Ramon Sangüesa, Director of Innovation recently spoke about “The Citilab Model” at the CCCB in Barcelona as part of the I+C+i cycle of talks.

The I+C+i programme announced the session as:

Citilab is a research project centring on models to promote and activate citizen innovation linked to information technologies and design, with an intrinsic component of promotion and creation of new cultures linked to technologies. Citilab was created in late 2007, starting up a series of projects and initiatives that have generated a variety of results. The aim of this session is to present the working bases of Citilab and consider the viability of its working model in areas associated with the promotion of culture/s.

Here’s what Citilab posted about the event:

Citilab is an open question and, therefore, there are as many different answers as there are people who form a part of this project. All those who recently attended the CCCB (Barcelona’s Centre for Contemporary Culture) so that the illustrious Ramon Sangüesa, director of Innovation at Citilab, could explain to us what sort of project it is, and what it can contribute as a cultural model, certainly the thing that nobody expected was for a man of more than 90 summers, (the eldest “citilaber“) to make things very clear via a video spontaneously recorded some months ago.

In an 8 minute video-ette which comprised part of the presentation one could perceive very personal Citilabs and experiencies that make up this project “in construction” (will it ever stop being so?) of more than a year-and-a-half of life. Sangüesa dedicated a good slice of the presentation to highlighting what we have all learnt along the way during this time, the positive experiences and also the negative ones (we can always learn more from our mistakes).

For all those who could not come and for those who want to see it again:

In this video Ramon Sangüesa defends one of the fundamental princples of Citilab, that a centre for technology can also be a cultural centre.

A model to copy

There was no shortage after the presentation of a whole raft of questions, the majority directed at knowing what there is behind Citilab and in what way this model can be replicated.
One often believes that the future comes in the shape of a Business Plan, and this was exactly the question that was posed: what course is this project going to follow, let’s say, in five years time. “If we adopt a rigid structure and we predetermine it to a large extent, we run the risk of coming to a halt”, was the answer from Ramon Sangüesa.
The idea is to go on exploring the field of social innovation in ambits as diverse as education and social participation and above all learn which are the concrete indicators to be measured, a task which Citilab can count on the University of Columbia (USA) for.

And companies? Well those that come nearest to seeing citizens as a source of innovation are the Living Labs, a model which, according to Sangüesa, “currently is what companies and Government Administration looks to but we want to go further”.

Ramon himself posted his impressions of the session on his blog:

I liked the questions from the public a lot, and many there were of them, as they help us to know what is clear, and what is unclear about the Citilab  project.

Several questions showed the interest and perhaps the pressing need of a change in models in differing kinds of institutions involved in the promotion of culture and knowledge. In particular, methinks I perceived a growing interest in knowing how to replicate how Citilab works in other environments, how to adapt it to diverse geographical surroundings and distinctive sectors.

I believe that the main thing is to replicate Citilab’s DNA in terms of:

• Listening to the people-at-large;
• Knowing where it is in one’s interests and needs, as well as knowing one’s vision in respect of one’s own capacity to adopt the innovation processes from a digital perspective (there are important segments of the population, convinced as they are, that there exists for them an unbreachable barrier to getting into and making everything innovative and digital significant);
• Making an effort to adapt the transfer of knowledge of all things digital to concrete interests, and to the significance that these new and practical skills might have in one’s daily life. One can learn to program computers or prepare a podcast but for many people this in itself has no interest, does not connect with what bothers them and moves them. We must learn to connect the potential behind innovation with their most urgent personal needs, from that of expressing themselves to improving their chances of finding a (new) job;
• The most important thing is to replicate the organizational process being established at Citilab. This is, the way of working that allows  us to ensure a quick turnaround of people and their projects, of the setting-up of learning-groups, of sharing knowledge and the putting into practice what has been learnt in both daily and significant situations and contexts. This replication does not depend so much on copying the physical space (building) in Citilab, although perhaps some infrastructures, such as the attitudes and processes of the institution, it does.