Building space for an institutional design intervention

Institutional design offers untapped potential to drive and sustain meaningful social change. Based on a conversation between the TIAL founders, which you can find here, these are the experiences they’ve had in building new institutions: the peaks, the pits, and the lessons. We hope that these steps contribute to building a field for institutional design innovation — something that many of us do, but only now are starting to recognize ourselves in. We are all building this field together, every day, through the decisions that we make in practice and in theory. Which is why we would love to hear from your perspective and experiences, so don’t hesitate to email us at info@tial.org

1. Getting started: there are many tactics to create an opening for institutional design

(i) Put your ideas out there 

Starting with a commentary in a prominent publication and building an advocacy strategy around it to generate interest and invite discussions is crucial. Identifying who has the power to create space for a sketch or more is essential for gaining support.

(ii) Find the right community

Identifying and engaging with the community of practice for any specific topic is essential. This includes understanding the landscape of stakeholders and potential negative influencers to neutralize or co-opt them. The community will vary depending on the topic, and knowing who can make or break the implementation is crucial.

(iii) Simulate the day-to-day

Simulating tangibly how the institutional idea would operate and work in everyday realities is important. Moving from conceptual ideas to concrete and tangible examples helps in understanding the practical implications of the design. Institutional architecture needs a method to create examples that capture different conditions effectively.

(iv) Create scenarios

Developing scenarios to explore potential risks and failures emphasizes the importance of institutional capacity and innovation. This approach helps in understanding the pathways and potential impacts of new designs.

Figure 1. Building space for an institutional design intervention

2. Building Momentum

(i) Within a political flow

There are various spaces for institutional architecture conversations. One space is within a political flow: from ideas to manifesto to budget, as demonstrated by the creation of Learn Direct — a lifelong learning institution in the UK which TIAL Co-Founder Sir Geoff Mulgan helped create. Initially designed to meet the need for workplace skills using new technologies, it was included in a political party manifesto, given a budget, and created as a public agency. At its peak, Learn Direct had about half a million learners at any one time and was working quite well, leveraging a combination of physical centers and an online platform to provide skills access. Despite its initial success, Learn Direct faced challenges when the government changed. Its lack of broad legitimation among elites led to its privatization and eventual downfall. Involving multiple political parties and creating broad support could have helped ensure its longevity.

(ii) Through consultation

Another space is through consultation. Institutions often start out as social innovations, and understanding their roots is crucial. For example, the Finnish social delivery and social service system shows how many current institutions began as social innovations. Institutional innovation then becomes a matter of codification. A case in point is the launch of a new policy experimentation approach in Finland from 2015 to 2019, which TIAL Co-Founder Juha Leppänen was involved in. The previous government had asked for support in utilizing innovative methods in policy design to move forward systematically. This process involved defining a structure within the Prime Minister’s Office of Finland, engaging with the narrative to align political demand, and addressing the technical aspects of existing structures. A key lesson from this phase was that over-designing and enforcing one’s way of looking at things can alienate practitioners. Effective communication and empathy are essential for embedding new institutions into existing structures.

Continuity and legitimization of transformative institutional capacity over time are vital. For instance, the next government in Finland doubled down on policy experimentation as a way to pursue imaginative policies. While progress has been made, there is still a need for systematic capacity to deliver and support experiments. The process involves engaging with academia, stakeholders, and ensuring the legitimacy of policy experiments.

(iii) A technical approach

Finally, there can be a technical approach. Institutional design often begins with an invitation to address a publicly recognized problem. This was seen in the advisory roles to government-convened expert committees on infrastructure in India, which TIAL Co-Founder Jessica Seddon was involved in. These committees start with precedents from other places to ground discussions and generate tangible possibilities for new institutional designs. Effective communication and iterative problem-solving are crucial to ensure the proposed solutions are practical and applicable to the specific context. If there is no back-and-forth, just presenting how other places have addressed the issue, the resulting report may not be very useful.

Working on blueprints for proposed institutions and socializing the idea within relevant communities can help gather support. For instance, “What Works” centers were promoted and advocated in a language that fit the new regime, leading to their establishment.

Case: Circular Economy

3. Leave it a little incomplete

Deliberate incompleteness in design is crucial for legitimacy and adaptability. “For instance, the Australian Centre for Social Innovation, created with the backing of the Premier of South Australia, was not driven by an urgent problem but by the idea that its time had come”, says Sir Geoff Mulgan. It provided a home for future efforts and demonstrated that institutions are better at orchestrating capabilities than short-term programs.

Recognizing that completeness may be naive and potentially harmful, institutional architects need to engage with decision-makers who will determine how the institution functions. Initial designs should identify negotiation spaces for both demand and supply for new institutional designs. Freedom from external pressures helps in articulating and creating a shared language and vocabulary, which is vital for early-stage sketches that require trust and adaptation.

“Part of the process involves pulling in examples and illustrating potential outcomes proactively and intentionally”, continues Juha Leppänen. Engaging with organizations like OECD can provide meaningful documentation and support for new approaches to policy design. Understanding different contexts through multiple experiments can gradually lead to a better understanding of institutions and their impact on specific issues.

As Jessica Seddon warns, “creating a blueprint in waiting for the right moment is often expected, but immediate uptake is rarely the case”. Committees need to recognize the importance of producing flexible designs that can adapt to changing circumstances and demands.

4. Sometimes, design must be speculative — to have a menu of options for when a need becomes urgent

Speculative design is essential to create options ready for moments of urgent need. This concept is akin to having a library of options to draw on when conditions change. For example, artificial intelligence regulation and governance have been anticipated issues for years, but there were no ready-made designs when urgency arose. Creating models, examples, and potential blueprints in advance can ensure preparedness for shifts in demand and need.

(i) Be ready — and persistent 

Being proactive in proposing and advocating for institutional designs is essential. An example is Geoff’s proposal for an AI regulator about 10 years ago, which led to the creation of the Center for Data Ethics and Innovation. Despite this success, it was surprising that more similar institutions did not materialize in other countries during those years. Currently, there is an anticipated challenge around elections, even though it hasn’t become yet part of the news and policy cycle. With more elections happening this year than ever in human history, half the world’s population is voting. All of these elections are incredibly vulnerable to attacks, misinformation, deep fakes, and so on. No country on the planet has an institution capable of defending elections or acting quickly enough. This is a case where there needs to be work on options and proposals and socializing them. It is uncertain who will demand or have the authority and will to implement them, but someone certainly will.

(ii) Build a repository

Creating a repository to illustrate examples and comparative cases is necessary. Documenting successful institutional innovations and sharing these examples can fill the current gap in repositories. You can find some ideas in our Illustration Cases (there is so much more coming). 

5. Go with the tides

Adapting to dynamic contexts is crucial for institutional architects. Vannevar Bush, who proposed the National Science Foundation after running the US science operation in the Second World War, is an example. Initially, his proposal did not get the expected budget, but the changing dynamics of the Cold War increased the budget beyond his initial ask. 

Institutional architects must be adaptable to changing political and economic circumstances, recognizing that the context and environment are beyond their control but critical to the success of their designs.

6. It will be worth it

Creating institutions has a lasting impact far greater than individual programs. Successful institutions influence the world for decades, making it worth the effort to think critically about how to do this well. Investing in institutional architecture is a high-leverage way to drive significant change and build a better future. The initial documentation of ideas, even in the form of “Easter Eggs,” can be crucial for future implementation when the right moment arrives. For philanthropies, supporting the creation of these foundational documents can pave the way for significant change when the time is right.


TIAL’s Co-Founders recently sat down and discussed their personal experiences on all of these topics. See their conversation here.