The Co-Design Toolkit: 4 Key Principles for Success

In this case, what does doing it right mean? For one, it meant doing underserved populations justice while balancing the inevitable budget and time constraints. It also meant learning that when co-designing with indigenous people in Canada, for example, you could be engaging with over 200+ sovereign nations, all with unique languages, rituals, preferences… you get the idea. 

But of course, the potential complexity of engagement work may lead organizations who want to do it right to delay doing it indefinitely. So what is the solution? For one, prioritization. Deciding on a starting point such as one particular demographic and educating ourselves on the community in all of its complexity. To support this work we recommend leveraging experts, and this brings us to our next point.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Proper Co-Design doesn’t have to start at the participant engagement level, but rather at the engagement planning level. This means pulling in experts who can provide guidance on how to prioritize the engagement work as well as the recruitment and engagement approach for the target audience. 

Depending on available budgets, this could take the form of working with consultants who already have a strong and authentic relationship with your target population. Similarly, working with community advocates who offer feedback on recruitment, session plans, and protocols can be a great way to conduct proper engagement work while respecting smaller budgets. And speaking of protocols, there is a lot more to consider than just participant engagement.

There seems to be this idea that an effective co-design session is filled with team activities and colorful tools. However, chances are that not all of your participants have used your chosen co-work tool before.  Meaning time, effort and attention need to be spent teaching how to interact with the platform. Therefore the rule of thumb is that unless a specific objective requires the use of such a tool, skipping it may be the way to go. Rather, focusing on simple visualizations and getting a team member to take live notes can help participants focus on engaging and following the discussion.

The nature of group sessions means that you may find yourself in a ‘room’ full of strangers with contrasting backgrounds and opinions. That much is clear. But depending on the nature of the product, additional safety precautions may have to be considered. 

Discussing people’s mental health outside of a clinical setting requires appropriate pre-session communication such as disclaimers about the sessions’ content and nature. Nobody should be asking themselves if they are actually attending a group therapy session or giving feedback about their color preferences for a crisis button. 

There is always a risk that a participant may encounter a triggering topic or person. The resulting reaction may also present an emotionally challenging situation to handle for the moderators. Therefore, we recommend safety precautions like offering a breakout room to participants if they feel overwhelmed. We also recommend providing training for moderators by mental health experts and support mental health resources to both participants and moderators post-session. The idea is to not leave anyone alone with overwhelming feelings once the Zoom session concludes.

Though we’ve learned a lot, the takeaways above certainly aren't exhaustive. Engagement work is a never-ending learning quest, requiring open-mindedness. We need to constantly challenge our own assumptions and look for common ground where there seemingly is little. Joining community advocate-led events can be a great place to start in understanding the needs of the community you are ultimately trying to cater to. However, if you are completely new to co-design, we are happy to start this conversation with you here!