IVO RECHTSPRAAK · SERVICE TRANSFORMATION · PUBLIC SERVICES

Changing the decisions behind digital judicial services.

Across two assignments at IVO Rechtspraak, I challenged the assumption that better interfaces alone would improve complex judicial services. I connected research with citizens and employees to legal processes, operational constraints and delivery decisions, helping teams shift from digitising existing processes and responding to stakeholder requests towards clearer journeys and evidence-led priorities.

ROLE: Service Designer
FOCUS: Service transformation · Decision alignment
SCOPE: Citizen services · Internal knowledge
PARTNERS: Judicial professionals · Stakeholders · Delivery teams
PERIOD: 2019 – 2023

TL;DR

Reframed errors and incomplete submissions in Familial Administration as service-design problems, using 15+ interviews with citizens and judicial professionals.
Used end-to-end journeys to align stakeholders on guidance, status visibility, terminology and the dependencies behind a more coherent digital service.
For MijnKennisOmgeving, translated research and accessibility needs into shared priorities, user stories and clearer scope for delivery teams.

01 · THE SERVICE PROBLEM

The interface was the symptom. The decisions came earlier.

Judicial services must reconcile legislation, specialist procedures, legacy technology and the needs of people navigating unfamiliar situations. In Familial Administration, that complexity surfaced as unclear guidance, paperwork and incomplete submissions. In MijnKennisOmgeving, it appeared as competing stakeholder requests and fragmented development priorities.

I approached both as connected service and organisational challenges: understand where people struggle, expose the process and ownership decisions behind that friction, then give teams evidence they could use to prioritise change.

CITIZEN SERVICES · FAMILIAL ADMINISTRATION

Redesign the journey, not just the paperwork.

Research showed that errors and incomplete submissions reflected unclear requirements, terminology and progress information. The service direction shifted towards guidance, transparency and connected self-service.

EMPLOYEE SERVICES · MIJNKENNISOMGEVING

Prioritise evidence over competing requests.

I translated user needs and technical constraints into shared scope and user stories, giving stakeholders and developers a clearer basis for negotiating priorities and shaping delivery.

Rechtspraak digital service and judicial casework context — Two different services exposed the same issue: experience quality depended on decisions made beyond the interface.

02 · CITIZEN SERVICE TRANSFORMATION

Turn user evidence into a different service direction.

For Familial Administration, I conducted more than 15 in-depth interviews with citizens, judges and judicial caseworkers. I translated findings into journeys, archetypes and process flows that exposed where legal and administrative logic conflicted with what people needed to complete their responsibilities.

I brought these perspectives together in workshops. Rather than treating incomplete submissions as user mistakes, stakeholders could examine how guidance, terminology, status communication and the sequence of interactions contributed to them.

01 / REFRAME

From user error to service friction.

Make unclear instructions and missing context part of the problem definition, not a burden placed on citizens.

02 / ALIGN

From separate touchpoints to one journey.

Connect forms, guidance, case progress and judicial workflows to inform shared service priorities.

03 / DIRECT

From digitised paperwork to guided self-service.

Shape concepts around clearer next steps, more transparent status and greater independence.

RESEARCH TO SERVICE DIRECTION

Research with citizens and judicial professionals, including journeys and process evidence — Interview evidence made the causes of errors and incomplete submissions visible across the full service journey.

Service journeys, wireframes and digital service concepts — Journeys and concepts translated that evidence into a service direction centred on guidance, transparency and self-service. These artefacts do not by themselves establish live-service outcomes.

03 · EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE & DELIVERY

Replace competing requests with shared priorities.

MijnKennisOmgeving presented a different challenge: legacy technology, multiple stakeholders and requests competing for development capacity. I structured stakeholder engagement and connected research with technical constraints, making user value a clearer basis for deciding what belonged in scope.

I translated findings into user stories and priorities for delivery teams. I also brought accessibility requirements into design decisions earlier, so WCAG considerations became part of how work was assessed rather than a final compliance check.

DECISION-MAKING

Evidence-backed priorities.

Give stakeholders a shared rationale for negotiating scope instead of letting individual requests set direction.

DELIVERY

Research translated into action.

Connect user needs, technical limitations and design requirements through clearer user stories and team priorities.

QUALITY

Accessibility by design.

Bring WCAG and understandable content into the requirements used to evaluate and shape solutions.

Internal knowledge environment concepts and prototypes — Knowledge environment concepts supported a more coherent employee experience.

Accessibility analysis and process mapping — Accessibility analysis informed design requirements and prioritisation within legacy constraints.

04 · CONTRIBUTION & IMPACT

What changed in service decisions and delivery.

Across both assignments, my contribution was to make user evidence consequential. Research was not just a validation step: it challenged the original problem framing, created a shared view across professional groups and gave delivery teams clearer priorities and quality requirements.

Citizen service direction. More than 15 interviews and cross-functional workshops shifted the focus from fixing forms and correcting users towards addressing service friction. The resulting journeys and concepts connected guidance, progress visibility and judicial processes.

Organisational and delivery impact. For MijnKennisOmgeving, research informed prioritised user needs, user stories and shared scope. Accessibility was brought into design requirements, giving stakeholders and developers a more consistent basis for decisions.

TANGIBLE OUTPUT · FROM EVIDENCE TO DELIVERY

Backlog, user flows and prototypes supporting delivery — Research and service decisions translated into user flows, prototypes and delivery priorities.

SERVICE DIRECTION

Reframed the citizen journey.

Shifted the focus from correcting incomplete submissions to improving guidance, terminology and visibility across the judicial process.

STAKEHOLDER ALIGNMENT

Created shared priorities.

Connected citizen research with judicial and operational perspectives, giving stakeholders a common basis for service decisions.

DELIVERY IMPACT

Made evidence actionable.

Translated user needs into prioritised stories, clearer delivery scope and accessibility requirements for MijnKennisOmgeving.