1. Insert the logos/names of the main institutions involved in the project...
Designing for citizen engagement
Understanding how people support each other in daily life both
through formal and informal volunteering and how to enhance
that
HEI: Lancaster University
Course(s)/Research body: MA Design Management, Module
‘Design Thinking and Research Methods’
Main Partners: Lancaster City Council
Place: Lancaster
Keywords: service design, citizen engagement

2. The context:
This research project aimed at helping the Local Council to better
understand the dynamics, conditions and forms of
spontaneous and informal mutual help within communities as
well as formal volunteering in both a rural and urban area, and to
use this knowledge to improve their service infrastructure and
provision to become more open and collaborative.

3. Click on the icon below to insert one or
more images showing the project…
(of people, objects and places)
Add text below to summarise the starting
concept and strategy, how did the
project develop? what were some of the
key outputs and outcomes?
Students in groups worked with different existing communities and
initiatives both Council led and not. They then reported on reasons
for citizens’ engagement and what the Council could do or use to
improve their work: i.e. less hierarchical communication strategy, a
digital credit system for time bank, guidelines for reinforcing
community spirit, cross generational activities, etc.

4. Actor Profile: Lancaster City Council
Motivations for involvement (agendas):
Lancaster City Council is exploring new approaches to citizen
engagement and participation into local governance and service provision.
The interaction with citizens is transforming, because of changing
demands, limited resources and the advent of new social media that
challenge traditional ways of communication and decision-making.
Contribution to the project (assets):
Contacts with local communities; access to data and feedback to project
proposals
The project outcomes for this actor:
Insights into participation and engagement, what support and prevent
them; some insights on few on-going initiatives and ideas to evaluate for
implementation.

5. Other actors or initiatives:
•Warton Village
•Hala Community Association
•Highfield Regeneration Project
•Lancaster Friendship Group
•Connected Communities
•Time Bank Lancaster
•Street Pride project
Contribution to the project (assets):
Support to students, access to information and co-design
The project outcomes for these actors:
Insights in their work and visibility with the City Council

6. Design Process was open to students choice of individual methods
and activities, but it had to fit within 10 weeks.

7. Methods used:
Students were presented with design research methods in general
from generic ethnographic methods to more designerly approaches
such as cultural probes, generative tools, co-design tools. They were
free to choose the most relevant for their investigations.

8. Methods used:
Ideas Fair was an event organised to present to all communities and
stakeholders involved the students’ ideas and get feedback for the
students to finalise their work.

9. Role of Design
In depth exploration of people’s motivations and resistances to
participation in community based or council driven initiatives. Also
valorisation of existing resources and their reciprocal relationships:
what is already there and how it can be reinforced.
Ideas generation beyond individual perspectives and interests.

10. Project output and impact:
The project outcome was a list of possible ideas to improve the
Council work with existing local communities and insights in their
motivations and needs
The council collected all ideas into a report for their communication
and engagement team. Some insights have been useful to inform
their future activities i.e. Street Pride (communication strategy), Time
Bank (credit system) or Skerton Connected Communities
(engagement strategies)

11. Learning outcomes:
List the key learning outcomes for the project for the different actors:
Students, HEI, course, other actors etc…

12. Successes and Shortcomings/ Barriers and Enablers
The successes of the project were the width and depth of the
overview the students developed that was difficult for the Council to
achieve; also the good relationships students developed with the
community groups. Ideas and insights were taken seriously on board.
Shortcomings were the time frame of 10 weeks and difficulty to
access some case studies with delays for students. Some ideas were
not feasible in terms of implementation.
Enabling has been the strong interest demonstrated by the City
Council to engage with Design and design students and how they
facilitated access to data and people.