Filed under: interesting, opendata | Tags: context, crime, data, design, justice, madwd
I’ve recently been adding thoughts, material and presenting in London as part of the ‘Making a difference with Data’ campaign. The initiative is campaigning for good, open data that can be used to shape our society. A bit more about the campaign;
“The Making a difference with data project has launched a new website, which will play a key role in realising its aim to spread understanding about open data and transparency in local public services.
madwdata.org.uk says it will show how citizens can use information obtained from public authorities to campaign and influence policies and decisions that affect local communities.
It is encouraging people to get involved by sending information, case studies, links to stories, participating in online and offline forums, responding to blogs and following the project on social media.
In line with the government’s policy for public authorities to become more open and transparent, the project aims to raise awareness about how individuals and organisations can obtain information from organisations including the police, NHS and local councils.” – http://www.rssenews.org.uk/articles/20110222
I was inspired to see a new project called ‘tidystreet’ kick off (via Good). A Uk Neighbourhood in Brighton, is recording their electricity use and recording it in the form of a giant inforgaph on the street.
“Each day the participants’ electricity usage over the previous 24 hours will be marked; and each week participants can choose to add another comparison line that will show how their electricity consumption compares to another region in the UK or even a different country. We hope that the residents, in collaboration with a local graffiti artist, will produce an engaging artwork that will stimulate the street and passersby to reflect on their electricity use.”
So far, energy use has been cut by 15% on the street prompting me to think about how we could visualise and project crime information into local communities. What effect would it have?
Looking back at the Oakland Crime Map which provides (just about) real time data, it is a shining example of a good, comprehensive data set that can be used to provide real time interaction with the city. Just as the joy of stats programme had shown the creators driving down the streets and the relationship of topography from higher up areas – less crime, to visible aesthetic change in the environment on the lower level streets and higher crime levels, how could we begin to embed data into our everyday lives. Would knowing an area had high levels of knife crime stop you from walking down a street or make a community want to gather together and fight the statistic? Could it bring together local authorities/gov/police to make environmental changes to the surrounding area, perhaps a bigger recognition of environment, re-designing and planning areas as opposed to spending money in treating problems as they happen?
Food for thought, but again I am going back to how we can use data to look at effecting change in the everyday. It begs questions about how data can be accessed and interpreted into useful information for communities and the public to use. Over the next month I’ll be posing more of these questions, and looking at existing data sets, their positives and negatives within the field of crime and justice. To cap off you can listen to some of my thoughts after the London conference recorded by Nicky Getgood on how design and context can help make data useful in people’s lives.
Filed under: event, Public Sector Design, Transformation Design | Tags: cocreation, codesign, coproduction, design, event, london, nesta, servicedesign
Last week, I found time to go to the NESTA Right here Right now Launch: Taking Coproduction into the mainstream. The event, focusing on taking coproduction as a marginal idea into the mainstream is the third of a three part series of reports from a collaboration between the New Economics Foundation and Nesta.
Re-reading NEF’s coproduction pamphlet, published two years ago I was struck by Edgar Cahn’s words on the term being hot on the lips of politicians, on both sides of the atlantic. Now more than ever, with our ‘big society’ and having to do ‘more for less’ it’s time to push Co-production in the mainstream. If you’re not sure what Coproduction is I suggest mulling over the three Nesta reports but for a summary of it’s inception;
“The term ‘co-production’ was coined originally at the University of Indiana in the 1970s when Professor Elinor Ostrom was asked to explain to the Chicago police why the crime rate went up when the police came off the beat and into patrol cars. She used the term as a way of explaining why the police need the community as much as the community need the police.”
Going back to Nef’s publication, this is a stand out for me;
“Neither markets nor centralised bureaucracies are effective models for delivering public services based on relationships. The author of System Failure, Jake Chapman, explains why, with market systems, ‘you can deliver pizza but you can’t deliver public services’. Market logic applies to narrow deliverables, but misses out the crucial dimension that allows doctors to heal, teachers to teach and carers to care: the relationship with patient, pupil or client. Centralised bureaucracies, public and private, find it equally hard to grasp these essentials.”
Following the discussion after the launch of the final Nesta Paper, the above quote from 2008 is very poignant. Designers ask three questions. What, how and why and what I’m experiencing from many of these co-design publications is people asking the how?
I often see elements of design as the process to drive this ideology. To me, the design process seems like the glue that will hold these together, and as a way of driving a co-production manifesto.
The question and answer session showed that this how question is where we get stuck. Garath Symonds who works at Surrey County Council sat on the panel as someone who has pushed this way of working on a local level. Questions were fired at him and his reply was,
“Just do it”
If the audience could have clapped, I feel there may have been a small ripple of applause. Gareth was someone that takes risks and gets this. I have always seen so many parallels between what I’ve done as a service designer and coproduction. Putting users (n.b users also mean staff) at the centre of service design and delivery. The mindset of co-creation (often seen in work I’ve been part of) as a vehicle to develop services and push towards co-production. Co-production is not just a design process and I would never say design is the panacea, but I believe expert facilitation attributed with a design process and involving different experts and frameworks at different stages, would be a good way of driving this process. I’ve seen services and social enterprises produced by designers that embody much of what co-production is about and reach a stage of dellivery. I’ll talk about some other points but Nick Marsh of Sidekick picked up on a great ‘that’s a thing’ point about the dependency of users on public services.
The publication had quite a few recommendations for taking co-production into the main stream.
1. Build the key features of co-production into existing services
2. Change the systems and structures that underpin public services
3. Make it everybody’s business
4. Shift the role of frontline staff
5. Get the best out of ‘personalised’ services
6. Put the right incentives in place
7. Build co-production into the commissioning framework
8. Give priority to prevention
9. Encourage flexibility and collaborative working
10. Measure what matters
11. Launch more prototypes in new sectors
12. Embed co-production as the ‘default’ model through a ‘Co-production Guarantee’
Some tough challenges, co-production works as a small scale project, and something very local, but public services face huge challenges, not just in the way an organisation is structured but in their processes and mindset they will need if they want to adopt co-production as a way of doing.
The publication summarises with future thinking moving away from tick box processes to a more human way forward. The big question is, who is going to take this forward?
“This is a new kind of public sector, with complex relationships rather than complex metrics at its heart.”
And how the hell are we going to measure this? Some of the final words of the event focused on co-production being an inherent value, and to me this rings a bell for something I’ve been considering for a long time…that it’s perhaps not a way of doing, it’s not a process, it’s a way of being.
The idea does perplex me (in a good way) but it’s something I want to be involved in, and I believe in it, it’s just finding a language that can dilute it into a process that will aim to achieve the outcomes it strives to deliver. To finish with the final words of the event,
“Perhaps this is not a policy, but a movement”
Filed under: Masters in Design Innovation, Public Sector Design, Transformation Design, work | Tags: change, design, experience, interviews, led, organisation, people, professionals, service, transformation
I’ve been a bit quiet as I’m blogging away on a closed platform, I’m not allowed to share everything I’m up to, but I can cross post occasionally.
I’ve been doing a round of interviews/chats with some fantastic people and just wanted to summarise who I’ve met so far. This is a thank you from me for all your time and knowledge!
The topics ranged from how to embed design in organisations, how project teams might work, encouraging a culture of innovation, systems thinking, meta design, and reflection on what makes up a designer, to name but a few.
Below is a selection of interviews completed so far;
I will be disseminating these over the coming week and pulling out useful case studies and advice for how to embed design in organisations. And meeting some new (and old) faces next week in London.
I’m free (ish) next Monday to Wednesday if anyone is around for a drink.