Esélykör – Circle of Opportunity

Esélykör (Circle of Opportunity) is a voluntary cooperation founded in 2016 by eight NGOs operating on the field of disability-care in the county city, Székesfehérvár. The goal of Esélykör is to coordinate and synchronise the operation of the different NGOs to enable effective collaboration with the local government and enterprises.

In addition to NGOs specialising in disability issues, there are two further organizations involved in developing and mentoring the NGOs of the circle. Of these, the activity of the Civil Centre Public Benefit Foundation (CiCe) is particularly emphasized as a think tank and coordinator. Thus, a total of ten organizations form Esélykör.

Esélykör is open and further NGOs can decide to affiliate. Until 2019, no new members joined the network, but this year the number of network members increased significantly: 15 new members joined the circle. The network thus includes not only member organizations but also the local government. Members of the network reach out to thousands of citizens with disabilities through their membership.

The foundation of Esélykör was necessary in order to remove impediments from the way of effective and efficient implementation of disability issues; the local government had difficulty negotiating with the several non-governmental organizations who run overlapping activities and did not want to address their common interests. It creates a single interconnected communication channel, involving civic organizations and local governments, which is reduces transaction costs of cooperation.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

The main beneficiaries of Esélykör are: people with disabilities living in Székesfehérvár, non-governmental organizations dealing with disability issues, non-governmental development organizations, Székesfehérvár City (local government). The member organizations of Esélykör have significant expertise among deaf and hard of hearing people, people with reduced mobility, people with visual impairments and citizens with mental disabilities.

Co-creation process

Esélykör’s main activities are:

Sensitizing society to the problems of their disabled peers.
Providing services to citizens with disabilities in Székesfehérvár.
Contributing to the employment opportunities of the disabled people in Székesfehérvár through organizing joint programs and operating information channels.
The members of the network work together to promote their interests through Esélykör.

The main innovation of Esélykör is that it has orchestrated strong cooperation among NGOs supporting people with disabilities in Székesfehérvár, and because of this bond it is able to facilitate a prosperous collaboration with the local government, to represent and act for the interests of the citizens it represents. Esélykör has an effect on the involved non-governmental organizations as well through the Civil Centre Foundation’s (CiCE’s) development activities. The municipality, although being an informal network, mentions Esélykör in its strategic documents and its funding has a separate line in the city budget. Esélykör is a bottom-up, voluntary and spontaneous innovation network, operating as an informal network at the moment. Esélykör can be interpreted as a centralized network with CiCE at its core as a NAO (Νetwork Αdministration Οrganization).

Digital Transformation Process

This case study is not about a digital transformation process, but about social innovation.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

As a result of the activities of Esélykör, disabled citizens of Szekesfehervar are able to defend their interests more effectively, and organizations working for people with different disabilities have a cooperative attitude instead of their previous competitive approach. Not only can their services deliver greater coverage, but also the organizations’ tasks and operations become more efficient and transparent. Communication with non-professional organizations (municipalities, companies, the general public) has improved as well. The network is able to use municipal resources more efficiently along the designated goals (e.g. social sensitization). NGOs are able to respond more flexibly to social needs by working in a network. The network can utilize the capacities of all organizations in a synergic way, so it can respond better to unexpected situations. The network has greater social embeddedness than the individual organizations themselves, so they can act more effectively to assert their interests.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

The general management knowledge and the legal knowledge of small NGOs are insufficient, their objectives are not coherent and consistent. Their internal communication is ineffective, it is often full of conflict. Due to lack of management knowledge and internal conflicts, the civil sector is not credible to other actors of the economy. If they are not able to articulate their goals (social impact), then it is not worth working with them. There is no consensus-based social vision, this way there is no strategy. While NGOs compete for scarce resources, which may be good in certain cases, they do not develop a culture of cooperation. The barrier to municipal and civil cooperation is that the municipality can only cooperate with a non-governmental organization that is legally registered. However, this entails significant costs and time, meaning that the transaction costs of cooperation for many civilians outweigh the benefits. These self-organized civil groups are not enter collaboration with the municipality in a network system.

Transferability & Replicability

Based on the effective operation of Esélykör, the municipality would like to initiate similar processes among NGOs of other professional areas to establish networks and to take over complex social services from the municipality. It also shows that the Municipality wants to launch a planned, top-down innovation process, based on the experiences with the bottom-up innovation process of Esélykör.

Success Factors

The city (local government) saw the value of working with NGOs in the delivery of public services, but also realized that communicating with them separately would create an inefficient system and therefore supported the establishment of the network. The city administration visits Esélykör’s event regularly. They also support the communication of the network, which is beneficial to both actors, as of course this also serves political purposes. The administration listens to Esélykör’s suggestions, integrates them into its strategies in so far it is possible, and contributes to their implementation as well. European Union grants and funds also support network based operation models, as these organizations alone do not have the capacity to prepare, submit and implement large and complex projects. Non-governmental organizations cannot take over complex public services from the local government, while a network of NGOs is able to do so. Everyone can put their best knowledge, experience and resources into this network, and build a comprehensive, complex service portfolio.

Lessons learned

The success of the network is largely due to the activity and coordination capabilities of the network administration organization (NAO), the CiCE. The structure of the network, the presence of a NAO, contributes significantly to the efficient and effective functioning of the network, which is why we consider innovation primarily as structural innovation. The professional work of neither the local government nor the individual NGOs has changed radically, but they have become more efficient and effective.

BAGázs Public Benefit Association – change in the lives of segregated Roma settlements

Since its foundation in 2011 BAGázs Association has been working to contribute to an inclusive and accepting society in which Roma people have a chance to achieve their goals. Currently BAGázs works in two segregated Roma settlements in Central Hungary, in Bag since 2011 and in Dány since 2017.

The BAGázs responds to local needs with a complex and flexible program structure targeting children as well as adults (families). The main objective of the Association is to bring about a permanent change in the lives of segregated Roma communities and in their environment (e.g. local institutions, village communities) and to transform the stereotypes and prejudices of the majority society against the Roma. This is implemented through professional work based on local needs and adopted to the dynamics and development pace of the given slums.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

The main beneficiaries of BAGázs live in the segregated Roma settlements of Bag (400 people) and Dány (600 people) in Central Hungary. A survey conducted by the Association in 2017 showed that the local community is far from homogeneous and the households vary greatly from one another, but the fundamental characteristics of segregated areas still fundamentally define the lives of the communities. Less than half of the adults living in the slum have not finished primary school. Of these, one quarter are most likely illiterate, having failed to complete even the first two grades. It is presumably linked to the low level of education that despite nearly half of slum residents having regular work, the average net income is 227.54 EUR (72,000 HUF) per months, and in some families, due to the high number of children, per capita income is far below average. The most pressing problem in the Roma slums in Bag and Dány today is the spreading and pervasive use of designer drugs. The work of BAGázs extends beyond the segregated settlements to the local village communities and to the level of society. The Association build relationships and cooperation with local institutions: local governments in Bag and Dány, kindergarten and primary school in Bag, family and child welfare services, police. ‘Parent Group for Our Hometown’ (SzöSz: Szülői Összefogás Szülőfalunkért) is a citizens’ initiative in Bag. They work with BAGázs from Summer 2018, and they play an important role to getting to know and accept the Work of BAGázs in the village. One of the most important aspects of BAGázs method is the high number of committed volunteers supported the professional work. In the beginning (2011) yearly 20-30 volunteers supported the professional work, in 2018 they have more than 100 volunteers per year.

Co-creation process

BAGázs is working to eliminate socio-cultural disadvantages of Roma people living in these segregated settlements. This can only be achieved if they jointly set up changes in the community of the settlements and in the majority society. The Association seeks to make the Roma people more capable, while at the same time sensitising and making more accepting the people belonging to the majority society. The program structure consists of 8 programs: mentoring for children, free-time activities, summer camp, women’s club, legal clinic and debt management, job hunt, adult education program, mentoring for adults, family consultation. The programs are based on local needs, so they are constantly evolving and adapting to the community. Most of the programs are organised by volunteers, so they are directly involved in professional work. The development of the BAGázs method is the result of a multi-year learning process that resulted in a complex program structure based on holistic, multi-level approach. The learning process is very reflective and conscious based on continuous assessment of experiences and results. Some program elements were largely modified during the last years (e.g. mentoring), and some elements have been omitted (e.g. small garden program or sport program). During the planning and implementation of the different programs the BAGázs Association interact with many stakeholders (e.g. donors, local public institutions, local civil organisations). Many of them play a crucial role in the co-planning and co-production of the programs.

Digital Transformation Process

Not applicable.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

BAGázs started a social enterprise in 2016, which can be a useful additional element to the core activity of the association. BAGázs Bazaar consits of a mobile and a regular charity shop and a community centre in Budapest. In Bagázs Bazaar they do not only recycle used clothes but are also able to provide job opportunities to people from the settlements. This way they can gain experience and prepare for entering the labour market. BAGázs Bazaar is also a Community Centre. By opening a community space in Budapest, the Association is broadening the horizon of the volunteer work, while providing further programs for underprivileged children. Main results in numbers:

permanent presence in 2 Roma settlements (Bag, Dány);
a complex program structure consisting of 8 programs for children and adults, 75% of families in the slums participated in these programs;
15 paid employees (9 full-time, 6 part-time employees);
in 2018 more than 100 volunteers are trained and involved in their programs to bring new patterns to the closed communities;
more than 200 Roma participants.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

The public social service system in Hungary is very fragmented, the colleagues of public institutions in this sector (e.g. case managers of the Guardianship Offices) are often overburdened, the prestige of social work is low, and therefore the lack of appropriate professionals is typical. The long-term finance is also a crucial question for the Association, they try to find more regular supporters. The relationship with local governments in Bag and Dány is not always supportive. Manifestations of antigypsyism, including hostility, prejudice and discrimination specifically directed at Roma combined with stereotypical portrayals of Roma constitute the predominant narrative in all majority society.

Transferability & Replicability

Together with the local social care system and municipalities, the BAGázs is working to solve problems together. As an independent NGO, the BAGázs feels responsible for addressing systemic issues and making changes in related professional areas. Presenting in the press and social media in order to gain more publicity and at the same time strengthen the potential for change within the Roma community.

Success Factors

The BAGázs supports entire families through individual and group programs. In the last years 75% of the families in the slums participated in these programs. There are also employees of BAGázs living in the segregated settlements. Their training and development demonstrates the potential and credibility of change not only for individuals but for the community as a whole. Communication between the non-Roma residents in the villages and the segregated Roma communities is being strengthened, with the aim of presenting everyone’s point of view and providing a basis for co-planning and co-operation. Volunteers participate in the on-site professional work on a weekly basis. The personal and ongoing contact with Roma people gives the volunteers a deeper understanding of the complex problem, and also the personal experience of obstacles makes volunteers more sensitive, receptive.

Lessons learned

The innovative approach of BAGázs method is based on voluntary and bottom-up processes. During the planning and implementation of the different programs the BAGázs Association interact with many stakeholders (e.g. donors, local public institutions, local civil organisations). Many of them play a crucial role in the co-planning and co-production of the programs. The development of the BAGázs method is the result of a multi-year learning process. This process is very reflective and conscious based on continuous assessment of experiences and results. The BAGázs method can be interpreted as an interactive process of innovation.

SIILAB – Hauts-De-France Region: A «Public Innovation Lab» for Digital and Social Inclusion

The SIILAB (Social Innovation and Investment Laboratory) is a «Public Innovation Lab» created in 2016 in the framework of a national call for project to foster the «Digital Transition of the State and Modernization of Public Action». The SIILAB was one of the twelve projects labelled as Public Innovation Labs in different regions. The raison d’être of the SIILAB is the digital inclusion in a region where a lot of people are poor or low qualified or unemployed or in scholar exclusion. Furthermore, digital exclusion (no digital device or illectronism) concerns 1,2 million people in the Hauts-de-France region (and 13 million in France). In the context of e-government and increasing e-administration, access to digital public services is a priority for public actors and social mediation actors. The SIILAB is an innovative answer to this political challenge. Even if 16 stakeholders were at the origin of this social innovation project, the DRJSCS (Regional Directorate of Youth, Sports and Social Cohesion) of the Hauts-de-France region (North of France) is the pilot of the Living Lab. As a resource centre for social innovators, the SIILAB is located in the antenna of the DRJSCS, in Lille. It is also considered as a “neutral meeting point” (a room with tools for design sessions) for stakeholders. As a methodology, the Living Lab is “a space and time of liberty” to experiment new practices in administrations. Above all, the SIILAB is a framework for actors of the social economy as well as public agents from the State or the local authorities to launch projects at the scale of the Hauts-de-France region. To improve social innovations and social economy, the work program of the SIILAB focuses on 7 axes : crowd-sourcing, simpler administrative procedures, illectronism, open data, e-learning, assessment, promotion of social innovations to grand public.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

The SIILAB was created by the DRJSCS and 15 other founders, from the social economy (association networks, social entrepreneurs networks, R&D institute for transfer of social innovations, a regional research and training chair), decentralised directorates from State services (social security, employment, housing, family allowances, environment, energy, social economy, statistics) and national public financial institutions. The Regional Directorate of Youth, Sports and Social Cohesion is the node of a larger network of public and private stakeholders that were used to work together but wished to improve their collaborative practices to create new solutions for digital and social inclusion. Beneficiaries are citizens that need social aids or at least inhabitants far from digital transformation of public services.

Co-creation process

The SIILAB charter sets out methods in order to «foster the emergence of territorial innovations (and) the evaluation of the impact of social innovations». The methodology follows 3 phases: 1) Co-design of public policies with users for their real needs ; 2) Prototyping and test of solutions; 3) Project development with agile methods. Specific tools inspired from design methodologies are used, such as «Lego games» as Icebreaker between people who come from diverse institutions with different professional mindsets. Other tools and co-creative methods are powered by the DITP (a governmental service for the transformation of administrations). A small team of managers and limited-term employees are in charge of co-creative workshops in a dedicated room equipped with mobile tables, large screens and software often forbidden in the French administration. The SIILAB team is beta-tester for these software, creates fact sheets for users and diffuses innovations on social medias. The SIILAB is a space which favours interactions between administrations and their stakeholders, that allows the “right to fail” and a collaborative work based on agility and a non-hierarchical organisation. Even if the stakeholders are first interested by the SIILAB to experiment new digital tools rather than creative methodologies, the Living Lab helps stakeholders to change their work habits to foster innovative projects.

Digital Transformation Process

The role of the SIILAB in the digital transformation is twofold: 1) exploring impacts of the administrative dematerialization on public agents and in particular on social workers in the region; 2) finding solutions for the digital inclusion of inhabitants whatever their social level and the territory where they live. Indeed, the national program Action 2022 aims at 100% administrative dematerialization in 2022 and at reducing the number of public officials: Internet has to become the main access to public services. But what will be the consequences in a region with a lot of inequalities? The SIILAB is a Living Lab for helping public agents with new digital practices, not only in the dematerialization of administrative requests but also to co-create new procedures beyond paper forms removal. Collaborative workshops were organised on the themes of end-users (digital vulnerability, reception in social centres), digital training of social workers or about authorised software (licences, security, hacking). To reduce the negative impacts of digital exclusion on fragile populations, the SIILAB designed and prototyped an interactive map of all social centres or other institutions than can help beneficiaries in their digital administrative requests. According to a Living Lab approach, a first inventory of local initiatives to improve the digital accessibility to public services was realised, by students of the university. A prototype of the map was invented in co-creative sessions, then tested on an “interactive table” in the SIILAB at Lille during the national «Week for Public Innovation» (2018). Accessible on the web, the interactive map constitutes a new public service against illectronism. An incremental updating of the map (800 places in 2018, 1500 places in June 2019) and user-returns about quality and accessibility are also a type of “evaluation in progress” of this new digital public service.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

The SIILAB is a tool for administrations to experiment new digital tools and work practices without the logic of signature books and with less political control than usual. As a public innovation Lab, the Lab managers are authorised to test disruptive rules for public procurement, such as the purchase of small equipment on the Amazon website or the use of a credit card. Thanks to the Living Lab, public agents can test online meetings or the national digital platform called “demarches-simplifiees.fr” (simplified processes) that helps public officials to co-product e-administration. As a Lab dedicated to social economy, social innovation and public innovation, the SIILAB is used by more than 150 public or private actors in the region. For transforming the SIILAB into “a network of networks”, the aim is to enlarge the audience of the Living Lab thanks to a mailing list of 1600 addresses (in 2019) of associations, local communities, State administrations, or through more than 1000 followers on Twitter. This social network is also used by the Lab managers to bypass the usual hierarchical communication with the ministries and elected people. Examples of outcomes are: a digital kit to train social workers in digital inclusion practices (access to social rights with Internet); a video prototype to explain «domiciliation in Social Centres»; an interactive map of places for digital inclusion not far from home (training, help of social workers to guide users in e-administration). The map has three aims: 1) helping inhabitants in their digital requests; 2) showing inequalities between citizens according to the territories where they live; 3) encouraging public authorities for improving the geographical diffusion of resource centres for e-administration.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

The SIILAB is a Public Innovation Lab managed by a State institution, the DRJSCS, under the authority of the Préfet (representative of the State authority in the regions). Even if a national call for project is a lever for public innovations, the change in administrative routines and the hierarchical top-down decisional process are real challenges. Another challenge linked to the call for project as a tool for public innovation is the short-term funding, too short to co-create with users and to prototype innovations. So, there is a gap between political discourses about co-creation and Living Labs (that need funds) and the national incentive for reducing public expenditure. According to the SIILAB experiments, a second bottleneck in transforming administrations is the digital process in itself. Cost, skills and data security can be barriers for the use of software in co-creative sessions with any public agent engaged in the digital transformation. And co-creation is not a priority when the digital transformation in public services implies more work to implement new software, new design and new rules (once only, easy to read and understand, etc.). Another barrier to the efficiency of Public Innovations Labs is that projects are based on partnership, too often based on engaged people but who could leave the experiment following changes in their careers.

Transferability & Replicability

The diffusion of the SIILAB experimentations is made by online social networks or through events “in the real world”, in the region or in France. From 2016, the SIILAB projected the scaling up of innovations at the regional scale, at the trans-border scale with Belgium and at a national scale through social economy networks. At a regional scale, the mapping of digital resource centres is a way of replicability in more and more local communities. At a national scale, other public innovations labs or social innovators come to visit the SIILAB in Lille in order to transfer some experiments. But considering the short time funding of the Living Lab, the uncertain future of the SIILAB makes it difficult to imagine the diffusion phase. Moreover, as a public innovation Lab created for the Hauts-de-France region, the SIILAB has no administrative authority to diffuse new public actions in other regions in France. These regions could just try to imitate the SIILAB, but probably in the limited framework of a call of project. A way to get around this obstacle was the participation of the SIILAB to the creation of a «Connected France Hub», a regional hub of public and private actors for digital inclusion (national call for projects from the “Bank of the Territories”). Linked to the national incentive for creating Living Labs in the public services, replicability of Public Innovation Labs as tools for administrative transformation goes also through a MOOC developed with the Sorbonne University in Paris to explain how to create a Public Innovation Lab.

Success Factors

For the government that launched projects for transformation of public action, the criteria of success are: cost-savings in public expenditure, a better quality of public services for users, a better work environment for public agents, an innovative digital project, the quality of governance. For the SIILAB, additional success factors are: an increased organisational performance, the learning of collaborative practices, a better implementation of public policies, new services for vulnerable people (poor, elderly, undergraduate, immigrants…). Moreover, SIILAB managers consider as a success the visibility of the social innovations by the Préfet (representative of the State in the regions) and by the government in Paris. Success criteria of the SIILAB were measured in 2019: more than 150 stakeholders; more than 3050 persons participated in 310 workshops or events (more than 200 participants in November 2018); 50 projects launched; 1600 persons in the mailing list; more than 1000 followers on Twitter and around 25 000 views per month; national prices as indicators of recognition and efficiency (Télécoms Innovation 2018, Best innovative strategy 2018). But a success factor to achieve these success criteria was the SIILAB capacity to reinforce the previous habits of decentralised State services to work together, as well as with the public and private actors of the social economy, including associations, universities and local authorities.

Lessons learned

The role of the SIILAB, as a Public Innovation Lab supported by the French Government, is to experiment digital tools and co-creative methods, often inspired from service design. Public Innovation Labs are elements of a national policy that aims to restore the legitimacy of public action by responding to three objectives: a social issue (linked to digital change), a budgetary issue (cost-savings), a governance issue (Public, Private, People Partnership). The specificity of the SIILAB is focused on social innovation and digital inclusion in a region where a lot of vulnerable people are far from e-administration. Its governance (a committee for strategic decisions, a self-organised partnership for actions, a regional networking) is one model among others in Public Innovation Labs. Introducing the Living Lab methodologies in a bureaucratic organisation allows the “right to fail” and new relations between State administrations, local public agents and private stakeholders (no subsidies but funds for a collective project). But some bottlenecks appeared through the SIILAB or other Public Innovation Labs: 1) co-creation with intermediate-users (public agents, associations) and not final vulnerable users; 2) when an innovative practice becomes a norm, it is more difficult to quantify how it changes public action; 3) it is difficult to evaluate the costs avoided by co-creation; 4) a short-term funding (2 or 3 years) does not allow to test innovations and change practices; 5) the Anglo-saxon model of «impact measurement» does not allow to evaluate the collective value creation (Commons).

Residential care services and value creation.

This case study looks at a for-profit housing and care provider for older people and people with disabilities in Scotland. The organisation provides care at home, housing support, care homes and responder-type services in ten local authorities in Scotland. This organisation is skilled in providing services through the support of digital systems, such as the emergency alarm system that aims to customise services for individuals and to give users more control over the service.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

Co-creation process

Three key points of value co-creation have been identified in this case study. First, at the stage of service design, the service users co-create value through joining the Tenants’ Group, using the complaints procedure, attending the organization’s AGM and filling in survey questionnaires. The service users are also involved in the development of the digital system to offer opinions on the look, feel and functionality of the system. Service users are also involved in the staff recruitment. Second, at the operational planning, value co-creation process is recognized during the collection of information about service users, where the role of service managers is highlighted. The care package is developed with individual service users, who thus participate in operational planning and co-create value for the service. Third, at the stage of service delivery, the service users play a pivotal role in creating value through their day-to-day involvement in service interactions. The service users and frontline staff build a service relationship through service interactions, which facilitates the service users to create value. Moreover, supporting processes and technology are recognized as an important interface to facilitate value creation, by enriching the experience of service users, increasing their social contact with family and friends, and helping staff to better understand user needs and to handle emergencies more effectively.

Digital Transformation Process

We have not looked at the digital transformation. However, technology and digital systems were mentioned as facilitating the effective provision of services in this case study.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

The outcomes and impacts are identified in two aspects. First, the service users’ involvement in service interactions and operational planning has contributed to the service improvement at the micro level and thus has impacted the value that individual service users receive from the housing and care services. Second, the frontline service staff have learned through service interactions with service users, which enables the service staff to perform their job more effectively and thus impacting their capacity to facilitate value creation and co-creation.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

There are some challenges related to the stages of service design and service delivery. At the service design stage, the service users are less likely to be involved in the design of service while various respondents have attributed the low involvement to the service users’ apathy to involvement outside service interactions. Three main challenges are identified at the service delivery stages. First, ‘too much care’ and a disparity in care offered by different frontline staff could result in service users’ unrealistic expectations of service and therefore, value destruction. Second, a lack of continuity in care to foster relationship building; personality clashes; a lack of resources; and a lack of knowledgeable or appropriately trained staff are seen as four ways to hurdle fostering service relationships and thus, pose challenges for value creation.

Transferability & Replicability

The case study organisation is a Scotland based organization, but its idea may be applicable to other contexts. However, this case study has not explored this aspect.

Success Factors

One central success factor identified in this case study is that knowledgeable, skilled staff who take a caring approach are important to value co-creation. For human-centred services in particular, this supported the development of the service relationship and trust.

Lessons learned

Four practical lessons have been learnt from this case study. First, frontline service staff play an indispensable role in co-creating value during service interactions. It was necessary, therefore, that staff were appropriately trained and knowledgeable. They needed the appropriate soft skills to manage the service relationship and engage with and understand service users’ narratives to co-create value. Second, services need to be accessible to service users and support the co-creation of value. Third, the organizational culture enabled or constrained value co-creation for service users. Culture had implications for the extent to which service users view themselves and public service staff view service users as capable of contributing to value creation processes. Finally, qualitative performance management tools should be developed to capture the multi-dimensional, subjective nature of value.

New Social Security Agency in Scotland

This case study looks at the development in designing the new Social Security Agency in Scotland and the experience of the current system which has been provided by the UK government. Social security is currently an area of change and reform in the UK, with the provision of the service being devolved from the UK Government to the Scottish Government under the Scotland Act (2016) which has permitted Scottish Ministers to develop new policies of social security entitlement. Subsequently, the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 has established the framework for the new system being developed in Scotland. It is with this Act that Social Security Scotland have been founded. This case study focuses on the design of new social security services in Scotland but reflects on service users’ experience of the social welfare system led by the system administered Department of Work and Pensions.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

The key stakeholders include the Scottish Government, policymakers, stakeholder organizations, and frontline staff of the social security system under the Department for Work and Pensions. The key beneficiaries include the service users of the social security system, organizations and wider society.

Co-creation process

Two key points of value co-creation have been identified in this case study. The first point is service design, where ‘experience panels’ are established to draw on service users’ experiences of the current social security system. At the same point, Stakeholder Reference Groups have also been organized for local authorities, third sector organizations and, to some extent, for-profit organizations to share knowledge about social security. These processes have engaged stakeholder organizations in providing an important perspective and knowledge to shape service improvement while connecting service users who have lived experience of the services. The second point is service delivery, where the service users access appropriate services and interact with frontline service staff knowledgeable and capable of supporting the service users. Positive relationships developed from the interaction are regarded as contributing to value creation. The service users’ families and friends are also seen as facilitating value creation by helping service users with complex procedures to claim benefits.

Digital Transformation Process

The digital transformation process was not examined in this case.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

The main impacts are twofold. First, at the service design stage, the involvement of individuals who have directly experienced services has greatly contributed to service reform. A lived experience-based approach has been described as outweighing any value that could be created by professionally designing the service. Second, at the service delivery stage, service interactions between the frontline service staff and the service users influence the service users’ service experience and thus shape their perceptions of value. A trusted relationship developed between the service users and the frontline service staff would contributed to the effectiveness of the service and ultimately facilitate value creation for the service.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Four challenges have been identified for the service design stage. First, the involvement of public service users in the experience-led/based service design has raised concern over excluding stakeholder groups. Second, there are incongruent perspectives of value and goals. Third, there has been concern over whether strong political leadership is in place to effectively manage and preservice the involvement of service users. Finally, the legacy of the UK social security system has been found constraining the value creation process. At the service delivery stage, constraints on value creation and co-creation are mainly reflected on barriers to service interactions, including the inaccessibility of services, a lack of support for vulnerable service users’ interactions with frontline staff, a lack of knowledge, expertise and a caring approach among frontline staff, a lack of continuity in service provision, and the stigmatizing, inhumane and adversarial culture in the current system.

Transferability & Replicability

The experience of developing the new Social Security Agency in Scotland may be transferred and replicated in other public service settings.

Success Factors

During the service design stage, a progressive approach, such as capacity building sessions, has facilitated and encouraged vulnerable service users to share their knowledge and ‘unique perspective’ on service experience to make novel service solutions to having the opportunity for value co-creation. During the service delivery stage the frontline staff’s knowledge and capacity to support service users are perceived as critical to the process of value co-creation by making the application for social benefits easier and developing positive service relationships with service users and frontline staff.

Lessons learned

Three practical lessons have been learnt from this case study. First, the frontline service staff play an indispensable role in co-creating value during service interactions. They need to manage the service relationship and possess the necessary soft skills to engage with and understand service users’ narratives to co-create value. Hence, appropriate staff training is emphasized. Second, service processes need to be accessible and support value creation for individual service users. Third, the organizational culture translated through both the approach of frontline staff and the supporting service processes has implications for the extent to which service users view themselves and public service staff view service users as capable of contributing to value creation processes. Thus, the organizational culture was important in supporting value creation.

Design of the new Social Security Agency in Scotland

This case study looks at the design of the new Social Security Agency in Scotland and its services. The design aims of this case include creating a system that is distinctive from the one that have been administered by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP); creating a seamless experience or journey for service users for the new social security services; enabling easy access to the social security system for service users; and developing effective backend processes.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

The key stakeholders include the Scottish Government, policy makers, agency staff working on the operational level, and service users and external stakeholders participating in service design and testing. The key beneficiaries are public service users of social security services, the agency itself and wider society.

Co-creation process

Digital Transformation Process

Not relevant

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

Since the case is still at the design stage, it is too early to evaluate the outcomes or impacts of the service design. However, the analysis of evidence shows that the service design has supported a cultural shift within the Scottish Government towards a user-centred narrative.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Three broad challenges for service design have been identified in this case study. First, the setting of social security services is extremely complex. Although it is necessary to divide this large-scale task of service design into small and manageable chunks, it is challenging to fit the design of each chunk back together without losing the sight of a big picture. The complexity of the service setting has negatively affected the effectiveness of service design. The second challenge is also related to a public service setting where it is difficult for wider cultural change to take place. There is an understanding that public services could produce incremental improvement rather than complete solutions. Therefore, there is a bottleneck of the scope of continuous improvement. Third, the case study has revealed a lack of service designers and other user-centred professionals in public service context, which leads to a lack of input from a professional service designer in some parts of public service design process.

Transferability & Replicability

The methods of service design in the new Social Security Agency in Scotland may be transferred and replicated in other public service settings.

Success Factors

The success factors are twofold. First, the case study reveals that the service design process has supported a service user perspective, which focuses on the needs of social security service users and enables easier access to the services for them. Second, the service design process in the case has supported a holistic view of services, which provides a strategic overview of how different services under the social security interact and facilitates the creation of a seamless service experience for service users.

Lessons learned

Four practical lessons have been learnt from this case. First, service design is facilitated by a degree of flexibility at the operational level. Second, a holistic view of the service experience needs maintenance throughout the design process. Third, service design in practice requires capacity building and organisational learning. Fourth, the rationale of human-centred design approach needs to be balanced against the protection of the public purse.

Ageing with intellectual disabilities

The Spanish case study of the Alas Foundation project to serve ageing people with intellectual disabilities describes the co-creation and delivery efforts of a Public Service Innovation Network for Social Innovation (PSINSI) formed by the foundation management, employees, families, and to a minor extent, the disabled elderly. Current services for this population group are limited to their earlier life expectancy. But the improvement in their life conditions and health have led to extended life expectancy and the need of new services that must combine specialized professionals and care of, in many instances, mature and autonomous persons.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

Stakeholders and Beneficiaries include:

Fundación Alas and the Special Employment Center Trefemo
The families that support the Foundation
The disabled elderly supported by the Foundation
The regional government of the Comunidad de Madrid (Spain)

Co-creation process

The content of the participation process included three related innovation elements:

The services model. This affects the facilities and types of services the elderly demand. But it also affects the type of professionals involved in providing the services. Finally, the measurement of the relevance and impact of the services is subject of review.
The facilities’ design. Residences need adaptation, but also the Foundation must develop new facilities to train and fulfil the needs of ageing disabled.
The relationships with other agents. If the earlier two might be related to services innovation, this concerns the processes and how the Foundation launches and consolidates new relationships with different public and private agents to help elderly sustain themselves and fulfil their rights to autonomy and proper care.

Digital Transformation Process

No digital transformation process involved.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

The ageing project of Fundación Alas is centered in solving wicked problems associated with the longer life-expectancy of people with disabilities (Plena inclusión, 2014) thanks to the improvement on their life conditions and treatments. Far from technological, the types of social innovations the foundation designs and executes are related to a public function that public agents in Madrid (Spain) have traditionally left to private agents. Indeed, at least in Madrid, the public agents have failed providing adequate services to this community and currently acts as mere funder of private initiatives – mostly supported through conventional tenders. The effectiveness of the intervention strategies for elderly with intellectual disabilities depends on the ability of the technical teams to develop and communicate clearly the plans to other professionals (Morgan, 1990; Shaddock et al., 1986 in Novell, et al., 2008), but also on the capacity, training and motivation of professionals who have the direct responsibility to carry them out (Aylward, Schloss , Alper and Green, 1995 in Novell, et al., 2008), as well as the coordination between all of them.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Dimension: Physical fitness

Lack of health care standards
Communication and identification difficulties of pain threshold
Participation in the promotion and living a healthy lifestyle
Lack of specific resources and standardised protocols for the evaluation of elderly with intellectual disabilities
Insufficient training of socio-health professionals in ageing issues and intellectual disabilities
Insufficient physical therapy

Dimension: Emotional well-being

Integration of the information from the field of dual diagnosis[1] and the gerontology area[2]
Environmental situations having a negative impact on the adaptive abilities of elderly or could raise behavioural problems or stress
Training professionals in ageing and dual diagnosis

Dimension: Material well-being

Adaptation to the needs of elderly with intellectual disabilities
Less opportunities to participate in meaningful leisure activities, less stimulating environments, lack of staff preparation and relationship difficulties between individuals
Lack of experiences with the rest of the ageing population
Segregated and expensive environments
Existing geriatric or gerontological intervention models are scarce and are not easily transferable to services
Decreased productivity associated with ageing, difficulty to make personal and social adjustments beyond the 50
Few work or occupational itineraries to support elderly with this condition
Pension plans different to those available for those without disabilities
Lack of assessments due to disability and ageing to maximise compensation when leaving work activity

Dimension: Human Rights

Physical access
Access to information
Disability recognition associated with ageing
Right to decide where and with whom to live
Right to health, training and rehabilitation
Barriers to keeping an adequate standard of living and social protection
Right to develop and keep plans and goals

Dimension: Self determination

Lack of information necessary to identify or recognise abuses
Transition to retirement getting actively involved in self-care

Dimension: Social inclusion

Opportunities to participate actively in their environment
Lack of relevant social goals and aspirations
Greater contact with people without disabilities and greater autonomy
Lack of promotion of the inclusion of the elder with intellectual disability by the support professionals
Ageing of the main carers
Lack of coherence in the implementation of an inclusive model
Shortage of personnel

Dimension: Interpersonal relationships

Continuous changes of professionals
Housing size
Physical and social barriers
Long stories of institutionalisation and change of services that make it impossible to consolidate a social network
Behavioural problems
Adaptive and communication skills

Dimension: Personal development

Feeling of ‘disconnection’ with the activities carried out in earlier stages
Favouring free-time of their main carers
Lack of a process of active ageing
Lack of services and opportunities that promote rest, fun and personal development

[1] For example, to know the most frequent psychiatric conditions in the population with ID or specific etiologies that present a higher risk of certain types of mental illness. [2] Identification of which behavioural and psychological changes are associated to the overall ageing process.

Transferability & Replicability

The institutional needs and problems detected in the main services that might affect the project of Fundación Alas are summarised below (Novell, et al., 2008):

Services of homes-residence / supervised homes

Personnel ratios are insufficient, both in residential homes and in homes, when it comes to addressing needs arising from cognitive deficits, behavioural issues and the functional deficits associated with ageing.

Occupational Centres

The ageing process generates continuous adaptation needs that pose an opportunity for the innovation of these services. Most generally, personnel in the occupational centres are not well prepared to carry out the work of Psycho-geriatric Day Centres – e.g., they are not provided with physiotherapy services. These centres usually lack transition services from the world of work towards a compatible satisfactory activity able to meet the needs of people who cannot continue in Special Employment Centre but still can work and get paid and that enhances their skills.

Leisure and educational activities

Elderly with intellectual disabilities need enough and varied social activities, adjusted to their age, to choose from according to preferences and accessibility. Enjoying free time and leisure is one of the most rewarding activities and making them accessible is a good indicator of the quality of a service. The elder with disability has motor and cognitive difficulties to self-organise and, depending on the level of disability, also to enjoy leisure. Promoting adapted leisure for elderly would benefit them normalising activities and improving adaptive behaviours, socialisation, fun and distraction, and quality of life.

Individual level

The need to enhance their self-esteem and personal growth, fighting loneliness; the need of full social acceptance; and the need to make decisions about aspects of one’s life in the most similar way possible to people without disabilities.

Success Factors

Dimension: Physical fitness

Sleep, food, activities of daily living
Health (physical and mental), health care and access to socio-health services (including technical aids)

Dimension: Emotional well-being

Community environments, ordinary or supported employment, significant learning opportunities, absence of problems social or emotional behaviour and support
Depression and anxiety, stressors – social exclusion, stigmatisation or lack of social support
Healthy lifestyle and food, access to valued activities, health and well-being in the housing environment, adequate emotional response to separation or death of parents

Dimension: Material well-being

Economic status (i.e., having enough income to buy what one needs or likes), employment (i.e., having decent work and an adequate working environment), or housing (i.e., having a comfortable home where one feels comfortable)
Adequate standard of living
Social protection
Searching, getting, keeping the employment and having the possibility of returning to it
Having the right to choose where and with whom to live

Dimension: Human rights

Rights that may be violated at ageing
Proposals to empower disabled elderly to educate them to self-manage their lives and defend their rights

Dimension: Self-determination

Autonomy or personal control self-regulation or setting own goals and values
Training or psychological competence
Self-realisation or own elections

Dimension: Social inclusion

Active participation of the elderly in their community
Residence or housing options that favour social inclusion during ageing

Dimension: Interpersonal relationships

Natural supports: significant relationships with family and friends
Interpersonal relationships through leisure experiences integrated into the community
Collaboration with community services belonging to the network of services for the elderly
Interpersonal relationships (friends, partners): emotional, sexual and social

Dimension: Personal development

Education, personal competence, performance, functional skills
Use of support technology and other alternative communication systems

Lessons learned

This case presents the collaboration process of a private institution with users and their families to provide a public service that is not properly covered by the public sector. It answers a pressing concern of the families and the elderly with disabilities, as this latter group has become a relevant part of the total disabled population. This is not the normal case of a PSINSI, as the public agent is just one of the actors involved by the initiating agents, and mostly covers what relates to the overarching legal or normative framework of the caring for the ageing disabled people. Besides those differences with other social innovation cases, we appreciate similarities that even in the absence of a strong public actor are well covered by the PSINSI theoretical framework. This is relevant as it may indicate that the focus on the social innovation aspect might drive agents, independent of their ascription, to form similar types of networks.

Carpe Diem Dementia Village

This case centres around dementia care and concerns the development of a ‘dementia village’ in one of Norway’s largest municipalities. The project is based on inspiration from the Dutch dementia village, the Hogweyk, and was initiated by politicians in the municipality after a visit to the Hogweyk in 2013. The new dementia care facilities are scheduled to open by the fall of 2020.

The village will have room for 158 residents suffering from dementia, with 8 residents living together in 17 smaller buildings with surrounding gardens. Inside the village there will be access to different facilities, such as a small shop, café, hairdresser and gym, and indoor and outdoor spaces for social gatherings and activities.

The idea behind the dementia village is to create an environment where residents can be free to move around in a safe environment, with more access to activities and recreation. This is contrasted with the more traditional nursing homes, which are often criticized for being too focused on the somatic aspects of care, which limits room for socializing and meaningful activities. By creating a more ‘homely’ atmosphere both inside and out, the municipality is seeking to provide dementia care services that enable seniors to continue living their life as before, as much as possible.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

Various actors in the local community become relevant stakeholders in this case, since one of the aims is to create more active links between the community and the elderly care services. Private businesses, civil society (NGOs and volunteers) and other public sector actors are invited in to provide inputs in the ‘co-creation’ of the village at the ideation and planning stages of the process. Moreover, local stakeholders are invited to ‘co-create’ the services when the new care facilities open. This can be volunteers taking part in arranging activities, schools or nurseries setting up performances, or private businesses providing services such as hairdressing, cafés etc. The main beneficiaries of the case are senior citizens suffering from dementia and their next of kin.

Co-creation process

The municipality has placed emphasis on co-creating the new services with potential residents, their next of kin, and other local stakeholders. To co-create the new services, the municipality is drawing on inspiration from service design and co-design. The design processes are mainly being carried out ‘in-house’ and facilitated by a development team with experience and training in facilitating innovation processes.

Digital Transformation Process

We have not focused on the technological aspects of the dementia village in the case study. However, introduction of new technology will be important for the development and operation of the new services.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

There are two ways of understanding ‘results’ in the context of this case. First, the main results of the dementia village project are linked to the construction of the new care facilities. Second, we may also highlight the results of the co-creation processes undertaken to create new solutions in this new service setting. These processes have generated a range of ideas for new solutions that will shape the new services. In this case, it is too early to assess outcomes and impact of the dementia village and the various new solutions within the new care facilities because it has not yet opened. We understand outcome and impact as the effects of new solutions which may be measured in various ways.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

There are some obvious challenges involved in co-creating dementia care. When the end users have cognitive impairment, and may even lack the ability to communicate verbally, co-creation and co-design is difficult. Finally, the challenges and constraints of service design in this context largely concern the complexity of the project and in providing high-quality services in dementia care. Dealing with dementia is inherently challenging.

Transferability & Replicability

The dementia village concept is already spreading across countries and communities (I.e. from the Netherlands to Norway) and across municipalities in Norway. However, the concept may be implemented with more or less focus on involvement and co-creation. We find that there are potential for inspiration, learning and transferability in the way Bærum has aimed to co-create the new dementia services with users and other stakeholders.

Success Factors

Not relevant.

Lessons learned

One of the central lessons learned from this case is that co-creation of innovations with services users is possible also when service users suffer from cognitive impairments.

Anonymous – An internal innovation and quality unit in a middle-sized municipality

The unit has two main focal areas; quality assurance and innovation; the former is seen as ensuring order and securing the quality of service offerings, whereas the latter is understood as experimental and risk-driven. The case study has taken to innovation unit as point of departure: The main activities of the innovation unit are; to mature the whole organisation in regards to an innovative mindset, to disseminate and share knowledge externally, to monitor projects as either project initiator, project lead or as sparring partners and to manage a yearly innovation fund. Both public (that is, from within the municipality itself), private and civil actors can apply for project money via the fund as long as the projects are finalised within a year.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

Key stakeholders are the internal functions in the municipality, private sector organisations and, despite to a lesser extent, academia. Beneficiaries are both elderly citizens and care takers.

Co-creation process

The unit is based on the logic of living labs – understood as a certain innovation methodology. From the perspective of the municipality, this living lab approach is seen as a platform where especially external actors can get an entry to collaborate with the public sector and herein access target groups, such as elderly that they could not otherwise have approached. Hence, most innovation processes are inherently co-creational since citizens, users and employees across sectors are engaged. Mostly, and across types of projects, the unit is primary lead regarding the research design, which is based on traditional user studies e.g. citizens interviews in their private homes or at care centres and public servant interviews and feedback, whereas the experimental aspects of living labs are enacted as test set-ups in homes and care centres – which seems to be part of most projects. In the projects the initial phase is considered crucial, which is why the unit emphasises how idea generation and herein reality checking need to involve various actors. This way they want to ensure that perspectives and input from the ones who are going to enact the solutions, and hence make the solutions live in the organisation, have been part of the development processes. Thus, even though the projects are inclusive processes with different stakeholders collaborating during the projects, and not necessarily with a dominant partner, the municipality is the sole decision-maker regarding the outcome of the processes.

Digital Transformation Process

There has been an outspoken focus on welfare technology, as both a means to make the citizens more self-reliant and as a way to address that there might be fewer employees in the sector prospectively (the idea is to replace all the work routines that do not imply human interaction with technological solutions). But despite the unit’s focus on technological development, it is emphasised that technology is not solely a solution in itself, but that the organisational change that might follow, be that cultural and/or procedural, is key.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

All projects should create value by addressing the following three bottom lines: increased quality for the citizens, better work environment to employees and value creation for the organisation – as either money or resource savings or increased efficiency or quality. These are the three main success criteria written into all projects, but they do not need to be fulfilled equally or have the same weighing in all projects. Besides the three bottom lines, it is emphasised that the activities of the innovation unit, and the municipality in general, hopefully support community building by creating new jobs and making it attractive to live in the region. Also, the overall societal challenge of more elderly and a reduced work force is understood as a concern and a responsibility that reaches beyond the single projects.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Barriers to conducting co-creation processes for innovation are both internal and external. Internally, the on-going focus on resources makes it important to the unit to be able to argue for spending time and money on the specific projects carried out. Externally, the collaboration between a huge public sector organisation with 6000 employees based on political leadership and e.g. a small one to two persons company is sometimes challenging – basically due to profoundly different work processes.

Transferability & Replicability

An important dimension regarding the value of a project is the ability to spread and disseminate the outcome, be that technology implementation or work processes. On the one hand, the innovation unit has been able to create a demand within the organisation and in the entire administration, which was not there from the beginning. But on the other hand, it is also recognised that change does not happen by itself and that both knowledge sharing and implementation can be a huge challenge, even though it is within the same organisation. Moreover, there is a focus on spreading in a wider sense not bound to the local context of the municipality; to other municipalities in Denmark and internationally. The reasoning behind is that if the unit is able to share best practices, hopefully they will also receive ideas and inspiration from the outside – and as such upscale both the solutions and the approach to innovation.

Success Factors

Increased quality of life for elderly citizen.

Lessons learned

To the innovation unit, the term and the initiatives that living labs comprise legitimise the municipality as a matchmaker between and translator of public and private sector logics. Moreover, it is revealed that living lab both refers to and enables a certain discourse and a sort of organising – making the perceived strength of the living lab concept – that it is a signifier – open towards a variety of interpretations without influencing the shared experience among the actors involved; that the collaboration is highly meaningful.

Mind Your Own Business (MYOB)

The organisation Mind Your Own Business (MYOB) is organising and facilitating development projects for young boys, between the age of 13 and 19, from marginalised housing areas. The program is centred around entrepreneurship and, in cooperation with voluntary venture pilots from civil society and business partners, the young boys are given the opportunity to start their own micro-enterprise. The philosophy behind MYOB is that the program further develops the professional and social competencies of the young boys and thereby enables a stronger association to the educational system and the job market.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

To be able to operate, Mind Your Own Business relies on a well-developed network of volunteers, mentor companies, non-profit housing associations, and public sector collaborators. The program is based on external funding. The main beneficiaries are the youngsters who participate in the program.

Co-creation process

Internally the program relies on a form of organising where there is no specific owner of the process and hence decision-making is made jointly among the actors involved – MYOB employees are solely acting as facilitators. A such, the program is itself based on a logic of co-creation.

Digital Transformation Process

No digital transformation process is going on.

Results, Outcomes & Impacts

To MYOB, the overall aim of the program is personal development of the boys, based on the understanding that the competences they gain from participating can be transferred to other contexts and hence increase their social and professional abilities, also prospectively.

Challenges & Bottlenecks

Historically, the main barriers are related both to the internal and the external environment of the program. Internally the boys are struggling with both low support and understanding from their families and with the acceptability from the other boys in their neighbourhood. Externally the adult lack of confidence in the competences and abilities of the boys is leading to mistrust. Hence, a barrier is to change the ‘outside’ story of the boys. Nevertheless, these barriers seem to decrease both during the course of a program and since the success stories of the program are now spreading.

Transferability & Replicability

At the moment the program is starting out in Greenland, and despite the need to develop and tailor the process to a new context the main idea does not seem difficult to transfer.

Success Factors

The process and the learning of the boys in the program are the main success criteria, but also there is an awareness that, from the perspective of the boys, an important success criterion is related to the micro-enterprises – the aspect of entrepreneurship is crucial for the boys to become engaged.

Lessons learned

MYOB is based on a planned network to function. As such the relationship building, and hence trust among actors, has been key in developing a functional network that over time can be seen as innovative cross-sectorial collaboration. The innovation network is bottom-up, since it is founded on an entrepreneurial initiative and still relies heavily on releasing local resources. Nevertheless, the network was from the outset conditioned by having an existing and recognised platform to develop from and still it is dependent on MYOB as ‘system integrator’ in realisation of the MYOB programme.