8/9/2019 Case6_290610_dailynotes

1/4

Case group work daily recording Case number: 6

Date: 29.6.2010

Case group work program of the day:

The group worked between 10.15 and 14.15 including lunch. The program of the day was knowledge

mapping in the case groups.

Work task recording

Description of the group working element:

Open discussion.

Outcomes of the working element:

Notes of group discussion: Five flaps sheets and semi-transcript of discussion.

Selected highlights and lessons learned during the working session:

- The discussion started of about how the group is working.

- Some spontaneous flap sheet action helped discussion.

- The session ended with brainstorming on barriers.

Semi-transcript of the discussion:

The team leader asked the group to read aloud the roles defined for the group.

- Team leader- Fascilitator (it was suggested that the fascilitator changes each day)- Recorder

Some comments about the topic and the definition of what we are talking about."In one year time the seniors are seen as a potential"Richard Branson has collected a group called the elderly to solve problems of the world.In Sweden we have the 1,6 million membership club.

Back to discussion of roles. Each one was read.- Group member- Observer

The reporter presented yesterday's results. Discussion about the observations and how the group is working. About

expectations of the facilitator: he can be very leading which requires a prepared process for the innovation, or he canencourage an open discussion. The reporter needs to focus on documenting results and not the process.

We need to focus on fun! Life begins at 65!

Discussion on rules of the discussion continuesWe will be using an open dicussion as there is very little time to prepare methods. Some rules were suggested anddiscussed:- you ask for speeches- nobody talks over each other- a maximum length of speech

8/9/2019 Case6_290610_dailynotes

2/4

- a daily goal needs to be chosen- you listen to each other

The spontanity of creativety versus heavy methodolothy was discussed.

A list of questions were put on the the flap sheet:1. Who is here?

2. What have we done?3. What can we do?4. How can ACSI benefit?

Oge presented herself - very international background, going through boundiers.

Leif commented "where have you learnt to think?", he has studied in California where he learnt to create new things. He getshis students to look at things from a new approach instead of recycling old theories.

Bjrn presented himself

The Boomerang effect

Lars learnt to think at home with his parents. Learn the rules, change the game, change the game. Lars hopes to create amore sustainable welfare society. Ambitious. Lar's ambition for the ACSI is to create something new that he wants to writeabout.

Helena comments, she is also ambitious and wants to get written down results. It's not only Helsinki, it's the whole nation.When we are thinking about old people, are we thinking too much that people change? How will what people want to dochange? Helena has background in health care and has worked in Helsinki and Turku. Has also worked in Germany,Sweden, Somalia (Unicef), Paris. Current post in Helsinki is advisor, expert. Before that as chief with employees. Helena'sboss expects new ideas and expects her to read and know. She and her employer hopes to get new fresh ideas from thecamp. It's difficult to see things differently when working in the health care science.

Ville tells that he has learnt that learning is done outside the comfort zone. Ville is finishing his phd in physics. Is fascinatedabout using new tools for analyzing for example organizational behaviour and innovating new ideas.

Robert (recorder) presented himself.

Discussion: Japan vs Finland - Finland is very individualistic and elderly are outside the scope of the individual, or corefamily.

The observer: From Paris. Entrepreneur and visual artist. Shaping ideas, shaping projects. Has spent time in Copenhagen.

Sofi: Cognitive science. Also literature, history. Hope to make the world a better place.

Finland has been working hard. Maybe now is the time for the elderly to take their time out? The second generation.

Continuing discussion from yesterday.

Hidden Nordic assumption: we do take care of the elderly

We can develop technologies to free barriers.

It is suggested that the case owner is the society.- supported by the group

We need to specify what we mean when we say society. For example, city, state, pension fund are same, but differentmoney.

The organization providing public services for the ageing is also ageing! The organization providing services needs to berenewed.

8/9/2019 Case6_290610_dailynotes

3/4

The l'oreal treatment!

BREAK

Discussion around flapsheets (quality of life, abilityto participate)

Linking concepts with a structured approach:- outgoing from quality of life: housing, health- willingness to participate leads toable/disable(temp/permanent)

Discussion on how services are provided anddesigned: does elderly services need a Steve Jobsapproach where we dont approach them from theneed, but instead of "how I would like it". I insteadof they.

TalkootWhy don't we practise talkoot today?

Barriers to "engagement"? (flapsheet)- capability- mindset- values- rewards

Needs and Providers matrix ( flapsheet)

Example about cleaning:

example from Denmark"stay as long as possible in your own life"

people call in asking for cleaning, end upgetting a rehabilitation plan

We need to think about means, ends, needs. Forexample about the root of why cleaning is an issue,and not who cleaning should be delegated to.

Tyyne individual (flapsheet)

8/9/2019 Case6_290610_dailynotes

4/4

We can't focus onthe individual"Tyyne" - itconstrains us. Weneed to think aboutthe whole senior

population. The rest

of the 80k.