For generations human history has been littered with evidence that people want to be included in decisions which affect them. In 1789, the French Revolution echoed to calls for liberty, equality and fraternity; one of the most memorable rallying cries of any movement. Liberty spoke to the need to be free of rules imposed by the aristocracy and clergy. Equality spoke to the new state of equal rights and responding to the will of the people. Fraternity spoke to the common struggle which had united the people of France and to which the movement would be accountable. These were radical ideals built on a millennial struggle by common people to be heard. Of course, those common people were led by those educated enough to provide commentary and the basis of new laws and wealthy enough to take the time to lead the movement. History tells us that they might not always have been as fraternal in their mindset as their ideals. Even so, their ideals live on as the hallmarks of democracy, of co-design.
It is the ongoing process of democratisation of decision making which is the backdrop for co-design. It too was initially created by intellectuals steeped in humanist philosophy. Sociologists, social workers and other humanities educated professionals created townhall movements and community engagement as part of the social revolution which overtook the Scandinavian countries in the 1970’s. Their attempts at re-designing social systems to create the cohesive and productive societies which continue to evolve in the frosty north has become an inspiration for others.
Be Seen, Heard, Understood, Engaged, In Control!
This is not surprising as we all have a desire to be:
In the history of government programs and many services, many segments of society were excluded. Medical research is replete with the use of male subjects meaning there are now calls for medical science to become more focussed on female health. Ethnic minorities and first nations peoples have not even been counted as citizens in many countries until more recent decades. Therefore, the simple act of gathering accurate data on issues which affect different populations ensures their needs have a chance to be seen.
Often, that data is so stark that service providers and those in power reach out to consult. This gives affected people a chance to be heard. However, as any good researcher will tell you, the questions you ask frame the response you receive. Asking groups how to make a service better assumes that service is a high priority for that population. You can receive many helpful suggestions but it might not result in more service use or impact.
This is where creating environments for open conversation about what matters most to individuals is important. Their perspectives and needs can be understood. However, if their contributions are taken away and acted upon by others with no ongoing reference to stakeholders, implementation can still miss the mark. This is where engaging communities of interest in designing solutions comes into its own.
Where providers are brave they may turn the entire program and resource over to the community. They make decisions about budgets, priorities, accountabilities and the very definition of what is a good or bad outcome. This puts in the hands of those most impacted real control over what matters to them. In the process agency and ownership arises which can turn lives around, improve the effectiveness of service delivery and create movements for change.
The Lego Story
This progression is similar to the story of Lego. Most of us will be familiar with those little plastic Danish blocks. They were originally created for children in an era when children were to be seen and not heard. The founder was belittled for wanting to create toys for children. Children were just starting to be free of the burden of working in family farms and businesses. Their recreation and education were starting to be valued. At that time children were not believed to be much of a market. Lego whittled away at that preconception so successfully they were at the forefront of what is now a multi-billion dollar children’s toy industry.
Lego pioneered bringing children into the factory and watching how they played with the blocks. They created competitions and designs based on what children gravitated towards. They even looked at the educational development which Lego fostered and attempted to create a whole movement around children’s learning. Understanding kids was central.
Lego then realised that older children and very young children continued to engage with Lego. Duplo was created for the youngest. Themed Lego boxes were launched to attract teenagers watching the latest movies. Lego for girls was invented to help them create the houses, cars and sets for the stories important to them. Their imaginations were engaged creating entire new worlds full of Lego inspired artifacts.
The real break from tradition came when Lego created an online system so that anyone could create a Lego design. Suddenly, car manufacturers, architects and adults from around the globe were converting ideas into blocks which were then packaged and sent to the designer wherever they were. Putting adults in control of Lego designs was a masterstroke for turning a childhood toy into an adult obsession.
Co-design Gives People Agency
Co-design is based on giving people agency. Their thoughts, their choices, their actions are what matter most. It is grounded in the plurality which is the complex social world we all live in. Until we explore that divergence and difference, we will never understand the potential which occurs in each place to transform into something better. Finally, it encourages reciprocity. Humans are best at meeting the needs of other humans like them and who they understand. This only occurs if we volunteer time and the best of our listening and engagement skills to appreciate others and what they can bring.
The best co-design efforts result in people being willing to go beyond what they currently do and offer their skills, time and resources to a greater goal. This is the embodiment of fraternity. It results from people feeling equal and engaged in a problem which is significant enough to them to require a new behaviour, commitment or sharing of an asset…even money or other resources they control. Liberation from the past and a better future for all is the result.
