2. Institutional Moment

The last phase had two findings about the relation of physical environment to support wellness and wellbeing, the institution and how it closely related to user interaction with the spatial element. This project aimed to understand the interaction between user and the institutional space to understand about how spatial environment can affect people experience and inclusivity.

This project phase consist of two main steps: collective institutional moment and study literature about inclusivity. The collected institutional moment from four personal experience. The collection were made from sketches and become the tools to understand the experience people had within an institutional space. These sketches were analysed to gather the information about occupants experience with institutional element, both physical and non-physical.

The project used phenomenological approach to personal perspectives of institutional moments as the sample of user interaction with the institutional space. It did not use observation approach to control neutral aspiration to the institution. The project gathered sixteen moments. These visualized through sketches and close captioned to generate how the moment happened. Those moments were analysed by categorizing the element of space, non-physical institutional element and the type of experience, positive or negative.

The next phase was the further step from the conclusion to the previous institutional moment analysis. This phase studied about the relation of user and inclusivity to understand more about the happening of the institutional experience through literature study.

After analysing the sixteen institutional moments, there were two types of experience happened. The positive experience made user felt the enchanted moment, feeling curious, acceptance, and comfortable. In contrast, the negative experience made them felt pressed, controlled, uncomfortable, and bounded. These identified experiences mostly happened in the in-between spaces; waiting room, lobby, and corridor.

There was also identified several specific action from the user in respond to the experienced especially for the uncomfortable experience. In the setting of a bounded waiting room, people concerned to look for distraction on ceiling to escape people eye contact in waiting room. In entrance area, a tightly controlled lobby area by the nurses made people want to hide in order seeking for privacy. In the exit way, people started to wave on the automatic door sensor to make the door opens.

Meanwhile the positive experience made people observing more the space because feel attracted and comfortable to explore the element of building. For example, the lobby of office space had a clear direction and friendly staff generated a distinct access and generate happiness through the warm-welcome. The magnificent entrance enticed people to come in and driven curiosity about what is in the inside. For this cases, the spaces could fulfilled the friendliness, approachable, and accessibility to the user.

The question raised after findings the both types of experience: How to understand the user need?; and How these positive experience can help support the wellbeing? To answer the question I jumped to the next step to understand more about user profile and feeling.

Image : Sketched for Phase 2, Recalling institutional moment

Top part : An excited feeling to explore an institutional space after being allowed to go inside from the receptioonist.

Bottom part: Hide and seek feeling in the waiting room under observation of the triage due to the regulation of ‘caregiver wait ouside’.

Image : Mind map from team’s discussion about the occupant experience inside an institutional space could affect how people act.