We followed an iterative process of research, co-creation, and testing to ensure that the redesigned service model addressed the real needs of service users, caregivers, and stakeholders at every level of the system.

Understanding the System: Secondary Research

To lay the groundwork, we conducted in-depth secondary research, analyzing key documentation such as development plans, policy frameworks, and case studies from other countries. This helped us map existing services, stakeholder relationships, and known systemic issues.

💡 Key Insight: A fragmented service landscape and inconsistent policies led to gaps in care, prompting a need for a more cohesive, user-centered model.

Engaging Stakeholders: Interviews & Observations

Since the service system involved a wide range of users and providers, we conducted a two-phase field study:

• 7 group interviews with 43 stakeholders (policy makers, service providers, service user organizations, healthcare and education professionals, and local municipalities) to uncover broad systemic challenges.

• 38 in-depth interviews and 6 contextual observations with service users, caregivers, and frontline professionals to capture personal experiences and workflow inefficiencies.

💡 Key Insight: Many users struggled with entering the system due to complex processes, while service providers faced administrative burdens that limited direct care time. These insights shaped our approach to simplifying access and optimizing resource allocation.

Making Sense of the Data: Thematic Analysis

All interviews and observations were transcribed and analyzed using a custom framework based on WHO’s life quality domains and key stages of the user journey (from identifying a need to navigating and exiting the system). We used affinity diagramming to cluster findings into actionable opportunity areas.

💡 Key Insight: Users needed services that aligned with their daily lives, rather than forcing them into rigid institutional structures. This directly informed our new service model’s flexibility and personalization features.

Bringing Collected Data to Life: Personas & User Needs

To bridge research and design, we created 15 personas representing five key user subgroups based on psychological and support needs. Each persona was designed to be concise yet rich in context, capturing real pain points, aspirations, and barriers within the service system.

Additionally, we developed user need cards, categorizing needs by service journey stage and life quality domain. These artifacts provided a tangible way for stakeholders to empathize with users and prioritize solutions.

💡 Key Insight: The personas and need cards helped stakeholders move beyond abstract discussions, enabling them to see how policy changes directly affected real people. This shifted conversations toward practical solutions rather than theoretical debates.

Co-Creation Workshops: Designing the Future Service Model

We facilitated 10 co-creation workshops with over 50 participants, using personas and journey mapping to collaboratively redesign the service experience. Each team focused on a different user group, iteratively refining their journey maps to address unmet needs.

💡 Key Outcome: Stakeholders co-designed user journeys that reduced bureaucracy, enhanced local support networks, and empowered users to navigate services more independently.

Refining the Model: Iteration & Risk Assessment

The ideas generated in workshops were synthesized into several service model prototypes, which we presented in another round of co-creation and discussion workshops to refine feasibility and assess potential risks of the proposed models.

💡 Key Outcome: By involving stakeholders early, we secured buy-in for key structural changes, such as streamlining service entry points and introducing proactive support mechanisms.

Real-World Validation: Piloting & Feedback

To test the feasibility of the new model, we launched a one-year pilot across eight municipalities, providing redesigned services to 40 individuals with psychological special needs. Throughout the pilot, we held reflection sessions with service providers to monitor implementation challenges.

At the end of the pilot, we conducted another round of interviews and surveys to measure impact and collect feedback for refinement.

💡 Key Outcome: Users reported increased accessibility and satisfaction, while service providers noted improved efficiency and collaboration. Based on these findings, the model was iterated for broader rollout.

Conclusion

By grounding design decisions in deep user research, collaborative ideation, and real-world testing, we developed a service model that better supported people with psychological special needs. The structured, iterative approach ensured that every change was backed by user insights, leading to a more inclusive and sustainable system.