer and 21 the touch screen, were the crucial parts of the home network and decided the actual range of use of the system. In Vallgossen, there was only one socket in each flat connecting the home network; other sockets could only be used for the Internet. The laptop computer had two different partitions, causing a person to restart the computer every time to switch between the Internet and the home network. If one had to move oneself physically and to restart the laptop computer, in order to connect to the home network, it would never have been done. In Ringblomman, on the other hand, it was not necessary to login to the home network. The touch screen was always connected to the home network. The respondents could easily watch the weather forecast, the clock and the indoor temperature, without any fixes. In Vallgossen most of the residents had their home network laptop computer shut off or converted to surfing on the Internet. This was to be interpreted that there is no need to visit the home network. Some respondents mentioned that it probably would have been better with a dedicated screen for the home network and a separate laptop computer for surfing on the Internet. Uptime Some parts of the hardware were remotely controlled by the support organisation, e.g. the residential gateway in each flat and the touch screen in Ringblomman flats. In the beginning some problems were identified; they needed to be rebooted regularly. Most of the faults were 22 taken care of by booting the gateway or the touch screen. After about a year the support organisation began to boot all gateways and touch screens as a preventive measure. This was done during the nights minimising the influence on the residents' usage. Some of the respondents mentioned that they had stopped calling the support organisation, as they had no absolute need for the home network. They could wait a couple of days. One day or another the system will be up and running. No respondent in Vallgossen mentioned any problems with the home network. This could have been referred to the function of the very terminal. The households login to the home network once or twice a week to access the booking system. By having a shorter set-up time - set-up was possible by touching the screen when passing by - in Ringblomman, the residents were more often aware of the system and if it was up and running or not. Mean time to repair This term was earlier described as the expected or observed time to repair of a system or component and to return it into normal operation. A good example showing why this is important is the respondents' opinions regarding the separate energy measurement and billing flat by flat. In the very beginning some initial problems with the energy monitoring functions were noticed. The system was designed assuming inhabitants in all flats, which was not the case. Thus, it became impossible to compare one's own usage of energy with the average use in the building. On GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER top of that, in Ringblomman all water meters were defective. The respondents revealed that most of them adopted a wait-and-see policy until the system operated as promised. In 2005 many stated that the energy metering system was of no use for them. They could not rely on the energy measurement from the beginning; to use it later on was highly influenced by the previous mistrust. Mean time between failures A substantial part of the respondents in Ringblomman mentioned that their initial expectations on the home network system were never fulfilled from the beginning. Better uptime and higher reliability than experienced were anticipated. Context Last but not least the context. Context is a background aspect, albeit not less important, and is related to usefulness. Cultural experience, knowledge, gender, economy, trust, all aspects contribute to specific user's ability to experience usefulness. Within the framework of this analysis the notion of context cannot be explored very much further. Only the trust aspect will be touched upon briefly, in order to give a hint of what can be observed during such in-dept interviews conducted for the presented investigation. Further reading on aspects of context and usefulness, see e.g. DAVIS et al. (1989) and PREECE et al. (2002). It was revealed during the interviews that the trust of technology is important for the residents' acceptance of the offered not so well User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living understood functions of a smart home. An individual can have use for a function and even consider it to be useful; still he or she does not set about to use it because lack of trust. Trust can be oriented towards the function itself: "probably it will not function", or towards oneself: "I will not be able to manage it". In Vallgossen the residents have two locks in their front door operated by the same key. The upper lock activates the away-lock function. The functions (electricity, alarms, water supply) due to be activated or deactivated when the away-lock is on or off, respectively, were highly appreciated by the residents in the Vallgossen. These functions were believed to increase safety and the proper behaviour of the away-lock over time would enforce trust. Eventually, trust is supposed to infuse a sense of well-being into the individual, which could be said to be the ultimate goal of the different functions of a smart home. Almost the same functions were activated in Ringblomman via the away-lock. The difference at Ringblomman in comparison to Vallgossen was that the electronic lock was operated via a keypad. If the resident wished to leave her home without activating the away-lock she just had to close the door to lock it. To activate or to deactivate the away-lock it was necessary to dial a code. First, dialling this code was found laborious. Second, the keypad did not always respond appropriately. Sometimes the resident had to dial the code three or four times before the lock activated or deactivated. Due to this uncertainty and inconvenience some residents in Ringblomman installed ordinary 23 mechanical door locks; the electronic lock was not to trust. Another example on the importance of trust was discussed above in the section mean time to repair. 2.7. Conclusions The qualitative approach in the evaluation of IT functions in homes was found to be useful and appropriate for the objective of the investigation. It gave a large room for variation in response. Small and individual details, which very likely would have been lost in a questionnaire, were allowed to be expressed by the informants and could be captured by the interviewer. Although the IT functions were not a conclusive reason for buying a particular smart homes flat, they still have a specific value for those living in it. Functions contributing to increasing safety and security (e.g. alarms) and to saving time (e.g. booking of common facilities) were throughout the most appreciated functions. However, the residents' revealed opinions showed the importance of the usability and accessibility in order to appreciate its usefulness. It is not enough only to fulfil the user's demands or wishes expressed in terms of functions, equipment and services. The usefulness of the matter, in its full range, has to be considered. The home networks installed in Vallgossen and Ringblomman, totally 185 flats, were not installed elsewhere before. Tests of the 24 home networks were performed only in laboratory prior to the site installations. As a consequence, not all possible faults and errors were detected in advance. The residents were to find them. Coping with a new and unstable technology is not the best environment for imposing trust between the user and the system. Despite lacking functionality in many respects the comprehensive two projects with their unique smart homes installations have offered a tremendous opportunity to learn lessons in order to be able to answer the question: "What requirements are really put on technological systems if they are to be used in a fully unpredictable environment, your own home?" The technology in this area is still developing. The accessibility and usability of the technical systems have to be continuously improved. The functionally of the technology must be secured over time. Cheap maintenance and easy upgrading of the technology will be important issues for the future of smart homes. Even if these conditions are met satisfactorily, a guarantee cannot be set that the technology as a whole will be accepted and asked for. Another issue enters, put aside in the present analysis but of utmost importance, viz. the consumers' willingness to pay. The residents, eventually, have to pay the cost for the technology and the services. Smart homes will remain a hot issue for the future, provided that functional quality is pursued and the users' benefit and comfort are kept in focus. GREGER SANDSTRÖM AND ULF KEIJER 2.8. Acknowledgement The authors gratefully acknowledges the financial support of JM AB, the Swedish research and development program Competitive Building and the Development Fund of the Swedish Construction Industry (SBUF). The academic supervision of the research project is partly funded by the Swedish Formas Research Council. 2.9. References CHOPRA, K. and WALLACE, W.A. (2003). Trust in Electronic Environments. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'03), 6-9 January, 2003. DAVIS, F. D., BAGOZZI, R. P., and WARSHAW, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35, (8). DENZIN, N.K. and LINCOLN, Y.S. (1998) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. Sage Publications, California. IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology (610.12-1990). www.ieee.org ISO 9241-11. (1998). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs). Part 11: Guidance on usability. International Organisation for Standardisation, Switzerland. User Values of Smart Home Functions in Residential Living JONES, P. F. (1978). Four Principles of ManComputer Dialogue. Int. J. of Computer Aided Design, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 197-202. KEIJER, U. (1980). Contributions to Interactive Computer-aided Design. Diss. Royal Institute of Technology, Publication 80:3, Dept. of Bridge Building, Stockholm. KLAMER, L. (2002). Kitchengate: The ScreenFridge innovation - solutions to fulfil a need? In Capabilities in Action - What People do. Editor Klamer, L. and Mante, E. MADSEN, A.S. and ULHØL, J.P. (2002). The innovators dilemma revisited: The Home Communication Concept (HCC). Working Paper 2002-2, Department of Organization and Management, Aarhus School of Business. PREECE, J., SHARP, H., and ROGERS, Y. (2002). Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. New York, John Wiley & Sons. PREISER, W., RABONOWITZ, H. and WHITE, E. (1988). Post-Occupancy Evaluation. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. SANDSTRÖM, G. (2003). Smart Homes - Buying Motives and User Values. An Investigation on Residents' Assessment of IT-supported Services in Three Housing Projects. TRITA-ARK-Research Publications 2003:9. The Architectural School, Stockholm, Sweden. 25 SANDSTRÖM, G. and KEIJER, U. (2003). Alloggi domotici integrati e di addestramento per persone con problemi mentali. Abitare e Anziani Informa, No. 1-2, pp 85-90. SANDSTRÖM, G., KEIJER, U. and WERNER, IB. (2003). Smart Homes Evaluated. Open House International, 28 (4), pp 14-23. SOLOMON, M., BAMOSSY, G. AND ASKEGAARD, S. (1999). Consumer Behaviour - A European Perspective. Prentice Hall, London. STORY, M.F., MUELLER, J.L. and MACE, R.A. (1998). The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities. The Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University, USA.