From the practical processes that shape our physical places to the systems and services that underpin everyday life, design is an often overlooked yet fundamental component of modern society.
Our recent roundtable on Public Design and the Success of Major Public Projects was led by speakers:
• Carla Groom, Deputy Director for Human Centred Design Science, DWP
• Professor Lucy Kimbell, Professor of Contemporary Design Practices, UAL
• Janet Hughes, Director General Civil Service Reform and Efficiency, Cabinet Office
This event brought together leaders from across government, academia and industry to explore the role of design in driving more effective policy and service delivery. Set against the backdrop of the 2025 Public Design Evidence Review, the discussion sought to unpack both the value of human-centred design and the barriers preventing it from being applied consistently at scale, particularly to major public projects.
What emerged was a resounding affirmation that the UK does not lack design brilliance: examples of its potential, expertise and creativity are clearly present across government and industry. Yet translating that potential into real-world initiatives is often hindered by entrenched bureaucracy and a risk-averse political environment.
The challenges faced by citizens of today, from long NHS waiting times to regional disparities in educational attainment, require systems-level thinking, empowered teams and human-centred design to create meaningful change.
Below, we explore the cultural shifts needed to turn existing design capability into meaningful, system-wide impact.
What is holding public design back?
Launched in summer 2025, the Public Design Evidence Review serves as an exceptional recognition of the critical importance of design in shaping more effective public policy and services. Bringing together insights from across government, academia and industry, the review sought to build a stronger evidence base, increase the visibility of existing practice and better understand how design can be applied in complex public sector contexts.
Over the past 20 years, design has become more visible in every sector, including policy making. The UK remains a global leader in this space; the Design Council continues to champion all design disciplines, evidencing their value and helping to shape an environment in which design can thrive. At the same time, design is increasingly embedded within higher education, with institutions such as UAL spearheading multidisciplinary networks that bring together researchers and practitioners to explore and advance new approaches to public policy design.
Within government, intelligent design initiatives have led to visible successes in recent years, from the digitalisation of public services to drivers reforms.
And yet, while the UK’s capabilities in public design showcase clear examples of excellence, change has not occurred everywhere and often, outcomes do not always reflect these strengths.
So why do major public projects still struggle?
What emerged throughout our discussion is that the issue is far from a lack of design expertise. Instead, as reflected in the Evidence Review, a systemic absence of clarity, visibility and connection are stopping best practice and innovation from being replicated across government departments. Design capability exists across government, often in highly effective pockets, but it is not consistently joined up, nor is it always positioned to influence the decisions that shape delivery.
In this context, rather than simply ‘doing more design’, the challenge is to ensure that design is able to operate at a systems level - shaping how policies are conceived, how organisations function and how services are ultimately delivered.
Breaking down silos: the case for systems thinking
Roundtable participants highlighted how silos and fragmentation remain major barriers to embedding design effectively across public services. Departments often operate in isolation, and as another attendee observed, “each department needs different modelling,” meaning a one-size-fits-all approach rarely works. This separation often prevents the full potential of design from being realised, with policy, operations, and organisational design treated separately. Despite the prevalence of this problem, it is not new – Lord Fulton’s report of the civil service in 1968 uncovered professional silos, underutilised tech, and processes that are too slow and bureaucratic, which remains equally true today.
By contrast, a systems thinking approach encourages teams to see public services as interconnected, enabling them to decipher complex variables and understand the wider impact of decisions. Participants gave examples of integrated approaches, such as HMRC scaling down central approval from 40 officials to 2, which allowed teams to work with confidence and avoid bottlenecks. Breaking down silos, joining up expertise, and applying systems thinking ensures design-led initiatives are both technically sound and socially effective, giving policymakers and service teams the ability to align incentives and create solutions that truly serve citizens.
Reaching transformation amid cultural constraints
This widespread fragmentation encompasses a climate of wider cultural constraints to the successful application of public design being used to improve public services.
Roundtable participants highlighted that progress is often slowed because there is a lack of understanding of how to bring together three critical elements:
• Make public services truly effective for every member of society
• Create new ways to deliver these services, such as digitalisation and AI
• Drive efficiency of internal government processes to support this
Participants identified a range of cultural barriers noticeable across government departments that reinforce these gaps.
"Solution-itis" was cited as a prevalent problem, where people frequently jump to answers before defining the problem. As a counter to this, teams need to consider what they actually want to achieve and decipher different ways of doing this. Without this clarity, initiatives can become rushed or misdirected, with teams focusing on implementing solutions rather than understanding the underlying challenges. This uncertainty is compounded by ambiguity around autonomy, with teams unsure when they have permission to consult with others, research adjacent industry solutions and innovate, which slows decision-making and reduces ownership of outcomes, often confining innovation to a cycle of ‘victimhood’ versus agency.
Addressing these challenges requires a careful balance; at the moment, rather than attempting to overturn entrenched culture, transformation can sometimes result in retrofitting new ways of working into existing organisations. Lessons from HS2 illustrate this principle: you cannot design a railway without first designing the organisation that will deliver it. Similarly, rapid prototyping and learning-oriented thinking are only effective when teams understand the wider system and its variables. While many teams and individuals have the capability to drive change, these teams are often not able to connect to the wider system capabilities, limiting their impact.
As discussed during the roundtable, programmes are being designed with a two-pronged approach: stabilising those delivering public services while encouraging those leading change to challenge established ways of working. This inevitably creates tension and perceived disruption, but when guided by a clear focus on what is best for citizens, it allows design to move from isolated projects to systemic transformation.
Learning from best practice
Our discussion also highlighted a number of examples where design-led approaches have delivered tangible results.
From DWP’s human-centred design science function to DEFRA’s co-design work supporting farmers, successful initiatives share a number of common characteristics:
• a clear focus on user outcomes over purely technical solutions
• strong cross-disciplinary collaboration
• empowered teams with the mandate to act
• and a willingness to test, learn and adapt
These examples demonstrate that effective public design is already happening. One participant shared an insightful anecdote of leadership within their organisation. Mass participation was encouraged along with human-centred design and frequent workshops that brought together academics, industry and policymakers. This approach emphasised that rather than focusing first on technical solutions, the change process should prioritise social and human outcomes. By energising people to tackle challenges collaboratively and building trust within existing constraints, leaders can make the choice to engage wider systems and get people in the same room to enable change.
As mentioned, this involves flipping the change process on its head and prioritising social before the technical. For example, from one participant’s experience, the civil service doesn’t tend to go out to visit or understand a place. Without gaining this experience and understanding of the wider context, even the capable can feel disadvantaged – there is a great need to promote wider engagement and collaboration, with strong value in a back-and-forth conversation to better reflect the realities of those using public services.
Looking to the future: driving bravery amid risk aversion
The future of implementing successful design for public services heavily depends on overcoming a climate of risk.
Risk aversion spans all levels of government; within the current system, risk management, responsibility and accountability are often separate. Decision making at the top is frequently buried in bureaucracy, with layers of approval slowing progress and stifling innovation. Amid this environment, even well-intentioned change can struggle to gain momentum; as one roundtable participant summarised, everyone involved will take out a bit of risk, diluting ownership and slowing action.
While the fear of public scrutiny or negative press can inhibit action, creating conditions where people feel confident to experiment, take calculated risks, and challenge assumptions is essential for meaningful change. Ultimately, it is this trust in both people and processes that will enable design to move from isolated successes to system-wide impact across public services.
From the 2012 London Olympics to the Covid-19 response, we already have proof that courageous, design-led approaches can succeed. Replicating this kind of bravery and innovation requires deliberate effort, cultural change, and, quite simply, the willingness to be bold.
