The Public and Its Problems in Public Institutions: From Customer Orientation to Co-Production of Services

The interaction between citizens ("the public") and public institutions evolves from the paternalistic model of "petitioner-official" to the paradigm of "customer-centricity" and further to the concept of "co-production" (co-production) of public services. Solving the public's problems today is a complex process requiring the restructuring of institutions, the introduction of technologies, and a change in management culture.

The Evolution of Perception of the Public: From Object to Partner

Passive beneficiary (traditional model). The citizen is an object of administrative influence, receiving a standardized service by decree. His opinion and experience are not taken into account.

Customer (New Public Management, 1980s-2000s). Under the influence of market approaches, the citizen has become regarded as a consumer of public services. The focus has shifted to convenience, speed, and quality of service. Service standards have appeared, MFCs ("one window"), satisfaction ratings. However, the essence remained reactive: the institution responds to the request but does not involve the citizen in creating the service.

Partner in co-production (modern Public Governance paradigm). Citizens and communities are recognized as active agents possessing unique knowledge, experience, and resources for joint resolution of public problems. The task of the institution is to create an environment for such partnership.

Key Public Problems and Institutional Responses

1. The problem of complexity and opacity ("where to run and what to sign?").

Answer: Digitization and the "One Window 2.0" principle.

Example — Estonia and X-Road: The citizen enters data once (the Once-Only principle), and the system itself distributes it between departments. A social benefit application can be automatically checked for compliance with criteria using data from registers of income, property, and family composition.

The Russian Federation's state services portal: Consolidation of hundreds of services in one point of access, which has sharply reduced transaction costs for citizens.

2. The problem of deindividualization and ignoring the context ("they do not hear me").

Answer: Personalization and proactive services.

Example — Singapore, the "LifeSG" platform: Based on data on age, family, place of residence, the application itself offers the user relevant services and support (enrollment in a kindergarten, tax benefits, programs for the elderly). The institution anticipates the need.

Service Design: A methodology implemented in advanced government agencies (for example, in the UK — Government Digital Service). The institution studies the user's journey (user journey) from awareness of the problem to its resolution, identifying and eliminating "pain points". The service design is created with the involvement of future users.

3. The problem of collective, "uncomfortable" issues (improvement, ecology, territorial development).

Answer: Participatory practices and co-production.

Example — the "Decidim" platform in Barcelona ("Decide"): Allows not only to vote for proposals but also to collectively develop, comment on, track the budget, and implementation stages. Citizens become co-authors of urban policies.

Participatory Budgeting: From practices in Porto Alegre (Brazil) to Russian cities. A portion of the municipal budget is distributed based on proposals and voting by residents. This turns the public from passive critics into responsible co-managers.

4. The problem of feedback and the feeling of uselessness of complaints.

Answer: Digital feedback tools with an obligatory response loop.

Moscow's "Our City" platform: Allows you to report problems in the city with geolocation and photos. The request receives a number, the status of its consideration is publicly tracked, and the result (filled pothole, removed garbage) is fixed. The key is "closing the feedback loop": the citizen sees that his signal has led to a change.

Analysis of the tone of appeals using NLP (Natural Language Processing): Allows you to identify systemic problems and sentiments in a mass of complaints, not just respond to each individually.

Challenges and Risks of New Approaches

Digital inequality: Deepening the gap between those who can effectively use digital channels and vulnerable groups (elderly, low-income, illiterate). A solution requires preserving and modernizing offline channels.

Tokenism: The risk of turning participation into formalism, when authorities imitate dialogue but do not consider its results. Transparency rules and the obligation to account for decisions made with the involvement of the public are necessary for trust.

Overload of data and responsibility: Excessive involvement may lead to citizen fatigue and shifting responsibility from professional government agencies to non-professional activists.

Data ethics: Proactive and personalized services require processing large volumes of personal data, which creates risks for privacy and requires the highest standards of protection.

Fact: The "IKEA" Effect in Public Administration

The psychological phenomenon known as the "IKEA effect" (people value more what they themselves create) works in the public sector as well. Studies show that citizens who have participated in the co-production of services (such as in the discussion of park design) demonstrate a higher level of satisfaction with the result and trust in authority, even if the final decision does not fully coincide with their initial preferences. Value is created by the process of co-participation itself.

Conclusion: From Problem Solving to Opportunity Creation

The modern public institution oriented towards the public no longer just becomes a "problem solver" based on requests. It becomes a platform and a facilitator, creating conditions under which citizens and communities can effectively solve their problems with the support of the state.

Successful interaction is built on three principles:

Accessibility and simplicity: Elimination of bureaucratic barriers through digitalization and process redesign.

Dialogue and involvement: Creation of institutional channels for meaningful participation where the voice of the public affects decisions.

Trust and transparency: Ensuring predictability, accountability, and respect for data and time of the citizen.

The future of an effective state lies in the ability to combine the power of technology (for personalization and efficiency) with the wisdom of the crowd (for legitimacy and innovation of solutions). The public ceases to be an external element whose problems need to be "solved"; it becomes an integral part of the management system, and its activity becomes the main resource for the development of public goods. In this transition from the "state for the people" model to the "state with the people" model — the key to increasing both the quality of services and public satisfaction.

Permanent link to this publication: