Toolkit Navigator

Inclusion Toolkit

The toolkit includes 5 methods for designing a more inclusive lab. The toolkit begins by guiding users through basic user observation, identification, and categorization processes (observation, interviews,
and personas). It then moves into problem definition and stakeholder prioritization, and finally defines a concrete suggestion for increased
diverse stakeholder governance. It includes templates and examples for each method.

Champion CHAMPION:
Can be remixed

About this resource

Country/Territory

Denmark

Date Published

License

CC BY Attribution

Formats

PDF publication

See cases from others doing this in government

Go to case studies

Find experts and advisers who can assist me with this

Go to advice

Other toolkits related to Design

One review for "Inclusion Toolkit"

  1. In this toolkit proposed by the Danish design center, a more inclusive approach to urban organization is proposed. If the explanations have been centered on the city of Copenhagen, this toolkit can be applied on many other cities to think about the relationship to be developed with the users of public spaces. 5 major steps are designed to achieve the optimal inclusion of users in the change process, these 5 steps are accompanied by a set of recommendations and valuable resources such as templates, as well as examples of questions to ask citizens to better understand their desire and frustration.
    This toolkit will therefore be useful for any public decision-maker wishing to implement changes in urban spaces. Based on the conviction that changes should include citizens, this toolkit will be very useful for a decision-maker who wants to involve several stakeholders in the design of a new project (see the 5th step :  « Sharing responsibility”).
    From a practical point of view, the toolkit succeeds, in just a few pages, in being very clear and providing the potential user with a solid starting point for his work. An effort in the layout is noticeable and allows the toolkit to become more effective in the messages it conveys.
    Nevertheless, it might lack a bit of concreteness in these explanations, so that it can convince a user to act with confidence. This confidence is built on one observation: to see that what we are about to implement, and which represents a serious investment of time, has already been successfully tested (this could be done through the concrete testimony of an actor who has already experienced this process, for instance).

Add your review

Have you used this toolkit? If so, what did you use it for and how did it work? What are its strengths and limitations? Share your experience so others can learn from you.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *