Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

Beneficiaries: Járókelő is the Hungarian translation for “passer-by”, it refers to any citizen who is walking by and can be able not only to see an urban problem or malfunction, but also to report it in an easy and efficient way. Other group of beneficiaries are the local governments and other service providers (e.g. public transport companies). Járókelő has now more than 40 volunteers, mainly from the younger generation. There are monthly meetings for the volunteer administrators/ case managers.The association developed a volunteer recruiting and selection process in 2018.

Co-creation process

Járókelő created a fully citizen-centric and community driven internet-based service to strengthen active citizenship, democratic participation, and improve urban management. Járókelő is a mediator between civilians and authorities, so basically it created a new process for collecting and sending complaints, which had an impact on the whole system of fixing street problems. The employees of local municipalities tend to use their map application on the jarokelo.hu website. There are some local governments that indicate jarokelo.hu for citizens as their official forum of reporting street problems.

Digital Transformation Process

The innovation Járókelő realized is complex and practice-based (bricolage). The solution included not only the internet platform, but a process design, knowledge base, marketing and organisational innovation. By its digital solution Járókelő partly substituted prior co-production practices as well as some of the functions of the public organisations. Technology can enable citizen engagement. Platforms like Járókelő and others are tools that can have a positive impact on strengthening democratic institutions, transparency, accountability and foster public participation in public life. Járókelő functions as a bridge between citizens and local authorities in the common need to solve immediate problems in the built environment. As most of the problems reported are easy to fix, local governments can easily give a positive response to citizens.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

Járókelő has grown considerably over the years since it started, nowadays it has reached around 20.000 visitors per month and registers 30 to 50 complaints per day in Budapest alone. Jarokelo has more than 9.000 registered users and more than 25.000 cases solved (as May 2019, approx. 2/3 of the reported cases are sold). Járókelő is often a „speeding lane”, so problem reporters experience quicker response. The positive experience encourages citizens to make further reports. Citizens monitor each other’s report, transparency is growing. The whole venture has not only grown in terms of the number of visits and reports but also in terms of the number of locations in Hungary such as Debrecen, Kecskemét, Veszprém, Szeged and Szentendre, cities that have joined the system. When the platform was launched, municipalities were unprepared for such an engagement, did not fully understand the platform and how it could be beneficial for them. As many of the municipalities lack the capacity of innovation to make their services more efficient and user-friendly, Járókelő can provide a platform that helps their work. Therefore, similarly to many other civic tech platforms, Járókelő can create a win-win scenario, building up trust between local governments and citizens, and improving public spaces. Nowadays Járókelő is more and more accepted as a trusted partner by public service providers.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Creating the financial background of the association is the biggest risk ever since Járókelő is functioning. Financial resources come from donor organisations (for-profit companies). The Association can plan their budget and operation only year after year. There is a slight risk that the government may introduce a one-stop notification system regarding public complaints, and this way Járókelő could lose its mediator role between civilians and authorities. There is also a little risk, that thanks to technological developments the local governments will have more and more user friendly ways of communication, so Járókelő’s platform may be superfluous. There is also a risk of emerging competitors e.g. a Swedish company trading with crowdsourced online streetmaps. Cooperation with most local governments and public service providers is well-functioning, but cooperation with local authorities has not always been easy. In many cases, municipal offices have been reluctant to cooperate with Járókelő. It really depends on the actual place and the people working in these offices.

Transferability & Replicability

The system can easily adapt to other Hungarian cities. Járókelő plans to develop its system to other Hungarian cities as well, for this they would need other paid coordinators, who could keep the contact with the volunteer case managers on the countryside. So the plan is to increase incomes in order to be able to finance new full-time employees.

Success Factors

Institutional factor: obligation for co-production on part of the public organisations is coded in Act CLXV of 2013 (dealing with complains and public interest disclosures). Even though in Hungary the Act CLXV 2013 deals with complaints and public interest, each city and district deals with them in a different way because the regulations of how to deal with those issues are actually made locally. Járókelő has now more than 40 volunteers, mainly from the younger generation (between 16 and 43 years). They work as web developer and case manager. The volunteers are typically students, free-lancers, have jobs with flexible schedule.  The Association has a well-developed volunteer recruiting and selection process. The IT system is constantly developed and the website is easy-to-use.

Lessons learned

Digital technologies can substitute traditional co-production practices (e.g. remote monitoring or predictive algorithms). The platform of Járókelő provides an easy-to-use technology for citizens, where the reporting users can track and monitor the problem solving process. Furthermore digital technologies can eliminate public sector organisations from co-production (e.g. self-serving communities). The citizens do not need to know which organisation (local authority or a public service provider) is competent to solve a given problem. This knowledge is provided by the Járókelő.hu.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

There are two main stakeholders, that facilitate the activities of the Verschwörhaus. The first stakeholder group are the city administration and the initiative initative.ulm.digital that founded the Verschwörhaus and are responsible for the operational tasks surrounding the living lab. They provide the resources for the volunteers so that they can focus on the various projects and events happening at the Verschwörhaus. The initiative.ulm.digital consists of different local corporations. Therefore, the Verschwörhaus also has ties to private sector organizations. The second group of stakeholders are the volunteers that organize and host the events. They can freely decide what they want to do and through their efforts they bring the lab to life. Most of the volunteers working there have a background in the STEM fields and therefore provide technological knowledge and experience and share it with citizens that lack this kind of knowledge. The main beneficiaries of the Verschwörhaus are the members of the civil society as the Verschwörhaus is an opportunity for individuals to work with tools that are expensive or take a lot of space, for example, most people do not have laser-cutters at home. Individual citizens can experiment with these tool and get help by volunteers, who explain them how the tools work. Furthermore, also young people benefit from the Verschwörhaus, as it hosts events that are targeted to young people.

Co-creation process

The co-creation processes taking place at the Verschwörhaus are diverse, as the volunteers that participate there are independent and pursue projects as they like. Because of this, the co-creation processes are characterized by a diverse set of actors and at the end, a prototype of a technological tool or product is presented. For example, some volunteers planned and developed a cheap circuit board, that can be used by students, individual citizens or the volunteers themselves to experiment with sensors or establish an Internet of Things. In this project the volunteers had the initial idea and came to one of the employees of the city administration to pitch it. The employee of the city administration procured the materials so that the volunteers could construct the circuit board. The volunteers then independently developed the circuit board. The funding was also partly provided by the initative.ulm.digital so it was possible for the volunteers to develop several prototypes. This example of co-creation shows that co-creation happens independently in the Verschwörhaus and is driven by the work of the volunteers. The role of the city administration is to facilitate this process and to solve problems.

Digital Transformation Process

At the Verschwörhaus facilitating the digital transformation of the public administration and civil society is not an explicit goal, however a lot of activities are targeted at developing digital tools or facilitating the digital infrastructure. Furthermore, the focus on digital transformation is also mirrored in the type of stakeholders of the Verschwörhaus, as the initiative.ulm.digital was founded to facilitate the digitalization of the city of Ulm. The digitalization is mainly driven by the outcomes the Verschwörhaus produces (as for example, the circuit board) or the events, where individual citizens learn about technology. Furthermore, the Verschwörhaus also helps public servants from the city of Ulm to digitize processes, as the head of the Verschwörhaus invites them to the living lab and hosts design-thinking workshops for them.  

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

There are several benefits, that arise from the Verschwörhaus’ activities. For example, digital technologies become more accessible. Public servants and individual citizens can come to the Verschwörhaus and play around with tools and technologies as circuit boards. Especially the creation of prototypes leads to an enhanced understanding of technologies. Therefore, the public servants learn about different technologies and open up their minds about digitization. However, the impacts the Verschwörhaus has is partly dependent on how the prototypes can be scaled-up. As the Verschwörhaus is seen as an experimental space, it is questionable if an upscaling can be realized through the work of volunteers. For the civil society the benefits are that they have a space with advanced technological equipment to experiment with technology. Furthermore, knowledge-transfer is enabled, as the volunteers explain individual citizens how they can use the tools properly. The benefits for the volunteers working at the Verschwörhaus are the generation of knowledge and networks. For example, one motivation for the volunteers to create a circuit board was to learn how a circuit board is created. So they took the opportunity to learn more about technology themselves. Networks are generated, because the Verschwörhaus creates the opportunity for volunteers to meet like-minded people and share the knowledge and experience they have.  

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Even though the Verschwörhaus is independent in pursuing projects and setting goals, there are some legal barriers that inhibit the progress of some projects. For example, if the Verschwörhaus needs additional material resources (as, for example a circuit board) they have to follow the rules for procurement of the city of Ulm. Therefore, procuring new materials takes time which slows down project progress. The second barrier is the lack of staff, as there are only two employees of the city administration that work primarily at the Verschwörhaus. Therefore, the Verschwörhaus in not able to host as many events as they like, as the employees are present at these events and their work schedule does not allow for events on every day of the week. This limits the possibilities of the Verschwörhaus, as it is open only at a few days of the week for citizens to come there and work with the different tools. The third barrier is that the communication between the Verschwörhaus and the city administration is flawed sometimes. Reason is, that the volunteers working there, have a different mindset and educational background. Therefore, it is hard for the volunteers to justify what they do and why they need those expensive resources as the decision-makers at the administration lack technical knowledge to understand exactly what the projects are aiming at. This challenge is partly resolved through the efforts of the head of the Verschwörhaus, who is working part time at the Verschwörhaus. He serves as transmission between the volunteers at the Verschwörhaus and the city administration because he has a STEM-background as well but also knows the organizational structure and culture of the city administration.

Transferability & Replicability

The activities of the Verschwörhaus are dependent on the work of a lot of volunteers that contribute time and resources in their leisure time. Therefore, the transferability of the concept of the Verschwörhaus is dependent on an active civil society that is willing to get involved in such a project. Here, the city of Ulm has a few advantages because some local firms are technological, innovative firms, and some of them collaborate already with the Verschwörhaus. Furthermore, in the civil society there are a lot of highly-educated people with a background in the STEM-fields that volunteer at the Verschwörhaus. This economic-political context might be rare, so if another city wants to adopt this concept, they should strategically think about if there are volunteers with fitting knowledge available that would volunteer. The second factor that is important for transferability is, that the decision-makers within the administration as well as the employees at the Verschwörhaus need to be careful not to demotivate the volunteers working there. In this case, the Verschwörhaus enjoys political support and the volunteers can freely decide which projects they want to pursue. However, for an administration this might by risky, as the absence of formal goals makes it hard to justify why a living lab might be necessary for the city.

Success Factors

There are several factors, that contribute to the success of the Verschwörhaus. The first factor is the physical space and equipment of the Verschwörhaus. The Verschwörhaus is located at the city centre and is easily reachable by bike and public transportation. Therefore, it is possible for a lot of citizens to come to the Verschwörhaus. Besides the different tools there is also a kitchen where the volunteers can meet and cook together, so the equipment of the Verschwörhaus also facilitates a sense of community. The second factor is the technological infrastructure, as the variety of tools enables the volunteers to create prototypes. Furthermore, they provide free Wi-Fi and server infrastructure so the volunteers can bring their own technical devices. The third success factor is the political support the Verschwörhaus enjoys from the mayor of the city. The mayor initiated the Verschwörhaus and enables that the Verschwörhaus can act independently. For example, the mayor convinced sceptics within the administration to take the financial risk without knowing the benefits the Verschwörhaus could produce beforehand. The fourth success factor is the freedom of action that the Verschwörhaus has, as they can set their goals independently without limits or requirements that have to be fulfilled. The employees of the Verschwörhaus support the volunteers and provide them feedback, without determining the goals of a project. The fifth success factor is the mindset of the volunteers and public servants working at the Verschwörhaus. The volunteers are crucial in this regard, because the Verschwörhaus is dependent on the input they provide, as they have specialized knowledge that public administrators do not possess. They are highly motivated, as they contribute time and effort to pursue the projects of the Verschwörhaus. The same applies to the head of the Verschwörhaus, as he is also motivated to work with volunteers as well as facilitates the co-creation processes within the Verschwörhaus and communicates the results back to the administration.

Lessons learned

This case study on the Verschwörhaus highlights the importance of political support, sufficient financial and material resources as well as the independence of the organization. To be successful, it is necessary to facilitate the voluntary effort that the Verschwörhaus is dependent on. This happens through the ongoing support from the mayor as well as the operational support from the head of the Verschwörhaus. They have recognized that the volunteers need the best environment possible to work on the solutions and projects and that the task of the administration is to facilitate this environment. Especially important here, is that the collaboration between the administration and the Verschwörhaus still needs some adjustment, as the barriers that are described by the respondents refer to the lack of staff as well as the scepticism of decision-makers within the public administration of the city of Ulm. Therefore, if a lab is too independent from its founding organization, it might be the case, that it loses its legitimacy within the organization, as the benefits produced by the lab do not benefit the administration as well.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

Apart from PricewaterhouseCoopers, beneficiaries include public administrations involved in specific projects such as the Lombardy Region.  

Co-creation process

Uptake of co-creation by private companies is a relatively recent trend, spurred by increased connectivity, technological innovation, and prioritization of user experiences. A recent report from Hitachi Europe found that “58 per cent of businesses have piloted co-creation projects to help them innovate.” More rapid communication between customers and service providers has altered the typical business relationship and thus PwC Experience Centers are becoming critical for facilitating co-creation and producing viable solutions for public sector clients. At the Experience Centers, PwC builds business approaches and methodologies based on their BXT mentality – which recognizes the interconnectedness of Business, Experience, and Technology. It places the human experience at the center of business and technological transformation – ultimately drawing on multiple perspectives and disciplines in development processes. Summarily, the BXT mindset evaluates proposed solutions holistically and stresses the importance of collaborative approaches, building around questions such as; is the solution useable? Is the solution useful? Does the solution work? The Centers’ application of a BXT-minded Service Design for Growth model and its associated co-creation processes help PwC remain adaptable and adjust services to meet specific client demands. The Service Design for Growth model is comprised of four key stages: 1) Exploration, 2) Strategy, 3) Co-Creation, and 4) Growth and focuses on impact and growth delivery. For each design stage, the PwC team introduces exercises to gain clearer understanding, define the service through synthesis of research, generate solutions, and transpose the principles of open-innovation and collaboration in clients’ everyday business. However, different from the sequential and rigid Stage-Gate approach, the process remains Agile in design and replicates the Design>Test>Iterate steps until outcomes are approved by all actors. A final ‘rapid prototype’ is the expected output, which PwC underlines as “cheaply, easily, and quickly changeable.” This method is user-oriented – meaning it is human centric rather than a top-down process – and Co-Creation sessions allow PwC staff to bring together stakeholders in product/service conceptualization to secure equal investment and widespread of the project. PwC also importantly valorizes incremental innovation, focusing on the small deliverables and touch points throughout the design process. At the Experience Centers, PwC teams move clients through the co-creation process that consists of two pre-project phases, Discovery and Session Design, then the Co-Creation Session itself, and lastly is followed by two post-session activities, De-brief and Deliverable Realization. Co-creation sessions can last anywhere from 1-5 days, depending on the client’s request, and are customized to meet specified objectives. The flexible and iterative nature of the co-creation methodologies at the Centers also allows for bi-directional learning. PwC benefits from leading co-creation sessions by refining their own approaches and learning what works with clients and clients revise their own business models to match consumer demands. Applying co-creation approaches brings new knowledge to the firm while also attracting forward thinking clientele. To better understand the specific exercises used in each design stage, we will analyze the use of co-creation sessions and Design Thinking by the PwC Experience Center in Milan, Italy in the Portal for the Lombardy Region project. In July, the PwC Milan Experience Center hosted a collective group including representatives from Regione Lombardia, business and test users, service managers, and other relevant administrative personnel. The participants were selected based on their wide range of backgrounds and intentionally included portal end-users. From the beginning, the co-creation session objective was clearly defined and the following goal was shared with participants: How can we help the project back office (Lombardy Municipality administrators) to operate smoothly to support users in a simple and immediate accession of the project? PwC staff then provided an overview of Design Thinking methodologies and the Design Sprint approach, which aim to promote a multidisciplinary vision, are human-centric, and ultimately deliver solutions in a time efficient manner. PwC staff divided the group into two sub groups, the citizens and the firm, and the groups were given a secret task that involved the user portal in order to initiate the service road mapping exercises. In the mapping process, there was emphasis placed on asking ‘why’ behind each problem solving statement to help uncover what the root issues were for the service providers and consumers. Giving each group a persona with specific user characteristics helped participants develop mutual understanding for the needs of the user portal and the challenges faced by firms developing the products. Further, PwC bases proto-personas used in the exercises on real data and market research to guarantee that the alignment in communication resulting from the session is applicable in a real world setting. After discussing the frustrations and needs of each persona in their groups, participants played a word association game where they could role-play and discover their overlapping concerns. Next, in the analysis phase, participants identified the various touch points for the portal services and discovered where there were issues within the service delivery model. Lastly, they worked together to generate solutions for how to enhance communication between stakeholders and improve the operational flow from a “What I Need From You” perspective. Overall, in the Lombardy Portal use case, the Experience Center’s co-creation session was instrumental for bringing together stakeholders using an all-inclusive approach and for creating an innovative, user-friendly service/product delivery model. The final output was a new ready-to-use portal for standardization in resolving of public works issues and improved assistance for Lombardy residents. The role of front-end employees/public service staff in co-creation. In co-creation sessions, front-end employees are essential for facilitating and guiding participant interactions. At PwC Experience Centers, there are two main types of employees working with external clients. The first group, are the creative specialists (digital engineers, industrial designers, UX technicians) that bring clients’ visions to fruition. The second group, are the facilitators of the co-creation sessions. The PwC staff in the facilitator roles are extensively trained in facilitator methodology and are well experienced at bringing together different perspectives in collaborative design thinking. Critically, the plurality of employees’ job profiles at the Centers allows for creativity in services offerings and guarantees that various types of clients will have the necessary personnel to execute the co-creation session objectives. To quote a Senior Manager at the Rome Experience Center referencing the value of staffing Centers with a variety of skillsets “the team (PwC) must be ready to support the different projects in every moment.” As aforementioned, the PwC staff act also in a ‘meta-consulting’ capacity – sharing information with and teaching internal PwC consultants. The normal managing consultancy team structures are not applicable to PwC Experience Center project teams. Instead, the front-end employees play dual roles as they are also actively participating in the co-creation process and the member composition is distinct from the usual partner, manager, senior associate, and junior associate team format. This is vital for co-creation to remain focused on the user and decentralized in structure. Additionally, the PwC Experience staff are tasked with procuring transformative interactions between stakeholders and ensuring that solutions from sessions are participant driven. This function is divergent from a typical PwC-client relationship, which can be less iterative and more unidirectional. The role of users/citizens in co-creation As noted in the section on how co-creation is outlived, co-creation prioritizes users/citizens at every stage and incorporates participatory design thinking. One of the main priorities of co-creation is iteration – allowing for user feedback and touch points throughout the development process. PwC considers customers/users/citizens as co-designers and their involvement is critical for avoiding product-centric outcomes and replication of past implementation mistakes. Part of PwC’s intermediary role is to relay the value of active user involvement to clientele, including public organizations and governments contracting the Centers’ services. This is executed through PwC’s creation of user and provider ‘personas,’ which helps cluster common characteristics and fosters mutual understanding among participants. Users/citizens need to feel a sense of commonality amongst themselves and development of personas also reveals universal concerns, frustrations, and challenges that were previously unacknowledged. There are several examples where PwC Experience Centers engaged multi-stakeholders and served as platforms where users/citizens could express their needs and wants of certain products/services. In the Lombardy case, for instance, in addition to the co-creation session PwC helped organize a call-for-feedback session, where Lombardy citizens were able to submit their opinions on the new public portal. Through this process, the Regione Lombardia could collect responses and better understand the fundamental issues of the application based on the user experiences. Another example, the Meet Sweden project pioneered by the PwC Stockholm Experience Center in partnership Swedish Industrial Design Foundation (SVID) and Swedish public agencies, highlights how the public sector is growing increasingly interested in the role of users/citizens in service model development. Asylum seekers in Sweden often struggle with long and arduous processes when trying to resettle and legally immigrate to Sweden. Information is lost between multiple visits to disjointed public organizations and refugees does not feel in control of their own asylum journey. To remedy some of these issues, PwC Stockholm brought together private and public actors as well as the migrants themselves at the Experience Center to participate in co-creation sessions and generate human-centric solutions. Assessing the needs of the migrants was essential when developing the layout and in-app design features in the Meet Sweden mobile application. As a result, the participants jointly created a new mobile application that streamlines the asylum process and saves time, money, and energy of all involved actors. This is just one project where livelihoods were improved based on co-creation design thinking and it exposes the potentialities of Experience Centers in enhancing public service delivery models. The role of other stakeholders (private actors, communities) in co-creation Given the Service Design for Growth delivery model’s emphasis on multi-stakeholder engagement, other private actors and the community at-large are valuable contributors, especially in co-creation sessions. Community stakeholder groups and private actors are active in participatory design thinking exercises in order to keep the target focus group, end users, at the core of solutions. Becoming representatives and managers of the public services/products instills important leadership characteristics in participants and ultimately facilitates self-governed, sustainable organizational processes.

Digital Transformation Process

PwC Experience Centers’ principal objective is to bring together customers and businesses in dynamic spaces to establish business models that incorporate user feedback at all design stages. In occupying this intermediatory role, Experience Centers help identify user needs and the root causes of customer dissatisfaction through co-creation processes so the resulting business model used by the client satisfies needs of end-users. This open-innovation environment attracts private companies and public organizations looking to modernize and transform the business-consumer service delivery relationship. Their human-centric nature makes these spaces distinct and helps concentrate varied perspectives and problem solving tactics in a central meeting location. Overall, PwC builds its Centers’ objectives around four key pillars:
  • Customer: placing the user at the center of the design process
  • Power of perspective: incorporating multiple perspectives in solutions
  • Always in Beta: maintaining iterative solutions that can be adjusted
  • Experiment with tech: enhancing existing tech and/or brainstorming new uses
  • Through iterative activities at the Centers, including group brainstorming in the Sandbox rooms, usability tests of company products and design thinking exercises, PwC works jointly with the public sector, its providers and the citizens to develop approaches that align with the above pillars. PwC intentionally outfits each Experience Center with adjustable, client-friendly workspaces and focuses on developing efficient and agile solutions. While Centers in every country belonging to the PwC network abide to a shared set of methodologies and approaches, each has its own focus and peculiarities. PwC structures each physical space differently to match regional and cultural characteristics. One example is the PwC Rome Experience Center. Inside the Center, there are flexible spaces with adjustable walls and moveable tables to accommodate activities organized for and with clients. It has a work café with objects of Italian design to create a familiar environment conducive to make people unwind and spur a positive ideation and reflection process. Additionally, the interactive technology and writeable walls incorporated in the central Sandbox meeting room offer clients unique spaces for meetings, workshops, and trainings with PwC UX design and technology professionals. The Testing Lab and Observatory Room include a unidirectional mirror so clients can carry out usability tests and observe real time client reactions to services/products. The Rome Experience Center also has AI technology, 3D printing, and contemporary digital programming to collaborate with clients in the development of prototypes. Typically, larger organizations have more rigid organizational hierarchies and learned cultural habits, which can make implementation of flexible methodologies difficult. The objective of the PwC Experience Centers are to function as testbeds and incubators for entrepreneurial design thinking and help PwC evaluate hybrid/agile managerial approaches to public sector challenges, in-house. By having the Centers operate in this way, PwC can overcome organizational challenges and share niche-consulting expertise gathered through Center activities to internal PwC consultants. This sort of ‘Agile Desk’ unit of PwC is transformative for internal work cultural – both enhancing workflow and teaching nuanced strategies for managing client relationships. There is a tri-fold benefit from PwC Experience Centers as clients, their customers, and PwC, learn and improve from the co-creation sessions and find solutions to broad, complex problems.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    Living Labs play a critical role in displaying the mutual value of co-creation approaches for public and private actors. In the public sector, there is a hesitancy to welcome consumer engagement throughout the service design process. Governments and public organizations are fearful that actively seeking consumer input is too cost and time intensive and are unaware of the potential benefits for engaging customers in the earlier design stages. Therefore, it is essential to understand the PwC Experience Centers’ role in helping enable public-private mutual understanding and fostering innovative co-creation solutions. They add value by acting as a platform for idea exchange between all actors, inciting and analyzing customer feedback, and promoting multi-perspective discourse. The resulting improvement in services and increase in public value benefit the supply-side and user-side equally, and substantiates the importance of intermediaries in opening communication channels. It enables organizations and companies to explore how to improve their own services and/or processes with consumer engagement as the central focus and at the Centers they can test, fail, retest, and optimize proposed strategies before actual implementation. Social learning and/or contamination of techniques/approaches during interactions at PwC Experience Centers is another key way that public value is realized. Social learning refers to two simultaneous, complementary, and intertwined processes: innofusion (Fleck, 1988) and domestication of technology (Sørensen, 1996). Fleck defines innofusion as the innovation that takes place during the diffusion of new technology amongst participants. In this phase, users discover their needs and wants through a process of technological design, trial, and exploration. The other component, domestication of technology, addresses the pre-existing “heterogeneous network of machines, systems, routines and culture.” Essentially, it recognizes how cultural consumption habits influence user behavior and underlines the value of incorporating users’ creativity in product design processes. For PwC Experience Centers, a transfer of co-creation approaches and design thinking techniques to its participants is valuable for ensuring sustainability of solutions and enabling shared sponsorship to anticipate possible resistance to project implementation. Additionally, there is a cross contamination of techniques between participants as they originate from diverse backgrounds and bring to the workshops different views for how to solve problems. In this process, divergence in ideas and incorporation of distinct actors allows critical knowledge transfer that often precludes innovation and helps identify overlapping challenges. Outcomes generated from co-creation activities at the Centers have included the use of private sector business models by public organizations. By seeing the design elements of private sector models implemented by PwC, clients can interpret and apply similar structures in their own operations – thus initiating a transfer of proven strategies between private and public actors. The ability to measure performance varies from center to center, as there is not a standardized system of analysis at the macro level. At the above-mentioned PwC Stockholm Experience Center, they have begun testing ways to assess the effectiveness of their products/services in terms of end user impact. Labeled as a ‘creative audit,’ PwC Stockholm staff retroactively analyzed their work in the past year. The criteria used to measure impact were developed around questions such as “How many end users have we reached?” and “How many lives have improved as a result of innovative business and service models?” There is a distinction in how PwC aims to measure the performance of Experience Centers against the broader PwC mission, which has traditionally been more concerned with client value. The underlying driver for evaluation is improvement of end user experiences rather than profitability and other conventional business metrics. While still in its early stages, the results from the Swedish case to a certain extent validate the value of PwC Experience Centers as innovation incubators. In addition, external organizations and other Living Labs are also looking to collaborate with PwC to actively monitor the impact of co-creation in their respective sectors. Based in Norway, the Asker Welfare Lab, a citizen engagement lab that “adopts an investment mind-set and treats citizens as co-investors,” has contracted PwC to help develop key performance indicators for the lab’s projects. They are working with PwC to develop a measurement model that, together with Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities, can monitor outcomes and trace results of how the lab is driving innovation. The PwC Experience Centers’ role in measurement practices is still yet to be determined, but validating the Centers’ activities and helping other labs track their progress are chief priorities.

    Transferability & Replicability

    It is expected that such digital transformation practice could be replicated in other parts of the Italian public administration if the need and the will is there, since it is the same socio technical conditions that apply. Whether such digital transformation can be replicated in public organizations located in other national contexts depends on the way public administration is organized in such contexts as well as the level of digitalization of both businesses and society.

    Success Factors

    PwC Experience Centers strive to alter existing unidirectional service/product deliveries. In regards to the service experience for users, more specifically there are two principal focuses:
  • Become more human centered in solutions for problems through qualitative based research approaches and human insight
  • Produce agile and iterative ways of working that draw multiple perspectives and provide timely/efficient testing of concepts for enhancing user experiences
  • Theoretically, in applying these principles PwC can foster multidirectional and collaborative relationships between developers and consumers. Improving co-creation interactions has two potential effects for the customer: (1) It reduces transaction costs, risk, and uncertainty, and (2) it reduces the costs of the interaction for the consumer, which leads to greater satisfaction with and trust in the company (Rajah et al, 2008). These improvements for the customer are interlinked with enhanced productivity for the supplier and for the contracted firm (PwC in this case). In working with the end users throughout the co-creation process, subsequent organizational models used by clients reflect specificities of the customers and provide material for PwC Experience Staff to utilize in their role as meta-consultants to the firm. The resulting service experience/relationship is circular, valorizing iteration and human input in design. Clients and customers can walk away from experiences at the PwC Experience Centers with new levels of understanding and transparency, which then translates to sustained changes in business models and provider-customer relationships. Uniquely, the Experience Centers allow PwC to diversify its approaches away from traditional Stage-Gate methods toward more Agile On-Demand approaches and this has also impacted the inside work culture at PwC. Stage-Gate is a methodology where the project is divided into separate phases and the manager leads the continuation of the process. Developed to avoid reworking or redirecting processes, the Stage-Gate model remains limited in its ability to incorporate external feedback and in its dynamism. Amidst the digital revolution, Agile approaches emerged and gained traction as they were inherently more responsive and emphasized the role of people over processes. At PwC, the adoption of Agile methodologies by its Experience Centers has expanded and permeated across other business units and has attracted new and varied clientele. Further, through the Experience Center unit, PwC experiments with additional forms of flexible approaches and this has contributed to its successes in rapidly developing product/services that alleviate misalignments between the client and their customers.  In the public sector, transforming the service experience to be more human-centric is growing in popularity and in several cases PwC’s involvement has helped spur new private-public partnerships. Another use case from the PwC Stockholm Experience Center is the Storsthlm project. In response to Stockholm’s recent growth, the Greater Stockholm municipalities needed to reorganize management processes in the areas of politics and public administration. Together with PwC, the municipalities and the County Council collaborated on the Health and Support initiative as part of the new Regional Development Plan that aims to enhance citizens’ mobility and access to public resources. One aspect of the plan focused on improving public assistance programing for the aging population. Within the PwC co-creation sessions, outputs were constructed around a core objective: How can we make sure to deliver on helping citizens through the aging process? In working with the public municipalities, engaging with elderly citizens, and integrating co-creation methodologies, PwC helped keep the solution human centered and rooted in qualitative research. The municipalities reinvested in their citizens and relied on PwC business approaches to solve reoccurring issues in administering of public services. This resulted in improved interconnectivity between municipalities and a collaborative program design that moved away from typical silos and disjointed public assistance organizations in the public sector.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The main stakeholders and beneficiaries include the ministry, and the 3,3 million Italian civil servants from all 10,500 public administrations.

    Co-creation process

    The MEF LL approach strives for mutually beneficial outcomes based on the different project objectives. Overall, co-creation is understood as a form of 1) needs investigation and 2) as a tool to enhance productivity and stakeholder buy-in. MEF DSII LL’s focus is to have a physical location to invite other stakeholders and to support co-creation innovation. Co-creation activities are undertaken at the exploratory stage, where it is important to identify the needs and the “current state” of stakeholder interest as well as the operational background context. A preferred option to understand user needs is to prepare co-creation activities based on established definitions and understanding of the users and what they represent. This exercise translates into the definition of personas. These are fictional characters that represent specific types of customers. For instance, a persona could be “Marc – IT supplier.” Marc has a background in IT software development, has certain predefined personal and professional needs, he is introverted but has strong analytical skills. Persona examples are created based on preliminary investigation of the themes and common characteristics of the people that will take part of the co-creation sessions. This involves research to produce an overview of the current habits and practices of the targeted users. After understanding the user characteristics, one then engages in the process of discovering the latent needs and wants of the user. A specific focus is placed on the current problems they routinely face, taking into account the specific situations in which these problems occur. Here, sensitizing techniques are used to delve deeper into the users’ levels of knowledge – uncovering tacit and inherent needs and wants. This leads to the development of opportunities for the improvement of the users’ ‘current state.’ These materialize in possible ‘future states’ and originate from collective brainstorming, ideation, and co-creation techniques. Co-creation at the MEF DSII is also understood in terms of productivity. Despite the perception that deliberate and open discussion among all stakeholders may be time consuming, the real productivity gains resulting from co-creation exercises validate these nuanced methodologies. During and after the co-creation sessions, there were positive outcomes from multi-stakeholder engagement. In fact, it became clear that the discussions organized inside the LL were settled faster and more smoothly simply by giving the opportunity to all the participants to work in a common space during a fix set of time. Co-creation is understood in terms of cost-efficiency. This is especially true in user-centric software design approach coupled with Agile and SCRUM methodologies. These spur the greatest benefits when they are undertaken in a conducive environment where cooperation between developer teams is facilitated. This is why Agile methodologies are synergetic with co-creation and participatory approaches, where developers can act preemptively by interacting with other teams and end users to step-by-step develop development IT systems – gradually building up the complexity of the solution over time and improving overall efficiency. The role of front-end employees/public service staff in co-creation The Living Lab is having an increasingly prominent role at the MEF DSII as Living Lab managers sponsor and promote its usage to external stakeholders. At the MEF DSII, front-end employees take over the role of coordinating the different groups of participants. They also establish and promote the emergence of close relationships between various participants. In this sense, MEF DSII Living Lab front-manager tasks and responsibilities go beyond the physical space of the Living Lab. Positive relationships outside of the lab preclude and guarantee successful co-creation sessions. For the MEF LL to be disruptive, strong alliances should be built with other stakeholders.The facilitation of co-creation sessions requires competences which are highly contextual, anticipate the designer/manager needs and capabilities in stakeholder interactions and adjust to local settings. Due to the novelty of the MEF LL, there is still a need to hire a number of practitioners that possess the right skillsets in order to get the most out of the co-creation sessions. Attracting and retaining a broader range of practitioners that are trained in a varied set of methodologies such as co-design, co-implementation and co-assessment activities should be prioritized. Further, the stockpiling of institutional knowledge on User Research, Usability Testing, Design Thinking Workshop, Business Model Design, Change Management and Service Design is likely to produce skillful judgments and facilitate meaningful interventions which are much needed. The role of users in co-creation The users that are invited to participate in activities at the MEF DSII LL have different profiles and demographic backgrounds. The answer to the question of “who” are the end-users in the co-creation session varies according to the session’s objectives. The users, or customers, with different qualifications are included in the innovation processes based on their suitability to achieve the expected output. The MEF DSII LL utilizes the personas approach to profile the main distinctive features of the LL session participants. Regulatory and compliance, contract law, and technical/IT experts combined with the end user groups are some of the categories which are commonly involved in test experiments. The role and involvement of the users at the MEF DSII Living Lab is understood both as reactive informants as well as active co-creators (Dell’Era & Landoni, 2014). The Living Lab of the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) DSII In the first use case, the users were involved in the MEF LL for implementation of top-down experiments, which are centered on the users and place users as the object of study. The MEF DSII ran a series of usability tests where the objective was to understand how a system should be used in order to produce optimal results. Different end users were asked: “Can you make sense of the tool? Did you experience any issues? Are there improvements needed for a user-friendly designed solution”? The project workers observed use of the products, identified problems and solutions with the engineers, and thought of ways to utilize different functionalities and properties of the IT system being studied. This methodology at the MEF DSII has proved successful when a technology/service relying on user feedback and acceptance has been tested. In such an occurrence, the MEF Living Lab allows collection, filtration, and transfer of all valuable end user ideas to the developers. In other co-creation sessions stakeholders are called upon to participate in an interactive and empowering way, enabling them to become co-creators, and to go beyond user-centered approaches that only passively involve users. Partners are therefore identified with important consideration of active user involvement in order to determine who should be involved in the different innovation stages. Users, or customers, with different qualifications are included in the co-creation processes based on their suitability to achieve the expected output.

    Digital Transformation Process

    Distinct from other Living Labs, the MEF DSII LL is driven by the public sector. It is operated by the public sector for the public sector. Although users are invited to co-create solutions, ultimately and intentionally, the public sector remains the primary beneficiary. The strategic aims of the MEF LL are in alignment with the Institution’s key objectives. Therefore, the Living Lab does not abide to set operational The Living Lab of the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) DSII rules and its administrators are keen to explore potentially disruptive applications. The MEF LL employs a multi-methodological approach that is output oriented. It has flexible objectives that evolve to meet its changing needs. Since its recent inception, the MEF LL has produced tangible results by acting as a platform and co-creation space to facilitate:
  • A co-creation space facilitating multi-stakeholders collaboration and knowledge sharing;
  • Used as experimentation and usability tests to bolster digital innovation;
  • To provide an example, in use case n° 1 we detail out the operations and outcomes of the Living Lab within the so-called “Cloudify NoiPA” project. The MEF DSII is undertaking a large project that, by 2020, aims to expand the number of public organisations it services to cover the entire Italian public administration staff. It is then paramount to involve the end users, which in this case are the other public organisations that currently depend on the payroll and HR services or are expected to do so in the near future, in the design process. The MEF DSII launched a series of multi-stakeholder co-creation sessions to collect their input. The involved participants were decision-makers from other public institutions (for example, representatives from the Italian police and the army). The goal was to collect their feedback on the functionality of the IT platform they use, including insight on what bugs, errors and other technological issues they would like to see improved and to better understand if their needs were being met. In this respect, the MEF DSII LL put into action a methodology for collecting user needs and produced a physical space that fostered different and varied forms of collaborative interaction to spur innovation. The overarching objective is to ensure that stakeholders from other public administrations buy into the programme. Ultimately, by strengthening their confidence in the process, stakeholders are more inclined to support the transformation programme throughout all phases of the “Cloudify NoiPA” project. Another example of the Experience centre functioning as a space that facilitates multi-stakeholder collaboration and innovation was the participatory re-design of the MEF DSII’s new organizational model –much needed initiative to support its service expansion. Rather than making the organizational re-design a purely top-down management decision, the process extensively used and prioritized a co-creation approach. As part of the project, the design team invited around 50 MEF and Sogei top figures to a co-design session at the Experience Centre (picture on the left). Each participant was asked to share their ‘Loves’ and ‘Loathes’ of several pre-identified critical processes and was tasked with proposing their own preferred to-be organizational model by drawing a diagram with the office responsibilities and target processes. The participants were clustered in 7 groups and asked to agree upon a common a to-be organizational model for the group. In this stage, the list of 50 organisational models was reduced to 7 potential options. Afterwards the 7 organisational diagrams were displayed at the living lab during an “Expo” day (picture below) and the employees that did not attend the co-design session were invited to visit the “Expo” to discuss the models with project owners, share ideas, and provide input. This two-way communication ensured implementation of both top-down and bottom-up decision-making. It eventually resulted in the final selection of the preferred to-be organizational model of the MEF DSII. The highly participatory approach enabled by the Experience Centre environment and related co-creation methodologies guaranteed an avenue for the entire Ministerial staff that would be affected by the organizational change to express their design preferences. Ultimately, this can ensure a higher adaptability and success rate in the subsequent phase of transition plan implementation. Additionally, the MEF DSII experiments in semi-real life context and tests its products to collect feedback about usability issues. To provide an example, the MEF DSII has forgone some usability tests in advance of the launch of its updated webpage portal. This portal, on top of sharing informative material to the constituents about the MEF DSII activities, has a specific webpage devoted to “self-provisioning” services. The ”self-provisioning” services are a type of delivery mode that allow the MEF DSII to enlarge the user base of its public administration “clients” in a cost efficient manner. The local and regional public administrations can select, configure, and start services themselves in a cloud environment where they have access to download software from the web portal. Self-provisioning allows users to have rapid access to a customized infrastructure through a self-service portal, thereby limiting installation and maintenance costs, and avoiding costly procedures for requesting and approving new software. Thus, seamless functionality of the portal is critical for incentivizing adoption of the services and the wider buy-in from targeted stakeholders. The MEF DSII carried out usability tests on the portal by inviting a representative set of users to surf the web portal in the “observation room” (pictured on the right). The test subjects were then provided with a personal computer and were requested to navigate the portal by performing a selection of given tasks. In doing so, the users interacted with the test moderator in a consistent and measureable manner. The front line staff employed the “speak aloud method,” advising the users to say out loud what he/she thought were the main obstacles when processing the tasks. This was intentionally used to prevent participants from taking a reflexive approach where they say what they think they are supposed to say rather than their first impression. In fact, by proctoring the usability test in the separate “observation room,” the MEF DSII designers were able to effectively record the natural feelings and reactions of the participants. The metrics used for the web-portal user navigation assessment were, 1) Efficiency, 2) Efficacy, 3) Satisfaction, 4) Learning ease, 5) Memorisation ease, and 6) Error management. Technical tinkering enabled users to diagnose and fix bugs and optimize the customer experience with assistance from engineers and frontline employees.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    In 1995, Mark Moore, in his book Creating Public Value (Moore 1995), coined the term Public Value to encapsulate an essential difference between the public and the private sector. According to Moore, public value can be seen as the total societal value that cannot be monopolized by individuals, but is shared by all actors in society and is the outcome of all resource allocation decisions. This shift calls for a different understanding in how value is generated. At the MEF DSII LL, it was observed that value stems from cross-interactions and knowledge exchange produced in Living Lab sessions and what emerges as an outcome. In its role as a public IT and HR service provider the MEF DSII is expected to deliver services to other public organizations. In this context, when these organizations see themselves merely as a recipient of services, dissatisfaction and claims of non-usable services are more likely. The MEF LL bridges the divide between the provider and end users and helps circumvent issues by integrating the users (other public organizations) in the different product/service development stages. It promotes active user engagement and incorporates user-feedback in a variety of ways. In the above-mentioned example, it is the user-friendliness and intuitiveness of the portal that gives it value. The public value and overall satisfaction generated from the MEF LL co-creation methodology is understood as a continuous and iterative value creation of services and products oriented for end users and prioritizes customer satisfaction. Initially a private consultancy provided co-designed and co-created solutions to the MEF DSII. In a context of contamination of approaches, the value seen in these methodologies in fulfilling customer satisfaction made the MEF DSII interested in establishing its own Living Lab at its own premises. This exemplifies the effect of contamination of approaches between private and public service offerings and delivery models crossing and blurring the differences. This is even more apparent in light of the shift, described in the New Public Management scientific literature, in how public services are increasingly inspired and managed according to private sector models. Public service providers are focusing on customer service and understand the centrality of the users as recipients of the services and holders of its public value.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    Throughout the co-creation session, staff observed an initial resistance by the involved stakeholders when having to follow a certain structure and set of rules during discussions and negotiations. For some participants, embracing the discussion in a different way than conventional meeting styles made them hesitant, impatient, or dismissive. However, at the end of the co-creation session a collaborative behavior emerged and participants gradually acted more like themselves. Seemingly less tangible, but still documented by participants during the co-creation session, was a heightened closeness with the other stakeholders. During the co-creation sessions users were more prone to finding a common ground with others and improved relationships proved to be a critical success factor.

    Transferability & Replicability

    It is expected that such digital transformation practice could be replicated in other parts of the Italian public administration if the need and the will is there, since it is the same socio technical conditions that apply. Whether such digital transformation can be replicated in public organizations located in other national contexts depends on the way public administration is organized in such contexts as well as the level of digitalization of both businesses and society.

    Success Factors

    The MEF living lab is an avenue that promotes innovation – which is understood in two ways. Firstly, as what stands between the ‘current state’ and how things will be done (i.e. the ‘future state’) – encompassing a whole series of drivers such as technology, nuanced business models, and organisational restructuring in line with the Open Innovation paradigm. Secondly, as a disruption to the current way of thinking and acting through the exploration and usage of innovative technologies. The MEF DSII Living Lab innovation approach mirrors the principles of Open Innovation, which is the concept that in addition to its own internal research and development, the unit’s innovation is based on external ideas, resources, and competencies. Openness is crucial for the innovation processes of Living Labs due to the valuable role in the collecting of a multitude of perspectives which allows development of the most competitive and productive innovations possible. This paradigm is based on the belief that knowledge today is diffuse and distributed among various stakeholders and no organization, no matter it size and influence, can afford to innovate effectively on its own. It is critical for the MEF DSII to open its innovation procedures to the critical sources of knowledge that are the potential beneficiaries of their services. Open innovation facilitated by a certain usage of Living Labs, such as the MEF LL, is a step toward an innovation process that is increasingly shifting away from top-down approaches and promoting user-driven ecosystems. The second approach to innovation at the MEF DSII LL can be labelled as ‘experimentation.’ In the stage where a certain solution or ‘future state’ materializes into a proven concept, the building stages of developing and experimenting technology applications are validated. For instance the MEF DSII organized a Design Sprint workshop in its Living Lab to select a cost-efficient and valuable blockchain solution for the redesigning of MEF’s internal processes. The workshop methodology combined divergent and convergent thinking in order to address the business problem/s from different perspectives. This problem solving session led to the prototyping phase of a blockchain application to re-invent and innovate MEF DSII processes. This is only an example on how the MEF DSII Living Lab acts as an innovation method.

    Lessons learned

    Observation of the ongoing activities and results from the initial studies of the MEF DSII LL are encouraging. Several psychological and general considerations have been realized for the correct assessment of its service experience. Ultimately, involvement and motivation in the process were both a pre-conditions to the co-creation session as well as a succeeding outcomes. Although involving users is only one factor among many that promotes co-creation in a LL, it is considered indispensable. Users at the MEF DSII LL were considered involved to the extent where their ideas were helping influence and develop others’ point of views. The success of such real-life collaboration, which aims to promote learning between different stakeholders, hinges on how the co-design process was orchestrated, facilitated, and managed.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The Team is in charge of supervising and providing support for the Agency for Digital Italy (AgID), the operation branch of the Council of Ministers. Since the creation of the Team, two Ministries have played a key role in this setup: the Ministry of Economy and Finance and the Department of Public Administration. The Ministry of Economy and Finance is responsible for the allocation of financial resources for digital transformation. Whereas the Department of Public Administration is in charge of all public sector needs and governs the process of modernisation and reform of the public administration. Lato sensu, the immediate beneficiary is the public sector, including public agencies, the Court of Auditors etc. However, its activities aim at creating a digital transformation impact for businesses and citizenry while making Italy more attractive from a digital perspective.

    Co-creation process

    The Team took a completely new approach to creating value by supporting public administrations in their digital transformation processes. This approach consists of three main pillars: (1) embracing existing and standstill projects necessary to build up the backbone of the digital architecture in the Italian public sector; (2) creating mechanisms, tools and processes to facilitate the Italian government’s pathway to digital change; (3) rolling out a model of active and open collaboration with all public actors. To explain the process of co-creation we provide examples about one project in particular that is underway. In the case of Data and Analytics Framework, at the co-commissioning stage, a public task force has been in charge with collecting requirements and setting jointly the priorities of the project. DAF’s goal is to create a platform for collecting, processing and sharing of public data, which will ultimately lead to improved public services based on the exchange and use of big data. During the co-design phase, extensively the experience of services users – especially internal ones – has driven the creation, prototyping and testing of the first version of the platform. Co-implementation is foreseen later, at the release stage, where service users will manage jointly public assets in the form of open data.

    Digital Transformation Process

    To support and advance the process of digital transformation, as mentioned earlier, the Digital Team has conceived a strategy built around three main pillars, working on them concomitantly. In the first one, the Team continues to implement a set of existing and ongoing projects designed to generate value through digital transformation, while contributing further by establishing new ones. By and large, these projects regard infrastructure and interoperability, services and tools championing a human-centric model. In the second pillar, to support the above-mentioned projects, the actions of the Team has focused on empowering the capacity of public administration in terms of assessing needs and finding proper solutions for developing and designing services fit for specific purposes. Finally, the third pillar is about engaging openly with the public sector through a staged approach, involving first enthusiastic adopters, and eventually get laggers on board.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    Given the nature of change, the Digital Team is contributing to implementing, the timeframe for seeing results matters. Most visible achievements are still measurable in terms of outputs, whereas impact and long-term value creation will have to be assessed at a later stage. In terms of outputs, we can refer to cost savings, time savings and productivity, the introduction of new services and creation of support tools for the public administration. In parallel, the Team focused on creating value in terms of skills and competencies, and a proper culture for digital transformation in the public sector; simplification and usability of public services for citizens and crucial from a societal perspective, the value of transparency.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    Among the challenges emphasized by the interviewed members of the Team can be mentioned: (1) cultural resistance to change; (2) lack of skills and digital awareness among public managers and policymakers, which leads to reluctance towards ambitious projects; (3) fragmentation of databases, power and plurality of suppliers, which slows down the process of adaptation, (4) lack of communication.

    Transferability & Replicability

    At the outset or in a more advanced phase, all the projects follow a user- or human-centred approach and design thinking methodology applied in developing services, directly targeting users (internal or external). At the same time, the Team adopts a management style that is agile, collaborative and efficient.

    Success Factors

    The radical approach adopted by the Team meant a departure from focusing exclusively on strategies and instead support planned actions with structured mechanisms and processes that lacked in the public sector. This required also a redesign of the process management, introducing an agile approach for: budget and staff recruitment, procurement process, software development process etc.  

    Lessons learned

    To ensure sustainability and support for such a complex process of transformation, the Team did not start from scratch; rather it has relied and acted upon already existing programmes that could work while launching new ones considering successful models developed elsewhere. With this in mind, the focus has been on both the definition of a long-term roadmap and, most importantly, the provision of means to make projects operational (tools, communication, etc.). Finally, the Team has engaged with other stakeholders to exponentially increase inputs and achieve greater outputs.