Co-design is increasingly promoted as best-practice and a solution to many policy issues such as such as declining trust, complexity and wicked problems. An article in Policy Design and Practice investigates whether co-designed policies and programs are in fact more successful in achieving positive policy outcomes. It found that while co-design can have a significant positive impact on the process when it is done well, its effect on longer-term program and political success depends on other factors.
Co-design and policy success
While co-design is still in its early stages of conceptual development, there is little empirical evidence on whether it leads to more effective policy outcomes. Are co-designed policies and programs more successful? To answer this question, the article examined the Family Safety Hub (FSH) co-design process undertaken in the Australian Capital Territory.
Co-design is seen to:
- offer close collaboration between service providers and citizens
- generate opportunities for improving efficiency and quality of public service delivery
- enhance democratisation and trust in government.
Co-design is generally presented as a process that, if successfully implemented, will lead to more legitimate, practical and effective policy outcomes. The research explored this contention by using a policy success framework to analyse the FSH co-design process and explore whether this approach supported the development of a more successful policy outcome.
The success framework
The success framework that was used outlines three dimensions of policy success:
- programmatic success in which a policy is successful when it delivers valuable social outcomes.
- political success which refers to the degree to which policy-makers are able to build and maintain political coalitions to support it
- process success which refers to the stages of policy-making in which issues emerge and are framed, options are explored, interests are consulted and decisions made.
About the research
The research used a qualitative case study method to assess the success of the Family Safety Hub (FSH) which was developed using co-design and was undertaken in collaboration with the ACT government. A consultancy was brought on board to run an extensive co-design process to develop a shared vision for FSH.
Thirteen project participants were interviewed – five from the consultancy, five from the ACT government and three service providers (SP). The semi-structured interviews focused on the experience of participating in the co-design process and the elements that were seen as more/less effective in achieving the goal of delivering a successful policy.
What the research found
Process
A successful policy is one that preserves government’s policy goals and instruments, builds a successful coalition and experiences limited or no opposition. However, co-design allows for negotiation, even conflict. Conflict was present in some aspects of the design of the FSH, particularly in the initial stages.
The co-design process ultimately changed the policy goals and instruments of the FSH. Initially intended to be a centralised “focal point”, by the end, it had transformed into an innovation lab designed to test and scale interventions, building on the key issues formulated during the co-design process.
Overall, the FSH appears to have been a process success. The policy was approved by government and a sustainable coalition was formed around an innovative policy approach.
Program
Program success is the most aligned with standard evaluation measurement. It is achieved when the policy is implemented in line with its objectives and accomplishes its desired outcomes.
The FSH experienced some challenges when it came to the implementation of the trials. The co-design process was intended to lead to the identification and development of policy issues, with the intent to test solutions through pilots, learn quickly and scale solutions. The challenge of determining if FSH was successful was noted from the start. The absence of visible program outcomes and evaluations means the achievement of desired outcomes remains hidden, complicating a declaration of program success.
Politics
A politically successful policy enhances political capital. Over time, the FSH became less politically successful. The initial co-design work generated a significant amount of goodwill. However, the lack of visibility of concrete actions in response to funding, created a more challenging political environment.
The bottom line
While a process success, the lack of transparency makes it challenging to declare program success (or failure) of the FSH. While there was some political opposition, it was not a failed policy politically. It generated significant positive attention and a focus on innovation.
The case study shows that co-design can have a significant positive impact on process when it is done well. It is far less clear from one case study whether co-design leads to program or political success. The perennial policy challenges with transitioning to implementation persist.
Co-design is not a magic bullet. It can help generate knowledge and build relationships, but if there is not a clear view of how it will lead to better programs and political success, it is important to reconsider whether it is the best approach. This is especially so given the costs (time, emotional labour) that can be incurred.
Want to read more
Unlocking policy success: is codesign the key to achieving effective policy outcomes? – Sarah Ball and René Rejón, Policy Design and Practice, June 2024.
Each fortnight The Bridge summarises a piece of academic research relevant to public sector managers.
- Published Date: 17 July 2024