Paper extracted from 7 th Interiornational DEFSA Conference Proceedings © Copyright 2015 by the Design Education Forum of Southern Africa (www.defsa.org.za) 127 Wicked ethics in Design Terence FENN & Jason HOBBS University of Johannesburg, South Africa Abstract Wicked problems are wicked because, amongst other things, understanding problems as existing in society, at the intersection of many possible points of views held by a variety of potential stakeholders introduces indeterminacy. Ethical frameworks in this context may also be multiple and may exist in harmony or dis-harmony alongside each other. In this paper, we argue for an acknowledgement of this complexity. This acknowledgement includes recognizing a distinction between successful and good design; that design, when considering the best course of action in an ethical and pragmatic sense needs to look beyond the business and consumer dichotomy; that ethical pluralism can exist across multiple stakeholders in an ecosystem; and that our ethical judgements need to be considered within the context of socio-cultural change. This paper concludes by suggesting a range of interventions and tools that could be incorporated into design curriculum to assist design students with understanding and navigating ethical complexity. Keywords: Complexity, Ethical judgement, Human-centred Design (HCD), Service Dominant Logic Introduction This paper discusses the many levels of ethical consideration that the designer has to account for. It argues that ethics, like design problems to which they are inexplicably linked, exist due to their construction within societal contexts and are thus compledž, iŶdeteƌŵiŶate aŶd iŶ Ŷeed of taŵiŶg. We will discuss and argue for the position that design is required to offer the best decision that enables positive impact for the widest range of actors and environments and it is the designer who carries the responsibility of navigating ethical complexity because of their influence over the future, resources, social practices, and so on. By drawing on a range of literature generally addressing complex societal problems in design and philosophical concerns related to moral relativism, this paper will argue a position centered around the following: 1. The need to extend the framing of design problems beyond human-ĐeŶteƌed desigŶ ;HCDsͿ common prioritization of the needs of users and businesses including managing conflicting ethiĐal positioŶs as a ƌesult of aĐtoƌs pƌioƌitizatioŶ of theiƌ oǁŶ ƌelatiǀe ethiĐal positioŶiŶgs 2. Accounting for the affects of change that extend beyond primary actors 3. Acknowledging the challenge of operating in contexts of ethical pluralism in general. The authors propose that affecting change through a consideration of factors beyond the immediate and relative ethical (or other) needs of primary actors may be more effective for the sustainable resolution of complex societal problems. Furthermore, the designer is required to engage with these broader areas of concern if they are to meaningfully comprehend the potential impact of their design interventions. This is achieved by the designer understanding the frameworks and systems related to the immediate problem space (codes of practice, policies, judicial laws, constitutional laws, acceptable practice etc.) while recognizing and reflecting on their own ethical motives. These like other aspects of ǁiĐked pƌoďleŵs Ŷeed to ďe uŶdeƌstood oďjeĐtiǀelLJ ďefoƌe theLJ ĐaŶ ďe aĐted oŶ suďjeĐtiǀelLJ.