What stops us from being trauma-informed designers and researchers?

A cute dog overcoming a barrier. Image credit: Tadeusz Lakota via Unsplash.

As designers and researchers, we want to do the right thing by our users and our teams. This includes working in an inclusive, ethical, and trauma-informed way. So why don’t we always implement these behaviours in practice?

To end the workshop I ran at UX Scotland, we co-created a trauma-informed charter as a group. I’m so proud of what the group generated, and I will share it at the end of this blog post. But before we could design the charter, we had to discuss how we can actually bring our principles into practice.

In the workshop, the group came up with many ideas about how to apply trauma-informed principles to their work (find the full collection of ideas in this post). They could bring some of these ideas into their very next research session — great! Others… not so much. This is because of constraints.

We all face constraints within our roles. These could be related to budget, time, entrenched ways of working, or simply a lack of awareness. To give us a better chance of embedding some of these ideas, I wanted us to think about the barriers we already face. If we identify the constraints, we can come up with strategies to work around them.

What constraints do we face as researchers and designers?

I shared a story of an experience I had in user research that was not trauma-informed. Both the researcher and I could have done better, but I’ll save that story for another post. Thinking about that example, I recognised some of the constraints we were working within on that project:

• Time constraints the project was incredibly fast-paced which left us little time to plan and reflect
• Agile delivery cycles there was a release every single week, this meant that we often had to press ahead with research if we wanted our designs to be evidence-based
• Lack of training and awareness of trauma-informed approaches at the time, I wasn’t aware of trauma-informed working and I don’t remember anyone on the team talking about it either
• No trauma-informed processes and protocols: we had no defined processes for trauma-informed working, or processes in place to protect the researchers against vicarious trauma
• Lack of buy-in from senior stakeholders: related to lack of awareness, this simply wasn’t an issue being spoken about at senior levels

After discussing this, the group also shared their experiences and barriers they had faced. These included:

• not having control over timescales
• not always having the power to enact trauma-informed practices
• organisation cultures which are not always set up to let us do this work
• financial barriers

Why understanding constraints is crucial

Identifying the constraints we face in our own organisations means we can come up with targeted strategies for embedding trauma-informed working. Because if it were easy, we would have done it already, right?

If we don’t understand the specific barriers we face, the challenge feels insurmountable and we give up. In my own example, budget was not as much of an issue but time and senior buy-in was. This tells me my strategy should focus on lobbying senior leaders to understand the risks involved in not working in this way. I could identify allies who are open to trauma-informed ways of working, and we could work together to advocate for change at more senior levels. Once we have raised some awareness, we could make a case for taking more time with our research. We could outline the benefits of that approach, and the risks of not doing it. I could also share resources with the team to help with raising awareness more widely.

Of course, alongside systemic work, we can also identify changes to our own approaches and implement these immediately. For example, reading up on inclusive and trauma-informed language and adjusting your discussion guide accordingly.

Co-creating the charter

The design the charter, we brought together three key elements:

• Who we are
• An acknowledgement of the barriers we face
• Our commitment to working in this way

Everybody stuck down their ideas and here is the final result (you can find a text-only version at the end of this post).

Digitised version of the trauma-informed charter

Original version of the trauma-informed charter

Willingly stepping into spaces that are uncomfortable

I’ve spent a lot of this post talking about how trauma-informed work is hard. We face barriers, we work within constraints. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it. I want to leave you with this wonderful reflection from Rachael Dietkus and Matthew Bernius. They articulate it much more beautifully than I could…

In this moment of potential, we want to remind you that working to integrate trauma responsive practices in design and research remains a bold endeavor. It requires all of us to willingly step into spaces that are often uncomfortable. After all, change is uncomfortable and often creates resistance (both in ourselves and in others). This work will take effort and should not be rushed. The journey is lifelong.

… [It] means giving ourselves grace while taking small steps. It means being vulnerable, asking for assistance, experimenting, and sharing what works and does not work. It means knowing that we will all still make mistakes along the way, possibly even causing unintentional harm to ourselves or others. It means finding the courage and compassion, when harm happens, to acknowledge it and move towards healing and repair. It means meaningful shifts toward collaboration, mutuality, and peer support to stay committed to “being with” versus “doing at.” Our greatest hope is that we continue to encourage, uplift, and support one another in this vital work.

If you are working in this area — or interested in trauma-informed design and research — I would love to hear from you. I’m on LinkedIn.

UX Scotland 2023: Trauma-informed charter [text-only]

We as…

• Trauma-informed researchers
• Accessibility specialists
• Interaction designers
• Human centred practitioners
• Service designers
• System support analyst
• User-centred designers
• Trauma-informed humans
• Designers for humans
• Inclusive designers
• Trauma-informed designers
• Medtech UX Designers
• UXers
• User experience practitioners
• UCD leaders
• Service designers
• User researchers
• Designers
• UX team at PHX
• Content designers
• People who work with people
• Trauma informed practitioners
• A group of committed user-centred design specialists
• Interaction design and volunteering leader of a trauma-informed working group
• Trauma-informed practitioners
• Interaction designer working in bereavement

Acknowledging that…

• Time constraints
• Financial barriers
• We lack (and will never fully have) all the knowledge, tooling, and resources
• We don’t always have the power or time to enact trauma-informed practices
• We aren’t aware of a person’s history
• We are only one person but also one organisation
• We may not have buy-in from senior leaders
• Our target users (people who use drugs) may be triggered or even relapse as a result of taking part in user research
• Trauma informed approaches need to be present at all stages of the design process
• Not all design & UR professionals have had active listening training (basic or advanced)
• Our organisation’s culture are not always set up to let us do this work
• We can’t possibly be aware and prepared for every situation
• Users or colleagues that we work with may have experienced various kinds of traumas
• People won’t “ok” it
• We may not have buy-in from leadership
• There isn’t clear guidance or not enough time
• Lack of team training
• We may get things wrong sometimes
• The world and we are not perfect
• We may not have enough time
• Lack of knowledge
• We may not have control over timescales
• Not everyone cares about humans
• Time constraints
• User needs are complex and even when we think we are experts we find ourselves surprised
• Making stakeholders understand can be difficult
• The constraints we face are sometimes inevitable
• The environment will not always be ideal but…
• Organisational needs can sometimes be prioritised over user needs
• The delivery process needs to slow down and improve for our customers
• Disinterested stakeholders
• We do not share the lived experience of our users’ trauma
• We’re busy
• The unexpected will happen and everyone’s life experience is different
• We are all volunteers with limited time and resources
• My users have all gone through trauma

Commit to…

• Keep fighting the battle
• Teaching more people the basics to start with
• To be empathetic, listen, make space and time for them
• Accessibility & trauma-informed design
• Do our best to avoid causing harm to others and ourselves
• Trying, to the best of our ability, to advocate and use trauma-informed approaches
• Incorporating kindness into our research planning, ops, and interactions with users and colleagues
• Putting people first
• Supporting our designers and researchers when interacting with other humans
• Proactively and consistently opening communication channels
• Making every effort to learn and advocate for trauma-informed research
• Bringing trauma-informed principles into our work
• Continuously learning and doing better
• Work towards being better informed by others
• Being transparent, aware, sensitive, and providing post-research support during user research activities
• Make space to collaborate with those who things we don’t yet know
• Advocate for all users and their needs
• Slow down to achieve a more mutual outcome
• Starting a conversation with my team about this
• Keeping the conversation going and do one small step at a time to protect ourselves from burning out
• Doing the work to practice and promote trauma-informed behaviours
• Being empathetic and always making design decisions to help the user
• Listen and learn
• Keeping trauma at the forefront of our minds when planning activities
• Encouraging the team to think about trauma and how we might amend our approach
• Further training and pledge to make better trauma informed decisions
• Creating a safe environment for research, where being trauma-informed is a priority and a fore-thought, not an after-thought