Interview– Anna Hirschfeld

Listen to full episode :

TRANSCRIPT (unedited - so please ignore the ums and likes..)

Audree: Hi, I'm Audree Fletcher, an expert in service design and digital transformation in the public sector. I'm recording a series of podcast episodes about optimism for and in our public services. Today, I'd like to introduce Anna Hirschfeld. Anna is first and foremost an amazing human being. She's also an experienced leader in the digital transformation space, having designed, managed and led massive transformation programmes in the UK and overseas, which delivered human-centered, secure, effective and efficient services for civil servants and citizens. And I'm so pleased she's agreed to talk to me today.

Audree: You and I have been working in public sector or public services for a long time. You’ve a good eleven years at least. In my time I've met lots of people who have become disillusioned and cynical about public sector reform and whether or not it's doable. People talk about like cycles of seeing the same things over and over again and you kind of get that whole nothing ever changes kind of vibe from them. But you're not like that. Can you tell me why?

Anna: That's a really good question, because I think so. This is a west wing. It's not a west Wing quote, but I know it from the west Wing and I use it and it's one of those things that's in my head often, which is like policy change and changing government is like the slow boring of hardwood, that it does take time and it isn't easy, but the arc of it is constantly moving you in the right direction, like, I think. Yes, and I've seen it. You have things go out of fashion, you have trends, you know, you can see it in a few places in the UK and in Canada of like, things moving into government and out of government and into departments and out of departments. But the general trend, I believe, is to better. It might not always be a perfect line, it is squiggly, but I think the general line is towards being better, trying to do better and getting us to the next step. And sometimes, you know, what, what we've said was wrong. It isn't wrong in every scenario and actually is the right thing to do. So I think it's kind of recognizing that, like, whichever ideology or kind of viewpoint you have, it fits certain scenarios, but it doesn't fit them all. And there's a reason different things keep coming back around. Some of those are not positive, like fender lock in and particular pressures and perhaps people falling back to things that feel comfortable. But I think there's also a thing of things. Some things come back around because whatever that change was. Has either outlived its usefulness or needs to come in. Come in. Rather than sitting outside and being like, throwing rocks from the outside, it needs to come in and change the hole. So, yeah, so for me, I think I see it as a slow, boring, boring, as in drilling, but maybe to people who are not as geeky about government, also just boring change. But it does. It does happen. And you can see it, like, the way governments, the way people talk about services and how you support people. And different governments might have different viewpoints, but the conversation has changed about government and what it's there for. And I think that's only a positive.

Audree: That really resonates with me. I have seen things that felt like failure at the time, that just. They were too early.

Anna: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Audree: The context wasn't right, it wasn't ready for it, but. But like, five years after I've gone, the stuff that I did absolutely was needed and used. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Anna: I literally just came off a call earlier today where we had made a recommendation to. To a government in Canada about a specific thing that they should do, which was introduced human centered design into a specific project which was very tech heavy, led by very, very, very clever technologists, but was very tech heavy. And we said this to them in 2021. And I just spoke to the service design user researcher who they just, they put onto the project in the last 18 months, who's now doing that. It's like, you know, gets there slowly, it's like, enters the brain, but it just. They weren't ready for it then, but they're ready for it now.

Audree: That also kind of speaks to, like a slow percolation of ideas or cultural change. Yeah, that's really interesting. Okay, next question. So public sentiment about public services is like, and trust and authority is really poor, and civil servants morale is shocking, and I don't blame them with how they've been treated over recent years. Yeah, I'm optimistic that we'll see that turn around over the coming years. I hope you are too. If you are. If you are, like, why? What can you see that make you believe that things might be different going forward?

Anna: I mean, there's a political answer, there's not a political answer. So I think. I think there's a thing that goes back to Tom's, like, definition of Internet era, which is raised expectations. So some of the things which ten years ago, when they, you know, when GDS started, when GOV.uk was created, when a kind of much more easy way to interact face with government in the UK, like happened and a bunch of services came out of that. That's normal now. Like, that's not cool or shiny. People don't. I mean, people were super excited at the time if you were just a general citizen, but it still was like, oh, hang on, this is way easier than I've ever dealt with government before. People are used to that now. And so I think places where that still hasn't landed, that those raised expectations are not being met. But I think the other thing is expectations have continued to raise, the bar continues to get higher, and I think government does need to keep that iterative, user need led approach to keep responding to those raised expectations. So I think that's part of it. The other challenge is obviously the money available for government services. There is only so far digital or anything will get you if you can't fund the services appropriately. And that's the more political bit of the answer for me is I think right now we're in a situation where there isn't a lot of money in the system in the UK, and that makes it very hard. I would hope that that is going to change over time, but I think that's a reality that, like, you can't completely ignore. Having said that, necessity is the something of invention, whatever it is. But, you know, crises, challenges, things like that are also where you can find out how you can do things for less than you ever thought. So that's my other bit of optimism, is like, sometimes that forces you to be clever and do things differently.

Audree: I'm completely with you on the raised expectations points. The last few days I've been doing some user research on a service where most of the users are older generation, and I, we've got like a prototype and we've just used the government design system to prototype it with. And this is a prospective service where there is remarkably low trust in government. And they're still saying, oh, yeah, no, that makes sense, it's familiar. I know how that's going to work. And we check, like, is familiar good? And yes, absolutely familiar is good.

Anna: Yeah.

Audree: So, yeah, I might not trust these guys, but this is good. And similarly, they're like, all of the information you already have, what you need to know about me in the various different parts of government, why do you need to give it to me again?

Anna: That's the one. Although that isn't.

Audree: They're expecting it now, even though they also don't trust government with their data a hundred percent. Why are you asking? You've already got it all. Why are you asking me again? People are expecting us to be able to, when they give us consent, not have to ask them again, which is exciting, because it means we do have to take on the issue of data interoperability across government, which seems to have been something that successive governments have, like, kicked down the road a few times.

Anna: Yes. It's that thing of people, like, they don't like the idea that government knows everything about them, but they also expect it. So then when they're trying to, at the point of need, the focus is on, why am I having to fill in a load of information you already know about me, when you might even know better than me if I'm trying to do it in the moment? So, yeah, yeah, we found that a lot on universal credit was a weird thing, but. I'm sorry, that was my doorbell.

Audree: If my doorbell was to go off, my dog would go nuts, because she's tuned to the doorbell. She knows there's somewhere there, even though I'm not in the house. Okay, my next question. What are you optimistic about for public services and for citizens? What sort of changes would you really hope to see for people?

Anna: Oh, I think data interoperability is a big thing. I think making that easier. I have a controversial one.

Audree: Yeah, go ahead.

Anna: I think at the moment, digital identity is a thing and we are going to have to figure this out, and we are trying in the UK to figure it out, and lots of people are trying to figure it out, but right now, the burden of proving yourself is incredibly high if you want to access government services, higher than it's ever been before, if you do it digitally. And I don't think that's right. And I think, actually, if we could. If we had the concept of a credential or a card or something that actually was passable between you as an individual and government, that meant you didn't have to go through a bunch of hoops. If you don't have a driver's license and a passport, I think that could be incredibly transformational for the people in our communities who are the most vulnerable. And I've seen it work incredibly well on universal credit. If you are, and I'm going to get the exact specifications of who it is. But essentially, if you are a refugee or not quite, but if you are someone who has come to the UK as a refugee, but is now allowed to receive benefits because you're nothing, automatically you have, essentially an id card. It's the actual. It's the id card system that was created and then just destroyed when Labour lost the battle on id cards. In the last Labour administration, it's the same system, but we've kept it for various people coming into the country, and it means that they can literally just, you know, it's a digital piece of credential as well as a physical cardinal. It's an incredibly easy journey. It's interoperable between DWP and the Home Office. Like, you just share that information, there's a QR code. Da da da da da. Done. You are now eligible for benefits, which as a group of people who are incredibly vulnerable and will rely on this benefit to a level that many other people might not. You know, they can't work, they can't do lots of things that is transformational and we don't do that. If it just happens that you are someone who's got a morgue, like, you don't have an easy credit, like, your credit file is complicated or non existent, you don't have a driver's license or a passport, or at least one that's in date. Like, the number of hoops you end up having to jump through if you have any form of chaotic lifestyle, is really frustrating. So that's one that I would love to see, but I'm also aware it's a bit controversial and has its issues.

Audree: What sort of changes are you hoping to see that the service users, the general public will see in their public services? What are you excited about?

Anna: Just going back to that thing of like a button that says just fix it all for me, just sort me all out. Like, I don't know how close we can get to that, but I feel we can get a lot closer. Data is a big thing about that. I am really interested in how automate, and I say automation in the broader sense, as in how digital can help staff in government be better at, or just free to focus on complex problems and real human problems. Like, I think that's a really. That was always a thing in universal credit that we were always trying to push for, was everything we're doing to automate processes, to get rid of manual processes, to get rid of spreadsheets and manual rekeying, was to help people pivot away from stuff that quite frankly, is not good use of a human to doing things that are about humans and talking to other humans. That I think is really exciting and, you know, is a place where all sorts of automation could be really interesting. Like, I'm pretty skeptical about AI, but in terms of making things more efficient, in terms of helping expert users focus on the right things, I think that can be really, that could be really powerful and giving people time back to focus on the complex, focus on the human, and then therefore hopefully create a much more kind and thoughtful system that isn't just about. Have you filled in form number six seven b 24 in triplicate? I think that that's pretty transformational.

Audree: I really like, there's a theme in your examples. There's like inclusion, compassionate services. So your first one, it's like inclusive services for the disenfranchised.

Anna: Yes.

Audree: And, you know, civil servants with jobs that they actually enjoy because the service is human, even if part of it is digital.

Anna: Yeah.

Audree: Really, really nice as examples. And I think also there's something there around the boring. The boring magic. Like, just having less broken services would be a massive improvement for lots of the general public.

Anna: Just not being stuck in horrible loops and just unending loops of doom. Like, if we can just get rid of the loops of doom, that would make me very happy.

Audree: Okay, so my next question, and my last question, I've heard it said that optimism is an essential leadership trait. If you agree, and you don't have to, but if you agree, how do you see that playing out in your work? How does it look different for leaders, for teams?

Anna: I think that's a really interesting one. I do think you have to have some form of optimism. I think you also need to be fairly skeptical. Like, I think you can't be. I think blind optimism is not good and leads to bad outcomes and means you're not checking yourself and thinking about, what about this? What about that? Have we thought about this? Why is this person saying the things that they are saying to me? Everyone has their incentives. You've got to understand that. And that's not necessarily pessimism or skepticism. But I think being overly optimistic can mean sometimes you try and ignore some of that. So I think you need both. But I do think if you want to bring a group of people with you on a journey, you need to have a vision of what better could look like and what good looks like and why we're on this journey in any way, shape or form. And I think that, to me, needs a level of optimism like you. I just think it's very hard to bring people with you if you're like, well, we're probably not going to be successful, it's going to be ****. No one's going to care anyway. It's probably not going to get you the outcomes you want to get to. So, yes, I do think you need optimism. What was the second part of the question?

Audree: Which is how do you see it playing out? It sounds like you're, like a skeptical optimist.

Anna: I think I am, yeah. I think I come across more optimistic than I am, but I think that's my leadership style. Like, I think that's kind of my thing. How do I see it playing out? I think, like, the things that I really enjoy doing is sort of is helping people build a thing, like leading teams, delivering something. And I think you can't, like, the people that I know who are the best at that have a vision that they're pushing you towards and they hold it and they recognize when they're not getting there and they recognize that it's a hard journey and they, they support you and nurture you through that. But they're also like, come on, we know we can get here. Like, we're here. We can get up to here. And I think if you don't have that in a team, certainly in kind of agile delivery teams, you can feel like you're a bit of a sausage factory of sprint after sprint after sprint. But you need that vision and that support to keep you looking at that North Star, at that vision of where we're getting to. So you can kind of go, okay, we're not there yet, but here's what we need to do, and we know we're going there and this is going to get us here. So, yeah, I think for me, like, a bit of both is important, but you've got to have some optimism to see, to believe that you can make a difference and make it and make a change.

Audree: That sense of agency is really, really critical in optimism. Otherwise, it's just wishful thinking, isn't it?

Anna: Yeah. Yeah, it is. It's agency. It is. I think I. When I'm feeling overly skeptical and overly just not in any way optimistic, I always feel like I just have no, I'm just like a puppet in a process, and you just. It's very hard to stay motivated in that scenario and reinforces itself.

Audree: I've run out of questions. So is there anything that you think I should think about in this space or anything that you think I should explore?

Anna: Oh, I don't know. I think that's kind of skeptical optimism. Like, what is that? Because it's definitely a thing. So I think there's more to talk about there, but I don't know. I think optimism in a crisis, it's quite hard, but totally is what gets you through. It's easy to lose that when you're. When things are really hard and it's just not going well, or the world around you is crumbling. Like, I think about the Kyiv team, and, like, the team in Kyiv and what they're achieving, and there's a lot of optimism in that, in what I would consider quite a very difficult situation to stay optimistic in when, you know, this is a war that's going on and on. It doesn't feel like it's finishing anytime soon, but they just seem to be like, no, no, no. We just got to keep cracking on. This isn't really important. Like, that's really interesting. Like, not losing faith.

Audree: I've always found myself most motivated and most optimistic in a crisis, because it's like all existing rules are suspended. Yeah, we're just going to get this done, so we're going to stop worrying about whose toes we're treading on. We're going to stop being territorial and political when we're just going to get together and figure out what needs to be done. And there's too much for us all to do, so we'll just have each other's backs and trust that everybody will do their best. And it's just such a grown up way of working. I miss it.

Anna: No, it's true, actually. Like, the last three months on universal credit was Covid, and I felt like we were back at that tiny team of 25 again, because we. I mean, but we weren't. Not that I was only working with 25 people, but, like, because it just felt like we were. It was just one focus. We all were working to the same goal. As you said, there was a bunch of noise and nonsense that just got dropped in an instant that had felt so important, and now it's just gone, and, yeah, everyone was just focused on a goal, and that was. Yeah, it was a nice. Well, not nice, but obviously. But it was a good last three months in a. In a roll. Like, it was like being back when we were little again, so.

Audree: Yeah, okay. I've taken up lots of your time, more than I said I would.

Anna: That's fine. That's all good. End of the day.

Audree: I really enjoyed it.

Anna: Cool. This was fun. Thank you.

Audree: It was fun, wasn't it? It was quite nice to end on a positive note.

Anna: Yeah, I feel. Yeah. Just nice and happy and ready to go and pick up my little boy.

Audree: Have a lovely evening, and thank you again. Bye.