Design Stories​

Design Thinking for Social Innovation

 

1.0 Social innovation

According to Sarah A. Soule, Neil Malhotra, and Bernadette Clavier, “Social innovation is the process of developing and deploying effecive solutions to challenging and often systemic social and environmental issues in support of social progress. Social innovation is not the prerogative or privilege of any organizational form or legal structure. Solutions often require the active collaboration of constituents across government, business, and the nonprofit world.”

Social innovation, in simple terms, is to develop new ideas, products, services, or models to address social needs and improve the well-being of the community. It need not be any new invention or traditional innovation which would aim to pursue newness. Rather, it progresses towards improving quality of life, achieving justice and equity, and positive change in society. It focuses on the greater good of people. Existing solutions and policies are redesigned and reprogrammed to achieve overall civil well-being. Social innovation is approached through meeting a particular need, coming up with a solution, altering social structures and relationships, and strengthening the society’s ability to act. The approach as it sounds, would also involve several factors that enable or drive the innovation; Social impact, economic sustainability, type of innovation, inter-sectoral collaboration, scalability, and replicability are key for social innovation.

1.1 Types and Levels in Social Innovation

Creating new patterns of human interaction, cultural interference, change in process, and addressing social concerns are ambitions of a social innovation portfolio. It can be implemented in the non-profit, public or private sector. These innovations are typically led by the social economy, communities, and social entrepreneurs to make a difference in society.

The Dutch philosopher, Herman Dooyeweerd, identified ten different types of social innovation: socio-juridical, socio-cultural, socio-political, socio-ideological, socio-ethical, socio-economic, socio-organizational, socio-technical, socio-ecological, and socio-analytical. Initiatives within the social innovation sphere can include one or more of these typologies as one might lead or require another one to exist. (Wigboldus, S., 2016).

The degree of innovation is two, radical and incremental. Radical changes are typically caused by events that are sudden and have an immediate impact which have a disruptive effect leading to immediate transformation to adapt and improvise the situation. Incremental changes are evolutionary which are gradual movements of change through controlled phase-wise interventions, and are naturally occurring. The impact of an incremental change is generally long-lasting and agile. Incremental step-wise changes can be shifted down, left, or up, which implies that processes and sub-steps can be modified according to the overall progress of the initiative.

1.2 Challenges in Social Innovation

However, for social innovation to be effective and efficient, innovators and their stakeholders have to mitigate risks and anticipate worst-case scenarios as well. Cultural sensitivity, demographics, adaptability, mindset, and time to adapt are some crucial aspects that social innovators have to look into.

At the macro level of managing districts, states, or senates, the challenges are different. Macro-level innovations involve effective communication, meetings, processing speed, voting in some cases, etc. Non-profit organizations would have to build reliability and depend solely on data management and data collection which would be a challenge in high-density population countries. Such challenges can be addressed through different modes of approaches and one such approach is Design Thinking.

2.0 Design Thinking today

Traditional methods of solving societal problems have limited effect and generally do not comply with the norms of changing society. A society has multiple stakeholders, including the government, social organizations and NGOs, the public, policymakers, administrative officials, and many more. More than just solving problems, a mindset shift is also essential for all these stakeholders to think and act a step ahead.

2.1 How does DT help in social innovation

Most often, traditional innovation patterns and approaches map the stakeholders of the higher impact and decision-makers. Social innovators are often blinded by the power of influence. Design Thinking realizes that the stakeholders are always constantly evolving, and especially in the scope of social innovation, power interests are blurry. Design Thinking helps in alignment and creating a perspective of the roles of the stakeholders.

Design Thinking also aids in understanding the end-user of the particular innovation. The understanding of the user would involve getting into the shoes of the citizens and uncovering the unstated needs of the people. Demographic understanding and cultural understanding solve major problems and address long-conflicting cultural biases among people. Design Thinking makes social innovation more democratized in the application pipeline for the innovation process.

2.2 Brief note on approaching the problem statement

According to the model of six stages of social innovation developed by Murray, Caulier-Grice, and Mulgan in the book, ‘The Open Book of Social Innovation 2010’, social innovation primarily involves two stages which would be to approach and define the problem statement.

In the first phase, social problems are not always obvious. Whether something is seen as a social problem is dependent on the societal definition. Something that is accepted at one moment or in one society, might be questioned in the future or in a different country. In this phase, indicators for the need for social change are taken into account. This might be poor performance, insufficient provisions, cost cuts, outdated processes, etc. These challenges are combined with inspirations – from creativity to the latest evidence – to tackle the root causes, not only the symptoms.

The second phase would involve proposals and ideas. In this stage, we focus on using creativity-supporting methods.

One such method is Design Thinking to redefine the problem statement. Asking questions that challenge the assumptions of the initial statement, and analyzing blindspots is a hefty but very useful approach in the long run (In return it is almost pre-prototyping for the solution). The 5-Why tool could unravel multiple dimensions underlying the problem statement that would dive deep into the actual problem that needs addressing. The tool is critical in analyzing and understanding the roots of the problem by asking “Why” has this particular event taken place and what led to it? Opening up multiple perspectives from the stakeholder standpoint becomes critical during this exercise of refining the problem statement as well. Positive, crisp, definitive, and actionable problem statements would serve as insightful when approaching a problem.

2.2 Narrowing down to understand the user

As mentioned briefly about understanding the user, Persona is a tool that we use to address the needs and challenges of the citizen. Through Persona, understanding the unstated needs of the end user becomes clear. Usually, citizens tend to be emotional about the process and innovations happening in the social sector. To address that emotional need, one must realize the demographics, cultural background, economic status, and feasibility checks for successful implementation of the innovation. History becomes crucial in addressing certain issues.

2.3 Pro-tips to go about the approach

Jeanne Liedka from the book, ‘Design Thinking for Greater Good’, suggested a few tips to approach Design Thinking for social innovation such as: generating creative ideas for a better understanding of solutions, reducing risk by levels, managing change, dealing with complex social systems, and empowering local capability building, increasing speed of innovation.

From the angle of social innovation, needs are to be addressed as soon as possible, or else citizens get agitated, start a protest and things might blow out of proportion. This is why prompts, as mentioned before, are to be noticed as they act as signals that convey or call for help. Complex social systems are to be noticed and bucketed according to the impact weightage which should be given priority. Locally developed capability systems are to be agile and quick in implementation in other States and localities. Every innovation at a social level would impact the behavior of the citizens at a large scale. Liedka suggests that the amount of change in behavior is a function of four factors such as the level of dissatisfaction with the status quo, clarity of a new future, and pathway, all balanced against any perceived loss that is associated with change. Speed of innovation is enabled by removing preconceived notions about the process and redefining the problem statement which automatically creates a vision to lock in on the things that matter.

3.0 Need of the hour (addresses the why, when)

The world, society, and order are always on the brink. There are wars, poverty-stricken nations, pandemic issues, rising environmental concerns, technological evolution, ongoing construction developments, and other changes that are both a threat and an opportunity for humans on Earth. Social innovation, unlike any other innovation, creates greater change in society which is faster and more impactful than any other innovation. This benefits larger groups of the society, implementors, beneficiaries, and sponsors as well.

3.1 Urgency of the situation and Why now?

There is always growth and humans by nature, aspire to live comfortably. These two components of human nature are complex and add rise to more challenges which in turn yield more opportunities. Social innovation makes citizens feel included in their home nation, empowers people, and can be easily taught, translated, and transcended. Here are some cases that used social innovation strategies using Design Thinking.

4.0 Case 1: Rescue of Bonded Labourers in India2

Our team, The School of Design Thinking conducted a workshop for the TN State Planning Commission in collaboration with UNICEF. This workshop witnessed participation of several Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers who had shared their views on social innovation. One such example is the case of bonded labourers in India.

Bonded labourers are people who have an agreement with an unofficial debt issuer who bonds them in return for their loan, who are treated poorly and are utilized overtime for laborious work. Most often, these people are from marginal communities who aspire to live, and end up taking loans from their local lender who is usually money-rich.

Down south in India at Thiruvallur, Tamilnadu, bonded labourers are large in number and are usually kept under the lender’s custody. They do jobs such as brick manufacturing, layering, and other construction work. These labourers are treated inhumanely for their work and are also paid less in salary so that they would stay as labourers to pay the loan that they have received. The situation is complex and most labourers end up ill or sick due to overtime. Some labourers run away and some even end up losing their loved ones because of loan shark harassment as well.

Labourers who leave or escape would be tagged as loan shark victims. Hence, the challenge here is employment for survival as it would become challenging for such individuals to carry a tag and work somewhere with the only skill they know i.e. bricklaying. The other challenge is the perception of an escaped labourer who joins his community again. The entire community feels threatened that the master, or the owner who had previously had him/her in his clutch would search and beseech the entire community in large numbers again.

IAS officers took this social concern and made social innovations. Envisioning or visualizing the end-state of the people, from enslavement to entrepreneurship opened up several windows that could enable them. Empathy and persona mapping tools enabled social innovation to understand their emotions, needs, and challenges which would be: Fear of working elsewhere, rejection from their community, and risk of endangerment.

Connecting the dots outside and internally enabled the skill realization of the people to be leveraged into an entrepreneurship opportunity with mapping schemes of the Government which led to an ecosystem of their own. About 416 bonded labourers have been rescued during the period 2017-2022, and they run their brick manufacturing startup which is indigenous to their region. The company and government schemes aligned their skill to the shortage of the situation and officers enabled them to live free of debts. The entire Community was strengthened, new business-related skills evolved and they were trained in-house to manage their finances and revenue.

4.1 Case 2: Making Innovation Safe at MasAgro3

Mexican farming zones vary from temperate mountainous to flat coastal and from humid tropic to semiarid climates. These variations make it challenging to scale practices that ensure adaptation to local needs. MasAgro, which is a partnership between the Mexican government and agricultural groups, closes the gap between farmers and research scientists to encourage the adoption of sustainable, modern agricultural methods. MasAgro researchers design experiments based on interests and needs expressed by locals. MasAgro sets up a local network, called a hub, where new technologies are developed, tested, and displayed for farmers to see for themselves. Designated technologies are then placed into experimental platforms to adjust and refine for weather, soil, and other conditions. The technologies are designed to sustain agriculture by maintaining and/or improving the land’s fertility, conserving water, and ensuring the quality of the crops. The hub system allows each farmer to visualize the new technology under local conditions, rather than relying on abstract arguments about its scientific superiority.

5.0 Summary

These stories convey a strong sense of social innovation by applying Design Thinking. Governments and social schemes which are bureaucratic, allow multi-dimensional thinking and extensive stakeholder alignment. Power-interest matrix mapping enables us to thread together stakeholders and various partners for the benefit of the greater good. Design Thinking also enables cross-domain sharing of knowledge for a better understanding of the ecosystem as a whole. Design is not only for products and services, Design Thinking is a medium to navigate “wicked” problems around us!

References:
1 Liedtka, J., Salzman, R., Azer, D. (2017). Design Thinking for the Greater Good: Innovation in the Social Sector. United Kingdom: Columbia University Press.

2 https://thebetterindia.com/319773/ias-officer-alby-john-verghes-rescues-bonded-labourers-in-rural-tamil-nadu/

3 https://www.businessofgovernment.org/report/applying-design-thinking-public-service-delivery