We took the stage to introduce the Service Standard to more people on the first day of this year’s Smart Country Convention.
Ministerial project partner Ralf and I ran a 75-minute workshop in one of the smaller spaces of the sprawling venue on Tuesday. It was titled ‘The Service Standard: designing practical and effective digital public services’.
It was just 1 day before the regulation came into effect, which was a compelling hook to get people to attend our session.
Getting the Service Standard regulation to come into force
It’s not real until it’s real. As of Wednesday, we have a binding legal instrument for the Service Standard. Signed by Minister Wildberger last week, the ‘Regulation on standards for online access to public services’ came into force this week.
For the subpar quality of government services in Germany, this can – and must – be a game-changer.
Finally, mandatory service quality standards outline criteria for effective work. We have already seen a response from the market. Digital outcome and IT providers working for government picked it up. They started making explainer websites and event roll-ups to assure the public sector they are up to the task. DIN SPEC 66336, which underpins the Service Standard, is actively discussed. People learn about it. This is what we hoped for.
Over the summer, our joint team from Federal Ministry for Digitalisation and State Modernisation and Digital Service has been bustling. In recap, quite a few things came together in the last few days and weeks:
Growing the website
Since launching servicestandard.gov.de in June, the offering has been growing. To understand how well formats, structure and terminology work, we ran usability tests with users from different levels of government. We implemented changes straightaway.
We added the first pieces of guidance – like ‘How to recruit users for research’. The section will evolve into a comprehensive handbook in the coming months. We have designed new website sections. The team also blogged about the iterative approach it’s taking.
Revamping peer review
In late July, we conducted the first peer review along the updated 13 criteria. We revisited the ‘Court claims for flight delays’ service from the Federal Ministry of Justice. The service had grown in scope since it was reviewed in summer 2024. The team was eager to get feedback on the new standard. Their report gets published in mid-October. As we aim to conduct more peer reviews, we have updated all the material explaining peer reviews and adapted the workshop format to the new standard’s structure.
Developing supporting material
We created new posters and stickers. Often, ambitious individuals want to educate colleagues within their org. They need supporting material. Apart from the website, printed materials are helpful. In addition to the overview poster, we also created mini-posters for each criterion. Someone with an open-source focus can display the poster for criterion 10 in their office.
Recognising that there is much outstanding work happening across the country, we began collecting stories from teams. They are often linked to a specific criterion. In the absence of a cross-government blog, we are building a substitute.
Workshopping with interested public servants and consultants
In Tuesday’s workshop, we provided an overview of the standard and its origins. We then introduced all the formats and content types that the website offers, including things to come.
In the interactive part, we asked several questions via Slido. From the participants, we wanted to know:
- How do you perceive the general feasibility of the Service Standard?
- For which criteria are you likely to need little to no support?
- For which criteria are you likely to need more support?
- Where do you see the biggest obstacles to the Service Standard taking effect?
93% of the participants stated that meeting the Service Standard is of medium difficulty, and 7% found it challenging. No one thought it was easy.
People stated that they need the least support for the following standard points: “Describe problems and set goals” (point 2), “Understand users and capture their needs” (point 1), “Develop, test and adapt solutions and incorporate expert knowledge” (point 4), and “Ensure safety and build trust” (point 9). We found that a bit surprising. These are the points that teams typically struggle with. We wondered what we would see in peer review if we conducted one.
Next, we asked which points are difficult to meet. “Measure impact and build on results” (point 12) and “Remove legal barriers and improve policy” (point 13) were the first points. “Follow open standards and provide interfaces” (point 7) follows immediately. I was somewhat surprised by that. I find it interesting that people are confident in point 2 but struggle with point 12. Setting goals is easy, but measuring the impact is not. I would like to better understand this gap.
In a longer content review and exchange session on Friday, Linn and I discussed these perceptions. Our hunch is that some cognitive bias is at work, akin to the Dunning–Kruger effect.
Greeting new colleagues
This week, we welcomed 5 new starters at Digital Service, including new designer Karo, who joined us from SAP.
She was the 4th person to join the user-centred design discipline this year. But possibly she was not the last one.
We just made further offers in service design and user research. That means we could still have one more person joining us in 2025.
What’s next
Charlotte, Stephanie, and I want to sync on service pattern work next week. This week, I had good conversations with the KERN Design System team. We discussed their gaps and how we can help fill them through some of our justice service work.
Additionally, I aim to complete the blog post on our design component work in the coming days. It would be great to publish it for our organisation’s 5th birthday in mid-October.
Another almost finished blog post covers our international work. Kara edited it this week after I wrote more than 1,000 words. I need to look at it again. We will also speak with Ottla from the European Commission’s Policy Lab about a 2026 event they are currently planning.