The MICADO team assessed the needs of key stakeholders in four pilot cities and aligned them in two convergence workshops. Based on the assessment we will develop a digital platform to facilitate the arrival procedures for migrants, and support public administrations managing migrant integration.
One of the main challenges in the MICADO project is to translate research outputs into ideas for technical development. To meet the challenge, project members from scientific institutions, developers and partners from public administrations in Antwerp, Bologna, Hamburg, Madrid and Vienna met in a convergence workshop to discuss this central question.
The end-user needs that had been collected during the field research phase were compiled into an extensive list of demands. This list included specific requirements, such as a map of doctors which can be filtered based on their language skills, and general demands, such as a call for more information on the education and health system. However, not all of these demands can easily be addressed by the MICADO application. The consortium identified which requirements were shared among end-users, very deemed important and for which needs the necessary data was available. As a result, researchers and developers agreed on a list of 20 central needs who will be considered in the further development of the app.
As a follow up to the first convergence workshop, a second workshop was held to collect feedback on the key features of the Minimum Viable Product of MICADO. Project members carried out a first test and discussed the features with the development team and the colleagues from the respective other pilot cities.
The MICADO solution is made up of three interconnected applications for public authorities, migrants, and civil society organizations. All three applications were tested individually by all participants. In a questionnaire that was carefully prepared by the organising team, first remarks on the overall impression, navigation, and general questions about the features were asked. Based on the results of the questionnaire, the second part of the workshop was dedicated to a detailed discussion.
In the workshop, it became clear that the three applications were already well developed and the core features were working. Opinions differed regarding one feature, the “information center”. Here, it was not clear which information it should provide compared to other features such as the “glossary” and “guided process”. Some smaller adaptations of naming of features and the provision of icons were also requested.
The second Convergence Workshop brought all partners to a common level of understanding and established a consensus on the functionalities. The discussion about the features also gave the development team important clues as to which features are not yet clear and need to be further defined. With these hints, the development team enters the next round of programming
Concept convergence, minimal viable product, requirements