This program touched everything from backend system changes and process redesign to new tools for coordination and communication. But for it to succeed, we needed more than new platforms and workflows. We needed everyone, from leadership to the front line, to share the same picture of how the service works today, and how it could work better tomorrow.
When we first came in, those pictures didn’t match. Some leaders were focused on future capability and the big-picture strategy. Others were stuck in the past, drawing on memories from their own time on the tools. People on the ground were dealing with the day-to-day reality of missing information, clunky handovers, and outdated tools. All of those perspectives were valid, but without alignment, conversations about solutions risked going in circles.
We started by designing the engagement process the same way the service itself should run: collaborative, communicative, and data-led. We set up a consistent subject matter expert as our touchpoint throughout the project. They acted like a customer representative, helping interpret what we heard and adding vital context from inside the organisation.
We ran engagement sessions that mirrored how people were already used to working. If teams thrived in short, focused meetings, we kept it that way. If volunteers could only join after hours, we made it happen. We created one-on-one spaces where people could talk openly about what motivates them, what works, and what quietly gets in the way. Those insights were then brought into cross-functional sessions, so the truth could surface naturally without asking anyone to speak up in a room where they might feel exposed.
Because the service operates in highly dynamic conditions, priorities could shift overnight. We kept our approach flexible, adjusting workshops and design artefacts on the fly so we could respond to new information as it emerged. This meant the project kept pace with reality rather than being held up by it.
The result was not just a clearer shared understanding of the service. It dramatically reduced the time and effort needed to get the right technology in place, shrinking the expected procurement process from a year to just a few weeks.
By approaching it this way, we built trust, uncovered detail that would have been missed in a purely technical project, and turned it into a clear, shared view of the service. That clarity meant the client could move forward quickly and confidently, knowing their decisions were grounded in how the service is actually delivered.
For us, that’s the point. When you’re designing a service, the process you use should feel like the service itself: people involved, informed, and working together toward the outcome that matters.