Clusters of insights - quick access
The practical problems with SAtSD
Access the part of the Miro Board represented in the image
List of clusters of insights
Select one of the clusters of insights to see the quotes supporting it. Select it again to hide the quotes.
It feels both vague and formulaic because it doesn't consider context
- It's shared with us as this all-encompassing tool and, after reading it, it is not an all-encompassing tool to me. It’s a tool for conversation-starting. [...] [public and third sector stakeholders] think that it is a tool for change. But in reality, it is a methodology and the set of principles that you bring to the table to assess whether or not you are doing it in this way
- It doesn't give you the tools to ask if service design is appropriate In that setting
- I can be cynical about the broad application of SD to everything, and as a sort of standardised practice, because for me it's better to have one tool kit where you pull different things from, I think there is some dogma attached to SD in the way the SAtSD is introduce as well, it does seem very formulaic and I think it's dangerous
It can set the wrong expectations because the process doesn't fit every project and context
- If your introduction to SD is the Scottish Approach - then you have currently a very fixed idea of how things happen, when they happen, and what you use to do those things
- [...] you are giving [public and third sector stakeholders' a document that says: ‘ you should be doing this, you should be doing this, this could lead to this’. [...] [pts professionals in the partnership] have really held on to some of the key points within it. Which can be a little dangerous because their focus on ‘we have to engage with citizens, we have to engage with citizens, this has to be the first rule’ [...] So there are all these different things that I’ve notice that - and especially in the third sector - people really hold on to the principles
Having to adapt it because it fails to consider wider context
- It kind of fails to supply people with further questions about the environment they are working in. [...] it fails to consider the wider context
- Find it easier to collaborate with specific teams, and there’s usually quite a lot of good will there. But then the SAtSD doesn’t necessity work in that context. So we’ve been trying to tease out a version per product almost. Because that’s where you change things
- We had a project where we managed to talk to five members of the staff. But none of the clusters of insights we pulled out and and none of the things we designed based on that were then taken forward. So when the team tried to SAtSD assess themselves according to the approach, they gave themselves a great grade because [...] we spoke to these people - yes, but we didn’t take it forward
- If we actually do a SAtSD assessment,[...] taking that approach and going to a project team, and saying ‘here’s the assessment, let’s do it’’, it’s actually quite difficult. Because it’s written from an organisational perspective only. You know, I think there’s one good example that is about design being embedded in all layers of the organisation, and this team doesn’t really have anything to say about that. [The SAtSD] doesn’t really quite assess specific products, but the organisation as a whole. That’s a difficult pitch, cause that suggests that I should go to the director of my organisation and say: ‘hey, here’s an assessment, you need to comply with that’; and that is a very difficult position to be in
Organisational focus
- What I found hard is that people sort of expect me to... [People] look at it and they’re like: ‘ok, so you are a service designer, you implement this.’ And in fact I can’t, because even the way it is written, it’s all about the organisation. I can’t personally embed design in my organisation, your organisation needs to embed it.this.’ And in fact I can’t
Too generic, anything fits under research and involvment
- [leader of participatory budget didn't trust community with money] And that's where I would like to see more of a heavy hand from the up top and say, the guidelines needs to be tighter less wriggle room. We need to say to folk: you need to be more active on what you want, there's ways to doing it, I'm going to show you, there's templates for this, and questions. Use your community council and push that question, and demand an answer and if they are not doing it, why not? I want to get them to a level where they are confident enough to really push back and know their onions so to speak, they can show examples, so they see the benefits. You want community engagement, you want participation, here you go, it's a gift for me!
- [When public sector colleagues understand as research asking one practitioner about their users' experiences.] I think that some of the messaging from the Scottish government is: ‘That's great! do it! you can do it!’ And I think that there is this idea then it is better than nothing, Which I get. But it can lead to very difficult situations. The language of the SAtSD can lend itself to interpretation from all specialties and disciplines and so me, as a designer, I then have to dismantle that again, Fight against that approach and say ‘ok, but maybe there is other things that we need to do’; and I sometimes wish it would back me up more. [...] ‘if you are working with patients, you need a certain amount of experiences, [...] For example, at the [ organisation] we do ethical research And we fill out an ethics form And you think about those ethical considerations. One of them is always, ‘ does the researcher have the necessary experience to talk to these people who might be vulnerable, or in a difficult situation and is talking about difficult topics. So I wish it [SAtSD] will back me up a little bit more and be less about ‘as long as you do it, is fine’
No practical examples
- I haven't really seen any real examples of how it was applied within context, and this is me applying it in context
- I kind of want to see the next bit of that story, I want to see how you would instruct a design team how to do that well. I almost want to go further than it‘s currently going. I wish it could instruct people to how to go about doing that. I think it points in a lot of directions, but it doesn’t take you down that direction
Struggling to understand its purpose
- I have looked to it and I‘ve struggled with it a bit just to understand what it is
- You know what, I get a little bit lost with the Scottish Approach to Service Design. [...] Personally, I don’t yet use it and that is the thing I kind of wanted to do like I wish I did
- Beyond using it for sending it to executives and as a resource, I‘m a bit confused to how else to use it and maybe that‘s the point of it. Maybe that‘s fine. But I think let‘s not try to pretend it‘s whatever else this other thing because even with the toolkit etc. I just don’t fully understand the aim of it
Teams and organisation's readiness
- When we’re talking about design in government, there are the intractable problems that means we can’t do the work that we really really want to do
- The organisations that I am working in partnership with have to use that approach, and I think that’s attached to funding. So you know, we want to use this, we want to test it out, go and do it in your area
- There are a lot of different siloed thinking and cultures there, so you almost have to bend the rules a little bit to make it fit
Emotional impact
- With the growth of SAtSD is the readiness of teams and organisations to take it on. It was being promoted at senior level, trying to get buy-in there, at the same time that people around the country were being introduced to the practice. Those 2 things were happening at the same time, it sounded like a great idea. Service designers were being hired or commissioned, but the readiness of the team they were landing in was not there yet. I wonder how that might have impacted people emotionally over the past few years
Barriers: organisational culture, mindset and environement
These clusters of insights are related to SAtSD but not only, they could also fit the theme ‘SD work and contributions’ or ‘Working with people’
Access the part of the Miro Board represented in the image
List of clusters of insights : Service Design is new and unfamiliar
People want the magic of Service Design but don’t want the change that comes with it
Change requires investment
- I think also Service Design and public service has a long way to go, it will require huge organisational change across a lot of public services, and across a lot of public bodies actually, not just public services. And that requires a lot of money, and these agencies do not have those pockets, their pockets are not deep enough. So while you can make lots of suggestions about how you might re-orient the organisation, it is not always possible that those things can happen. So that is a big challenge
It’s threatening people
People's fear of change
- Fear from front-line and mid-management staff. It tends to be a thing, but that’s not the same for everybody. Because some people get really excited about the opportunity to actually involve and redesign what’s around them. And I really try to make sure that we try and do like the kind of communication and co-design cycles with the staff, the teams. But I definitely found that individuals can be a real barrier there because they are scared of change, they’ve seen it before, it failed last time. Organisational memory is really strong. Often people in local authorities have been in the same job and will never leave in their whole life, you know, it’s one of the lasting bastions of career singularity that you can get
- There is something about just change, if this is a change that's difficult and that needs leading, especially when you ask people to do things like discovery and testing, if they have never done things like that before, and I think the resource against that feel too overwhelming
Design is evidence based, decision-making and is threatening to other professions
A new mindset
Resistance to doing things differently
- For the most part, people are quite open to something different. Sometimes, the clients are really onboard and they know it's going to be different. Sometimes, you have other people who maybe had not decided to bring you in, and are bit more like "oh, why are we doing this like this?" For the most part, people are positive about you being there, but sometimes you can get a bit of resistance to doing things differently
There are a hundred barriers
- There’s about a hundred answers to that question
True participatory service design would challenge existing structures and jobs
- Last time I've checked, public services in Scotland are the biggest employers, so you have all these people who - if you had strong participatory service design in - a lot of jobs would be called into question and a lot of services would be called into question either they need to reshape quite a lot or they need to go.[...] people can't feel good in that position in a public service. I think about that a lot
A new way of thinking people are not used to
- These are new ways of working for lots of traditional and bureaucratic organisations
- The barrier is that the [organisation] has not done this ever before, and there isn’t an awareness. So for example, the whole attitude, the whole way of thinking. So for example [during] safety training, and part of it is looking at software and trying to discover safety issues. And there was something around ‘oh there’s this monitor that beeps if there is this specific thing wrong with the patient, what’s the clinical safety things that you need to pay attention to’. So there was things like: Human error, staff error - top of the list, always top of the list - and and the story goes ‘a not so senior nurse may misread the thing’ and, obviously as a designer sitting among clinique technicians my question was: what’s the font size on that monitor? What is the contrast? This isn’t even service design so never mind this nurse actually having enough time to go and read this thing, and why is she going in to read it, and then copying it on a piece of paper that then she carries somewhere else in the first place? You know, that's not even think about the actual service level. But basically, the organisation’s thinking was very very clear, ‘oh, staff error. We need more training. And so to get people from that attitude to, ‘wait a second, can we look at the error of the service or even the product you’ve got plunked here that makes no sense - it’s really hard work. I think stories from patients or even designing with-- or even nurses, even staff, would be really helpful. But we are a long way off of even acknowledging that that’s where the problem is
Using the traditional method ot start a Service Design approach
- It’s been interesting to see how to take something from a really traditional engagement and insight type of work - this might be a public survey - to illustrate in a way that maybe fits into a user journey and takes other research insights into account. Pushing it forward to let’s produce those insights and action points for senior leadership
List of clusters of insights : Current ways of working is blocking service design
Decisions and hierachies
Slow to act on insights
- Present the insights to various boards to just tell them that they need not invest making this happen. And it took them maybe another six months to stop the project officially for them, the citizens, solicitors and basically for anyone. Quite interesting and I‘m very proud that they stopped it because that‘s one thing, they don’t admit to mistakes very easily
Not understanding how decisions been made
- There’s lots, right, like in any corporate situation - and by corporate I mean any large, complex organisation. There’s many constraints, there’s many different people who have positions of power that dictate what needs to happen and when. In my experience a lot of the challenges are organisationally and culturally influencing things, that people understand why decisions are being made
Organisational hierachies
- It’s really difficult. The hierarchies aren’t there to support our work. I don't really know how we get around that. We've been trained with an agency mindset, where you never have that problem. You just do a Project, and then move on
How to act upon a decision?
- The way I am starting to see it is that this minister has done the design. They know what they want, it’s there, there is a brief, you can go and build it. That is an interesting one to me. How do we still do service design around decisions that have already been made? And how do we sell that it is still necessary? It is exhausting
Not admitting mistakes
How things are currently done
Resigning and just accepting that‘s the way it is
- They‘re kind of aware of each other. But it‘s almost this sign of resignation because it‘s so big. It‘s just impossible to coordinate. We kind of feel this with us as well. My colleague describes it as pushing open doors. Why don’t we try to coordinate this a bit and unify it? And everyone says “yeah, yeah, sounds like a great idea but don‘t know how to do it”. And that is kind of the attitude how most people think. So, no one tries because everyone is kind of resigned thinking that‘s just the way how it is
Not doing the right thing because the work is mandated (by the government)
- I also think, particularly with the public sector, sometimes goals change quite regularly, and the reason to do something is not always because it's the right thing to do, it might be the right thing to do, but quite often things get done because it's mandated. So it's quite a culture shift that is still to properly take hold
Talking instead of doing
- But sometimes in Scotland it just feels like those conversations are just conversations for years and it‘s quite annoying because people dying
Solution-driven approach vs problem-driven
- There’s all these sorts of reputation risks, cause quite often the things that people have been asked to do are solution-orientated not problem-solving
Clients want to start building things before having a shared vision
- [Some want to develop code before establishing things like a ] shared vision of what that website is for. What it‘s going to achieve. What is the user going to need to do on it? What's the business need? All that stuff isn’t there