CASE
Back to a humane social security system
The social security system in the Netherlands is intended to provide for all Dutch citizens, when they are unable to do so themselves. However, the system no longer appears to work well: it does not offer security, but rather makes people insecure. Muzus mapped out the experiences of Dutch citizens through various projects and designed solutions to get the government and implementing organisations moving.
KEMs
INVOLVED
Muzus, MinSZW, TNO, Movisie, Divosa, UWV, LCR, various Dutch municipalities
THEME
Health & Care
Inclusive society
Social innovation
Not so sure about social security anymore
Social security in the Netherlands is intended to provide for all Dutch people when you are unable to do it yourself. For example, in the event of retirement, illness, disability, death or unemployment. The Dutch system no longer does what it is supposed to do. It does not offer security, but makes people insecure. Insecure about their income and their livelihood. You see it in the many news articles about the social security system, all kinds of documentaries and in politics, with the biggest example being the benefits affair.
Over a period of more than ten years, design agency Muzus has carried out various projects with the aim of getting the social security system moving. In collaboration with municipalities, ministries, knowledge institutes and researchers, we have conducted research at multiple levels, designed innovations and solutions and examined legislation and regulations. In this case, Muzus talks about her insights and the design approach that was used to initiate an institutional change. The most important insight: innovating the social security system requires system changes, transitions and solutions at different levels. These solutions and changes together ultimately get an institution such as the government moving. The effect of multiple small projects is ultimately great.
“Living with a disability is not easy. I think most people don’t realise how easy it is to just take the train to work, to get to everything in the supermarket, or to move without fear of not having their facilities arranged. I have accepted that. Who should I blame for that? (…) What I find unacceptable is that it is made so difficult for me to participate in society in terms of work. I have found a job that I am very happy with. Where I can express myself. Where I have an employer who takes me into account. But the incredible hassle that it causes with my benefits… It is as if that income settlement is the real work disability.”
– A personal story from 'When offsetting is a limitation', one of Muzus's studies that contributed to changes in the social security system.
Innovating social security requires system changes, transitions and solutions at different levels.
Flyer / When offsetting is a limitation
At the legislative level, innovation is often based on symptoms and not integrally based on a vision; this must change.
Interview Place for everyone
The social challenge
System change needed at different levels
The fact that the social security system no longer offers security cannot be attributed to one aspect of the system. This problem is interwoven at various levels throughout the system – it runs from the written law to its implementation at the office of a municipal official, from the system to the street.
Level of legislation
A large part of our system is based on a labor market that is no longer the same. For example, income insurance was created for people who work as employees. This is a good arrangement for them, but at the end of 2022, 1.2 million of the working population were self-employed (12%). This means that the legislation no longer matches reality. To solve this, small 'repairs' are often devised that make the law suitable for specific cases or target groups. The result is an enormously complicated system for people to understand, which is also difficult to implement. In short: on the level of legislation innovation is often based on symptoms and not integrally based on a vision, this must change.
Level of implementation
Social legislation is implemented by implementing organisations, of which the UWV and the Tax and Customs Administration are the best known. Each organisation, but also all 342 municipalities, give substance to social legislation in their own way. The implementation differs and the service provision to residents also varies enormously. Because each organisation has its own learning climate and its own (political) culture, innovating and improving this system throughout the country is on the agenda. level of implementation almost impossible.
Level of society
The combination of legislation and implementation causes enormous bottlenecks for specific target groups. For example, 92% of the workers with a work disability experiences uncertainty about their income due to the income settlement.
'Can I work more in addition to my benefits, or will I end up in debt?'
This even leads to a third not working, or not wanting to work more hours, to avoid financial problems. While they would actually like to work more. On the level of society the social security system creates uncertainty – and in some cases even puts people in trouble! This brings us to the most poignant problem: people who need it most suffer most from the complexity of this system. People with limited skills, without financial buffers, with reduced ability to do.
The emotions that come from empathizing with another person create a sense of urgency to solve the problem.
1 hour on welfare
Making concrete the things you can already do to change is extremely important.
App / Brainteasers
Research material / from unemployment benefits to social assistance
Income settlement visualization / When settlement is a limitation
The KEMs
In recent years, Muzus has contributed to the realization of institutional change within the social security system through several projects at different levels. In this process, the design approach value provided in different ways:
Citizen perspective in legislation and regulations
An important part of appropriate legislation, regulations and implementation is ensuring that it fits the citizen and their context. Many civil servants have difficulty taking the citizen's perspective into account when creating legislation and regulations. Especially with complex and abstract issues. Muzus helps them to to empathize with the citizen's situation, so that they feel what it is like to be in their shoes. And to realize how big the gap is between their own context and the context of the people for whom they are making policy. In the project If offsetting is a limitation for example we developed the 'serious game: 1 hour on welfare' in which you experience what it is like to live on welfare and what choices you have to make. This game is based on conversations with people who have experienced this themselves and has been further developed into its current form in collaboration with municipalities (participation & co-creation). The 'serious game' is used by municipalities, implementing organisations and even by members of committees such as OCTAS played. And it makes an impact: people who have played this game then sit at our table angry and surprised.
“I got really frustrated with that game. That we do this to people.. That can’t be right?!” – participant in the 'serious game: 1 hour on welfare'
Empathy with the citizen was also central to the experience stories on payswork.nu (part of the research If offsetting is a limitation), in the research Harsh effects on citizens due to bottlenecks in (implementation of) legislation and regulations within social security and in the many municipal customer journeys that we carried out around benefits and assistanceOur experience: the emotions that empathy produces lead to a sense of urgency to solve the problem.
Providing tools for a brighter future
A sense of urgency alone is not enough. To bring about change, it must also be clear what you can do. Muzus creates action perspective by delivering action-oriented solutions and products. For example, the municipality of Arnhem was looking for insight into how citizens experience the Poortproces. Not only do we map out those experiences using a customer journey, we translate these insights into materials or interventions that you can start using right away. Think of a solution to to experiment or a suggestion for a different frame of mind, so that you see (the context of) the problem in a new perspective. From 'understandable communication' to 'communicating until the resident understands' (from If offsetting is a limitation). A small reframing, but a world of difference for the resident.
Finding the right perspective for action remains a challenge due to the many dependencies that, among other things, the implementing organisations experience: the policy that they have to implement is determined by legislation. And you can't adjust that so easily. An employee who does want to change often has to deal with colleagues and managers who are not yet ready. Then you need perseverance to push through that change yourself. For that reason, making concrete the things that you can already do to change is so incredibly important.
Learn to experiment
However, taking action is often scary. An idea is not yet fully developed and a concept is not yet completely finished. We see that government and implementing organisations often block because of this. An idea is often still abstract and does not yet offer a complete solution to the complex problem. Muzus makes things tangible and concrete by making prototypes. Prototypes for a complete concept, sometimes for parts of the solution. With this we show what a solution can be, and we are all talking about the same thing. In the project Head scratchers we worked on evidence-based practice* for implementation professionals. We made various prototypes for this at various points in the design process. For example, we created a digital prototype of an app and a paper prototype of a group discussion (called the Exchange of Thoughts). By showing that there is support from the implementation professionals and that the prototype is gradually taking shape in this way, we create trust. In addition to the fact that an idea can still be vague, we see the fear of creating false expectations. This makes it difficult for government and implementation organizations to determine what you can and cannot discuss with citizens. Especially when you work on behalf of the government and in times when stories quickly circulate on social media.
* Evidence-based practice means that implementation professionals make decisions based on a combination of three types of sources: science or research, client experience and their own (work) experience.
Trust through co-creation
Trust is essential, because with the design approach we deviate from the usual way of working of governments and implementation organizations. Most are used to working in a linear process, while we aim for an iterative process. This is a process in which we go through multiple improvement cycles, in which we explore solution spaces, make choices, try them out and bring the insights back into an improved concept.
To create trust, we ensure that the client and stakeholders have as much ownership of the process and the outcomes as possible. We do this by co-creation sessions where the client and stakeholders give space to make choices within the process. We constantly switch between perspectives of clients, stakeholders and target groups, so that a solution fits all layers of the system.
Co-creation session / Brain teasers
In the co-creation sessions of Head scratchers, we therefore invited not only the client and the target group, but also others who were working on similar issues. Not only does this provide valuable insights from all kinds of perspectives, but we also let them contribute to shaping the solution. By doing this at every step, we build a good network that supports the development of the concept. Because in order to help a concept into the world of the social domain, support is needed in various places. That regularly requires flexibility and patience. Because each of the stakeholders works in their own way and is usually not as agile as most designers. That is why perseverance and empathy are again important qualities for all parties involved.
To create trust, we ensure that the client and stakeholders have as much ownership as possible over the process and the outcomes.
Focus group / Brain teasers
To help a concept enter the world of the social domain, support is needed in various places.
Field consultation webinar / Head scratchers
The result
Muzus’ projects offer a solution for a specific part of the social security system. On their own, they do not yet bring about institutional change, but together they create a movement. And that can be seen in a number of snowball effects that have been set in motion by our projects:
- The serious game 'One hour on welfare' is an empathic visualization of the research. A means to let policy makers, managers, professionals and politicians empathize with the target group. This game was nominated by the Dutch Design Awards because of the varied methods used during the research, but especially for the way in which the target group was involved (participation) and conveying their experiences in a way that others can also empathize with. By deviating from the delivery in the requested report on their own initiative, the results are much more memorable. This ensured that Divosa the game has been released as a standard offer for policy officers, managers, professionals and politicians. Due to the rich experiences and many reactions to the game, UWV decided to create its own version to also be able to offer it to its own employees. The voice of the people on welfare is being spread further and further in this way.
- Since 2019, Muzus has been helping Knowledge Platform Work and Income (KWI) with the question of how we can stimulate professionals to work more evidence-based. We immersed ourselves in the target group and looked for a method that ties in with the practice of the implementation professionals of municipalities and the UWV. We did not do this alone, but involved several scientists, researchers, implementation professionals, team leaders and knowledge advisors in its development. Due to broad interest, Head scratchers soon to be further developed for the fourth time by a consortium of parties such as Sam, Divosa, VNG, UWV, TNO, Movisie and the Ministries of Social Affairs and Employment and Health, Welfare and Sport. Sam is eager to Head scratchers to be rolled out and made available to all implementation professionals. In the meantime, not only Head scratchers an increasingly well-known term, evidence-based working is increasingly becoming the standard.
- In 2021, Muzus published together with Optimalistic and Stimulansz the research report If offsetting is a limitation and the associated website payswork.nu. The website provides insight into what people go through when they work part-time with a work disability in addition to receiving benefits. The research report, with a lot of room for the experiences of this group of people, points out specific points in implementation, policy and legislation where things can be improved. But also how this can be improved. This led to parliamentary questions, which in turn led to the investigation Harsh effects on citizens due to bottlenecks in (implementation of) legislation and regulations within social security in collaboration with Panteia, Hogeschool Utrecht and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Here too, extensive research was conducted into the experiences of people who have been affected by legislation and regulations, and concrete improvements and solutions were suggested. This again led to parliamentary questionsThere appeared to be a need for an Independent Commission on the Future of the Disability Insurance Scheme (OCTAS), with a designer as one of the members. Early 2024, the committee will issue advice and recommendations on a system for long-term disability. Now partly based on a design approach and not just the straightforward process, which is often still the standard.
Each of these snowball effects once started with mapping the experiences and needs of people in the social security system and eventually led to changes for multiple implementing organisations. This required imagination, iterative work, flexibility, perseverance, creative power and empathy with the practice of government and implementation.
Exactly what designers can offer when tackling complex social issues!