For my second intervention I am going to test a new method on how can creative self confidence can influence collective imagination . In a book called Citizen Designer: Perspectives on Design Responsibility, there is a question that intrigued me: how can a heterogeneous society develop shared values and yet encouraged cultural diversity and personal freedom? At some senses, finding similar voices or shared values can be a struggle for a people in a multicultural environment such as metropolitan cities. Also, the rapid urbanization makes daily struggles among citizens becoming more complex and unexplainable, making people choose to tolerate rather than taking action about it. The failure to imagine differently is a result from a profound alienation which has been heavily conditioned by institutions (DelSasto, 2022).

The triggers often coming from the sense of powerlessness especially for the vulnerable or the marginalized groups, just like the people in urban villages. According to the first online intervention with Cipadu citizen, they were satisfied for having a forum where they were facilitated to share their ideas and mapping their thoughts about their neighborhood. The quality of the conversation enabled them to identify key interconnected issues—social, economic, and environmental—that they had sensed but previously lacked evidence to speculate. Through the co-design discussion, they were finally able to engage in a meaningful dialogue that led to the development of well-formed, collective ideas.

In fact, this proven the sociological imagination as introduced by C. Wright Mills, linking the complex issue that is currently happening in the present with history and personal background. Annotated from National University Blog, Mills believed that finding a balance between systems and the individuals within them was essential to understanding their dynamic relationship, as well as the social structures that arise from conflicts between different groups. An individual issue might linked with others, and it can be a solid evident on how systemic issue might troubled a society, thus connection and quality discussion should be taken place.

Regardless Indonesia is often known for their comraderies or mutual assistance or gotong royong collective imagination seemed to be hardly woven into a tool for problem enquiry. This also evoked from the people in Cipadu from the previous workshop, they appreciated the sense of gotong royong among the neighborhood as their spirit in the urban village. But apparently, gotong royong does not cater the collective imagination that happened to be important human capital for the betterment. Social Imagination should be a method in building a quality conversation and interaction, using people’s daily experience (or we can say autoethnography) that can turn into actionable future solution. Social imagination bridge the gap with design and social sciences, planning with reflective, to actively explore the wicked problems using collective mode of thoughts (DelSasto, 2022).

One of the answers on the Padlet, showing how they actually wanted be seen and heard by the province level government official. This can give indication that people want to be heard and to be given the attention immediately. However, in a midst of complex modern problem requires radical innovation that sparked from bottom-up (Manzini, 2015). This term was also introduced by Ezio Manzini as Design as Social Innovation, where multiplicity of actors, experts and non-experts, interact to co-design the innovation for change or initiative. This will give more agency to the people in the urban village by becoming their own changemaker and curators of their own area.

This reflection made me mapping out my idea into Theory of Change framework, with focus on several goal reflected from the citizen inquiries:

• Make the aspiration heard by giving people agency to become the changemaker of their own area.
• Build a resilient, creative urban village.
• Make gotong royong as the DNA of the community that can trigger social innovation.

From that idea, I managed to iterate a new framework for the next workshop or intervention, by focusing on self and how it can be reflected to others in order to elevate potential in the urban camaraderie.

Phase 1: Identify the Friends and the Villains

“Villain & Friend Mapping with STEEP” (Individual/Small Group)

Based on the “Memory Maps,” participants identify specific “Friends” and “Villains.” Crucially, for each “Villain,” they also assign a this indentification method can be varied, from curating experiences by 5 senses and also STEEP category (Social, Technological, Economic, Environmental, Political). 

Phase 2: Acknowledge your Superpowers

“Hero Within: Discovering Your Superpower” Introduce the concept of citizen superpowers. Provide “Superpower Cards Prompts” (e.g., The Connector, The Storyteller, The Innovator, The Guardian). The superpower will be given using a quick “superpower test”.
In addition, each person will be given a “shield” with a symbol for their superpower and a short “superhero name,” stating how their superpower can help the village.

Phase 3: Assembling The Heroes League

Group participants into diverse “Heroes Leagues” (4-6 people), ensuring a mix of identified “superpower archetypes” within each team. This enables a balanced and inclusive debate. As a whole group, or within teams followed by a plenary sharing, collectively prioritize the top 2 most pressing “villains” from that the “Heroes Leagues” will focus on for their missions.

Phase 4: Mission & Imaginarium Activation

“Superpower Synergy for a Regenerative Future”: This is the core imagination activation. Teams brainstorm (and document in their zine) how their combined “superpowers” can overcome the “villain.” They visualize and describe what a truly regenerative future would look like once this “villain” is defeated, focusing on vibrant aspirations.

Phase 5: Collective & Cross-Pollination

This process is using world’s cafe method, using “host” and “visitor” role play to rotate through other teams’ stations in timed rounds. Visiting teams learn about the “villain” and the imaginative solutions from the host team, offering their own insights, questions, and building upon the ideas. They can add notes or sketches to the zine/station’s evolving content.

Phase 6: Discussion!

This is the phase where every groups share their opinion and how they collaborate to explore their common “enemies” all together.

This method of participatory discussion will be first implemented with fellow Indonesian diasporas in London, in collaboration with an Indonesian student collective called @LondonBergerak with different question, so it will be more fit in with various Indonesian background in here.

If the method promising and actually opening up to the new narrative, it can be iterate and be implemented again with the Cipadu citizen in September.