Bright Harbour’s 6 Operating Principles

Convening teams with diverse perspectives is a core part of our operating model. One of the wonderful consequences of working this way is that it makes visible the norms, assumptions and histories shaping our practice.

Designers take a different approach to method, sample and ‘rigour’ than researchers. People with lived experience contextualise issues in ways that tilt and reframe the questions we explore. We’ve all got norms and beliefs about what “the work” we do is all about. Etc.

As the ‘right’ way of doing things becomes contested space, we rattle the chains of our disciplinary and personal histories to find new ways of working. We blend, meld and question to find approaches that best fit the combined strengths of the team, and best honour the questions they explore.

This can get — usefully —messy.

These 5 principles are the lighthouse that focus thinking, guide decision making and keep us on path. They help find clarity in complexity and new ways forward. They are also in perpetual, collaborative revision.

Our thanks to designjustice.org for the inspiration.

Principle 1: We see everyday people as the equals of those in power.

Our partners believe participatory practice isn’t just the most effective way to work, it’s an ethical imperative. Public audiences are more than capable of shaping decision-making, whether that means designing financial advice services, or setting the direction for complex Government policy.

We advocate for their right to be heard. Beyond this, we prioritise client work which consciously transfers decision making to the public: shaping how public services are designed and delivered, but also shaping public sector agendas, visions, strategies and directions.

Principle 2: We prioritise positive, respectful experiences for our participants above all.

Many of the practices normed in research and design ultimately originate from practices in the ‘hard’ sciences and medicine, and unintentionally code in often harmful dynamics around expertise and power.

We’re constantly exploring participants’ end-to-end journey to ensure respectful, positive and healthy experiences. We’re doing this openly (more to come) and would love your help. We’re also exploring the health of our own value chains; our relationships and incentives with our partners, clients, recruiters etc all inevitably shape participant experiences and our data.

We try to work reflexively so that our histories, privileges and educations don’t shape experiences for the worse. We are committed to continual learning: expanding the perspectives and voices shaping our work, and actively questioning our processes, practices and thought patterns.

Principle 3: We value collaboration > competition.

Bright Harbour exists in part because clients’ questions are growing in urgency and complexity , and more diverse perspectives are needed to tackle them. Collaboration is baked into who we are and how we work, and we’d always rather combine strengths than fight it out to find a winner.

We partner freely, often and with joy, sharing our work lives with people and organisations who share our values (and bring their own brilliant skills and perspectives). Our partners are a powerful source of fresh perspectives, critical challenge and mutual support. In doing so, we’re honest about what we’re good at and where others should lead the way. Outcomes over ego.

Principle 4: It’s on us to create conditions that help our teams thrive.

We care deeply about doing our best work for our public sector clients, which means we want to work with the best, at their best. This requires the deliberate earning of partners’ respect and trust: we aren’t an agency, we don’t own anyone, and partners work with us by choice or not at all.

We tailor our ways of working to the talents, preferences and needs of the actual beautiful humans involved in each project — including in relation to ‘life stuff’ like mental/health, pandemic pressures, caring responsibilities, neurodiversity, etc.

Sometimes we get things wrong, which is a painful but necessary part of trying new things. When we do, we own up to our mistakes, listen to our teams, and find better ways forward. We openly share our successes but also our failures so others can try better.

Principle 5: We work with clients that we believe in and that share our core values.

One of the beautiful benefits of smallish business is that we don’t need to work with everyone. We don’t need to bring in multi-millions every year, we don’t need to say yes to every brief, and we don’t chase work with clients that don’t respect the evidence or the public.

Our teams deserve clients who believe in evidence-based change as much as we do and respect the people and communities they engage with.

Our clients care about their work and the people it’s for; work in respectful, effective, evidence-based ways; and collaborate as partners. They are open to challenge and new ways of looking at old questions, and respect lived experience as a critical source of wisdom. They aren’t perfect (us neither) but they are excited to learn and explore together.

Principle 6: We think publicly funded research should be as open as possible

Many of our clients conduct research that would be useful to other non-profit organisations trying to better serve their publics — but data and findings are often silo-ed and only reach the direct commissioners.

We work with clients to identify small steps in every project that make research findings find their wider audience, whilst respecting client confidentiality and competition needs. For example, where feasible we’ve enabled clients to invite collaborators into design or analysis meetings; held open findings workshops for sector partners; or simply helped shape long-lists of potentially interested parties to share reporting with.

Where clients are really brave and happy to make their anonymised data public for wider use, we’re all for it — and can help you do this in ways that are respectful and supportive of participants’ data rights and wishes.

What’s not here but is on our minds.

For us, evidence is a social justice issue. As such, we remain uncomfortable with many of the practices that shape traditional research and design practices — including in some of our own historical and current work.

We’re continuing to think through how we can explore and model in our own practice ways of doing things that offer a positive way forward, particularly in relation to:

• Shifting deficit-based thinking that focuses on “problems” at the expense of strength, connection and wellness. This includes the unhelpful positioning of researchers/designers as experts, problems solvers and extractors rather than facilitators of people driven change.
• Furthering focus on the concrete and narrow (the product/the user/the interaction/the behaviour) at the expense of the systemic and contextual (the landscape, the incentives, the embedded inequalities, the invisible consequences).
• Unquestioned privilege embedded in design and research power and practice: race, class, sexuality, geography, neurodiversity, gender, health, and so on. In particular, who is represented in decision making matters, and we are 1) working to ensure we are an inclusive space that is more representative of the publics we engage with and 2) rethinking our own relationship with our participants and their communities.
• Creating more positive and regenerative work cultures in evidence disciplines — and finding a positive response to legacies of exclusion, mistreatment, burnout, poor mental health, bad data and narrow thinking.

As in all things: feedback, challenges and new perspectives welcomed. We are a community in evolution, and if you see something we’re missing let us know.

And if these are questions that tug at and challenge you too, get in touch.