The Laboratory of Government uses an innovation methodology in public services based mainly on the “Double Diamond” design process. This methodology has four stages, from a discovery stage to the management of the knowledge raised throughout the project. Before implementing this project, each of the organizations involved in the service, acted independently and at the same time, each of the distribution companies designed their own bills, using their own language and non-standardized information. The methodology used allowed the Government of Chile to sit all of the relevant actors at the same table, coordinate them and put them to the task to develop jointly a standardized solution with a focus on the beneficiaries.

The methodology used for the development of the innovation is a model called “Double Diamond”, designed by the UK Design Council. It divides the service or product design in four stages: 1) Discovery, 2) Definition, 3) Ideation and 4) Delivery, applying a divergent and convergent thinking approach, which orients the problem-setting process as well as the solution-creation process. The initial problem stated was that the users were unable to understand the electricity bills and didn’t trust the electricity service. This was the starting point that triggered the first part of the Double Diamond, where –through divergent processes- we were able to deepen our understanding of the problem from the user’s perspective, in order to set the innovation challenge.

The ecosystem of actors involved in the electricity service in Chile includes public institutions, private companies, clients and consumer associations. The Ministry of Energy, through the “Energy Agenda 2050” instructed SEC to promote greater transparency of energy information for the citizens and the actors in the sector. This instruction was the start point and the legal framework of the Project. SERNAC was the bridge between the executing team and the consumer associations. Its role was fundamental in articulating the relationship with these organizations at a national level. The beneficiaries of the service were represented by the consumer associations, who contributed with the users’ perspectives. The participation of the energy distribution companies was key to make possible the implementation of the improvements in the service. The mission of the Laboratory of Government was to make their methodologies available, which gave shape and accompanied the process.

The methodology contributed by the Laboratory of Government opened different participation spaces to all of the relevant actors. During the first stage, different exploration workshops were carried out in different regions along the country, where different actors of the groups named above were able to discuss the problems together and collaborate in the diagnosis. During the second stage, we held several ideation workshops where the different actors could contribute with their solution ideas. In the prototyping stage, the proposals were tested among the citizens and validated through interviews with experts. The electricity companies’ participation was specially relevant during the piloting stage, where adjustments carried out to secure the implementation was a key aspect of the Project. One of the process enablers was that the executing team was formed by representatives from all of the stakeholders, which allowed us to guard the different interests throughout the whole process.

The Laboratory of Government, next to SEC and SERNAC, designed an instrument to measure the variations in the level of understanding of the new bill. Specifically, the instrument sought to measure the level of the understanding of the old bills, previous to the launching of the new bills in the districts indicated (baseline).

After two billing processes using the new bill, we measured the level of understanding and the use of the new bills (output line). The sampling on the other side was stratified-proportional in order to study the level of understanding of different socioeconomic groups found in the districts where the pilot experience was implemented. The poll found a 23.2% increase in people’s trust, reaching 70.4% of the total. Secondly, there was an improvement in comprehension, growing from an initial 49.2% to a final 71.7%. In third place, the clarity of the bill’s information rose by 25.4%, reaching 76%. Finally, transparency rose by 29.4%, reaching 76.7% of the total population. Although the study was quantitative, we also carried out focus groups, which aimed at detailing some of the inconveniences that could bring the new bills, as well as improvements which the same citizens could help to develop a better product.

One of the main challenges was to align the diverse actors, in order to find together the solution. In this sense, the main effort was to work with the 34 companies and explain what were the benefits. Many of them were opposed to a homogenous design. The work developed was key to illustrate the value of the exercise and to hear their own clients requesting the improvements. We had to convince 34 corporate managers of several issues: that the methodology used was as robust as many others that they used to understand their clients; that a people-centred design process was legitimate when innovating in public-policy making; that a new governmental organization and formed by a young, multidisciplinary team (as the LABGOB) could lead the methodological process. Finally, the methodology used gave us the chance to work with collaboration tools that increasingly lowered the initial apprehensions and with time and consistency, each of the actors saw the unique value of the process.

There are at least three conditions necessary for the success: To have a clear leadership in order to get the involvement of all of the actors and explain the strategy of the expected results. When this doesn’t happen, or the project governance is undefined, the implementation promise disappears and the different actors collaboration tend to feel less motivated. To have a real promise of implementation. There is no use in having prototypes or pilots if they do not transform into concrete public policy services or products. There needs to be funding to implement, evaluate, replicate, etc. If not, it will result in mere activism and might probably create a good organizational climate but will have no value for the citizens. To have in place a team with clear responsibilities, adequately diverse in terms of expertise and with well-defined roles. Especially, because when tackling complex projects involving several organizations, there has to be clarity with respect to each person’s job.

In fact, several public departments in charge of different services (water, sanitary services, banking regulations, etc.) have interest in adopting the methodology used in the development of the new electricity and gas bills. This is a good example of replicability in two areas:

1. About the design of the information that citizens receive. For this Project, we tested fonts, messages, words, information architecture and content hierarchies, which in itself can guide and orient several government departments in charge of producing complex information and contents for the public.

2. In the process itself. We have used this example and study case to explain almost all of the innovation processes which we are leading. It allows us to explain very precisely how the methodology used is an innovative and rational way of using time, talents and public funds. The methodology, as a means to organize time, budgets and teams, is being use in almost all of the projects we are currently working on.

The main less is that innovation in the public sector is possible, when there is a clear governance model in a certain Project. There needs to be clear “political owner” keeping the promise of implementation alive throughout the process. If not, the methodology becomes a series of activities without a purpose and the perseverance spirit is lost. In this sense, having the commitment from the Ministry of Energy through the SEC, gave credibility to the process and this way, get buy-in from all of the actors involved. There are several aspects we could improve. First, to invest more time in illustrating the value of the methodology through success stories. The companies finally acknowledged the value of the methodology but it took more time tan necessary. It would have been positive to design a specific strategy for them, so they could quickly adopt the language, the practices and the methods.

Michelle Bachelet, President of Chile: “This is good news for millions of homes. When we need to do the paperwork or fill out a complaint, the idea is that we are well-informed and completely trusting. And this is just what the new design of the electricity bills is about, which will be received by around 6 million homes.”

Luis Felipe Céspedes, Minister of Economy: “This initiative is another example of the way the Government is innovating through the State, with creative ideas that serve the citizens. With “Cuentas Claras” (Clear Bills) consumers receive the information in a simpler, detailed and transparent way. We hope that this model is replicated in other services in order to strengthen clients’ trust in terms of the market.”

Andrés Rebolledo, Minister of Energy “One of the great stepforwards in this new format is that 34 electricity companies are going to have the same format, which allows great homogeneity when it gets to understand what each home is paying for.”