A Triple, and Double Diamond method for Systemic Service Design
Experiences of practically using the Systems Design and the Diamond model
Everyone who practices any type of design with an organisation must have some type of framework or approach to do what they do. Here we take what progressive Service, Business and Organisation designers are already using as a starting point - the Double Diamond.
|
Banathys original work created what he called Systemic Design, and was the foundation of the 1996 Double Diamond model. His work combines Systems Thinking with Design Thinking, and recognises that change in complex situations requires - A Multi-disciplinary approach.
|
|
There is a general recognition in the Service Design world, that we are moving from where it is today, moving closer to transforming more of the whole service itself. Taking UX and the application of Digital, to a wider scope involving the staff in co-creation, the culture, and management behaviour. We also strive to move further into the realm of the customers social world. The Triple Diamond here describes one way of achieving this.
Characteristics of this Systemic Design approach include;
I am taking this opportunity to reflect and write about the learning that I and many others have gained in the empirical practice of countless interventions using this framework since 2002. And going back to reflect on Banathy's original concepts. And looking at systemic design that has occurred in the past 80 years.
Characteristics of this Systemic Design approach include;
- Design the cause of the problem out of the system. The presenting problem, is almost always not a good place to start.
- Begin from understanding the whole, and understand all the aspects of an organisation and how they interact and influence each other.
- This is about integrating Design with other disciplines; business & management, complex change, systems thinking & complexity.
- Design the whole operational service as a complex social system, not just implement a Digital product.
- Co-design through those in the workplace.
- Co-design directly with the customer.
- Transformation rather than change.
I am taking this opportunity to reflect and write about the learning that I and many others have gained in the empirical practice of countless interventions using this framework since 2002. And going back to reflect on Banathy's original concepts. And looking at systemic design that has occurred in the past 80 years.
Systemic Design, what is it?
The concepts; traditional design vs systemic design.
Traditional approaches reduces the problem to manageable pieces and seeks solutions to each. Practitioners of this approach believe that solving the problem piece by piece ultimately will correct the larger issue this method aims to remedy.
The systems design approach, in sharp contrast, the seeks to understand a problem situation as a system of interconnected, interdependent, and interacting issues and to create a design as a system of interconnected, interdependent, interacting, and internally consistent solution ideas. Systems designers envision the entity to be designed as a whole, as one that is designed from the synthesis of the interaction of its parts. A systems view suggests that the essential quality of a part of a system resides in its relationship with, and contribution to, the whole. Systems design requires both coordination and integration. All parts need to be designed interactively, therefore simultaneously. This requires coordination. The requirement of designing for interdependency across all systems levels invites integration.
And now applying this concept to Service Design;
Traditional approaches reduces the problem to manageable pieces and seeks solutions to each. Practitioners of this approach believe that solving the problem piece by piece ultimately will correct the larger issue this method aims to remedy.
The systems design approach, in sharp contrast, the seeks to understand a problem situation as a system of interconnected, interdependent, and interacting issues and to create a design as a system of interconnected, interdependent, interacting, and internally consistent solution ideas. Systems designers envision the entity to be designed as a whole, as one that is designed from the synthesis of the interaction of its parts. A systems view suggests that the essential quality of a part of a system resides in its relationship with, and contribution to, the whole. Systems design requires both coordination and integration. All parts need to be designed interactively, therefore simultaneously. This requires coordination. The requirement of designing for interdependency across all systems levels invites integration.
And now applying this concept to Service Design;
|
Service Design
Deals with the behaviour of human beings, focusing on the aspects of the interaction between people who use and staff who provide a service. (we tend to focus on customer experience, interactions, and on applying Digital technology to enable this) We are focused on designing a specific outcome from the start, often through the innovation of a Digital product. |
To
|
Design of Services
Taking the customer needs and characteristics, and designing a service around this. We start with the interactions and move into the whole flow of work. Enabling the full human engagement and innovation of staff and managers, through new ways of working together. We are focused on assisting those in the work to design together, so a whole service reinvention emerges. |
|
It is this expansion of service design that has resulted in this triple diamond, as a process to achieve this
|
Evolution of service design
|
more about the development of designing services
|
Service design today, as brought through from the world of product design, is generally rooted in the interaction between the customer and the organisation. UX and CX play a central role. As designers, we link these together, to ensure that the organisation has an interface that is ideal for the customers. We create personas to help define the flexibility we need to design in, so that as wide a range of customers can delight in service. |
Designing a service is to take an existing service, and to challenge the whole way it works, the way the staff work together through its procedures, and the way that the managers manage. This is starting from the perspective of the customer and the business, and being prepared to challenge the norms, beliefs and mind-set that we currently hold about the way we work. Described as 'meta design' by the Design Council. |
|
This is about developing interfaces, often using Digital. We tend to ask questions like; - What is the problem you want us to solve, and we will solve it? - How can we optimise the experience for the customer, and how can you respond to their needs? - How shall you respond to our design that we come up with? - What is the Digital and other technology that will enable this? - How do we then put this product into the existing service? - How can we leverage technology for you to gain a competitive advance, or simply to keep up. |
This is about redefining the service away from the orthodox, this time starting from asking the question; What would our service look like if everything we do is focused directly only on what we need to do for customers? - What would it look like for the customer? - How should we organise ourselves? - What sort of engagement should we have between all of us? - How should teams work to allow the right sort of decisions to be made at the front line? - How should managers behave to allow the right sort of culture at work that enables freedom for innovative workplaces ? - How can we behave so that individual autonomy, development and a shared focus, allows for each of us to maximise our potential and maximise effectiveness. |
|
As Designers, we begin by being clear on the problem to solve, understanding customers, defining specific outcomes, collaborate with the staff, to come up with excellent products, which we then place into the existing service. Design Thinking puts the human in the center of attention, so we can create the best product and interaction with the staff of the service. |
As Designers, we begin by creating an intervention team, who we develop into undertaking the re-design process. This is led by the leadership team, who then experiment where a new way of working emerges. Design thinking puts the human in the centre of the design of the service, to to create new operations, and allows for a new service to emerge. |
Service Design is almost always only dealing with one part of the service. And there is nothing wrong with that. The problem lies when the designer focuses on analysing and re-designing when they are only looking at the customer, or citizen. Looking at them analytically, and using data.
The design of Services is about starting with the whole service, and everyone in it.
The design of Services is about starting with the whole service, and everyone in it.
The Diamond Model - how it works
Designing services is about creating different ways of thinking and working. However, the challenge is often not the ideas themselves, but the move from the old to the new. The sequence of working with a service to help them to change can be summarised in the knowledge that underpins this diagram, that takes the original Diamond design from Banathy, and the Design Council, and develops it into the triple diamond, plus one element. This page is written assuming the reader has some prior knowledge of this body of work.
And why three diamonds? This is because the experiment stage is not just about ideas, but about developing new ways of behaving and working that are distinct from that which exists in traditional organisations. And it is important that leaders understand and agree to this becoming part of the prototype, as it affects managers and leaders most of all - as they have to change their mindset and behaviours. If we are simply developing a standalone product, then the Double Diamond is sufficient. And as the Decision Council reminds us; the Double Diamond was never intended to be just two diamonds, but many, in different configurations
And why three diamonds? This is because the experiment stage is not just about ideas, but about developing new ways of behaving and working that are distinct from that which exists in traditional organisations. And it is important that leaders understand and agree to this becoming part of the prototype, as it affects managers and leaders most of all - as they have to change their mindset and behaviours. If we are simply developing a standalone product, then the Double Diamond is sufficient. And as the Decision Council reminds us; the Double Diamond was never intended to be just two diamonds, but many, in different configurations
Triple diamond service design methodology
the elements of the design
0. The senior leaders realise that their service needs a significant review, and they agree to set up an internal team, who they will work together with, to enquire regarding alternative ways of delivering the service(s) of the organisation.
1. Staff and some each part of the value flow, are brought together to from the redesign team. They work full time, and may include supervisors.
2. The design process begins with the team learning how to sense-make and apply methods to enable innovative experiments to highlight alternative ways of delivering the service.
3. The customer is directly involved in the design; first by sense-making what matters to customers. Then by engaging with individual customers to redesign their individual experience during the Experiment phase
4. The team, together with managers, develop a new collaborative working culture, where each member is valued in their own right. They learn how to work together, evaporating departmental barriers. And they discover what new roles and the level of decision-making the team should have.
5. Managers link up with the team, and learn together with them, creating alternative management behaviours. They gradually increase their role to lead the team in the Prototype stage.
6. Digital and other technology is connected to the team from the start, and they begin their development work when the prototype is being developed.
7. The whole end to end of the service is enabled by bringing in other stakeholders and connecting them into the team. This includes support departments of the organisation; like IT and strategy, as well as groups external to the organisation.
1. Staff and some each part of the value flow, are brought together to from the redesign team. They work full time, and may include supervisors.
2. The design process begins with the team learning how to sense-make and apply methods to enable innovative experiments to highlight alternative ways of delivering the service.
3. The customer is directly involved in the design; first by sense-making what matters to customers. Then by engaging with individual customers to redesign their individual experience during the Experiment phase
4. The team, together with managers, develop a new collaborative working culture, where each member is valued in their own right. They learn how to work together, evaporating departmental barriers. And they discover what new roles and the level of decision-making the team should have.
5. Managers link up with the team, and learn together with them, creating alternative management behaviours. They gradually increase their role to lead the team in the Prototype stage.
6. Digital and other technology is connected to the team from the start, and they begin their development work when the prototype is being developed.
7. The whole end to end of the service is enabled by bringing in other stakeholders and connecting them into the team. This includes support departments of the organisation; like IT and strategy, as well as groups external to the organisation.
Understand - Why do we need a change? This is about understanding how our current service works from our customers and staff perspective, and why we have designed it this way. This then reframes the original problem by defining a better service outcome.
- what we do today and how it impacts on customers and staff.
What this physically consists of are demand analysis, value flows, customer needs, staff impacts, measures.
- We also want to understand; why it is like this.
This is about the underlying structures that create the visible elements of the service.
Example - we own many rental properties; The problem - some of our tenants keep failing to pay rent on time, despite the penalties for doing this. We have tried to make it clear in telling tenants how determined we are, and have strengthened the wording in the letters we send out. We make it really easy for them to pay, and we have trained our staff to be polite. The problem still exists!
Understand - We listen to individual tenants, and learn why they are in arrears. We discover that most of them cannot pay on time, and our actions actually make their situation worse. Our way of working is not working for them. We also find that the management believe that enforcing the rules is the best way to achieve this. The outcome is an understanding that we aspire to design a better suited service.
- what we do today and how it impacts on customers and staff.
What this physically consists of are demand analysis, value flows, customer needs, staff impacts, measures.
- We also want to understand; why it is like this.
This is about the underlying structures that create the visible elements of the service.
Example - we own many rental properties; The problem - some of our tenants keep failing to pay rent on time, despite the penalties for doing this. We have tried to make it clear in telling tenants how determined we are, and have strengthened the wording in the letters we send out. We make it really easy for them to pay, and we have trained our staff to be polite. The problem still exists!
Understand - We listen to individual tenants, and learn why they are in arrears. We discover that most of them cannot pay on time, and our actions actually make their situation worse. Our way of working is not working for them. We also find that the management believe that enforcing the rules is the best way to achieve this. The outcome is an understanding that we aspire to design a better suited service.
more detail
The starting point is a recognition by leaders that the service needs to be redesigned, and they are often clear as to the nature of the problems. However, in this approach of designing a whole service, looking at the service as a system forces us to reframe the original problem; to transcend problems as originally stated into a better future service.
To achieve this reframing, we transcend our current frame of reference that traps us all in our own paradigm. Here, we do this by looking at the service, not from our, but from a customers perspective. Once we perceive this new perspective, the leaders can then decide if they wish to redesign the systemic causes - to effectively design out the reasons for what the problems exists in the first place. The outcome of this stage is a new service paradigm and better outcome.
What we examine are; the operational workflow, waste in the flow, measures, systemic barriers, working culture, staff interactions, management thinking and behaviours.
The enquiries during Understand consists of;
1. What is the Purpose/ Mission of our service from a customers perspective?
2. How well we achieve this purpose.
3. The reality of customers journeys, through the service, end to end. We look at sense-making what matters to them.
4. We map out the operational steps within the organisation, and the various departments that they go through.
4. Measure the true value of the service that our customers tell us they get from us compared to the Purpose.
5. Look at the inter-relationships between us, the communication flows, and how they affect our way of working.
6. Examine the role, measures and behaviour of managers and decision-makers in the service, and how these affect the behaviours of what we all do.
7. Link the learning to uncovering the mental models and thinking that underpins the managerial culture.
To achieve this reframing, we transcend our current frame of reference that traps us all in our own paradigm. Here, we do this by looking at the service, not from our, but from a customers perspective. Once we perceive this new perspective, the leaders can then decide if they wish to redesign the systemic causes - to effectively design out the reasons for what the problems exists in the first place. The outcome of this stage is a new service paradigm and better outcome.
What we examine are; the operational workflow, waste in the flow, measures, systemic barriers, working culture, staff interactions, management thinking and behaviours.
The enquiries during Understand consists of;
1. What is the Purpose/ Mission of our service from a customers perspective?
2. How well we achieve this purpose.
3. The reality of customers journeys, through the service, end to end. We look at sense-making what matters to them.
4. We map out the operational steps within the organisation, and the various departments that they go through.
4. Measure the true value of the service that our customers tell us they get from us compared to the Purpose.
5. Look at the inter-relationships between us, the communication flows, and how they affect our way of working.
6. Examine the role, measures and behaviour of managers and decision-makers in the service, and how these affect the behaviours of what we all do.
7. Link the learning to uncovering the mental models and thinking that underpins the managerial culture.
We use pictures and narratives of how the service currently works. We use story telling for complex cases.
|
We pull together a whole understanding of what our service is really like, and we compare this to how we thought we worked, and to how the customer expects us to work. This then allows us to decide how to proceed to the Experiment.
Concepts
Banathy, the design process and systemic design.
Ackoff and systemic design.
Systems thinking, reframing, iceberg model, SSM, and worldviews.
Argyris & Schon, espoused theories and theories in use.
Theory U, Otto Scharmer.
Norbert Werner, single and double loop learning.
Complexity, to understand sense-making and understanding complexity.
Team working; respect for people from Toyota.
Concepts
Banathy, the design process and systemic design.
Ackoff and systemic design.
Systems thinking, reframing, iceberg model, SSM, and worldviews.
Argyris & Schon, espoused theories and theories in use.
Theory U, Otto Scharmer.
Norbert Werner, single and double loop learning.
Complexity, to understand sense-making and understanding complexity.
Team working; respect for people from Toyota.
Ideation using Experiments - to learn how to solve the customers demands, using new systemic principles.
Exploring the desired future; exploring new possibilities with a systemic view
For the team to develop a design culture, working with customers through active experiments, a model of the new service. As a team we take individual demands and learn what happens when we deal with them in new ways. It's about disrupting how we work.
Example; we work with individual non-paying tenants, and understand them, and try out various ways of solving their problem; from threatening them, to simply listening to their life stories. We find that we can indeed improve the non-payment problems, as the % of those we deal with return back to a position of balance is far higher than in the old service. We discover five types of situations that cause non-payment, and most of the causes are not in our direct control. No wonder this is difficult.
Exploring the desired future; exploring new possibilities with a systemic view
For the team to develop a design culture, working with customers through active experiments, a model of the new service. As a team we take individual demands and learn what happens when we deal with them in new ways. It's about disrupting how we work.
Example; we work with individual non-paying tenants, and understand them, and try out various ways of solving their problem; from threatening them, to simply listening to their life stories. We find that we can indeed improve the non-payment problems, as the % of those we deal with return back to a position of balance is far higher than in the old service. We discover five types of situations that cause non-payment, and most of the causes are not in our direct control. No wonder this is difficult.
more detail
operating We start with a new set of principles, and work within a protected 'bubble' isolated from the rest of the service;
- We are here to learn, and making mistakes is a part of this. We actually have to learn how to learn!
- We start by focusing on what matters from each customer.
- We make decisions based on data and knowledge, not opinion.
- Deal with the demand entirely end to end.
- Work as a team.
We start taking a demand, we start by focusing on what matters from each customer and experimenting with solving their issues and provide value. We do this manually using paper to replicate any technology. We repeat this sprint, until we have tried out various ideas and ways of working. The co-creation with customers is achieved by directly working with each of them.
Everything we learn, and do, is put on the visible walls. We discuss lots, and begin to create new workflows.
We focus on what decisions we need to make, and how to do that. If we need expertise, we go outside the team and get it.
- We are here to learn, and making mistakes is a part of this. We actually have to learn how to learn!
- We start by focusing on what matters from each customer.
- We make decisions based on data and knowledge, not opinion.
- Deal with the demand entirely end to end.
- Work as a team.
We start taking a demand, we start by focusing on what matters from each customer and experimenting with solving their issues and provide value. We do this manually using paper to replicate any technology. We repeat this sprint, until we have tried out various ideas and ways of working. The co-creation with customers is achieved by directly working with each of them.
Everything we learn, and do, is put on the visible walls. We discuss lots, and begin to create new workflows.
We focus on what decisions we need to make, and how to do that. If we need expertise, we go outside the team and get it.
learning how to design
The team develop;
1. A new way of thinking.
2. The ability to model design and systems.
3. Design concepts and principles.
4. The means and method of design and systems thinking.
1. A new way of thinking.
2. The ability to model design and systems.
3. Design concepts and principles.
4. The means and method of design and systems thinking.
When we have learned enough, we pull all our ideas together, to demonstrate the learning we obtained. This is then reviewed and a future prototype design now emerges, which is adjusted to align with the reality of the organisation and its constraints. The team also demonstrate a new way of working, and engaging that will affect the whole organisation structure and culture. It will require new ways of management. Therefore this decision point alloys leaders to understand and lead this change themselves.
Concepts
Learning as a design process.
Self exploration of our paradigms, thinking and principles.
Constancy of purpose.
Team building with a common purpose, in a safe space.
Toyota, iterative continuous improvement as a core way of thinking.
Focus on people as individuals nad the core of the organisation.
Dan Pink, development of roles based on autonomy, mastery, and purpose.
Control with, rather than control over.
Concepts
Learning as a design process.
Self exploration of our paradigms, thinking and principles.
Constancy of purpose.
Team building with a common purpose, in a safe space.
Toyota, iterative continuous improvement as a core way of thinking.
Focus on people as individuals nad the core of the organisation.
Dan Pink, development of roles based on autonomy, mastery, and purpose.
Control with, rather than control over.
Prototype - From having trialled the new operational workflow, we now expand on this and develop a working Minimum Viable Service;
- model the new service and how it impacts on customers and staff
Here we apply what we learned with the experiments, to create an operational working team, and we design in Digital infrastructure. We do this by taking real demands involving all the stakeholders.
Example; we design a mechanism where we understand the cause of non-payment of the tenant at the earliest point. We then work with them, depending on the cause, to assist them with their issues, possibly using external charities, and the local government for support. We use new measures and find that our non-payment total value halves with those we tried this with.
- model the new service and how it impacts on customers and staff
Here we apply what we learned with the experiments, to create an operational working team, and we design in Digital infrastructure. We do this by taking real demands involving all the stakeholders.
Example; we design a mechanism where we understand the cause of non-payment of the tenant at the earliest point. We then work with them, depending on the cause, to assist them with their issues, possibly using external charities, and the local government for support. We use new measures and find that our non-payment total value halves with those we tried this with.
more detail
The prototype builds on the experimentation learning, and we develop a team using the new operational model . And we begin to operate with real customer demands.
New measures are created, and these are put to use to learn with the team and managers together.
We develop the new ways of working together and new forms of information flows, that then creates a new working culture. This resembles a cross-functional team that can decide some operational decisions themselves.
Finally, the new forms, Digital infrastructure, and other aspects that are needed for the successful operations are created into the new working prototype.
New measures are created, and these are put to use to learn with the team and managers together.
We develop the new ways of working together and new forms of information flows, that then creates a new working culture. This resembles a cross-functional team that can decide some operational decisions themselves.
Finally, the new forms, Digital infrastructure, and other aspects that are needed for the successful operations are created into the new working prototype.
The result is a small team taking demand in a new way. This is the beginning of the operations of the new service.
|
Transition - the new service
Transitions the Prototype into the new service; the new service We make it the normal way of working - by expanding the prototype, finalising Digital infrastructure, until it becomes the complete new service. Here we begin to take people from the old service, and pull them carefully into the new team. Example; We now work with tenants with whatever problems they have, and the team co-locates staff from several departments into there same space . We use visits to tenants as well as phone calls.. We transfer all the staff to this new way of working, and work with stakeholders to develop different working relationships. Over time we monitor the new measures and share this knowledge to all across the system. Over two years this problem reduces by 70%. more detail
The prototype is complete, and the task is now to develop the redesigned service. Digital and other infrastructure is developed and completed. To transfer staff, a member of staff from the 'old' service, is pulled into the new prototype, and they are trained to work in the new way by their colleagues. As staff are added, the size of the old way of working reduces as the new redesign increases. The original team who were in the prototype will continue to lead to improve the service, and develop a new culture of continuous improvement. The new measures are fully working, with the service manager now taking full ownership of the service. The result is a new redesigned service, with a new set of operating principles. |
The Definition of Systemic Service Design - the Principles
There are now a whole set of new ways of undertaking Systemic Change, that are quite different from the traditional systematic approaches; where change is manufactured in a room and imposed from above. The new approaches to Change come from alternative sets of principles. Forget the diamond models for a moment; absorb the universal principles of design that are the underlying laws that cut across the various design approaches.
A version, in the table, underpins the triple diamond model, and is a more important way of defining systemic service design. Understand and follow these principles, and you will be undertaking Systemic change or transformation.
A version, in the table, underpins the triple diamond model, and is a more important way of defining systemic service design. Understand and follow these principles, and you will be undertaking Systemic change or transformation.
The fundamentals - what is a good service?
We must know the answer to What is a good service, or what is the point of claiming to design services? This has been a question that has dogged many for decades. However, I find it important to put aside our own opinions, and consider that the answer to this question:
Ask the customer that question - Understanding from the customer drives how we design the flows of the service.
Explore that question with the people working in the service - Understanding from the staff drives how it works together.
Whatever answers that emerge and what matters to them, will be the foundation of the definition of what the 'measures' should be focusing on.
I would like to define measures here as, not as numbers to be analysed, but the activity of 'how we understand and learn'.
Both areas of measures described above; customer and staff, are then are used to focus the direction of the design of the service.
If you look at the example at the bottom of this page, then you will see this in action.
Ask the customer that question - Understanding from the customer drives how we design the flows of the service.
Explore that question with the people working in the service - Understanding from the staff drives how it works together.
Whatever answers that emerge and what matters to them, will be the foundation of the definition of what the 'measures' should be focusing on.
I would like to define measures here as, not as numbers to be analysed, but the activity of 'how we understand and learn'.
Both areas of measures described above; customer and staff, are then are used to focus the direction of the design of the service.
If you look at the example at the bottom of this page, then you will see this in action.
The double & triple diamond in reality
The working method through the triple diamond are derived from the idea of Holistic, systemic and design concepts, that is a far cry from the traditional reductionist (waterfall) principles of change as we have known it in organisations popular over the past decades. We have to recognise that with any aspect of change, whether it is Digital, or operational, that any change in one will affect all others; and that included the decision-makers. Their understanding and mindset alters as they progress through the triple diamond.
The design process is not the diagram, but the body of knowledge behind the diagram. For any change designer facing whole service complex change, understanding how all the elements fit together can be a daunting prospect. And various techniques and methods have developed over time that help us to achieve success. For instance, we now avoid the approach of the past where we would drop a new design on the lap of the service managers in the hope that they will then adopt our carefully crafted design.
- Complexity is inherent in change with regards to the employees; how they communicate, change, behave and work together.
- Complexity may be inherent in the nature of the service itself, particularly in the public sector.
As designers, we now understand that we should work together with the staff from the service. To co-create with them, creating the space for change with the service managers. The outcomes are produced by the activities of the change team as they innovate and decide on the path to take in their design. I have seen the power when trust the team to apply the design principles, and develop the designs that are right for them, in their context.
The design process is not the diagram, but the body of knowledge behind the diagram. For any change designer facing whole service complex change, understanding how all the elements fit together can be a daunting prospect. And various techniques and methods have developed over time that help us to achieve success. For instance, we now avoid the approach of the past where we would drop a new design on the lap of the service managers in the hope that they will then adopt our carefully crafted design.
- Complexity is inherent in change with regards to the employees; how they communicate, change, behave and work together.
- Complexity may be inherent in the nature of the service itself, particularly in the public sector.
As designers, we now understand that we should work together with the staff from the service. To co-create with them, creating the space for change with the service managers. The outcomes are produced by the activities of the change team as they innovate and decide on the path to take in their design. I have seen the power when trust the team to apply the design principles, and develop the designs that are right for them, in their context.
It is a model of a framework, a systemic grouping of concepts
This framework, whose core is Design and Systems Thinking, is a purposeful and creative decision oriented disciplined enquiry. Its function is to help us to redesign by exploring, understanding and learning; exploring ourselves and the system we are designing. An organisation is a people system (complex adaptive system), as much as it is a physical operational construct.
The use of the framework incorporates both of these areas of the service;
The use of the framework incorporates both of these areas of the service;
|
The people
|
Examine why we (decision-makers, employees) have developed the service to work in the way it currently does. To understand our paradigms and ways of relating to each other. And to challenge ourselves to expand our thinking away from the reductionist and analytical, towards the systemic, holistic and relational.
|
|
The service
|
The operations flow, departments, structures, technology, and data. Re-examining the whole service or organisation from systemic perspectives that give us holistic understanding of how it all works together.
|
background
The Double Diamond from the Design Council was put together to codify a design process for the new discipline of Service Design. Although doing that as a starting point might be helpful, remaining with this model may prevent us from delving into greater understanding and development of designing services. We can see this inward focus happening in the discipline, when we look at the continuation of focus on Digital products. This page is to help show that if we go back to examine the work of some of those who developed it, and to add in experience gained in the last two decades, how the Double Diamond can be used more widely in service re-design.
Banathy created a design process suited to complex situations, and this is one of the frameworks he developed. He included concepts from Ackoff - mission or collective purpose, and Checklands root definitions and 'Weltanschauungen' or worldview. This is detailed in Designing Social Systems in a Changing World, which I would highly recommend for anyone interested in further study.
Also contributing to this is Ritter and Webber's wicked problems and Ackoff's messes, which guide us to avoid rational problem solving in complex change. Overall the concepts and practice described by Banathy come from a myriad of places of practice of design and innovation through the ages.
John Seddon and the Vanguard Methodology provides a base that describes this approach.
It is less about being seen as a systematic process, rather than a systemic one.
Banathy created a design process suited to complex situations, and this is one of the frameworks he developed. He included concepts from Ackoff - mission or collective purpose, and Checklands root definitions and 'Weltanschauungen' or worldview. This is detailed in Designing Social Systems in a Changing World, which I would highly recommend for anyone interested in further study.
Also contributing to this is Ritter and Webber's wicked problems and Ackoff's messes, which guide us to avoid rational problem solving in complex change. Overall the concepts and practice described by Banathy come from a myriad of places of practice of design and innovation through the ages.
John Seddon and the Vanguard Methodology provides a base that describes this approach.
It is less about being seen as a systematic process, rather than a systemic one.
The application of the Triple Diamond
This framework is conceptual in that is represents part of a whole body of knowledge. Unless being used to guide a beginner, this 'model' is never a recipe or a tool, despite the fact that it appears linear. It is actually a methodology - a collection of methods.
The real path taken, depends on the context, and it is about applying the concepts only with what is relevant for the application in hand. For instance in complex contexts, the path taken is often oscillating backwards and forwards between the various stages. We constantly integrate information, knowledge, insights gained, and the findings of testing into emerging design solutions. This process is not linear, sequential, or systematic. Design manifests dynamic inter- action between feedback and feedforward, reflection and creation, and di- vergence and convergence. This dynamic process goes on until we develop confidence in the viability of one of the solution alternatives.
And surely the role of the interventionist is to both guide those undertaking this activity, the discipline of the design process, and to offer the methods and concepts to them.
The point of whether or not it is the double or triple loop diagram, is never the point. The recursion happens as many times as is necessary. And the number of decision-points happen when they are required.
The real path taken, depends on the context, and it is about applying the concepts only with what is relevant for the application in hand. For instance in complex contexts, the path taken is often oscillating backwards and forwards between the various stages. We constantly integrate information, knowledge, insights gained, and the findings of testing into emerging design solutions. This process is not linear, sequential, or systematic. Design manifests dynamic inter- action between feedback and feedforward, reflection and creation, and di- vergence and convergence. This dynamic process goes on until we develop confidence in the viability of one of the solution alternatives.
And surely the role of the interventionist is to both guide those undertaking this activity, the discipline of the design process, and to offer the methods and concepts to them.
The point of whether or not it is the double or triple loop diagram, is never the point. The recursion happens as many times as is necessary. And the number of decision-points happen when they are required.
|
Sometimes, the stages may overlap. We may recursively go back, and re-examine past stages. Continuous interaction between definitions and outcomes.
|
|
|
And other times, we might miss out a stage! I did this when we had to respond rapidly to lockdown, and achieve outcomes in a week
|
|
|
The team themselves, once they have completed one full iteration, will have found that they apply this without thinking about it, and continue to refine the design of their service moving forwards on their own; continuous improvement, and adaptability to change.
|
|
Managers engagement & the decision points
If we see Design as a disciplined, decision-oriented enquiry, then the places where the diamonds converge and the movement shifts from one to the other, is a most important step. There are two key activities that happen here;
1. The team have to focus their attention to pulling together and summarising their learning.
2. The decision-makers, who have already been connected to the work, spend two hours with the team and all the artefacts. The team help to describe and use narrative and story-telling to convey what they have done, and learned. They then explore what the implications for this work are. One of my rules is that written reports of the teams output must not created, decision-makers have to visit and engage directly with the team.
However, managers at all levels will have engaged with the team during the previous sections, therefore this decision point is not a surprise.
But ultimately, guiding the work and making decisions is not a one-off activity. It is end-to-end and occurring throughout, active and passively. That is why it is never one decision that defines but rather a chain of decisions. And we are always deciding.
1. The team have to focus their attention to pulling together and summarising their learning.
2. The decision-makers, who have already been connected to the work, spend two hours with the team and all the artefacts. The team help to describe and use narrative and story-telling to convey what they have done, and learned. They then explore what the implications for this work are. One of my rules is that written reports of the teams output must not created, decision-makers have to visit and engage directly with the team.
However, managers at all levels will have engaged with the team during the previous sections, therefore this decision point is not a surprise.
But ultimately, guiding the work and making decisions is not a one-off activity. It is end-to-end and occurring throughout, active and passively. That is why it is never one decision that defines but rather a chain of decisions. And we are always deciding.
Public sector design & GDS
This approach is valid for both the private and public sectors, but he greatest error to be made in public sector service design, is to simply bring in private sector design and apply it without modification. This is an important difference that any designer has to recognise, and this is based around the concept of Complexity. In the public sector we do have some customers that want a service, but in the majority of cases we have citizens who need something to help them in their lives.
We can categorise two types of services;
- Transactional services which are logical and standard - like online shopping. Digital through GDS (Government Digital Service) has been highly successful as an enabler.
- Complex services which include non-logical, are unlikely to be predictable, and have multiple links with other aspects of peoples lives. The focus of sensemaking and service delivery is through personal engagement and working with citizens.
When we consider complex services, we have to incorporate the design to the entirety of the interactions with citizens, and this almost always includes multiple interactions with staff. Therefore Digital has go be designed in hand in hand with staff to citizen interaction. And for those who have experienced it, the UK public sector has made some spectacular simplifications in its implementation of Digital in local government;
1. Digital by default has standardised service journeys for citizens that has resulted in the further distancing of services and citizens.
2. Universal Credit is a nationwide service, consisting of various services, that is inappropriate in dealing with citizens who have complex issues. The cost to the nation has been to increase poverty and difficulty for those who are most in need. And the cost in the operation of this service is far higher than it should be. Simply due to the failure to understand complexity.
We can categorise two types of services;
- Transactional services which are logical and standard - like online shopping. Digital through GDS (Government Digital Service) has been highly successful as an enabler.
- Complex services which include non-logical, are unlikely to be predictable, and have multiple links with other aspects of peoples lives. The focus of sensemaking and service delivery is through personal engagement and working with citizens.
When we consider complex services, we have to incorporate the design to the entirety of the interactions with citizens, and this almost always includes multiple interactions with staff. Therefore Digital has go be designed in hand in hand with staff to citizen interaction. And for those who have experienced it, the UK public sector has made some spectacular simplifications in its implementation of Digital in local government;
1. Digital by default has standardised service journeys for citizens that has resulted in the further distancing of services and citizens.
2. Universal Credit is a nationwide service, consisting of various services, that is inappropriate in dealing with citizens who have complex issues. The cost to the nation has been to increase poverty and difficulty for those who are most in need. And the cost in the operation of this service is far higher than it should be. Simply due to the failure to understand complexity.
more Detail
In the UK at least public sector digital service design has been highly successful in transactional services, like passports and driving licenses. We also have a initiatives like - Digital by Default. However, as we move towards more people based services, the principles that we have followed need to be modified. The worst thing we can do when we design public services, is to impose the wrong approach.
An example - pushing demand into digital front-ends in local government councils, has increased the alienation of citizens with getting support, as engaging with a person has become more difficult or impossible. The most obvious example of this is Universal Credit, which has pulled a raft of citizens into greater distress across the country.
An example - pushing demand into digital front-ends in local government councils, has increased the alienation of citizens with getting support, as engaging with a person has become more difficult or impossible. The most obvious example of this is Universal Credit, which has pulled a raft of citizens into greater distress across the country.
We have found that Complex person-centred services have to have certain characteristics:
1. They must engage with citizens, not just at the start, but through the journey of the service.
2. It is often not about 'delivering' a service, but more of assisting with something.
3. The service delivery often follows a different path for each citizen demand.
4. The information used in the service, is often behavioural, every-changing, multi-faceted. It often cannot be formed into data, but must remain in a systemic narrative.
1. They must engage with citizens, not just at the start, but through the journey of the service.
2. It is often not about 'delivering' a service, but more of assisting with something.
3. The service delivery often follows a different path for each citizen demand.
4. The information used in the service, is often behavioural, every-changing, multi-faceted. It often cannot be formed into data, but must remain in a systemic narrative.
Public sector design characteristics - Sabine Junginger
There is another aspect to this, and that is the relationship between the designer, organisation, and the citizen. Far more involved than the private sector. Bringing in a private sector paradigm as a designer, may be focused in the top left hand. In reality, a Good Service is obtained in the bottom right corner. And it is the knowledge of the Diamond process, that can take us there.
Moving from the top left, to the bottom right
A case study of the use of the triple diamond
Here is an example from a Local Government service - Environmental health. They inspect food establishments to ensure they are safe. It demonstrates how the steps of the triple diamond work together, and the activities and artefacts from one example. Although this is a non-Digital Service Design example, this is applicable to Digital Service Design.
