How design capabilities could help the government deliver their national missions
By Nigel Ball, Jenny Haigh, Lucy Kimbell, Ramia Mazé, Esme Trevelyan, Niki Wallace and Grace Wyld
On 17th July, the Cabinet Office and Policy Profession published the government’s Public Design Evidence Review which for the first time shares insights from the use of design approaches across policymaking in the UK, in the wider context of improving how government works.
Whilst missions aren’t addressed explicitly by the review, there is huge potential for design to help deliver the government’s missions. In March, the University of the Arts London (UAL) and The Future Governance Forum (FGF) partnered to hold a workshop at UAL’s Chelsea College of Arts to discuss how design expertise could serve a mission-driven approach. The half-day session was designed and facilitated by UAL experts using design methods and was attended by civil servants working in national and local government, policy experts, design professionals and academics. This blog explores our top takeaways from the day.
The role of design in mission-driven government
The government’s missions represent, and remain, a radical change in the statecraft of government: it must lead with purpose and govern in partnership. A mission-driven approach recognises the critical role the government has in providing a strong direction for society and the economy, while having the humility to know that it cannot deliver missions alone. Working in broad coalitions across and beyond the state becomes essential. This was the central argument of Mission Critical 01: Statecraft for the 21st century, a report delivered in partnership between FGF and UCL’s Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose.
The report also argued that policies are too often designed on paper without making contact with reality, and that a mission-driven government should build design capabilities, including participation, digital and experimentation. For the past 20 years national government departments and local authorities have been building up their competencies in the field of design, which we’re seeing explicitly come to fruition in the Cabinet Office’s Test Learn Grow programme alongside established design capabilities in government including the Government Digital Service, the cross-government Policy Design Community and teams such as Policy Lab.
Design approaches can accelerate and improve policymaking by bringing stakeholders together, build a shared understanding of issues and opportunities, and create clear pathways for collective action. There is a natural synergy between the practices and principles of design and the approach that successful mission-driven government requires - something we explored in a short pre-read for participants in our March workshop. The case for design enabling missions is now being made more widely (including a paper by service design consultancy Livework).
A number of illuminating findings emerged from the workshop.
Local government in the lead
It is clear that local and regional governments are well positioned to adopt design approaches and are simply getting on with it with optimism and pragmatism (as shown in the Design Council’s recent report on Design Beyond Central Government). We heard examples of transformational change led by Greater Manchester Combined Authority, Gateshead and Adur & Worthing Councils, who are proving the value of design in government through real-world application.
Greater Manchester, for example, has a history of co-designing policy with Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise organisations and communities. Collective leadership runs through GMCA’s recent 10-year strategy and as the UK’s first “prevention demonstrator” they will be taking a whole-person, whole-system approach to public service reform. (FGF will be meeting with GMCA at a roundtable today hosted by our partners, the Growth and Reform Network, to discuss the opportunities presented by this preventative approach.)
Camden Council has demonstrated the success of a mission-driven, place-based approach which prioritises empathy and experimentation. Camden is the first in the country to receive an ‘outstanding’ rating for adult social care, and has received the badge for children’s social care for the second time. Local government is leading the way and of course requires no permission from national government to act. And yet, attendees described limitations and barriers that could be overcome quickly with national government action - as mapped out by the Public Design Evidence Review.
Two different proposed approaches for how national government should catch up
Many civil servants still see design as impractical or risky, or they are caught up in the institutional inertia that pushes against efforts to try a new way. This isn’t about individual resistance. Rather, accountability mechanisms don’t lend themselves to the openness and experimentalism of design approaches. As one participant pointed out, one easy way to make an overwhelming day feel more manageable is to cut out feedback loops.
Government frameworks such as the Green Book and traditional funding models prioritize rigid, linear decision-making, which often contradicts the collaborative, participatory, iterative nature of design. Policies are often evaluated based on process adherence rather than outcomes, making it difficult to adapt and improve initiatives based on real-world impact. Experimental initiatives like the UK’s Policy Lab often remain on the margins rather than the mainstream. And design does not have the status of other academic disciplines so can be neglected in civil service training.
The room was united on the scale of the challenge, but split on the best approach to tackling it.
The integration approach
Some attendees of our workshop felt that overcoming this challenge was best done through integration – design should be positioned as complementary to dominant approaches such as quantitative analysis and legal processes, rather than in conflict with them. Policymakers respond best to practical, results-driven solutions rather than abstract theory, so practitioners should be open to simplifying language to help the adoption and use of design across government.
The transformation approach
Others felt that aligning closely with existing ways of thinking could get lost within the status quo and would take too long to have an impact. Instead, they argued, design should be positioned as a transformational new movement that everyone should want to feel a part of. They felt design needs to be described as something distinctive and specialist, with the same legitimacy as dominant academic disciplines in policymaking, such as economics. There is an opportunity in the government’s approach for missions to bridge the gap between design and economics. Only with this approach would design methods such as collaboration and iteration be embedded into existing accountability structures, required in financial and strategic planning, and embedded in job descriptions and business cases.
Either way, there is an urgency to act
Amid our debate, many practical ideas emerged. The recruitment of qualified design practitioners into government should grow. Design expertise should be built into civil servant leadership training, to provide them with a basic understanding of key principles and practices of design. The existing network of design-related teams and policy labs within and across government should be strengthened.
Missions aren’t delivered by governments on their own, but achieved by collaboration across society. Governments aiming to support the delivery of missions require a culture of being comfortable with uncertainty, shared accountability, humility to test, learn and improve and trust in people and communities.
The opportunity to integrate design into government has never been greater, but it must be harnessed before the moment passes.
Nigel Ball is the Director of the Social Purpose Lab, UAL
Jenny Haigh is Head of Policy, Fashion and Textiles & Creative Economy at the Social Purpose Lab, UAL
Professor Lucy Kimbell (PhD) is Professor of Contemporary Design Practices, Central Saint Martins, UAL
Ramia Mazé (PhD) is Professor of Design for Social Innovation and Sustainability, UAL
Esme Trevelyan is Creative Industries Policy Manager, UAL
Niki Wallace is an AHRC Innovation Scholar and Programme Director of Graphic Design (CCW), UAL
Grace Wyld is Head of Policy and Research at FGF
It is helpful to see the timeline of how the current exemplar councils are demonstrating their ability to apply change methods to their long term strategies.
Camden started in the 2000's by learning about systems thinking methods, and redesigning some of their services using a particular systemic design method called the Vanguard method. This approach also created purposes that were rooted in their citizens needs and the localities that they lived. Her time, these purposes became what we now call missions.
Gateshead and Manchester both started with systems thinking methods, that are rooted in their initial design methodologies. With Manchester then having the leadership that ensured the continued success of its drive to where it is now.
By looking at the design methods that are used by those that have developed the methods using systems thinking we can see how they are able to redesign whole series - end to end, and also to absorb the complexity of much of the public sector.