RED4SUS
Application Manual
- Concepts -
1.
INNOVATION
Click on the cloud to know more
The levelling of concepts is a fundamental factor for understanding the issues covered in the Manual and Toolkit. They form the basis for the procedures and methods presented in the Manual and Toolkit. For this reason, in this introductory section, we present the key concepts that support the proposition of the model. These concepts involve Innovation, Sustainable Innovation, Innovation in Public Service, Design and Innovation in Public Service, and Design and Sustainable Communities.
INNOVATION
Innovation is the premise of the moment for any development, regardless of the type of organization, process, product, service or experience planned. But what is innovation? For something to really be called innovation, it must necessarily be something NEW and, at the same time, something that creates VALUE. It is more than just new, what we might call invention, or more than something that just creates value, what we might understand as optimization or rationalization. To be considered an INNOVATION, the solution must be successfully adopted by users who can extract its value and, at the same time, can bring results to the organization that adopted it. Thus: "Innovation involves new solutions that create value for society, companies and individuals" (Regeringen.se, 2020).
Above all, innovation must be a solution developed from a new perspective on the problem, derived from out-of-the-box insights and conjectures. This means keeping your mind free to consider and analyse any possibility, even that that product, process or service can or should be discontinued if it does not create enough value for your investment. Innovation is not an improvement on what already exists, but rather the application of a new approach to understanding and collaboratively solving the problem with a view to creating value. In addition, it is important to realize that innovation does not necessarily refer to technology, since, in many situations, this only enables the automation of some process, or the promotion of some marketing strategy, without the effective creation of value for the user. On the other hand, it does not mean that technology is irrelevant, as technological innovations have facilitated the daily lives of people, as well as companies, and offered important inclusion options for people with limitations or disabilities.
Although, academically, the concept of innovation can be typified in several ways (incremental, radical, modular, architectural, evolutionary, systematic, and many others), a simple and objective way to classify innovation is between absolute or relative. Absolute when there is no benchmark in society, or market, for that innovative product, service or process that is being created. Relative when there is this parameter, when there is an offer in a certain society, or market, from which a product, service or process is being derived, equal or customized, for another society, or market, offering there a value that did not exist before. Innovation can still be defined as closed (closed innovation) when its process is developed entirely within the organization, thus maintaining the intellectual property of the innovation solely linked to this organization; or open (open innovation) when there is external collaboration, whether from other organizations or agents, in this process. Evidently, both forms of development have advantages and disadvantages, and identifying the best model to do so is part of the organization's strategic management.
However, regardless of the defined strategy, telling the team to "go ahead, think outside the box, and innovate..." is not enough. The point is? How to innovate? It is known that for any significant result - as is the case with innovation - significant investments must be made. Therefore, innovating is not about something elementary or a process that can be objectively followed just like a cooking recipe. It involves subjective aspects such as, for example, individual and even collective effort to diversify knowledge. Generality contributes to creative thinking in the generation of ideas, as much as the specialty to its refinement, and one way to enable this convergence of competences is through the formation of interdisciplinary teams for innovation. The diversification of knowledge, whether individual or collective, and an expanded universe of multidisciplinary information, may collaborate to generate insights through analogies between different areas of knowledge.
Above all, in individual terms, in addition to knowledge, there is an additional subjective aspect. An interesting recent study revealed that people have, on average, about 6,200 thoughts a day (Poppenk and Tseng, 2020). The limiting issue is that between 90 and 95% of them are essentially the same as the day before. So, it's not hard to imagine how much thinking and, consequently, doing the same thing over and over again can compromise major changes in attitude or real changes in people's perspective on challenges and problems. The good news is that it is possible to enable the mind to think and act differently, unlocking its creative potential through techniques designed to develop creativity. They are effective, have been explored by large organizations, and involve ways to stimulate creativity through simple but persistent practices of action inside and outside the workplace. Creativity as a human skill and innovation as a change action channelled through this skill are aspects that are increasingly valued by companies that seek competitiveness, efficiency and leadership in society.
Speaker Dayle Maloney (1984) in the announcement of his Selling Secrets seminar already warned: "If you continue to think like you've always thought, you'll continue to get what you've always got." Although the statement seems obvious, its meaning can be enriching for organizations that wish to innovate if we translate it as a recommendation in the sense of not repeating indefinitely ineffective solutions, if they really want another effect. You have to be creative to innovate when the solution to a problem is no longer effective, when it doesn't bring results in terms of value creation. Diversifying teams, investing in new knowledge and techniques that release the latent potential that we all have for creativity seems to be an accessible path for all those seeking innovation.
SUSTAINABLE INNOVATION
We have already looked at the concept of innovation and, at this point, we are going to discuss the concept of Sustainable Innovation. This is the type of innovation that properly considers and includes in the solution the three axes of sustainability: economic, social and environmental. It is important to understand that Sustainable Innovation, by considering the three axes of sustainability, intrinsically incorporates two outstanding characteristics, presented below.
First, Sustainable Innovation usually leads to more intense, radical, disruptive innovations. This happens because, to meet the social and environmental aspects, it is necessary to rethink the product or process or service or the way of doing business. Thus, from a sustainable perspective, quite different and out-of-the-box solutions are often designed and implemented to meet a certain need. Second, Sustainable Innovation has the potential to deliver greater value to the groups involved, translated into economic, social and environmental benefits. So, it's not just about doing something new that can be marketed and delivered as a product or service to society, but doing something new that simultaneously contributes to solving social or environmental problems that afflict the groups involved. In the context of Sustainable Innovation, solutions usually explore the interfaces between the economic-social, economic-environmental or environmental-social areas, as discussed in the next paragraphs.
Solutions that focus on the economic-social interface involve those projects where the generation of work and income is primarily directed to the lower income or more fragile classes. Thus, solutions at the economic-social interface, while moving the economy by generating products or services and consequent financial return, also reduce inequalities and potential social conflicts. They allow the inclusion of the less favoured classes in the labour market, promoting great transformations both at the individual level (personal growth and empowerment) and in the extension of the neighbourhood or community involved. Solutions at the economic-environmental interface include projects that solve or alleviate environmental problems and, simultaneously, have the potential to generate financial returns. They often appear in the form of public-private partnerships, to revitalize degraded spaces. An example of this are partnerships for the restoration of lake and river shores, which are restored, returned to the population and, at the same time, can be commercially exploited and maintained by private companies. Commercial exploration can involve bars, restaurants, convenience stores and many other services that are of interest to the population. The environmental-social interface typically includes projects involving the treatment of waste and recycling, generating work and income for the lower income classes (social benefit, inclusion and reduction of inequality) and, simultaneously, recovering materials that can be returned to use following the premises of the circular economy (environmental benefit, reduction of waste accumulation, reduction in the use of natural resources). This prevents these materials from polluting the air, land or water, preserving the environment and generating benefits for society as a whole.
Naturally, in addition to projects that explore economic-social, economic-environmental or environmental-social interfaces, there are also projects that contribute in all areas at the same time. For example, projects that generate income, promote social inclusion, and are targeted precisely to solve environmental problems that afflict the communities involved. These projects are especially transformative and usually require great creativity and collaboration among stakeholders. Creativity and collaboration, together with social and environmental awareness and responsibility, are distinct marks of Sustainable Innovation.
Sustainable Innovation is the path to be followed on a planet that does not support aggressions beyond those to which it has already been subjected. It is essential for humanity to transition to a sustainable future. Sustainable Innovation differs from traditional innovation because, from the beginning of the solution design, economic, social and environmental aspects are considered in depth. Thus, the solution solves the proposed problem without causing negative social or environmental impacts. Furthermore, whenever possible, the solution alleviates or resolves environmental and social issues. This adds even more value to the proposed solution, which is designed to be sustainable in the long term, adding value to the current generation without compromising or preferably improving conditions for future generations. Sustainable Innovation is particularly relevant to public service. This is because, in the scope of private companies, the economic dimension, translated into the form of profit, traditionally receives the greatest relevance and attention. In the public service, on the other hand, environmental and social issues are also of utmost importance. Thus, the public service, which must serve citizens, offers the ideal space for promoting Sustainable Innovation. Furthermore, the population and consumption growth seen in most regions of the globe make Sustainable Innovation even more important and absolutely crucial for current and future generations.
PUBLIC SERVICE AND THE NEED FOR INNOVATION
Innovation is a current and relevant topic for all organizations, more specifically guiding the private sector over the years, due to greater competition and the need to maintain market share through new products, processes or services. However, it is inherent to innovation that it happens for different purposes. Thus, organizations work towards their development, strengthening what we can call innovation processes. In the public sector, although the objectives are different from those of the private sector, the innovation process is now also included as a practice, meeting the intrinsic challenges of managing resources to fulfil its mission.
According to Oliveira and Santos Junior (2017), there are at least three major strands that address innovation in the public sector. These authors analysed several studies to understand the visions of innovation in this environment. The main one, and in this content the most evident, would be the innovation approached according to the Schumpeterian theory, seen as the change or transformation from the point of view of economic development, based on new combinations undertaken by agents that make economic expansion viable. In this sense, it is worth noting that there are aspects present both in the spirit of entrepreneurship and in the implementation of an innovation, whether in the context of the environment or public or private management. Still, there are currents that corroborate that innovation should be seen as similar to that arising in the private sector, being carried out or implemented in terms of products, processes, new organizational or marketing forms. Obviously, in this sense, there are peculiarities inherent in what is proposed, when developing, adopting and implementing such innovations in the public sector. Finally, and based on more current authors and theories, innovation can be analysed as a form of governance and implementation of public policies, associated with the roles of governors and the management cycles inherent to elective public positions.
As already discussed, innovation occurs through the application of a new approach to understanding and solving the problem with a view to creating value. Added to the innovation process are new forms of organization or market, as well as business models that add creative and diversified methods, knowledge and tools to their modus operandi. Innovation in organizations presupposes different processes of creation, use of techniques, accumulation of know-how, and new technologies and tools capable of transforming the practices for carrying out internal actions. The desired result is the creation of value for customers and for the organization itself, whether through greater efficiency, profit format, cost reduction, or better use of available resources to carry out its mission.
The evolution of a society based on a knowledge economy and the use of technology requires that the responses of a public sector organization also be accompanied by this innovation. The need to act supported by digital technologies, the internet, connectivity, services and use of networks, applications and social media is evident. These changes require not only structural changes, but also agile and reliable services, meeting the expectations of a new citizen profile. However, it is known that the administration in the public sector is based on fundamental normative and legal pillars for the maintenance of constitutional principles, according to Art. 37 of the Federal Constitution of 1988. In addition, there are the so-called “normative instruments for the execution of planning and budget for the public sector, such as the multi-year plan (PPA), the budget guidelines law (LDO) and the annual budget law (LOA) at the three levels of the Brazilian Federation” (Emmendoerfer, 2019, p.22). In this legal environment, innovation is particularly important to achieve greater efficiency, but it can help with any of the demands incorporated in the aforementioned regulations. Allied to legal and constitutional instruments and regulations, public management can be understood as practices and tools aimed at better planning, control and execution of projects, programs and actions.
To support the implementation of innovation management in the public sector, the OECD makes important contributions in terms of methodologies, mainly guiding the assessment of public policies. These guidelines provide conditions for evaluating and coordinating the collection and interpretation of data on innovation processes, in order to assist governments in the management and development of plans and implementation of these practices. It is noteworthy that “in the 4th edition of the Oslo Manual, issues of innovation in the governmental sphere and on public policies were included” (Emmendoerfer, 2019, p.39). According to the National School of Public Administration (ENAP), the main types of innovation that could be made possible in the public sector are those focused on organizational processes and in services or public policies. These innovations can contribute to the development of new ways to make services available to society and meet its demands, to promote changes, new features, and delivery of these services, always considering the impacts positively both for the public administration and for the citizens.
It is important to highlight that trends in terms of innovation also contribute to public sector management paying attention to the implementation of improvements aimed at creating value. As examples, investments in technologies that add security both in terms of infrastructure and in central systems, and that enable the modernization of processes using digitalization, especially from modular architectures. To these can also be added the transformation of processes and other deliverables as services (everything as a service). These combinations of the use of technologies are essential innovations to be planned. They tend to gradually intensify, determining that the efficiency of services is a prerogative in the public sector, in terms of traceability and the possibility of making processes more agile, faster and safer.
The innovation process, as it is a complex, multifaceted and multilevel phenomenon, makes the public sector a great agent of change and reinforces the role of the State as an entrepreneur. In addition to trends from the point of view of technology development, advances in science and knowledge in an applied way, it is essential that the State, governments, public administration are aware of other global aspects, such as the SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) and strive for sustainability in management. It is inevitable that most technological innovations whose trends are posed as challenges for both the public and private sectors are also motivated by their shared interaction and development. The demand for this development and the generation of innovations may be inherent to public structures, but the presence of the private sector, together with universities and innovation centres, has great potential to contribute to facing these challenges. Of course, not all innovations go through the application of technology directly. Innovations in processes or organizations, in addition to those directly linked to public policies, have a wide spectrum of application. However, many of these permeate the look of new tools enhanced by technological input. The management (and security) of data at scale, the combination of human and machine aspects, the possibility of carrying out more comprehensive and robust analyses and the increased accuracy in decision making are consequences that can be observed.
Finally, it is important to consider and evaluate the implementation of the innovation, in order to understand the consequences and impacts it caused. In this sense, Oliveira and Santos Junior (2017, p. 37 apud Rogers, 2003), suggest that there are three dimensions to an assessment of the consequences of innovation in the public sector, considering the effects for the individual or for a social system, after implementation.
• Desirable or Undesirable: when there are functional or dysfunctional effects;
• Direct or Indirect: when changes are immediate to the adoption of the innovation or arising from its consequences;
• Anticipable or Unanticipated: when changes are recognized and intended or unintended, nor recognized by the members of the system.
There are other authors suggesting the need to assess factors such as efficiency, effectiveness and quality, which are also intrinsically linked to the evaluation aspects of public policies and programs, projects in general, among other factors to complement the requirements capable of assessing the impacts and consequences of implementing innovations.
HOW DESIGN CAN CONTRIBUTE TO PUBLIC SERVICE INNOVATION
When talking about projects, one immediately thinks about the more traditional and widely known methods, such as the PMI (Project Management Institute) knowledge guide on project management. On the other hand, when it comes to design-based projects, for non-experts, it is associated with something less structured, based on something more intuitive, focused on visual appeal and product development. The point is that most of the time, they are seen in a dissociated way.
When it comes to public projects, there are similarly preconceived views, associating bureaucracies, lack or scarcity of resources (financial, physical, intellectual and human) and projects dissociated from what the market is delivering. The issue here is to think beyond methodologies and techniques, but rather about how we think and conduct our projects. And this is where we must change the way we think and use existing methods and techniques to get different results. And that's where thinking about design comes in and how it can contribute to potential results in public projects. Design thinking can act on two main fronts: Who are we doing our projects for? And how are we thinking and conducting our projects?
Let's start by talking about who. One of the main points of design thinking is the focus on the human being, that is, looking at people, really understanding them, developing empathy. But what is empathy? Empathy is feeling what the other feels, not just understanding, but actually feeling, putting yourself in the other's shoes, changing the lens of vision on a certain problem or challenge. It is knowing how to listen to the other, learning that every problem or challenge has several points of view, and that all of them must be considered, with no right or wrong.
Let's go to how then. Design thinking is about this: exploration. Explore problems, challenges, solutions, before moving on to a definition. The double diamond, a very representative figure of design thinking, was presented by the Design Council. It shows two major moments of divergence, which represent the exploratory process of broadening and deepening problems, challenges or solutions, and two other moments of convergence, which are the definitions of the real and relevant problem and the solutions that actually add value to the people. But it is important to understand who are the people who must be understood to deliver value solutions. Public projects often, due to constraints such as time, financial resources and people, end up focusing only internally to the institution. However, many of the projects are made for the external population. For this reason, identifying the people who should be considered for the project's success must extrapolate the internal environment of the public institution. It should look at all those who impact or are impacted by the project, both internally and externally. But more than considering, they must observe, talk, empathize with them.
The aim of this whole exploratory process is to find the unexpected. Until the unexpected is found, not enough is explored. In addition, this exploratory process must also consider the context in a broad way, looking at the market, activities (interacting directly with the beneficiary of the projects, but also supporting the solution to be delivered), infrastructure, communication, resources, social factors, political, geographic, economic and how they all interact with each other and with people.
Understanding the problem is the basis of creativity, that is, this entire thought process in design leads to thinking creatively in the face of all constraints and to understanding the obstacles identified as opportunities for actions so that the solution can be innovative, delivered in the end with success, that is, being implemented, adding value to people and being sustainable. In the end, the important thing is to understand how to think differently to deliver better results. It's not about processes, methodologies and tools, but knowing how to use them to develop better people-to-people solutions.
HOW DESIGN CAN BOOST SUSTAINABLE SOCIETIES
Society faces a huge challenge in creating sustainable conditions for our future. We are facing complex problems where the role and task of public-sector organizations is not clear and can change quickly and radically.
The sustainability challenges are sometimes called wicked problems as it is difficult to see what happens in the system when trying to solve the problems. Sustainability challenges can also be described as challenges where we don't even know what the questions are or how the challenges really look like. It might be that by solving one problem, one can create another.
The challenges of today’s society new forms of problem solving given that clashes between wicked problems and traditional problem‐solving systems often arise. However, many public agencies today are not equipped for these changes. Solutions on wicked problems often needs to be based on great flexibility and agility. However, many societies have built a public sector based on last century's needs, conditions and management models. This has resulted in that the institutions and organizations in public sector are not always optimal or even relevant for dealing with today's often complex challenges.
The multilateral Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) argues that public administrations in many countries are approaching the limit of what they are able to achieve using existing processes and service delivery systems. In this scenario, Design Thinking as a problem-solving and a human-centred innovation approach come in as a method suitable for developing new innovative solutions. It puts people we design for at the centre of the process and invites them to co-create solutions. Design Thinking can be carried out in a five- step process: Empathizing, Ideation, Prototyping, Testing and Implementation. You can read more about the six- step process in the Solution Design chapter.