Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
in Northern Ireland:
APPLYING A SOCIAL INNOVATION LENS
1.0
Acknowledgements 04
2.0
About the Authors 04
4.0 Summary 06
5.1 Background
Bibliography 26
Appendices: 27
ORGANISATION NAME
Active Communities Network Mark Copeland
An Munia Tober Eamonn Donnelly Patricia Flanagan
Ashton Community Trust/ Fablabs Adam Wallace Patricia works with Work West as the
Belfast City Council Jonathan Twinem / Sinead O’Regan lead on all design thinking initiatives and
Belfast Health & Social Care Trust Yvonne Cowan has over 25 years’ experience working in
Belfast Met Heather Hedley/ Mary Coffey the Enterprise and Education sectors in
Northern Ireland. Since a visit to Stanford
Bright Owl Solutions Alison McCaw
University in 2010 Patricia has worked
Bryson Charitable Group John McMullan
exclusively in Design Thinking and Creative
Department for the Economy Roisin Sloan Problem Solving. Her primary focus is
Department for the Economy (ESF) Fiona White on developing design-thinking/creative
Department for the Economy (United Youth) Anne McCready problem solving approaches to stimulate
ECL Elaine Taggart / Gerard Fox innovation. Patricia is a specialist facilitator
Fermanagh Trust Lauri McCusker and frequently delivers to school pupils,
students, teaching staff, businesses and the
Footprints Womens Centre Gillian Gibson
third sector.
Gems Aileen Graham
Include Youth (Belfast) Paddy Mooney
Leafair Karyn Cunningham
NEETS forum Lorraine Boyd
North Down Community Network Louise Little
North West Migrant Forum Louise Moorhead
North West Regional College Stephen Sheridan
Now Group Pauline Fitzsimmons
Okey Dokey design Joe Conere
Princes Trust (Belfast) Orla Major Michelle Dolan
As ‘Design Thinc-er in residence’ at Work
Princes Trust (North West) Sharon Doherty
West, Michelle is responsible for the
Resurgam Trust Denis Paisley co-delivery of design thinking workshops
Sandy Row Community Forum Glenda Davies and the development of the materials
School Principal Tom Armstrong used in the ‘thinc process’. Her BA in
Skills 2020 Oonagh Quigg Visual Communication provides her with a
Springboard Angila Chada grounding in creative arts and theory. She
worked in creative media prior to assuming
Springvale Learning Mary McGurk
a role within the education sector which
Start 360 Anne Marie McClure
enabled her to gain an insight into the
Strabane Enterprise Agency Christina Mullen everyday experiences of students within the
TEAM programme Sean Curran education system. Her recent completion
The 4 R’s Joe Brolly of an MA in Social Anthropology provided
Unltd Nuala Smyth her with the opportunity to develop critical
USEL (Belfast) Bill Atkinson/ Karen Gilgunn research skills.
USEL (North West) Anne Marie O’Hara
Voypic Vivian McConvey
West Belfast Partnership Board Louise Brennan
Whistle Project Teresa Dunlop
Youth Action Emma Johnston
1 to provide a detailed overview of how 2 to make visible the successes and 3 to share the ideas generated through
a design thinking process was applied challenges experienced along this the process as a ‘call to action’
for the first time in Northern Ireland in journey.
a ‘Knowledge Exchange Programme’
This report details how organisations based in Northern Ireland collaborated, assessed and
reimagined the ways in which they support 16-18 year olds into employment. It also highlights
the key findings and the prototyped ideas developed by teams of committed providers who
support young people in the employability sector. It is fundamentally a ‘call to action’.
Throughout the programme the Work West ‘thinc’ process was used with
the following thinking principles introduced and reiterated frequently:
1. Be open to developing a new mindset
2. Defer judgement and support your team mates
3. Listen and learn
4. Be present both physically and mentally
5. Say ‘yes and’
6. Engage both divergent and convergent thinking
7. Empathise with the end user
Workshop 1: Introducing a New Workshop 3: Define the Challenge Workshop 5: Further Ideation and
Way of Thinking Concepts
Between workshops two and three an
Teams were facilitated to share their online tool to profile thinking preferences Workshop five was a further ‘dive’ into
individual insights and knowledge as (FourSight) was sent to participants. The ideation using creative thinking exercises
experts on the challenge. Participants were profiles were shared with the groups and the and additional ideation tools. Teams utilised
introduced to a methodology for gathering teams were restructured. A visual journey an evaluation tool to select their strongest
insights in the field which focused to a was developed for each cohort and the ideas to take to the next stage. Convergent
large extent on encouraging story-telling, cohorts identified thirteen key themes. thinking tools were then introduced to
listening, eliciting feelings and emotions Each team was allocated themes and asked help refine, build and present their
and completely avoided ‘closed’ questions. to share their understanding of how this chosen concept(s).
theme impacted on the young people.
Teams generated a long list of potentially
actionable ‘How Might We’ statements
Workshop 2: Sharing Insights Workshop 6: Storyboard and
(hereafter referred to as ‘HMW’ statements).
Prototype
The time between workshops one and
two was two weeks to allow participants Teams selected and agreed their strongest
to gather insights. Participants shared Workshop 4: Ideation concept and completed a storyboard. They
their insights from their field research and then produced a prototype i.e. a basic, scaled
created a ‘wall of stories’ from those they The workshop began by reviewing all the down version of the product or service built
had spoken to. They analysed their insights ‘HMW’ statements with participants then using inexpensive materials. Participants were
and observations, identified core themes voting for the statements which they had encouraged to test their proposed solutions
and ‘pain points’ that were emerging. a passion to take forward and ideate on with their end users.
to create imaginative solutions. In the
ideation phase teams generated ideas using
divergent thinking and the cohorts were
encouraged to consider ‘wild ideas’ and Workshop 7: Knowledge Exchange
then find the best ways to either solve or
Workshop seven provided the first
‘get around’ the problem.
opportunity for the promotion of knowledge
exchange across the two cohorts and for
them to meet and effectively ‘show and tell’.
Teams were reformed and the event offered
a unique opportunity for both groups to
share their solutions and obtain feedback
from their peers. Founder of MADLUG,
Dave Linton, was invited as a guest speaker
to share his journey.
What is working/ has worked well? What is not working? How might we do things differently?
• Development of a strong personal • Focus in government tenders on the • More communication between
relationship between client and mentor output not the outcome. funders to avoid duplication.
Commission for outcomes
• Community based support followed • Duplication of provision
by individual tailored support • Consider a new common system used
• Organisations have a desire to change to grade job readiness of the young
• Use of sport or other specialist interest how and what they deliver. Conflicted person to show need and progression.
areas to engage 16-18 year olds between bidding for contracts that
fail to meet the needs of the user and • Co-design of all programmes with
• Use of local role models telling their sustaining their organisation. providers and users.
stories particularly if similar challenges
were faced. • Frustration at the criteria and • Ensure there is one key contact with
bureaucracy of the funding the young person who is consistent
• Programmes are working well if the environment. Too limited to provide throughout their journey enabling the
mentor assigned is appropriately long term tailored support that would development of trust.
skilled e.g different skills are required make a real difference.
for youth work and employability. • Ensure that employers are engaged in
• There is so much competition relation to employability initiatives
between providers which at times
makes collaboration challenging and • Consideration should be given to
leads to mistrust. rolling out the supported employment
model of support
• Can be mistrust between youth
work focused organisations and • Change how schools might prepare
employability focused organisations young people for ‘real life’ and work.
Focus delivery on the client
• Learning environment not suited to
young people which leads to drop-out.
Based on discussions with Consultees suggested that secondary for funders, providers and users to co-
providers through the mapping schools could provide more practical design interventions that will meet the
support in relation to preparing young needs of 16-18 year olds. It is essential
exercise it became clear that people for work and life outside the that providers employ staff who clearly
challenges start to emerge statutory education system. Once a sixteen understand the challenges facing ‘hard to
when children are eleven years year old leaves school they often end up reach’ young people. Appropriate mentors
old following their transition to in a learning environment that does not should be skilled and deployed to ensure
secondary education. meet their needs. There is a requirement they match the needs of the clients.
As the graph shows, the combined cohorts In addition to this, a visual journey map was
display a high preference for clarification created for both cohorts which reflected the
and implementation but a low preference key insights gathered and also highlighted
for ideation. Ideation is essential for the the common threads across Belfast and Derry.
generation of new and innovative solutions.
6. Employability 7. School experience 8. Attitudes to work 9. Where are the 10. Benefits trap
experience jobs?
Teams were allocated themes on which they generated ‘How Might We (HMW)’
statements. They worked collectively using divergent thinking to consider the themes
from a range of perspectives, to reflect on the insights they had gathered in order to fully
understand the challenges young people were facing and to distill the overarching problems
into actionable ‘HMW’ statements which were ripe for new thinking.
• Ensure every young person has a positive role model within their life?
• Encourage all providers of services to 16-18 year olds to collaborate to find one solution?
• Work with young people to support them in recognising their own self- worth and values?
• Empower young people to be independent and resilient?
3. Role model
• Educate young people on the benefits of working and earning money (wages vs benefits)?
• Break the cycle of benefits dependency?
• Ensure that young people start on the right training path, ‘long term vision’?
• Work together to create a service network that puts young people first?
• Resource organisations supporting young people better?
• Intervene earlier?
12. Infrastructure
4
Workshop 4: Ideation
(Divergent Thinking)
Ideation is the creative process
of generating, developing and
communicating new ideas. This
is known as divergent thinking. It
favours novelty and wild ideas and
is essential for meaningful ideation
to take place. As the majority of FourSight creative profile:
participants did not present a
‘thinking’ preference for ‘ideation’
this workshop commenced with
numerous exercises to help and
encourage participants to engage
with this form of thinking.
HMW work with young people to Hobby mentor / identify hobbies first:build courses around them/
support them in recognising their own midnight learning club/ earn as you learn £40 for full weeks work/
self worth and values? meet them,ask them, listen to them, respond/ holistic approach from
primary school up/ overseas travel/ conscription: a month away from
NI/overseas travel/ bring back play/ project based learning/ allocate a
1. Confidence & significant other thoughout school/ confidence awards for class clowns/
motivation interaction with community groups/ £25,000 for ‘jobs we don’t want to
do’/ change the language/ ‘Good job’ Friday awards
HMW address access to Get the mothers back to education/ parent , buddy mentor system/
opportunities? learning dreams/ move away from term NEET/ informal learning
environments/ remove stigma
2. Social &
community
influence
HMW tailor individual learning? Map the reality of the system without penalties/ teachers should swap
schools (cream no longer floating to the top)/ communicate in first
HMW ensure equal opportunities
names only/ enhance empathy by personalising experience/ school
within schools?
becomes community hub
7. School HMW build on each child’s strengths?
experience
HMW look to influence our
education system?
‘HMW design a purposeful catch-up New system: education compulsory until 19/ paid –to-catch-up scheme/
qualification pathway after leaving Leaving Certificate ROI style/ free education to 19/ careers mentor/
formal school’? remove financial incentives/ matching kids to teaching styles/ confidence
building: life coaching as part of training/ focus on the 3 R’s/kids design
‘HMW simplify the provision of the system/ master apprenticeships for new industries/ wider curriculum:
9. The training training in NI?’ practical life skills module /virtual university in the community
system
‘HMW have education and training Delivery: extended school hours/ teachers to have youth work
driven by demand and not by funding qualifications/ teachers rap their classes/ schools as a community
availability?’ resource/ creative learning programmes/ trainee wage paid by the
government/ teachers should only teach for a few years/ change value
base: education more beneficial than the dole
Key Observations • Although the teams were challenged • The graphic above shows the wide range
throughout the ideation session, those of ideas which varied from ‘conscription
• There was a low attendance rate at the present worked hard to produce a strong away from Northern Ireland’ to getting
fourth workshop. This created difficulty assortment of ideas to carry into the next parents back to education.
for attendees as in order to generate the ideation session
volume of ideas that was required in the
ideation phase full attendance was crucial
6
Workshop 6: Storyboard and
Prototype
In workshop 6, teams constructed
a storyboard and prototype of
their concept. This prototyping
exercise encouraged participants
to produce a visual of their concept
with inexpensive materials- literally
‘giving their mind a hand’. The
prototype creates a space between
the team and the user and, because
it depersonalizes the idea, it allows
teams to constructively receive
feedback.
Key Observations • This fast paced, hands on session • Conscious of a new way of working it
taught the participants the value of took some participants time to become
• Through storyboarding, prototyping and
rapid experimentation and highlighted the comfortable in the prototyping phase. In
presenting it was observed that teams
iterative nature of the design future programmes it may be beneficial
gained clarity and confidence in their
thinking process to introduce a prototyping exercise at an
concepts and ideas
earlier stage.
A list of recommendations have been • Provide total clarity at the outset on • Request that participants make a financial
compiled based on observations made the programme content and essential contribution towards the programme
throughout the programme. These requirement to team up to gather insights with an additional fee payable for any
recommendations have the potential to from another organisation. ‘Buddy’ every workshops not attended
enrich and improve a future Knowledge participant with someone from another
Exchange Programme. A future organisation and each person must • Give an additional time allowance for
programme would now: interview the others’ users and feedback the intensive level of networking which
participants sought.
• Host an introductory workshop at the • Complete Foursight profiles at the outset
outset inviting all those interested and create teams based on this.
to attend. Make local knowledge a
key element of this event with real • Introduce additional ideators to the teams
opportunities to share knowledge and at the ideation stage if needed
experience for all attending
• Prior to the programme many participants access their clients. As a result the insight • All the workshops were fully interactive
would not have had the chance to meet gathering element of the programme did and the success of the ambition to
with each other and therefore did not not work as well as it might have. develop innovative solutions was
have a full understanding of the services dependent on the contribution of the
being delivered by others. The programme ‘It was honest and inspiring, participants. Throughout the programme,
created real opportunities for people especially the realisation that there was a great emphasis placed on
to learn more about each other’s work, I don’t do enough of it (insight the need to attend and fully participate
exchange their own experience of the gathering)….I will be doing more of in all the workshops. However, poor
challenges and successes in their work. attendance at a number of the workshops
it going forward’’
It also helped to improve participants’ was an issue and had a very negative
knowledge of other providers and the ‘talking to groups of young people impact on the groups and the overall
support infrastructure for young people. in care was very humbling’ process. Despite this, participant feedback
This level of knowledge exchange was demonstrated high level improvement
very much valued by all programme • Participants felt that their insights and in relation to creativity, networking
attendees. Participants felt that the group opinions were listened to and valued and social innovation and innovative
workshops were critical to the process as throughout the process and they engaged approaches within both cohorts.
was the input from case study providers. in in-depth explorations and discussions
of the issues facing young people in the • The FourSight profiling tool revealed that
• Participants engaged fully in the debates ‘NEETs’ category. both groups had a low preference for
and discussion surrounding the challenge ideation making the overall generation
• Participants had a very deep
‘How Might We improve the employment of new innovative ideas more difficult.
understanding of the challenges the
opportunities for 16-18 year olds in Shifting from old to new thinking patterns
young people faced and the volume of
Northern Ireland’, and during these is difficult, takes time and requires a
‘How Might We’ statements created
conversations it was observed that the willingness and an open mindset. As with
truly reflected the enormity of this
timescale of this programme did not allow any new process, participants experienced
challenge and pinpointed all the stages
for the extent of discussion that these both pain points and high points and
on the journey which were ripe for a new
service providers desired. Participant this programme depended upon having
and innovative approach. These HMW
feedback expressed a wish for a greater willing and motivated people in the
statements could be taken forward by
focus on networking in Workshop One: room. The recruitment process called for
any organisation who wish to ideate
participants who believed there may be
‘The first workshop could have been and implement solutions for their own
a different way to tackle this pertinent
organisations. The lack of a clear pathway
more introductory, speed-dating emerged as a fundamental issue facing
social challenge (‘How might we improve
style could work well’ the employment opportunities for 16-18
both young people and service providers.
year olds in Northern Ireland’). Design
This defining insight became the focus
‘I would have liked more time at the thinking is a methodology which, like all
for the teams as they moved through the
others, takes practice before a level of
beginning to get to know others’ design thinking process.
confidence can be attained. Throughout
• Throughout the programme it became • Participants were incredibly confident the seven workshops, differing levels of
apparent that there was a lack of that the solutions proposed could be resistance and doubt about this approach
awareness of what competing service implemented to improve the employability were noted as follows:
providers offer and as a result, a lack of opportunities for young people but did
awareness of the scale of duplication not seem to take ownership for the actual ‘blue sky thinking outputs are not
within the sector. The process highlighted implementation of these. Participants affordable in today’s economy’,
a discomfort amongst participants when came from different organisations and
the suggestion was made to pair up to were returning to their “day job”. They ‘I feel the weakest part of this
gather insights with each other’s clients. could see the benefits of a collaborative process is not knowing if anything
Participants willingly shared their own working approach to bring these ideas will come out of it’.
views and expert knowledge of the sector forward but the mechanism to do this
but appeared reluctant to allow others to does not currently exist.
To what extent participants felt that the following had improved as a result of the programme
To what extent did the programme improve your knowledge 59% 41% 0% 0%
and understanding of other providers and the support
structure?
To what extent do you feel that you improved your level 23% 55% 18% 5%
of understanding of the pre-employment and employment
needs of young people aged 16-18?
How important were the group workshops in completing the 60% 40% 0% 0%
process
How useful did you find the case studies and guest speakers? 65% 30% 0% 5%
Do you feel that your insights and opinions were listened to 86% 14% 0% 0%
in the team, were they valued in the process?
At Social Innovation NI, social innovation Social Enterprise UK defines Social Design thinking is a methodology used
is simply defined as finding new and Enterprises as organisations that trade by designers to solve complex problems
innovative solutions (products, services, to tackle social problems, improve and find desirable solutions for clients. It
practices, processes, rules, organisational communities, people’s life chances, or draws upon logic, imagination, intuition
forms etc.) to existing social problems. the environment. They make their money and systemic reasoning to explore
These solutions can take the form of from selling goods and services in the possibilities of what could be and create
new products, services, models, markets open market but they reinvest their desired outcomes for the end user.
or processes. Crucially social innovation profits back into the business or the local
seeks not only to resolve the immediate community. Not all social enterprises
social problem but also enhances society’s claim to be innovative (some use tried and
NEETs
capacity to act in future. trusted models), though many are.
NEETS is an acronym used to describe
In other words, social innovations are both Social Entrepreneur
young people aged 16-24 who are not in
good for society and enhance society’s
Ashoka (one of the largest networks of education, employment or training.
capacity to act. Social innovation is not
new. It has been happening throughout social entrepreneurs worldwide) define
human history. But by thinking about social entrepreneurs as people with
how it happens, we can increase our new solutions to society’s problems.
chances of developing the new solutions Rather than leaving societal needs to
society needs. existing institutions, social entrepreneurs
find what is not working and solve
the problem by changing the system,
spreading the solution, and persuading
entire societies to move in different
directions. They can be found in all
sectors, working both inside organisations
and independently. Where social
innovations are the new solutions,
social entrepreneurs are the people who
develop and/or grow them.
6A Albert Street, 301 Glen Road, Skeoge Industrial Estate Beraghmore Road,
Belfast BT12 4HQ Belfast BT11 8BU Londonderry BT48 8SE