Using creative problem solving techniques to improve intuition-based decision making of mid to low level government officials.
THE PARADOX OF CENTRALIZATION AND DECENTRALIZATION
Ever since mankind has practiced forms of politics and governance, it has had to deal with the implications of the centralized model. The most notable example being the Roman Empire, which was governed from Rome. Before all their successes, the Romans did not have to cope with a large administration. As their empire grew, the existing city governance model had to change as well. The Romans chose to keep the center of decision making in Rome and often distributed other tasks over the generals that were responsible for parts of the empire. This caused the generals to grow very powerful and make their own decisions, as they often had a large army behind them. We can somehow state, that the Roman empire showed the very first signs of bottom-up and top-down processes.
In today’s world, governments still deal with these processes and find ways to predict how to best use them. As of recent, most notably in Europe, the discussion has arose to what extent we should design centralized governance models. Following the European Union (EU) parliamentary elections (2014) this past May, anti-EU parties made significant gains. Despite all these anti-EU claims, it is not expected that the policy trend will be impacted. On a domestic level, however, these claims are causing larger and larger disillusions about the purpose of the EU.
THE STRATEGIC VALUE OF DESIGN IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
The value of design in the public domain has recently become a more discussed topic among actors and researchers. However, the body of knowledge is still not as large as that of architecture and urban planning for example. After World War II, these practices have developed at a rapid pace as there was an immediate need to rebuild and develop cities (Cipolla, 1972). For design, the role it can play within the public domain has not been as clear. With the current attention shifting towards service design, we have seen more projects in the public domain. An example of this is the designing out crime project in Sydney (2014), which was supported by the City Counsil. There has also been an increase in opinionates whom are each searching for their own definitions and interpretations.
“Services traditionally delivered by the public sector, consider the users to be passive recipients. What happens if we imagine a new generation of public services attuned to active and collaborative citizens?”
“I like the idea of balancing the push and the pull very much. Especially in changing lifestyles. We are very good at designing the carrot and the stick but what we especially need is to design the integration.”
“I am very interested in how issues like trust and intimacy happen. How can we design for promoting this interpersonal, relational qualities? In the end this means that social innovation is very much about relational services.”
Some of the issues that appear from these quotes are related to collaboration, integration and relational services. A human-centered approach is debated, however little is said about the design of existing decision making processes. To some extent, we feel that therefore reframing techniques have received considerable attention. Careful and deliberate innovation of the existing decision making is something reframing is not aiming to do.
REMBRANDT is connecting individuals in society with his legacy by transforming everlasting values in a graciously framed vision.
RMBRND supports, translates and integrates abstract policy with mid to low level government, policy makers and actors to add value by supplementing empathy to a predominantly rational approach for the individual, in order to create products or services for the society as a whole.
OUR KEY ACTIVITIES – How we help you get there
– Supporting existing activities and embedding empathy
– Translating existing and new solutions for societal needs
– Implementing the solutions with longevity in mind
Whereas reframing operates in a space focused on the de-establishment of current decision making models, the biggest struggles seem to appear somewhere in between. Policy makers and actors in mid to low level governments have to implement policy while also coming up with new, local policy. They are constantly playing in a field where rationality dictates intuition, since communication processes in a centralized model are structured and well-defined (Calabretta, Gemser & Wijnberg, 2014). In order to create local value, these actors should have the power to shift between rationality and intuition (Calabretta et al., 2014). RMBRND supports, translates and integrates abstract policy with mid to low level government, policy makers and actors to add value by supplementing empathy to a predominantly rational approach for the individual, in order to create products or services for the society as a whole.
SOURCES and INSPIRATION
Calabretta, G., Gemser , G., Wijnberg, N.M., Hekkert, P.M. (2014). Collaborating with design consultancy firms for effective strategic decision-making in new product development. Retrieved on June 17, 2014 from: http://repository.tudelft.nl/view/ir/uuid:df02633d-582e-4213-bdc1-cf43426205d2/
Calabretta, G., Gemser , G., Wijnberg (2014). The interplay between rationality and intuition in innovation decision-making: a study of practices.
Cipolla, C. M. (1972). The Diffusion of Innovations in Early Modern Europe.Comparative Studies in Society and History, 14(01), 46-52.
Cipolla, C., & Manzini, E. (2009). Relational services. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 22(1), 45-50.
Designing out crime (2014). Retrieved on June 17, 2014 from: http://www.designingoutcrime.com
EU elections (2014). Retrieved on June 17, 2014 from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/deanpopplewell/2014/05/26/euro-steady-as-anti-eu-parties-rock-elections/
Jégou, F. (2012). On from the design of public services to the design of public policies. Parsons Desis Lab. Retrieved on June 17, 2014 from http://vimeo.com/41814874
Manzini, E. (2009). New design knowledge. Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy – 2008 Elsevier Ltd. – Design studies, 30(1), 4-12.