What do talk about when we talk about democratising design. SDinGov 2026
This year’s Service Design in Government conference’s theme was Democratising design. It could be (and was) interpreted in many ways, showing how rich and varied design practice is among public+ sector practitioners. As last year, it was quite an experience. I felt privileged I had a chance to come back, this time as a participant and a speaker.
The keynotes
The keynotes addressed the main theme in different ways. On the first day, George Aye spoke about Designing a new social contract. He shared diagnosis about current democracy crisis in the United States and beyond, manifesting in the rising popularity of far-right and rooted in white supremacy. It effectively lead to different social contracts being presents for four groups:
- Epstein class
- White Americans
- People of Colour
- Black Americans.
George Aye invited us to start thinking about shaping new one with the consideration that
Social contract [is] what we expect from each other when we’re in need.
I appreciated his reflection about care for the elderly in this context. I wished the talk tried to answer how to create a new social contract in more detail though.
The second day started with Laura Yarrow’s Every promise has a shadow: how designers can shape the democratic future of public services talk. She argued that democracy is a valuable design constraint. She shared shocking examples of the stark real-life impacts of badly designed services. Also, she brought our attention to those that were created in more considerate way, and benefited the users. It rang like a warning of the consequences of undemocratic design.
The last day of the conference started with Tricia Nicoll’s talk What would it take? ‘Gloriously Ordinary’ as a starting point for design in public services and ‘democratising life’. It aimed to inspire us to embrace people in their diversity and create conditions for everyone to live their fullest lives.
The sessions
As always, choosing which sessions to attend was like playing a game of “you win some, you lose some”. I was happy with my choices, and regretted the lack of ability to clone myself at times.
After Wednesday keynote, took part in 12 equity and justice questions about AI — a consequence scanning workshop ran by Clara Greo and Betty Mwema. It was helpful to see a structured framework to assess implications of the AI. All prompts worked really well together.
I found interesting to think about their relationships and overlaps. I’d argue that “Who’s accountable?”, alongside “Who has the power?” are the ones we should be paying the most attention to. Not because the others are not important. But because without the understanding of who has the power over AI and is accountable for it, it’s difficult to get to the bottom of the other ones. In effect, there could be neither harm reduction, nor a chance for equality. Even if we know who’s being hurt or disadvantaged.
Testing and learning a different way of doing design by Jemima Higgins and Hannah Jump was an inspiring case study of applied “Learn, test, grow” approach. It described a team set up and ways of working that were different to the one known from usual digital teams working on than large scale digital(-first) tools implementation. In this case, service designers were in close collaboration with policy design and local services delivery stakeholders and focused on end-to-end services in local contexts. It sounded like it lead to impressive impact. And I got an impression that many of us present in the room had wished we could work in a similar way.
Playing policy: using games to explore, engage, and create policy was a workshop ran by Lewis Just, Fionn Tynan-O’Mahony and dr Jen Ballie. Conference pro tip: entertaining, playful workshop on Friday after 2 intense days of sessions and connections is a way to go. It was surprising and fun.
Despite hard negotiations and dealing with random crises, our team managed to meet interests of public, private and education sectors and save the democratic society. I took the session as a good reminder that as long as stakeholders have a common goal, they can compromise when needed and help each other out. Even if they don’t have the same immediate priorities. The clear vision and objectives of the ultimate outcome are the key.
Lost in translation: Policing, service design and speaking human by Connie Sinclair, Sarah Taylor and Chris Muir was a testament to the amazing impact of collaboration with Subject Matter Experts, breaking organisational barriers, and redesigning organisation from the ground up, and not top-down which usually happens.
Living Well — designing an inclusive health service in rural Wales described an effort of Tim Smith and his team to bring healthcare to those who were at a risk of exclusion. I was impressed by the interventions proving that they met people where they were, rather than ignoring their living circumstances and barriers they faced to using digital services.
Design without designers: why democratising design is harder than we admit by Omar Idris and Andy Marsden introduced the concept of designing for stewardship and long life of the service design outlasting design practitioners on the project.
The closing talk
Last year I was deeply inspired by Rachael Dietkus’s Care for the public: trauma-informed service design keynote. Although I enjoyed and appreciated all the sessions I participated in this year, I had been missing similar energy and boldness, rooted in hope and care. It changed when Imandeep Kaur closed with Designing for systemic uncertainty.
She spoke about Civic Square and what they’ve been achieving in Birmingham and in other places. It was great to see examples of the actions taken with the communities, reimagining housing, ownership, resourcefulness and resilience. She emphasised environmental and socioeconomic impacts of the climate change – not as an abstract future, but the presence. It was a stark reminder that we must be addressing them while designing public services. They need to be fit for a warmer world with all implications that raising temperatures bring.
Get magdalena mips’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
I found Imandeep’s storytelling powerful, arguments compelling and the message urgent and moving.
She gave us a vision for a new social contract. The one that finds local solutions to the global problems, offers an alternative to the aggressive neoliberal capitalism and its extractive economical rule. The one that gives the power back to the people.
I was grateful to the organisers for inviting her, and wished more people could have heard the talk. Keep an eye for the recording if you couldn’t make it.
Joining as a speaker
Democratising design through community of practice and the NHS service standard was a title of the talk that JJ Knowles and I gave on the second day.
We framed the talk with this definition from Department of Government:
Democracy is a framework of governance where the power resides with the people.
(Emphasis ours.)
We then spoke about how communities of practice and NHS service standard can be used to share power and responsibility when we design services. This can happen at an organisational level, when we work together with internal teams and stakeholders. And, more importantly, when we invite the diverse public participation in shaping and designing services. We illustrated it with the story about the journey we were on while service standard maturity in Screening in Digital Prevention Services Portfolio.
As we found out after the talk, it stroke the right notes with some of our peers, and lead to meaningful connections. I was really happy about it it was great to May the conversations continue.
The gathering
SDinGov was so much more than the sessions though. It really felt like gathering of like-minded folks who wanted to learn from each other, share knowledge and cared about designing good services. Top vibes.
Organisers helped us connect with each other. On the first day, I was greeted by a table with the jigsaw of Scotland’s map. It was a quieter, friendly space to orienteer yourself – both on a map and at the event. And what a joy to find a puzzle you accidentally find that fits into the bigger piece. After the short but mighty lightning talks in the late afternoon, we were invited to a ceilidh. It was a brilliant way to connect with other participants, and share a very Scottish experience. I missed the Angry Hour happening on Thursday evening (despite a very compelling title), but I have heard great things about it from those who went.
There were also quiet and prayer rooms, and a working space. Let’s not forget lovely ways to personalise your conference ID: stickers letting people know for example if you were open to chat or your preferred pronouns, or Legos to create badges. You could make the SDinGov your own.
Final thoughts
“Democratising design” had many faces and incarnations at the SDinGov 2026. Collectively, we reflected on the main theme in the contexts of
- sharing some service design capabilities with team members
- collaborating with stakeholders and co-designing services with them
- creating more democratic tools, such as frameworks or service patterns
- last but not least, involving the public in designing services in participatory way.
It was a treat to participate in a 3-days long conference around this theme. It felt timely and needed. I’m curious to see which learnings I will apply in the future.
PS
Reading
East of Eden by John Steinbeck – an ultimate classics about complexity of humans. Also, a pure reading pleasure. Worth reaching out for before you see the series.
Inspired by
Natural Behaviour by Thick and Tight at Edinburgh’s Studio Theatre – it’s always a treat to see their show. They usually combine contemporary dance and drag to tell meaningful stories, often work in collaboration with Corali Dance and people with learning disabilities. This time T&T looked into what is considered natural vs. unnatural. It was brilliant, very funny and very camp. They’re touring now in the UK, don’t miss it.
