Service Design: A look inside Washington DC’s interagency experiences
A UX Case Study by Melissa Glasser
Introduction
Project DC was an opportunity to apply the UX design process to aid the City Administrator of Washington DC in a multi-year exploratory study and service redesign initiative. With perspectives, pain points and challenges at the center of our discovery, thirteen designers set off to understand the customer journeys for both employees who work for government agencies and residents who obtain services. Our timeframe for research and synthesis was 17 days.
We worked in smaller teams of two and three to address agencies organized by service cluster. My colleague and I had the pleasure of interviewing three of the Human Services Agencies: the Office of Disability Rights, the Department of Human Services and the Department of Aging and Community Living.
Using the Stanford d. School Design Thinking Process we used empathy to connect with our research subjects and to conduct one hour long interviews with the top five managers at each agency. We were inspired by the dedication and leadership demonstrated by those fifteen. We listened as they shared what is working well and what challenges they face.
We defined the scope of our work by synthesizing our data and produced subsequent user personas, use cases and customer journey maps. We ideated our findings into service blueprints to communicate current states. We presented our findings to the client with recommendations for prototyping and in order to test the findings.
Research Plan
With a quick turnaround time, the research plan was essential for guiding our process. It includes our objectives, gaps in knowledge, audiences, locations, methods, schedule and outcomes and is outlined below.
Objectives: What are the biggest challenges and opportunities for employees serving at internal/resident facing agencies of the District of Columbia? How might these be redesigned using service blueprints to improve employee satisfaction and resident experiences indirectly?
Greatest Gaps in Knowledge: Interagency inner-workings
Audience: Employees and Residents of Washington DC
Locations:
- Office of Disability Rights
- Department of Aging and Community Living
- Department of Human Services
Employee Surveys: in person
Resident Surveys: Online
Methods: Interviews, Topic Map, Screener and Informational Survey, Affinity and Topic Maps, Synthesis, User Personas
Schedule:
Week 1- Plan, Research, Interviews & Document
Week 2- Synthesis, Document and Make Recommendations
Week 3-Present, Design, Prototype, Test
Outcomes: Photos, Transcripts/Quotes, Survey Responses, Trends, User Insights, Challenges
Artifacts-Research Plan, Survey/Responses, Interview Script Questions and Responses, Insights and Synthesis
Deliverables-User Personas, Customer Journey Maps, Service Blueprint and Recommendations
Interviews
Over three days, my partner and I conducted 16 interviews at the following agencies: Office of Disability Rights, Department of Aging and Community Living, Department of Human Services.
We spoke to those serving at the highest levels of leadership to understand their experiences working with the following seven key internal facing agencies:
Department of General Services
Office of the Chief Technology Officer
Office of Contracting and Procurement
Department of Human Resources
Office of Risk Management
Office of Disability Rights
Office of Labor Relations and Collective Bargaining
We asked each interviewee to describe their role within the agency. Per the client’s request, we asked them to describe what they liked about, found frustrating with and suggested improvements for, each of the above seven agencies. Lastly, we conducted a client sourced questionnaire which required the interviewee to card sort for each agency, the pillars of customer service, from strength to weakness.
In order to see the entire service ecosystem including the residents’ experience, we asked our interviewees for their insight into the challenges that DC residents face when obtaining services through our local government agencies. We supplemented this with an independent survey of residents focused on experiences with the Department of Human Services. Our primary goal was to see if residents felt they had accomplished their intended tasks when obtaining services and what obstacles they encountered. The survey was disseminated across social media platforms and using Reddit.
Synthesis
In order to best explore the findings of our interviews, we collected our transcript notes in a document created in Google Sheets, color coded Red for ‘Challenges/Frustrations’, Green for ‘What is Working’ and Blue for ‘What Can Be Improved’. This allowed us to export the data cells into Miro for affinity mapping first by agency using the same color codes.
We conducted a second round of affinity mapping of quotes and insights and these overarching categories emerged: Customer Service, Outreach/Awareness, Guidance, Training, Hiring/Staffing and Tools/Technology.
“We have a good relationship when it comes to assisting employees to get reasonable accommodations for their jobs.”
“They have a very dedicated staff who care and want to help.”
“Recruitment has been frustrating.”
“I get scolded all the time by them and it is to the point that I am numb.”
Using what was uncovered from the interviews and synthesis, we developed User Personas. These include fine and broad strokes such as biography, demographics, interests, motivations, frustrations and influences. By understanding the User and their Use Cases, we were able to articulate their Customer Journey Maps.
In the example seen below, we meet Tina who is an upper level manager for a resident facing agency. Her Use Case delineates her experience making a new hire and some of the challenges she encounters along the way. Many of these challenges also negatively impact the person who is being hired. This journey forms the center of the Service Blueprint that follows which includes Tina as the hiring manager and Mary, a soon to be new employee for the agency.
The user we have identified values responsiveness, guidance, training and accountability. They aim to model these behaviors amongst their teams and to the residents who obtain services from their agencies. Therefore, the value is extended to and expected from their interagency experiences. When recruitment, screening, on-boarding and retention have identifiable pain points, our user experiences frustration and a diminished hopefulness around their work. This example highlights a few of the challenges that we heard during our interviews.
Summary
The greatest takeaways from our research, interviews, synthesis and design were in alignment with the interconnectedness we often see in service ecosystems. Successful service is the result of the careful orchestration of well designed systems operated by thoughtful, trained professionals. Iteration allows for assessment and improvements.
Card sorting surveys around customer service pointed consistently to a belief that courteousness is the greatest strength of each Internal Service Agency. Above else, people value people and that is hopeful! There was visible satisfaction, near I say joy, when people described a reliable and effective relationship with another agency contact.
Our recommendations to the City Administrator are to explore more carefully these processes: recruitment, hiring, staffing, training, guidance, outreach/awareness. We recommend a parallel foray in the development of customer service as a value and guiding principal. For if not for the customer, or in this case the agency and employees being served, where would we be?
Lastly, we heard from a number of agencies one key takeaway that they see as a pain point for residents. Resident calls get bounced around from agency to agency due to the lack of awareness around customer needs and agency services. Several leaders recommended reinstating a previous initiative to implement a customer database so that a caller’s service history could be tracked. In conjunction with increased interagency outreach/awareness, residents could avoid multiple transfers and repeating themselves over and over.
