Co-creation of Ethical Guidelines for Designing Digital Solutions to

Support Industrial Work

Päivi Heikkilä

, Hanna Lammi

and Susanna Aromaa

VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Tampere, Finland

Keywords: Ethics, Ethical Guidelines, Co-creation, Design, Industrial Work.

Abstract: Digitalization and automation are changing industrial work by bringing a variety of new digital solutions to

the factory floor. Digital solutions are primarily developed to make industrial work more efficient and

productive. However, to ensure user acceptance and sustainability, the aspect of ethics should be included in

the design process. The aim of this research is to increase the role of ethics in design by providing a set of

ethical guidelines for designing digital solutions to support industrial work. As a result of a co-creation

process, we present twelve ethical guidelines related to six ethical themes, with examples of how to apply

them in practice. In addition, we propose a practical approach to help a project consortium in co-creating

project-specific ethical guidelines. Both the co-creation process and the guidelines can be applied in the design

and development of new digital solutions for industrial work, but also in other work contexts.

1 INTRODUCTION

Digitalization and automation are changing industrial

work by bringing a variety of new technologies and

digital tools to the factory floor (Kagermann et al.,

2013; Romero et al., 2016). The work of factory

workers is changing towards a more self-led

direction, requiring management of complex systems

and problem-solving skills (Gorecky et al., 2014).

The work of factory operators includes interaction

with a growing number of novel technologies and

tools, which highlights the role of appropriate and

holistic design of the new tools.

Novel digital tools are designed and adopted to

make industrial processes more efficient and

productive. However, to ensure user acceptance and

to create long-term value, human factors should be

given a significant role in the design process. In

addition to considering usability, safety, and

ergonomics of the new tools, the experience and

acceptance-related factors should be considered from

a wider perspective, including the aspect of ethics. As

the new technologies, such as artificial intelligence

(AI) or collaborative robots, may have significant

changes in the ways of working and the roles of

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8999-179X

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7849-0845

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8843-496X

workers, paying attention to ethical themes, such as

workers’ autonomy, privacy, and dignity, becomes

particularly important.

To consider ethics in the design process, several

approaches can be applied (e.g., Friedman et al.,

2013; Wright, 2011; Ikonen et al., 2009). One of the

most established methods for embedding ethics in the

design process is to create and follow ethical

guidelines. However, guidelines do not guarantee

ethical thinking and commitment in a design project.

Even though ethical guidelines or checklists would be

created to guide project work and to contribute to

design decisions, ethics may remain as an extraneous,

isolated, or overlooked area in design (Hagendorff,

2020; Madaio et al., 2020; Kaasinen et al., 2022). We

aim to avoid this by engaging the project consortium

of our ongoing design and development project to co-

create ethical guidelines for the project.

The aim of this research is to deploy a co-creation

approach to provide a set of ethical guidelines for

designing digital solutions to support industrial work.

The work is conducted in a design and development

project with a goal to develop digital tools to improve

the working conditions on the factory floor by

automating monotonous work and increasing the

Heikkilä, P., Lammi, H. and Aromaa, S.

Co-creation of Ethical Guidelines for Designing Digital Solutions to Support Industrial Work.

DOI: 10.5220/0011679700003417

In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications (VISIGRAPP 2023) - Volume 2: HUCAPP, pages

185-192

ISBN: 978-989-758-634-7; ISSN: 2184-4321

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

185

value of human work through smart assistance. The

project consortium includes end-user manufacturing

companies, technical developers of digital solutions,

and research partners. The resulting guidelines are

created primarily for the ongoing project but can be

applied wider, in industrial contexts and beyond.

The paper is structured as follows. First, we

present the related work. Then, we describe the co-

creation process of the ethical guidelines. In the

results section, we present the resulting ethical

guidelines and examples of their application. After

that, we discuss the ethical guidelines in the design of

industrial digital solutions and propose a practical

approach for co-creating project-specific ethical

guidelines. Finally, we discuss the future work and

conclude the findings and our contribution.

2 RELATED WORK

This section focuses on the related work relevant to

our research. First, we provide a background for

understanding ethics in design and ethical guidelines;

we then address ethics in designing digital solutions

for industrial work. Finally, we introduce the co-

creation approach in the design of ethical guidelines.

2.1 Ethics in Design and Ethical

Guidelines

Ethics addresses the issues of what is 'right' and what

is 'fair' (Hosmer, 1995). Thus, ethics describes moral

principles influencing conduct; accordingly, the study

of ethics focuses on the actions and values of people

- what people do and how they believe they should

act in the world (Luppicini, 2010). In technology

design, several approaches have been applied to

consider ethics, such as assessing the possible

impacts of technology (Wright, 2011), identifying the

values of the intended technology users and

responding to them (Friedman et al., 2013), or by

following ethical guidelines (e.g., Ikonen et al.,

2009). The Ethics by Design approach (Niemelä et

al., 2014) promotes positive and proactive ethical

thinking in the early phases of the project. Thus,

considering ethics should not only focus on

identifying ethical problems, but also on design

decisions that are based on ethical values and can

positively support developing ethically sound

solutions.

Ethical reflection is based on the tradition of

several disciplines. In biomedical ethics, a strong

point of reference is the patient-centered approach,

giving clinicians clear guidelines for their interaction

with patients, based on four fundamental principles:

beneficence (doing good), non-maleficence (not

doing harm), autonomy (respect for the person and

his/her rights), and justice (distributing benefits,

risks, and costs fairly) (Beauchamp & Childress,

2001). As the patient-centered approach has a similar

value base as the human-centered approach in

technology design, the same principles are also

applied and included in the guidelines targeted for

human-centric design and designers. Wright (2011)

bases a framework for ethical impact assessment on

these four principles. Ikonen et al. (2009) base a

framework for mobile intelligent applications on six

ethical principles: privacy, autonomy, integrity and

dignity, reliability, e-inclusion, as well as benefit to

society. The principles include the same elements as

the patient-centered approach but emphasize aspects

relevant to the design of digital solutions, such as

privacy and inclusion. Ethical guidelines may also

emphasize other aspects, depending on the purpose of

the guidelines. For example, Nihan (2015) lists ten

ethical values related to employing ubiquitous

technology at the workplace and includes the aspects

of health and safety, as well as social interactions and

integrations in the values.

Regarding novel technology, the need for

discussion on ethics and creation of ethical guidelines

has increased due to the growing significance of AI.

In a review of 84 ethics guidelines for AI by Jobin et

al. (2019), 11 clusters of principles were found:

transparency, justice and fairness, non-maleficence,

responsibility, privacy, beneficence, freedom and

autonomy, trust, sustainability, dignity, and solidarity

(Jobin, Ienca & Vayena, 2019). Floridi and Cowls

(2021) created an ethical framework of AI principles

set by the four principles of bioethics (beneficence,

non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice) and an

additional AI-enabling principle – explicability.

Several approaches have been proposed and

applied in addressing ethics in design (e.g., Friedman

et al., 2013; Wright, 2011; Ikonen et al., 2009) and

development of AI-based solutions has further

increased the role of ethics. Still, concrete examples

of the research and design processes that include

ethics are scarce and would be needed to support the

adoption of an ethical mindset and true integration of

ethics into design.

2.2 Ethics in Designing Digital

Solutions for Industrial Work

The fourth industrial revolution (Kagermann et al.,

2013) is changing the industrial work, and new

technologies are emerging on the factory floor.

HUCAPP 2023 - 7th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

186

Romero et al. (2016) describe how novel technologies

and tools, such as exoskeletons, augmented and

virtual reality (AR/VR), wearable trackers, intelligent

assistants, collaborative robots, social network

services, and big data analytics could support and

empower future workers. The future intelligent

manufacturing systems are described as a

composition of humans, cyber systems, and physical

systems (i.e., human-cyber-physical systems),

working together to achieve manufacturing goals

(Zhou et al., 2019).

Along with the development of cyber-physical

systems, the discussion related to ethics has gained

more attention in the context of industrial work, and

different taxonomies and checklists are provided to

understand multifaceted ethics in the design of

emerging technologies. In line with the Ethics by

Design approach (Niemelä et al., 2014), Palm and

Hansson (2006) highlight that the ethical assessment

of technologies should be a continuous dialogue with

technology developers rather than a single evaluation

of a specific technology. They propose an ethical

technology assessment method to consider the social

consequences of the technology early in the design

phases. Brey (2012) agrees that it is important to

consider ethics in the early development phases, even

though it is difficult to fully predict ethical issues

related to emerging technology use in society. Thus,

Brey suggests adapting forecasting approaches to

study technological devices, their use, and their social

consequences. Related to AI, Dignum (2018)

proposes three levels for considering ethics: 1) ethics

by design: ethics as a part of the behavior of an

autonomous system; 2) ethics in design: regulations

and methods to support ethical design of systems, and

3) ethics for design: conducting development and

research in an ethical manner.

From the industrial workers’ perspective, the

adoption of new technologies has raised concerns

among employees, for example, regarding learning

new skills, the perceived demands to work faster, and

the safety of new tools (Kadir & Broberg, 2021).

Novel technological solutions are often based on

gathering data of the work environment and even

workers, and this may be ethically sensitive (Moore

& Piwek, 2017; Heikkilä et al., 2018). When

designing new solutions, it would be important to pay

attention to both work performance as well as

workers’ well-being (see e.g., Heikkilä et al., 2021).

To support transformation of industrial work and

work practices, as well as a desired user experience

of new technology, it is important to design the new

tools in a holistic way. One method is to define user

experience goals including ethical aspects. For

example, a user experience goal to make workers feel

encouraged and empowered at work (Heikkilä,

Honka & Kaasinen, 2018) drives the design of a

digital solution towards an ethically sustainable

direction.

To support ethics-aware design, Kaasinen et al.

(2019) define five ethical guidelines related to

modern factory work, based on the earlier work by

Ikonen et al. (2009). The guidelines describe the

guidance related to each selected ethical theme with

one guiding sentence. For example, to support

workers’ autonomy, the designed solutions should

allow operators to choose their own way of working.

However, as the guidelines are presented with only

one sentence and on a high level, they form a good

basis for project work, but benefit from elaboration

within a project for their application.

2.3 Co-creation Approach in the

Design of Ethical Guidelines

Co-creation has become a common practice of

involving different stakeholders in the design process

(Sanders & Stappers, 2008; Robertson & Simonsen,

2012). Co-creation is referred to as any act of

collective creativity, i.e. creativity that is shared by

two or more people, and it has been described as a

certain collective creativity that is applied throughout

the whole design process (Sanders & Stappers, 2008).

Madaio et al. (2020) brought out that

organizations rarely produce ethical checklists with

active participation from the practitioners. Without

involving practitioners, the checklists have proved to

be misused or even ignored. When utilizing a co-

creation approach, different perspectives, and a

productive combination of them (Steen, Manschot &

De Koning, 2011), may lead to successful outcomes,

and it would be important to include the various

perspectives also in ethics-related design activities.

In our project, the goal is to keep the project

partners involved and informed about ethics along the

project to maintain ethics-aware mindset throughout

the project. In the following section, we describe the

co-creation process utilized in our project.

3 CO-CREATION PROCESS OF

ETHICAL GUIDELINES

Ethical guidelines to support the design activities of

the project were iteratively created with the project

consortium through a co-creation process, described

in Figure 1. As our general approach, we applied the

Co-creation of Ethical Guidelines for Designing Digital Solutions to Support Industrial Work

187

Ethics by Design approach (Niemelä et al., 2014) that

emphasizes addressing ethical issues in the early

project phases. Co-creation methodology was

selected due to its potential to engage all project

partners to generate common understanding of ethics

and to increase ethics awareness within the project.

The co-creation process was part of the project work

in a design and development project with an aim to

develop technological solutions to support human

work in the manufacturing industry. The participants

represented several European manufacturing

companies, solution developers, and research

institutes. Thus, the design and development

perspective was complemented with the

considerations on the context of use, needs of end-

users and integration to other tools and equipment.

During the co-creation process, two workshops

were organized to involve the project consortium in

identifying possible ethical challenges related to

project work and in creating ethical guidelines for the

project. The consortium had an opportunity to

provide comments to the initial guidelines and later,

to the modified guidelines.

The first ethics-related workshop was organized

as a part of the first consortium meeting of the project.

The aim of the workshop was to identify potential

ethical challenges and questions in the very early

phases of the project. Twenty-four project members

participated in the workshop. The participants were

divided into pairs or small groups and instructed to

write down one ethical challenge related to

conducting research work in an ethically sustainable

way or to developing and deploying ethically sound

solutions during the project.

The workshop resulted in eight ethical challenges

that formed a starting point for formulating the initial

ethical guidelines. The challenges were categorized

by three researchers under six ethical themes,

identified as important in earlier research (Ikonen et

al., 2009): privacy, autonomy, dignity, reliability,

inclusion, and benefit to society. Some of the

challenges were related to one theme, but some had

several connections. For example, a notion that

machines should assist people, not take over their

work, had a connection to the ethical theme

‘autonomy’ from the workers’ perspective, but it was

considered also as a wider societal issue, connected to

the theme ‘benefit to society.’ Specific research

ethics-related questions were responded to separately

in the guidance given to the project consortium for

conducting user studies. Still, most of these questions

were also included in the guidelines; for example, a

question on handling personal data had an impact on

the guidelines related to privacy. In the end, twelve

initial guidelines, two for each category of ethical

themes, were formulated.

The second workshop was arranged to introduce

the twelve initial ethical guidelines to the consortium

and to collect feedback to them, as well as to discuss

topical ethical questions arisen in the project work.

The workshop was organized as a separate online

meeting, and all project members were encouraged to

participate, even if they had no previous experience

with ethics-related work. Eighteen project members

participated in the workshop. After a brief

introduction of the guidelines, the participants were

divided into three subgroups with moderators to

discuss and give feedback on the clarity and relevance

of the guidelines. After the second workshop, the

guidelines were refined to include aspects raised in

the comments and discussions of the participants. The

guidelines were modified to make them easier to

understand and more aligned with the different

perspectives of the workshop participants. To clarify

the ways to apply the guidelines, remarks to suggest

concrete ways for following the guidelines were

added. The modified guidelines were shared with the

project consortium to be commented on and to remind

everyone of them. Based on the comments received,

minor refinements were made.

The final guidelines are described in the results

section. The project consortium is guided to apply the

guidelines in the design-related activities throughout

the project. At the end of the project, the guidelines

will be reviewed and updated if new challenges and

needs arise during the project.

Figure 1: Phases of the co-creation process.

HUCAPP 2023 - 7th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

188

4 RESULTS: ETHICAL

GUIDELINES

The co-creation process resulted in twelve ethical

guidelines related to six ethical themes: privacy,

autonomy, dignity, reliability, inclusion, and benefit

to society (Table 1). In the following, the guidelines

are described with examples of how to apply them in

the project work. The guidelines cover the aspects of

designing ethically sound solutions and piloting the

solutions at work in an ethical way; the first guideline

relating more to the design of the solutions and the

second one more to the trials at workplaces.

Table 1: Ethical guidelines for designing industrial digital

solutions.

Ethical

theme

Ethical guideline

Privacy

- Workers’ privacy should be respected

when collecting and storing data

- Workers should be made aware when their

personal data is collected/stored, and they

should control access to it

Autonomy

- Task allocation between workers and

technology should support meaningful

work and appropriate human oversight and

control

- Workers’ autonomy and rights should be

considered when organizing pilots and

informing of participation

Dignity

- The solutions should support discreet use

- Opting out of the pilots should not cause

negative consequences to the workers

Reliability

- The solutions must not compromise

workers’ safety

- Workers should be informed of the

reliability of the solutions

Inclusion

- The solutions should be accessible to

workers with diverse backgrounds,

capabilities, and skills

- Workers with diverse backgrounds,

capabilities, and skills should be able to

participate in trials

Benefit to

society

- The solutions should assist workers,

supporting focus on value-adding work

- The solutions may not cause harm to

anyone – to their users or stakeholders

The guidelines related to privacy emphasize the

respect for workers’ privacy when collecting and

storing their data, as well as the importance of

informing workers of the personal data collected.

Privacy of the participants of user studies needs to be

protected in accordance with the general data

protection regulation, which is facilitated by guiding

the project members to use an appropriate informed

consent form in all user studies. For example, storing

the personal data only as long as necessary and giving

access to the data only to researchers who need

access, are practical methods to protect the privacy of

the trial participants.

The guidelines related to autonomy emphasize the

desired outcome of smart-task allocation between

workers and technology, so that human work would

be meaningful, and workers would be and feel like

they are in control of the operations. Smart-task

allocation supports interesting and variable human

tasks, while technology or machines can perform

repetitive, monotonous, or non-ergonomic tasks.

When organizing user studies and pilots, the

participants’ autonomy needs to be considered by

ensuring true voluntariness for participation, not

pushed by the employer.

The guidelines related to dignity guide applying

practices and designing solutions that respect the

dignity of workers and stakeholders. The solutions

should support discreet ways to convey information.

For example, all notifications that include content that

may be interpreted as negative, or embarrassing

should only be accessible by the user of the solution,

not others (e.g., health or work-performance-related

information). In pilots and user studies, all potential

participants – whether they want to participate or opt

out – should be treated equally, not causing any

negative consequences for those workers who decide

not to participate.

The guidelines related to reliability emphasize

two aspects: First, the solutions must not compromise

their users’ or other people’s safety; and second, the

users should be informed of the reliability of the

solutions. When the solutions are tested during the

pilot phase, the users and other stakeholders should

be informed as to whether the solutions are still under

development and whether some problems are likely

to occur. When offering solutions to be adopted at

workplaces after the pilot phase, liability and

responsibility issues should be defined and users

informed of them.

The guidelines related to inclusion emphasize

design and demonstration of the solutions in a way

that they are accessible to workers with different

backgrounds, genders, ages, cultures, and

nationalities, as well as capabilities and skills.

Accordingly, users with diverse backgrounds,

capabilities, and skills should be able to participate in

the trials. In practice, this can be supported, for

example, by providing clear guidance for using the

solutions and different language versions when

feasible to provide those.

The guidelines related to the benefit to society

encourage designing solutions that assist workers, not

Co-creation of Ethical Guidelines for Designing Digital Solutions to Support Industrial Work

189

replace them, supporting focus and transformation

towards value-adding work. To benefit society, the

solutions must not cause harm to anyone, neither the

users nor stakeholders. The solutions should support

workers’ well-being, for example, by not causing

unnecessary cognitive load or by not demanding

usage in non-ergonomic positions. In addition, the

designed technology should not conflict with

environmental sustainability.

5 DISCUSSION

In this section, we discuss the co-creation of ethical

guidelines for industrial work and propose a practical

approach to help a project consortium in co-creating

project-specific ethical guidelines. After that, we

discuss application of the guidelines and future work.

5.1 Ethical Guidelines in the Design of

Digital Solutions for Industrial

Work

The co-creation process resulted in twelve ethical

guidelines that support designing digital solutions for

industrial work. Our goal was to provide a set of

guidelines which would be jointly understood and

committed to by the project consortium. We aimed at

short and condensed guidelines, that would be easy to

internalize, and thus apply, in design. The resulted

guidelines are based on the ethical themes of the

framework for intelligent mobile applications

(Ikonen et al., 2009), but they have similar elements

with several ethical guidelines and checklists (Nihan,

2015; Wright, 2011, Palm & Hansson, 2006), most

closely with the more general one-sentence

guidelines developed for the context of modern

factory work (Kaasinen et al., 2019). Even though

these guidelines, developed for modern factory work,

could have been applied in our work as such, we

wanted to experiment with the co-creation approach,

to elicit ethical thinking in the project, and to agree on

guidelines relevant for the project consortium. To be

applicable in the separate design tasks of the project,

the guidelines were formulated to reflect the common

goals and contents of the project but also to cover

different solutions developed in the project.

In a design and development project, it is

important to provide guidelines for research ethics as

well as for designing ethically sound solutions. Even

though the focus of this work was on supporting the

design of ethically sound solutions, we noticed that

the project members could not always differentiate

between these two sides but rather discussed mixed

ethics-related topics. On the other hand, the topics are

not always easy to separate; for example, testing the

solutions in real environments includes the same

ethics-related questions and principles as considering

end users during the design process. According to

Dignum (2018), ethics related to AI can be analyzed

on three levels: 1) focusing on the behavior of an

autonomous system; 2) covering regulations and

methods to support ethical design of systems; and 3)

focusing on the code of conduct in carrying out

development and research. In this study, all these

levels were relevant, but the guidelines mainly

support the second level, while the detailed guidance

for research ethics (level 3) was provided separately.

In addition, as most of the digital solutions designed

in the project are not autonomous systems, level 1

was not focal; instead, we focused on the principles

relevant to the design of digital tools utilizing novel

technologies.

The ethical guidelines of this paper can be adopted

for the development of other digital solutions in an

industry context as such. However, even though the

use of ready-made guidelines is beneficial, the

highest benefits may be achieved by engaging the

project consortium in the co-creation process.

This ensures that the guidelines are suitable for the

project and is likely to increase the project members’

commitment to implementing the guidelines. In

addition, this ensures that all project members

become familiar with ethics. This is beneficial, for

example, as technology developers may lack prior

skills in identifying and analyzing ethical aspects

(Palm and Hansson, 2006).

To support a co-creation process of ethical

guidelines, we suggest a practical approach for

project groups to define the guidelines based on

relevant ethical themes and purposes or contexts of

use for the guidelines. An illustrative example of this

approach (Figure 2) includes six ethical themes

(Ikonen et al., 2009) and three purposes for the ethical

guidelines: ethics related to design of solutions, ethics

related to adoption of solutions, and ethics in

executing research and design work. This example of

the categorization is based on our co-creation process,

but the themes can also be based on the needs of the

project or existing categorizations (e.g., Dignum,

2018). As ethics may be considered as an abstract

perspective to design, this kind of a categorization

may make it more tangible to approach and reduce the

challenge of ethics remaining an extraneous or

overlooked area in design (Hagendorff, 2020; Madaio

et al., 2020; Kaasinen et al., 2022).

HUCAPP 2023 - 7th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

190

Figure 2: Illustration of a practical approach to facilitate considering ethics in a co-creation project.

5.2 Application of the Ethical

Guidelines and Future Work

Both the co-creation process and the ethical

guidelines presented in this paper can be applied in

the design and development of new digital solutions,

by professionals of human-technology interaction

and by practitioners of other fields. The guidelines are

designed particularly to support designing digital

solutions for industrial work, but they are also

applicable in other work contexts. Still, we also

encourage the project groups to co-create ethical

guidelines of their own. Existing guidelines or ethical

themes can be used as a basis for co-creation, not to

overlook important ethical aspects, but still to allow

the project group to define joint ethical principles

relevant for the project.

In our project work, the project partners were

given the freedom to use the methods familiar to them

in applying the co-created ethical guidelines. At its

best, this may lead to innovative and integrated ways

to apply the guidelines, yet it may also be perceived

as a challenge. In the future, developing and applying

methods to explicitly support embedding ethical

guidelines in design work would be a further step in

increasing the role of ethics in design. Also involving

workers in defining the guidelines would be an

interesting track for research, strengthening the role

of end-users in design.

6 CONCLUSIONS

This paper presented a co-created set of ethical

guidelines for designing digital solutions to support

industrial work. To support design of industrial

digital solutions, we introduced twelve ethical

guidelines related to six ethical themes.

Both the co-creation process and the guidelines

can be applied in the design of new digital solutions,

particularly to support industrial work. However, we

also encourage project groups to co-create ethical

guidelines of their own. This may lead to deeper

engagement with ethics, stronger commitment of the

project partners, and in the end, better integration of

ethics into design.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project has received funding from the European

Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation

program under grant agreement No. 873087 (project

SHOP4CF).

The authors are grateful to project partners who

have participated in the ethics workshops and

contributed to the work presented in this publication.

REFERENCES

Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of

biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, USA.

Brey, P. A. (2012). Anticipatory ethics for emerging

technologies. NanoEthics, 6(1), 1-13.

Dignum, V. (2018). Ethics in artificial intelligence:

introduction to the special issue. Ethics and Information

Technology, 20(1), 1-3.

Ehrwein Nihan, C. (2015). Ubiquitous computing in the

workplace: ethical issues identified by the

interdisciplinary IWE and HRM Research Group.

In Ubiquitous Computing in the Workplace (pp. 75-93).

Springer, Cham.

Co-creation of Ethical Guidelines for Designing Digital Solutions to Support Industrial Work

191

Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2021). A unified framework of five

principles for AI in society. In Ethics, Governance, and

Policies in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 5-17). Springer.

Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Borning, A., & Huldtgren, A.

(2013). Value sensitive design and information

systems. In Early engagement and new technologies:

Opening up the laboratory (pp. 55-95). Springer,

Dordrecht.

Gorecky, D., Schmitt, M., Loskyll, M., & Zühlke, D. (2014,

July). Human-machine-interaction in the industry 4.0

era. In 2014 12th IEEE international conference on

industrial informatics (INDIN) (pp. 289-294). IEEE.

Hagendorff, T. (2020). The ethics of AI ethics: An

evaluation of guidelines. Minds and Machines, 30(1),

99-120.

Heikkilä, P., Honka, A., & Kaasinen, E. (2018). Quantified

factory worker: designing a worker feedback dashboard.

In Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on

Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 515-523).

Heikkilä, P., Honka, A., Kaasinen, E., & Väänänen, K.

(2021). Quantified factory worker: field study of a web

application supporting work well-being and

productivity. Cognition, Technology & Work, 23(4),

831-846.

Heikkilä, P., Honka, A., Mach, S., Schmalfuß, F., Kaasinen,

E., & Väänänen, K. (2018, October). Quantified factory

worker-expert evaluation and ethical considerations of

wearable self-tracking devices. In Proceedings of the

22nd International Academic Mindtrek Conference (pp.

202-211).

Hosmer, L. T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between

organizational theory and philosophical ethics.

Academy of management Review, 20(2), 379-403.

Ikonen, V., Kaasinen, E., & Niemelä, M. (2009, July).

Defining Ethical Guidelines for Ambient Intelligence

Applications on a Mobile Phone. In Intelligent

Environments (Workshops) (pp. 261-268).

Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global

landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine

Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399.

Kaasinen, E., Anttila, A.-H., Heikkilä, P., Laarni, J.,

Koskinen, H., & Väätänen, A. (2022). Smooth and

Resilient Human–Machine Teamwork as an Industry

5.0 Design Challenge. Sustainability, 14(5), 2773.

Kaasinen, E., Liinasuo, M., Schmalfuß, F., Koskinen, H.,

Aromaa, S., Heikkilä, P., ... & Malm, T. (2018, August).

A worker-centric design and evaluation framework for

operator 4.0 solutions that support work well-being.

In IFIP working conference on human work interaction

design (pp. 263-282). Springer, Cham.

Kadir, B. A., & Broberg, O. (2021). Human-centered

design of work systems in the transition to industry 4.0.

Applied Ergonomics, 92, 103334.

Kagermann, H., Helbig, J., Hellinger, A., & Wahlster, W.

(2013). Recommendations for implementing the

strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Securing the future

of German manufacturing industry; final report of the

Industrie 4.0 Working Group. Forschungsunion.

Luppicini, R. (2010). Technoethics and the Evolving

Knowledge Society: Ethical Issues in Technological

Design, Research, Development, and Innovation. IGI

Global.

Madaio, M. A., Stark, L., Wortman Vaughan, J., &

Wallach, H. (2020, April). Co-designing checklists to

understand organizational challenges and opportunities

around fairness in AI. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

(pp. 1-14).

Moore, P., & Piwek, L. (2017). Regulating wellbeing in the

brave new quantified workplace. Employee Relations,

39(3), 308-316.

Niemelä, M., Kaasinen, E., & Ikonen, V. (2014). Ethics by

design - an experience-based proposal for introducing

ethics to R&D of emerging ICTs. In ETHICOMP 2014-

Liberty and Security in an Age of ICTs.

Palm, E., & Hansson, S. O. (2006). The case for ethical

technology assessment (eTA). Technological

Forecasting and Social Change, 73(5), 543-558.

Robertson, T., & Simonsen, J. (2012). Participatory Design:

an introduction. In Routledge international handbook of

participatory design (pp. 1-17). Routledge.

Romero, D., Stahre, J., Wuest, T., Noran, O., Bernus, P.,

Fast-Berglund, Å., & Gorecky, D. (2016, October).

Towards an operator 4.0 typology: a human-centric

perspective on the fourth industrial revolution

technologies. In Proceedings of the international

conference on computers and industrial engineering

(CIE46), Tianjin, China (pp. 29-31).

Sanders, E.B.N., & Stappers, P.J. (2008). Co-creation and

the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1), 5-18.

Steen, M., Manschot, M., & De Koning, N. (2011). Benefits

of co-design in service design projects. International

Journal of Design, 5(2).

Wright, D. (2011). A framework for the ethical impact

assessment of information technology. Ethics and

information technology, 13(3), 199-226.

Zhou, J., Zhou, Y., Wang, B., & Zang, J. (2019). Human–

cyber–physical systems (HCPSs) in the context of new-

generation intelligent manufacturing. Engineering,

5(4), 624-636.

HUCAPP 2023 - 7th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

192