Some people responded with. ‘no’ in the poll. What are those things that you have that created a No answer?
I found the session interesting and informative, and Tom was certainly experienced in transforming services.
The reason I put a No, was that it did not go far enough. It was only about a limited type of service.
Highly transactional Public services have been shown to be highly effectively transformed through Digital. No problem there. The problem are the other things that the public sector does, more of it is not transactional, it involves dealing with citizens, families and the complexity that arises. Applying the principles of transactional public service design to complex area, simply fails
One example is Universal Credit. For some people it works, and for other citizens it fails. But when it fails them, they go hungry, their families suffer, they turn against society. If you ask a Housing manager in a local council, what the top reasons for rent arrears are, the answer is the way UC has been designed.
I would like to see both recognition of this, and to be a part of the discussion, so that designers do not simply carry on with the mantra of ‘Digital by Default’, that causes untold misery for some citizens.
The danger is that Digital is seen to be good for everything, when in reality, engaging with citizens person to person is essential and is often being pushed out of design.
And the Health service is another topic altogether!
John