User Centricity newly thought: Mervyn Lorde and Cliff Pfefferkorn on participation as a success factor for smart city projects

In this interview, our Managing Director Cliff Pfefferkorn and Mervyn Lorde, eStrategy Consulting’s expert for strategy & digital transformation as well as public affairs, shed light on the role of participation of all stakeholders (citizens, culture, business as well as politics and administration) for the success of smart city projects, what distinguishes participation from usual user-centric methods of the digital economy and where there are parallels.

Cliff Pfefferkorn (Managing Director of eStrategy Consulting) & Mervyn Lorde (Principal at eStrategy Consulting).

Cliff Pfefferkorn: Hello Mervyn and welcome to eStrategy Consulting. We are very pleased that you have joined our digitalization and transformation expertise as a Principal since the beginning of November!!

Mervyn Lorde: Thank you very much, I am very happy to be part of it!

Cliff Pfefferkorn: Your experience in political communications and consulting in the policy-related sector and public administrations makes you a very special specialist for the topic of smart cities. This fits in very well with our previous portfolio of services in this area, for example the “eBay Your City” project, which I’ll come back to later.

But first, let’s take a look at the term “Smart City”. The term “smart city” covers a wide range of different topics, and everyone understands it differently. What do you actually understand by the term smart city? What is actually to be achieved with the “Smart City”?

Mervyn Lorde: That is indeed true. The term smart city originally comes from urban development. It’s a definition that I think is very purposeful:That is indeed true. The term smart city originally comes from urban development. It’s a definition that I think is very purposeful:

Smart City is a holistic concept that integrates the information and communication technologies that have become available as part of the digital transformation into the urban infrastructure and systems, and links these previously separate infrastructures and subsystems, “smart” together.

This definition comes from the Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development (BBSR), which is located at the federal level in Germany and is in charge of the conceptual aspects.

The subsystems or infrastructures of a city mentioned are, for example, energy, buildings, transport, water and wastewater. In terms of sustainable urban planning, these subsystems are now being expanded to include the entire toolbox of digital transformation. The aim here is to meet the challenges of increasing urbanization in social, ecological and structural terms. The most important requirements here:

• Sustainable use of resources and energy
• Sustainability in consumption and mobility behavior
• Economic innovation
• Participation of urban society

However, this requires the innovative solutions and networking that are emerging in the context of digitalization.

Regardless, as you have already correctly pointed out, municipalities define their smart city fields of action and priorities very differently. However, I see certain overarching clusters here: economy, administration, quality of life, environment & energy, people & participation, and mobility.

In this context, the cities are at different stages in their digitization efforts and the urban development strategies are also very heterogeneous. For example, some cities are focusing their smart city efforts on digitizing their administration, while others have chosen networked mobility and logistics solutions or sustainable urban development as the core of their strategy. What all city visions have in common, however, is that citizens and their living conditions are at the center of their considerations. Not least for this reason, all smart city strategies and implementations are accompanied by qualified citizen participation.

This is really of central importance: People have to be at the center of all these considerations. Cities as social meeting places have to be livable and to protect and preserve the foundations of human life.

Cliff Pfefferkorn: These are very ambitious goals that a smart city must meet. There is one fundamental parallel to all terrains of digital transformation: new, innovative technologies are emerging that, used correctly, can improve the lives of users, create positive “experiences” and change behavior. We very often master this challenge for our customers by focusing on user-centric methods and the correspondingly high strategic importance of “Customer Centricity”. After all, these are also very proven approaches for business model and service innovation.

“The citizen or the person at the center of the smart city” sounds like a very comparable requirement, except that the citizen is the customer here. But the respective environment is quite different. What do we need to keep in mind here?

Mervyn Lorde: User-centricity is equally relevant, that’s quite right. The central term used for this in the context of the smart city is participation.

I’ll come back to that in detail in a moment. But first I would like to explain the three most important fields of technological innovation that are of central importance for the smart city of tomorrow.

1. Decentralized and hybrid energy systems for buildings and neighborhoods. This involves networking conventional and renewable energy sources for the decentralized supply of buildings and neighborhoods. The decisive factor here is that the generation, storage and use of renewable energies in particular can flow in a networked manner between buildings, the power grid, the heating grid and the customers/microenergy producers. In hybrid grids, electricity generated from conventional energy sources flows together with electricity generated from renewables. The system ensures the feed-in, of the electricity produced by a private person by photovoltaic or solar thermal. The technological solutions required for this are, for example, digital twins for the simulation of hybrid energy systems, smart metering, i.e. the use of new meter functions and services to enable market-dependent dynamic or special consumer- and prosumer-oriented (Note: Prosuming is the cooperation of the customer in the value creation process. He takes over partial services in the process chain and receives a reduced price for them, for example) tariffs as well as innovative energy storage solutions.
2. Multimodal transport systems are something like the omnichannel solution in city transport. Multimodality in passenger transport means the possibility to use different means of transport. A person is multimodal when he or she uses various means of transport powered by electricity from renewable energy sources and, for example, travels to work by bus and to the hardware store by rental car. This requires electric rail systems, electric buses and electric cars for driving services, as well as the corresponding innovative and effective charging technology, and booking, routing and information systems that make public transport, including driving service providers, more attractive and make the use of one’s own car superfluous. In the future, solutions in the field of autonomous driving will be added.
3. Interoperable software platforms. This refers to the possibility of running any type of urban application over the same infrastructure via a unique, powerful and reliable network. All conceivable data is to be combined, analyzed and processed on this platform. The goal is to optimize urban services or to use data for completely new services. The underlying technology should be based on open standards in order to guarantee the seamless integration of third-party systems and customer-specific applications as a brand-independent solution. In addition, this should increase confidence in a durable platform solution that is always kept up to date and available.

In addition, the IoT should also be mentioned for the successful implementation of a smart city strategy. It is the key technology relevant for all sensor technology topics.

Cliff Pfefferkorn: That is a very broad portfolio. How do you ensure that solutions are created that are ultimately the right solutions from the citizens’ point of view? Otherwise, as a city, you run the risk of implementing projects that no one wants to use.

Mervyn Lorde: That’s why participation is so important. I think the comparison of a “citizen-centric view” with the customer centricity approach is successful and very correct. In the context of strategy development, everything must revolve around the citizen in his or her various roles as a user, consumer, addressee of sovereign acts or as a participant and know-how carrier. In many respects, the smart city approach offers the opportunity to digitally and newly model government services, e.g., in the area of sovereign administration, through e-government solutions. Of course, this must be done in compliance with the requirements of administrative law. It is therefore conceivable that, in the relationship between the administration and the citizen, recurring services with low-threshold requirements could be initiated by the authority as a proactive service, and extensions of permits and personal documents could be made online, legally secure and without delay. However, it is necessary to consider not only the process-optimizing authority as the addressee of the transformation, but also the needs of the citizen. Although sovereign administration usually involves commands, prohibitions or permits that require monitoring and control, it makes sense to relieve the citizen of some of his or her duties here and to act as a service provider to the citizen. This is all the more true since most people deal with a public authority mainly in the context of their obligation to renew their identity documents. In short, the tools used in business model innovation, such as potential analysis, ideation and prototyping, and validation in iteration, are elementary components of smart city strategy development when it comes to identifying new smart city projects and optimizing existing smart city projects.

Cliff Pfefferkorn: User-centered strategy development is a central component of the DNA of eStrategy Consulting. We build on the typical methods of user-centered design and – what is particularly important – always align them individually to the respective situation of our clients and their users.

When used in business, the playing fields at stake – the so-called “problem spaces” – are already often very diverse. Smart City, however, considers even more open terrains, with a larger number of stakeholders, greater diversity of opinions and interests, and usually fewer existing relationships with the provider of the digital solutions.

What other methodologies can be applied in companies? Are there also methodologies that are not suitable for management at all?

Mervyn Lorde: Strategy creation follows the same principles as in business. Only the emphasized task of citizen participation differs from the strategy creation to be carried out in a company. Citizen participation is to be carried out at every level of smart city strategy development. The goal is to inform, explain, accompany and participate. In order to achieve this important feedback with the citizen, an accompanying communication strategy is required. It specifies which civil society initiatives can serve as multipliers and how they can be identified. It also describes which instruments (social media, face-to-face events, town hall meetings, etc.) can be used to directly address which target groups from the citizenry. Citizens must have the opportunity to learn about the current project status at any time with the possibility of direct participation in terms of content. Citizens, regardless of their membership in associations or other civil society organizations, must be involved in iterations during the testing of prototypes produced as part of the strategy development process.

As I said before, citizens are at the center of smart city efforts, so they must also be able to test the solutions developed for them in advance and bring their ideas to the process.

In this context, I would like to point out that the principles and tools of change management can also be applied here. At the latest in the implementation planning, the empowerment of employees and managers, of the organizations affected by the smart city projects, plays an essential role. Communication, as already mentioned, is a key success factor. It is important here to identify and give qualified consideration to the key very different stakeholders. These are politics, administration, business, science, civil society and interested citizens. Of course, politics is important here, as it must develop the vision and a communicable narrative in cooperation with other stakeholders. At least as relevant, if not more important, is the administration. Here, relevant stakeholders must be identified in advance and any resistance must be disclosed. In parallel, the vision and the target image must be permanently communicated to the organization as a story. The entire communication toolbox of change management must be used. This can include explanatory videos, cell phone apps, presentation events, discussion offers at group level, recruitment of project ambassadors, etc. The goal is to communicate the vision and the target image to those affected by the project.

The goal is to ease the anxiety of change for those affected by the smart city project and offer empowerment in terms of new technologies or changing responsibilities.

As a result, I can also apply the familiar methods and instruments here. However, it is also clear that different principles apply in the area of privatized services of general interest and public administration than in a company striving to maximize profits. In the public sector, the common good is the decisive standard of review. In addition, speed plays a rather minor role compared to effectiveness. At the same time, “citizen-centeredness,” including permanent citizen participation, is an absolute prerequisite for any smart city strategy.

Cliff Pfefferkorn: In connection with effectiveness, I would be very interested to know what the success factors are for the creation of a smart city strategy and its implementation.

Mervyn Lorde: : I think the primary factor here is participation, or the citizen participation already mentioned above. In particular, the stakeholders from politics and administration mentioned above need long-term, reliable feedback from civil society and citizens. If this does not happen, there is a risk that smart city offerings will not be accepted and will fizzle out without any effects in terms of sustainable change in urban society. Moreover, a smart city concept without popular support would be politically unwise.

Therefore, I would like to briefly describe the essential steps to successful participation management.

1. The goals of the smart city concept must be clear and must be communicated clearly and comprehensibly in the form of a vision.
2. All internal stakeholders, i.e., the administrative staff, must want to participate. The support of the administration is absolutely necessary for the success of the concept. If necessary, convincing must be done in the administration even before the project begins (strategy development) with the instruments of change management, as already mentioned.
3. Suitable participation offers must be defined
   • Surveys or evaluations (interviews)
   • Collection of ideas or idea competitions
   • Input of concerns, suggestions and proposals
   • Question-and-answer dialogues with the administration (townhall format)
   • Prepared, interactive (map material) prototypes (concrete feedback through prototyping)
   • Co-creation
4. Ensuring information and transparency
5. Selecting tools that fit the goals and target audience.
6. The creation of a communication strategy. This strategy must be flexible enough to allow for agile rescheduling of already planned communication channels in case of recognizable problems or wrong approaches. Should a target group be better reached offline, such a realization must be flexibly integrated.
7. Promote the smart city and its strategy creation process and activate all relevant target groups in on- and offline formats, including non-digital affinity groups. Inclusion is one of the pillars of the smart city concept.
8. Know the drawbacks of solutions, but be driven by feasibilities. I.e., avoiding the classic communication mistakes and taking into account in best practices from other experiences already made.
9. Addressing representatives and multipliers from civil society (associations and other organizations) to elaborate proposals and Smart City project options. After the creation of a prototype, citizens, regardless of any affiliation with an initiative, are asked to test and evaluate the prototype. Their vote will determine whether or not there are more loops to go through in the ideation process.

Cliff Pfefferkorn: Exciting! And what would suitable participation formats look like?

Mervyn Lorde: The following participation formats come into question here:

• Citizens Forum: Urban Thinkers Campus
• Design Thinking Workshops
• Co-creation / Hackathon
• Focus groups on implementation measures
• Intra-municipal steering committee
• Municipal online platform
• Expert forum with reference cities

Cliff Pfefferkorn: One last question. What characterizes the smart city of the future?

Mervyn Lorde: It is networked, resource-saving, digital, sustainable and livable. People and their needs are at the center. In this respect, the smart city has a character that serves people. All in all, the city of the future will be quite a livable place.