{"id":364,"date":"2017-12-07T08:10:22","date_gmt":"2017-12-07T07:10:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/?p=364"},"modified":"2017-12-13T11:01:08","modified_gmt":"2017-12-13T10:01:08","slug":"364","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/2017\/12\/07\/364\/","title":{"rendered":"SETTING THE CURSORS OF CO-CREATION"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\" \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

SET THE CURSORS OF CO-CREATION<\/strong><\/h2>\n

(version fran\u00e7aise \u00e0 la suite)<\/p>\n

How to reconcile an approach framed in advance and a posture open to co-creation? How to navigate between systematic and time-consuming co-creation and marginal co-development on residual or peripheral elements? How to distribute co-creation equitably between stakeholders without falling into a scrupulous formalism? How to go beyond conversation as a zero-sum game to install a constructive co-creation that invents solutions that were not there before? How to listen to voices that are not heard enough and the idea that distributed creation always brings a better solution? How to avoid co-creation as an ideology? Etc.<\/p>\n

So many questions and much more than certainly the actors of co-creation in general and in particular the stakeholders of the VILCO<\/a> project: citizens’ initiatives, local authorities, researchers, actors who carry this project and aim to reinvent collaboration between local dynamics for a better resilience of cities.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

QUESTIONNING THE \u00ab\u00a0CO-EVERYTHING\u00a0\u00bb<\/strong><\/h3>\n

VILCO<\/a> is born within the CO-CREATE<\/a> program of INNOVIRIS<\/a>, the Brussels Institute for Scientific Research. It is part of the great movement of the \u00ab\u00a0co-everything\u00a0\u00bb and the desire today to question the effective efficiency of these approaches from the enthusiasm for the co-design within public innovation labs<\/a> to SwafS programs Science with and for Society<\/a> of the European Commission. As SDS already noted in 2015 by scanning the lessons learned in terms of social innovation from the more than 500 cities that have participated in the URBACT I and II programs<\/a> [1], a change in the governance of cities is underway for better collaboration between citizens. (Re)inventing this co-creation as a mode of collaboration within local dynamics in cities is at the heart of the VILCO project.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

THE THOUSAND FIRES AND THE TORMENTS OF CO-CREATION<\/strong><\/h3>\n

VILCO<\/a> is one of the many projects supported by the INNOVIRIS programs in the Brussels-Capital Region: it is at the same time a concentration of expertise on co-creation and an object of experimentation of this co-creation. Confronted like all the other CO-CREATE projects with the thousand fires of co-creation – but also with its torments – the carriers of the VILCO project as the first living lab of VILCO organized a working session at SDS the 30th<\/sup> of November to experiment, in small committee first, an exercise that could be titled: \u00ab\u00a0Set the sliders of co-creation.\u00a0\u00bb. The aim was to discuss together how to co-create and what to do in a working group.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

IDENTIFY DIMENSIONS ON WHICH SET CURSORS<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The exercise was in two parts.<\/p>\n

At first, we sought in sub-groups to identify \u00ab\u00a0in-sights\u00a0\u00bb: what stuck in co-creation? What is difficult? What are we magnifying? What’s wrong? Etc.<\/p>\n

For each problem identified on the co-creation we have described an underlying polarity on which it was necessary to \u00ab\u00a0set the cursor\u00a0\u00bb. Among the many problems discussed, here are a few: in a process of co-creation should everything be 100% transparent even if the consequence is to make the project more heavy? Should all decisions be co-decided or delegated to one or more people who have the mandate to decide? Should a co-creation process be framed by a set of precise rules or should it be left open, improvised and untagged (off-piste)? How to define who should participate in the co-creation process: what makes each stakeholder legitimate to take part in the co-creation process and where does this legitimacy come from? Or, how to position yourself between \u00ab\u00a0it is the process that is important, the result we do not care\u00a0\u00bb versus \u00ab\u00a0it is the result that is important no matter how we get there\u00a0\u00bb? Etc.<\/p>\n

In a second step, we tried to adjust the sliders: each subgroup successively installed the polarities that it had identified on a major axis materialized on the ground. Everyone has positioned their own personal cursor and the groupings formed exchanged their contrasting arguments. In the end, we looked at each dimension of the identified co-creation to move the working group’s slider from \u00ab\u00a0how it is now\u00a0\u00bb to \u00ab\u00a0how would we like it\u00a0\u00bb in the future.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS BUT NOT IMPENETRABLE<\/strong><\/h3>\n

After 3 hours of debate and \u00ab\u00a0slider adjustment\u00a0\u00bb on the multiple dimensions raised by the co-creation processes, the discussions within VILCO project core partners showed divergences in positioning, in perceptions, in personal habits and in professional practices. A first synthesis is underway to extract the most significant dimensions – at least those that emerged until yesterday – but a lot of work remains to be done with all the actors of the local dynamics at the heart of VILCO<\/a> and the wealth that their experiences represent. Our intention was to try out this approach in small groups to test its interest and to fine-tune its modalities. The exercise looks promising: the dimensions of co-creation are multiple but its paths are not impenetrable!<\/p>\n

Fran\u00e7ois J\u00e9gou, SDS, November<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n


\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0\"\"<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

POSITIONNER LES CURSEURS DE LA CO-CREATION<\/strong><\/h2>\n

(English version before)<\/p>\n

Comment concilier une d\u00e9marche cadr\u00e9e \u00e0 l\u2019avance et une ouverture \u00e0 la co-cr\u00e9ation ? Comment naviguer entre co-cr\u00e9ation syst\u00e9matique et chronophage et co-\u00e9laboration \u00e0 la marge sur des \u00e9l\u00e9ments r\u00e9siduels ou p\u00e9riph\u00e9riques ? Comment distribuer la co-cr\u00e9ation \u00e9quitablement entre les parties prenantes sans tomber dans un formalisme scrupuleux et protocolaire ? Comment d\u00e9passer la conversation comprise comme un jeu \u00e0 somme nulle pour installer une co-cr\u00e9ation constructive qui invente des solutions qui n\u2019\u00e9taient pas l\u00e0 auparavant ? Comment \u00e9couter les voix qui ne sont pas assez entendues et l\u2019id\u00e9e que la cr\u00e9ation distribu\u00e9e apporte toujours une meilleure solution ? Comment \u00e9viter la co-cr\u00e9ation comme une id\u00e9ologie ? Etc.<\/p>\n

Autant de questions et bien plus encore que certainement se posent les acteurs de la co-cr\u00e9ation en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral et en particulier les parties prenantes du projet VILCO<\/a> : initiatives citoyennes, autorit\u00e9s locales, chercheurs, acteurs qui portent ce projet et ambitionnent de r\u00e9inventer la collaboration au sein des dynamiques locales pour une meilleure r\u00e9silience des villes.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

INTERROGER LE \u00ab\u00a0CO-EVERYTHING\u00a0\u00bb<\/strong><\/h3>\n

VILCO<\/a> est n\u00e9 au sein du programme CO-CREATE<\/a> d\u2019INNOVIRIS<\/a>, l’Institut bruxellois pour la recherche scientifique. Il s\u2019inscrit dans la grande mouvance du \u201cco-everything\u201d et la volont\u00e9 aujourd\u2019hui d\u2019interroger l\u2019effective efficience de ces approches depuis l\u2019engouement pour le co-design des labos d\u2019innovation publique<\/a> jusqu\u2019aux programmes SwafS Science For And with Society\u00a0<\/em><\/a>de la Commission Europ\u00e9enne. Comme SDS le notait d\u00e9j\u00e0 en 2015 en scannant les enseignements en termes d\u2019innovation sociale des plus de 500 villes ayant particip\u00e9 aux programmes URBACT I et II<\/a>\u00a0[1], une \u00e9volution de la gouvernance des villes est en cours pour une meilleure collaboration avec les citoyennes et les citoyens. (R\u00e9)inventer cette co-cr\u00e9ation comme mode de collaboration au sein des dynamiques locales dans les villes est au c\u0153ur du projet VILCO.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

LES MILLES FEUX ET LES AFFRES DE LA CO-CREATION<\/strong><\/h3>\n

VILCO<\/a> est un des multiples chantiers ouverts par les programmes INNOVIRIS en R\u00e9gion Bruxelles-Capitale\u00a0: il est \u00e0 la fois une concentration d\u2019expertises sur la co-cr\u00e9ation et un objet d\u2019exp\u00e9rimentation de cette co-cr\u00e9ation. Confront\u00e9s comme tous les autres projets CO-CREATE aux mille feux de la co-cr\u00e9ation – mais aussi aux affres de celle-ci \u2013 les porteurs du projet VILCO en tant que premier living lab de VILCO se sont mis-au-vert chez SDS le 30 novembre dernier pour exp\u00e9rimenter, en petit comit\u00e9 d\u2019abord, un exercice qui pourrait s\u2019intituler : \u00ab R\u00e9gler les curseurs de la co-cr\u00e9ation \u00bb. L\u2019objectif \u00e9tait de s\u2019interroger ensemble sur le comment de co-cr\u00e9ation et sur les modalit\u00e9s \u00e0 adopter dans un groupe de travail.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

IDENTIFIER LES DIMENSIONS SUR LESQUELLES REGLER LES CURSEURS <\/strong><\/h3>\n

L\u2019exercice proc\u00e9dait en 2 parties.<\/p>\n

Dans un premier temps, nous avons cherch\u00e9 \u00e0 identifier en sous-groupes des \u201cin-sights\u201d : qu\u2019est-ce qui coince en mati\u00e8re de co-cr\u00e9ation ? Qu\u2019est-ce qui est difficile ? Qu\u2019est-ce qu\u2019on loupe ? Qu\u2019est-ce qui d\u00e9raille ? Etc.<\/p>\n

Pour chaque probl\u00e9matique identifi\u00e9e sur la co-cr\u00e9ation nous avons d\u00e9crit une polarit\u00e9 sous-jacente sur laquelle il fallait \u00ab r\u00e9gler le curseur \u00bb. Parmi les nombreuses probl\u00e9matiques identifi\u00e9es, en voici quelques unes\u00a0: Dans un processus de co-cr\u00e9ation tout doit il \u00eatre transparent \u00e0 100% quitte \u00e0 alourdir le projet pour permettre cette transparence ? Les d\u00e9cisions doivent elles \u00eatre toutes co-d\u00e9cid\u00e9es ou bien d\u00e9l\u00e9gu\u00e9es \u00e0 une ou plusieurs personnes qui ont le mandat pour d\u00e9cider ? Un processus de co-cr\u00e9ation doit-il \u00eatre cadr\u00e9 par un ensemble de r\u00e8gles d\u00e9finies ou bien ouvert, improvis\u00e9 et non balis\u00e9 (hors-pistes) ? Comment d\u00e9finir qui doit participer au processus de co-cr\u00e9ation\u00a0: qu’est ce qui rend chaque partie prenante l\u00e9gitime \u00e0 participer au processus de co-cr\u00e9ation et d’o\u00f9 vient cette l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9 ? Ou encore, comment se positionner entre \u00ab\u00a0c\u2019est le processus qui est important, le r\u00e9sultat on s\u2019en fout\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> versus \u00ab\u00a0c\u2019est le r\u00e9sultat qui est important peu importe comment on y arrive\u00a0\u00bb<\/em>\u00a0? Etc.<\/p>\n

Dans un deuxi\u00e8me temps, nous avons cherch\u00e9 \u00e0 r\u00e9gler les curseurs\u00a0: chaque sous-groupe a install\u00e9 successivement les polarit\u00e9s qu\u2019il avait identifi\u00e9es sur un grand axe mat\u00e9rialis\u00e9 au sol. Chacun a positionn\u00e9 son propre curseur personnel et, \u00e0 la mani\u00e8re d\u2019un d\u00e9bat mouvant, les regroupements form\u00e9s ont \u00e9chang\u00e9 leurs arguments contrast\u00e9s. In fine<\/em>, nous avons cherch\u00e9 sur chaque dimension de la co-cr\u00e9ation identifi\u00e9e \u00e0 d\u00e9placer le curseur du groupe de travail de \u201ccomment c\u2019est maintenant\u201d \u00e0 \u201ccomment on voudrait que ce soit\u201d \u00e0 l\u2019avenir.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

DES DIMENSIONS MULTIPLES MAIS PAS IMP\u00c9N\u00c9TRABLES<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Apr\u00e8s 3 heures de d\u00e9bat et de \u201cr\u00e9glage de curseurs\u201d sur les multiples dimensions soulev\u00e9es par les processus de co-cr\u00e9ation, les discussions au sein du groupe d\u2019acteurs qui portent le projet VILCO<\/a> ont montr\u00e9 des divergences de positionnement, de perceptions, d\u2019habitudes personnelles et de pratiques professionnelles. Une premi\u00e8re synth\u00e8se est en cours pour extraire les dimensions les plus significatives – du moins celles qui ont \u00e9merg\u00e9es jusqu\u2019\u00e0 hier \u2013 mais beaucoup de travail reste \u00e0 faire avec tous les acteurs des dynamiques locales au c\u0153ur de VILCO et la richesse que repr\u00e9sente leurs exp\u00e9riences multiples.<\/p>\n

Notre intention \u00e9tait de s’essayer en petit comit\u00e9 pour \u00e9prouver l’int\u00e9r\u00eat de cette approche et en affiner les modalit\u00e9s. L’exercice semble prometteur : les dimensions de la co-cr\u00e9ation sont multiples mais ses chemins ne sont pas imp\u00e9n\u00e9trables !<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Fran\u00e7ois J\u00e9gou, SDS, novembre 2017<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[1] J\u00e9gou, F., Bonneau, M. 2015. Social innovation in cities, URBACT II capitalisation<\/em>, URBACT Publishing, Paris.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0 SET THE CURSORS OF CO-CREATION (version fran\u00e7aise \u00e0 la suite) How to reconcile an approach framed in advance and a posture open to co-creation? How to navigate between systematic and time-consuming co-creation and marginal co-development on residual or peripheral[…]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":368,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[7,8,5],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/364"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=364"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/364\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":385,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/364\/revisions\/385"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/368"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.strategicdesignscenarios.net\/lab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}