Pattern principles in the welfare sector

Finding design patterns for welfare that work for all nations just isn’t that easy.

When our diverse group of international government design teams couldn't find common patterns, we pivoted towards something potentially more valuable: a shared framework that helps any government think systematically about design at every scale.

This post is part of a series about public design patterns. They are inspired by the Public Design Conference, and published between the Winter 2026 and Summer 2027. Read other posts in this series here.

We couldn't find global design patterns

When the call came to collaborate on welfare for the Public Design Conference (part of the World Design Congress Design Safari) in September 2025, Ireland (Department of Public Expenditure and Reform), Finland (Kela), Peru (National Council for Integration of People with Disabilities), and the UK (Department for Work and Pensions) swung into action.

We set out to identify common design patterns in welfare services that could work globally. After all, people everywhere face similar life transitions—having a baby, losing a job, dealing with illness, or retiring. Surely the welfare services supporting these moments should also have similarities?

As we shared our respective work on patterns, we discovered we had very different approaches to patterns and operated at different levels of maturity. We also seemed to lack a common definition for what constituted a "pattern." We understood that our group wouldn’t discover common patterns. Had we failed in our efforts?

The pivot: from patterns to principles

Instead of asking "What common patterns do we have?", we decided to look at the levels and hierarchy of patterns. We moved to more fundamental questions: "What makes something a pattern?" and “Could we come up with a framework for patterns?”

This shift moved the conversation from concrete outputs to underlying qualities - from trying to share specific solutions to understanding the attributes that make any solution shareable and scalable. The result was a framework built on five attributes:

Proven: backed by evidence and demonstrated in practice Repeatable: works reliably across different contexts User-focused: centred on solving real problems for people Trust-building: creates confidence and legitimacy for users and the public Actionable: clear enough to be applied and adapted in real work The framework: four levels of interconnected patterns

Our group recognized that patterns exist at multiple, interconnected levels and identified four distinct levels where patterns operate in government services.

Level 1: Component patterns

The building blocks - individual pieces of best-practice design that combine to create larger units - were a key element of the pattern. Think of form fields, buttons, or notification systems. These are the LEGO blocks of digital government.

Level 2: Sequence patterns

Reusable flows that make sense across many contexts. How users verify their identity, submit documents, or make payments. These sequences appear again and again, regardless of the specific service.

Level 3: Service patterns

Complete, reusable solutions for delivering end-to-end services. A "report a change" service might look similar across welfare services and beyond, whether you're updating your personal information for taxes, benefits, or vehicle registration.

Level 4: Life event patterns

A life event is the organizing principle for services: an event is the trigger and the journey through services is the highest level of patterns. This level organizes everything around the user journey and needs during this transition. The services supporting these moments could share common elements.

Top-down or bottom-up

Government organisations can start developing and leveraging patterns from the system level (top-down) or from the local and user-need level (bottom-up). Patterns at each level support and enable patterns at other levels. Taking a life event approach shapes what services are needed, which determines the sequences required, which then defines the components to be built. But it also works in reverse: component patterns enable sequence patterns. Sequences combine into services. Services form a seamless and coordinated journey around life events.

Life events matter

Traditional government organisation can lead to a fragmented landscape and disconnected services, which becomes especially problematic during major life transitions. Our group came to the conclusion that by thinking in terms of life event patterns, governments could:

bridge departmental silos reduce the burden on citizens navigating multiple services create more coherent, human-centred experiences build services that anticipate and respond to real needs.

This approach could even transform patterns from a design practice tool into a bridge between service delivery and policy reform. And having reusable patterns across different levels in the framework would be a massive cost-saving factor for government organisations.

Are we on to something and should we continue?

While our group seemed to be satisfied with the pivot and the discovery of a framework for patterns, some questions remain. How wide-spread is the life events approach in different countries and is there value in treating them as patterns? Could a shared global pattern language actually help bring together design practice and policy reform?

We ended our mini-conference with the understanding that it would be worth exploring these questions further but we might have some alignment difficulties. It is hard to align work around patterns within the same department, and this could be many times harder on a country or global level.

We will continue our discussion and share experiences with patterns and the life events approach in our respective countries. What patterns do you see in your government's services? How might thinking in levels - from components to life events - transform how you design for citizens?

Thanks for the contributions of...

UK: Alice Forward, Shalom Jesusanmi, Lindsay Stephens and Kieran Spruce.  Ireland: Trevor Vaugh and Aidan O’Boyle. Finland: Janne Mattila, Anni Ojajärvi, Päivi Rajaharju and Anna Haimila. Peru: Nayeli Jazmin Lopez Peña, Mauricio Andre Beuzeville Montañez, Gian Marcos Medina Palpa. Join our community

We use this blog to talk about the work of the multidisciplinary policy design community. We share stories about our work, the thinking behind it and what policymaking might look like in the future. If you would like to read more, then please subscribe to this blog. If you work for the UK's government, then you can you join the policy design community. If you don't work for the UK government, then connect with us on social media at Design and Policy Network and subscribe here to be notified about our monthly speaker events to hear from influential design thought leaders and practitioners.

https://publicpolicydesign.blog.gov.uk/2026/02/05/pattern-principles-in-the-welfare-sector/

seen at 14:57, 5 February in Public Policy Design.