· DANIIL BELOZEROV
Whose project is this?
Choose one option, explain your reasons and understand your part of the work
Imagine you are preparing a page about your work. A colleague suggests telling your story in detail, a specialist suggests showing the result for the client first, and an AI assistant offers three drafts. You need to choose what goes into the first version and which promises you are ready to stand behind.
What can guide that choice? Which part of the work do you take on, and what needs agreement with others? This illustrative situation is our starting point for talking about authorship in a project.
The previous issue of PROJECTORIUM, №000, helped assemble a first project map: idea, person, form, participants and action. №001 examines one specific decision: why you choose this option, what you contribute and where your responsibility ends.
The working question of this issue: whose project is this, and what does it mean to be its author? There is a short exercise at the end. If you apply it to your decision, you can record what you choose, why, and which part of the work you take responsibility for.
From subject to responsibility
- 01SUBJECT
What are we deciding, and for whom?
- 02POSITION
What do I choose, and why?
- 03ACTION
What will I do or pause?
- 04RESPONSIBILITY
Which part do I take responsibility for?
01 / SUBJECT
WHAT YOU CHOOSE TO WORK ON
Start with an illustrative situation. A person wants to organize a reading evening. They are already thinking about a name, a room, a poster and guests. Those questions matter, but the intended evening is still unclear.
It could be a lecture about a book, a conversation among experienced readers, or a way to help people who want to read but feel shy about joining a discussion. Each version needs its own rules, host and invitation.
The organiser chooses the third option: a meeting where an adult beginner can discuss a short story comfortably. The subject of the work becomes the conditions for a first conversation about something read.
That choice helps define the form. A large room and a long lecture may be awkward for this task. A small circle, one shared short text and a question requiring no specialist knowledge seem more appropriate. This is still the organiser’s assumption; it needs testing.
The subject is what you intend to work on and the change you want to create. Name it in ordinary words. Someone else should understand what the project could make possible.
Try one sentence: “In this project, I am working on…” If your answer contains only a product name, add the person and their situation. You will have a basis for choosing between options.
02 / POSITION
WHY YOU CHOOSE THIS APPROACH
Two organisers can work on the same subject from different positions. One wants everyone to have a chance to speak. The other wants to explore one difficult question deeply. Both can make a meaningful meeting, but they will use the time differently.
A position becomes visible when it changes a decision. In our illustrative example, the organiser limits the group and chooses a short story. They want the beginner to have time to read it and a chance to speak.
The decision has a cost: fewer people can attend, and an extended analysis must wait. The organiser sees this limitation and accepts it for the first meeting.
The position can now be discussed. A participant can decide whether the format suits them. The host can propose a structure. A coauthor can object: perhaps a beginner would rather listen first. There is something specific to discuss.
In this issue, an authorial position means a clear relationship to the subject that determines an action. This is a working framework for your practice. It allows uncertainty, discussion and revision.
To test a statement, ask which decision it changes. “We value quality” leaves much unknown. “We organize the first meeting so someone can attend without preparation; we choose a short text and send it in advance” already defines work.
03 / CONTRIBUTION
EACH PARTICIPANT BRINGS THEIR OWN WORK
Return to the reading evening. The initiator chose who the meeting is for. The host devised questions and a way for people to speak. An editor prepared a clear invitation. Someone suggested a rule that completely changed the conversation.
Name each contribution. This helps explain how the result emerged and agree who makes decisions in each part of the work.
A small project may need only a short table. This continues our illustrative example.
| Participant | Contribution | Decisions | Agreements needed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initiator | Subject, audience and initial idea | Which change the first meeting tests | Significant format changes with the host |
| Host | Discussion structure and questions | How to lead within the agreed conditions | Duration, group size and participation rules |
| Invitation editor | Copy explaining the format | How to communicate agreed conditions clearly | Every promise to participants with the organiser |
Another team may distribute these roles differently. One person can do several jobs. Several people can choose the direction together. Record how a shared decision is made and what happens when people disagree.
Each participant can have a meaningful authorial position. Respecting your own choice includes being precise about others' work: which idea you received, what you changed yourself and whose decision helped the project take shape.
The author’s name on the cover does not tell the whole story. A few lines about contributions make that story clearer.
04 / ACTION
A CHOICE NEEDS TO CHANGE SOMETHING
A position takes form through a specific action. The organiser chooses one story, drafts an invitation and discusses the opening with the host. The proposed test is now visible.
Distinguish a decision from an open question. “We will hold a meeting for six people” is a decision when the people doing the work have agreed it. “This will make speaking easier for everyone” is an assumption about the result. Observation may support it or suggest another form.
A second illustrative scenario: a specialist is preparing a page about their work. They ask an AI assistant for three ways to explain the service. One sounds impressive, another describes the result more clearly, and the third promises something the specialist has not tested.
The next authorial action is to choose wording the specialist understands and can support through their work. Then they can show the draft to a prospective reader and ask what the reader understood and expects.
An assistant can prepare options, identify contradictions in a text and suggest questions. A person needs to check the wording. The existence of a draft does not mean its promises have been accepted.
To adopt an option as your own is to understand the choice it expresses and decide what to do with it. If its meaning is still unclear, clarifying the question may be the next step.
DIAGRAM / HOW A POSITION BECOMES WORK
SUBJECT What do we work on, and for whom? ↓ POSITION Which approach do we choose, and why? ↓ DECISION AND ACTION What do we accept, and what do we do next? ↓ RESPONSIBILITY What depends on us, what do we check, how do we respond? ↓ OBSERVATION What happened, and which decision is needed now? ↺ back to subject, position or action
This is a proposed editorial framework. Apply it to a meeting, page, exhibition or new working process. Returning to an earlier point helps when observation changes your understanding of the task.
05 / RESPONSIBILITY
WHICH PART OF THE RESULT CAN YOU HOLD
The organiser can choose the text, explain the format, prepare the space and agree with the host. Participants decide what to say and whether to return. An accurate promise recognises this boundary.
In the example, a fair promise could be that participants receive a short text in advance and an opportunity to discuss it in a small group. Whether everyone enjoys the conversation becomes clear only afterwards.
Responsibility also appears in what happens next. If people expected a lecture but found a discussion, the organiser needs to hear the mismatch, check the invitation and decide what to change. They can explain their choice, acknowledge unclear wording and prepare a new version.
A third illustrative scenario: two people prepare a small exhibition. One chooses the works and their order; the other writes the explanatory text. During preparation, they find that the text gives the works a meaning the first person does not share.
A useful next move is to return to the subject and record the disagreement: which meaning each wants to offer the visitor and who decides the caption. If agreement is not ready, they can keep two options or postpone the disputed fragment. Both should be able to see the agreement.
Responsibility needs specific words: which decision is yours, who needs to agree, what you undertake to check and whom you return to with the result. The length depends on the work. A small step may need only a few lines.
An author can change their mind. Keep a note of what changed and why. The next version can then continue deliberate work on the project.
EDITORIAL NOTE / THE CONVERSATION BEHIND THIS ISSUE
In “Designer as Author”, MICHAEL ROCK considers the limits of authorship as a model for design and draws attention to collaboration. Here his critique prompts care in describing contributions and the limits of an author’s influence. The framework “subject—position—action—responsibility” is this publication’s proposal.
Another useful example is the CREDIT contribution taxonomy on the NISO website. It describes work behind research publications and explicitly distinguishes describing contributions from defining authorship. Our exercise uses the simple question “who contributed what”; it does not transfer the entire scientific taxonomy into every project.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
MAKERS’ EVENING
The first map proposed a session. Now the author chooses between an introductory session, a course and a shop of finished objects.
- BASIS
- The result of one visit can be explained clearly and the invitation can be checked.
- MY CONTRIBUTION
- The session program, organization and final invitation.
- ACTION
- Prepare one invitation and gather feedback.
- BOUNDARY
- Participant interest is still unknown. The first form does not yet establish demand.
06 / APPLY IT
ONE DECISION FOR YOUR PROJECT
Choose a project you can describe now: a small meeting, your page, an offer, a series of works or a new process. Take one imminent choice you genuinely need to make.
Complete eight lines. Brief answers are enough. If you do not yet know an answer, leave it open or write a question that could help.
| Field | Your answer |
|---|---|
| SUBJECT | What exactly am I working on? |
| PERSON / AUDIENCE | For whom does it matter, and in which situation? |
| DESIRED CHANGE | What could the person understand, do or experience? |
| MY CONTRIBUTION | Which part of the idea or work do I bring? Whose work do I build on? |
| DECISION | What do I choose now, and why? Which limitation do I accept? If I am not choosing yet: “pause”. |
| NEXT ACTION | If chosen: what will I do, when, and how will I recognise completion? On a pause, leave this open. |
| RESPONSIBILITY BOUNDARY | What depends on me? What needs agreement with someone else? |
| WHAT TO CHECK | Which assumption or unknown could change the decision? |
Read the answers as one paragraph. If you made a decision, check whether the choice and its consequences are clear. If you are pausing, record that.
An illustrative paragraph: “I am preparing a meeting for adults who find it difficult to start a conversation about a book. I choose a short story and a small group so participants can prepare and speak. My contribution is the meeting’s idea and the choice of text; I discuss the structure with the host. My next action is to prepare an invitation and obtain the host’s comments by Thursday. It is complete when we have agreed the invitation copy. Clear conditions and preparation are my responsibility. We will test whether this format is comfortable for a beginner at the first meeting.”
“By Thursday” is an illustrative deadline. If you choose an action, name a real day or an understandable event in your record.
Ask someone you work with to explain your choice back to you. If they understood it differently, clarify the record. Keep questions and assumptions separate from decisions.
If the decision is not ready, write: “I am not choosing yet. I am pausing.” Add what is missing if you wish. An action and deadline can remain blank.
CONTINUE / DIGITAL TOOL №001
ROLAND · AUTHORIAL POSITION
You can complete the exercise independently. For a guided conversation, the related PROJECTORIUM №001 tool is ROLAND · AUTHORIAL POSITION.
The proposed scenario asks questions about your situation and assembles an AUTHORIAL DECISION MAP: subject, audience, desired change, your contribution, decision, next action, responsibility boundary and questions to check. You review and correct it, then confirm your choice or record a pause. During a pause, the action and deadline stay open.
Begin with a short account in your own words. An existing project map from №000 can be a starting point. Buying the earlier tool is optional.
The price of tool №001 is ₽1,111. We agree the contents, payment and transfer arrangements after your inquiry. The paid scenario is currently in Russian; access to your AI platform is separate.
BEFORE YOUR NEXT STEP
Which decision in your project are you ready to call your own—or would you like to pause for now?