Designing for ecosystems in government
How might we work across organisational boundaries — in ecosystems, to tackle complex systemic challenges in our society? This was the central question for a panel at Futures Seminar (May 2024)— an event sharing interim results of the futures process on design in government. The Finnish government design community “Julkis-muotoilijat” launched a futures process to better understand the changes we are seeing in the field of design in government. One key result of the process was that designers in government will work in a more systemic way, or as part of ecosystems, in the future. This blog will summarise key points from the panel on ecosystems.
Defining ecosystems
There are different types and definitions of ecosystems. In the panel we defined it through a systems view on all the stakeholders we have involved in designing in government. As in the panel, ecosystems are formed of stakeholders across sectors — government organisations or employees, consultants and businesses, and academics and universities. Also NGOs or the civil society should be part of the ecosystems.
In general terms, ecosystems are formed of actors or stakeholders who are interacting and connected in a network like structure. Ecosystems have a shared purpose and produce value to its members. Ecosystems can be organic and self-organising, or official and well structured and coordinated.
Some examples of ecosystems
Data ecosystems. According to Sitra, there are two types of data ecosystems: ones who use data as part of their wider operations, or ones that have data in the core role of the ecosystem. Data is shared and utilised for creating data based solutions. An example could be the Fintraffic which is a traffic data ecosystem.
Life event ecosystems are part of the Finnish national digital strategy (Valtioneuvosto, 2022). They are service ecosystems that gather service providers from different sectors together to provide services and solutions to customers in a specific life event. Often these ecosystems include sharing data and automation of integrated services. An example could be “the Death ecosystem” —initiated in 2018 by DVV.
Natural ecosystems. In nature, ecosystems are everywhere. Our planet is an ecosystem, our bodies are ecosystems. As you can imagine, these ecosystems are constantly changing.
Living labs are collaborative innovation ecosystems. As an example, the Kalasatama district was the first smart city district in Helsinki. In this case the ecosystem is place-based. All the players active in the disctrict, including the government, business, and residents form the ecosystem. Start-ups, residents and academics have a special role in this sort of ecosystems. Start-ups want to test their solutions, residents want to develop their living area and academics want to study what happens, the intake of technologies, and what are the best practices. The city made an explicit decision to make Kalasatama an innovation district, and this was a key push for the ecosystem to form. In the end, the synergies, energy and funding has been the keys to its success. (Kaisa Spilling)
Challenges in working with ecosystems
The panel discussed different challenges in working with ecosystems.
Balancing between open and secure
One main challenge for ecosystems is balancing interoperability and data security. We want to make the flow of data between different information systems easy and enable the use of public data — while still considering data privacy. The government programme includes an objective about reducing obstacles to using public data. — Elina Norros
Finding a business case
In succesfull ecosystems, participants have a common mission — something that they really want to solve. Ecosystems need real ownership and an operational model. There needs to be hooks for data providers to stay in the ecosystem. Business case is needed to get stakeholders to dedicate their time in the ecosystem. There needs to be a customer — who cares about the impact. And there needs to be tangible results and actions — if nothing happens, if ecosystems turn into conversation clubs, things die out.— Ida Rainio
Sometimes there is not yet a business case, especially at the early stages of the innovation. Experimentation and funding can help us understand what is needed and how users respond — eventually building a business case. Building continuation for ecosystems can be difficult, especially with a dependency on public funding. Ecosystems need orchestration. For example, the role of Forum Virium Helsinki can be the mediator between stakeholders, and someone to “blow fire” into the initiative. (Kaisa Spilling)
Working with complex challenges
An example of an ecosystem’s mission could be: How might we increase youth physical activity? There is no one actor who has the ownership of the entire challenge. There is a lack of structures for collaboration.
Who should be in the ecosystems? Not just your peers — such as other government organisations, but also NGOs for example. Cities are often quite skilled in working across sectors. Stakeholder mapping is key when starting to work with ecosystems.
With the current polycrisis of systemic and complex challenges, ecosystems are (if not only) essential ways to build pathways to the future. And building smarter and sustainable cities need ecosystems.
Roles and responsibilities for ecosystem stakeholders
Often the potential roles in the ecosystem are unclear to its stakeholders. Defining the roles and their tasks needed in an ecosystem is a useful step in the early days. “What does it require from me, and what do I get?”. Deciding on roles and responsibilities will help stakeholders to commit to the ecosystem. (Ida Rainio)
Capacity building for collaboration
In the end, ecosystems are all about learning to collaborate. There is a need to understanding the different contexts and creating shared processes, and aiming for long-term solutions. The ability to understand the different agendas and ways of working between stakeholders is a success factor. Facilitation of collaboration between players is key. (Natalia Villaman)
Ecosystems are complex social systems. It’s all about facilitation and how we communicate and connect with others. How do we operate together, what rules do we make. Stand on the edge of chaos. Don’t have too many rules, but some hierarchies and rules are needed, some structures.— Elina Norros
Democracy and participation in ecosystems
Ecosystems should allow people agency to take action within that system, or even allow resistance in that system, or capacity building and understanding the systems we are embedded in. — Natalia Villaman
- How might anyone be involved in developing the mission for ecosystems — How to get passionate about developing the systems we are part of?
- Consultation (as a level of participation) vs deep collaboration and long-term impact
- Disruption is a way to work outside an ecosystem. Bottom-up action. Social movement theory.
Current economics
The current economic situation can help push the ecosystems approach. It is not a matter of goodwill anymore. We need to cooperate. We need to build services together. We need to do it seamlessly. Because we do not have the money to do it otherwise. — Elina Norros
About the writer and panellists
This blog was written by Anni Leppänen, founder of Julkis-muotoilijat, and the chair of the ecosystems panel.
Panellists included:
- Natalia Villaman, Doctoral researcher, University of Helsinki and Aalto University
- Elina Norros, Head of Development, Prime Minister’s Office and Finnish Customs
- Kaisa Spilling, Development manager, Forum Virium Helsinki
- Ida Rainio, Principal advisor, Futurice
References
Sitra (2024). Kilpailukykyä datasta -käsikirja. Toimintamalli ekosysteemeille datan hyödyntämiseen.
Valtioneuvosto (2022). Suomen digitaalinen kompassi. Valtioneuvoston selonteko. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/JulkaisuMetatieto/Documents/VNS_10+2022.pdf
