Suzanne Hall and Nick Pettigrew Ipsos MORI (UK) session A social contract for the 21st century Not in Excel document.

A social contract for the 21st centurySuzanne Hall and Nick PettigrewIpsos MORI

Background

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is one of the largest UK government departments

It aims to provide work for those that can – and help for those that can’t

And this help includes the payment of a number of benefits – the State Pension, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Incapacity Benefit – accounting for a quarter of all public expenditure in the UK

But recently, the Department has undergone much change…

Efficiency measures meant that DWP had to redeploy 30,000 staff

– Which, in turn, had an impact on service delivery with a shift from face-to-face to telephone support

Parts of the Department have also been restructured to help improve its offering

– E.g. the Child Support Agency is being disbanded and re-launched as the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission

Attitudinal change

Technological change

Lifestyle change

Demographic change

Migration

Globalisation

And external changes are also affecting how it works…

The challenges facing UK society in 2008 and beyond

Looking at these challenges in more detail…

Large multi-national companies – not small independents – so called ‘Tesco-isation’

Globalisation leads to structural changes in the economy. In the UK this has meant:

– A move from manufacturing towards a service or knowledge-based economy

– An increased demand for high-skilled labour

Globalisation

Looking at these challenges in more detail…

In 2005, an average of 1,500 people a day came to live in the UK

But, during that same year, over 1,000 people left the UK every day to live abroad

This creates additional pressure on resources, but also leads to the availability of different skill sets

Migration

Demographic change

Looking at these challenges in more detail…

Family structures are changing: Rising numbers of households and pensioners will mean more demand for services

There will be 2m more households in England and Wales in 2017 than in 2007

And the population is getting older - there will be 2.4m more people over 65 in 2017 than in 2007

Lifestyle change

Looking at these challenges in more detail…

2.8 million children were living below the relative poverty line in 2005/06

In 2003, three in ten (31%) of households were single person households

– An increase of eight percentage points since 1981

In the UK, the average age of first-time mothers is rising

Technological change

Looking at these challenges in more detail…

Half the population has broadband in their homes

And people are increasingly using online services

Customer services increasingly provided through call centres

Attitudinal change

Looking at these challenges in more detail…

People have increasing access to information

– But this can lead to people feeling overburdened – ‘the paradox of choice’

– And who or what do you trust?

Work/life balance issues are also becoming paramount for many

– UK workers work the longest hours in Europe

And this means DWP cannot operate as if it is ‘business as usual’

The problem with doing so is that people’s skills sets no longer match the UK’s economic needs

– And unemployment is costly to the taxpayer

Two in five people (41%) currently rely completely on the state for financial support in retirement

Almost one in four children in England and Wales now lives in a one-parent family

So DWP wanted us to help it understand… The best way to deliver effective, high-quality services in

the future, in light of the changes the UK faces

How citizens and the state can best work together:

– What could this new relationship look like?

– What should be the balance between rights and responsibilities?

– How should services be personalised?

And this presented us with some real research challenges…

1. Designing a research approach which allowed us to explore these issues in depth

2. Determining how to inform participants about current and future contentious topics

3. Encouraging people to make hard choices

We adopted a deliberative approach…

Deliberative research comes in all shapes and sizes (and has lots of different names)

Methods: Citizens Juries, Deliberative Workshops, Deliberative Forums, Deliberative Polls, Collaborative Workshops…

Techniques: Break-out groups, plenary sessions, voting, debate, presentations, Q&A, fact sheets, pre-tasks, reconvening…

How is deliberative research different?

Involving the client:

Presenting during plenary

Participating in syndicate discussions

Q&A Sessions

Explaining its viewpoint

Observing

How that helps:

Increased public engagement

In-depth information

Improving understanding of

proposed changes

Opportunity to inform

How is deliberative research different? Rather than taking responses as concrete,

deliberative researchers aim to challenge participants’ thinking in order to reach reasoned conclusions

And often participants’ views will change during the deliberative process

Deliberative techniques can be a way to give more power to citizens

– Links to a wider government push to involve people in decision-making

An innovative research design – and a first for DWP…

Five day long deliberative workshops with c.35 participants in each aged 18+

London Manchester Birmingham Bristol Newcastle

Reconvened deliberative workshopLondon

And an approach that was so successful that it was then repeated in another six locations…

The benefits of this approach…

The length of the workshops meant we had longer to spend with participants

– Crucial given the complexity of the issues we were debating

During that time, participants were exposed to information from a balanced range of sources to inform their views on the subject. This included:

– The constraints within which DWP is operating

– The challenges which DWP is facing

– The reasons for/against a particular solution/action

Participants were then given time to debate and discuss the issues with each other

– And unlike much qualitative research, deliberative events are usually intentionally recruited to be heterogeneous

The benefits of this approach…

The length of time the workshops ran for also allowed us to vary the format

– A mix of break-out and plenary sessions changed the dynamic of the day, facilitated general and more detailed debate, and kept participants engaged

– And introducing expert witnesses from the Department meant information could be presented to participants in a variety of ways

And much thought went into the running of the day itself…

We recognised that the issues under discussion would be contentious

– And that as participants were exposed to information and debated their ideas their views would change

Consequently, we needed a way to crystallise opinion at key points throughout the day

– And to monitor how and why opinions shifted

– So we could help DWP understand what resonates with the public and what does not

To this end, we used IML voting technology

Illustrating how views changed…

Government services should be tailored to individual customers’ needs, even if it means an increase in taxes

% Agree % Disagree

End of the workshop

Beginning of the workshop 32

18

43

60

And the moderating had to be of a high quality…

Given the complexities of the debate, we needed moderators who understood the policy area

– So close co-operation with sector specialists within the company

More importantly though, we needed skilled moderators who could facilitate detailed discussion on sensitive issues

– And who could handle a varied group in which participants ranged from age 16 to 80

– They also needed to be able to monitor how opinions changed – and to debate inconsistencies in views

But this approach required rigorous preparation beforehand…

The preparation of the stimulus material was key

We needed to present complex information in a way that everyone could understand

And we needed to make sure that the information was not only clear but also impartial

– Our role was not to make people ‘take the government’s side’ but to understand how they felt about key social issues

How we presented demographic challenges and change…

‘‘Working Age’ ‘People aged 65+’

1901

2005

2050

We also needed to work carefully on recruitment…

Given the size and scale of this study, we needed to pay great attention to the recruitment

– In total, we spoke to around 300 participants, so had the opportunity to recruit from a wide range of backgrounds

– And the sample could be reasonably representative of the general population – so strict quotas were key, along with close relations with our team of recruiters

But we also had to take care that we recruited those who could take part in a lively debate – which went on for a long time

– So attitudinal characteristics along with demographic information was also taken into account

And our administration systems had to be spot on…

These events were logistically challenging

– Plenary and break out rooms had to be organised

– The technology (including IML voting and video) needed to be checked

But most importantly we needed to cater for the needs of participants

– We needed to make sure the events were accessible for all – including those with a long term illness or disability

– And we needed to make sure all participants arrived safely in London for the reconvened workshop – and this meant organising travel and accommodation for people from all four nations of the UK

We were left with rich seams of data… This study generated a great deal of information

– Notes made in the field

– Transcripts

– Voting data

– Video footage from ‘Diary Rooms’ which were set up to capture private thoughts

To make the most of this, we used thematic framework analysis to help determine the key findings, to understand the links in the data and how views changed according to sub-groups

– And the brainstorms that facilitated this brought the whole team into the analytical process

But gathering this data helped us train the qualitative researchers of tomorrow…

Each break-out group was led by a moderator who was supported by a note-taker – typically a more junior member of staff

– Their role was to create ‘instant transcripts’ and observe the interaction between the participants

But it also provided an ideal training opportunity

– They could see how a group works in action

– And due to the senior level involvement it meant they could learn moderating techniques from the most experienced social researchers

And the final report has had a real impact on the work of DWP…

The research found that there is strong support for the principle of a safety net

– Participants recognised that there will always be people in need of support

– And that it is the hallmark of a modern and caring society to provide this

However, participants also recognised that as a result of the challenges facing the UK there will need to be changes

– So they began to construct definitions of deserving – and this was typically those denied life chances through no fault of their own e.g. the disabled, children

And the final report has had a real impact on the work of DWP…

They also felt that work should be put at the centre of the welfare state

– Employment was not only seen to bring economic benefits but emotional/social ones too e.g. increased networks, self confidence and exposure to new skills

Because of this, the state was seen to have a role in empowering people to work

– This could be done through effective information provision, devolving economic decisions down to a local level and encouraging the long-term unemployed to donate their time to community activities

And the final report has had a real impact on the work of DWP…

However, while empowering methods were favoured, participants believed that a series of sanctions needed to run in parallel

– These included a time limit on claims, means testing and more stringent tests of ‘eligibility’ for certain benefits

As well as the principles underpinning the welfare state needing to change, participants also thought that how services are delivered needs to be re-evaluated

– And much of this related to an increasing personalisation of services e.g. providing help and advice in libraries/supermarkets, home visits and out of hours help

And the final report has had a real impact on the work of DWP…

One of the striking findings from this research was the extent to which public opinion chimed with current policy development

– E.g. The Leitch Review on skills and the White Paper on pensions

However, the low levels of awareness about the work of Department means the DWP needs to build its profile with the public

– As a result, our work has gone on to form the foundations of DWP’s current communications policy

– And is underpinning the latest White Paper in welfare reform

To find out more…

Please see www.dwp.gov.uk for more information about this study

Thank you