Starting back at the DCN conference I’ve been talking about design a lot as I try and make the case that we need to design our new unitaries before we start to measure them. I’ve also been part of some really thoughtful work from the Policy lab on this and also some research carried out by DWP which you can read here.
The whole LGR timetable is pretty pacey and the priority programme even more so. Its not surprising that we are in a rush to get to an answer – but if we don’t stop and think on the way we risk missing the opportunity to create something better rather than just rearranging what we have now.
I’m advocating a design processes as design approaches have a number of useful elements:
- The starting point of taking time to understanding the purpose and the problem or challenge you want to address
- An embedded view of outcomes you are tying to achieve
- A set of design principles which thread things together
- A process for creating design assumptions that you will need to test
Design is iterative. When we created the Adur and Worthing organisational design we talked a lot abut working in pencil on key elements and then circling back to them when working in order to areas to check whether the assumptions made still hung together. This kind of constant iteration and emphasis on assumptions and testing makes it possible to hold a range of views safely as you work through together to a shared position.
With the big choices in terms of unitary models we have in front of us this kind of iteration is invaluable in terms of how we collaborate even when we hold different viewpoints.
A purposeful design process is really powerful in terms of taking a wide range of opinions and a wide range of professional views in particular and turning into something coherent and greater than the sum of the parts. It can also be done quickly in sprint formats and often design teams choose to isolate and make big steps together and then test their thinking on the wider stakeholder groups.
This is also something that could be a shared process. While every place is unique we have common patterns and approaches which could be better reused. We can borrow the lessons from the test and learn programme and from countless other successful innovations with the advantage of creating the conditions for success from the start. The Local Government Digital community, along with Government Digital Service has made big strides with respect to common patterns and tools and given the centrality of digital to all our future organisational designs this shows how we can think together differently.
We have some big choices ahead and around us, but starting with the question ‘what problem are we trying to solve?’ is still vital. Perhaps the thing that is the biggest blocker to doing that is choosing which of the many problems on our desks we have to focus on. My preference to to bring those challenges together and try and find the space for a preventative model that is both better and cheaper.
It’s a big dream but isn’t it the right one? The alternative seems like the same amount of effort to rearrange what we have now, and I just can’t find the joy in that.
Leave a Reply