Society UX Model to Explain Denmark
A model explaining the success of digital services in Denmark, through underlying societal elements
Summary
Describing a model of understanding Danish digital society called Society UX (the user experience of society) that can be used for example to look at the feedback loop behind the successful adoption of digital services, but also other areas that Denmark excels in. Introduction Denmark is a front runner. There are things we can find in society, even as we just visit, that indicate this. There is the existence of systems and services, there is the prevalence of services.
But we should remember to ask what actually drives the demand and creation of this. Danish society is only the most digital1 in the world, because of historical factors and societal mechanisms, which all combine to create positive feedback loops. These feedback loops in turn help propel Denmark ahead, as technology development advances.
In this post we will introduce how we see some of these loops, and examine how companies and public organizations (ministries and municipalities) in Japan, might go about learning from them.
Rankings show a direction
Normally rankings are cited ad hoc, to support a certain point. This is an easy-to-understand approach, and it is not wrong per se. But it does often leave out the benefit that shedding light on a grander narrative can bring.
Here are some rankings that are often brought forward when talking about different aspects of Danish society, and why it is worth watching and learning from.
Denmark ranks highly on both well-known rankings such as happiness, but also lesser known professional rankings. (Numbers are within the last 5 years)
When the rankings are assorted like this, they give an overall impression of a well-to-do country. There is an air of achievement, of success and progress. But if we re-arrange the rankings, a story emerges that hints at causality.
The problem with how many talk about Danish digital society, is that digital society is presented as an end-point, whereas it is in fact much more an enabler of more important factors. Rankings are outcomes in and of themselves, yes, but they still point at each other.
From my own experience in Denmark, and comparing it both theoretically and practically while living abroad in Japan for 10 years, I have always had a sense that the rankings could be combined to give a hint at why things are how they are. This way, they could perhaps point at some principles to learn from.
Sorting the rankings allow us to tell a story with them.
We start arranging by stating that social outcomes such as happiness and wellbeing, are dependent on other factors in society. This focusses our attention on people. Danish people are not inherently happier than others. This is important to agree on, because it recognizes the opportunity for all societies to achieve better social outcomes. Second, the social rankings are related to how we work. Our work lives immediately impact our own wellbeing and that of our families. Third, how we work is impacted by digital services. Digital rankings give an idea of how well we do in this regard. Not only in terms of availability of infrastructure and services, but also in our use of these. Beneath the other factors, there are the ‘great intangibles’ of education, history and culture. This is of course relevant, but not immediately actionable when determining what to learn from another society.
Now we have a structure that is human-centered, because it puts the human experience of well-being and happiness on top. The digitized reality is not the thing to look it as an end point, but rather something to see as an enabler of something and as being enabled by something. This is a feedback loop.
Although the rankings are sorted vertically, there is an implicit feedback loop behind them.
Digital services enable better work and, in turn, better social outcomes too. And the digital services themselves are derived from both the culture layer, as well as from a pull-effect in the work and social layers. The pull-effect stems from my assertion that Denmark did not become happy from digital services, but rather, the expectations that a happy life fosters increases the need and urgency for good digital solutions to everyday problems.
Experienced value is the driver of the loop
So with the assertion that expectations from a certain way of life started the move to digital out of the way, let’s look at what keeps it moving.
The Experience Loop shows that digital services both drive use and are driven by expectation.
Once the first impetus towards digital solutions has been cleared, and it is cleared in a sufficient way, the feedback loop may begin with the launch of a digital solution.
If a solution is well-made, people experience value when they use it. This can come in many shapes and sizes, but fundamentally a digital service has to let people do what they need to do. When people experience that value, they not only trust the service, they also trust the entity (the government or private company) to deliver the service - and more like it. This is what eventually feeds into an expectation of things being done online, or having a self-service component, or being easy, or whatever it might be.
Conversely, in the public sector, people often do not have a choice of using the services - digital or otherwise. Many times, designers and people responsible for the procurement of these services, take this as an excuse to simply make something barely-working digital - because there is no competing offering.
But the experience loop model here, helps explain how this is a negative feedback loop.
People will experience no or little value from the service, trust it and the government’s ability to produce something workable and ultimately have low expectations of the service level.
In Denmark, the feedback loop is overwhelmingly positive. And when visitors are introduced to Danish society, they see this and might believe that it is the natural order of things. But I am convinced that it is not. The digital solutions in Denmark began from a need to serve the welfare society and the expectations people have of work and life in it. And the solutions are (largely) well made, because there is an understanding that they have to be useful and usable to create value and create the trust on which future digital innovation is predicated upon.
Design (service, product, graphic, UX) plays a big role in making the Danish experience. But without the understanding of the loop, it might seem to the outside observer that Danish digital solutions are just somehow thankfully fairly well designed. I don’t believe that is the case. I believe that behind the quality of the solutions and their implementation, is the personal and social expectation of the solutions. There is a conscious effort to live up to that, and I believe this is part of the loop, because we are now at a point where even managers in municipalities are talking about the user experience of a service or new initiative as something to take seriously. We have been through the loop so many times over that past 20 years that the narrative (which is one way these expectations manifest) has taken root in so many diverse places in society. This is the power of the feedback loop.
There are two points to be made here. The first point is that digital solutions don’t have to just exist, they have to be good. The second point is that digital solutions do not happen in a vacuum, and should be made and maintained with an eye on their implications for trust.
Conclusion
Society UX is a way to structure our understanding of society, so we can use it as a lens going forward.
When we recognize this kind of model to structure our understanding of Denmark, we can use it as a stepping stone to launch investigations into any relevant topic. Topics such as way of working, or human resource development or design can all be examined by framing them through the model, and then looking into what connections they have between the layers.
Perhaps more importantly, we can use the model to compare other countries, such as Japan, to Denmark, to better put into words what could be done better to achieve great results.