How cities are changing the narrative around government experimentation
How might we reimagine government’s approach to innovation?
We know this may sound odd but let’s do some word associations. What do you think of when you hear the words ‘Government’ and ‘Experimentation’? Was it hard to imagine anything at all?
If so, we ask you to imagine a world where…
● Government serves as a convener that effectively brings together diverse actors to address complex problems
● Experimentation is understood as a critical methodology governments employ to understand how policies and programs will impact those they serve
You may be thinking this world is a departure from what exists today. And you would be mostly right. But we have seen firsthand how 13 cities are challenging how many think about government’s capacity to affect positive outcomes. While their journeys are far from done, these city governments that participated in the inaugural Innovation Track of the Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative are beginning to show the way for a better model of government innovation.
For context: this collaboration between Bloomberg Philanthropies, Harvard Kennedy School, and Harvard Business School aims to equip city governments with new tools and methodologies to help solve the biggest challenges that their residents face. As the implementation partner for the inaugural Innovation Track within this program, our team at the Centre for Public Impact worked with Bloomberg Philanthropies and six human-centered design coaches to train 13 cities in innovation methods over a 9-month period. Through a combination of on-the-ground and remote collaboration, we had a front-row view into how city governments are experimenting in partnership with residents to drive change. Here are their stories, and some principles that undergird their work.
Our team is excited to be kicking off the second Innovation Track with 9 new cities embarking on this journey, and, just this past week, Bloomberg Philanthropies announced that they are opening up innovation training to even more cities! Given the groundswell around building innovation capacity in city leaders, we thought now would be a good time to reflect on what we learned and what we saw over the last year.
Principle #1: Teams that bring together diverse skills and experiences are best positioned to develop creative solutions
Cities started the Innovation Track by assembling a ‘core team’ of people from across all levels of city government passionate about the problem they would focus on for the program. Importantly, teams were diverse — in terms of personal experiences, seniority levels, and cross-departmental representation.
In Tulsa, OK, the city originally defined its problem as the presence of violent, stray dogs on the streets. Frontline staff played a big role on the core team — helping the mayor’s leadership team better understand some of the deeper causes of this initial problem statement. Through early site visits to the Tulsa Animal Welfare (TAW) center, the team gained a better understanding of the human nature of the problem. Contextual interviews with staff across the center revealed that compassion fatigue — a state of “secondary trauma” experienced by those helping people or animals in distress — was a major issue.
Equipped with a better understanding of the problem, the core team tested out a wellness program for TAW staff. While the TAW staff on the core team led the experiments, a member of the city leadership team joined internal meetings, offering political support and instilling confidence that their voices were being heard. Through their initial tests, the program has been found to improve morale, increase interaction between management and staff, and create a safe space where staff are able to express concerns and offer solutions.
Results of this cross-departmental experimentation team demonstrate that people best positioned to solve a problem are those who are directly impacted. Those with power and influence should make sure to always keep an open door to those at the frontlines. In addition to frontline staff, residents represent another important stakeholder with valuable perspectives. This brings us to our next point around legitimacy…
Principle #2: Co-creating with residents leads to improved solutions and increases the legitimacy of government
Intentionally involving residents as well as important stakeholders at all steps in the innovation process can reassure residents that their voices are valued by those in government. An effective methodology for ensuring that voices are heard is human-centered design, a core element of this program. After all, who better than those affected by something to come up with a solution?
A team that put residents at the heart of their process is Trenggalek, a city of nearly 700,000 in Indonesia whose leadership team is championing inclusive design methods. Their core team was interested in understanding how they can better support farming communities. To identify the key problems these communities face, the team left the confines of city hall — organizing field visits to rural areas. Through contextual interviews on their own turf, farmers felt they had a safe space to air their frustrations and propose new ideas.
What the core team learned is that prior to the program, farmers did not feel supported by the government to experiment with new, sustainable agricultural techniques. With this understanding, the team invited the farmers to co-creation sessions, where they generated over 100 ideas on how to build a community of practice around environmentally friendly techniques. Ultimately, the creativity spurred the establishment of a farm school, which will build an agricultural community of practice through in-person and online support. Due to the team’s intentional engagement, farmers felt a renewed sense of trust in government and are excited to help grow the farm school.
Bringing together those individuals that would benefit from the program not only helps build legitimacy in the eyes of residents, but also creates an environment for better idea generation. Engaging the public as co-creators can create a broad reservoir of support for city government.
Principle #3: Testing low-cost prototypes allows for meaningful insight and feedback, and results in a stronger program overall
Too often, governments plan programs in a vacuum; this is not likely to lead to meaningful results. Instead, we saw cities proactively receive feedback on ideas early and often in place of rolling out expensive programs created behind closed doors. A key skill embraced by cities in the Innovation Track Track is testing ideas with residents early and often at every step of the process — from problem definition to prototyping.
St. Paul, another city that participated in the program, serves as an example of effectively using this experimentation approach. In an attempt to remove barriers to securing affordable, safe, and stable housing for those exiting the criminal justice system and becoming fully integrated and successful in the community, the team designed a prototype for a certificate for a landlord recognition program that would include public acclamation of their community-oriented leadership. This program aimed to highlight good landlords within the community willing to rent to those with criminal backgrounds. In sessions with local landlords, however, the team learned that not all of them were as keen to be a part of this program (and potentially receive city recognition) as city officials had previously imagined.
The feedback loop in this case allowed the team to reconsider what sort of recognition program (if any) was more well-suited for outstanding local landlords. By intentionally building in time for experimentation, the city was able to pivot and refine their idea quickly in a low-cost and low-exposure way. This approach can mitigate against larger risks — such as resident dissatisfaction, bad press, and wasted time on an idea not likely to achieve positive impact.
What this means for these cities
Spending time on the ground with these 13 cities has inspired us to think more expansively about the role that innovation in government plays in improving outcomes. Next time you hear the words ‘Government’ and ‘Experimentation’, we encourage you to think about how they do (or do not) apply to your experiences, and dream big about how your city can use innovation to improve outcomes for residents.
