THE BARRIERS
AND ENABLERS
OF SERVICE
CO-CREATION
A FOLLOW-UP OF
SIX CO-CREATION
PROJECTS
ATLAS – A MAP FOR FUTURE
SERVICE CO-DEVELOPMENT
Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014
CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 The context of the study 3 The follow-‐up interviews 3 Analysis methods 5 Basic definitions 5 2 The co-‐creation projects 6 Overview of the six case projects 6 Comparison of the projects 7 3 Evaluation of the co-‐creation methods 8 The methods utilised in the case projects 8 The co-‐creation approach 8 The co-‐creation workshops 10 Experiences of specific methods 11 4 The impacts of the projects 23 The levels of impact 23 The School Project 24 The Virtual Innovation Project 25 The Service Design Project 26 The City Services Project 28 The Wellbeing Project 29 The Hospital Project 30 5 The barriers and enablers of service co-‐creation 32 The tension in co-‐creation 32 The barriers and enablers 32 Collaboration – Finding a common ground 34 Organisation – Enabling commitment 40 Processes – Being integrated 43 Implementation – Making an impact 45 Methods – Becoming a practice 48 6 Conclusion: Towards sustainable service co-‐creation 51 ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 2 1 INTRODUCTION The context of the study This research report aims at offering a concise evaluation the methods, impacts as well as barriers and enablers of service co-‐creation as experienced by 23 professionals who have participated to six different co-‐creation projects realised by research units at Aalto University during the last five years. The follow-‐up study is part of ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐Development research project. The ATLAS project (2012–2014) is a joint strategic research project between three units in the field of Innovation and Service Design at two Schools of the Aalto University: SimLab (coordinator), ENCORE research group from the Department of Design, and IRIS research group from the BIT Research Centre. The three groups have collaboratively carried out in-‐depth analysis of the data generated by 13 service co-‐
development projects that have been conducted in Aalto University during the past five years. The project is funded by TEKES, The Finnish Funding Agency of Technology and Innovation. The main objectives of the ATLAS project are to integrate different theoretical perspectives regarding the human-‐centered co-‐development of services; to identify and map the tools most adapted to service co-‐
development and innovation, with a user-‐centric perspective; to identify how specific context influences the co-‐creation and co-‐development of new services, and how to find the best process leading to the implementation of new service; and to reinforce the capability of Finnish organisations to develop and offer services that are both world-‐class and could also be deployed in an international context. The main outcome of the project is the ATLAS map of service co-‐development methods that is created based on the theoretically relevant dimensions, and contextualised according to the situational contingencies. The map provides a clear vocabulary that clarifies the ambiguous field of service design, helpful for the practical users of the methods, as well as for scientific research. The map is grounded on empirical findings and theoretical reflections from 13 research projects that have studied service co-‐
creation with different theoretical starting points and in different service contexts. Other outcomes of the project are academic articles and doctoral theses. The project combines different theoretical and methodological viewpoints to create new, trans-‐disciplinary knowledge about service co-‐creation. The follow-‐up interviews For the follow-‐up study, 23 persons who had been participating to six different co-‐creation projects realised between the years 2006 and 2012 by Aalto University were interviewed. For reasons of anonymity, the projects are here identified as the School Project, the City Services Project, the Virtual Innovation Project, the Service Design Project, the City Services Project, the Wellbeing Project and the Hospital Project. The content and objectives of each project is explained more in detail in Chapter 2. The distribution of the interviewees according to project, their job title and home organisation can be seen in Figure 1. There were 8 interviewees from the School Project, 3 from the Virtual Innovation Project, 2 from the Service Design Project (of whom one had also participated to the Virtual Innovation Project), 3 from the City Services Project, 2 from the Wellbeing Project and 5 from the Hospital Project. Among the participants are 14 public sector employees (5 teachers, 5 healthcare personnel and 4 city development officers), 5 company representatives (all from the same multi-‐national technology manufacturing corporation) and 4 researchers or students who had been working as facilitators in the projects. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 3 FIGURE 1. THE INTERVIEWEES ID PROJECT JOB TITLE ORGANISATION 01 School Project Principal Comprehensive School, Lower Stage 02 School Project Principal Comprehensive School 03 School Project Principal Comprehensive School 04 School Project Communications Manager City, Education and Cultural Services 05 School Project Administration Manager City, Education and Cultural Services 06 School Project Development Director City, Education and Cultural Services 07 School Project Lecturer Comprehensive School, Upper Stage 08 School Project Special Education Teacher Comprehensive School, Upper Stage 09 Virtual Innovation Project Research Director Technology Corporation 10 Virtual Innovation Project Senior Usability Specialist Technology Corporation 11 Virtual Innovation Project Development Director Technology Corporation 12 Virtual Innovation Project Product Release Manager and Service Design Project Technology Corporation 13 Service Design Project Project Manager Technology Corporation 14 City Services Project Special Advisor City, Economic Development 15 City Services Project Doctoral Candidate in Industrial Design University 16 City Services Project MA Student in Industrial Design University 17 Wellbeing Project Chief Physician Psychiatric Clinic 18 Wellbeing Project MA Student in Industrial Design University 19 Hospital Project Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist University Hospital 20 Hospital Project Service Planner University Hospital 21 Hospital Project Nurse University Hospital 22 Hospital Project Customer Services Development Manager University Hospital 23 Hospital Project Doctoral Candidate in Industrial Design University The aim of the follow-‐up interviews was to evaluate the methods, processes and outcomes of co-‐creation in retrospect in order to increase the understanding on the success factors and critical issues in co-‐
creation. The main themes in the interviews, devised by the researchers collaboratively, included: •
What do you remember about the co-‐creation project? – Own role, goals of the project, the other participants, outcomes and development ideas based on the project, implementation of results. •
What co-‐creation methods do you remember? – Experience of the methods, identification of good and not so good methods, later adoption of methods in own work or organisation. •
Do you remember the specific artefacts used in co-‐creation? – The participants were shown images of the particular tools and outcomes of the projects and asked to evaluate them. •
What kind of co-‐creation work do you do? – More general discussion on the nature and challenges of co-‐creation and other development activities from the interviewee’s perspective. The semi-‐structured interviews were conducted by the ATLAS researchers. They usually took place in the participant’s workplace and lasted from approximately one to two hours. One interview was conducted with three persons collectively (01, 02, 03) and one with two persons (20, 21). With the exception of interview number 13, they were conducted in Finnish. The interviews were recorded and transcribed by research assistants. The written transcriptions have been used as primary sources in the analysis. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 4 Analysis methods The analysis of the follow-‐up interviews focused on the three main themes mentioned above: the participants’ evaluation of the co-‐creation methods used in the projects, their assessment of the impacts of the projects, and the barriers and enabling factors of co-‐creation that they identified. The analysis approach has been comparative, seeking to open up the variety of co-‐creation approaches as expressed in the case projects. The data has mainly been analysed by the author through close reading and classification along the pre-‐defined themes. Parts of the data were also classified thematically in a workshop with four other researchers. Other material and publications of the Atlas project have been relied on for reflecting the findings and as sources. The presentation of findings to a great extent relies on direct quotes from the interviewees. Most of the excerpts have been translated to English by the author. They have in some cases been shortened and edited to increase readability. However, care has been taken to convey the orginal content as accurately as possible. Comparative tables and diagrams have also been used as means of analysis. The emphasis in this stage of analysis has mainly been on practical level outcomes that would be useful for organisations who seek to utilise co-‐creation approaches as well as for facilitators who are developing the methods. The results will be reflected with the academic discussion in a forthcoming article. Basic definitions The use of diverse theoretical frameworks and terminology arising from different research traditions in the interview material has necessitated the adoption of some general umbrella terms to provide a common ground for the analysis. The three key terms used in the report are briefly explained below. •
Co-‐creation in the report refers to the activity of creating a product, service or environment in a collaborative process with multiple actors or organisations as well as the customers or users involved. Co-‐creation is understood broadly, covering both co-‐development that was used in the technology oriented case projects and co-‐design preferred in the design field. The co-‐creation realised in the case projects typically was a predominantly academic activity led by researchers, most often with a rather weak connection to actual development or implementation design. •
The term facilitator is used throughout the report of the persons with expertise in co-‐creation methods who planned and realised the actual co-‐creation activities in the projects, whether they were researchers in the fields of industrial engineering or design, designers or other consultants. •
Participant here refers to a person or organisation who took part to the co-‐creation activities as a client or partner. The participants typically were professionals in the public organisations or companies that had set the goals of the co-‐creation project and were seeking to utilise the results in their operation. They could also be partners of the client organisation or other stakeholders invited to the project. In some of the projects, also users were included as participants. •
By co-‐creation method is meant the practical methods and tools that were used in the projects for eliciting information about the development topic, for facilitating co-‐creation and for presenting the outcomes and solutions, not a research method in the theoretical-‐methodological sense. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 5 2 THE CO-‐CREATION PROJECTS Overview of the six case projects Of the 13 co-‐creation projects that were analysed in the ATLAS project, the follow-‐up interviews cover six. The case projects and their objectives are shortly described below. As the focus in the follow-‐up study is in the co-‐creation methods and their outcomes, a more detailed analysis of the projects has been left out. •
THE SCHOOL PROJECT (2007–2010) studied the collaborative public-‐private service innovations in the “extended teaching processes” of comprehensive schools. The project developed new networked service concepts and business models of the “extended school” within its learning community together with the multi-‐disciplinary network involved. The project was large and had several cases focusing on different comprehensive schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area. The interviews mostly deal with a case that focused on the merger of two schools in Helsinki. The project was realised by a reseach unit in the field of Industrial Engineering and Management. The partners included several schools, the city and companies. Funding came from Tekes. The co-‐
creation methods utilised were Process Simulation, Future Recall, Personas and Scenarios. •
THE VIRTUAL INNOVATION PROJECT (2010–2011) aimed to study and develop innovation processes and practices as well as principles of innovation management and to create concepts and prototypes of new ways of collaboratively creating ideas. The project focused on the internal service development of the pilot company’s innovation processes and related digital tools. The process of introducing a new software for creating, developing and collecting ideas was studied and developed and ways to improve its adoption were sought in collaboration with employees and researchers. The project was funded by Tekes, led by a global technology manufacturing corporation and realised by a research unit in Industrial Engineering and Management. The methods included Process Simulation, Future Recall, Personas and Scenarios. •
THE SERVICE DESIGN PROJECT (2008–2010) explored service co-‐design as a strategic approach for building novel business partnerships, for promoting the pilot company’s willingness to understand their end users, and for communicating its new user-‐centred slogan within the organisation. There was a case about recognising novel partnership possibilities between three companies in senior housing. The project was led by the same technology corporation than the Virtual Innovation Project and realised by a research unit from the field of Industrial Design. The methods included Design Games, Personas and Acting and Drama. •
THE CITY SERVICES PROJECT (2009–2012) looked at the application of human-‐centred co-‐design and service design methods and approaches in the development of public services provided by the city. The partners included the city (who also funded the work), healthcare service providers and a consulting firm. The interviews deal with a pilot focusing on the development of customer-‐
centred networked service models for carer families within an urban neighbourhood. The co-‐
creation part in the project was realised by a research unit in Industrial Design. The principal methods and tools were Design Probes, Design Games, Storytelling and Scenarios. •
THE WELLBEING PROJECT (2011–2012) targeted the co-‐design of human-‐centred public wellbeing and healthcare services together with municipalities. The project was part of the World Design Capital program. The follow-‐up interviews deal with a case focusing on the development of psychiatric treatment environments and practices in public healthcare. The project was realised as a study project by a multi-‐national group of students of Industrial Design. Design Probes and Co-‐design Workshops were the main methods. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 6 THE HOSPITAL PROJECT (2011) aimed at bringing forth the needs of the patients for improving and designing patient-‐centered healthcare services in a university hospital. The first phase aimed at improving the patient service and patient experience of sarcoma-‐type cancer patients through design research. The second phase focused on prototyping the future work, care and recreation spaces in the hospital. The project was funded by Sitra, The Finnish Innovation Fund, and realised by researchers in Industrial Design in collaboration with the personnel in the pilot hospital. Design Games, Customer Journey, Scenarios and Prototyping as well as a Design Probes type photographing task were utilised in the project. •
Comparison of the projects As seen, the case projects represent a rather broad array of topics, objectives, actors and approaches. The following table (Figure 2) depicts the variation more in detail. Four of the projects were situated within the public sector, either education (the School Project) or healthcare services (the City Services Project, the Wellbeing Project and the Hospital Project). The two remaining projects were industry-‐led, incidentally by the same large company. Regarding the facilitator side, the projects divide into those grounded in industrial engineering and management with its specific tools and methods (the School Project and the Virtual Innovation Project) and those driven by co-‐design (or service design) (the Service Design Project, the City Services Project, the Wellbeing Project and the Hospital Project). These differences should be kept in mind when interpreting the findings of the follow-‐up study. Importantly, also the object or scale of development varied in the projects. The application of co-‐creation approaches ranged from the improvement of a specific web-‐based tool (Virtual Innovation Project) to the development of the spatial solution and operations of a new hospital unit (Hospital Project), and further to the creation of a new service model and network of actors supporting home care in an urban area (City Services Project). The co-‐creation methods used will be discussed in the next chapter. FIGURE 2. COMPARISON OF THE CASE PROJECTS Participants Focus of development Methods SCHOOL VIRTUAL INNOVATION SERVICE DESIGN CITY SERVICES WELLBEING HOSPITAL Public sector X X X X Private sector X X X X Employees X X X X X Users, customers, patients X X Product, service, tool X X X X X Space, facility, environment X X X Process, practice X X X X X Network, partnership X X X Co-‐creation Workshops X X X X X X Process Simulation X X Future Recall X X Personas X X X Scenarios X X X X Design Probes X X X Design Games X X X Acting and Drama X Storytelling X Customer Journey X Prototyping X ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 7 3 EVALUATION OF THE CO-‐CREATION METHODS The methods utilised in the case projects A wealth of distinct co-‐creation methods were utilised in the case projects (see Figure 2). Other, more conventional methods such as interviews, focus groups and participatory observation were also part of a few of the projects but since they did not involve a co-‐creation dimension, they have been left out from the present examination. In the following will be presented the participants’ evaluation of the methods of Process Simulation, Future Recall, Personas, Scenarios, Design Probes, Design Games, Acting and Drama, Storytelling, Customer Journey and Prototyping. Before the evaluation of the individual methods, the participants’ assessment of the co-‐creation approach in general and their experience of the co-‐creation workshops, that were the principal arena of collaborative activities in all of the projects, is opened up. The co-‐creation approach In general, the participants’ attitude towards the co-‐creation (co-‐development, co-‐design) approach was positive despite some initial prejudices related to its role and relationship to implementation. This particularly concerned the more design-‐driven projects. Most participants were not familiar with service design or co-‐design and had a perception of design as superficial “decoration”. However, the co-‐creation approach also raised interest and enthusiasm due to its newness and radicalness in comparison to regular development activities and methods within the participating organisations. The initial attitude towards co-‐creation also depended on the type of organisation. This implies that nderstanding of the organisation’s level of advancement and familiarity regarding co-‐creation methods and user orientation is thus needed when applying the methods. In the large multi-‐national technology corporation that led the Virtual Innovation Project and the Service Design Project, co-‐design approaches and methods as well as the emphasis on user experience were an established area of activity where the company had many internal people working on. In the school environment, co-‐creation was more unusual. By contrast, the city development people were somewhat familiar with or at least aware of collaborative and participatory approaches due to their previous work. The attitude of both of these groups to co-‐creation was predominantly positive and enthusiastic. The reception of co-‐creation was most sceptical in the healthcare sector. This was perhaps because of the strong professional roles and hierarchy within the field. In comparison to the primary focus in hospitals on healthcare and “saving lives”, designerly co-‐creation approaches and the talk about customers were seen particularly by physicians as something “soft”, “superficial” or downright unnecessary. However, the hospital management had recognised a need for more collaborative and patient-‐centred service development. The backbone and justification for adopting the co-‐creation approach in the Hospital Project was provided by a long-‐term spatial renewal program (–2020) where customer-‐centred development of operations and practices (rather than building houses) had been taken as the key focus area. The service developers had realised that surveys or customer feedback do not provide deep enough customer knowledge to benefit service development. Co-‐creation was explored as approach to the strategic goal of bringing the patient into the focus of the development of hospital spaces and services and to the more practical goal of developing a new operational model for the new hospital. (22, 23) In retrospect, the service design approach was considered good because it increased the holistic understanding of care services. By looking at the big picture beyond individual processes and professions, it was able to reveal breaks in the service from the user perspective. It was also seen that the hierarchic and slowly changing healthcare organisation could learn from design methods that emphasise ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 8 experimenting and prototyping, unfinished solutions, testing with users, allowing imperfection and iteration. However, this creates a challenge in the healthcare sector where mistakes are not acceptable in the practice of treating people. In this sense healthcare and design are two distinct worlds, which may cause difficulties in fitting them together. (22) In the School Project, the goal of co-‐creation was to bring together the actors and make visible the whole development process towards the merging of the schools and see how different actors connect to it and in which stage. The stated benefit of the co-‐creation approach in the project was that it made individual teachers to “come out from the class with their own limited or discipline-‐based view and for once to look at the whole learning environment” (01, 04). According to an interviewee, the fact that the project was run efficiently and in time and the facilitation of the methods was good greatly contributed to its success. The City Services Project aimed at bringing design thinking into a public organisation. The co-‐creation approach was utilised for building the network of care service providers in an urban area with particular emphasis in the customers (home carers). Focus was in user experiences and needs and in service co-‐
design. The participants stated that the project succeeded in bringing people together across administrative sectors and was true co-‐creation because the city, companies, third sector, and customers were involved in creating the service model. However, it took time in the beginning to figure out the role of design research. (14, 15) The Virtual Innovation Project is example of a focused project with very concrete objectives related to the improvement of a corporate web-‐based innovation tool on the basis of co-‐creation methods that created understanding on the different roles/personas of the innovators. As seen, the co-‐creation approach can be applied to rather diverse topics and fields. To sum up, the main value of the co-‐creation approach and methods as stated by the interviewees was related to: •
Bringing various actors representing different fields and professions, including the end users, together to ideate and work on a common development topic. •
Providing concrete, specific methods and tools for service development. Radical and novel methods that positively distinguish from traditional workshops, presentations and memos. •
Rapid, hands-‐on way of working relying on experimentation and solution-‐orientedness where the outcomes emerge already during the co-‐creation event. However, the implementation and further development of the outcomes was considered a critical point. •
Generic design thinking – analytical expertise in grasping the essential aspects in multi-‐
disciplinary collaboration and translating it into clear visualisations and other material that supports the forming of a shared understanding of a complex problem among people coming from different fields. Such thinking can essentially be applied to any problem. •
Researchers were an extra resource in development who facilitated collaboration and documented the meetings. They also helped in focusing the discussion on common high-‐level goals. As outsiders they brought a new angle to the topic. It was also deemed to increase the authority of the project when an eminent actor such as the university was involved. Following quotes from the interviews (in Finnish) illustrate some of the aspect brought up by the participants when reflecting upon the pros and cons of the co-‐creation approach. The value of co-‐design methods Se on esimerkki ja tapa tehdä toisin joka jää sitten elämään sinne niiden mieleen kun puhutaan co designista, design gameista tai ylipäätään yhteissuunnittelusta. -‐-‐-‐ mä väitän että tää oli ainoo niinkun tämmönen erittäin tiivistetty ja tehokas työskentelymalli että jos sitä ois saanu levitettyä sinne laajemmallekin -‐-‐-‐ Mitenhän sen nyt sanois, jotain muuta kuin post it lappuja ja valkoisia fläppitauluja. Ja sellast niinkun; no puhukaa keskenänne. -‐-‐-‐ Se niinkun asioiden visualisointi ja se että se asia rakennetaan yhdessä pöydälle on mun mielestä se juttu. (15, Researcher, City Services Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 9 Patients eager to participate Aina mä ihmettelen sitä, että potilaathaan lähtee kaikkiin tutkimuksiin mukaan. -‐-‐-‐ Se on jotenkin niin hämmästyttävää. Et jos mä oisin potilas niin mä en varmaan viittisi lähteä. -‐-‐-‐ Tottakai me niinkun valkattiinkin siinä, että ei me niinkun ketä tahansa pyydetty. Ei me myöskään pyydetty pelkästään sellaisia potilaita joilla kaikki on mennyt hyvin. Että kyllähän me esimerkiksi tähän sarkooma caseen me yritettiin pyytää yhtä paljon niitä jotka on ollut jotenkin niinkun pettyneitä prosessiin tai johonkin hoidon osa-‐alueeseen tai johonkin tähän että me saatais niitä, niinkun näitä negatiivisiakin mielipiteitä mukaan. -‐-‐-‐ Ja toisaalta me yritettiin valita myöskin potilaita joilla saattais olla oma ammatti sellainen että ne ymmärtää mistä me puhutaan, mutta kyllä sitten siellä ihan tämmösiä maatiaiskanojakin, että tavallisia suomalaisia ihmisiäkin millä ei oo mitään koulutusta ja ne oli ihan innolla mukana. (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) Bringing the actors together Interesting (in the workshop) was when there are people from different backgrounds and expertise such as doctors, nurses, patients, architects who all bring in their own perspective. -‐-‐-‐ Se oli mun mielestä kauheen rikastuttava keskustelutilaisuus kaiken kaikkiaan. (20 and 21, Service Planner and Nurse, Hospital Project) The co-‐creation workshops In all of the case projects, the main arena of co-‐creation were workshop type events gathering together various actors and facilitated by the researchers where various collaborative methods were used. Various artefacts, such as process diagrams, stakeholder diagrams, roadmaps, personas, scenarios and concept descriptions and different types of visualisations were created in and for the workshops. Most of the participants considered the workshops useful. However, workshops with varying degree of collaboration and co-‐creation also were a very typical way of working for many development professionals particularly in the industry and the city organisation. Workhops in general were seen as a relatively useful way for gathering actors together, framing a topic and generating discussion and ideation around it in a structured fashion. In the company, for instance, it was very common for the development team to work around a poster with post-‐it notes. The value of workshops to actual development, however, was not not always seen as very good. The success of a workshop was deemed to greatly depend on: •
•
•
•
•
•
Professional planning, organisation and facilitation of the workshop Choice of participants to ensure inclusion of crucial actors/fields and variety of views Well-‐focused and efficient co-‐creation methods Opportunity also for open discussion and opinion sharing The quality of the documentation of the results Special “after-‐event” effort for ensuring the adoption and further development of the results The case projects involved many types of co-‐creation workshops. Various expectations were connected to the workshops by participants. In the Service Design Project, for instance, the goal of workshopping was to learn and internalise new working methods and to try out how co-‐creation could work with one of the company’s customers (another company) (12, 13). Workshops were seen as a structured, flexible tool that can be applied to different contexts and where one of the key benefits is “getting together and doing it, building a solution right there on the table” (14, 15). At best, a co-‐creation workshop could become a memorable, refreshing and fun experience that the participants immersed into and that made them to change their mindset and created a shared understanding and enthusiasm among the various participants (e.g. 05, 12, 13). This could be supported by construction of the workshop as a special event in a space outside of the everyday environment of the actors, as was done in the School Project and the Hospital Project, where even a stage designer was used. The value of external facilitation: people can express themselves more freely Se oli tosi arvokas tuki, niiden käytäntöjen ja sen työkalun kehityksen tueks tuli. Arvokasta siinä oli etenkin se et oli tämmönen yhteistyöprojekti missä oli ulkopuoliset fasilitaattorit, jollon kaikki ihmiset uskals tavallaan, eri tavalla sanoa et mikä mättää ja, mitä pitäs tehtä ja miten pitäs tehä. Ja taas jälleen kun, oli osaamista mukana niin ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 10 pystyttiin fasilitoimaan niitä tilaisuuksia niin että ihmisille jää niistä tosi hyvä kuva. (12, Product Release Manager, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) Workshops are often useless but can be effective if well-‐organised Yleisesti kommentti on aina että mun mielestä workshopit on aina ollu tosi turhia mut jos ne järjestetään näin hyvin niin niistä on hyötyä. -‐-‐-‐ Fasilitointi, materiaalit, kutsut, ihmisvalinnat. Oikeestaan nää kaikki [vaikuttaa siihen että ne olivat hyvin järjestettyjä]. Ja myös jälkihoito.-‐-‐-‐ Poikkeuksellista oli että kaikki nämä asiat olivat huomioitu. Ja sit harvoinhan meidän ihmiset näkee noin hyvin valmisteltua materiaalia kun ei meillä oo, taittajia ja visualisoijia. (12, Product Release Manager, Company, Service Design Project) More radicalness is allowed to external facilitators If trying something that is too radical, all the participants start looking at the method instead of the topic. As a facilitator you should know very well what kind of people you are having in the workshop and [adapt the methods] based on that. Of course, especially if we have an external facilitator, I would say that people tolerate more extreme methodologies. But if you are coming directly from in-‐house it may have, people may have more doubts if you introduce very radical methods for them. But if it’s external specialist or facilitator, then people tend to be more open to new methodologies. And generally I think if you come up with some new method and use that, people at the end are usually quite positive about it because everybody are so bored at doing it every time the same way as it has been done. So I think there is opportunity and room for these kind of new methods, just to energise. But the challenge is to have a facilitator with really the understanding of the methodology and then matching it to the topic and the group. -‐-‐-‐ [In continuation,] I really would recommend that there would be more emphasis on this let’s say brainwashing and really training the agents to the organisation so that they really know the methods inside out afterwards. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Limited ability of workshops in innovation Nowadays we are focusing so much on this workshopping and trying to find new ideas and innovations that it is really rare to come up with somethig totally new which hadn’t been invented already twice or three times before. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Workshops as opportunity for learning for the student facilitators Siit tuli hyvii juttui. Meillä oli tavoitteena oppiikin niitä juttui ja uusia menetelmiä, et sen takia päätettiin kokeilla, vähän niinku että meni syteen tai saveen niin sit osataan järjestää tämmösii. Ja toki sit sille konseptille tuo roppakaupalla uskottavuutta, jos tällaisen tekee. Käyttäjien perusteella tehty se juttu eikä vaan silleen että kun muotoilija keksii että täähän ois hyvä juttu. Niin sitten se oli tietysti hyvin dokumentoitu ja silleen et hyvin perusteltu, et se oli aika tärkee homma. (18, MA Student, Wellbeing Project) Experiences of specific methods PROCESS SIMULATION SimLab™ business process simulation is a developmental action research method consisting of a seven-‐step process that culminates in a simulation workshop where visualised process models and a participative facilitated group discussion are utilised to enable knowledge co-‐creation. Process Simulation was used in all phases of co-‐creation in the School Project. The aim was to enable envisioning the future and forming a shared understanding and a bigger picture of the future processes to be developed. Process simulations were lead by researchers who first interviewed the participants and then prepared a specific simulation day with visual process models and other specific assignments. The simulation days were facilitated by researchers who also analysed the data collected during the simulation days. The simulation days aimed at knowledge sharing and co-‐creation with the help of the process model acting as a boundary objects, supported by well-‐planned facilitation. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 11 In the Virtual Innovation Project, Process Simulation was used in the first phase of co-‐creation. The aim of using the method was to promote forming a shared understanding of the challenges at hand and to enable further planning of the co-‐development work. The simulation made use of visual process models and other specific objects such as personas and a scenario. In the School Project, the simulation events were generally considered stimulating and inspiring. Most interviewees remembered the physical space that gathered diverse actors together and the screen that enabled rich information display. The space, technology and the facilitation was considered good. As positive aspects, the method provided a clearly set date and special space outside of the everyday environment, possibility to get familiar with others and develop things together with an open agenda, organisational legitimation in the form of funding and allocation of working time, broad range of public, private and academic actors participating; concrete methods and tasks despite open goals; and rapid results which emerged already during the event. Importantly, the events gathered diverse actors in a vast project together around a common visionary goal, broadened the perspective and made the participants to look at future possibilities of the school more holistically (01, 02, 04, 05). The core idea was “we learn better when we try out things”. This gave stimuli to experimentation – “hey, that’s something we could try out” (02). The thematic summary report of simulation days was seen as its most useful outcome (04). The simulation method provided a clear structure for phasing the discussion and co-‐creation. (05) As a downside, just a few persons were involved from each school or organisation which made it difficult to spread the results. The role of companies in the events was superficial. (07) The inclusion of even more participants e.g. from the third sector could have brought in even more fresh ideas. It was suggested that the simulation should focus less on charting the existing process but to anticipating the consequences of alternative choices of various actors and providing concrete design drivers. (04) The SimLab method was deemed to suit for assessment of results in a multi-‐disciplinary group (refinement of the results and making common conclusions), but it was stated that after the day, face-‐to-‐face work is needed concentrating on the practical solutions (05). A representative of the Virtual Innovation Project stated that the simulation days in that project were well planned and professionally facilitated, logical in content, with focus in correct things, and well presented in advance to the person in charge. This meant that he could trust the facilitators of the novel method with regard to his colleagues and the customer company. (11) Simulation was about gathering the actors and structuring ideation Päällimmäinen muistikuva on se että puitteet oli hyvät. Tilat ja tekniikka ja kivalla tavalla ja positiivisella otteella vedettyjä tilaisuuksia. Ja toisaalta niissä on aika hyvä se että saa koolle ne ihmiset, joita monesti on vaikea saada muuten yhteen tilaan. Sinne kun lähdettiin oikeen asiakseen, niin sitten oli kaikki meidän puolelta sitten olennaiset ihmiset paikalla. (05, Administration Manager, City, Scool Project) Vaatii paljon niiltä jotka vetää sitä. Et osaa johdatella sitä keskustelua oikeeseen suuntaan ja pitää olla hirveen hyvin sisällä siinä mitä ollaan tekemässä. Et tota et et, sinänsä et mikä on tää simuloinnin ero, mikä on se hyöty mikä siit nousee verrattuna johonkin perinteisempään työskentelytapaan niin tota, ehkä se tietysti on se että voidaan vaiheistaa se keskustelu, et se ei pompi asiasta toiseen. (05, Administration Manager, City, Scool Project) No kyl se tärkein oli se et sai koottuu ihmiset yhteen keskustelemaan ja sitten et se tapahtuu niinkun hallitusti ja johdetusti se keskustelu. Et sit se on se haaste siinä, et miten se keskustelu saadaan siirtymään konkretiaks tuleviin suunnitelmiin. (05, Administration Manager, City, Scool Project) Well-‐planned workshops created trust Musta [simulaatiopäivät] oli erittäin hyvin suunniteltu et tutkijat annoin kyllä ja annan edelleen niinkun hyvän palautteen, että ne toimi sillä tavalla loogisesti, että ne keskitty musta oikeisiin asioihin ja oli ajallisesti myöskin varsin hyvin suunniteltu ja sitten me myöskin käytiin hyvin yhdessä etukäteen läpi. Et mulle — kun olin tavallaan päävastuussa — niin ei tullu mulle yllätyksenä, niin pysy luottavaisin mielin lähtee tällasiin. (11, Development Director, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 12 Visualisations as important part of simulations No mun mielestä siis [simulaatiopäivä] oli onnistunu sen takia, et ne ohjeet oli hirveen hyvät, et heti ties et mitä piti tehdä ja mä tykkäsin, et se oli semmonen se koko homma niinkun tarpeeks. Et vaikka puhutaan tulevaisuudest, joka saattaa kuulostaa hirveeen utopistiselta, niin ne olikin konkreetisia asioita mikä parissa siinä sitten tehtiin työtä. Vaikka sille tulevaisuudesta puhuttiinkin, niin tässä meidän arjessa. Mä tykkäsin siitä. Siin oli sopivassa suhteessa sitä omaa ajattelua ja sitä ryhmätyötä. -‐-‐-‐ Mä en oo mitenkään siis visuaalinen, mut tää [process visualisation] on tarpeeks simppeli ja tarpeeks selkee, et mäkin tajusin tän. -‐-‐-‐ [T]äs oli aika hyvin kaikki ne toimijat mukana. -‐-‐-‐ Mun mielestä se tuki sitä mitä tehtiin. Ja sit se et se aika nopeesti siinä samanaikasesti niinkun rakentui. Et ei tarvinnu niinkun 2 kk odottaa, et tämmönen siitä tuli. (07, Lecturer, School Project) Tämmönen visualisointi kyllä niinkun rikasti tätä ideointia sen sijaan et oltais kirjotettu näitä keltasia lappuja tänne, niin tää toi tähän vähän semmosta rikkautta tähän kuvaukseen. Et tää oli hyvä idea. -‐-‐-‐ Kyllä sillon kun konkretisoidaan konsepteja ja uusia asioita joita ei oikeen ole pystytty vielä määrittelemään niiin kyllähän tämmöset kuvaukset on [hyviä]. Vie yhden vaiheen eteenpäin ja avaa kehitystä. Siinä suhteessa erinomainen. (11, Development Director, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) Simulation as means to induce user needs and requirements to the process, could be more concrete Simuloinnin käsitetapaa mietittiin. Että olisko tässä vielä voinut päästä meitä hyödyttävälle tasolle. (Olisko ollut hyödyllisempää mennä vielä syvemmälle ja vielä konkreettisempiin asioihin?) Niin. Ja kysytty mitä tästä seuraa. Jos harrastaa vaikka liikuntaa. Minkä kokonen liikuntatilan pitää olla. No siihen on tietyt määräykset olemassa koulujen liikuntatilaan, joka on myös kuntalaisten käytössä. Ja siellä on ne ja ne välineet. Kuitenkin, että jos siellä harrastetaan vaikka musiikkia, niin mitä se tarkottaa äänieristyksessä. Saako sinne tulla bändit. Tän tyyppisiä asioita olis vielä voinut jatkaa. (04, Communications Manager, City, School Project) The process simulation method as such was nothing special… Mitä [muistan projektista], niin sekalaisia workshoppeja ja lakanoita laitettiin seinälle. En kyllä varmasti pystyis palauttamaan mieleeni, mitä niissä postereissa luki. Ja tän paikan myöskin. Varmaan niiltä ajoilta osasin löytää oikeen reitin tänne. -‐-‐-‐ Mun mielestä erilaiset tavat generoida keskustelua ja mielipiteiden vaihtoo, niin siinähän noi toimi vallan mukavasti. Et jonkun metodin ympärille se keskustelu on rakennettava ja tää toimi ihan mukavasti. (09, Research Director, Virtual Innovation Project) …But some interesting details arose out of it Siis ainakin mä muistan hyvin yhden esityksen, missä puhuttiin innovaatioprosessin erilaisista metaforista se oli ihan mielenkiintonen juttu. Ehkä kun meikäläinen itsekin on taistellut tätä trattimetaforaa vastaan ja tän puzzle solving -‐metaforan puolesta, mut sithän on nää kauppametaforat ja kaikkee muuta. Ja sitten siellä esiteltiin erilaisia rooleja. Siis käyttäjärooleja, challengerin ja ownerin rooleja. Niistä siellä paljon puhuttiin ja yritettiin määritellä, että mitä kullekin kuuluu ja mikä on paras kuvaus. (09, Research Director, Virtual Innovation Project) A critical issue in the Process Simulation method were the process diagrams and network diagrams prepared by the researchers as part of the simulation days. In the School Project, the city representatives (04, 05, 06) criticised these type of representations of complex systemic problems or situations as overtly simplified, often emphasising the wrong elements, and potentially even harmful regarding the public. The city organisation was already using many types of process descriptions, and the ones by researchers were considered as unrealistic and misinterpreted in comparison to the city’s own processes. It was stated that there is a need to carefully distinguish between existing real-‐life process maps and visionary maps by researchers. The persons stated that to be able to make better maps, researchers should familiarise very well with the goals of the project and the nature of the organisation they are working with. They stressed that the political aspect in such forward-‐looking and politicall controversial project like the School Project is important. The diagram created in the project was a “red rag”, not in line with the other work. It presented isolated small things that began to lead their own life. The city representatives would have wanted to align the communication better and agree on the content that is communicated to the outside. The process and network diagrams were also considered rather technical and engineer-‐like. On the other hand, maps and diagams when properly done were seen as effective tool for getting an overall picture of a complex network. For teachers, the mapping of the network made visible the amount of partners in the extended learning environment and the challenge of managing the network (01). ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 13 Similarly, in the Virtual Innovation Project, the researchers’ attempts at describing the company’s processes were seen as unsuccesful (09, 10, 11). The company as well had its own processes that the superficial maps couldn’t cover. They were seen as too detailed and “black-‐and-‐white” to really communicate the essentials of the tool to its potential users. However, the process chart was useful as basis for discussing the bottlenecks in the process, identifying hotspots (that exude discontent) and “black holes” (that eat energy). Moreover, it was seen that even if it is customary activity to model processes into visualisations, overt use of rigid process charts is something that an agile corporation is rather trying to get rid of. It was emphasised that if used, process descriptions should be as simple as possible. Dangers of overtly simplified process and network diagrams Kun meillä oli koulupuolen ihmisiä ja päivähoidon ihmisiä ja kolmannen sektorin ihmisiä niin tää on ehkä aika insinööritieteteisrationaalinen lähestymistapa, mikä ei ehkä sovi kaikille. Aika moni koki että tää on liian tekninen lähestymistapa. Mutta periaatteessa tää selventää asian. Täytyy vaan se moderointi ottaa siihen rinnalle. -‐-‐-‐ Jotkut oli puolustuskannalla tai tää oli vähän punainen vaate, kun tää oli tehty eri orientaatiosta, kun me vietiin täällä sitä lähes 100 hengen suunnittelukoneistolla läpi. Meillä oli erillisiä suunnitteluryhmiä ja muita ja kun tää ei ollut linjassa sen kanssa, tää herätti monissa puolustusreaktiota tai semmosta, et olis mieluummin halunnu kanavoida sen keskustelun yhteiseen malliin tai suuntaan. (06, Development Director, City, School Project) Täällä [kaaviossa] oli tällanen palvelukeskus, joka oli aika vaarallinen, tämmösestä ei oltu mitään puhuttu siihen mennessä et tää oli tullu jostain. Ehkä se on hyväkin, et tulee tämmösiä heittoja. Mut sitte et tämmönen joka tulee workshoppiin pohjaversiona se ei sais lähtee omaa elämäänsä elämään ulkopuolelle, jos se on vaan heikoille jäille heitetty idea. Toki akateemisista piireistä odotetaankin et sielt tulee -‐-‐-‐ Ideoita jotka on vähän reuna-‐alueella ja rohkeita. Ja se on ihan ok työryhmätyöskentelyyn ja päivän virittelyyn tai vaan jopa että saa ihmiset ajattelemaan, reagoimaan. Mut jos se jää sen jälkeen kuvioksi joka julkaistaan ryhmätyön tuloksena, se on ihan eri juttu. Tai että se esitetään jossain ulkopuolella totuutena. Pitää olla varovainen mitä siitä viestittää. -‐-‐-‐ Ihmiset ottaa sen helposti totena. Pitää sopia niin että mikä tän päivän aikana on se lopputulos mikä konsensus tai yhteinen tahtotilamme tän asian suhteen. Jos paikalla oleva väki sanoo, että tää on tän hankkeen kannalta vaarallista, niin se pitää kuunnella sit ja ottaa pois. Et herkkyyttä tarvitaan siihen miten asiakas ohjaa näitä hankkeita ja mikä on sitten akateemista vapautta. (06, Development Director, City, School Project) Process charts not very useful, avoiding them rather Joo kyllä prosessikuvauksia on käytetty ja itsekin parhaillaan väkästän nyt sitten teknologia-‐managementin prosessikuvausta seuraavalle organisaatiokierrokselle, et kyl sitä tehdään, mut henkilökohtasesti pidän kyllä aika yksinkertasista kuvauksista. Ja sit on varmaan tullu ylimmältä johdoltakin että meillä on keskeinen tavoite saada prosessia yksinkertaistettua. Siinä on varmaan optimi, että jos ei oo mitään prosessia, niin sitten on ihan sotkua vaan ja jos on taas liikaa niin sit menee pelkän prosessikuvauksen tekemiseen aika eikä ehditä tehdä töitä ollenkaan. (09, Research Director, Virtual Innovation Project) Ehkä enemminkin ollaan yritetty päästä eroon [monimutkaisista prosessi-‐vuokaavioista]. -‐-‐-‐ ne ei niinkun ketterien konsulttien työkaluihin kuulu, jäykät prosessit. (10, Usability Specialist, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) FUTURE RECALL Recalling the future is a method originally developed in social services to provide a tool to facilitate the work of the professionals in that field. The method is based on first creating a common vision of an ideal future and then formulating plans on how to achieve it. This is done through discussion, which is facilitated and led by the professionals. (Kokko 2006.) In the School Project the Future Recall method was utilized in the early phases of co-‐creation as a part of process simulation, together with personas, scenarios and a visual process map. The aim was to focus on the solutions that would take the organization into the desired future, and to avoid getting stuck with the everyday challenges. The future recall begun with a story that transferred the participants to the future, and then the participants recalling the steps that were taken on the way to the future. The exercise was lead by researchers that read the future story and facilitated the discussion, but the participants' involvement increased gradually. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 14 In the Virtual Innovation Project the Future Recall method was utilized in the last phase of co-‐creation as part of a design game exercise. The aim was to identify concrete steps to take to reach the collaboratively envisioned future of innovating at the pilot organisation. The exercise was mainly driven by participants but initiated by researchers by reading out loud an imaginary future story and giving instructions for the completion of the task. Future Recall in both projects was part of Process Simulation. In the School Project, the method worked very well and yielded good results (02, 07). The method was concrete enough and connected to the everyday of the school, there were clear goals and good instructions by the facilitators. The method had a good combination of group work and own thinking. The scenario visualisations, process diagrams and network diagrams used were simple enough and supported the task. In the Virtual Innovation Project, the interviewees saw the method as rather close to working with roadmaps, which the corporation was already doing a lot (09). A particular workshop concentrating on the virtual innovation tool was considered more concrete than others and opened up how the platform and tool connect with other types of innovation streams. Because the tool had already been used, there were many enhancement ideas. The participants were able to identify the main challenges, bottlenecks and development needs related to the tool and ideating solutions to them. The event was succesful because there was a range of different experts present. A good categorisation of issues emerged and a roadmap for the tool development that is still used. (09, 10, 11, 12) PERSONAS Personas are synthesised portrayals of people that entail characteristics of real people studied for understanding users. They are usually textual descriptions with visual images and contain a demographic profile as well as information about the characters behaviors, goals, needs, frustrations, values and beliefs. (Cooper 1999.) In the Virtual Innovation Project, the Personas method was utilized throughout the project. In the first collaborative session the personas were prepared by the researchers and in the later phases the creation and refinement of them was a shared process between participants and researchers. The aim was to center the co-‐creation of the innovation process on human aspects, move the co-‐development work from abstract visions to a concrete level of day-‐to-‐day social interaction both face-‐to-‐face and virtually. The persona descriptions were considered useful by the company representatives because they “made us really think about what the roles of the users of the tool would really be and to what direction it should be developed based on that” (11). The personas also inspired a lot of discussion and people remembered them well because of the images and visual material that they relied ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 15 on. Profiling the “champion” persona based on insight from broad range of people from all levels of organisation and reflecting the persona to the process was great result of the project. Understanding of the personas influenced the building of an Innovation Manager network within the company and gave deeper understanding of the innovation tool’s users. Regardless of the co-‐creation project, the company is already using personas in different situations, such as product development, user studies and customer insight (marketing). There is potential for using more future oriented personas in ideation and storytelling, in thinking of the future user, and in assessing how changing situations impact scenarios and how users change (connecting personas and future scenarios). The company also utilises personas in use cases e.g. for depicting the actions and roles of various actors in a hospital. The work of mechanics has also been charted with the help of personas. (09, 10) Personas connected to futures Kyl me persoonia on käytetty aika paljon ja käytetty yhä enemmän aikalailla erilaisissa tilanteissa. Sekä tuotekehityksessä sekä käyttäjistä erilaisista käyttäjistä ja myöskin asiakkaista ja rooleista, et saadaan ihminen mukaan sinne. (10, Usability Specialist, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) Persona as a useful method for communicating roles to employees No meillä oli erityisen hyödyllistä ton Champion-‐persoonan työstäminen kun me oltiin erityisesti panostettu näiden henkilöiden valintoihin mutta myös heidän sparraamiseen ja jopa kouluttamiseen et me todettiin aika pian että tää koko prosessin toimivuus on hänestä kiinni, mutta sitten me tultiin mietittyä koko sitä että miten tää prosessi pitäisi toimia ja mitä me edellytämme jokaiselta. Kyllä siinä esimerkiks tän käyttäjän profiilin luonti oli varmasti vaikuttava. Suoraan tai epäsuorasti. -‐-‐-‐ Kyllä nää on ollu jossain tällasissa tietoiskuissa esillä nää on kommunikoitu juuri näille henkilöille, jotka tässä roolissa on. -‐-‐-‐ Minusta se oli juuuri tämän workshopin lisäarvo, että me saatiin aika laajasti näkemyksiä johdosta niinkun suunnittelijaan asti. Miten varsinkin tän Championin niin minkä tyyppinen henkilö hänen pitäis olla. Kyl sillä oli hyvin suuri merkitys et jos yhteisymmärryksessä luotuja nää roolikuvaukset. (11, Development Director, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) SCENARIOS In scenario-‐based design, descriptions of how people accomplish tasks are a primary working design representation. Aside from use scenarios, also broader future scenarios can be created. Maintaining a continuous focus on situations of and consequences for human work and activity promotes learning about the structure and dynamics of problem domains, seeing usage situations from different perspectives, and managing trade-‐offs to reach usable and effective design outcomes (Carroll 1994, 1995). Scenarios were used in the School Project throughout the co-‐
creation process. As the aim was to develop a future school concept, scenarios were chosen to concretise the possible ways how schools could operate in the future and to bring the future users' perspective to the co-‐development. In addition, scenarios were used together with the Process Simulation method, personas, and future recall. Scenarios were produced by the researchers on the basis of participant interviews, and the researchers also facilitated the use of scenarios in the co-‐
development events. According to participants, the persona-‐based scenarios in the School Project helped in concretising the needs and goals of the project, in helping the participants to identify with the users and in starting discussion (01, 04, 05). However, their connection to practical design solutions was weak. The city ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 16 representatives in particular saw scenarios as a refreshing, novel and promising method with potential usage in marketing the goals of the city towards citizens. Scenario building enabled dreaming of the future, which was needed in this type of project and is unusual in city-‐driven development projects. Scenarios could be used for envisioning e.g. the future of senior services in the city. The interviewees suggested that scenarios would be a good method for inclusion of citizens and enhancing customer-‐
centredness of public services. Web-‐based scenarios could be developed. (05, 06) In the Virtual Innovation Project, scenarios were utilised throughout the project. They were also combined with other methods, such as business process simulation, future recall and personas. The aim with the scenarios was to familiarise the participants with the current situation or to transport people to a time in the future, to enable imagining and envisioning as well as to share a story that captures the everyday experience of people in a rich and vivid form. In the City Services Project, criticism towards scenario strips and other visualisations was brought up by a researcher (15). Overt work input on scenarios to her undermined the expertise of design researchers and made them into illustrators merely supporting the consultants’ work. Clients should understand the role of designers not as makers of finished communications material but as facilitators of collaboration. Scenarios useful in marketing (more than in the actual school design process) Kyl mä luulen et tietyillä mielikuvilla sen mitä ollaan haluamassa siltä tilalta, niin [skenaarioista] saa ihan hyviä rakennuspalikoita siihen, et miten mielessään näkee sen valmiin tilan. Mut et se on sit sen porukan joka sitä suunnittelua tekee niin heille oleellista. Sit taas se mikä meidän näkökulma täs oli niin ehkä enemmän se et miten tätä markkinoidaan ja miten viestitään vanhemmille ja tuleville kuntalaisille, et mitä ollaan tekemässä. Tämän tyyppistä ajattelua vois käyttää siinä markkinoinnissa. (05, Administration Manager, City, Scool Project) Potential application of scenarios in communicating customer segments Pitäis olla sellanen hanke, missä olis tällasta unelmointia tulevaisuudesta ja tehdään jotain uutta ja tehdään jotain uutta mitä ei oo ennen tehty. Kyllähän paljon kuntien haasteena on palvelutoiminnan kehittäminen ja kuntien palvelutoimintaa pitäis saada byrokratiavapaammaksi. Nimenomaan mä näkisin tämmösen hyvän puolen tämmösessä kehittämisessä et saadaan asiakaslähtöisemmäks. Mietittäis tämmösii asiakassegmenttejä ja otettais sieltä konkreettisia caseja vaikkakin hypoteettisia. (06, Development Director, City, School Project) DESIGN PROBES Design Probes are an approach of user-‐centred design for understanding human phenomena and exploring design opportunities. They are based on user participation by means of self-‐documentation. Probes are a collection of assignments through which or inspired by which the users can record their experiences as well as express their thoughts and ideas. (Mattelmäki 2006.) The probes study kit contains various assignments to the participants that they conduct by themselves after which the material is analysed by researchers and deepened by interviewing the participants. A typical probes study may consist of some open questions, a disposable camera to take pictures of meaningful places and objects, timetable to explain what happens during a week, etc. The probes material can be used as basis for personas, co-‐creation workshops, concepts and other co-‐creation work. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 17 Design Probes were utilised in the Service Design Project, the City Services Project and the Wellbeing Project. The Hospital Project included a similar type of photographing assignment with hospital personnel. In all cases, probes were used as background material for further co-‐creation workshops with professionals and also the user themselves present. In the City Services Project, a probes study with home carers was realised documenting their everyday life. The results were used in service experience prototyping. It was noted that the outcomes could not be efficiently brought to benefit co-‐creation. However, to the mind of a city representative, they gave indirectly valuable information on what people “think they need”, whether the city service offering corresponds with that, and how to develop the service processes. (14, 16) A potential for the method was seen in mapping the experiences of carer families even in a broader context. A downside would be the laboriousness of the method, involving lot of work by researchers. Some methods are more useful and credible, such as the probes Yhteistyötaholle ne yhteissuunnittelun työpajat, ne molemmat tai kaikki oli vähän semmosia et joo nää on näitten taideyliopistojen juttuja. Se jäi vähän mielikuvaks siitä. Mut jos ajatellaan luotaamista ja palvelukokemuksen prototypointia nin sitä myös yhteissuunnittelun osa alueena niin se oli ehkä tehokkaampi ja hyödyllisempi siinä mielessä että se myös johti siihen että kaupungissa innostuttiin siihen, että sitä luotaamista vois käyttää semmosten omaishoitoperheiden tilanteen kartoittamiseen ja palvelusuunnitelman apuna ja he kehittivät siitä omaan palvelupilottiin sopivan version. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) DESIGN GAMES Design games as described by Brandt (2006) are generative, sensitive, visual and playful tools aimed at sensitizing the imagination and facilitating exploration in co-‐design settings. In the Hospital Project, Design Games were be utilised for making a complex customer journey quickly understandable. In this case, patients with cancer were interviewed about their experiences by modeling their journey as a game board. It allowed for the interviewees to easily situate their own experiences and to recall important events during their treatment. In the Virtual Innovation Project the Design Game method was employed in the last phase of co-‐development. The aim was to bring together created knowledge about good practices in the studied innovation process and to support decision making regarding the future through the use of a card game, game board and a future timeline. The activity was mainly driven by participants but supported by researchers' facilitation and pre-‐
design of game materials. In the City Services Project, there was a design games workshop that lasted for 3-‐4 hours (which proved to be too long for the carers). There were 10 persons in two groups (a city project manager, a project worker, a special advisor, a senior services director, an entrepreneurs association representative, a senior services representative, two carers, and two design researchers). Three carefully planned design games were played. The first game aimed at ceating understanding on the life of the carers. It was based on stories of the day of the carer families based on image cards based on probes. The same material worked differently for professionals (as tool for understanding customers process) and laypeople (as inspiration for sharing experiences). The second game dealt with mapping of the actor network around the day and identifying the requirements for them on cards. Professionals completed this game (even if focus of ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 18 discussion shifted to city bureaucracy), while the carer participants considered the game as childish and did not want to get engaged. However, the human perspective was never forgotten in their discussion. This raised questions among the researchers about how users adopt and learn design games and understand their purpose and what if they don’t want to play along predefined rules; can games be more open? (16) The third game was about building a service tray to support the whole, based on the idea of a personal budget, and services from public, private, and third sector providers. Tangible craft materials were provided for this game. This game again was completed for the officials, the carers didn’t participate much. All in all, the city representatives valued the games because the carers were given a voice. The method provided knowledge about the carers’ everyday to authorities that was truly new to them (14). In the Hospital Project, the design game focused on the sarcoma patient journey. There was a game board with a flow diagram, depicting patient experiences and needs based on the probes study, and tokens representing feelings. The game according to participants was an effective method that gave the service developers courage to approach the patients directly, ask them about things and observe their actions (22). It also opened up the complete patient journey to the hospital staff. Importantly, the game enabled patients to talk about negative issues that are not usually revealed to a doctor. The game cards acted as trigger for discussing difficult matters on a general level without emphasis on individual persons. (19) Winning participants over by the method, being immersed into the game Kun me ajettiin tänne workshopiin, mun silloinen esimies sanoi että hei, nyt on sit tällänen juttu että me yritetään ottaa noista tutkijoista kaikki mehut irti mahdollisimman pienellä omalla panoksella. -‐-‐-‐ Että pelataan tää juttu sillä lailla että... Well, you understand. -‐-‐-‐ Joo sitte mä muistan, ei ku me ruvettiin pelaamaan niin jossain kohtaa sit unohtu kyl ihan kaikki tämmöset omat agendat. Et sit siitä tuli semmost yhdessä tekemistä. (12, Product Release Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Personally internalised the game approach Mulla on jonkinasteinen, design game -‐pakkomielle/fetissi nykyään. Jos mä johonki pystyn sellasen ujuttamaan niin mä yritän, käyttää sitä menetelmää. -‐-‐-‐ Jotenki siis niinku mä sanoin mä tykästyin niihin peleihin tosi paljo ja sen takia et ihmiset jollain taval tiputtaa kaikki aseet omat agendansa ja heittäytyy siihen mukaan helposti. -‐-‐-‐ niissä on hyvää se että siinä on semmonen tekemisen meininki. Ja ihmiset eläytyy paremmin siihen asiaan mikä on käsillä. Että ne voi olla aika yksinkertasiaki, pelejä mutta mä oon kokenu et niist on tosi paljo hyötyä kyllä siin tekemisessä. Ja varsinkin ideointivaiheessa. (12, Product Release Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Benefits of design game, differences in how it facilitates Molemmissa ryhmissä materiaali toimi virikkeenä, mutta vähän erilaisena. -‐-‐-‐ Se kyseinen materiaali toimi niinku tosi hyvänä siihen että kyseinen ryhmä pääsi nopeesti töihin, sekä ne rupes puhuun samoista asioista, eli niin ei tarvinnut enää keskustella ja miettiä sitä, että mitä omaishoitajana olo tarkoittaa tai minkähänlaisia ne ihmiset on, vaan ne pystyi käyttämään niitä konkreettisia kuva esimerkkejä ja sit taas siinä toisessa ryhmässä se helpotti keskustelun aloitusta. Ja esimerkiksi vaikeista aiheista, jos esimerkiksi kokee että puoliso on aggressiivinen, niin siellä on kortti joka kuvaa aggressiivista puolisoa, että just tällästä meillä on. Kunvieraat ihmiset työskentelee noin niin tarvitaan sellaista impulssia siihen työskentelyyn. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) Resistance to the game approach Palvelutarjotin teema toi peliin semmosen mielenkiintoisen ajatuksen että jos ihan oikeesti käyttäs sitä että niillä on tarjotin johon he rakentais palveluista sellasen fyysisen rakennelman eli et sen sijaan et puhutaan niinkun, tai tavallaan puhutaan abstrakteista asioista mutta niinku jollekin muodolle tai palikoille voidaan antaa merkitys sen ryhmän omassa työskentelyssä. Eli siinä käytettiin materiaalina erilaisia askartelumateriaaleja, siellä oli kertakäyttömukeja ja puu palikoita, helmiä ja jopa legoja, niitä sai kiinnitellä ja rakentaa ja kirjoittaa. Siinä oli sellainen pahvinen tarjotin mihin he rakens sitte sen tarjottimen. Siinäkin tuli aika paljon eroo sen kahen ryhmän välillä että myöskin ihan ihmisten välillä. Ykkösryhmä lähti heti tekemään ja rakentamaan aika ennakkoluulottomasti sit taas siellä toisessa ryhmässä muutama henkilö oli että minä en mitään legoja rupee rakentamaan, eli heti sellainen negatiivinen suhtautuminen siihen tuli tai semmonen vastareaktio. -‐-‐-‐ heidän työskentely oli sit enemmän et he keskusteli niistä tarpeista ja palveluista mitä olis hyvä saada tai mitä he tartteis siihen. Mut et heidän oli vaikee lähtee tuomaan niitä sanoja semmoseen niinku konkreettiseen muotoon, et se meni selvästikin joillakin ihmisillä vähän liian tämmöseks. Et ei oo niinku tarpeeksi leikkimieltä kaikilla siinä asiassa. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 19 Benefits of the design game Se [sarkoomapotilaan pelilauta] oli mun mielestä niin kuin niin mahtava oivallus, se on varmaan teille niin kuin jotain niin kuin jokapäiväinen leipä. Niin se että ne potilaat pystyi siinä hahmottaan sen kulun ja niitä ongelma alueet, minusta se oli ihan mahtava. -‐-‐-‐ Ja potilaat pysty siinä niinkun kun niiltä kysy että mikä menee huonosti, eihän ne niinku. Ja siinä oli [kaksi projektin vastuuhenkilöä] tärkeässä roolissa, että ne pystyi houkuttelemaan potilaita puhumaan. -‐-‐-‐ Mä tykkäsin siitä.-‐-‐-‐ Mä en ollu siinä mukana, me tehtiin itse asiassa se tarkoituksella että mä en mee mukaan. Potilailla on suuri halu miellyttää mua, tajuntaisesti ja alitajuntaisesti. Ne ei sillon sano epäkohtia, vaikkei ne oliskaan minusta. -‐-‐-‐ se pelilauta oli hyvä visuaalinen tämmönen jonka avulla pystyttiin käymään niitä asioita läpi. (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) ACTING AND DRAMA, STORYTELLING Acting and drama based methods in service development aim at empathising with the customer in individual service encounters. The method helps to analyse and test the characteristics of successful interactions with customers. Storytelling is a method for sharing experiences through narratives – aiming to engage participants, to enable them to imagine new perspectives, and to elicit empathy. In the City Services Project, a storytelling approach was utilised for making the workshop participants to familiarise themselves with the life of a home carer and to understand the requirements in her work. One of the design games utilised in the Service Design Project was called Character Game. The general aim of the workshop was to explore senior houses as a base for strategic B2B partnerships and it was employed in the fuzzy front-‐end of a design project. The Character Game built on roleplaying to promote new perspectives for the topic and go through user insights in empathetic and inspirational way. Participants were product developers from three companies. The activity was facilitated by a researcher and game materials, which included photos and quotations from the user study, a game world description, character templates, and photos to illustrate the role characters. The game materials were based on participatory observations in senior houses and discussions with experts. The roleplay resulted in several scenarios, reframed design tasks, design drivers, and themes of interests. Following the first Character Game in the Service Design Project, the materials from the four groups who simultaneously played the game were interpreted, and four main topics of concern were formulated; feeling safe, aesthetic accessibility, me and others, and moving around. These four themes were exhibited later for a month in the Senior Expo that was held in the company’s R&D space. The exhibition displayed provocative and stereotypical notions, such as the text “Who am I?” painted on a mirror that people were asked to look at while wearing a mask of an older man. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 20 The design game methods in the Service Design Project were considered interesting and beneficial by the participants. It was stated that the games were good because people got engaged to them and dropped their premeditated agendas. As put by one interviewee: “I think that especially this role playing or character game, I think that everybody was quite excited, that it was quite new for us at that point.” The acting part was also important because it forced the participants to adopt the perspective of the end user. The workshop playing out a day in a senior house based on personas increased the understanding on senior-‐friendliness. The character exhibition based on the project was considered a good way of sharing the findings which received a lot of positive feedback from within the broader R&D organisation. It was considered more participatory and a new way of communicating findings instead of powerpoints. (12, 13) The facilitator “owning” the method confidently conquers resistance I was a little bit nervous before the customer workshop, that how our customers perceive the extreme method. But it was very nice to notice that the customers were also quite excited about the method, and of course big thing was that the team were so in it, so that they were really able to facilitate it properly. And all the stuff and practical things and documentation and things like that were on a good level, like all the materials used in the workshop. I think it was good. One thing is -‐-‐-‐ that you need to really have ability to really know this methodology inside out so that they can run it smoothly, efficiently and professionally. Because the participants can also sense if you are uncertain and not comfortable with the thing that you area trying to get them to do, and if they sense that, you really can’t get them in. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Method as means of communicating innovativeness to potential partners It gave probably to [the housing developer] the view that we are an innovative company also because we try new innovative methods. So in that sense I think it supports what we also want to communicate to our customers. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) CUSTOMER JOURNEY Customer journeys visualise a service from the customer’s point of view by presenting it as sequential interactions between the customer and the service provider. Using them, intangible elements of a service experience can be explored through a visible and tangible artifact. (Kronqvist 2012, Kimbell 2009.) The Customer Journey method was utilised in the Hospital Project. Even though healthcare work processes are often well documented, the customer journeys of the patients are not understood completely. General aim was to engage employees in care units to visualise the customer journey and through that shift the focus from what the care workers do towards what the patient needs. The method was complemented by Service Process Modeling where the healthcare service process of cancer care was mapped first with two doctors heading the program and afterwards refined by conducting a walk-‐through and interviewing the key personnel along the process. The end result provided a detailed image of the process, which could fit on an A4 sheet. Customer Journey mapping was considered a very concrete and efficient tool for revealing the sarcoma patient experience in the hospital and related development needs (20, 21, 22, 23). It created a shared way of understanding that both the personnel and the patients could relate to. The use of the method led to understanding the need for and importance of a nurse that goes through the sarcoma care process with the patient hand in hand. The method led to finding out a new role for nurses in order to support patient’s ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 21 experience which takes some burden away from the physicians. It also revealed bottlenecks in the customer service process, such as the slowness of the process for patients to get into the treatment. The patient journey diagram as a mediative “boundary object” Poliklinikkatyöpajassa oli hirveen toimivaa kun siitä alkoi laatia sitä palvelupolkua. Se luo semmosen niinku yhteisen välineen, sen potilaan kokemuksen ymmärtämisen, sen potilaan ja henkilökunnan välille, kun sä luot tällasen välineen niin se auttaa niinku niitä fokusoitumaan tiettyihin kysymyksiin, tiettyihin haasteisiin. Se purkaa niinkin kompleksisen jutun kuin tilan normaalin ihmisen käsiteltäviksi osiksi. (23, Researcher, Hospital Project) PROTOTYPING Tangible prototyping of the future work, care and recreation spaces in a new hospital unit was realised as part of the Hospital Project. The method relied on props made of cardboard and other material that was worked with in multi-‐professional groups to envision and try out different spatial configurations to support the service processes, resulting in a mock-‐up “cardboard hospital” that would ideally provide some input for the actual hospital design and development process. The co-‐creation in the Hospital Project consisted of the creation of shared vision of a patient-‐centred hospital, and building the cardboard mock-‐up of a hospital unit on the basis of that. The cardboard hospital consisted of props with open meaning: boxes, doorframes, screens, and movable walls. They could be drawn upon and given many meanings. There were about 20 participants, mostly care personnel but also patients and architects of the forthcoming hospital building. The facilitators’ goal was to create an isnpirational setting, a “liminal space” between present and imagined worlds (23). This was helped by music, refreshments and comprehensive design of the whole event.Thetre were two facilitators directing the event, documenting, and building the outcome on the spot. The participants experienced the method as “vaguely useful”. According to a physician, it was eye-‐opening the see things differently and from the perspectives of many actors, including patients. The collaborative ideation of patients and designer-‐researcher-‐facilitators with the help of the props according to her brought many concrete design ideas (“co-‐insights”) to the project, such as a reception counter with opaque window so that you can see if there’s someone in and get contact, screens to inspection rooms to enable undressing in privacy, and a back exit corridor to ease circulation and increase privacy. (19) The idea of co-‐design in this case seemed to be hard to explicate and understand. There were mixed feelings among the participants about how realistic vs. unrealistic the setting and ideas were and what was going to be implemented. It was nice to be able to modify the sizes of spaces freely, but the two nurses already during the event realised that the outcomes were unrealistic (20, 21). One of them even pondered whether they had been given the opportunity to participate so that they couldn’t complain later. Designing the co-‐creation event On tosi tärkee, että sä luot sellasen maailman, jossa kaikki vaihtoehdot on avoinna. Ja ihmiset inspiroituu kuvittelemaan uutta. Et se on tavallaan niinku sellanen välitila, niinku nykyisen maailman ja kuvitellun maailman välillä. Tähän me käytettiin tosi paljon aika, et me mietittiin sitä. Joka kerta kun me järjestettiin uusia työpajoja siinä pahvisairaalassa, mulla oli mukana lavastesuunnittelija. Freimattiin se haaste siinä tilassa käyttämällä niinku tätä aivan upeeta lavastesuunnittelija osaamista. -‐-‐-‐ Pyrittiin vahvasti muodostamaan tällanen esteettinen tunnekokemus siihen, et kun he astuu tilaan, niin he ymmärtää mitä siinä tapahtuu. Ehkä hyvin pitkälle vamaan tiedostamatta asettuvat niinku sellaseen, ymmärtävät sen haasteen asetelman kautta ja saivat sellaisen mindsetin joka etsii uutta ja on turvallinen kokeiluympäristö. (23, Researcher, Hospital Project) Realism creeps in Mun mielestä se [cardboard hospital design workshop] ei mitään leikkimisjuttua ollu. Siinä tuli vähän ehkkä semmonen että mopo karkas käsistä. Mulle tuli semmonen että tää ei nyt ihan tällaisenaan mene läpi. (20, 21, Nurses, Hospital Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 22 4 THE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECTS The levels of impact This chapter describes the impacts of the co-‐creation projects as stated by the participants in the follow-‐
up interviews conducted approximately 1–3 years after the ending of the projects. Direct, measurable impacts to real-‐world services or solutions are not common in the material. The impacts that the participants mentioned typically were personal “revelations” about the importance the end user/client/patient, increased collaboration among people or organisations, new development ideas, or incremental improvements to existing services, processes or tools. It should be noted that it was not easy for the participants to distinguish in retrospect, whether specific changes had actually resulted from the co-‐creation project, from other development work done at the same time that the organisations were involved in, or from general systemic progression. It seems that in the experience of the participants, various development activities taking place simultaneously merge together. It was difficult for them to specify the exact consequences of co-‐creation activities. A typical evaluation was that “the project was useful but it is difficult to pinpoint how”. Moreover, it should be kept in mind that the impacts mentioned represent the interviewee’s subjective perception and thus are not necessarily objectively measurable. Some stated impacts of a project that others didn’t. Based on the interviews, the impacts of co-‐creation can be positioned on a hierarchy of levels where each level denotes a more profound and long-‐lasting effect (see Figure 3, partly based on Katja Soini’s forthcoming dissertation on the diffusion of innovation in the housing renovation field). Firstly, there were impacts on the level of the individuals who participated to the co-‐creation activities. Secondly, there were impacts on the organisation level including the products. Thirdly, the network of actors connected to the co-‐creation efforts could be impacted. Moreover, there could be impacts extending to the field (such as the education field) or even to the societal level. However, the latter were not evident in the material. FIGURE 3. THE LEVELS OF IMPACT Different types of impacts or outcomes could also be elicited from the interviews. There were purely mental impacts such as the shift of mindset of an individual or a group of people, the feeling of empowerment and being heard, or the increase of personal motivation to further a cause. There were ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 23 impacts on people’s behaviour and practices, such as the increase of collaboration among the teachers in different schools in the School Project. In addition, the co-‐creation projects had impacts related to concrete products and services, such as specific improvements to a virtual innovation tool in the case of the Virtual Innovation Project. A concise description of the main impacts of the case projects on different levels is given below. A more profound analysis is left to a later stage. The School Project INDIVIDUAL LEVEL IMPACTS The project according to the principals had significant impact to some individual teachers’ professional development and attitude. It helped them to focus on what’s important (the pupils and the learning process, not the school bureaucracy). They got more readiness to experiment with and develop own work practices. Some teachers recognisably “came out from their foxholes” and adopted a more holistic view, considering also the viewpoint of other actors and schools. The project lowered their threshold to collaborate with teachers in the others schools in general. (01, 03, 07) New understanding of the extended learning environment (broader than school) was created among the participants. They also realised that many actors are needed to make that possible. The punchline “future school is co-‐created” was the key finding for a participant from the city. (03, 06, 07) ORGANISATION LEVEL IMPACTS In the participating schools, the project inspired a future-‐oriented way of thinking and working which has stayed alive after the project and impacted the development of own school. One school is continuing to develop the use of ICT and social media in pedagogy in another development project. (01, 02, 03) The schools had also adopted some of the ideology of co-‐creation. For example, one school was seeking to include parents into the development of the school and to gain better understanding and knowledge on the pupils’ lives. Methods inspired by the co-‐creation events have been adopted in school board meetings for making the meetings more interactive e.g. by using coloured post-‐its to describe processes and make visible good and poor feedback. Future recall was used in a reverse way for “looking back” on important events for the annual report. The use of various process descriptions had also increased after the research project. The idea of different learning styles had been introduced in one school after the project. (03, 07) Results of the project concerning user needs for school spaces according to one interviewee impacted the project planning of the new school to be built. Learnings from user needs regarding school spaces were discussed among diverse representatives of education within the project, connected to previous knowledge and mediated to the technical project planning. Some ideas from co-‐creation “certainly are visible in the project plan” (04). However, others did not mention this. By contrast to the schools, the city organisation was not able to utilise the outcomes concretely and had not adopted any co-‐creation practices. The city representatives said that they should have thought better beforehand what is the benefit from the project. They found it difficult to identify any concrete impacts and stressed that the initial goals of the project for the city were not realised. The city would have wanted more concrete backup to development from research and more focus on the school architecture. As a positive side, the research project provided added value to the school project by opening up some issues and collecting people together. Scenarios were also seen as a potentially promising method for envisioning future city services together with citizens. The primary outcome to one participant was the slide about the importance of co-‐creation. However, she pointed out that “one slide is not enough as the return of investment”. She would not recommend the city to participate to a similar project again. (04, 06) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 24 NETWORK LEVEL IMPACTS The project emphasised the sharing of knowledge and expertise among teachers in own school, across teaching disciplines, between schools, and with other actors. It hence connected to and increased understanding on the general trend towards collaboration and partnerships in the education field that can be both forced (merging of schools) and voluntary (looking for synergy locally). The project increased collaboration with other schools (01, 02). The connection between schools would not have been created without the project (08). Teachers have begun to exchange working practices. There is collaboration among teachers via visits, email, phone, and common trainings. Most of the collaboration is informal and unofficial, depending on personal chemistry. (08) However, the interviewees found it difficult to say what in the increased collaboration is outcome of the co-‐creation project and what would have happened anyway after the merging became a reality (02). One principal was using a roadmap in the upcoming merging process of schools that was partly based on the project (a 3-‐year timeline on what is happening in different areas: pupil and teaching, personnel, spaces, organisational culture, etc.) This acts as means of communication during the merging process towards the personnel and school boards in the two schools. (01) The most significant impact arisen partly out of the co-‐creation project is the combination of special education classes in three schools on the basis of class levels. This innovation is now spreading to other schools. It has also meant close collaboration of special education teachers in the area. (02, 03, 07, 08) Innovation from the project that is spreading Tapa muodostaa erityisluokat yhden vuosiluokan luokiksi on ollu tosi merkittävä juttu, joka leviää myös koko kaupunkiin. Se innovaatio mitä täs tehtiin niin sil on ollu vaikuttavuutta tosi paljon. (02, Principal, School Project) Expansion of personal perspective and impact to professional development Mitä siit on jääny elämään, niin mun mielestä ne simuloinnit ja semmonen työskentelytapa niinkun tulevaisuuteen ajattelu, niin se on ollu työskentely ja ajattelutapana yks semmonen joka on jollain tavalla jääny elämään ja ehkä yksittäisten opettajien jutka on siinä hankkeessa ollu mukana, niin on ollu merkittävä vaikutus. Se on jollain opettajilla ollu jotenkin omassa ammatillisessa kehittymisessä tärkee juttu ja se näkyy. (01, Principal, School Project) Impact of project to teachers’ and school principals’ mindset Jotenkin mulle jäi näistä semmonen näist simulointiprojekteista et ne autto muodostamaan.. autto ajattelemaan kokonaisvaltasesti sitä et minkälainen se koulun tulevaisuus voi olla. Et siit tuli semmosii virikkeitä ja kuitenkin kun siin otettii niin monenlaisii asioita huomioon... ei kaikki tietenkään osattu ottaa… mut semmosen "hei tommost vois lähtee yrittämään". Must ne oli semmosii virikkeiden antamistilaisuuksia, ainakin minulle. (02, Principal, School Project) – Oon samaa mieltä ja monella, jotka oli siinä mukana oli samantyyppinen kokemus. Ne koettiin innostavana ja inspiroivana. Siinä laajennetaan näkökulmaa, kun katotaan sielt tulevaisuudesta käsin, et kaikki on mahdollista. (01, Principal, School Project) – Opettaja tulee ulos luokasta ja se voi olla aika kapeekin se oma katsontakanta, on oman oppiaineen tai oman opettamansa luokan kautta niin näissä ajateltiin koko kouluu. (02, Principal, School Project) The Virtual Innovation Project ORGANISATION LEVEL IMPACTS The research project had a very concrete focus in the development of the virtual innovation tool. It provided input to the actual development and implementation team of the tool. What was wanted were concrete improvements to innovation activities. A central aim was to to facilitate collaboration among global R&D teams. The company had decided to examine the front end innovation process and were seeking to recognise process improvement suggestions that could be realised either immediately, put into a short-‐term roadmap or put into a long-‐term development roadmap. At the same time, they were looking at the management of innovation and the engagement of R&D personnel to innovating. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 25 The project gave new insights and findings that were developed further by the tool development team (consisting of a designer or innovation manager, a global administrator of the tool, an a virtual collaboration service provider). They were occupied with iterative improvement of the front-‐end innovation process, not just virtual tools but face-‐to-‐face aspect and management as well. The participants described the development of the tool and attached reward system as a gradual process where emphasis has shifted from quantity of ideas to accelerating the procession of ideas, and lately to the quality of ideas. The participants sought to absorb the applicable ideas from the co-‐creation outcomes rapidly and suggest them to the development team. The project findings were fused into the general stream of development activities. The particular impacts of the research project thus are not clear (09). However, the project was considered a valuable support to development of innovation practices and the tool especially because there was an external facilitator which “gave everyone courage to express what is wrong” and which gave resources to facilitation so that “people got a good impression of the co-‐creation events” (12). The main impact of the project (combined with the work of the development team) were feedback on and improvements to concrete features of the virtual innovation tool. Adding an invention report function to the tool was named as direct impact of one co-‐creation workshop (10, 12). Another impact of the project was the clarification of three different roles of ideators (users, champions and owners of ideas) and the requirements for them in various phases of innovation. For example, how the owner of the idea could be given more responsibility in its further development. (10) The personas method here opened up the roles and led to person choices or changes to them. Easily approachable personas were considered good for communicating the new roles introduced to the system. Profiling especially of the “champion” persona was useful and impacted the tool development. (11) A third concrete action that the project led to was the adoption of a continuously evolving process development roadmap for innovation activities that is still in use (11, 12). It was based on one of the co-‐
creation workshops but also improved by other increments and greatly simplified. The roadmap is used for communicating the “big picture” of the innovation process. The improvement of the tool has enhanced the collaboration between global R&D units. The company has started building an Innovation Manager network of global administrators of the tool and to create continuity, training and organisational culture around it. The personas are communicated to the tool users. The use of tool is also expanding to stakeholder users (sales, marketing). (12) Concrete outcomes due to tight focus of the project Me tehtiin alusta lähtien sellanen päätös, et me otetaan tämmönen front end -‐innovaatioprosessi tutkittavaksi ja pyritään tunnistamaan sieltä semmosia prosessinparannusehdotuksia, jotka sitten toteutetaan joko välittömästi tai pannaan lyhyen aikajänteen kehitysroadmappiin tai sitten pidemmllä aikajänteellä kehitysroadmäppiin. Tietenkin johtamismenetelmät oli yks keskeinen haaste, mut kyllä oli ihan selkeesti semmonen haaste, et miten meidän teknologia-‐r&d-‐organisaatiossa otetaan ihmiset aktiivisesti mukaan tähän front end -‐innovointiprosessiin. Et tää oli tavoite ja me ollaan tässä projektin myötä löydetty kyllä konkreettista tekemistä, josta meillä on koko ajan täällä käsittelyssä tällanen prosessikehitysroadmäppi. Kyllä se johti konkreettiseen työhön, jota me tehdään koko ajan. (11, Development Director, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) The Service Design Project INDIVIDUAL LEVEL IMPACTS The project caused one participant to become an agent of co-‐creation methods in the company. In her own words, she developed a “design game obsession or fetish” and is now continuosly looking for opportunities to use the methods in her work. Planning, facilitating and playing the games in the research project under the guidance of an experienced design researcher familiarised her with the method and gave her confidence to later apply them herself to new contexts and facilitate workshops. She had also ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 26 developed own games for different uses not found in her existing toolbox. Moreover, she made a workshop planning guide to product development after the projecta and took a facilitation master class course. She now has a “secondary role as workshop mastermind”, contacted by people within the corporation who are looking for new methods. (12) ORGANISATION LEVEL IMPACTS According to one interviewee, the project gave a bunch of small ideas, but nothing so big and concrete that a new R&D project would have been founded. It confirmed that the user-‐orientated approach is valid and needs to be continued. There was a change of mindset during the workshops towards really understanding better the context of use and user value, which eventually can lead to new ideas. (13) One main outcome was the realisation that there are many methods for co-‐creation and that a well organised workshop really produces more results that “sitting in a circle around a slideshow” (12). The company also realised that their own skills in arranging co-‐creation events are limited. Interestingly, the project impacted a change of mindset from “design thinking to design doing”, e.g. more hands-‐on experimentation inspired by the project and visits to Design Factory. Two interviewees brought up a tendency away from powerpoints and printed material to tangible concept prototypes and demonstrations (models of user interfaces, mock-‐ups etc.) that people can touch and feel. (12, 13) Personas have been used in the company for deepening the understanding on customer segements. They have been adopted as part of global “value selling training” where they are used for getting into the shoes of the customer and understanding what kind of value can be provided to them by the products. However, this is not an impact of the project but comes from own customer insight and end user studies. (13) NETWORK LEVEL IMPACTS The project facilitated a new partnership and the probing of shared business interests on a new application area with a company from another field (senior housing). The novel methods were also explicitly used for communicating the innovativeness of the company to the potential business partner. However, the prospect of business collaboration waned after the single workshop. (12, 13) Characters and character game as eye-‐opener I think that especially this role playing or character game, I think everybody was quite excited, that it was quite new for us at that point. -‐-‐-‐ Really because there was this acting part as well, I think that was for some persons maybe quite extreme, to really throw yourself into the situation. I think in that sense it was quite exciting as such, and then of course we collected the ideas and had a few discussions over the concrete outcomes, but it then kind of a little bit faded away, because we didn’t get any this kind of silver bullet idea, that okay this something that we really must start immediately. But there were maybe small little things. Part of them were let’s say invented again. This was kind of confirmation that yeah, this kind of thing would be truly needed. But still they were maybe so small that it wasn’t the size of a full-‐scale project. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Utilisation of customer character cards in value selling training Let’s say that we have a character of building manager, and let’s say that he has old elevators in his building, and he is thinking about the modernisation of the elevators. And of course one could think that he wants to get as cheap deal as possible to replace the elevators. But it might be that more important to him is that the modernisation is done very quickly so that the disturbance to the tenants can be minimised. And by understanding the customer needs like this, we can for example sell our solution with a higher price if we can provide a shorter installation period. And to understand through these personae and characters what kind of elements and things are important for this building manager. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Towards tangible concept prototypes and demonstrations This year we have been focusing more on building demonstrations and prototypes and communicating new stuff through them instead of just making those powerpoints. But really trying to come up with some novel prototypes or demonstrations that the participants can have a look and feel, like this it could be, and this is perhaps how this would work and things like that, and I think that has been a very welcomed way and we are definitely continuing that. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 27 Becoming an agent Kun oli mukana suunnittelemassa ekan kerran niin tajus et hei, täähän on hyvä juttu. Ja siitä se sitten lähti. -‐-‐-‐ Ja sit sen jälkeen ku olin mukana tekemässä ja sain sit vähän sitä varmuutta ja sitte pysty itekki soveltaan. -‐-‐-‐ projektin jälkeen mä tein myös semmosen, workshop planning guiden meidän tuotekehitykselle, liittyen tähän projektiin. Ja sitte taas mä kävin semmosen Facilitation Master Class -‐kurssin, niiden perusteella. Niin, mulle tuli vähän semmonen, secondary role että jos järjestät workshopeja niin ota yhteyttä [minuun]. Ihan käytännössä tuin ihmisiä jos ne halus kokeilla erilaisii menetelmiä. (12, Product Release Manager, Company, Service Design Project) The City Services Project INDIVIDUAL LEVEL IMPACTS For one of the city development professionals, the project was personally and important learning experience about customer-‐centredness. She described it as energising and empowering. (14) The design researchers also said that they learned a lot from the project. One of them realised that designers need to be involved early enough in a project to have true impact. He also found out that facilitating co-‐design with not just users but other stakeholders as well involved was very interesting and rewarding. The other facilitator interviewee emphasised the role of the facilitator in ensuring good results regardless of methods and facilitation as special skill. (15, 16) ORGANISATION LEVEL IMPACTS From the city perspective, the project provided an arena for the actors in the large development project (city, companies, users, researchers) to meet, exchange ideas and familiarise with each others’ viewpoints. The project induced a change of mindset from producer-‐perspective (top-‐down) towards thinking in a more collaborative, holistic, customer-‐centred (bottom-‐up) way beyond organisational borders and rigid processes. At best, the project “was true co-‐creation” of services for the urban neighbourhood. (14) However, it was just a small experiment separate from the actual development process. The project would have been more useful if it had been broader and better integrated with implementation. (14, 16) The co-‐creation workshops opened up to authorities the “soft” experience of users (the emotions and troubles of carers) to complement the “hard” side (money, processes) that is driving service development. (16) The probes study and co-‐creation workshop revealed truly new insights about the everyday needs of the carers that could be utilised in the development of services in the area and also more broadly to service management and strategic level service development in the city. (14, 15) After the project, some city project workers have attended a service design training suggested by the employer. The city has also utilised design probes in their own service network pilot. (14, 16) NETWORK LEVEL IMPACTS A network of home carers in the area was founded by them as outcome of the co-‐creation project (16). True co-‐design was achieved Toimintaverkon rakentaminen on edennyt todella hyvin ja se on ollut todella yhteisuunnittelua, että siinä on ollut mukana yrityksiä, kolmannen sektorin toimijoita ja myös asiakkaita rakentamassa toimintaverkoston toimintamallia. Ihmiset on oppineet matkan varrella. (14, Special Advisor, City, City Services Project) Bringing in the user view and empowering them – this as task of the designer Työpajatyöskentely osoitti sen että omaishoitajan tai ylipäätään sen kohde tai palvelun käyttäjän, niitten kohtaaminen jotka niitä tuottaa ja kehittää niin se on tärkeetä. Totttakai se on tärkeetä niille jotka kehittää niitä mut se että ne omaishoitajat pääs semmoseen tilanteeseen jossa ne koki että niitä kuunnellaan ja niitten mielipiteillä on arvo ja niinkun se että pääsee jakamaan myös niitä hasteita ja hankaluuksia mitä siihen omaishoitajuuteen liittyy. Et se ei oo mitään semmosta ruusuilla tanssimista koko ajan. Et he sai yhden kanavan minkä kautta voi kertoa omasta elämästään ja itsestään. Ja mä jotenkin koen sen että pelkästään se että ne pääs sellaiseen tilanteeseen niin oli tosi tärkeetä. Sit taas se että mitä ton seurauksena oli tapahtunut niin oli se että nämä omaishoitajat itse tai ainakin yksi heistä sanoi siellä, joka kyl mun mielestä kuvastaa useammankin, että he ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 28 niin kuin itse havahtui että mitä he voi mitä ihmiset niinkun voi tehdessä yhdessä saavuttaa. Eli se yksi henkilö sanoi että kun hän kuuli että kuinka monta niitä omaishoitajaa Lauttasaaressa on niin hän sanoi että jos meitä on täällä Lauttasaaressa 50 perhettä niin ajatelkaa mitä kaikkea me saatais aikaiseksi jos me toimittais yhdessä. Ja sen seurauksena Lauttasaareen järjestettiin tämmönen omaishoitajien tapaaminen, jossa omaishoitajat kutsuttiin keskinäiseen tapaamiseen ja ilmeisesti sinne oli tullut myös niitä yrittäjiä. Ja kaikesta tästä tuli semmonen havahtuminen ja se niinkun miks mä painotin siinä mun työssä sen muotoilijan roolin ja mun roolin merkitystä oli se että ei muotoilijan rooli välttämättä oo yhteissuunnittelussa se että kasataan ihmiset yhteen ja suunnitellaan yhdessä ja siitä tulee joku lopputulos vaan se voi olla pelkästään se että luo tilaisuuden tai tilanteen jossa ihmiset voivat kohdata. Niin se muotoilijan rooli voi niinkun sen jälkeen kokonaan feidaantua pois. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) Design researcher as middleman, interpreter Se on aika paljon tulkintaa ja kommunikaatiota eri tahojen välillä. -‐-‐-‐ Ylipäätään muotoiluun liittyvä se, että yrittää ymmärtää eri tahojen näkemyksiä ja tuoda yhteen. -‐-‐-‐ Et ei oo semmosta tunnetta että nyt pitää kattoo tätä sosiaaliviraston näkökulmasta. Mulla ei ole sellaisia riippuvaisuuksia, eikä myöskään vääränlaisia riippuvuuksia käyttäjäpuoleen, koska enhän mä oo käyttäjä tai omaishoitaja. Sit taas niitten visualisointien kautta yrittää luoda sitä dialogia ja kommunikoida niitä asioita eri tahojen kesken, että voi olla joskus asioita, joita ei vaan ole pystytty visualisoimaan tai ääneen… tai asioita mitä ei sanota ääneen niin ei kukaan pystyny… tai jotenkin selkeyttämään. Niin siinä jotenkin auttamaan sitä että luodaan semmonen yhteinen näkemys tai pohja siihen. Esimerkiksi se että kun mä tein luotain-‐haastattelun pohjalta niitä visualisointeja niin kyl ihmiset jotka oli esimerkiksi työskennelleet kolme vuotta jonkun perheen kanssa tai omaishoitajien kanssa sanoi että kyllä sieltä tuli uusia asioita. Et he ei tienny sitäkään eikä sitäkään niistä perheistä. En mä osaa sanoa että mikä se yksittäinen tapa toimia on mut jonkinlainen tämmönen niinku jonkinlainen ”middleman” siinä kaikkien kanssa. Tai niin, ohjaaja. Se on tavallaan semmonen elokuvan ohjaaja tai teatteriesityksen ohjaaja joka ei välttämättä ole niissä kaikissa jutuissa itse mutta sen pitää tuoda niitä tiettyjä elementtejä yhteen. Pitää myös sitä kokonaisvisiota, näkemystä. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) The Wellbeing Project PERSONAL LEVEL IMPACTS For the chief physician, the project gave some minor seeds for own thinking and development. (17) The students learned about applying co-‐design in a complex and sensitive real-‐life context. They also noted that the nurses were pleased that someone was interested in their work. (18) ORGANISATION LEVEL IMPACTS The co-‐creation project was a one-‐off, short-‐term collaboration. It was decided that there will be no continuation. According to the chief physician, “the initial potential and enthusiasm was great but was not truly realised”. The students’ solutions were creative and provocatory which was expected. They were not applicable in the present process but can provide seeds that actualise later. The project took place in a chaotic time in the hospital, which eroded the utilisation of results. The low impact of the project was probably influenced by the fact that the facilitators were (foreign) students and the privacy and other problems in approaching psychiatric patients directly as co-‐creators. The partipant said that he had later discussed about service design approaches in conjunction of the development of several minor practices or functions in the service process, e.g. the referral practices. He played with the idea of a (probes-‐like) “homework” package for new patients containing information on their situation and the patient process, electronic device with care plan, etc. The idea of mapping the patient service journey and experience as such were considered interesting. The interviewee stated that there is a tendency in psychiatry nowadays to think less of the hospital and more of the extended care network and how the patient is provided easily what he needs, i.e. the customer’s process. (17) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 29 The Hospital Project PERSONAL LEVEL IMPACTS The specialist physician participating to the project experienced a profound turn towards the patients during the co-‐creation process involving patients. She was astonished that patients see similar problems than doctors even if they are amateurs. To her, patient-‐centredness was more crucial in the project than design-‐centredness. She was truly awoken to the fact that patients have a lot of valuable things to say and amazed at how many good ideas they brought to development, as well as of their cost-‐awareness. She saw that collaborative design could add value to usability, beauty and work ergonomics in the hospital. (19) For the nurses, the main benefit of the project was that “their voice was heard and that they heard others’ voices”. It has been good that everyone has had an opportunity to tell their ideas and thoughts on hospital design, but the long process also causes frustration: a lot of talk but were are the results? The nurses rather doubted that the outcomes of the co-‐creation would ever be realised due to lack of money, even if they were waiting for the new hospital with “cautious excitement”. They felt that the organisation is not capable of utilising and implementing new ideas and lacks long-‐term thinking. (20, 21) For the hospital’s Customer Services Development Manager service design was just what she had been looking for. When she familiarised with service design in the project she “fell in love with it”. The approach felt as an answer to get better understanding of the customers. She then took a service design course at a university and became an agent of service design methods in her hospital. She also stated that the co-‐creation process gave her more courage and readiness to approach patients directly. (22) ORGANISATION LEVEL IMPACTS According to the physician, the project has been useful for the organisation, even if it is difficult to say how. It introduced a different way of thinking, a mindset that may lead to impacts in the future. Understanding of the role and potential of design in the care environment has broadened. (19) As rather boldly claimed by the researcher-‐facilitator, “We created through these interventions a need in the hospital to adopt this type of development as part of their operation.” People from various levels of the hierarchic organisation exchanged ideas as equals and the message of patients was taken as equally valid than that of professionals. The study dissolved widespread preconceptions of patients. (23) A concrete design idea of a back exit corridor to enhance privacy and circulation in space emerged from the cardboard hospital case. However, the architects resist the idea because it takes too much space. (19) The need for shortening the patient intake process was a result of the sarcoma patient journey mapping. Based on the findings some minor changes have been done to the real patient intake process. During the project, the idea of sarcoma nurses following with the patient along the journey was developed. This led to a new job description of sarcoma nurses that is used as basis of job applications. (20, 21, 22) According to the Customer Services Development Manager, the hospital had started to focus on customers about 2.5 years ago. Customer satisfaction surveys are realised, and there is a growing interest towards service design (the sarcoma and cardboard hospital cases were first experiments of it). The demand for customer service development has also increased within the hospital. There is more awareness of customers/patients and holistic thinking. The service design approach has been received well even by conservative doctors. Again, the impacts of the individual research project are difficult to specify, and the actual hospital project is still ongoing. The interviewee states that the organisation is on a watershed regarding customer service design. She has suggested that the hospital should make a customer contact strategy: define the objectives, go through the service moments and touchpoints. (22) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 30 When pioneering work has been done, other units in the hospital have begun to see the benefits of service design and have become interested in adopting the results. The physician noted how “our ideas have been hoovered up to other hospital units -‐-‐-‐ we took the trouble and others yield the harvest”. (19) Astonished about patients’ good insight Tietysti kun mun täytyy kun mä oon lääkäri niille potilaille, mun täytyy puhua niille kuin pienille lapsille. Selkeitä, yksinkertaisia lauseita että ne ymmärtää. Niin sitten niinkun hämmästynyt siitä että kuinka hyviä ideoita potilailta tulee. Oikeesti, mä oon vähän hämmästynyt siitä, en mä niitä tyhminä pidä, mutta sitten kuitenkin se että kuinka hyvin potilaat on ollut mukana niin se on ollut, mä oon ollut oikeesti positiivisesti yllättynyt että kuinka paljon hyvää ne on tuonut. (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) Revelation of the value of listening to patients Se potilaslähtöisyys on ollut mulle jotenkin tärkeämpi kuin se muotoilulähtöisyys. Minä olen jotenkin herännyt siihen että potilailla on paljon sanottavaa. (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) Changes to process as impact of service journey mapping Siinähän oli hirveesti kaikkee, mutkia matkassa, että sitten kun niitä ruvettiin poistamaan niin sehän lyheni hirveesti se potilaan pääsy siitä kun se todettiin tai potilas lähetettiin tänne, kun se pääsi sitten leikkaukseen että…” Researcher: “Siis teillä on tehty tämmösiä muutoksia?” Nurse: “On joo.” (20 and 21, Service Planner and Nurse, Hospital Project) Eye-‐opening experience We are somewhat blind here and don’t acknowledge all those things that could be acknowledged and we can’t see all the opportunities. (20 and 21, Service Planner and Nurse, Hospital Project) Disillusionment Ja onhan se sillai kun aattelee, että jokainen saa sanoa nyt sanottavansa että kun tule sairaala tulee, niin ei voi sanoa että ei multa kysytty mitään. (20 and 21, Service Planner and Nurse, Hospital Project) Potential impact Mun mielestä meidän pitäisi tehdä asiakaskohtaamisen strategia, jossa luodaan tavoitteet, käydään läpi palvelutuokiot asiakkaiden kohtaamispisteet, mikä niissä mättää, mitä me halutaan niiltä . Se sai hyvää tulta se asia, mutta mitään ei ole vielä tehty konkreettista päätöstä että miten tätä jaketaan. Tää on muhimassa nytten noiden johtajien päässä, voi olla että jotain tapahtuukin. Me ollaan pohdittu että pitäis olla just tää asiakaslähtöisyys siihen yhdistettynä hoitoketjujen kuvaus ja niiden kehittäminen ja samassa yhteydessä potilasturvallisuus. Me koetaan täällä että sillä voitaisiin saada sitä toiminta asiakaslähtöisempään suuntaan. Laadunparannnusta ja mittaamista ja jatkuvaa kehitystä, kaikki nää se vaatii. Mikään näistä ei toimi ittekseen ja sit tietenkin perustyö joka siellä on, laadukas lääkäri ja hoitotyö. Toiminnan standardointi on laadun tärkee asia. Mut me annetaan palvelulupaus hyvästä palvelusta, että se on huikee asennemuutos. Tossa on toi meidän strategia. Me luvataan hyvä palvelukokemus, sen eteen on tehtävä töitä. jos se ois helppoo, kaikkihan se ois tehny. Ei tää niin hirveen vaikeeta oo mut se vaatii työtä. -‐-‐-‐ Täähän ei riitä että me tehään nää jutut, mut miten se jalkautetaan, miten se resursoidaan, miten sen yksikön johto sen resursoi. Että ne asiat oikeesti tehdään, niille varataan aikaa. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Support by management, has lead to increasing demand for customer-‐centredness Se lähtee siitä että se johto ymmärtää että hetkinen meidän täytyykin ruveta tekemään jotain tän asian eteen. Siellä on nyt mun mielestä se ymmärrys lisääntynyt. Ja tuntuu että mullakin ois kysyntää valtavasti, ihan näillä asioilla. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Benefit of customer-‐centredness Mitä mä oon esimiehiä haastatellut että miks he kokee asiakaslähtöisyyden tärkeäksi. Työtyytyväisyys lisääntyy, prosessit menee sujuvammin, raja-‐aidat madaltuu yksiköstä toiseen. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Led to adoption of customer-‐centred methods Mun näkemys on, että me saatiin näillä muutamilla interventioilla luotua siihen sairaalaan sellanen tarve ottaa tämän tyylinen kehittäminen osaksi toimintaa. (23, Researcher, Hospital Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 31 5 THE BARRIERS AND ENABLERS OF SERVICE CO-‐CREATION The tension in co-‐creation Reading the follow-‐up interviews, a tension concerning the impacts and outcomes of co-‐creation emerged. As seen in the previous chapter, a co-‐creation project conducted by a university easily remains a superimposed one-‐off activity with rather weak connection to actual end solutions and with little value or impact to the participating organisations’ core activities aside from a change of mindset or incremental development ideas. How could participants and facilitators of co-‐creation move towards more sustainable co-‐creation that would add value to the participants and lead to more in-‐depth transformation? FIGURE 4. THE TENSION OF SERVICE CO-‐CREATION The barriers and enablers In the follow-‐up interviews the participants to the six case projects bring up some barriers, that is, constraining factors that hindered the succesfulness of co-‐creation and eroded collaboration in the projects. They also discuss various enablers which contributed to making the project to succeed. 20 barrier–enabler couples, seen in Figure 5, could be deduced from the follow-‐up interviews. They relate to the themes of collaboration, the organisation, processes, the implementation of outcomes and the co-‐
creation methods. The barriers and enablers are outlined more in detail in the following. There is a short description of each complemented by some quotes from the interviews that relate to it. The barriers and enablers should be seen as practical level findings that ideally can be utilised by public and private organisations when planning co-‐creation activities. They offer a (by no means complete) overview of some of the critical issues and challenges faced by professionals participating to co-‐creation. A more scientific reflection of the barriers and enablers will take place in an academic article to be produced on the basis of the preliminary analysis presented in this report. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 32 FIGURE 5. THE BARRIERS AND ENABLERS OF SERVICE CO-‐CREATION ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 33 Collaboration – Finding a common ground 1 PREJUDICES AND MISCONCEPTIONS There are prejudices among organisations and sectors that require time and social interaction to overcome. Design, particularly service design is a field that is unfamiliar to many. Public organisations and companies typically are suspecting towards the co-‐creation approach in the beginning. They have misconceptions about the role and leverage of design which make the participants question the relevance of the methods and the return on investment. Prejudices can exist on both sides: in the Wellbeing Project, the hospital staff understood design as superficial decoration whereas the students had prejudices about mental healthcare patients. (07, 12, 15, 17, 18, 19) à TRUST THROUGH MAKING TOGETHER Co-‐creation is basically seen as something positive but it also requires a lot of explanations for “why”. Co-‐
creation necesitates clarification to the client of what service design is and what it does. In many other fields, people are used to finished solutions: how to allow and understand designerly prototyping and experimentation with unfinished solutions. Commitment and trust are created by coming together and making things. Actual co-‐creation events usually change the attitude towards design, diminish opposition and create trust. The mindset, overall feeling/atmosphere among the participants influences how the collaboration ends up. Setting the stage and overcoming prejudices is an important task of facilitators. Confidence of the facilitator is especially important when using unconventional methods.They should not mind initial objection and take care of priming the client beforehand to avoid wrongful generalisations related to design. Getting to “know people’s faces” personally lowers the threshold to ask stupid questions and to collaborate. Personal chemistry and unofficial networks are important in sustaining collaboration. (07, 08, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22) Overcoming prejudices by doing – the co-‐creation methodology as an adaptive set of tools Mut et nimenomaan se, että näytetään konkreetisesti mitä se on, koska noi on sellaisia menetelmiä, että jos et sä oo ite osallistunut, niin sä et vaan tajuu mitä se on. Näin se on. Niinkun tuntuu olevan se kaava. Niinku jos et sä ite oo siellä mukana niin se näyttää siltä askartelu paskartelulta. Et sun pitää ite omakohtaisesti olla siellä ja kokee että tää on tavoitteellista ja hyödyllistä toimintaa. -‐-‐-‐ Työskentely on aina tosi tavoitteellista ja tosi suunniteltua, et mun mielestä se väärinkäsitys mikä monella on että ruvetaan askartelemaan paskartelemaan. Ei siin mennä istuskelemaan ja miettimään että mitä vaan ruvetaan heti hommiin. -‐-‐ Tää on kans vaikee saada selitettyä joillekin ihmisille, varsinkin jotka ei oo tottunu, et ne ei tiedä yhtään mitä tää on, et sehän on vaan niinkun työkalu jonka sä voit muokata just sellaseks mitä tarvitaan. (15, Researcher, City Services Project) Mutual preconceptions Ainakin aluksi niille oli vähän epäselvää mitä täs pitäis nyt tapahtuu et mitä muotoilija ylipäänsä tekee -‐-‐-‐ Se kävi jossain ilmikin, se sanoi se ylilääkäri että me kelattiin aluks että te tuutte tänne vaihtaan verhojen värii tai tekemään jotain tiloille. Mutta kyllähän se siten aika nopeesti niille kävi selville että jostain muusta on kysymys, että mietitään siihen työhön liittyviä sisältöjä enempi. Mä en tiedä onko se mikään haaste sinänsä. Mun mielestä kaikki meni sujuvasti kuitenkin. Oli jotain ennakkokäsityksiä. Että joutuuko tässä nyt joidenkin outojen potilaiden kanssa tekemisiin. Ja että joutuu meneen ihan outoihin paikkoihin ja miten siellä pärjää, ehkä vähän se ja sit toisaalta semmonen, tykkäsin tehä ryhmän kanssa ja toisten ihmisten kanssa töitä, mutta on aluksi sellainen kynnys mennä toisten ihmisten pakeille, siksikin oli hyvä että kaikki oli hyvin etukäteensuunniteltu kun mentiin. Et ties mitä tekee. Et ei vaivaa toisia turhan päiten ja sit se workshopin järjestäminen oli vähän jännittävä juttu et mitähän täst tulee ja siel pitäis nyt sit esiintyy edukseen ja pystyy liidaamaan sitä hommaa. Ja sit kun mentiin aina ei paikkoihin käymään, me käytiin tosi monis paikois. Niin vähä että mitä tulee vastaan, et saapas nähä. Aika nopeesti selvis että siellä on aina ne osaavat henkilöt töissä ja kyllä niiden kans tulee hyvin juttuun. Ne oli hyvin mukana siinä. (18, MA Student, Wellbeing Project) Resistance and mistrust to design expertise Kyllä se sillon alussa kun puhuttiin että Aalto yliopisto tulee mukaan niin kyllä niitä semmosia hohhoijaa ilmeitä oli ihan liikaa. Mut että se on tätä tämmöstä , meillä on täällä sairaalassa tämmösiä multipotentteja ihmisiä jotka tietävät kaiken[.] (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 34 Need to clarify what service design is and what it does Mä kysyin että mitä palvelumuotoilu sulle tarkoittaa ja mitä se on tässä projektissa ollut niin ei ne osaa sanoa mitään. tai sit ne sanoo jollain yleisellä tasolla. Semmonen world design capital hypetys pyörii siellä mutta että mitä se tarkoittaa käytännössä noissa projekteissa niin ei osata välttämättä sanoa mitään. Mut sit se kulminoituu sellaseks että no kuvat oli kivoja. Haasteena on nimenomaan tää että ihmiset ei tiiä mitä se on ja ihmiset ei tiiä mitä silt vaaditaan. Ihan sama puhutaanko co designista, osallistuvasta suunnittelusta, palvelumuotoilusta, ylipäätään. Tää henkilö kysy että mitä te nyt tuutte tänne sitten ratkomaan näit meijän ongelmia? Ja mä sanoin että ei me tulla, et me tullaan niit tekee teijjän kanssa. Me luodaan tällainen platformi. niinkun se että ei me tulla antaan mitään vastauksia. Et te teette sen työn niinkun yhdessä. (15, Researcher, City Services Project) Justification of the design approach in a public organisation Jos yrityskontekstissa joutuu perustelemaan muotoilua niin kyllä ehkä vielä kaks kertaa enemmän joutuu julkisen tai terveyspalveluiden puolella. Jo se että miten muotoilu voi siihen. Ettei se vaan menis siihen, että me toimitaan vain visualisoijina ja piirretään kivoja kuvia ja sit muut miettii niitä palveluita tai niinkun sitä kokonaisuutta et se kommunikaatio on aina hankalaa siihen asiaan ja sit ehkä semmonen että ois aika hyvä ja auttaa paljon jos on mahdollisimman korkean tason siunaus sille työskentelylle. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) Informing stakeholders on what co-‐design is and what it does Mutta jos yhteissuunnittelu olisi tuottoisampaa ja hyödyllisempää. Niin laajempi määrä ihmisiä pitäis perehdyttää siihen että mitä se yhteissuunnittelu tarkoittaa. Että jos mä puhun jossain yhteydessä yhteissuunnittelusta, niin se ei sille toiselle osapuolelle, vaikka siitä ois keskusteltu, niin se ei tarkoita samaa asiaa se yhteissuunnittelu. Heille saattoi yhteissuunnittelu tarkoittaa että pidetään yhteinen palaveri ja keskustellaan. Ja jos sitä hyödynnetään ja käytetään niin se pitäis ottaa jo suunnitteluvaiheessa huomioon, eikä silleen että hei ois kiva tehä tämmöstä, varsinkin tällaisissa julkisissa organisaation ja hankkeen kanssa. Jos ne jotka on suunnitellut hanketta ei oo suunnitellut että siinä käytetään yhteissuunnittelua eikä niillä oo ymmärrystä mitä se on niin se tavallaan vaikeuttaa koko ajan kumulatiivisesti sitä yhteissuunnittelua. Ei tuu semmosta vahvaa organisaation kautta tulevaa tukea sille tavallaan. Kun jokainen sessio vaatii semmosta perustelua että miksi se on hyödyllinen, mitä se on miksi sitä tarvitaan, että se on niinkun haasteellinen. (16, MA Student, City Services Project) Pioneer agents preparing the ground Siel tarvitaan aina sellainen pioneeri joka liputtaa asian puolesta, tässä tapauksessa Marja-‐Leena. Siel tarvitaan aina joku joka on sen asian taustalla. Ja sekään ei välttämättä avaa sitä että nää yksiköt tekis yhdessä töitä, et se, sillä on ihan hirveesti merkitystä että ketkä siellä on panemassa projektia pystyyn, kuka siellä on paikalla ja kuinka paljon törmätään vastuktukseen. Et sit jos siellä on heti semmoinen omistajuus ja yhdessä tekeminen niin kuin alusta lähtien eikä niin että se on noiden projekti ja me tullaan vaan sit josmeit huvittaa. -‐-‐-‐ On paljon työtä ja vastustusta, ennen kuin itse kokeilee. -‐-‐-‐ You have to earn the trust. It doesn’t exist until you have done something. (15, Researcher, City Services Project) 2 DIFFERENCES IN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE There are major differences in the “language” and vocabulary in cross-‐disciplinary collaboration. Unfamiliar words and terms create confusion. It takes time to find a common ground. The administrative language of the city, the professional language in healthcare, business language, the laypeople’s language and the researchers’ language each have their own terminology and way of speaking. There are misunderstandings on all sides in the beginning. How to create a common understanding, what terms and concepts are used? à CREDIBLE, RESPONSIVE COMMUNICATION Overcoming the differences in language and culture and finding a common ground can be supported by personal face-‐to-‐face communication. The participants need to explain, show, make, adjust the message, and translate among disciplines. Designers also should adjust their communication and argumentation according to the context and the receiver. Many things in the practice in different fields are self-‐evident, tacitly known, and cannot be said aloud. Truly being listened to and getting the message through is a challenge. The nurses in the Hospital Project for instance were concerned that the designers don’t really get their needs even if they were explicitly expressed. Especially in the process-‐centred and hierarchic hospital organisation, “hard” vocabulary is needed for increasing the credibility of the message of designers. “Fluffy” communication (emphasising feelings and the mind) was considered too soft to convince doctors. They may easily feel it as “foolish” or not scientific hard facts enough. For example, instead of talking about users’ stories it’s better to talk about processes first. In psychiatric care, softer issues are accepted. It should also be considered in communication that the participants may have different level of familiarity with the co-‐creation methods. The organisational culture also differs even within The political aspect needs to be considered when ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 35 administration sectors of the city or units in a company. Some are open to iterative collaboration, others hierarchic with fixed processes. working with public organisations. There is a contradiction with the academic and the city communication. Sending the wrong message can hinder collaboration. Wrong message by researchers can hinder collaboration. For instance, they should not give too positive promises of the users’ ability to influence. They “erode the trust and credibility”. The political aspect of communication is also important to consider in large scale public projects. (06, 10, 14, 19, 22) (06, 14, 17, 19) Differences in vocabulary Sit menee sekaisin hoito ja palvelu, ne velloo, mitä me nyt muka kehitetään, kehitetäänkö hoitotiedettä vai palveluproisessia. että mitä me niinku tehdään. Tällaiset vieraat sanat. Että me ollaan tekemässä jotain asiakasprosessia, niin ne on niin vieraita tässä maailmassa. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Allowing experimentation as something new Tosi hyvä juttu on että ei tarvii tehdä täydellistä heti. Että kun voidaan prototypoida ja voidaan mennä kysymään potilaita miltä tää näyttää. Sallitaan mokat ja sallitaan että ei olla täydellisiä. Ajatusmaailmallisesti tää on semmonen tärkein anti ehkä ollut muotoilussa. Sekin on terveydenhuollossa aika vaikee, ethän sä siellä voi mokata. Hoidossa ei voi mokata, mutta tässä voit tämmösissä osallistaa ja ottaa mukaan, kysyä miltä tää nyt tuntuu kyllähän me sitä kokemusta voi kehittää mokaillenkin tai kokeilemalla. Et ei tää toimikaan kauheen hyvin, tehään joku muu juttu. Se on niinku erilainen maailma, tuolla se voi olla tosi vaikee hyväksyä että ei tehdä täydellistä heti. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Being heard is important Mä pelkään sitä että te ette hahmota nitä meidän tarpeita, vaikka me sanotaan ne ääneen. Niin meillä on tietyt asiat niinkun itsestäänselvyyksiä joita ei osaa sanoa ääneen mut että me niinkun, että te hahmottaisitte mitä me tarkoitetaan. Sitä mä toivon kaikista eniten. Mulle tuli ainakin hirveen hyvä fiilis silloin siellä kun me sitä pahvisairaalaa tehtiin niin siinä, oisko ne ollu sit arkkitehtejä jotka vaan seuras ja katteli ja kuunteli, mul tuli siitä ainakin semmonen hyvä olo, että ainakin se yksilö joka sitä meidän työskentelyä seuras, niin se oikeesti kuunteli että mitä. Ja että se osais sit pukee sen paperille, sen mitä me ei osata pukee paperille niistä meidän toiveista. Että se hahmottas mitä meidän toiveet on ja miten ne voidaan toteuttaa. Ja sit että ne pystyis toteuttaan vielä rahallisesti ja tilaratkaisullisesti ja näin. (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) 3 CONFLICTING GOALS AND EXPECTATIONS Different types of organisation have different goals, agendas and expectations from co-‐creation. There can also be conflicts between sectors (like health sector and social sector) that hinder collaboration. Within organisations, people are fixed to their narrow professinal roles. The motivation for co-‐creation and customers-‐
centredness in public and private sectors can differ. In companies, the driver of adopting co-‐creation often is profitability, wheras in a hospital the approach can be justified by ethical reasons as well as saving due to increased efficiency. In the merging of two schools in the School Project the challenge was to combine the practices and cultures of two quite different schools to act as one. Moreover, there often is a conflict between the expectations of researchers and the participating organisations, e.g. the city would have wanted more concrete input to the real school project. à SEARCH FOR MUTUAL VALUE Co-‐creators should think beyond professional sectors and individual tasks, seeking to see the bigger picture and strategic goals. A succesful co-‐creation project requires negotiation and balancing between the sometimes conflicting goals of all participants. Ideally, participants with divergent agendas and roles (academia vs. practical developers) can work together and yet concentrate on fulfilling own goals. The conflux of expertises at best adds value to all involved parties. It seems to be an important enabler or co-‐creation that there is a common (high-‐level, strategic) agenda that all participants see as valuable in their own way and can relate to in their everyday practice. Well-‐chosen methods and facilitation can support the search for mutual value and the reconciliation between goals. The concrete expectations of participants from the co-‐
creation project should also be made explicit in the beginning of the project. (01, 06, 09, 22) (01, 04, 16, 22) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 36 Be careful with communication and the political aspect Hankkeen etenemiselle oli monia esteitä tai haasteita, täs oli poliittista vääntöä ja talouden heilahdukset vaikutti koko tän [alueen] rakentumiseen ja poliittinen tahtotila sen mukana ja sitten tää oli aikaansa edellä että koettiin suurkouluksi, joka oli monille suomalaisille päättäjille punainen vaate. Mua varotettiinkin aikasemmin että tän hankkeen kommunikointi on haasteellinen. Täs pitää olla varovainen. Viestinnän ammattilaiset sanoo, et ei sais viestiä ennen kun on riittävästi sisältöä ja Simlabilla oli tarve viestiä omasta näkökulmastaan ja se oli vähän ristiriidassa tän kanssa. -‐-‐-‐ Kun puhutaan menetelmästä, et tämmönen pitäis kommunikoida just meidän hankkeen monimuotoisuuden ja haavottuvaisuuden takia riittävän hyvin hankkeen vetäjien kanssa. Me nähtiin tää siellä ekaa kertaa yhtäaikaa kohderyhmien kanssa. Se oli vähän riskaapelia. Sitä nieleskeli siellä ja sen yritti kääntää siellä. Et ups! Ai et toikin on tuolla mainittu. Sitä nyt ei olis ehkä kannattanu. Et ku tässä oli hirveen paljon näitä latauksia, jotka oli sellai niiku kieli keskellä suuta. (06, Development Director, City, School Project) Holistic view through design She says that interviews for customer journey helps to understand holistic picture: “Sit kun lähdetään haastatteluihin, niin päästään tähän kokonaisuuteen käsiksi. Ymmärretään tää koko pötkö. Sitä kautta tulee tietoo.” “Että kun nää on niin vaikeita nää prosessit. Tää muotoilu on mun mielestä se ainut tie että me edes itse ymmärretään että mitä me täällä tehdään. Tää on varmaan haastavimpia palveluita. Nää on niin monimutkaisia nämä prosesssit ja sitten vielä raskas asia. Sairaus. Muotoilulla pystyy niin kokonaisvaltaisesti katsomaan sitä.” (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Service design demands more holistic view than traditional nurses’ and doctors’ practice. “Sehän lähtee liikkeelle se ymmärrys siitä että sä oot vastuussa jostakin suuremmasta. Jos sä oot omassa kliinisessä työssä tuolla ja teet sitä omaa palasta, niin ei se ymmärrys tuu kauheen nopeesti.” (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) 4 COMPLEXITY OF ORGANISATIONS, PROCESSES AND REAL-‐LIFE CONTEXTS à IN-‐DEPTH UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TARGET SYSTEM The complexity and special characteristics of large organisations and networks are a barrier to co-‐
creation. The facilitators have a hard time trying to figure out the operating principles of an organisation like a city or a hospital and identify where and how co-‐creation could add value. Idealistic models imposed from outside do not work in complex real-‐life contexts. The public administration system is slow and rigid. It hinders experimentation and fast adoption of novelty. There are also particular challenges for working in the healthcare sector, which is very hierarchic and relies on strong professions. Laws on privacy and confidentiality in healthcare are in contrast with the openness of design. It takes money, resources and long time to transform the practices and organisation in a hospital. The division of responsibilities in large organisations and lack of central process management also presents a barrier to co-‐creation. In the education field, one actor controls money, another the technical infra, and a third the spaces. The characteristics of the system also impact the selection of participants. Involving the end users to co-‐creation can be difficult in cases like the mental healthcare. For home carers it was not easy to find time to participate to workshops. The city can’t favour service providers so the companies were left out from co-‐creation. (01, 03, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23) For co-‐creation to be able to make and impact, the facilitators should properly familiarise them with the system they are working with. They need to understand the basic principles and the “operational logic” of the complex organisation. For instance, when working with a city it’s important to understand the public decision-‐
making process. In healthcare, there are many particular requiremnts that need to be taken into consideration, such as high confidentiality. It’s important to remember and understand the historical development and roots of the organisation or field because they influence the practice of today. In the hospital cases, it was brought up that researchers should observe and participate in the actual work practices of nurses with patients in the hospital spaces to really understand their requirements regarding spaces and equipment. Some experience from healthcare is useful. There were doubts about the designers’ ability to design hospital spaces because of lack of everyday experiences from the practice. Making co-‐design project in a city necessitates taking into consideration complex issues. Ideas need to be “sold” across administrative sectors to have them commit to it. There is a need to inform politicians and involve companies, the third sector and users. (06, 14, 18, 20, 21, 22) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 37 Designer needs to profoundly understand the complex city organisation Mikä auttaa muotoilijaa paljon, täytyy ymmärtää se kaupungin toiminnan rakenne. Miten kaupunki hallinnollisena järjestelmänä toimii, tällainen taustatieto on hyvä olla, mikä on lautakuntien rooli ja miten suunnittelujärjestelmä kuntalain mukaan menee. Meillä on paljon lainsäädännöllisiä reunaehtoja ja terveydenhuollossa vielä enemmän. Se on yhtä viidakkoa. Täytyy vaan olla nöyrä ja opiskella. (14, Special Advisor, City, City Services Project) Challenges for designers in very focused, “sceptic” organisation like the hospital Jotta pystyis ulkoapäin tuomaan jotain uutta tähän niin täytyy olla tiettyä katu-‐uskottavuutta. Toisaalta se oli raikasta ja kivaa kun te opiskelijat jotenkin tulitte tähän kentälle niinku takki auki ettei niinku, ei tultu niinku sellaisella asenteella että anteeks että tässä ollaan olemassa vaan ihan reippaasti tultiin mikä on sinänsä hyvä asia, mutta että tää on niinkun aika tämmönen ikiaikainen tää terveydenhuoltojärjestelmä ja hierarkiat ja systeemit ja nää toimintatavat et miten mennään. Et se että se ei olis niinku jotenkin päälle liimattua tai semmosta. et helposti täs on niinku sitä että ja tietysti me työskennellään myös ollaan opittu kun me ollaan hädässä olevien ihmisten kanssa, niinku heitä autetaan niin että jos joku yrittää tuoda jotain huuhaata niin se aika nopeesti sitten myös niinku leimataan ja todetaan, että tää on huuhaata tää niinku tuota et tämmösen jutun kanssa ei kannata olla tekemisissä. Et tietys mieles tähän on sisään rakentunut semmonen tietty niinku aika vahva skeptisyys niinku. Et sen niinku tavallaan voittaminen sitten. (17, Chief Physician, Wellbeing Project) 5 SYSTEMIC RESISTANCE AND PROFESSIONAL POWER HIERARCHIES Systemic resistance to all changes to the status quo coming from outside the organisation is a common barrier met by co-‐creators. Especially the hospital organisation was protective against the co-‐creation approach. This was justified by the perception of the hospital as a special world with a clear core mission, tied by extensive regulation and committed to its refined care processes. It was not easy to persuade physicians to commit to a design project where the benefits were uncertain. It is difficult to bring in new roles and positions among the strong professional power hierarchy in healthcare where the physicians are used to being in charge. According to one interviewee, a physician herself, physicians are “multipotent besserwissers, demanding persons who think that they can make design decisions”. Strong, sceptical personalities with power can turn down the attempts by researchers to induce changes. Power and control issues are critical in co-‐design within hierarchic organisations: are everyone’s voices heard and needs respected, what is prioritised, and who makes decisions. Hierarchy in the hospital and doctor-‐patient relationship affects social dynamics and willingness to bring forth problems in co-‐design as patients subconsciously try to please the doctor. The facilitators need to break the thought that only “us experts” can understand the needs and requirements. As it was difficult to see and measure the benefits of service co-‐creation, the participants felt that it was just increasing their workload. Customer service was seen as gratuitous, less important area separate from the core function of the hospital. There has also been a lack of incentive for hearing to the customers of the hospital. They in most cases have no other choice than to be patients. à AN INFORMAL ARENA FOR DIFFERENT EXPERTISES TO COME TOGETHER AS EQUAL One of the key benefits of the co-‐creation approach according to the interviewees was that it created and open space for exchanging experiences and ideating together where all actors could come together as equals and look at things holistically, outside from their narrow professional roles and the formal organisational hierarchy. This could induce a shift of mindset to more openness and collaboration. It is important that people can be themselves. Special focus in co-‐creation methods should be put to overcoming systemic resistance and allowing for informal collaboration where hierarchic roles are temporarily put aside and people meet as equals. An external facilitator can also give people more courage to openly express what is wrong. An important enabler for co-‐creation approach to “break through” the power barrier is the professionalism and credibility of the facilitators. It was emphasised by the interviewees that the researchers need to be convincing and understand the hierarchy to avoid superimposed solutions and to overcome strong scepticism inherent to the field. Communication should be direct and proactive but polite and respecting the busy professionals. Humour helps not to take too seriously or be offended by the sometimes harsh comments and criticism by powerholders. Designers seeking to impact a complex real-‐life situation also need to accept that organisational renewal and getting through new thinking is slow. (01, 02, 03, 08, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21) (17, 19, 22, 23) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 38 Designing different “worlds” for different user groups in a hospital Mun mielestä on tosi tärkeetä painottaa potilaiden näkökulmaa sairaaloissa, että sairaaloiden toiminnan suunnittelussa painottuu hyvin vahvasti työ. Jos ihmisiä on osallistutettu projekteihin niin se on pääasiassa henkilökuntaa ja se valitettavasti näkyy nykypäivän sairaaloissa. Ne on suunniteltu lääkärien ja hoitajien ehdoilla. Ja potilaat joutuu sitten luovimaan sitten siinä maailmassa. Ja tää on mun mielestä iso oire, ei oo ymmärretty että sairaalassa on kahdenlaista isoa käyttäjäryhmää, on potilaat ja henkilökunta ja kummallekin pitää rakentaa se oma maailma. Tää lääkäri sano hyvin, et tuota potilaat ei saa päästä siihen sairaalasysteemiin, siihen koneeseen. vaan niille pitää rakentaa rajapinta sen koneen ja heidän oman maailman välille. (23, Researcher, Hospital Project) Acknowledging patients as individuals Hoitajilla on paljon helpompaa kohdata potilailla, mutta etenkin lääkäreillä on tosi vaikea nähdä se potilas ihmisenä. ja tässä me luotiin sellanen ympäristö jossa nää on niin kuin tasavertaisia ja sen potilaan sanomat asiat otettiin tasavertaisena henkilökunnan sanomisen kanssa. Tää on mun mielestä, tätä pitäis henkilökunnalta tietysti kysyä tarkemmin, mutta mun mielestä tää on niinku heille silmiä avaavaa, koska siellä tulee esille sellaisia asioita mitä he ei oo ikinä ajatellu. Ja se rikkoo sellaisia ennakkokäsityksiä, mitä sairaalassa on tosi paljon potilaasta ennakkokäsityksiä. (23, Researcher, Hospital Project) Systemic resistance within healthcare Lähtökohtaisesti terveydenhuolto on sellainen ympäristö, että sun pitää todistaa että sä tajuat siitä ylipäätään mitään. Siellä on helposti se ensi asenne, että kuule tää on niin oma maailmansa. -‐-‐-‐ täytyy murtaa semmonen ennakkoasenne että tästä ei kukaan muu ymmärrä kuin henkilökunta itse. Ja lääkäreiden rooli on niin vahva sairaalassa että sun täytyy tehdä duunia, että sä saat muiden äänen kuuluviin niiden yli. -‐-‐-‐ Se on yksi iso haaste, se muotoilu-‐ tai metodihaaste, että miten sä saat kaikkien äänet siinä kuuluviin. (23, Researcher, Hospital Project) The co-‐design event as open arena [Ilmapiiri on tärkeä] ja se miten sä rakennat siinä sen luottamuksen et sä kuuntelet mitä toisilla on sanottavaa. Riippuu sit ihmisistä ketä siellä on mukana niin sen mukaan vähän säädellään. -‐-‐-‐ Kaikki pääsee sanomaan ja puhumaan, sen mä oon kokenut itse noissa tosi hyvin. Siit jotenkin niinku turha poistuu. Se turha on semmonen nipotus tai pönötys tai siinä ollaan niin kuin ihmisinä siinä postissa mitä sä hoidat. Jotenkin semmonen rooliviitta tai hallinnollinen pönötys tai joku, en mä osaa sanoa mikä, niin se jotenkin vapauttaa siitä. (14, Special Advisor, City, City Services Project) Creating an arena for sharing insights as equals Ja se minkä takia mä noiden puolesta olen niin innoissani niin siinä on kerrankin tilaa eri osapuolten, ei vaan käyttäjien ja kaupungin, mutta kun nehän on ihan älyttömän isoja verkostoja että ne ei siellä kaupungin sisällä tunne toisiaan. Siihen liittyy hirveesti muita tekijöitä, kolmas sektori. Niin se on sitten se paikka missä ne oikeesti kohtaa. Ja se on se paikka missä ne oikeesti pääsee naamatusten puhumaan asioista. Et se ei mee sellaiseen stereotypiaan että kun tämä virasto aina sitä, mutta kun teillä aina näin, teillä aina näin. Niinku voi ruveta keskusteleen siitä asiasta, ett se ei jää semmoseksi että kyllä me mutta kun noi on niin hankalia ja siinä mun mielestä tapahtuu se kun ne kohtaa ja ne rupee yhes tekemään niin silloin ne myös sitoutuu. (15, Researcher, City Services Project) Resistance and different attitudes / collaboration styles among participants Näähän ei tapahdu tosta noin vaan, että siinä kestää aikaa ja resursseja. Siinähän on heti vastarinta, että ei nyt, ajatuksen muutos niin kyllähän se kestää aikansa. Että jos sä sanot että nyt tehään näin niin sieltä tulee varmasti että ”Ei varmaan tehä ja mitä sä nyt tommosia rupeet puhumaan! Ennenkään ei oo tehty” Mitäs sille vois tehdä? Kauheesti pitää koko ajan selostaa miksi miksi miksi näin tehään. Mut mikään muutos ei kyllä käy tosta noin vaan käden käänteessä. Mut on semmosiakin, että jotkut heti ajattelee että se on ihan ok. Osa lähtee innostuneina mukaan, osa vähän seurailee, ei kommentoi mitään ja osa nostaa kaikki neljä raajaa että ”Älä kuule kuvittelekaan!” Pikku hiljaa uppoo tai sit käy niin että ne vaan unohtuu. (20 and 21, Service Planner and Nurse, Hospital Project) Limits of customer-‐centredness Mä en kyllä suostu ikinä siihen että mä sanon niitä asiakkaaksi, koska sitten asiakashan on se joka saa kaiken. Eikä se niin voi mennä. En mä tarkoita, mä oon hyvin potilaslähtöinen ja ystävällinen mielestäni ja kunnioitan potilaita. Mut ei tää mikään tavaratalo oo johon tullaan ja sanotaan että mä haluan nää nää ja nää. (19, Orthopediatrician and Traumatologist, Hospital Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 39 6 LACK OF OWNERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP One problem in co-‐creation projects involving many parties is lack of proper management and leadership of the collaboration network. Who initiates the partneship and is in charge? Unclear roles and nobody “owning” the outcome means low commitment to the project. For instance, in the School Project the commitment of companies to co-‐
creation remained superficial due to. Also the lack of perceived value for the organisation can prevent commitment. à TAKING RESPONSIBILITY OF CO-‐CREATION Good leadership of the co-‐creation process and the partner network enables commitment to it. There is a need for an actor who leads the development activities and takes responsibility for the implementation of the results. Succesful co-‐creation requires clear responsibilites of the partners. (01, 04) (03, 04) Managing partnerships as a challenge Se mikä olis ollu hirveen hyvä, joka oli meille todella hankala juttu oli ne ulkopuolisten kumppaneiden mukaanotto kunnolla. Kuka kutsuu, missä vaiheessa, kenellä on valtuudet tehdä ne päätökset että kuka tulee mukaan. Se oli meille sisäisestikin epäselvää, että kuka kiinnostuneita kerää ja jos he ilmasee kiinnostuksensa ja samalla alalla ihmisiä on monta, niin miten sitten tehdään. Se ulkokumppaneiden kanssa toimiminen ja heidän näkyväksi tuleminen oli mun mielestä ehkä kaikkein suurin haaste. Ja sitten toinen semmonen mielenkiintonen oli se koko koulun ja vapaa-‐ajan keskuksen johtamismalli. Kuka päättää niistä asioista? Miten heidän yhteistyönsä toimii? (04, Communications Manager, City, School Project) Need for a committed leader and implementor of co-‐creation within the network Kylhän se yhteiskehittäminen se on helppoa ja tapahtuu hyvin helposti, mut se vaatii sen et joku on sitä ottaa sen fasilitaattorin roolin ja vie sitä eteenpäin ja järjestää sen asian että. Se siinä ehkä suurin haaste on että niinkun jos siinä ei oo sitä promoottoria niin sit se jää siiihen keskusteluun, tai jää siihen et joku se on Toolissa discussion tai as-‐is tai miten sitä kehitetään eteenpäin. Niin sit sinne joku vastaa tai sit se jää. Tai jos se on tällasta ihan kokreettisten niinkun kehittämisworkshoppi-‐ideoiden avulla, niin se helposti jää sinne kun on vastuuta ja fasilitaattorit niinkun palaverin rooleihin et porukka kokoontuu tietyn ajan välein juttelemaan niitä näitä kyseisestä aiheesta, mut kukaan ei tee siinä välissä aktiivisesti. Se vaik se on yhteiskehittämistä ja kaikki tuo ideoita niin joku pienempi porukka valmistelee ja työstää sitä aina eteenpäin ja tuo sitä niinkun vie sitä asiaa eteenpäin, että muuten ne jää tämmösiks.. -‐-‐-‐ Niin! Ne jää ilmaan lillumaan! Ja siihen et pitää aina alottaa niistä samoista ongelmien ja turhautumisen purkautumissessiolla ensalkuun. -‐-‐-‐ Ja kyl se on aika pitkälti nimenomaan siit et miten hyvin se istuu kunkin muuhun työrooliin etjos se ei oo suoraan istu, niiin se on hankala, et kukaan ei haluu ottaa sitä niinkun oman toiminnan ohessa, et se jää sellaseks pyörittelyks. Se vaatii et on tietty omistajuus. Jos se on kaikille tärkee asia, mut ei kenenkään oma niin se jää siihen turhautumiseen. (10, Usability Specialist, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) Organisation – Creating commitment 7 LACK OF ORGANISATIONAL JUSTIFICATION AND à SUPPORT FROM MANAGEMENT, CONNECTION TO COMMITMENT TO CO-‐CREATION STRATEGY AND EVERYDAY GOALS Many respondents, particularly the pioneers of accepting co-‐creation in their organisation, experienced a lack of organisational support. It was often one person’s responsibility to further the co-‐
creation project. There was no understanding of what co-‐design is and no ability to utilise outcomes. Due to poor commitment of organisations to co-‐
creation, there was also a lack of continuity as changing representatives were attending the meetings. In some publicly led projects, companies were “just there to look responsible”, and no real co-‐creation was achieved. Due to lack of true interest, the ideas never took off. (03, 07, 16, 17) Support from management as central prerequisite of co-‐creation came up in many interviews. Co-‐creation requires explicit managerial support on all levels, otherwise development is torpedoed or slowed down. In the school case, the school management team was assigned to participate in the project. Inclusion of teachers plus higher-‐level decision-‐makers eased the dissemination of results. It also helps if co-‐creation connects to the strategic goals of the organisation. The technology corporation for example had an explicit strategic agenda towards customer-‐centredness, which justified the co-‐creation project. However, it was stated that in the hospital, strategy works for upper management but does not ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 40 impress clinical staff who need more concrete motivation with emphasis on patient care. The development work is more easily overtaken by people if it connnects to the reality of their everyday work. (01, 02, 03, 13, 16, 17, 19, 22, 23) Enablers: managerial support, right time and place, incentives to participants Mikä on hyvä ollut tässä.. niin että johdon tuki on ollut tälle asialle tai siinä määrin mitä sitä on ollut niin se on ollut se mikä on auttanut. Et täähän oli tämmöstä niinkun että mä jollakin tavalla omalta puoleltani innostuin tästä asiasta ja jos ois ihan ollut täysin yksin niinku innostunut siinä niin et mun asemaa aatellen niin se tuli selkeesti mun ikään kuin lainausmerkeissä yläpuolelta tämä ikään kuin toimeksianto ”et haluutteko olla mukana”ja se niinku siunaus tälle ja se, että se on ok olla mukana tällaisessa ja käyttää aikaa tähän, niin jos ei tähän siunausta olis ollu niin täs oltais oltu niinku jotenkin aika liukkailla. Sitä että miten tää muu porukka lähtis tähän mukaan, niin se ei olis varmaan ottanut tulta. Se mikä edesauttaa että siinä on se riittävä johdon tuki. Monissa semmosissa, jos haluaa jotain uudistuksia saada aikaseks tai muuttaa luoda jotain uutta hyvää, niin se ois hirveen tärkee, että siinä olis laajalla rintamalla ai niinku kaikilla tasoilla johdon tuki. Et jos ei sitä oo niin se on selkeesti sitten että se torpedoi sen homman. Tai haittaa edistymistä. Jos pystyy vähän niinkun katsoo sitä, että tila ja aika, et mis on semmonen niinku otollinen vaihe tai paikka tuoda tämmöstä yhteistyötä, että mikä on sopiva sauma että se homma menee läpi. Siinä on armaan vaihtelua paljon, ja tosiaan niin kuin viittasin niin tämmönen skeptisyys ja tämmönen ehkä nihilismi jos kovasti epäonnisesti esimerkiksi ”väärissä paikoissa ja väärään aikaan” ottaa näitä esille niin koko mitä ollaan tekemässä saa semmosen leiman että se on jotain sellaista mistä kannattaa olla mahdollisimman kaukana. Eikä semmosta leimaa nyt oo vielä tullu, ehkä tämä meidän kulttuuri. -‐-‐-‐ Miten saa henkilökunnan innostumaan tai sitoutumaan, tietysti aina voi miettiä että mitä semmosia porkkanoita, että mitä ihmiset hyötyy sitten. Helposti, jos ei välitöntä hyötyä oo sitten niin jaksaaks ihmiset innostua tai motivoitua sitten, et ne voi olla aivan banaaleitakin porkkanoita, et niinku tarjotaan joku päivällinen tai joku. (17, Chief Physician, Wellbeing Project) Value of research? Jos sille on dedikoitu ja dedikoidaan aikaa ja resursseja siihen hommaan et niille pystytään antaa työkaluja ja siihen se on ensiarvoisen tärkee et sitä voi käyttää hyväksi. Mut se vaatii et sielt on pystytty erottaa ja tunnistaa niinkun ihmiset, ketkä on siinä roolissa, et se tuo niinkun lisäarvoo. Et jos niillä ei oo sitä et ne samantien menee organisaation käyttöön niitä välineitä, niin se jää vähän niinkun tyhjäks. Valikoitu porukka käy kuuntelemassa kivoja ideoita ja vähän niinkun jumppaamassa jotain uutta, mut kun ei oo suoraan looppia takasin päin niinkun arkityöhön et olis hommana kokeilla, niin sit se jää aika pinnalliseks. -‐-‐-‐ Ja vaaditaan aika suuri commitment siltä organisaatiolta, kun lähtee mukaan. Turha lähtee sellai et kiva juttu kuulostaa kivalta, et tullaan juomaan kahvia ja sillee niinkun ei saa eteenpäin. Ja kutsutaan jotain parin hengen vaikka johtoryhmän kaveria, ne kuuntelee worshoppia, et mitä uusia ideoita vois käyttää. Vähän niinkun Dilbertmäinen vitsi, et kokeillaan jotain brainstormia tai jotain uutta ideaa, niin alaiset huomaa, et jaha pomo on käyny jossain seminaarissa tai koulutuksissa ja pari viikkooo se jaksaa, mut sit palataan samaan vanhaan hommaan. (10, Usability Specialist, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) 8 LACK OF TIME, RESOURCES AND FUNDING FOR à ALLOCATION OF TIME, RESOURCES AND FUNDING DOING ANYTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY FOR CO-‐CREATION ACTIVITIES Lack of clearly allocated working time for participating to co-‐creation was a major barrier identified by the participants. People in most cases are so busy with their regular work that they have a hard time for doing anyting out of the ordinary unless they can expect high benefits from it. It is challenging to participate to development projects in addition to own workload. Challenges in the physicians’ everyday work, for example, were many information systems, hardware problems, increase of patients and bureaucracy, rigid organisation, tight schedules, and increased inefficiency due to extensive reporting. Lack of time and resources leads to fluctuating degree of commitment, breaks, unefficiency, and loosing the thread. True impact would require more and more regular use of time. There also were The organisations should clearly allocate time, person resources and funding for co-‐creation activities for them to be impactful. It should be acknowledged that co-‐creation requires this kind of concrete dedication. In the School Project, project funding enabled common trips and other activities that started true collaboration between the schools beyond the official meetings. The city had also recignised the need to allocate time and budgeting money specifically for the co-‐creation project and academic collaboration. An organisation can also support co-‐creation by founding special positions. In the technology company, an employee became the agent of co-‐creation methods. In the hospital, the position of Customer Services Development Manager was a means of allocating resources to service development. (01, 02, 03, 08, 10 14) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 41 many ongoing renewal projects in many of the organisations. It was hard to find time and energy for development when it’s continuous. But being busy can also be an excuse for not to be part of development processes. Several participants hade realised during the projects that their organisation would not have resources to realise co-‐creation by themselves especially with such broad agenda and many stakeholders. External research project with facilitator resources and funding woud be needed. (06, 09, 12, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22) 9 LACK OF PERSONAL MOTIVATION AND INCENTIVE TO PARTICIPATE à MEANINGFUL PERSONAL ROLE IN CO-‐CREATION WITH BENEFIT TO OWN WORK A personal incentive is needed for people (particularly laypeople) to commit to co-‐creation taking a long time (parents commit to own child’s issues, not to development of the school of the future in their free time). Lack of personal motivation for co-‐creation os also a challenge for professionals. If they do not see value in the project from the perspective of their own everyday work they either avoid participation or are not really committed. A participant should see her own position in the project and get a feeling that she is advancing and developing. It is important that the participants have a clear position and role in co-‐creation that benefits their own work. Information sharing and clear agreement on tasks and responsibilities is needed. Individual participants should be attched to the co-‐creation project concretely: “what am I in the whole, what is expected from me and what is my expected input”. In the co-‐creation projects, the workhops in particular boosted the work of the people involved. Their role could also vary: inone project the participant could be planning the methods, in another merely as participant. More in-‐depth involvement led to more learning. People are diverse and have different skills, which should be recognised and balanced in co-‐creation. Some are better with technology, some socially, some more inventive. All can not be developers, “brakes” are also needed. People have different attitudes to development. Some are more willing to adopt new things. For instance, there is a broad range in teachers’ skills and adoption rate of ICT in teaching. Moreover, when the key people change in the organisation, collaboration easily wanes. Different types of co-‐creators should be taken into consideration in projects. There should be a “common thread” in the project that diverse individuals can relate to. There are personality types in organisations that can support or turn down new approaches, such as “pioneers” or “open-‐minded accompanists” or “narrowminded stoppers”. Without the chief physician’s enthusiasm, the Wellbeing project would not have been realised. Personal connections were also important enablers in other projects. (01, 03, 06, 07, 08, 16, 20, 21) Forcing participation from above doesn’t work but can destroy relationships. Some people adopt new things fast and some struggle with them. People should be given differently sized “burdens” in co-‐creation Incentive to participate is also crucial. “Carrots” are needed to get the personnel enthusiastic and committed to development. Well-‐prepared workshops are a simple means to enable this. Internalising the message can be supported by inviting broad range of people from the organisation to workshops. (02, 02, 03, 06, 12, 17, 19) Positioning of individuals as part of the bigger picture Et tavallaan se kiinnittäminen siihen et mitä minä olen siinä kokonaisuudessa ja mitä multa odotetaan ja mikä mun työpanos siinä kokonaisuudessa on. Ja varmasti me rehtoreina kouluissamme vedetään sitä hankkeen punasta lankaa vedetää, niin kyl se on haastava rehtorillekin kun tulee uusia elementtejä koko ajan. Ehkä se et hankkeessa oli tavaraa liikaa lyhyessä ajassa. Et tavallaan päästiin vaan raapaseen. Että ehkä edellytykset kehittää käytänteitä olis paremmat, jos oltais keskitytty. (03, Principal, School Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 42 10 MISFOCUSED CO-‐CREATION Because of the unfamiliarity of the co-‐creation approach, organisations utilising it often realised only in retrospect, that the focus of co-‐creation should have been other than it was. A very broad or vague focus of co-‐creation easily leads to outcomes that are too generic to provide input to actual development. It seems that the results of projects with a clearly defined and limited focus (such as the Virtual Innovation Project or the Hospital Project) yielded better results. Processes – Being integrated à FINDING WHERE CO-‐CREATION TRULY ADDS VALUE In the Wellbeing Project, the actual needs or the organsiation would have been spatial design (which was too late) or administrative functions in the clinic. Instead, the design students were concentrating on the patient’s process. There were many elements in the School Project project which eroded efficiency. The project could have gone deeper into some topic. It was now scratching the surface of many areas. More focus would have enabled the change of practices. To increase the usefulness and return of investment from a co-‐creation project, the client organisation should invest time for clarifying to themselves what they expect from co-‐creation. The organisation should investigate its own processes to identify the critical points where co-‐creation can truly add value. The brief for researchers is an important aspect of co-‐creation that should be thought carefully and made explicit. In the Virtual Innovation Project, the corporation had carefully defined the goals from co-‐creation and their connection to the development of the innovation tool. The research project was used as a source of insight and findings to practical development team. The researchers provided a temporary resource for the company that was made to work on a topic where the approach was anticipated to have value. (03, 05, 11, 15) (03, 17) 11 DISCONNECTION FROM OTHER ACTIVITIES à INTEGRATION OF CO-‐CREATION TO THE CORE A typical problem with co-‐creation research projects is that they are not well integrated with other development activities, but isolated efforts in the fringes of “real” development, the outcomes of which are often not even realistically expected to be implemented to actual solutions. Co-‐creation and its methodologies should be brought closer to the core operations of organisations and integrated with other development work. This would mean rethinking the whole co-‐creation chain from goals to actors, resources, methods, outcomes and implementation to benefit the whole organisation. In the City Services Project, plans of service design and co-‐design could not be brought from outside to consultant-‐run process. Complexity of the project made it difficult to incorporate designerly methods. It took time to see where they could be beneficial. The project was already fixed and planned. It was difficult to try to “squeeze in” service design methods and the idea of user-‐centredness. At best, inputs from different directions come together in the right time. The Hospital Project was made possible by public funding to directed to the topic. That coincided with the trend in the field towards multi-‐
professional development and patient-‐centredness. Hospital management at the same time begun to see the design approach promising. Yet a lot of work was needed in convincing in organisation. (06, 15, 16) (06, 16, 19, 22) Service design seen as distant from the core functions of the hospital (“saving lives”) Tänne ei niinku mitään designia, että me pelastetaan elämiä, sehän on kans semmonen mihin vedotaan aina ”mutta kun me sentäs pelastetaan täällä elämiä, että se on meidän tärkein tehtävä”. Ihan niin kuin ne olisi erilliset jutut. Niinkun elämän pelastaminen ja hoito tehdään jotenkin järkevästi. […] Asiakkuus yleensäkin nähdään erillisenä toiminnasta, perustoiminnasta. Et tää on jotain puolihömppää tää asiakkuus juttu ja sit tää on sitä oikeeta työtä mitä me tehdään. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 43 12 ASYNCHRONY OF DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES à COORDINATION AND TIMING OF PROCESSES Co-‐creation typically takes place too early or too late to make an impact to the “real world”. Also it seems that the many development streams in organisations are not integrated with each other or coordinated as a whole but remain separate. There are gaps between separate projects and cycles of development. This was made evident in the School Project, where there was a break between the visionary research project with academic goals and the real school building project, that in the end was diluted due to the economic situation and political decisions. The research project failed in impacting the design of the school. Right timing of co-‐creation projects in relation to concrete development projects is crucial if the objective is to utilise the results in designing actual solutions. The right moment and place for co-‐creation to make an impact needs to be recognised. This is crucial for novelty to get through and be incorporated into the general stream of activities. Wrongly placed co-‐creation just drives participants away. The more complex the project and the actor network are, the more effort is needed in timing and coordinating the various streams. Different time scales as well as different amounts of resources available for development need to be considered. The slow, democratic processes of urban development need to be matched with the fast processes business. It is also important to monitor the process. Moreover, different actors operate on different time scales. The goal of a new school building is so far (5-‐8 years) that third sectors organisations cannot commit to development. Also for companies the goal is too far, they want fast outcomes. The citizens’ needs concern just the few next years. (06, 10, 11, 12, 17) (04, 05, 06, 19) 13 ONE-‐OFF, SHORT-‐LIVED DEVELOPMENT SPURTS à CONTINUITY BEYOND SINGULAR PROJECTS One-‐off co-‐creation workshops or short-‐term projects instead of continuous co-‐creation practice are typical. It is difficult to disseminate the results of small experiments to broader organisation. They do not easily become a standard practice or policy. It either takes time to employ new things into everyday life or then they are just forgotten. The changing project organisation also disrupts the continuity of development. In order to have more long-‐lasting and deep impact, development needs to be continuous activity on many fronts. The outcomes of co-‐creation need to be processed further within the organisation and connected to other knowledge. This can be enabled by assigning more permanent service developer positions like was done in the hospital. (22) (08, 13, 20, 22) One-‐off workshops a typical way of doing development work The generic way of doing workshops in [our company] is that you first of all struggle to get all the people that you want to be there to participate to the workshop and basically that’s like your opportunity window to get the input from them. And afterwards you usually don’t have reflection sessions or things like that. -‐-‐-‐ The project core team is of course discussing and referring to the results, if there is something that adds value. But that’s done very much unofficially and not systematically. It’s just a basic thing to take those findings and put them into use and to implement the ideas into the project. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) The idea of a process with various actors emerged as backbone Kyllä kyllähän se niinkun huomattavasti workshoppien ja projektin tuloksena se jonkinnäkönen prosessimaisuusidea parani koko ajan. Sekä niiden tuloksena et siinä kun porukka itte kohitti sitä prosessia ja menetelmää eteenpäin. Niin myöskin muita hyviä juttuja tuli siihen mukaan. Se prosessi kaiken kaikkiaan toinen hyvin havainnollinen tekijä, mikä meillä näkyy vielä niin itte prosessi niin kaikki erilaiset roolit mitä ihmisillä on et mitä heidän pitää tehdä missäkin vaiheessa. Se ei riitä et siellä on se pelkkä ideointialusta, vaan jonkun pitää prosessoida niitä ideoita eteenpäin. (10, Usability Specialist, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 44 Implementation – Making an impact 14 POOR ABILITY TO UTILISE THE OUTCOMES Due to the fundamental “difference” of a co-‐
creation research project from the organisation’s “normal” processes, organisations have difficulties in utilising the outcomes. They do not see the value of the results of co-‐creation to their own services or products. The co-‐creation methods are so unfamiliar and new that they. The organisations’ capability to select the useful ideas from the rich material and reflect them with their own needs are undeveloped. à SKILLFUL “TRANSLATION” OF THE OUTCOMES The organisation needs to be able to utilise the outcomes of academic collaboration and there must be added value. The outcomes need to go to use in the organisation, not just few persons listening to nice things, otherwise it remains superficial. Often new ideas, practices and methods are short-‐lived. (09, 10, 19) It’s a special skill to be able to utilise the outcomes of design research in own organisation. Usually a “translation process” is required for the implementation of outcomes where most promising results are picked up and translated into the organisation’s own “language”. In the technology corporation participating to the Service Design Project, images and other findings from project workshops were presented to the tool steering group and via them to upper management with positive feedback. After that they were transformed into “the language of roadmaps, action points, project budget, outlook and excel”. In this way, results of co-‐
creation “swim into” the system. Implementation requires further sorting, modification and iteration of results by managers. Collaboration between the research project and the practical development team is important. Concise “executive summaries” of results are needed aside from academic results for disseminating the outcomes to managers. (09, 11, 16) Abundance of “light” ideas vs. the challenge of sorting and implementation Tällaisissa kehitysworkshopeissa aika usein käy hyvinkin niin että — niinkun siellä pitääkin käydä — et siellä innovatiiviset ihmiset hyvin nopeesti ideoi suuren määrän ajatuksia, jotka on raakileita ja josta loppujen lopuks hyvin pieni osa pystytään toteuttamaan. Ja parhaittenkin toteuttamiseen menee paljon yrityksen omaa aikaa, jotta homma saadaan niinkun teloilleen ja irti, niin tota siinä mielessä meillä on hyvää raaka-‐ainetta kokoajan käytettävissä ja tota jokainen idea myöskin kehittyy eteenpäin ajan myötä. Opitaan prosessista koko ajan lisää ja ymmärretään et mikä on millonkin mahdollista ja kannattaako sitä siinä alkuperäisessä muodossa edes toteuttaa. (11, Development Director, Company, Virtual Innovation Project) Translation into the corporate ”language” important No perinteisestihän meillä on tämmösiä… roadmap on tällanen vakiotemplate, ja sitten on erilaisia touhupisteitä elikä actionlistoja, joissa on kerrottuna mitä tehdään, kuka tekee ja mihin mennessä. Se on toinen tämmönen formaatti. Siihen ne.. sen tyyppisiin asioihin ne sitten ui. Ja sitten puhutaan taskeista tai isommissa hankkeissa projekteista, jos niillä on oma budjetti. Se on se miten me hommat organisoidaan ja tietysti sitten Outlook on tämmönen varsin hallitseva organisoimisperuste kyllä. Mut et meillä on omat tapamme kommunikoida ja ne on kyllä tämmöstä Excel-‐
pohjasta aika paljon. (09, Research Director, Virtual Innovation Project) 15 RELIANCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION ON à BECOMING AN AGENT WITHIN OWN A FEW INSIDERS ORGANISATION OR NETWORK Dissemination of the results of co-‐creation projects largely depends on the few individuals who participated to the project. The impactfulness of a project depends a lot on the person who is responsible of producing/presenting the project material to the management and other employees. It is affected by the personal skills, communication style and commitment of the individual. If not given special effort, the impacts remain limited. (06, 07, 08, 09, 13, 15) In implementation, someone needs to take the role as facilitator, “owning the idea” for it to go further. If there’s no such promotor, things are easily just left to the level of discussion. There is a need for actively taking results further by a committed person to whose other activities it suits. Experts participating to co-‐
creation events themselves can become distillers and mediators of ideas into practice, reflecting the outcomes with own professional knowledge and complementing it with their expertise. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 45 Two of the participants had become agents of co-‐
creation in own organisation or network. They acted as messengers within the organisation, making people more responsive for new, radical methods. They were bringing forth the message and convincing people, reading and interpreting the organisational culture to researchers, and acting as softening buffer. One saw herself as “an insider but also an outsider”. After the School Project, the schools had begun to use teachers as trainers for the disseminating results. They are familiar with the methods but have “school credibility” unlike external consultants. In this way, implementation can make use of (hidden) knowledge and skills already existing among personnel. An agent with contentual knowledge is more influential than an external facilitator with merely method expertise. People can be helped in becoming agents e.g. through service design courses but being an agent essentially requires an internal motivation. (02, 04, 10, 12, 13, 15, 22) Dependence on individuals, lack of systematic adoption by organisation That’s maybe a weakness of our organisation that we are not very good at taking this kind of new processes or new methods into systematic use. Because they are more or less every time it’s depending on if those persons, individuals who have been part of the project, if they take those new methods and start applying them, then they are getting into the organisation, but if there is not that kind of drive, then usually these direct new methods they are not directly implemented. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Lack of agent who “owns the method” disrupts later application of co-‐creation methods The new methods work well if you have a facilitator familiar with the methods and driving them. But as we didn’t have persons who would be so in [from the company side]… So I think that was the biggest reason why the methods haven’t been used that much after this project. We have been adapting the creation of characters, and those have been used in workshopping quite a lot. But direct gaming aspects unfortunately… I think we had two workshops internally after the project as we have [interviewee 12] who was at that time working in my team. So she got perhaps got to be most involved with the methodologies as she was working very closely with [the key researcher]. When she was facilitating workshops she used this kind of gaming methods quite many times, but the rest of us who were not so in, we didn’t capture the methods so that they would have been used after the project. Facilitator needs to have this kind of storyline of the method and like the script of the day very clearly in his head to be able to facilitate the event. I guess it’s not rocket science so everybody could learn that, but I think in our case many times the challenge is that you have so little time available for planning the workshop that it’s usually easier, faster, safer to take this kind of very traditional, basic approach, and not spending that much time in creating the gameboards and building up this kind of very detailed script of the day. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Educating agents The belief of the new method should be built stronger within these agents so that they would feel even passionate about these new methods and would be promoting them actively, even though there would be the alternative to take the shortcut and go with the old methods. -‐-‐-‐ I think there should be more this kind of facilitator training so that these agents would learn the methods more thoroughly. So that they really absorb it. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Agent roles and characteristics She describes herself as “pillow” in between design and hospital cultures and sees her task to be the one who brings in the service design thinking to managemers and daily practices as well. “Miten mä vien tätä asiaa täällä eteenpäin. sitähän ei voi kukaan ulkopuolinen tulla niinku joku muotoilija sanomaan että teidän pitää ruveta nyt tätä palvelumuotoilua tekemään näin, mutta eise myöskään koske yksittäistä osastoa tuolla, että ne rupeis tekeen. että mä tuon sitä palvelumuotoilun kulttuuria siihen johtamiseen ja tekemiseen. Toisaalta mä tuon sitä meidän omaa toimintakulttuuria sinne palvelumuotoiluun.” (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) “Mä oon tavallaan sisä-‐ mutta ulkopuolinen. mulle voi puhua kun mä oon talon sisältä. Että siinä vois olla kynnys että rupeis jollekin ulkopuoliselle esittämään hienompaa mitä todellisuudessa on. Mä suodatan sen oman maailman ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 46 kautta kuitenkin, että huoletta kysyn uudelleen ja uudelleen. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) To ease taking design thinking and practices into hospitals and healthcare organizations, she recommends having insider in the organization, someone who can help communicating and take responsibility for implementation: “Isossa talossa missä on paljon verkostoja ja toimintamalleja, niin olis hyvä olla yhteyshenkilö joka kantais sitä vastuuta toisessa päässä. Sun täytyy vakuuttaa ihmiset siitä mitä sä oot tekemässä että sinä saat ne ihmiset mukaan.” (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Messengers/agents of change Mut siel on sama juttu kun täälkin et se on yksittäisten henkilöiden puuhasteluu, jos mä nyt sanon suoraan. Et en mä nyt tiedä et kuinka moni meidänkään talosta sitä intona jatkaa. Se vaatii kuitenkin aikaa. Ja sit se et tuntee sielt jonkun. Et se on vaikee lähtee ihan sattumanvarasesti, et "olisko tääl ketään historian opettajaa jota huvittais". -‐-‐-‐ [J]a sit tavallaan talon sisällä yritin osin tuloksetta osaks onnistuen vakuuttaa muitakin siitä et tää oikeesti kannattaa ja tää on hyvä juttu. Ja tavallaan se et meillä oli vaan osa opettajista siellä koulutuksissa ja simuloinneissa, et mitä siel on tehty. Tavallaan senkin viestin tuominen. (07, Lecturer, School Project) 16 SYSTEMIC BARRIERS TO DISSEMINATION Ideas coming from many sources need to be incorporated into the general development stream. It is to ideate superficially, but difficult to sort and take further most relevant ideas. There are enough ideas, the challenge is their implementation. The developer-‐agents in their organisation meet resistance when trying to take the results of co-‐
creation further. They need to “sell” the novel ideas internally to management and other units or sectors. For example, there was resistance towards the “artistic” character exhibition from more engineering and technology-‐oriented R&D people within the technology corporation. (08, 11, 13) à PILOTS AS SEEDS OF BROADER TRANSFORMATION Gradual transformation of the broader system through pilot projects and good examples building on what exists was seen by interviewees as the most realistic way of implementation. Change begins to spread from small niches. Pilot projects are important because “one cannot change everyone at a time”. As put by one participant, someone changes first, then others learn from her one by one: “hey, I tried this out and it works”. An existing network is easier to co-‐create with and strengthen than starting from the scratch. A good method would be “stealing good ideas and making them better together” (in face-‐to-‐face ideation). The implementation of the concept of the extended learning environment, for instance, was seen as a stepwise process that demands cultural change, new practices, changes to management and the learning of new tools. In the hospital, changes would require change of mindset and attitudes, turn to patients, and replanning of the available resources. In the technology corporation, tangible and designerly approaches with an “eye-‐candy aspect” were seen as important part of internal sales of new ideas and concepts. The organisation had begun to adopt more hands-‐on methods partially due to the project. (05, 06, 08, 13, 20, 21, 22, 23) Changing the culture and mindset little by little Se on koko kulttuurin muuttamista siinä mielessä että katotaanko me asiakaslähtöisesti vai ei. Et se mindsetin kääntäminen tuottajalähtöisyydestä käyttäjälähtöisyyteen ja siihen että lähdetään yhdessä tekemään. Toiset on sitö mieltä että me olemme asiantuntijoita, ei tässä muita tarvita. Kysymys on hyvin pitkälle siitä että miten sä oot kouluttautunut tai minkälainen kulttuuri siinä työorganisaatiossa on. Täällä on noin 40 000 työntekijää, tää on Suomen suurin työnantaja. -‐-‐-‐ [Yksi hanke] on kuin pisara meressä, mutta jostakinhan pitää aloittaa. Luulen että se on paljon helpompaa tulevaisuudessa. Tarvitaan hallintokulttuurin, toimintakuttuurin ja palvelukulttuurin muutosta. Jos hallinto ei muutu, niin toimintakuttuuri ei pääse muuttumaan. (14, Special Advisor, City, City Services Project) Systemic change on many levels required to adopt co-‐creation Kun täähän on on kulttuurin muutos, toiminnan muutos, tää on tekemisen muutos, johtamisen muutos työkalujen käyttämisen oppiminen. Tää sisältää niin paljon asioita, että tää on niinku asteittaista. (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Pilots as starting point She states that implementing Service Design in the organization demands pilot cases that can show benefits of ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 47 service design. Good examples help others to get inspired as well. “Tule (tuki ja liikuntaelinsairaudet) on ollut tässä se tulenkantaja, jossa se on selkeesti levinny, se on saanu siellä jalansijaa. Sit tarvitaan muu kohde, että ne oppii että hei tuolla Tulella tehdäänkin tuollaisia hyviä juttuja, et mekin haluttais tehä. Sit se rupee siitä niinku vähitellen leviämään.” (22, Customer Services Development Manager, Hospital Project) Internal sales of new ideas and concepts can be supported by tangible, experimental approaches I think that [tangible and designerly approaches] are part of internal sales of new ideas and concepts. The more you can provide this kind of eye candy and do things that you can touch and feel -‐-‐-‐, the more easier it is to sell your ideas. And the better you can sell your ideas and concepts, the better chances you have to get the funding for the project. And of course at some point of time in the project you need to really prove the technology behind, but before that you first really need to raise the attention and attraction towards the overall concept. And for that you need this eye-‐
candy kind of things that are tangible and touchable and look nice.-‐-‐-‐ It’s also like internal sales in the R&D. To the top management of R&D, leaders of R&D who at the end of the day decide, that okay, this project is receiving funding and this one doesn’t. There is lot of ideas, lot of projects that basically you can have facts that okay this project would be needed. There is always more project ideas than resources to [fulfill them]. So for that purpose, the stronger emotional impact you can make when introducing your project idea, the better chances you have. It’s very much about internal sales and marketing kind of thing.-‐-‐-‐ Sometimes we joke and laugh that the most challenging part in making the commercially succesful product is to sell it internally in our organisation. If you can manage that, then it’s easy to sell it to the customers. -‐-‐-‐ Especially the more radical the innovation or the concept is, the more challenging the internal sales is because the internal organisation, they are very much focusing to these existing solutions and they know maybe how they should be improved a bit and they understand incremental changes and they are very much focused to that and if you are really providing something outside the box kind of thinking, then you need to have much better argumentation for that because of course the risk level is higher with that kind of thing. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) Methods – Becoming a practice 17 SUPERIMPOSED METHODS WITH WEAK CONNECTION TO IMPLEMENTATION Co-‐creation methods particularly in the field of design often remain superimposed, with weak connection to actual implementation. They may not abe allowed to interfere with the “hard” world of implementation, nor are capable of doing that because of their detachment from design. à INTEGRATION OF CO-‐CREATION METHODS ALREADY IN THE PROJECT PLANNING PHASE On the other hand, the designer-‐facilitators in some projects felt that their input was reduced to mere illustration with no real impact to the core development project. The potential of design was not fully utilised in the projects. However, many other participants emphasised the value of visualisations in creating a shared understanding. Designers should be involved already in planning stage for the methods to be influential and incorporated in to whole, not superficial things added on top. The methods should be thought as a sequence where each part supports the others and the common goal, not as separate tasks. The methods should be targeted according to the audience and purpose and connected to established workflows and tools. (15, 16) (05, 15) 18 POOR LEVERAGE OF THE METHODS, UNCONVINCING OUTCOMES à EFFECTIVE, WELL-‐FOCUSED AND WELL-‐PREPARED METHODS, FACILITATION AND REPORTING The quality and scope of the outcomes of co-‐
creation methods does not always meet the expected standards. The documentation and other outcomes from workshops can be unconvincing, too generic or too distant from the reality of the participants. Lack of confidence and training also hinder the application of methods. Shift from Co-‐creation methods are effective, well-‐focused and well-‐prepared and deliver outcomes in a format that is useful for the client organisation. Some methods are also more credible and valid than others. Design probes and service journey mapping for example proved to be useful in the healthcare sector. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 48 talking to doing in methods is crucial –how ideas are transmitted to solutions. “Owning the method” properly and confidently conquers resistance as does building stronger the belief among the agents into the methods: “Brainwashing the agents more efficiently so that they would be more active in promoting these methods.” One participant from the large corporation pointed out the limited ability of workshops in innovation: “Nowadays we are focusing so much on this workshopping and trying to find new ideas and innovations that it is really rare to come up with something totally new which hadn’t been invented already twice or three times before.” Design games and visual material can act as enabler of collaboration and source of inspiration. Visualisations “carry through thick piles of paper”, make visible key issues, and act as points of discussion. (13, 23) Well-‐planned workshops show commitment. The holistic co-‐creation event can be designed to inspire experimentation and shift of mindset. Facilitation of co-‐design was recognised as a special area of expertise. The facilitator can open up cliques and encourage participation. Good preparation and professional, confident appearance are essential when working with a specialists organisation. The facilitators can have divided roles. Them actively participating to the situation, seizing good ideas and building the outcome on the spot is beneficial to co-‐creation. The facilitator needs to take flexible roles during the project according to needs (alternation of user orientation, solution-‐orientation and systems thinking). (04, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 23) Tools for documentation phase needed Typically many workshops are such that after the workshop you have piles of post-‐its and paper documentations and thing like that, and then it’s up to the facilitator to start the real work of making the sense out of that. So if the method could be done in a way that it would be like self-‐documenting, and as an outcome you would have, the outcome would have been processed during the workshop to be more ready, so that there would be less this kind of after-‐workshop work to make sense of the results. (13, Project Manager, Company, Service Design Project) 19 RIGID, STRENUOUS METHODS à OPEN AND FLEXIBLE METHODS Too rigid, pre-‐planned methods and overt use of written material may hinder free discussion, exchange and iteration of ideas in co-‐creation events. The interviewees also criticised overt emphasis on process diagrams in some projects. As an example, the presence of designer-‐facilitator in their table discouraged the laypeople carers to engage into the co-‐design task (of service tray). Everyone should feel good and be able to express their point regardless of the methods used. Openness and flexibility of methods would enable their wider adoption. The methods would need to be adaptable and scalable to different situations ranging from fast, small-‐scale experiments to long-‐term, large-‐
scale development. The co-‐creation processes led by the university were seen as heavy and slow. There should be lighter versions of the methods as well. Finding the balance between the openness and clarity/easy applicability of a method is a challenge for the researchers and developers of methods. The strenuousness, slowness and work-‐
intesiveness of the methods hinders the application of co-‐creation methods by the organisations themselves after the externally funded research projects with facilitator resources are over. (13, 15, 22) (09, 14, 15) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 49 20 RELIANCE OF THE METHODS ON AN EXTERNAL FACILITATOR Uniqueness of the co-‐creation methods and the reliance on their application on the researchers presents a barrier for co-‐creation to develop into a more widespread practice in organisations. Researchers can use more time for methods, facilitation and compiling results than a company. à PORTABLE METHOD TOOLKITS AND FACILITATOR TRAINING In general, there was poor ability to realise co-‐
creation in the organisations due to lack of experience on the practical application of the methods. The principals from the School Project stated that collaboration is nowadays increasingly expected from the school but there are no available models or tools for realising it. In the global technology corporation, adapting the co-‐creation methods to different cultures was a challenge met by the advocate “agent” of the approach. (01, 10, 11, 12) To be disseminated, the co-‐creation methods also need to work without the researchers. Developing portable co-‐design toolkits and related facilitator training can make this possible. Easy availability of methods without the need to hire an external consultant was stressed by the participants. The corporate developers suggested facilitator training plus a toolbox for running the methods, including systematic processing tools as a solution. In the education sector, there was a need for generic models and tools that could be adopted in many schools as well. The participants were wondering how to make the methods portable so that they can be adapted by (ever new) teachers without the project space available or technological or graphic skills. (01, 02, 03, 07, 09, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22) Portability of methods important in a global corporation Yksi workshop [Kiinassa] mihin mä tein suunnittelupelin tai ideointipelin niin sehän nyt ei menny kauheen hyvin. Lopputulos oli jotain ihan muuta mitä mä kuvittelin. Et tarkotus oli siis tehdä uusia ideoita ja mä olin sitä varten, tehny muutaman tämmösen eri skenaarion. Niin he antovat sitte lopulta nämä, tehtävänannot tavallaan omina ideoinaan.-‐-‐-‐ Siel oli meijän tuotekehityksestä ihmisiä. Siel oli kaks sessiota ja, varmaan yhteensä sanosin kaheksankyt osallistujaa. Pöytäkunnissa tehtiin sitä ideointia. Ja kääntäjä siellä oli mukana mutta sit jälkikäteen ku keskusteltiin niin selvis häneltä et kaikki ei välttämät ihan ymmärtäny tätä tehtävänantoo kuitenkaan. Ja mä olin sit taas vähän pettyny kun hän ei saman tien sanonu sitä siellä et hei otetaan uusiks. Mut, tääl on tämmönen, kasvojenmenetysjuttu et aina ei välttämättä kehdata sanoa suoraan et sä et osaat tai nyt tää menee huonosti. Tietenki ulkopuolisen on vaikee, ihan tarkkaan ymmärtää miten se toimii. Mutta ein sanominen on vähän sillai. Joten olenkin opetellut uuden sanan – ehkä pystyn. -‐-‐-‐ [Suurimpia haasteita yhteiskehittämisessä on] se että ihmiset oppii tekemään yhteistyötä ihmisten kanssa vähän eri kulttuureista. (12, Product Release Manager, Company, Service Design Project) ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 50 6 CONCLUSION: TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE SERVICE CO-‐CREATION The results of the follow-‐up study in brief In the light of the follow-‐up interviews, a research-‐driven co-‐creation project realised by a university easily remains superimposed, one-‐off activity disconnected from the core operations of the client organisation and with little impact to real-‐life solutions or the organisation aside from possibly tuning the mindset of individual participants, increasing collaboration and giving improvement ideas. This is partly because of systemic resistance within any organisation to novel inputs coming from outside of it. Design in particular is a field that seemed alien to representatives of organisations such as a city or a hospital. According to the interviews, there were initial prejudices towards the co-‐creation approach within the participating organisations that the facilitators needed to overcome. The approach was perceived as too “soft” or “superficial” to be able to make a real change. To break through the systemic resistance and bring in value, the facilitators need to master their methods and stand behind them, acquire profound understanding of the context of co-‐creation and the complex systems and processes of the participating organisations, and be adaptive to suggestions and guidance. The co-‐creation approach was perceived valuable because of its holisticity. The main benefit of the approach would seem to lie in its ability to create an open arena for discussion, ideation and sharing of experiences across professional sectors and fields where ideally also the power hierarchies are temporarily dissolved and the previously “unheard”, such as the users, given a voice. Regardless of its direct short-‐term effects, co-‐creation can prime professionals to being more receptive to the insights of users in their future work. Several participants had experienced a turn towards understanding the importance of the insights of users (customers, patients) to development. Visualisations and tangible outcomes such as prototypes were seen as valuable outcomes of co-‐creation. The approach also provided concrete methods and tools that can be applied to different contexts and that many participants saw promising and were seeking to adopt. Examples of specific methods that were experienced as valuable are the Customer Journey and the Design Probes. According to the material, the meaning and value of specific co-‐creation methods seems difficult to measure and make explicit in retrospect. To most of the participants, individual methods within the projects were relatively unimportant and, apart from some exceptions, they could not identify very specifically the outcomes or impacts of a given method. Many stated that the projects where useful, only that it’s difficult to pinpoint how. Increments from the projects were merged with other development. The main weakness of the co-‐creation methods according to the study would be their disconnection from actual implementation. A significant break exists between a co-‐creation project and other, more concrete development activities. Unless the value of the project is not seen on all levels of the organisation, the impacts remain limited. Special effort and skills are needed for implementing the results of co-‐creation. A key finding of the follow-‐up study is the importance of committed individuals who become agents within the organisation, disseminating the results and priming others for the novel approach. A combination of inherent personal motivation, professional contentual knowledge and practical method/facilitator skills seems to be needed for people to become agents. To sum up, the enablers that can contribute to more sustainable co-‐creation with value to participants and leading to in-‐depth transformation include: creating trust through making together; credible, responsive communication; search for mutual value; in-‐depth understanding of the target system; an informal arena for different expertises to come together as equal; taking responsibility of co-‐creation; support from ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 51 management and connection to strategy; allocation of time, resources and funding for co-‐creation; meaningful personal role in co-‐creation; finding where co-‐creation truly adds value; integration of co-‐
creation to the core; coordination and timing of development processes; continuity of development beyond singular projects; skillful “translation” of the outcomes; becoming an agent within own organisation or network; pilots as seeds of broader transformation; integration of co-‐creation methods already in the project planning phase; effective, well-‐focused and well-‐prepared methods; open and flexible methods; and portable method toolkits and facilitator training. ATLAS – A Map for Future Service Co-‐development | Antti Pirinen, Aalto University, Department of Design, 4 June 2014 52