Design By Doing 2.0 Pathways to Employment A Social Innovation Lab convened by the Edmonton Bhutanese Community, EndPovertyEdmonton, Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative, City of Edmonton and the Skills Society Action Lab
2018/2019 | Action Lab | Edmonton
TABLE OF CONTENTS Conveners of Design By Doing 2.0 ................................................................ 1 What is Design by Doing? ..............................................................................2 Generating Prototypes: 2 Day Workshop .....................................................8 The Prototypes ...............................................................................................25 Community Showcase ..................................................................................32 Reflections & Key Learnings .........................................................................33
CONVENERS OF DESIGN BY DOING 2.0 ACTION LAB Skills Society is one of the largest disability service organizations in Edmonton. A not-for-profit organization, our vision is of a community where all individuals are valued citizens deserving respect, dignity, and rights. A social enterprise of Skills Society, the Action Lab is designed for hosting group collaboration, strategy sessions, and social innovation explorations. The Action Lab experience promotes creative problem solving, offers tools to help tap into collective wisdom, and helps people prototype solutions to challenges they are working on. Revenue from the Action Lab supports the employment of people with disabilities, innovative social change initiatives of Skills Society, and subsidizes community groups’ use of the Action Lab. www.skillssociety.ca @skillssociety #ActionLabYeg
MULTICULTURAL HEALTH BROKERS COOPERATIVE MCHB is a group of Multicultural Health Brokers. Many of us started as volunteers in our communities, were identified as natural leaders, and were brought in as a paid capacity as Brokers with the Co-operative. We serve over 2,000 families a year in the Edmonton area, and this number is growing every year. As Brokers, our own cultures reflect the 25 communities we work with. Many of the families are new to Canada, and need support to bridge between their own knowledge from their home country and Canada’s health, social services, education, justice, immigration and employment support systems. We have a holistic approach towards health, and we honour the families and work with them as long as they need us. We believe in the strength and aspirations of families and communities, and as Brokers we build bridges between people and systems. We are a worker co-operative. This means MCHB is owned and controlled by all our Brokers. We believe in the values of mutual care, self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity.
1
ENDPOVERTYEDMONTON EndPovertyEdmonton is a community initiative working towards prosperity for all through advancing reconciliation, the elimination of racism, livable incomes, affordable housing, accessible and affordable transit, affordable and quality child care, and access to mental health services and addiction supports. Together, we can change the conversation on poverty and ensure every Edmontonian has the opportunity to thrive. www.endpovertyedmonton.ca
CITY OF EDMONTON The capital of Alberta, a northern city of art and ideas, research and energy. Edmonton is an energy city. Energy drawn from the ground and from above; from the sun and wind. But the true power of Edmonton is the democratic spark in its people.
EDMONTON BHUTANESE COMMUNITY There are about 350 Bhutanese newcomers living in Edmonton. Together they form a supportive, strong, and resilient community of people.
STEWARDSHIP GROUP Representatives from the organizations above, as well as identified leaders from the Bhutanese community, formed a lab stewardship group in the spring of 2018 and together began learning from the Bhutanese community what the Design by Doing Lab should focus on and help the community with. Over 8 months this stewardship group learned from each other, strengthened collaboration, built authentic relationships with the Bhutanese community and created a social innovation lab process that Bhutanese community leaders felt would work in their cultural context. The stewardship group strove to co-create a process with the community rather than for the community.
2
STEWARDSHIP TEAM
WHAT IS DESIGN BY DOING? Design by Doing is a social innovation lab series focused on discovering new solutions based on the Game Changers identified in the EndPovertyEdmonton Roadmap. EndPovertyEdmonton, Skills Society Action Lab, Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative, and the City of Edmonton are key partners in this initiative.
ROHIT
SHIVA
LUCENIA
YVONNE
SARAH
SUSANNAH
PAIGE
BEN
Social innovation labs allow people from all walks of life to come together to describe their experiences with an identified issue and brainstorm new ways of solving problems. Each lab follows specific processes geared toward gathering input from all participants in comfortable and nonstandard ways that enhance creativity. There are no limits placed on the types or number of ideas generated, but the goal is to design solutions that can be put into action and have been reviewed by those impacted by the issue. The labs are held both in the ActionLab and in community. Action Lab is a social enterprise of the Skills Society that has received international attention for the quality and depth of knowledge in stewarding social innovation labs over the last 10 years. The Action Lab runs both shorter and longer multi year labs (for an example of a multi year lab check out the Edmonton Shift Lab being undertaken with the Edmonton Community foundation). Each Design by Doing lab identifies a specific issue or challenge area and assembles community members, service providers, members of different orders of government, and most importantly those with lived experience of the issue being explored. This group of people come together for one or two days to do the guided work of exploring the issue, generating ideas, and reviewing them. The length of the lab is dependent upon the needs of the community and the issue being explored.
DESIGN BY DOING 1.0 Design by Doing 1.0 was held in early 2017 and focused on (1) poverty and (2) making navigation of service systems for newcomers more accessible. A portfolio of prototypes were developed by community in this diverse gathering. More about what happened in this lab can be found here.
3
DESIGN BY DOING 2.0 Design by Doing 2.0 was a longer process, running from the spring of 2018 through to the fall of 2019. The process was co-created by leaders within the Edmonton Bhutanese community, Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative, Action Lab, EndPovertyEdmonton, and City of Edmonton. This iteration of Design by Doing focused on culturally adapting the social innovation lab processes and design with the Bhutanese community, to allow people from different cultural backgrounds and with varying levels of English language fluency to fully participate. Two workshop days were developed and designed with the Bhutanese community to address the barriers and needs Bhutanese community members face in seeking and securing gainful employment. A short documentary about the design by doing process is also being developed to help communicate what happens in social innovation labs.
1. Empathy Listening to stories, conducting ethnographic research, sense making and systems mapping. 2. Define Making sense of needs and insights from stories and defining 3. Ideate Brainstorming, getting ideas from other fields, co-designing with community and building on ideas of others.
4. Prototype Choosing ideas that could meet needs and making prototypes of what a service, policy innovation could look like. 5. Test Checking the prototypes with community/ with user groups the prototypes are for.
4
CORE CHALLENGE The community identified the following as the core challenge to be explored in the lab:
How might we create relevant pathways to support the Edmonton Bhutanese community to access more gainful employment opportunities? As the core challenge was explored with Bhutanese community leaders, three pathways to employment emerged as key areas to explore further: A traditional pathway (i.e. job searching, resume, interview, on the job training); Self-employment or micro-enterprise pathway (i.e. starting a small business or micro enterprise based on personal skills such as gardening or crafting); and English language learning pathway (i.e. gaining increased English language fluency as a stepping stone to employment).
WHY FOCUS ON THE BHUTANESE COMMUNITY? The newcomer population in Edmonton is diverse. While there are settlement and employment supports available for newcomers, they may not be responsive for smaller immigrant and refugee communities who face multiple barriers such as limited English Language skills, limited education, and complex socio-economic challenges. The Bhutanese community is one such community. Despite demonstrating tremendous resilience, cultural wealth, and hopeful optimism that their lives will be better in their new homeland, the 350 members living in Edmonton, find current systems and supports often do not adequately support them in overcoming the multi-faceted barriers to employment they face.
5
OVERVIEW OF DESIGN BY DOING 2.0 ACTIVITIES PRE-LAB (6 MONTHS) Scoping the Challenge & Culturally Adapting the Lab Process Pre-lab workshops took place over the course of 6 months. During these workshops the stewardship group researched, explored, and worked alongside Bhutanese community leaders to scope the challenge area. After a great deal of discussion and learning, employment was selected as the core challenge area. With the challenge area scoped, it was time to explore how to culturally adapt the lab process. A period of learning took place, during which the stewardship team learned from the Bhutanese community leaders how their community generally approaches problem solving in their cultural context. Allowing this information to guide us, and drawing on human centred design principles, we worked alongside the Bhutanese community leaders to co-create culturally sensitive lab tools and processes. This process, incorporating translation and creative input from the community, allowed us to utilize design methods while making sure they worked, were appropriate, and relatable within the Bhutanese cultural context. Some key adaptations we made to the process included: teaching/processing through storytelling, translating the empathy map and other lab tools, and drawing brainstormed ideas (rather than speaking or writing them).
LAB WORKSHOPS Generating, Refining, and Testing Prototypes Generating Prototypes (2 Day Workshop) This 2 day workshop, formed the “main event” of the Design by Doing 2.0 process. A variety of stakeholders including members of the Bhutanese community, leaders of nonprofits, and service providers came together to explore the scoped challenge of employment, following the 5 stages of the human centered design process. Refining & Upgrading Prototypes (Evening Workshop) After the 2 day workshop, those who confirmed they wanted to keep refining and working on prototypes to transform them into potential pilots, came together for a prototype refining and upgrading workshop. “Translated Human Centred Design Tool”
Testing the Prototypes with Community (Evening Workshop) With the prototypes refined, we were ready to share and test them with the community.
6
POST-LAB Prototype Working Groups Implementing some or all of the proposed pathways is the point at which a lab transitions from being more exploratory focused to project management focused. Here, working groups are forming to help develop pilots. This is a critical point and also tricky as resources for implementation are often hard to continue after a lab exploration. Stewards at this point are looking for partners and collaborators to help make ideas tangible for the community.
Key 2 day Workshop Steps 1. Establish context, the frame and key challenge being explored 2. Empathy Mapping of 3 user personas created by Bhutanese community 3. Creating criteria for choosing ideas 4. Ideating possibilities 5. Converging on ideas to rapidly prototype 6. Rapid Prototyping 7. Rapid feedback and testing 8. Now What, So What?
Who Came to the Lab Workshops? 40+ people attended the lab workshops including: Bhutanese community members with lived experience of employment challenges, front-line service deliverers, service designers, and staff of numerous organizations including the City of Edmonton, the Government of Alberta, Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative, Cultural Connections Institute, University of Alberta, Catholic Social Services, and Norquest College.
Picture of participnts in 2 day lab workshop
7
GENERATING PROTOTYPES: 2 DAY WORKSHOP Introduction & Guiding Principles Shiva and Rohit (Bhutanese community leaders) and Ben (lab facilitator), welcomed everyone and explained what was going to happen over the following 2 days. Shiva and Rohit performed a Bhutanese ceremony that involved lighting a butter lamp and honoring a wise person in the room who was bestowed with the responsibility of protecting the group. The person chosen for this role was Kate Gunn from City of Edmonton who has been instrumental in pioneering new ways to help address poverty including the co-creation of pathways with community. Shiva and Rohit offered Kate a ceremonial red Katak silk scarf to honor her. Following the ceremony, Ben and Shiva went through the Action Lab Agreement (see below), outlining 10 principles that guided our work over the 2 days. These principles were created in collaboration with the Bhutanese community.
Kate Gunn, City of Edmonton, wearing a silk scarf gifted to her by the Bhutanese community during the opening of the lab days
Action lab agreement created in collaboration with the Bhutanese community - 10 principles to guide our work over the 2 days
8
GENERATING PROTOTYPES: 2 DAY WORKSHOP Learning Station Exploration To help understand the history, hopes, strengths, and challenges facing the Edmonton Bhutanese community, 4 learning stations were curated by community leaders. The Bhutanese community led a show and share followed by questions and answers to help the lab explorers gain a foundational understanding of Edmonton Bhutanese refugees. After each 12 minute learning round (4 total), people would fill out insight cards and leave them at the stations. This was an amazingly interactive exploration and a highlight of the lab days.
9
Themes that emerged from the learning stations Three designers attended the lab days to support the group in making sense of the insights and ideas generated. The designers pulled key themes emerging from the insight cards filled out by lab explorers at each learning station. These themes were then made into posters (see below) and printed for lab explorers to view on day 2.
BHUTANESE HISTORY What we learned: • Bhutan’s location is geographically significant • Bhutan is ethnically diverse • About 6,500 Bhutanese refugees resettled in Canada, and around 300 resettled in Edmonton Interesting insight: • An entire generation of Bhutanese people were born and raised in refugee camps
CHALLENGES & OBSTACLES What we learned: • It is difficult to gain the first Canadian job experience(s), especially in their chosen field • Bhutanese youth may have difficulty balancing work, school, and the cultural expectation of taking care of elders • Language and communication is a significant barrier in attaining steady work Interesting insights • It is nearly impossible to get Canadian job experience if all employers require it • Culturally, Bhutanese people may be afraid to take risks and lack confidence • Employer discrimination is a complex and systemic societal issue
10
HOPES & ASPIRATIONS What we learned: • Education and skill-building is especially important for women, who have traditionally been discriminated against • There is hope for stability - financially, in communities through family reunification, and through permanent residencies Interesting insights: • Bhutanese community members have hope for their younger, Canadian-born generations and want to see their children thrive
STRENGTHS & SKILLS What we learned: • The skills of Bhutanese people are not seen as transferable by employers • The Bhutanese community seeks harmony in their diversity, and values strong relationships • The Bhutanese are hardworking, respectful, dedicated, resiliant, and ready to help Interesting insights: • Youth (20-40 yrs) experience challenges with employment because of low English language and literacy levels • There is a lack of understanding around why jobs are being lost
11
STORIES Bhutanese community leaders and Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative worked together to create 3 unique stories that were used as case studies during the lab exploration. The stories were designed to reflect some of the common experiences of Bhutanese community members. The purpose of these stories was to help lab explorers understand some of the challenges, barriers, and strengths of community members experiencing barriers to employment. The three stories and the associated employment pathways are outlined below. Lab explorers were divided into three teams, each exploring a different persona or story.
TSHERING (TEAM 1) Bhutanese community member needing support with traditional pathways to employment. (e.g. job searching, resume, interview, on the job support)
WANGMO (TEAM 2)
Member of the Bhutanese community looking to use their talents and gifts to start a small/home business (e.g. micro enterprise, self employment)
RUDRA (TEAM 2)
Member of the Bhutanese community seeking employment but whose main barrier to employment is limited English Language skills
12
EMPATHY MAPPING Empathy Mapping was used as a sense making tool during the lab days. This tool is designed to help lab explorers understand an experience from the perspective of the user/person. During the lab days the group was split into 3 teams. Each group was assigned one of the 3 stories created by the Bhutanese community leaders (outlined above as Tshering, Wangmo, and Rudra). Stories highlighted the hopes, wishes, pain points, and strengths. In addition to the stories, groups also had the opportunity to hear from Bhutanese community members who shared their experiences throughout the activity.
It’s important to note that Empathy Maps represent shared sense making of the specific team that came together on the particular day. Empathy maps cannot be used as absolute truths for what all members experience. By engaging in Empathy mapping, new insights in a lab team can be generated that can provide insight into the challenge and can help a lab team see innovation opportunities to design solutions around. Identifying Needs and Areas for Innovation on the Empathy Maps After the Empathy Maps, teams did an analysis where they had a conversation and placed 3 color coded tags where the team saw: • 3 Areas for Innovation (I) • 3 Areas of Need (N)
13
Tshering is 28 years old, married, and lives with his parents in Edmonton, Alberta. He was only one year old when his family fled to Nepal. He spent his entire childhood and schooling in a refugee camp in Nepal. Conditions were rough and he and his brothers and sisters were often hungry. But Tshering was one of the lucky ones. He was able to complete his high school diploma in the camp just before he moved to Canada under the Government Assisted Refugee (GAR) Program. He was already 20 years old and his English skills were barely past the beginner stage so he enrolled immediately in the national language program - known as the LINC program - that the Canadian government offers free to all immigrants. But the class was mainly filled with older students - parents and married couples, and the topics they were studying did not interest Tshering much. Eventually he discovered a college that offered an English program designed especially for youth. He did very well in that program and graduated with a one year plumbing certificate. He was placed in a work experience job and he hoped they would hire him as an apprentice. This did not happen. Tshering was disappointed and confused. He thought he had done a good job.
14
He needed to find a job. He was soon to be married and he wanted to move out of his parent’s apartment and have his own home with his wife. A friend told him about an employment support agency for immigrants so made an appointment to get some help writing a resume. He sent the resume to 15 plumbing companies but never got a single reply. He went back to the employment counselor and asked for advice. “No Canadian experience” he was told, “doesn’t look good on a resume”. Maybe you should get a survival job first and work your way up to a plumbing job. So off he went to get a survival job. Tshering discovered that the job postings he found in cleaning, or fast food restaurants, or warehouses didn’t even ask for a resume. They all required an online application. Tshering had a cell phone but could not make the applications work. It was so discouraging. One day a guy he knew told him his data plan was too small and he couldn’t use the app. He then went back to the employment counsellor and, with help, was able to make some applications using the agency computers. This process was taking a lot longer than Tshering or his family expected. Tshering was feeling badly that he couldn’t earn some money to help his family. And all this running around to apply for jobs was costing a lot in bus fare. Finally, Tshering got his first Canadian job: a part-time, night position stocking shelves in a large grocery store. He was ecstatic. Sure it was minimum wage, but it was a start. And now he would have Canadian experience to add to his resume. His whole family and his new bride celebrated with him. The job did not turn out as he had expected. The supervisors on the night shift were young and inexperienced and really had no control over the workplace. As a new worker, Tshering was ridiculed heavily for his accent, the way he looked, the things he said, the things he knew and didn’t know. He had never been treated so terribly. But the ‘bosses’ were part of the problem so he didn’t dare speak up. He was sure he would lose his job, and he couldn’t let that happen. So he said nothing, and kept working.
15
Team 1 Findings (Tshering’s Story) Converge Phase - finding leverage points
N - Needs of this User/Person • Secure employment (eliminating fear of losing job) • Access to information (e.g. about services and programs) • Support and training for inclusive employment (both entry & higher level jobs) I - Areas for Innovation or Interventions to Improve System • Advocacy and Mediation (in workplace and out of workplace) • Support and training for gainful, inclusive employment • English program specifically for the workplace
What the team decided on the lab day that this user really needs and why: • Advocacy and mediation • Access to information • Paid work experience • Further employment support and training • Community support • Inclusive employment
16
Born and raised in a Bhutanese village, Wangmo was married at the age of 14. She had no formal schooling in her life and instead spent her childhood helping on her family’s farm. In 1992 she and her husband and their two children fled to a refugee camp in Nepal. While in the refugee camp, Wangmo learned the art of weaving and spinning wools and was able to make a little money selling her garments. She also tended a small garden and was able to help feed her family with fresh fruits and vegetables during the time of dire food shortages in the refugee camp. She also was able to attend adult literacy classes in the camp and for the first time was able to read and write in her first language, Nepali. Hoping for a better future, Wangmo and her family resettled in Edmonton as government assisted refugees. At first they accepted government assistance and both attended full time English classes, but eventually they were desperate to make their own way and get off of social assistance, so they set out to find jobs.Someone from the community helped Wangmo find a packaging job which she stayed at for six months before she was laid off for reasons she does not understand. She continued to apply for jobs on her own but had no success. Her husband works at two part-time jobs and with that the family is able to survive, but just barely. Wangmo has enlivened her passion for vegetable gardening with the support of the Duggan community league. She owns a small community garden and grows spices and vegetables; tending her garden gives her great pleasure. She also enjoys getting together with the women in her community and weaving on a handmade loom. She creates bags and placemats of beautiful colors and textures. One friend has a sewing machine that Wangmo is able to borrow from time to time and she makes a little money sewing for people. Wangmo is a hard-working and ambitious woman. She is willing to work hard and wants to be self-reliant. She dreams of being able to earn money by selling the food she grows and the clothing and textiles she creates. She knows she needs to have some money to start and a place to sell her goods‌but how? Where? She doesn’t know where to begin.
17
Team 2 Findings (Wangmo’s Story) Converge Phase - finding leverage points
N - Needs of this User/Person • Reducing communication barriers • Support system • Capital for start up, space, and operating costs I - Areas for Innovation or Interventions to Improve System • Creating a support system • Mentorship • Access to success stories of people in similar situations • More individualised socialaid • Managing acquisition of and confidence in transferable skills • Understanding how to market oneself - considering current market and uniqueness/culture of products
What the team decided on the lab day that this user really needs and why: • A support system • Mentorship • Accessibility to success stories • Service providing interpreters • Looking for collaborators • Should practice better need assessment → too prescriptive currently •
Capital • Start up money • Affordable space • Advertisement
18
After facing severe persecution in their homeland of Bhutan, Rudra and his wife, Anita, fled to Nepal and spent the next 20 years raising their four children in a refugee camp. They lived in very harsh conditions with minimal food, water, and medical services. Finally, in 2011, they were accepted as Government Assisted Refugees (GARs) to Canada. The first few months in Canada were a “honeymoon stage”. The family was excited about their new opportunities and happy with their comparative safety and comfort. Rudra rented a small apartment in a neighbourhood with several other Bhutanese families. The proximity of friends and neighbours who spoke Nepali, shared the culture, and understood the experience of refugee camp life was a big support to Rudra and his family. But that sojourn was short-lived. Lack of affordable housing forced many Bhutanese families to other parts of the city and the community was dispersed. His inability to speak English meant that Rudra could not find work and poverty became a new threat. In addition, other realities of being an immigrant with refugee experience – loss of community, disoriented family relations, loss of status, loss of familiar comfort foods and traditions, literacy issues due to interrupted schooling making language learning all the more difficult, and PTSD – took the shine off the honeymoon glow very quickly. Rudra decided he needed to learn English so he could find a job to support his family. He was grateful that he was able to get into the free English classes offered by the Canadian government, Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC). However, Anita, who had even less English than Rudra, could not start her studies right away because there was more than a year waitlist for childcare in the LINC program and one of their children was still a preschooler.
19
Rudra worked diligently to learn English, but studying was often difficult. The system of schooling was very strange. The alphabet was new to him and since he couldn’t read and write very well in Hindi, everything about grammar was totally confusing. He liked the topics they studied: shopping, banking, school system, getting around Edmonton, and finding a job, but there seemed to be so much to learn. Often Rudra found it impossible to focus at school. He frequently felt exhausted and would lose his attention and get lost in worry. He worried about his wife and children and how hard it was for them; he worried about the members of his family who were still back in the refugee camps. He worried about how he would get enough money to feed his family. Living costs for a family of six were barely covered by the government assistance he was receiving and on top of that he has the added pressure of making his monthly payments for the refugee transportation loans for each member of his family. To save on rent costs, Rudra and his family moved into a small house that belonged to another Bhutanese couple. Sharing someone else’s house complicated the family dynamics and added to the stress of their lives. After a year and a half, Rudra passed his LINC level 4. He was told that this was a level that would give him enough English to get a job. A counselor at an immigrant serving agency helped him write a resume and although he sent it to many employers, he did not get a single interview. His resume does not impress because it tells only of his experience farming in Nepal. Eventually a leader in the Bhutanese community linked Rudra to the owner of a grocery store and he got his first job stocking shelves at nightworking at minimum wage. The job only lasted a couple of months before his hours started being reduced until he was barely working at all. He never understood the reason his hours were cut. For several years now, Rudra has had to rely on income support from the government. Meanwhile he continues to study English because he likes to have something productive to do with his time. His speaking is improving but the reading and writing is very frustrating. He has heard about English for Employment programs that can help train immigrants for specific jobs, but he needs to have LINC 6 or 7 for those programs and he can’t progress to the next LINC level until he passes the reading and writing benchmarks. At 45 years old, Rudra is still able-bodied and would much prefer to work and build a solid credit history than to be on government assistance. He struggles with depression. In addition, there are many memories in his past that haunt him. He feels that he is losing hope.
20
Team 3 Findings (Rudra’s Story) Converge Phase - finding leverage points
N - Needs of this User/Person • Get a good job • Build skills (not only language skills but others as well) • Be healthy - both mentally and physically I - Areas for Innovation or Interventions to Improve System • Get a good job • Expand/new approach to language learning that is more flexible • Generate incentives to employ refugees/immigrants (maybe similar to STEP)
What the team decided on the lab day that this user really needs and why: • Holistic support: taking a more holistic approach in class. He also needs a broader circle of supports outside of class. • Flexible English classes that meet individual needs • English classes connected to employers and jobs • Support answering the following question: How can I solve this problem (job) and who will help me?
21
PROTOTYPING Getting Our Minds Ready for Thinking Differently On the second day of the the lab workshop, we needed to get people’s minds in a space to think differently in order to generate creative employment pathways that work for the Edmonton Bhutanese community. To do this a Bhutanese community leader named Rohit shared a traditional mythological story that highlighted the ways in which many Bhutanese people approach challenges creatively. The story highlighted key principles of thinking differently about challenges: • • • •
Be open to learn from experienced ones (Gurus) Things on the surface are not always what they seem The need to change perspectives to see a situation from different angles Creativity should be in service to others to alleviate suffering
22
Ideating Fresh Possibilities To Address The Core Challenge After sense-making of needs through empathy mapping, the teams ideated possibilities through sketching 5 creative possibilities that could meet the needs of the people in their case study story. After sketching ideas, the teams gave and received feedback in order to begin to converge on prototype possibilities. To do this teams of two created 8 possibilities.
23
A Bit About Prototyping After ideation comes prototyping. This is where we make the selected ideas visual, tangible and somewhat testable. Prototyping is a lowcost, low risk way to co-design and test potential solutions. Prototypes are often Storyboards of a service possibility, 3d rough models in Lego describing a concept, visual drawings, service maps, or even role plays. You don’t want to go out and make plans to scale a prototype you have only tested with a few people, with whom the prototype impacts. Testing and pitching the prototypes to more people affected by the prototype can help with checking if the prototypes are promising with more people than just the design team. As a side benefit beyond the prototype outcomes, co-designing and prototyping solutions helps to strengthen teams and fosters bridge building. As lab teams move forward with their prototypes, they need to consider the following to make progress: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Is the prototype coherent? Is the prototype likely to be effective in trying to do what it’s supposed to? Is it likely to be feasible? Is it likely to be viable? Is it ultimately testable?
The Prototyping Process • 6 prototypes emerged during the lab days. Groups connected and continued to refine their prototypes. Groups considered the following as they refined their prototypes. • Discard the prototype: Team decides it’s not worth continuing the prototype pathway • Evolve the prototype: Adapt, Tweak Prototype in some way get more user feedback? • Graduate prototype to Pilot: Team feels positive enough to formally pilot • Go to Scale: Test results and feedback so positive that the team is ready to scale without further testing • Keep Testing prototype: Results of testing weren’t strong enough to make decisions at this time. Upgrade the evaluation design and try again • The 6 prototypes were refined and collapsed into 3 prototypes • Prototypes were further refined during a prototype working night held with community members • Prototypes were then made visual with each team creating a poster • Prototypes were tested using scrappy testing methods (see key learnings from this in later section)
24
THE PROTOTYPES The following three prototypes, outlined in more detail below, were generated in this social innovation process. The prototypes reflect the multiple challenges the Bhutanese community experiences in seeking employment. Co-designed with the Bhutanese community, the prototypes demonstrate how to build on the strengths and talents of the community to fulfill their aspirations for a productive and secure future in Canada.
25
PROTOTYPE 1
SUPPLEMENTAL ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING FOR EMPLOYMENT The Big Idea in a Nutshell An experiential, supplemental English language learning program that supports newcomers in developing speaking/listening skills specific to employment so that they can get a job earlier in the English learning process. This innovative program is envisioned as an ‘elective’ course that complements the already well-established Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC) program in Canada. Who this Prototype is For This program supports vulnerable populations with complex barriers to employment newcomer groups who do not have a job but would like one, and who have ‘beginner’ to ‘low intermediate’ English speaking/listening language skills (Stage 1 on the Canadian Language Benchmarks). These individuals may have limited literacy in their native language. The Problem this Prototype Solves Existing English language courses emphasize raising an individual’s overall language level. While this is important, it does not enable individuals who require immediate employment to support themselves and their families, to gain the speaking/listening language skills necessary to get a ‘survival’ job.
26
Key Learning After Testing This prototype has been field tested! Members of the Bhutanese community came together with the prototype team to try out this model. This included a mini classroom session followed by a field trip to a local grocery store. After the test the group debriefed the experience. The following emerged as key learnings: •
• • •
The Bhutanese community members felt this type of English class would be helpful and fill a gap that currently exists in their English learning Community members liked that it would be offered in conjunction with LINC classes - a program that they are already connected to The experiential component was key! It was important to go out and experience things rather than just sit in a classroom Members liked that the content could be responsive and emergent to their current needs/challenges
Where Things are At Now... Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative is currently exploring the possibility of piloting this program in collaboration with local English Language Learning organizations.
27
PROTOTYPE 2
SUPPORTED MICO-ENTERPRISE The Big Idea in a Nutshell Guided help and hands on support for members of new-comer communities who are interested in using their unique talents and skills to start a small home-based business. Who this Prototype is For Members of the Bhutanese community and other similar cultural groups who are looking to use their unique talents and skills to start a small home-based business for supplementary income. The Problem this Prototype Solves New-comers who want to start a small business are often at a disadvantage and quickly become frustrated with the process of beginning a business.
28
Key Learning After Testing To test this prototype, we facilitated a meeting between someone with an established relationship and strong working knowledge of the Bhutanese culture with a Bhutanese community member and trialled selling crafts at a local market. In this process we learned: •
•
•
The guide is essential for success. Challenges cannot necessarily be predicted and without the essential support of a guide, the individual would be unable to pursue this pathway to employment. Trust is essential for success. The guide must have a deep understanding of the individual’s cultural background to be able to bridge between the individual’s home and Canadian contexts and must work to establish a strong and trusting relationship with the individual. Selling hand-made goods at market may not be a sustainable source of income for all newcomers as it can be challenging to get a small business up and running. However, Bhutanese community members indicated this can be a great ‘side hustle’ and opportunity to build confidence and hone skills.
Where Things are at Now... Through testing we learned that this may not be the best pathway to gainful employment for all newcomers but can become a great ‘side hustle’. Due to limited time and resources on the part of our project team, no further development of this prototype has taken place. However, with the right partners and funding, we could see this prototype being refined and developed into a successful program.
29
PROTOTYPE 3
COMMUNITY LED EMPLOYMENT BROKERING The Big Idea in a Nutshell This prototype is a sustained process of employment support, career guidance and workplace mentoring for multi-barriered newcomer communities with limited access to employment opportunities. Who this Prototype is For Members of smaller newcomer communities who may have different levels of literacy & English, education (training) and previous work experience and encounter multiple-barriers to gainful employment. The Problem this Prototype Solves Expanded access to information about employment opportunities and services is needed, particularly for refugee and new-comer communities with specific cultural and language barriers. These multi-barriered communities require outreach to develop relationships with employment service providers.
30
What We’ve Learned from Testing So Far... We’re only part way through testing this prototype. In the first phase of testing we assembled an employment brokering team consisting of a newcomer seeking employment, a cultural broker, and an employment connector. Together they’ve explored the newcomer’s career goals, current skills and talents, and done a scan of potential job opportunities. Some important learnings have come from testing so far including: •
• •
•
Having both a cultural broker (someone with deep knowledge of the cultural background of the newcomer) as well as an employment connector (someone with deep knowledge of the employment landscape in Edmonton) is critical Newcomers benefit when employment supports are directed both at individual and community needs Trusting relationships are essential in building confidence and readiness of newcomers to participate in employment assistance programs Working closely with relevant employers ensures that interests and concerns are addressed once a newcomer is connected with them
Where Things are at Now... To further test this model, we are organizing an Employment Resource workshop hosted by the Bhutanese community. In doing so we are bringing Bhutanese community members/leaders and employment agencies together to plan and execute the event. After the event, we will coordinate a reflection session to bring stakeholders together to reflect on the experience and discuss follow-up activities.
31
COMMUNITY SHOWCASE In August of 2019 a community showcase took place. During this afternoon event, Bhutanese community leaders and other members of the stewardship team went to a Bhutanese community gathering to share an update on the project and show the prototypes. Community members learned about what had happened on the project since they participated in the lab days and had an opportunity to look at the prototype posters and ask questions.
Two Bhutanese Community Leaders speaking about the prototypes to their community
32
REFLECTIONS & KEY LEARNINGS EVALUATION PROCESS There were several moments for evaluation and reflection built into the Design by Doing 2.0 process including: • • • • • •
Reflexive conversations amongst members of the stewardship team Testing prototypes with community Evaluative interviews with community partners Focus group with stewardship committee Focus group with Bhutanese community members Community showcase
The following questions guided reflections on the process: 1) What are we learning about barriers to employment as experienced by the Bhutanese community in Edmonton and how they might be addressed? 2) How is culturally adapting the Design by Doing approach going? What is going well and not so well? Are there tensions? 3) What are the implications of this kind of approach? Where is the value and why do it again? Quick Overview of the Design by Doing 2.0 Process (24 months) 1) Stakeholders come together - relationships established 2) Core challenge identified and scoped with the community 3) Culturally adapted lab days 4) Prototype Refinement & Testing 5) Community Showcase
33
REFLECTIONS ON THE CHALLENGE Addressing Barriers to Employment as Experienced by the Bhutanese Community For the purposes of this lab, employment was thought of as one important piece of a newcomer’s journey towards economic integration. Economic integration, being long term, gainful employment, was the ultimate desired outcome articulated by the Bhutanese community. The journey towards economic integration includes learning English, gaining employability skills, learning about the Canadian employment landscape, holding survival jobs, and obtaining gainful, long term employment. The path towards economic integration is different for everyone and can be described more as a journey with twists and turns than a linear path. Members of the Bhutanese community experience barriers all along the journey towards economic integration and therefore require different supports at different points in their journey. In this lab, we learned that current settlement and employment supports available for newcomers are not always responsive for smaller immigrant and refugee communities such as the Bhutanese community. Communities such as the Bhutanese community face multiple barriers such as limited English Language skills, limited education, and complex socio-economic challenges. Through pre lab research, conversation, and various lab activities such as empathy mapping, we heard that the Bhutanese community faces barriers before and during employment. The infographic below highlights some of the barriers we learned the Bhutanese community faces (that are also similar to the barriers experienced by other smaller, marginalized newcomer communities).
34
As suggested by the multiple barriers Bhutanese community members face both before and during employment, there is a need for sustained support throughout their journey towards economic integration. The infographic below highlights some of the desired supports before and during employment as well as in longer term career development.
The Bhutanese community identified three unique contexts in which their members experience barriers to employment: A traditional context: Members with some employability skills and/or education looking to get a job through job searching, submitting a resume, doing an interview, and completing on the job training Self-employment or micro-enterprise context: Members looking to start a small business or micro enterprise based on personal skills such as gardening or crafting English language learning context: Members working on gaining increased English language fluency as a stepping stone to employment
35
REFLECTING ON THE PROTOTYPES The prototypes generated in the Design by Doing 2.0 process reflect each of the three contexts identified by the Bhutanese community (see outlined above). They were co-designed with community to reflect their unique needs, and drew upon community strengths and gifts. Prototypes were not only designed with and by community members, they were also tested with community! Each prototype team worked to ‘try out’ their prototype with members of the Bhutanese community. Read on to discover what this process looked like for each team and their key learnings. Supplemental English Language Learning To test this prototype, the team organized a ‘mock’ English Language learning class. Bhutanese community members were invited to participate in a 4 hour experience that included 2 hours of in-class instruction and discussion, a 1 hour experiential field trip to a local grocery store, and a 1 hour reflection. During the reflection participating community members were invited to share their insights and experiences through group discussion and individually in a short survey. In this process they learned: • All participants reported enjoying the class experience and content • All participants reported finding the class useful. They thought it would assist them in learning English for employment • Most of the participants felt they would be very likely to sign up for a class like this • Participants liked that the course content was directly applicable to employment Supported Micro Enterprise To test this prototype, the team facilitated a meeting between someone with an established relationship and strong working knowledge of the Bhutanese culture with a Bhutanese community member and trialled selling crafts at a local market. In this process they learned: • The guide is essential for success: Challenges cannot necessarily be predicted and without the essential support of a guide, the individual would be unable to pursue this pathway to employment. • Trust is essential for success: The guide must have a deep understanding of the individual’s cultural background to be able to bridge between the individual’s home and Canadian contexts and must work to establish a strong and trusting relationship with the individual.
36
Community Led Employment Brokering This team is still in the midst of testing. In the first phase of testing they assembled an employment brokering team consisting of a newcomer seeking employment, a cultural broker, and an employment connector. Together the team explored the newcomer’s career goals, current skills and talents, and completed a scan of potential job opportunities. In this process they learned: • Having both a cultural broker (someone with deep knowledge of the cultural background of the newcomer) as well as an employment connector (someone with deep knowledge of the employment landscape in Edmonton) is critical • Newcomers benefit when employment supports are directed both at individual and community needs • Trusting relationships are essential in building confidence and readiness of newcomers to participate in employment assistance programs • Working closely with relevant employers ensures that interests and concerns are addressed once a newcomer is connected with them Next, the team is organizing an Employment Resource workshop hosted by the Bhutanese community. In doing so they are bringing Bhutanese community members/leaders and employment agencies together to plan and execute the event. After the event, they will coordinate a reflection session to bring stakeholders together to reflect on the experience and discuss follow-up activities.
37
REFLECTIONS ON THE PROCESS Culturally Adapting a Social Innovation Approach
Why a social innovation approach? Addressing barriers to employment for a multi barriered newcomer community is complex work. The following are indicators that the challenge is complex: (1) there are many people, organizations, and systems that have a stake in the challenge; (2) there is not much agreement on the nature of the problem, (3) there is not much certainty about what to do about the problem, and (4) there is a high degree of unpredictability. Complex challenges such as this one are well suited to a social innovation approach because of its emphasis on: (1) bringing diverse stakeholders together, (2) going deep to understand root causes, (3) creating solutions ‘with’ not ‘for’ people, (4) finding out what works using small scale tests, and (5) scaling only the ideas that show promise after testing with community. Why culturally adapt the social innovation process? Social innovation processes are often imbued with dominant Western approaches to problem solving. This can become problematic when seeking to meaningfully engage ethno-cultural communities as equal partners in problem solving processes. When this is the case there is a need to culturally adapt the process so that it reflects their unique cultural context and approach to problem solving. Foundational Elements to the Design by Doing Approach Design by Doing 2.0 was unique in its approach. Throughout the process we endeavored to maintain an approach that was community led and culturally adapted to reflect the values and problem solving approach of the Bhutanese community. This was complex work, rife with tensions that required flexibility, adaptability, and a deep commitment to working ‘with’ and alongside rather than ‘for’. As we navigated the process the following continually emerged as foundational elements that enabled the success of this project.
38
Starting with a Foundation of Relationship and Trust A process that is co-designed requires first and foremost a strong, trusting relationship between the project partners. The basis of this relationship must be rooted in a genuine desire to learn from and alongside a community of people. In doing co-design work there is a belief that the community you are working with holds knowledge that you do not have and therefore are important partners in understanding and tackling the challenge. Building relationships takes time and intentional effort. For this project, it was helpful that Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative already had a well established relationship with the Bhutanese community and knowledge of their cultural traditions and approach. Ways Relationship was Fostered • Time for getting to know one another and learning from the Bhutanese community about their approaches to community organizing and problem solving were built into the process • Members of the stewardship community were invited to and attended community cultural events Remaining Community Centred Since Western ways of knowing and problem solving are so dominant, it can be easy to slip into ‘old’ ways of doing. Critical reflection, on the part of the stewardship team, was an important part of helping the project remain community centred. Remaining community centred looked like: • The stewardship team checking in with leaders from the Bhutanese community each step along the way to make sure they were comfortable with the way the project was moving forward • The stewardship team asking questions such as “who does this serve?” and “who has been involved” as decisions were made • Stewardship members holding each other accountable and gently reminding one another when they had moved away from a co-design approach • Working with Bhutanese community members to identify the core challenge and scope it • Having two natural leaders from the community on the stewardship team, attending all planning meetings, and acting as connectors to the broader Bhutanese community in Edmonton • Inviting the Bhutanese community to host and lead the lab days, decorating the space, bringing traditional cultural food, and sharing in ritual
39
Openness to Adapting Tools and Activities A co-designed process requires one to do away with rigidity and embrace ambiguity. Prescriptive tools and activities will not always work in a codesigned process because they often do not reflect specific ethno-cultural ways of knowing. This means, in co-design, there is sometimes a need to culturally adapt lab tools. In Design by Doing 2.0 this looked like: • Translating tools into the Bhutanese language - we translated our rules of engagement, empathy map, and human centred design image • Adjusting activities to reflect the specific ethno-cultural approach to ideation • Trying out activities and tools with community, receiving feedback, and tweaking them • Switching things up altogether - during the lab days we used storytelling, an important tool used in the Bhutanese culture, as a way of shaking up participant thinking before ideating together Flexible Timelines Because the process leaned towards the emergent side, we did not know exactly how long it would take. As we moved through the process we learned quickly that culturally adapting and co-designing a process takes much more time than a conventional social innovation process. By creating space for our timelines and deadlines to be adjusted we enabled a more responsive and meaningful process. The bullets that follow highlight a few of the reasons things took longer: • Translating not just language but also cultural practices and approaches takes time especially when much of it is implicit knowledge. Much time was spent explaining and learning from one another about different cultural practices and approaches to problem solving. • Going back and forth between the stewardship team and community. There would be times when the community leaders on the stewardship team needed to return to the community to find out more information/ ask a question. This process of going back and forth took additional time. • Thinking deeply about the approach and process each step along the way. There was a need to pause, reconsider, pivot, and adjust as things moved along. • Non hierarchical, democratic and dialogue based approach to decision making led to long discussions and periods of contemplation before moving forward.
40
HIGHLIGHTS OF PARTICIPANT FEEDBACK ON DESIGN BY DOING 2.0 PROCESS The following chart highlights strengths and challenges encountered throughout the Design by Doing 2.0 process as articulated by community partners, the stewardship team, and members of the Bhutanese community. These insights were gathered through focus groups held with the stewardship team and Bhutanese community members as well as interviews with a sample of community partners.
Design by Doing 2.0 Process Stakeholder
Strengths
Challenges
Community Partners Involved in the lab days and the development, refinement, and testing of the prototypes
Brought Together Diverse • Perspectives • Networking and learning from others doing similar work • Gained takeaways to apply to own work elsewhere
Big Time Commitment • 2 days was a large time commitment
Built Empathy & Awareness • Engaged directly with the Bhutanese community - the community experiencing the challenge • Learning from the Bhutanese community about their culture and the challenges they face • Learned communities are falling through the cracks, their needs are not met by traditional services • Raised awareness about an issue they didn’t know about before
Needed More Time • Needed more time to prototype - takes time to bridge expert knowledges of community with professional/service knowledge • More time for sharebacks to large group during lab
41
Design by Doing 2.0 Process Stakeholder
Strengths
Challenges
Stewardship Team Core lab team stewarding and involved throughout the entire process
Cultural Adaptation • Enabled by deep conversation and relationship building with community • Valuing of non dominant ways of knowing • Catering to nuances of a specific ethno cultural community enabled very specific and useful prototypes to emerge
Communication Beyond the Stewardship Team • Challenging to keep community partners involved/informed throughout the process without overburdening Emergent Process • Hard to plan when you’ve never participated in a social innovation process before • Ambiguous and emergent process required flexibility and adaptability
Community Centred Process • Anchored in relationship with the community • Entire process built around community Translation needs and desires • Challenging to translate all aspects of the • Full participation of the community, process (e.g. tools like Empathy Map) space created for them to lead and learn • Tough for community members to do ‘on from the process the spot’ interpreting • Learning about the community’s already established methods for problem solving Shared Leadership • Strength in having multiple partners at the table (Bhutanese community, MCHB, EndPovertyEdmonton, City, and Action Lab) - each brought different assets and perspective
Bhutanese Community Members Involved in scoping the challenge area, participated in lab days, as well as prototype development, refinement, and testing
Sharing our Stories and Experiences So good to share our experiences in the learning stations Decorating the space and sharing our food Having our language present Felt Heard and Respected Felt heard and as though they had space to share their thoughts and ideas throughout the process Opportunity to share issues and needs with others Honorarium for time Solution Focussed Approach Focus on outcomes was nice Building Community Capacity Participation in lab days resulted in new connections to resources and strengthened relationships
Western Way of Knowing Remained Present Some members felt their opinions were taken superficially or lightly Some felt the western way of knowing took precedence at times (during prototyping especially) Needed More Time Things moved quickly during the lab days More time needed for prototyping, it felt rushed More or Different Stakeholders More Bhutanese community members Employers Government of Alberta programs like Alberta Works
42
EMERGING TENSIONS As with any complex challenge, a number of tensions emerged as we moved through the process. The chart below provides an ‘at a glance’ look at three tensions that emerged in the Design by Doing 2.0 process. Navigating these tensions skillfully was tricky work that took consistent reflection, flexibility, and adaptability. Recognizing that simplistic approaches and rigid strategies would not work for the complex challenge at hand, the stewardship team opted to embrace the following tensions. What emerged was an approach that was culturally sensitive, collaborative, reflective of community gifts and talents, and responsive to community needs.
One Side of the Tension
Tension
Other Side of the Tension
The Design Challenge (So What?)
Important to have the community’s voice present throughout the process.
Engaged vs Burdened
People’s lives are busy and full. Community members are already engaging in a lot of ‘invisible labor’.
How do you foster authentic community engagement that isn’t burdensome?
Recognizing the value in pushing for systems change so that things can change for newcomers into the future.
Changing systems vs Change in the here and now
Community members face certain realities right now that they long to have support with (e.g. finding employment).
How do you balance the need to push for systems change (slow but important work) and the need to create material change in the lives of the community members in the here and now?
Co-design requires authentic engagement and collaboration with the community. This requires extra time and continual reflection.
With vs For
Because of fiscal and time constraints it can be easy to fall back into patterns of inauthentic collaboration with community- doing for rather than with.
How do you design the process so the work is done with rather than for ethnocultural communities?
43
CONSIDERATIONS AND IDEAS FOR NEXT TIME Key considerations: • Planning and building in additional ‘check in’ points with people participating in the process: As the process unfolded it became challenging to reconnect with people who attended the lab days, updating them on how the project was moving ahead, and providing them with further opportunities to get involved. An idea for the future would be to have someone on the stewardship team in charge of delivering project updates via an electronic newsletter or in person announcements. • Planning for the ending of the project and supporting prototypes in becoming pilots: This challenge is not unique to this lab but one worth noting. As the project progressed it became blurrier and blurrier as to when a natural endpoint might come and who would be responsible for carrying prototypes forward. This is something we are still navigating as we work to find ‘homes’ for each of the prototypes - people or organizations who will continue to work on supporting the prototypes in becoming pilots. • Planning an ethical exit: After working so closely with a community for an extended period of time it is important to consider what the end of the relationship looks like. This is something we are still navigating as a group. One thing we did decide to do was host a community showcase. This afternoon event provided the stewardship team an opportunity to share key learnings from the project with community members. It also created space for the community members to ask questions about the process and outcomes and learn more about the prototypes.
44
CONSIDERATIONS AND IDEAS FOR NEXT TIME Things that worked really well and shouldn’t be forgotten: • Having a project manager/coordinator: Hiring someone who could focus on keeping the project moving forward, booking meetings, and following up on loose ends so they aren’t forgotten was critical to the success of this project. For future projects, if it is feasible, it would be even better if there could be a prototype coach/coordinator for each prototype team to help guide them through the development, refinement, and testing process and keep things on track. • Compensation for community members: We had two community leaders from the Bhutanese community as part of the stewardship team. They and other community members who participated at various points throughout the process were financially compensated for their time. This was a critical component of engaging the community as equal partners. • Having translators in each prototype team for the lab days: We had bilingual members of the Bhutanese community work as translators in the working groups during the lab days. This was crucial in ensuring each step of the process was accessible and inclusive to everyone.
45
SO WHAT, NOW WHAT? IMPLICATIONS AND NEXT STEPS… Project Outcomes • Increased awareness about the Bhutanese community and their needs • A number of Bhutanese community members have found jobs through connections made in the process • Deepened understanding of approaches to problem solving with community rather than to community • New relationships leading to fruitful partnerships and collaborations into the future Implications • There is value in co-designing a process and prototypes directly with a specific community (rather than focussing on newcomer communities for generally for example) • Design by Doing 2.0 is an example for others to use - Culturally adapted approach applicable to other ethno cultural communities • Prototypes hold promise for addressing barriers to employment experienced by the Bhutanese community in Edmonton as well as other multi barriered newcomer communities Next Steps • Prototypes, in their various stages continue to be tested and developed • Seeking funding and a ‘home’ for each prototype - community members or organizations with the capacity to continue to support prototypes in becoming pilots • Share our learnings with others through presentations, conversations, and distributing the mini documentary on the process
46
