Co-creation processes and innovative municipal services

Municipalities increasingly use the language of co-creation when redesigning welfare services. The attraction is understandable: complex needs rarely fit neatly inside one department, and services are more likely to be relevant when residents, professionals and managers contribute to their development. Yet co-creation can easily become a label for consultation without changing decisions, responsibilities or everyday practice.

Research on the development and initial implementation of Veikart in Sola municipality offers a useful way to think about the difference. Veikart was developed as a visual assessment tool and a collaborative working method for residents who need several welfare services at the same time. The underlying challenge was not a lack of individual services. It was fragmentation: parallel assessments, unclear responsibility, limited information flow and residents having to explain the same situation repeatedly.

Start with a concrete service problem

Co-creation works best when it begins with a problem that participants recognise in practice. “We need more innovation” is too broad. “Residents with complex needs are being passed between services without a shared plan” creates a clearer starting point. It helps participants identify who is affected, which routines reproduce the problem and where collaboration is currently breaking down.

This also changes who needs to be involved. A co-creation group should not include only managers or only enthusiastic project staff. It needs the people who use the service, frontline professionals who understand daily constraints, decision-makers who can change organisational conditions and, where relevant, external partners.

Create a shared object for collaboration

Cross-service collaboration is difficult when every profession works with a different language, assessment format and definition of success. A shared object—a roadmap, service journey, common assessment or jointly defined plan—can make collaboration more concrete. In Sola, the visual format of Veikart was intended to help residents and professionals see different life areas together, clarify goals and identify which services should contribute.

The tool alone is not the innovation. Its value depends on the interaction around it: whose perspective defines the situation, how goals are agreed, whether responsibilities are assigned and whether the resident remains an active participant rather than becoming the subject of a professional meeting.

Connect participation with organisational authority

Many co-creation processes generate good ideas but fail during implementation. The reason is often structural. Staff may lack time, managers may not prioritise the new approach, digital systems may not support information sharing, or uncertainty about consent and confidentiality may prevent collaboration.

For this reason, leadership involvement should not be limited to approving the project at the beginning. Leaders need to clarify where the method is relevant, allocate resources for testing and learning, remove organisational barriers and decide how the new practice will be anchored after the project phase.

Treat implementation as continued co-creation

An innovative municipal service should rarely be treated as finished at launch. Initial use will reveal whether the method is understandable, feasible and valuable for residents and staff. Feedback should therefore be built into implementation through short reflection meetings, interviews, observations or practical learning logs.

The central lesson is that co-creation is not a single event. It is a structured relationship between participation, joint problem-solving, practical experimentation and organisational change. Municipal services become innovative when that relationship results in a better way of working that residents and professionals can actually use.

Dr. Aleksandar Bozic

Associate Professor at the University of Stavanger. His work focuses on social innovation, collaboration, civil society, migration and psychosocial services. Available for selected research, evaluation and advisory engagements.

About the author →