31-10-2020 // REFLECTION OCTOBER

We have decided to write an extensive reflection on the process at the end of each month. We will reflect together more often, but at the end of the month, we each reflect for ourselves how we experienced that month. In this reflection, we will reflect on the past month, but also on the feedback from our feedback buddy.

BUDDY LYNN

Lynn is our feedback buddy. We asked her if she could have a look at our blog and elaborate on that. There were some things she noticed:  

- I see a lot of text, I know that it often occurs in blogs, but then maybe try to divide it into paragraphs with for example headings and titles! This is a bit easier to read and I think the information will be absorbed better. Illustrations and images can never hurt either;).

- I noticed on the blog Hello Municipality that there are screenshots of feedback and then your email. It might be useful to reflect on this a bit more, such as what did you think of the feedback and why you chose to email the other people, and why with that precise content? In any case, make it clear to the reader what you were thinking at that moment or what was on your mind :).

- What is related to the previous feedback is the following. You may find it helpful, especially for yourself, to explain after a blog what you have learned from the new information, feedback, or conclusion and what the next step will be. this is clear to the reader as we are curious about the process and useful for you as you give direction to your own project.

- I have to say: it all looks very interesting! the blogs with the figures also show very clearly that you explain every picture etc eventually show that you understand. I think in general you are doing very well and you are clearly showing what your steps are and what kind of findings you have found!

We discussed Lynn's feedback with each other. It is very helpful for our process to get feedback on what we are doing. The first point that Lynn describes is easy to integrate; we just have to be careful that we structure the text we write. The second and third points are perhaps even more important to us; indeed we mainly described what we did and what we got out of the meetings, but we did not reflect on that extensively. That is why we will reflect extensively on this reflection on all the blogs we have written so far. We will not change our blogs, because our process is central and there should always be space for improvement. A goal for next month could be to immediately reflect on what we have done and clearly describe what our next steps will be.

OUR PROCESS

We try to put the necessary time into this project every week. So far the collaboration has been going well; we divide tasks and set deadlines for ourselves. We have regular contact, so we know what to expect from each other. If one of us doesn't get the work done in time, we will let each other know. In this way, we try to stimulate and help each other to continue working. It is also motivating that we both find the project very interesting. The Emmasingelkwadrant is a large area with many stakeholders, which makes it challenging. In the first weeks, we found out how interesting this area is. This area is entering a transition period between the planned developments and the actual developments. For us as Community Designers, this is an interesting area to work with.

We will use the Double Diamond model to indicate in what stage of the process we are. The first phase of the Double Diamond model is Discover, which is the phase we are currently in. We started with a general problem definition, our challenge. In this phase, you try to learn more about the variables that influence the problem or challenge. In this research phase, we try to understand the challenge, rather than simply assume. The purpose of the discovery phase is to identify the real problem or opportunity and put it in context. This is the first part of our "quest." It involves speaking to and spending time with people who are affected by the issues. In this phase, we try to maintain an open attitude, in order to process all information as well as possible. This discovery phase will yield large amounts of information. Knowing how to manage and organize this information is crucial to us. We write everything down, to reflect on it later and see what can be used for our project. As soon as we have gathered enough information in our opinion, we open the problem definition again and try to define the challenge in a different way. This is something we will try to do in the near future. It does not necessarily mean that this will be a linear process; we may go through different stages of the Double Diamond model multiple times (Costa, 2018).

REFLECTION JESSE

In this text, I will reflect upon the first real month into the project and the weeks in advance.

 

The project came up all of a sudden. After responding to an inspiring message on yammer it was only a matter of weeks before we started. However, the project is nothing alike we first imagined. The Performatory works in its own unique ways that the municipality of Eindhoven is not familiar with. It took some time to come up with a concrete assignment. Nevertheless, both Amber and I saw a lot of potential in the project and clear links with multiple design competencies. Therefore, we decided to start with a lean start-up approach and figure things out along the way. Before choosing Community design as our definite approach, our introduction to the projects was helping with the creation of a Dutch Design Week exposition regarding the development projects in and around the city center. Due to new measures around the Covid pandemic, the whole physical part of the DDW was canceled and the exposition did not take place. Nevertheless, setting up the expedition provided us with insights into the overall situation around the planned development projects that have influenced my thinking. It showed me how the municipality is willing to inform its inhabitants about what they are working on. Moreover, how committed they are to make Eindhoven a more attractive city to live in not only for valuable newcomers but for its residents as well. The city has a clear vision for the future and invests a lot in building it as socially sustainable as possible. This is highly interesting to me as I like to think about the why of matters all the time and am usually not easily triggered by financial concerns.

 

After those first weeks, we have shifted our focus from the DDW to the Emmasingelkwadrant, an area that I am very familiar with as I have lived close to it for the past five years. By all the conversations we had already had, our mutual understanding of the project possibilities had grown, and we were finally able to come up with a clear assignment.

 

From that moment on we were able to start exploring the situation. We noted everything that we already knew and tried to get in contact with all the people involved in the municipality. As we started with municipality staff only, we are now able to create a vision of the situation from a municipal perspective. I think it is very valuable to have a clear division of the perspectives we have to deal with. However, the danger is that we now take over that specific perspective. We are very keen on guarding our open attitude towards the project and keep repeating together that we should not fall for what we think to see yet. In all the conversations with governmentally involved professionals, we have introduced our project, dropped our desired approach, asked for tips, and asked questions about who they think the involved people are and which possibilities they see.

Now we have spoken to everyone on that list. I have the feeling that we have arrived at the point in which we are ready to engage with the local and probably more emotionally involved parties.

As we took on an assignment from the municipality, we will probably be seen as some delegation of it. Therefore, we were advised to be very careful with creating expectations and getting up the hopes of the local inhabitants. I think they did not advise us because they are skeptical about our capabilities, but do not want us to get lost in a trap of expectations. We cannot help everyone with their individual needs but are there for the common good.

We took this advice to heart and are trying to be very clear and careful with stating what our role will and will not be in the coming time. We now have an image of the assignment from one perspective and will try to find out what more there is to the challenge. Once we are able to distinguish the varying perspectives, we will take stock, draw conclusions, and discover the possibilities together with the stakeholders involved.

REFLECTION AMBER

We started our project with the challenge: How can we convert the nuisance in the area around the Lichtplein into something positive in the long term? The more we got to know about the area, the more I found out that this challenge was not suitable in my opinion. In this challenge, we emphasize converting the nuisance, although we did not know to what extent this nuisance existed. The word 'positive' also raised several questions for me. Because to what extent can you create something positive for everyone involved? What is positive for one person may not be positive for another. The challenge did not feel correct, which is why we continued to discuss it with Jesper and Monique. On the basis of this conversation, we were able to formulate a challenge that would not focus on a topic such as nuisance, but was much more open and could be better connected to multiple systems. The current challenge is as follows: How can we improve the general living experience in the public space of the Emmasingelkwadrant in the run-up to the development projects?

I'm not from Eindhoven myself, so I don't know the area. I saw this as an advantage in this orientation phase; I could visit this area without any preconceptions or thoughts. I could create my own image of this neighborhood. What immediately struck me is that the area is right next to the center, but it is a lot quieter. You wouldn't see it without knowing it. I immediately noticed that the (future) Victoria Park has not been maintained; it looks like a construction site. The buildings around it, such as the carcass, don't look welcoming either. On the other hand, I also saw a lot of positive points; For example, there are a number of ‘cozy’ restaurants adjacent to the Victoria Park and the Lichtplein and the Victoria Park is a large, open space where there could be room for events or something else that meets the needs of the stakeholders. 

After we had a first impression of the area, the first step for us was having a dialogue with those involved from the municipality. I found it important to know what was already going on in this neighborhood, how the neighborhood works, and what we can respond to if necessary. By talking to different people, I was able to sketch a more critical picture of the situation described from a municipal point of view. One of my personal goals was to learn more about the 'municipal world' and to broaden my network. I must honestly say that the Corona situation does not make it easier to get in touch with people. All the conversations we've had so far have been online. We went to the municipality once to pick up our laptop and activate our email address, but even then hardly anyone was there. Although we cannot get to know people face to face, I do have the idea that meetings are scheduled faster; people do not have to move, they can just talk to us from behind their screens. Most meetings were therefore scheduled quite quickly; something I did not expect in an organization like the municipality (prejudice?). Yet the 'municipal world' remains a difficult world; you usually can not just contact someone, because they are afraid that you will pass someone else. That is something I am not used to, but something I must take into account. 

This also applied to the introduction we had written about our project; we asked Monique if she could check it first before sending it to others. on the one hand, because we were in our starting phase and wanted to know if she had anything to add, on the other hand, because we already noticed that we couldn't just send something without first asking ourselves whether we were passing someone. The feedback she has given us has been very helpful. She has not changed anything but gave us possible additions. It gave me the feeling that she really wants to help us and at the same time gives us the freedom to shape the project our way. The reason we wrote this introduction is to give the people we contacted an idea of who we are and what we will do. The introduction encouraged them to think about our project and any questions or comments they might have for us. At the time we sent the first e-mails, we did not yet have an e-mail address from the municipality. We, therefore, wanted to make a clear impression, so that people were more inclined to actually email back. We needed these first contacts to create a first impression of the neighborhood.

There are a number of people we have spoken to in our first project weeks. We speak regularly with Monique, to keep her informed and reflect together on the process. We also spoke to Rolf (communication advisor), Eric (area coordinator of the Emmasingelkwadrant), Olha (strategic advisor on citizen engagement), Annelies (involved in the Sunseeker project), and Jim (VitalZone). I will elaborate on the most important insights, in my opinion. 

The first one we spoke from the municipality, next to Monique and Jesper, was Rolf. The first thing Rolf mentioned was: 'start this project with an open mind and just see how it goes and what you will find out'. This immediately gave me the feeling that Rolf did not want to steer us in a certain direction, but rather stimulated us to go on a quest ourselves. And that is exactly what I try to do and have to do a lot more: START DOING. Only then we will find the answers we maybe need. He also said: 'It is interesting to find out what is already in the neighborhood, what is possible in the neighborhood, and what is still missing in the neighborhood?' His statement fits well with a theory that we want to focus on: Asset Based Community Development. It is interesting in a neighborhood like this, to look at what the neighborhood has to offer. In addition, according to Rolf, it is important to emphasize that we are not part of the municipality but are doing this project in consultation with the municipality. I immediately thought: why could it be a disadvantage to say that we are from the municipality (Although we will never say that, still)? Is it because of a (negative) image that has been created about the municipality? This is also something that I find interesting to elaborate on because it also has to do with the system or systems in which this challenge is embedded.

The second one we spoke with, was Eric. An important point that Eric mentioned: 'See what's already there and where you can hook up'. By this he does not mean the same as Rolf; Eric means that we have to see who or which organizations are already working in this neighborhood to ‘brighten up’ the area. I personally agree with Eric; It would be a shame if we act as a dependent party, even though we can help each other. We need to see where we can make a connection and where we can strengthen each other. It is not the intention that we work as a separate party without looking for possible collaborations. That is why we contacted VitalZone and VANTOT (still waiting for a response).

There are two things that especially stroke me about the conversation with Olha. First of all, the municipality is used to communicating with organized neighborhood communities, as there are more possibilities around helping with subsidies or permits. As far as I am concerned, this is something that could be seen as discriminatory towards the individual. I interpret this as if it is more difficult for individuals to get in touch with the municipality or to know what is going on in the neighborhood. As soon as the municipality only communicates with certain groups, there will never be clarity for everyone about certain matters. It is interesting to see how people would like to be reached and what the best way is. Furthermore, Olha warned us to be careful with arousing the expectations of the stakeholders we plan to work with. She emphasized keeping contact with the people so that they will be kept up to date. At the same time, we should be clear about our goals, roles, and possibilities right from the start. That is something we definitely have to keep into account and we already try to work on that: make clear what we do and what our roles are. We try NOT to create expectations; we want to see where the needs lie and try to respond to them. The process is central, not the outcome.

We talked to Annelies, but she recommended to contact Esther from VANTOT to know more about their plans in this area. We did send an email and we are waiting now for her response. Anyway, we did speak with Jim from VitalZone, the other party that is involved in ‘brighten up’ this neighborhood. 

Jim stated that he finds it very interesting what we are going to do and that there is a clear connection with what they do at VitalZone. The only thing he did not like about our project introduction, was the word "reuring" (buzz). according to him, you cannot enter this project with the idea of ​​creating a positive buzz; you don't know yet whether buzz is where the need lies. When I started thinking about that, I realized that I agree with him; we do not yet know whether creating a buzz is something the neighborhood is open to. If creating buzz ultimately meets the needs of the stakeholders, then it is good, but then it is substantiated. The reason we use this word is that our client/supervisor Jesper named it. Yet he was perhaps referring more to making the neighborhood 'lively', in other words, buzz in the sense of coming into contact with people. Anyway, it is good when small things such as a word are linked back so that we can think about it and see how we can possibly frame it differently. Next to that, Jim mentioned that policymakers mostly on the negative, on the problem. At VitalZone they focus on the positive and the negative. Although he mentioned this is probably a better approach than focusing on the negative, what it certainly is, we will mostly focus on the positive. Maybe we will include the negative part in a playful way, but we will emphasize the positive. So we will work with Appreciative Inquiry. 

In addition to talking to people from the municipality and organizations that are also active in this area, we have also come into contact with a number of residents and members of the owners association. We were invited by Eric to the ‘Liveability Meeting’ (Leefbaarheidsoverleg). For us, this was our first contact with people who live and work in the neighborhood. We were happy to be invited; for us, it was very interesting to know how these people thought about their own neighborhood. Would these people confirm what we already knew or came suddenly 'de aap uit de mouw'? During this meeting, we noticed that there are two major issues that bother the participants. On the one hand the Victoria Park; they want clarity about various matters. The second major issue is safety (and nuisance), which is in line with the Victoria Park. The participants are convinced that when the park is being built, safety will also improve. Until then, something must be done about it. 

I noticed from the way of talking that the irritations were high. What has already been mentioned a number of times by both the municipality and during the liveability meeting, is the (in) safety in the area and the (empty space of the) Victoria Park. The figures (can be seen in the logbook of 21-10-2020) indicate that vandalism and nuisance are on average lower in this neighborhood than in the rest of Eindhoven. However, the feelings of insecurity in this neighborhood are higher than the Eindhoven average. So my question is, after talking to different people from within the municipality, the residents, and studying the figures, to what extent is this neighborhood unsafe? Isn't it an image that the stakeholders of the area have formed about this area? Because of what I said and what was also confirmed by several people in the conversations in recent weeks: the area looks like a construction site, little is happening and there is not much clarity. It is interesting to find out how the stakeholders think about their neighborhood, what they appreciate, but also what they would like to see differently. I don't know yet where 'the truth' lies, but I want to take a critical look at how this neighborhood works.

Points that have been mentioned more often and are useful to keep in mind:

• Many nationalities live in this neighborhood; more international people than national people. How can these people be reached and involved (this also applies to the youth)? How long will they live here? How do they see the municipality (corrupt?)?

• Possible stakeholders that are mentioned: Jumbo, Youth Centre (Huiskamer), Library, TAC, Cafés adjacent to the park, Hollandtostay, residents/associations of owners. 

• Possible partners: VitalZone & VANTOT (& the municipality)

• The carcass, the stripped building, attracts people that should not be attracted. Could be a reason for the nuisance? Next to that, there are many homeless, drug users, and alcohol users in this area on the street. (Is that true?)

• The Victoria Park is an empty space that looks ‘ugly’ but it lends itself as a useful ground for possible activities or something that fits the needs of the stakeholders. 

Until now we have mainly spoken with people from the municipality. Although they were very open in my opinion and did not necessarily want to steer us in a certain direction, I am very curious about what we will find out about the stakeholders in the neighborhood and whether that (partly) corresponds with what we have found out already through the conversations we have had so far. I don't want to draw any conclusions (yet) about how this neighborhood works; I want to be critical and see where the next few weeks will take us. The people from the municipality have their own thoughts and opinions, so it is interesting to see to what extent their thoughts are reality.

References

Costa, R. (2018, November 6). The Double Diamond model: what is it and should you use it? Retrieved from https://www.justinmind.com/blog/double-diamond-model-what-is-should-you-use/